* Research Note 85-83

* MEASUREMENT OF THE CRITICALITY OF COMBAT TASKS

Eugene H. Drucker, R. Gene Hoffman, Richard E. O'Brien

* 0 Human Resources Research Organization

* and

David W. Bessemer

* IArmy Research Institute

- for

Contracting Officer's Representative

Donald M. Kristiansen

ARI Field Unit at Fort Knox, Kentucky

Donald F. Haggard, Chief

TRAINING RESEARCH LABORATORY

Harold F. O'Neil, Jr., Director

DTiC

3 -

U. S. Army U Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

AUGUST 1985

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

" .85 10 24 021

- - - - C,? * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
U. S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

A Field Operating Agency under the Jurisdiction of the

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

WM. DARRYL HENDERSON

EDGAR M. JOHNSON COL, IN

Technical Director Co,51I)diu1

Accession For

*NTIS GRA&I

DTIC TAB

Unannounced 

Justification

By -

Distribution/

Availability Codes

Avail and/or

Dist Special

I This report, as submitted by the contractor, has been cleared for release to Defense Technical Information CenterDTIC) to comply with regulatory requirements. It has been given no primary distr ibution other than to OTIC

and will be available only through DTIC or other reference services such as the National Technical Informeat

Service (NTIS). The vicws. opiniens, and/or findings contained in this report are those of the authorls) and

should not P a contruej as an officias Cepattment of the Army position, policy. or decision, unless so designated

by other of. At documentation.

K
-l . " d

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE ("?m Date Er$,$d)_

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE READ INSTRUCTIONS

BEFORE COMPLETING FORM

%1a REPORT NUMBER 2. GV N .. SSUjpp RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

ARI Research Note 85-83 _ _ __

4. TITLE (and Subtitle) S. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED

Final Report

MEASUREMENT OF ThE CRITICALITY OF COMBAT TASKS May 1981 - January 1982

6. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

FR-TRD(KY) -83-4

7. AUTHOR(s) S. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER()

E.H. Drucker, R.G. Hoffman, and R.E. O'Brien MDA9 03-8 0-C-02 23

(Human Resources Research Organization) and

D.W. Bessemer (Army Research Institute)

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK AREA & WORK UNIT NUMBERS

Human Resources Research Organization AREA K N

1100 South Washington Street 53 5340 6740

Alexandria, Virginia 22314

It. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

US Army Research Institute for the Behavioral August 1985

and Social Sciences 13. NUMBER OF PAGES

5001 Eisenhower Ave., Alexandria, VA 22333 185

14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADORESS('If different from' Cntrollingi Office) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (of this report)

Unclassif ied

IS&. DECL ASSI FIC ATI ON/DOWN GRADING

SCHEDULE

16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of thif. Report)

Approved for open release; distribution unlimited.

I7. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of he abstract emtered in Block 20. It different from Report)

*" IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

This research was technically monitored by Dr. David W. Bessemer of ARI.

" Contracting Officer's Representative was Donald M. Kristiansen.

IS. KEY WORDS (Continue on reverse side if necessary and Identify by block number)

Military Training Task Selection

Task Criticality Leadership Training

Training Development Job Training

" Instructional Development

20. ABSTRACT (Ca_ tliue am reverse esd If nei eay and Identify by block number)

This report describes the development of a method for selecting combat tasks

for training based on their criticality in determining the successful

accomplishment of the unit mission in which they are performed. Comparisons

are made between this method for assessing task criticality and the approach

recommended in the Instructional Systems Development (ISD) model.

*. DD , "n 1473 EDITION OFINOVSSOBSOLETE Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (W',.yi Dea Entered)

.................................................................................. -f A*,"'**** . . . .
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(Wh, Data Flntor.E)

* ii Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE147ien Data Entered)
FOREWORD

The Fort Knox Field Unit performs research and development in combat

arms tactical training. An important part of this research has been

concerned with procedures involved in training development.

This report describes the development of a procedure for measuring the

• jcriticality of tasks performed during combat. The procedure requires

experts to rate the effects of task performance on the successful accom-

*. plishment of the unit mission. The report also describes research on the

* importance of providing raters with information pertaining to the mission

and the combat situation.

This report should be of interest for training developers who must

select combat tasks for training. Although the present research was

performed using tank platoon leader tasks, the results should have

generality outside of this task domain.

i-i

* . .... * . * * * * * * - . . - * . . . * . . . . .

. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

-. 4b* .. . . . .* . ". .. . * - * *.'.- . . . .. * . * . -
. -------------.. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . -- W - - -

MEASUREMENT OF THE CRITICALITY OF COMBAT TASKS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Requirement:

To develop a methodology for measuring the criticality of combat tasks

based on ratings of their effects on the successful accomplishment of the

unit mission; to determine the importance of providing descriptions of the

missions and the contexts in which the tasks are performed when measuring

their criticality.

Procedure:

Two questionnaires were administered to separate samples of Army

officers. One questionnaire contained scenarios describing four different

armor missions and the tasks that were performed by the platoon leader

during these missions. Respondents read each scenario and judged the

degree to which the performance of each task would affect the successful

accomplishment of the unit mission. They also judged the degree to which

the performance of these tasks would affect factors normally associated

with combat effectiveness (e.g., firepower, survivability). The second

questionnaire contained alphabetical lists of platoon leader tasks, but did

not describe the missions nor the contexts in which they were performed.

Respondents judged the degree to which the performance of each task would

affect the successful accomplishment of the unit mission. Judgments were

also obtained on the factors recommended by ISD for selecting tasks for

training.

p.

Findings:

Ratings of mission success were found to be highly reliable. The

effects of contexts on these ratings were found to vary with the tasks

being rated and with the particular contexts. The construct validity of

mission success ratings as measures of task criticality was supported by

the finding that the combat effectiveness factors were more predictive of

mission success ratings than were the ISD criteria.

Utilization:

The method for measuring task criticality described in this report

uses direct Judgments of the effects of task performance on mission

accomplishment. This method can be used by training developers to select

tasks for training based on their effects on the successful accomplishment

of the mission in which they are performed.

J.

"*~...... . .. --.......... ......-.- '.-. J. ....-...................... :.. ... .. .. ... .............-. -.- -. ::,-..-....-. ....-. .. . -.--.
MEASUREMENT OF THE CRITICALITY OF COMBAT TASKS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION . . . . ........... . . . . . . . . . .. . 1

Current Procedures for Assessing Task Criticality . . . . . .. 1

Weaknesses of Current Procedures for Assessing

Task Criticality . . . . . .................. 3

Assessing Task Criticality Using Ratings of

Mission Success . ...................... . 4

The Importance of the Combat Situation in

Determining Task Criticality ........ ................ 4

PURPOSE .............................. 5

METHOD e............................... . 6

Materials ........................... 6

Subjects .. .. . . o . . ................ 8

Procedure ................................ ....... 8

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ... ........ ............... 9

Scale Reliability ...... ... ....................... 9

Mean Ratings of Platoon Leader Tasks . . . ........ . 12

Context Effects on Ratings of Mission Success .. ......... ... 18

Selecting Tasks for Training . . . ............... 25

Analysis of Mission Success Ratings .. .. ............ 28

CONCLUSIONS ............................................ . 37

REFERENCES ... ......... . . .................... 39

APPENDIX A. SELECTION OF TASKS FOR CRITICALITY ASSESSMENTS

AND TANK COMPANY MISSION SURVEY

B. MISSION-BASED QUESTIONNAIRE

C. ISD-BASED QUESTIONNAIRE

D. MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF PLATOON LEADER

TASKS RATED USING THE ISD-BASED QUESTIONNAIRE

E. MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF PLATOON LEADER

TASKS RATED USING THE MISSION-BASED QUESTIONNAIRE

F. RANKINGS ON TASKS ON RATINGS SCALES USING THE

ISD-BASED QUESTIONNAIRE

vii

......................
G. RANKINGS OF TASKS ON RATING SCALES USING THE

MISSION-BASED QUESTIONNAIRE

.4 LIST OF TABLES

* Page

Table 1. Interrater Reliability Estimates for Rating

Scales in ISD-Based and Mission-Based

Questionnaires . . . . . .............. . . . 10

2. Tasks Described as Most and Least Critical

on Scales Contained in the ISD-Based

Questionnaire ......... ...................... ... 13

3. Tasks Described as Most and Least Critical

on Scales Contained in the Mission-Based

Questionnaire ... ......... . . ........ . . . . 15

4. Analysis of Variance: Questionnaire Type and

Task Effects on Mission Success Ratings ......... 19

5. Summary of t-tests Comparing Mean Mission

Success Ratings Obtained from Mission-Based

and ISD-Based Questionnaires .... ................ 21

6. Analysis of Rating Method by Task Interaction

for Occupy Battle Position...... . . . . . . . . . . 23

7. Table Summarizing Analyses of Variance of

Scenario Effects on Mission Success Ratings

for Six Platoon Leader Tasks ............... ..... 24

8. Task Selected or Rejected for Training

Using Mission Success Ratings Obtained from

Mission-Based and ISD-Based Questionnaires ....... 27

9. Intercorrelations Among ISD-Based and Mission

Success Scales Across 161 Tasks Appearing in

the ISD-Based Questionnaire ..... ............... ... 29

10. Intercorrelations Among Combat Effectiveness

and Mission Success Scales Across 66 Tasks

Appearing in the Mission-Based Questionnaire ......... ... 29

11. Intercorrelations Among ISD-Based Scales and

Combat Effectiveness Scales Across 66 Task

Ratings .......... ......................... ... 30

12. Summary of Regression Analysis of Mission Success

Ratings Obtained in the ISD-Based Questionnaire ........ . 31

viii

%.
13. Summary of Regression Analysis of Mission

Success Ratings Obtained in the

Mission-Based Questionnaire . . . . . . . ......... 32

14. Summary of Interaction Analysis of

Scenarios by Task Effects on

Mission Success Ratings ..... .............. . . . . 32

15. Summary of Regression Analyses of Mission

Success for Each Scenario ...... ................ ... 33

16. Correlations Among ISD-Based and MissionBased Rating Scale Composites with ISD-Based

and Mission-Based Ratings of Mission Success

on 66 Tasks ................. 35

A-i Mean Ranking Received by Company Missions

on Two Criteria ........ ..................... .. A-i

A-2 Mean Rankings Received by Company Mission

Phases on Two Criteria ............... . .. A-4

5i.

. .x

- . . . . .

. .
MEASUREMENT OF THE CRITICALITY OF COMBAT TASKS

INTRODUCTION

-I

- One of the major problems experienced by training developers is the

lack of sufficient time and resources to train all of the tasks that are

performed by soldiers in a particular duty position. There are several

ways in which this problem can be handled. One is to lower the performance

standards so that more tasks can be taught in the same amount of time or

within existing resources. While this approach will help to assure that

the maximum number of tasks will be taught, there would be a risk that the

soldiers would not be able to perform the tasks well enough to allow their

units to function effectively. This would be an especially serious problem

during combat since it can lead to the failure to achieve mission success.

Another way to handle the problem is to conduct training during hours not

normally devoted to training such as evening hours or weekends. This

approach is also unsatisfactory since it can lead to excessive fatigue and

can cause morale problems. In addition, it can prevent the success of

accelerated training during a military emergency. A third approach, and

one that is recommended by the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command

(TRADOC) in TRADOC Pamphlet 350-30, Interservice Procedures for Instructional Development, is to-trairr only those tasks that can be handled within

the available time and resource constraints, but to include those tasks

that are most critical to mission success. Although this approach would

prevent soldiers from learning all of the tasks performed in an MOS, careful selection of tasks could keep the impact on unit performance to a

minimum. Ideally, tasks that are not learned during institutional training

could be learned later during unit training or learned informally while on

the job.

Current Procedures for Assessing Task Criticality

Guidance on the selection of critical tasks for training is contained

in TRADOC Pamphlet 350-30 and in TRADOC Circular 351-4, Job and Task Analysis. The selection process described in the latter document specifies that

an inventory should be prepared listing the tasks performed by soldiers in

a particular duty position. The tasks contained in this list are to be

classified as either critical or non-critical using the results of a survey

of job incumbents and job experts. The purpose of the survey is to provide

information on how the tasks rate on factors considered to be indicative of

task criticality. Each proponent school is to assign weights to these

factors according to their priority of importance within that school. The

weighted scores are to be used to classify the tasks as either critical or

non-critical. A task selection board is then to review the results of the

task classification and either approve them or make whatever modifications

it deems necessary. The final list is then sent to the Commandant for

approval.

Eight survey criteria that can be used to classify tasks as critical

or non-critical are suggested in TRADOC Pamphlet 350-30, although the

1
..

document states that other criteria can be added or substituted. The eight

recommended criteria are (1) the percentage of job incumbents who perform

the task, (2) the percentage of time spent performing a task, (3) the

probable consequences of inadequate task performance, (4) the delay that

can be tolerated between the time the need for task performance becomes

evident and the time actual performance must begin, (5) the frequency of

task performance, (6) the difficulty involved in learning the task, (7) the

probability of deficient task performance, and (8) the time between job

entry and task performance. The guidelines for applying these criteria

specify that ratings should be obtained from job incumbents, supervisors,

or other individuals who are familiar with the job to be trained. After

the ratings are obtained, and once it is determined how many tasks can be

trained, the ratings can be used to classify tasks as critical or noncritical prior to their final administrative review.

Additional guidance for selecting tasks for training is contained in

TKADOC Circular 351-4, Job and Task Analysis. The purpose of this document

is to supplement TRADOC Pamphlet 350-30 with later TRADOC policy and to

modify its contents so that they will correspond to the current philosophy

in the TRADOC training system. The process of selecting critical tasks is

described in the circular as one of the most, if not the most, important

requirement in the training development area of responsibility. Four criteria are suggested for selecting critical tasks (in contrast to the eight

that were suggested earlier). These criteria are (1) probability of emergency performance, (2) task learning difficulty, (3) probability/consequences of inadequate performance, and (4) percent of soldiers in the MOS

performing the task. One criterion, probability of emergency performance,

corresponds to the earlier criterion pertaining to the delay that can be

tolerated between the time the need for task performance becomes evident

and the time actual performance must begin. The other three recommended

o -ri-eria also parallel criteria recommended earlier. However, four critei appearing in the earlier document are absent in the new document--

(1) -ie percentage of time spent performing a task, (2) the frequency of

task performance, (3) the probability of deficient fask performance, and

(4) the time between job entry and task performance.

The eight criteria that are recommended in TRADOC Pamphlet 350-30 and

the four criteria that are recommended in TRADOC Circular 351-4 are

intended to be used to identify critical tasks. A critical task is defined

in TRADOC Reg 350-7, A Systems Approach to Training, as one that is

essential to the accomplishment of a mission. In other words, it is a task

which if properly performed increases the probability that a unit will be

successful in accomplishing its mission. Conversely, it is a task which if

not properly performed decreases the probability that a unit will be successful in accomplishing its mission.

'Subsequent to the initiation of this project, the U.S. Army Training Board

developed new guidance for measuring the criticality of collective tasks.

Each task is to be rated on two five point scales: (1) how essential the

task is to mission success and (2) how essential the task is to survival.

These scales are described in Collective Training Workshop (U.S. Army

Training Board, 1983).

.1 ' ,2

• . .i' ': '. -i .."i. .- -. i. .. ' -. . '. " - :, .- ' -- i . " - - ' .. :. . -- : i :- - -i l -. .- .- ,-, : .:- - ' i''" ' i ' - - - i - : -: -i < l '
Weaknesses of Current Procedures for Assessing Task Criticality

Although task criticality is clearly defined by TRADOC in terms of the

effects of task performance on the successful accomplishment of a unit's

"" mission, this factor is not among the criteria recommended by ISD for

. assessing task criticality. Tasks that must be performed quickly do not

necessarily have a greater impact on mission performance than tasks that do

* not have to be performed quickly. This is not meant to imply that tasks

that must be performed immediately do not affect performance. They obviously do, but so do many tasks that do not have to be performed quickly.

Planning a mission, for example, may take place over a long period of time,

but the quality of its performance can have a major impact on the success

of a mission. Similarly, tasks that are hard to learn do not necessarily

have a greater impact on performance than tasks that are easy to learn.

And tasks that are performed by many soldiers in an MOS do not necessarily

have a greater impact on performance than tasks that are performed by relatively few soldiers. The criterion that seems to have the closest

relationship to performance among the four recommended by TRADOC is the

probability/consequences of inadequate performance. If the consequences of

task performance affect the performance of a mission, and if these consequences are likely to occur, then the task must be critical. Since the

description of this criterion in TRADOC Circular 351-4 states that it

pertains to the loss of life or limb, or to damage or destruction of equipment, this factor does seem to correspond, at least indirectly, to the

concept of criticality. Regardless of whether these criteria correspond to

the concept of task criticality as it is described by TRADOC, they are all

indirect ways of assessing the criticality of a task. That is, none of the

criteria pertain directly to the effects of task performance on the successful accomplishment of a unit's mission. A preferable way to measure

task criticality would be to determine directly how the performance of a

task affects such performance. This would eliminate the need to infer how

performance would be affected by the intermediate characteristics actually

being measured. The most direct way to determine the effects of task performance, of course, would be to observe how the performance of the task

affects actual performance. But making these observations would be difficult, especially during combat, and determining the ultimate consequences

stemming from the performance of any one task would probably be impossible.

Moreover, it would be difficult or impossible to make enough observations

of each task and its consequences to make reliable estimates of the task's

criticality.

As an alternative to observing combat, a battle simulation could be

used to estimate the consequences of task performance. This method would

allow the performance of a task to be repeated, albeit in simulated form,

so that several estimates of consequences could be obtained. However, the

use of battle simulation requires sufficient input regarding consequences

of task performance so that the ultimate effect on the combat mission can

be deduced. Unfortunately, programs are not yet sufficiently refined to

enable the effects of individual tasks on mission outcome to be determined.

3

. . . .

.

. * . . . . . b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Assessing Task Criticality Using Ratings of Mission Success

If it is neither possible to observe combat directly nor to use battle

simulation to determine the effects of task performance on the accomplishment of the unit mission, an alternative technique for directly assessing

these affects is through the use of ratings. Unlike the ISD method for

assessing task criticality, raters would not be asked to rate the criticality of a task indirectly by describing its learning difficulty or the

percentage of soldiers who perform the task. Instead, they would be asked

to directly rate the degree to which the performance of the task affects

the successful accomplishment of the unit mission. Since this type of

rating scale would correspond to the definition of task criticality presented by TRADOC, its use could circumvent the problems created by trying

to infer task criticality indirectly rather than directly. When a rater is

given the title of a task and asked to rate its effects on the accomplishment of the unit mission, it is likely that the rater will have to take

into account the context in which the task is performed. A task whose

performance may have a large effect on the outcome of a mission in one

situation may have a very small effect on the outcome of the mission in

another situation. For example, if a leader neglects to post a guard, the

consequence of this behavior would depend upon whether or not there would

have been anything important to detect had the guard been posted. The

rater who must rate the effects of the task on mission accomplishment would

need to know more about the context in which the task was performed in

order to make a judgment of its criticality.

The Importance of the Combat Situation in Determining Task Criticality

Since the ISD model for assessing task criticality requires r&ters to

rate tasks on factors such as learning difficulty and time to perform

rather than on their effects on mission accomplishment, the lack of a

context in ISD should make little difference. The difficulty of learning a

task will remain the same regardless of the context in which the task is

later performed. Similarly, the time available to a soldier before that

soldier must perform the task is probably less affected by the context than

are the effects of the task on the accomplishment of the mission. While

the consequences of inadequate performance do appear to depend upon the

context in which the task is performed, the ISD model does not specify that

a context be used when obtaining ratings of this criterion.

The respondent who is asked to rate the criticality of a task, but who

is provided no context explaining when the task was performed, is presented

with a dilemma. There are several different strategies that the rater may

use. One strategy would be to rate the task in the context in which it

would be most critical. Another strategy would be to rate the task in its

most likely context. Another is to try to estimate its average criticality

across all of the contexts in which it is likely to be performed. Still

another approach would be to try to estimate its criticality on an abstract

basis without attempting to place it in any particular context. If differ-

-* ent raters use different strategies or if the same rater uses different

4

°........ ....-. "*.*.* '-........,-..-.o. .. * * .. .. ....-.....-.-..--.-.-.- %-
strategies for different tasks, then the ratings are likely to be unreliable even if all of the raters were capable of judging the criticality of

each task in each circumstance in which it was conducted. To avoid differences in criticality ratings due to the strategy adopted by the rater, it

is important to prevent the adoption of these different strategies. An

appropriate way in which to accomr1 ish this could be to provide the context

to the rater and require that the effects of the performance of the task be

described only for the particular context which was provided.

If the context in which the task is performed affects its criticality,

then it is obviously important how the context is chosen for surveys of

task criticality. To attempt to include all or even most contexts in which

a task is performed would be time consuming and wasteful. However, it

should be possible to specify a criterion for which training is most important. For example, battle simulations can be used to identify contexts in

which the performance of a unit has the greatest impact on the outcome of a

major engagement. Once these contexts are identified, they can be used to

prepare contexts in which the performance of individual tasks can be

assessed in terms of their overall effects on the accomplishment of the

unit mission. To seek a solution to this problem at the present time is

premature, however. First it is necessary to determine whether direct

judgments of the effects of task performance on mission accomplishment can

be reliably obtained and if such judgments are affected by the descriptions

of the contexts in which the tasks are performed.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine the use of a Mission Success

scale as a more direct means of assessing task criticality and to determine

the importance of describing the mission and its context when obtaining

direct ratings of mission success. In particular, the following issues

were examined:

1. Are ratings of mission success sufficiently reliable to be used to

assess task criticality? How does the reliability of this scale compare to

the reliability of the scales recommended by TRADOC for assessing task

criticality?

2. What tasks are described as having the largest effects on mission

success? Are the most critical tasks identified using the mission success

scale the same as those identified using the scales recommended by TRADOC?

3. What effects does the use of a context have on judgments of task

criticality using the Mission Success scale? Is a task equally critical

when contained in different contexts?

4. When using the Mission Success scale to assess task criticality,

will the use of a context affect the tasks that are selected for training?

5
5. Is the Mission Success scale a valid measure of task criticality?

What is the relationship of mission success ratings to ratings on factors

generally accepted as related to mission success? How does it relate to

the scales recommended by TRADOC as part of the ISD model?

METHOD

Two questionnaires were prepared to assess the criticality of a sample

of tactical leadership tasks performed by tank platoon leaders. Both

questionnaires contained mission success scales on which respondents could

rate the effects of task performance on the successful accomplishment of

the mission. The questionnaires differed, however, in three ways:

(1) whether or not scenarios were provided which described the contexts in

which the tasks were performed, (2) the number of tasks that were to be

rated, and (3) the remaining scales that were contained in the questionnaires. One of the questionnaires, which will be referred to as the

mission-based questionnaire since each task was imbedded in a specific

mission, contained four different scenarios and a total of 66 tasks (including some that were duplications). It also contained five additional

scales that measured factors that are normally associated with combat

effectiveness (i.e., firepower, communication and control, mobility, survivability, and sustainability). The other questionnaire, which will be

referred to as the ISD-based questionnaire since it was based on the ISD

guidelines, contained no scenarios, but did contain 161 platoon leader

tasks (including the 66 that were contained in the mission-based questionnaire) and four scales. Three of the scales measured factors that were

recommended in TRADOC Circular 351-4. The fourth scale was the Mission

Success scale.

Materials

Mission-Based Questionnaire

The mission-based questionnaire contained four scenarios each

depicting a different mission. Each scenario contained two parts--a

description of the general situation and a description of the special

situation. The general situation described the company mission, the enemy

situation, the terrain and weather, and the units that were involved in the

mission directly or were supporting it. The special situation described

the role of the platoon leader during the mission. A sketch was provided

depicting the special situation for the platoon. A total of 51 different

platoon leader tasks were embedded within the four scenarios. The procedure and materials used to select these tasks are described in Appendix A.

Since several tasks appeared in more than one scenario, or more than once

within the same scenario, respondents were required to make 66 sets of

judgments among the 51 tasks.

Each scenario was followed by six sets of rating scales. Listed

alongside each set of scales were the platoon leader tasks that were

depicted within the scenario. The first five sets of rating scales, the

6

.. .--v-f • • .• .° • -• , . .. ".. - ... ° -%. ....... ..
combat effectiveness scales, corresponded to the five factors normally

associated with mission success. They pertained to the effects of task

performance on (1) effective application of fire power, (2) effective use

of mobility and maneuver, (3) effective command, control, communication,

and coordination, (4) survivability of men and equipment, and (5) sustainment of combat effectiveness. The sixth set of scales pertained to mission

success. The scales were presented in the same order for all four scenarios. However, the order in which the four scenarios were presented was

counterbalanced so that each scenario appeared in each of the four positions an equal number of times.

Five-point scales were used on which respondents indicated the effect

of task performance on each factor. The response alternatives for the

mission-based questionnaire were: none, small, moderate, large and extreme. The instructions required the respondents to consider both the

decision and action components of each task when making their judgments. A

copy of the mission-based questionnaire is contained in Appendix B.

ISD-Based Questionnaire

The ISD-based questionnaire contained 161 platoon leader tasks

presented in alphabetical order. The procedure used to select these tasks

is described in Appendix A. The contexts in which the tasks were performed

were not described. Four scales were included in the questionnaire. Three

of the scales corresponded to ISD criteria for selecting critical tasks

contained in TRADOC Circular 351-4. The first criterion described in the

circular is Probability of Emergency Performance/Task Delay Tolerance.

This is defined as the amount of delay acceptable in performing a task.

The scale corresponding to this criterion required respondents to rate the

amount of time that the platoon leader would have available before starting

the task. The response alternatives for this scale were: none, one minute

or less, several minutes, several hours, and one day or more.

The second criterion described in the circular is Task Learning Difficulty. This is defined as the time required to achieve performance

proficiency. The scale corresponding to this criterion required respondents to rate the time that would be required to learn the task by most new

officers. The response alternatives for this scale were: none, one hour or

less, several hours, one day, and two days or more.

The third criterion described in the circular is Probability/Consequences of Inadequate Performance. This is defined as the loss of life or

limb or damage/destruction of equipment that would likely result from

inadequate task performance. The scale corresponding to this criterion

required respondents to rate the amount of equipment damage and/or injury

to personnel that could result from the performance of the task by the

platoon leader. The response alternatives for this scale were: none,

small, moderate, large, and extreme.

A fourth criterion described in TRADOC Circular 351-4, Percent

Performing, was not included in the questionnaire. This information is

generally obtained from CODAP reports. Since only officially accepted

--i- - 7

-..
tasks are contained in these reports, the percentage of platoon leaders

performing each task could not be obtained and was not taken into account.

The fourth scale contained in the ISD-based questionnaire was the

Mission Success scale. The scale was identical to the Mission Success

scale appearing in the mission-based questionnaire.

The 161 platoon leader tasks appeared in the questionnaire four separate times, once for each set of scales. Although the tasks always appeared

in the same order, the scales were counterbalanced so that each scale

appeared in each of the four positions an equal number of times. Since

each tactical leadership task contained both a decision and an action component, respondents were asked to consider both when making their judgments. A copy of the ISD-based questionnaire is contained in Appendix C.

Subj ects

The subjects for this research were two platoons of U.S. Army officers

enrolled in the Armor Officer Advanced Course (AOAC) at the Armor School in

Fort Knox. A total of 57 officers were assigned to one platoon, while 65

officers were assigned to the other. The assignment of officers to

platoons was done non-systematically.

While descriptive data were not available for the particular group of

officers who served as subjects, students in this course generally average

four years of service as commissioned officers and have the grade of

captain. Approximately three-fourths of the students are assigned to

armor, while most of the remaining officers are assigned to infantry.

Procedure

Each of the two questionnaires was administered to a separate platoon

of AOAC officers, but in different classrooms and at the same time. The

mission-based questionnaire was administered to the platoon containing 57

officers, while the ISD-based questionnaire was administered to the platoon

containing 67 officers. Since officers were assigned to platoons nonsystematically, there are unlikely to be any differences between the two

groups of subjects that could influence the ratings.

The order of the questionnaires within each set was systematically

varied so that one-fourth of the respondents received each version. One

and one-half hours were allocated to the administration of both questionnaires, but all respondents were finished in just over an hour.

8
[1

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Scale Reliability

. Results

Interrater reliability estimates for the two Mission Success scales,

the three ISD-based scales, and the five combat effectiveness scales are

presented in Table 1. These estimates were derived using the intraclass

correlation method (Ebel, 1951) and represent the average intercorrelation

between all pairs of raters across the tasks that were rated. Since an

intraclass correlation gives the mean reliability for a single rater, the

Spearman-Brown formula was used to estimate the interrater reliability of

each scale with different numbers of raters. These values are also

contained in Table 1 up to the size of the sample from which the data were

obtained.

The estimated interrater reliability of the two Mission Success scales

was extremely high although it was slightly higher for the scale contained

in the ISD-based questionnaire (.94) than the one contained in the missionbased questionnaire (.89). The reliability estimates for the three ISD-

* based criticality scales were also high ranging from .93 for the Damage/

Injury scale to .96 for the Time Available and Time to Learn scales.

Similarly, the reliability estimates for the five combat effectiveness

scales were high ranging from .86 for the Sustainability scale to .93 for

the Mobility scale.

The standard error of measurement for each scale is also presented in

" Table 1. This statistic is an estimate of the standard deviation of the

mean ratings that would be received for a task if different samples were to

be drawn that were equal in size to the samples used in the present study.

This value is a guide to the stability of the means that would be obtained

with repeated criticality assessments. Since the standard errors of

measurement for the Mission Success scales were identical (.09) regardless

of the type of questionnaire in which they were embedded, the stability of

the scale does not appear to be affected by the context in which it is contained. Overall, the standard error of measurement for the different

scales tends to cluster around .10; this suggests that the means obtained

from newly drawn samples of the same size would be within .10 of the means

obtained in the present samples approximately two-thirds of the time.

Thus, the mean rating obtained by a task on any of the scales is extremely

stable and should not vary widely from sample to sample.

Discussion

It was anticipated that the reliability of the mission success scale

would be higher in the mission-based questionnaire than in the ISD-based

questionnaire. This expectation was based on the assumption that respondents would use different strategies when asked to rate the criticality of

a task without being told the context in which the task is performed. That

is, it was assumed that some raters would try to judge the average criticality of the task over the different contexts in which it could be

4 . 9 S.,

.. 5".. * . .. .-. * -''*'''*'. . .*.**- ' ' ... ..-.- -* .... . . *. ... v .- . . . . .- - .".-...-..-. ...--. -* . . -.
Elr-A 0 m' t*. 4 r%. 11 -4r 0 N in %DU 0n .A.i -4 -4 -4 N cn (V) Pn 0a r. P. Go w 00 k (A rq- * . . . %-, 

0.0

>41

co - -4 N- (Vn (VI -T r- r- CI co a% U 0%L)- .5f. . .5- 4.3

'a

041 0

b04 El c .0 41 0 *.t r

5

n 0 %0 N1 0% (Vl O -4 cn cn U,

9 0 go 0v H C4 c -.1 L, U, r- r- GO OD 0% a' a% U,

Aj 0 0

40 ~40 414 ww4 Dc G -4 0 - (n 0"t I. N4 r- 0 N4 4 NU, -H40 1-4 (I -2 In U, %0 t. OD Go 0% a%' 0 V)U -4

.0~ ~ w 4I 

co 0 -,4 41 c.n co 00 U, ryw - U, C4 %0 O0 0%U Ln 0 -H w4 u5I -4 N4 ml n .7 W% 'D r - Go OD Go coU 0

-r4

.54V

41 8. -

El vO~ V4 -.7 -7-i %D P a' OD U, 0 N 0% U,% m. 00 -H0 'a *i4..4 7 , '0 ' - 0 -4 0 ' a ' 

0 J4 C

41 00w % D % n 0 D . %I D C nL

:3 co44 -N .i U, IT0 %T r- r- 00 Go a% 01%. 00

V I44H

54)

00 la -H 044 '0 %4* '.0 14 1,, C.4 .7 aT U, -4 0 en C7%0 En ~ (A - 4 cn 'T .7 .7 r- co co Go a a% '7% v.D

414

0* $

.0 444 o 9:0M4

0 41 .- 4 C-7 - - 8. N 0n -7 a' 0- wV 0 a 9a (VI -74 U, U, r-. -4 a' a 00 "0 k0 0 4-4~ ~~~~ . 5 ZO 

r410
performed, that some raters would judge the criticality of the task in its

most critical context, while others would judge it in the context in which

it would most often be performed. It was also considered possible that

some raters would attempt to judge the task abstractly without relating it

to any particular battlefield context. On the other hand, it was assumed

that the context presented by the scenarios in the mission-based questionnaire would cause the raters to judge the criticality of the task within

the same context, thus achieving greater reliability.

The results of the research failed to confirm this expectation. The

interrater reliability of the mission success scale was extremely high for

both questionnaires. While the high reliability of the Mission Success

scale in the mission-based questionnaire was anticipated, the high reliability of the scale in the ISD-based questionnaire was not. One possible

reason for the high reliability of the mission success ratings made in the

ISD-based questionnaire may have been that the assumption that different

raters would use different strategies when judging task criticality was

wrong. Since the respondents were not asked how they made their judgments,

it was impossible to determine just how the judgments were made. It is

possible, however, that the subjects tended to use the same strategies when

making the judgments. Another possibility is that the respondents may not

have used any strategy to make the judgments, but may have echoed the

information that they had learned in class or that they reflected armor

doctrine. If such were the case, then it would be possible that the raters

may have used a similar approach in judging task criticality using the

mission-based questionnaire. This probably did not happen, however, since

the correlation between the two sets of mission success ratings was only

.57. If the raters reflected armor doctrine when making the mission

success ratings in both questionnaires, then the correlation between the

two sets of ratings should have approached the reliabilities of the two

sets of scales. The fact that the correlation between the two sets of

ratings was .57 implies that 32% of the variance in the ratings were shared

in common among the two scales, but that 68% of the variance of each scale

was unique to that scale.

One difference between the two Mission Success scales was in the

distribution of scores that was obtained from each questionnaire. While

the ranges were similar (2.84-4.48 in the mission-based questionnaire and

2.69-4.55 in the ISD-based questionnaire), there were far more scores in

the lower end of the distributio in the ISD-based questionnaire than in

the mission-based questionnaire. While 21 percent of the mission success

scores in the ISD-based questionnaire were below 3.50, only 2 percent of

the tasks had mean mission success ratings below 3.50 in the mission-based

questionnaire. The difference in the dispersion of the scores obtained

from the two questionnaires can also be examined by comparing the standard

deviations of the ratings. The standard deviation of the ratings in the

ISD-based questionnaire was .37, while the standard deviation of the ratings in the mission-based questionnaire was .28. An F-test comparing the

variances showed that they differed significantly (F-1.71, df=160, 65;

R<.01). This difference in the distribution of mission success scores from

.See Appendixes F and G for distributions of mission success scores.

i 11

- . '
the two questionnaire types may also explain the difference in the reliability of the two sets of scores. The restricted distribution of the

mission success scores in the mission-based questionnaire may have negated

any positive effects on reliability due to the context in which the ratings

* were made.

Mean Ratings of Platoon Leader Tasks

Results

The means and standard deviations for the 161 platoon leader tasks

rated using the ISD-based questionnaire are contained in Appendix D, while

the means and standard deviations for the 51 platoon leader tasks rated

using the mission-based questionnaire are contained in Appendix E. The

tasks are identified in both Appendixes according to the number assigned to

them in the ISD-based questionnaire. The data are presented in Appendix E

by scenario. Within each scenario, the data are presented by mission

phase. Since several tasks appeared in more than one scenario or in more

than one phase within a scenario, these tasks will appear in the table more

than once. Footnotes adjacent to an item number will designate when data

for that task appear elsewhere.

ISD-Based Questionnaire. Appendix F contains the rankings of the 161

tasks on each of the four scales contained in the ISD-based questionnaire.

The mean scores obtained on the Mission Success scale ranged from 2.69 to

4.55; only three tasks received mean ratings below 3.00. Thus, virtually

all of the tasks were described as being at least moderately critical in

terms of their effects on the successful accomplishment of the mission.

The five tasks that were rated as most critical and the five that were

rated as least critical on each of the four scales are presented in Table

2. The tasks that were described as having the largest effect on the

successful accomplishment of the mission all involved an aspect of planning

(e.g., Issues OPORD, Chooses a Course of Action). These tasks were similar

to those that were described as requiring the most time to learn. On the

other hand, the tasks whose performance was describei as resulting in the

most damage to equipment and/or injury to personnel involved attacking the

0enemy (e.g., Directs Enemy be Engaged, Directs Fire and Maneuver by

Conducted). Similar tasks were also described as being required in the

shortest amount of time (e.g., Directs Open Fire, Directs Enemy be

Engaged). Thus, the five most critical tasks appearing on the Mission

Success scale and on the Time to Learn scale pertained to planning, while

the five most critical tasks appearing on the Damage/Injury scale and on

the Time Available scale pertained to engaging the enemy.

The five tasks that were described as having the smallest effect on

the successful accomplishment of the mission involved platoon movement

(e.g., Directs Coil Formation, Controls Interval Between Tanks). Similar

tasks were among those whose performance was described as having the least

effect on damage to equipment and/or injury to personnel although the least

critical tasks on the Damage/Injury pertained to communications (i.e.,

Reports TOW Effects, Requests Wire Communications be Installed). The least

12

I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. .... ,.;..,,...... , ... , ... m~m' '.... ....... " " ".... "",.. . . .
-°7.

Table 2

Tasks Described as Most and Least Critical

on Scales Contained in the ISD-Based Questionnaire

Mean Mean

Scale Most Critical Task Rating Least Critical Task Rating

Damage/Injury Directs Enemy be Engaged 4.11 Reports TOW Effects 2.34

Directs Enemy on Objective 4.03 Requests Wire Communica- 2.45

be Destroyed tions be Installed

Develops the Situation 4.03 Directs Herringbone 2.49

Formation

Directs Fire and Maneuver 4.02 Directs Coil Formation 2.50

be Conducted

Directs Attack be Conducted 3.95 Directs Traveling 2.50

Time Available Directs Surprise Targets 1.72 Conducts Reconnaissance 3.67

be Engaged

Directs Open Fire 1.73 Conducts Necessary Coordi- 3.59

nation

Directs Cease Fire 1.86 Prepares an Operation 3.57

Plan

Directs Enemy be Engaged 1.91 Issues OPORD 3.42

Directs Suppressive Fires 1.92 Prepares a Fire Plan 3.41

be Shifted

" Time to Learn Prepares Operation Plan 4.27 Awaits Time or Permission 2.02

to Open Fire

Conducts Reconnaissance 4.26 Awaits Time or Permission 2.08

to Attack

Issues OPORD 4.23 Reports Crossing Phase 2.08

Lines

Analyzes OPORD 4.12 Directs Air Guards be 2.09

Kept Alert

Coordinates Indirect Fires 4.11 Direct Air Guards be Posted 2.11

Mission Issues OPORD 4.55 Directs Coil Formation 2.69

Success Issues FRAGO 4.52 Directs Coil or Herringbone 2.74

Format ion

Chooses a Course of Action 4.49 Directs Herringbone 2.78

Format ion

Makes an Estimate of the 4.47 Controls Interval Between 3.00

Situation Tanks

Analyzes OPORD 4.45 Controls Speed of Tanks 3.05

Note. High mean ratings indicate high criticality on the Damage/Injury, Time to

Learn, and Mission Success Scales; low mean ratings indicate high criticality on

the Time Available scale.

13

J............*....... - ". -.................. ......
. . . T M T

critical tasks identified on the Time Available scale pertained to planning

(e.g., Conducts Reconnaissance, Prepares an Operation Plan). Thus, the

least critical tasks on this scale were similar to the most critical tasks

that were identified on the Mission Success and Time to Learn scales. The

* least critical tasks in terms of time to learn involved waiting for permission to open fire or attack, reporting the crossing of phase lines, and

posting or alerting air guards.

In summary, the Time to Learn scale was the only one of the three ISD

scales on which tasks that were reported to be most critical to mission

success also appeared as most critical. Moreover, tasks pertaining to

planning were reported to be least critical on the Time Available scale

even though they were the types of tasks reported to b most critical in

terms of mission success.

Mission-Based Questionnaire. Appendix G contains the rankings of the

51 tasks on each of the six scales contained in the mission-based question- naire. There are a total of 66 rankings since a task was ranked each time

it appeared in a scenario. The tasks are identified in Appendix G according to the numbers assigned to them in the ISD-based questionnaire. The

mission and mission phase in which each task appeared are also identified.

The mean scores obtained on the Mission Success scale ranged from 2.84 to

4.48. However, only one task (Requests Illumination) received a mean

rating below 3.50. Thus, proportionately fewer tasks were rated as comparatively low in criticality in terms of mission success when using the

mission-based questionnaire than when using the ISD-based questionnaire.

The five tasks that were rated as most critical on the Mission Success

scale and the five tasks that were rated as making the greatest contribution to combat effectiveness on the five combat effectiveness scales are

presented in Table 3. The five tasks that were rated as least critical and

as contributing the least to combat effectiveness are also presented in

Table 3. The tasks that were described as having the largest effect on the

successful accomplishment of the mission involved attacking the enemy (e.g., Directs Fire and Maneuver be Conducted, Directs Enemy be Engaged).

Although the five tasks that were described as most critical on the Mission

Success scale in the ISD-based questionnaire pertained to planning, only

one of these tasks (Issues FRAGO) also appeared in the mission-based

questionnaire. The most critical tasks identified on the Mission Success

scale in the mission-based questionnaire appear to be more like those that

were identified as most critical on the Damage/Injury and Time Available

scales of the ISD-based questionnaire.

Among the five combat effectiveness scales contained in the missionbased questionnaire, the most highly rated tasks on the Sustainability

scale most overlapped those that were identified on the Mission Success

scale, although the most highly rated tasks on the Sustainability scale

also included those pertaining to movement and positioning of tanks. In

general, the most highly rated tasks on each scale corresponded to the

nature of the scale. For example, the tasks that were described as having

the largest effect on the effective application of firepower all pertained

to firing (e.g., Designates Sectors of Fire, Directs Tanks Move to Good

Fields of Fire). Similarly, the tasks that were described as having the

14
Table 3

Tasks Described as Most and Least Critical

on Scales Contained in the Mission-Based Questionnaire

Mean Mean

Scale Most Critical Task Rating Least Critical Task Rating

Firepower Designates Sectors of Fire 4.54 Directs Guards be Posted 2.95

Directs Tanks to Move to 4.39 Requests Illumination 2.98

Good Fields of Fire

Directs Fire and Maneuver 4.37 Directs Air Guard be Posted 3.12

be Conducted

Prepares a Fire Plan 4.35 Directs Chemical Alarms be 3.12

Emplaced

Directs Avenues of Approach 4.35 Submits SITREP 3.19

be Covered

Mobility Plans Displacement 4.51 Requests Illumination 2.48

Selects and Announces 4.41 Directs Chemical Alarms be 2.82

Withdrawal Routes Emplaced

Directs Movement Into 4.39 Directs Air Guards be 2.86

Defilade Position Posted

Directs Assault be Started 4.26 Directs Wire Communications 2.81

be Installed

Directs Movement Into Over- 4.25 Directs Range Cards be 2.95

watch Position Prepared

Command Issues FRAGO 4.56 Requests Illumination 2.79

Requests Wire Communica- 4.27 Directs Tanks be Camoflaged 2.95

tions be Installed

Coordinates with Adjacent 4.23 Directs Air Guards be 3.00

Platoon Leaders Posted

Coordinates with FIST Leader 4.07 Directs Tank be Put in 3.04

Turret Defilade

Prepares a Fire Plan 4.05 Directs Obstacles, Mines, 3.11

and Flares be Installed

Survivability Directs Tanks be Camoflaged 4.61 Requests Illumination 3.02

Directs Tanks be Put in 4.57 Submits SITREPa 3.33

Turret Defilade

Directs Movement Into 4.56 Submits SPOTREP 3.37

Defilade Position

Checks Positions for 4.46 Requests SPOTREPS 3.56

Suitability

Plans Displacement 4.43 Submits SITREPb 3.58

15

"* ...
Table 3 cont'd.

Mean Mean

Scale Most Critical Task Rating Least Critical Task Rating

Sustainability Directs Movement Into 4.36 Requests Illumination 2.77

Defilade Position

Directs Enemy be Engagedc 4.32 Submits SITREP 3.28

Directs Enemy be Engaged 4.29 Directs Movement Into 3.45

Designated Position

Requests Indirect Fires 4.28 Submits SPOTREP 3.46

Directs Tanks be Put in 4.27 Request Team Patrol 3.48

Turret Defilade Reports

Mission Directs Fire and Maneuver 4.48 Requests Illumination 2.84

Success be Conducted

Directs Enemy be Engagede 4.46 Monitors TOWS 3.50

Directs Avenues of Approach 4.45 Directs Ground Guards be 3.59

be Covered f Posted

Directs Enemy be Engaged 4.42 Requests Wire Communications 3.61

be Installed

Requests Indirect Fires 4.39 Directs Air Guards be Posted 3.66

* Note. High mean ratings indicate high criticality.

a Hasty Attack b

"* c Movement to Contact

d Movement to Contact

d

e e Defend Battle Position

Movement to Contact

16

...........................................
largest effect on the effective use of mobility and maneuver involved

different aspects of this factor (e.g., Plans Displacement, Directs Movement into Defilade Position).

The five tasks that were described as having the smallest effect on

the successful accomplishment of the mission involved requesting of illumination, monitoring TOWs, installing wire communications, and posting

guards. The least critical of these tasks on the Mission Success scale,

Requests Illumination, was also described as having the smallest effect on

all of the combat effectiveness scales except the Firepower scale on which

it was described as having the second smallest effect. Another of the

least critical tasks appearing on the Mission Success scale, Directs Air

Guards be Posted, appeared among the tasks described as having the smallest

effect on the Firepower, Mobility, and Command scales. Four of the five

tasks that were described as having the smallest effect on survivability

involved reporting (e.g., Submits SITREP, Submits SPOTREP).

In summary, the tasks that received the highest ratings on the Mission

Success scale in the mission-based questionnaire pertained to attacking the

enemy and appeared to be similar to the most critical tasks identified on

the Damage/Injury and Time Available scales in the ISD-based questionnaire.

Discussion

A major purpose of this project was to examine the most critical

platoon leader tasks identified using the Mission Success scale and to

compare these tasks with those identified using the ISD-based scales. The

most critical tasks identified using the Mission Success scale differed in

the two types of questionnaires. The most critical tasks identified using

the ISD-based questionnaire involved various aspects of planning (e.g.,

Chooses a Course of Action, Makes an Estimate of the Situation), while the

most critical tasks identified using the mission-based questionnaire involved attacking the enemy (e.g., Directs Fire and Maneuver be Conducted,

Directs Enemy by Engaged). It is important to note, however, that the

mission-based questionnaire only contained 51 of the 161 tasks that were

contained in the ISD-based questionnaire. Thus, the most critical tasks in

the ISD-based questionnaire were not included in the mission-based

questionnaire and therefore could not have appeared among the most critical

tasks.

The most critical tasks on the Mission Success scale in the ISD-based

questionnaire were similar to those that were most critical on the Time to

Learn scale. This suggests that the tasks that have the largest impact on

mission success are also most difficult to learn. However, the most critical tasks identified on the Mission Success scale in the mission-based

questionnaire were similar to those that were most critical on the other

two ISD-based scales (i.e., Damage/Injury, Time Available). This seems

somewhat of a paradox in that all three ISD scales identified the most

critical items that were identified using the Mission Success scale, but

one of the ISD scales identified the same type of tasks that were identified on the Mission Success scale without scenarios while two of the scales

identified the same types of tasks that were identified on the Mission

Success scale with scenarios.

17

....................... . .
While the purpose for examining these results was to contrast the most

and least critical tasks identified using the Mission Success scale with

those identified using the ISD-based and combat effectiveness scales, an

adequate comparison between the scales requires the application of correlational techniques. For example, despite the fact that the most critical

tasks identified on the Mission Success scale on the ISD-based questionnaire were more similar to those identified on the Time to Learn scale than

on the Damage/Injury scale, the correlation between the Mission Success

scale and the Damage/ Injury scale (.84) was higher than the correlation

between the Mission Success scale and the Time to Learn scale (.61). The

results of these correlational analyses are presented later in this section

of the report.

One final point concerns the confounding of scales and questionnaire

types in this research. Ideally, both the ISD-based scales and the combat

effectiveness scales should have been included in both sets of questionnaires. Moreover, all 161 tasks contained in the ISD-based questionnaire

should have been contained in the mission-based questionnaire. Unfortunately, time and subject constraints prevented the adoption of a more ideal

research design. The present design, although clearly not ideal, was .4 intended to provide the maximum amount of information within the resources

that were available.

Context Effects on Ratings of Mission Success

Results

Effects of Presenting a Scenario. The fifty-one platoon leader tasks

that were rated on the Mission Success scale in the mission-based questionnaire were also rated on this scale in the ISD-based questionnaire. If the

context provided by the scenarios in the mission-based questionnaire had an

effect on the mission success ratings, then a significant difference would

be expected between the two mean ratings obtained from these questionnaires. To determine whether the obtained differences were in fact

statistically significant, the means for the 51 tasks were compared using

analysis of variance (ANOVA). Several of the 51 tasks appeared in more

than one scenario. Since the context provided by the different scenarios

could have had different effects on the mission success ratings, a separate

ANOVA was conducted for each scenario. Thus, four analyses were conducted,

each analysis setting questionnaire type as the between-subjects factor and

tasks as the within-subjects factor. Before conducting these ANOVAs, a

single score had to be selected for each task that was repeated within a

scenario. The mean rating of the task within the scenario was used for

this score.

The results of the four ANOVAs are contained in Table 4. A significant main effect for questionnaire type was obtained only for the analysis

of the tasks that were contained in the Occupy Battle Position scenario.

2See page 28.

18

........ -. . . . . .

p . . . . - ... . . .
Table 4

Analysis of Variance: Questionnaire Type and Task

Effects on Mission Success Ratings

Scenario

Source of Variation df MS F p

Movement to Contact

Between Subjects

Questionnaire Type 1 5.21 1.73 ns

Error (Ss within questionnaire) 117 3.02

Within Subjects

Task 9 8.78 20.80 .01

Task X Questionnaire 9 3.47 8.23 .01

Error (Ss within task X 1053 0.42

quest ionna ire)

Hasty Attack

Between Subjects

Questionnaire Type 1 5.04 1.14 ns

Errorb (Ss within questionnaire) 116 4.41

Within Subjects

Task 14 5.03 12.08 .01

Task X Questionnaire 14 1.74 4.17 .01

Error (Ss within task X 1624 0.42

questyonnaire)

Defend Battle Position

Between Subjects

Questionnaire Type 1 0.09 0.00 ns

Errorb (Ss within questionnaire) 113 3.40

Within Subjects

Task 10 13.77 26.27 .01

Task X Questionnaire 10 2.68 5.11 .01

Error (Ss within task X 1130 0.52

questyonnaire)

Occupy Battle Position

Between Subjects

Questionnaire 1 93.62 14.73 .01

Errorb (Ss within questionnaire) 113 6.35

Within Subj ects

Task 22 5.96 14.60 .01

Task X Questionnaire 22 0.84 2.05 .01

Error (Ss within task X 2486 0.41

questYonnaire)

.".19
All of the tasks appearing in this scenario were rated as having a larger

effect on mission success when they were rated in the mission-based

questionnaire than when they were rated in the ISD-based questionnaire.

However, significant questionnaire type x task interactions were obtained

in all four ANOVAs. These interactions indicated that the effects of the

questionnaires differed among the items contained in each scenario. Consequently, post hoc comparisons were made to determine which tasks were rated

differently in the two different types of questionnaires.

Simple t-tests comparing questionnaire types were conducted for the

tasks contained in the three scenarios in which there was no significant

main effect for questionnaire type. The mean rating for each task obtained

-. when using the mission-based questionnaire was compared with the mean rat-

*ing for the same task when using the ISD-based questionnaire. The results

of these t-tests are contained in Table 5. There are two significant differences among the ten tasks appearing in the Movement to Contact scenario.

The tasks Directs Movement Into Defilade Position and Directs Movement Into

Overwatch Position were rated as having a significantly larger effect on

the successful accomplishment of the mission when the tasks were rated

using the mission-based questionnaire than when using the ISD-based questionnaire. Thus, the presence of the scenario in the mission-based questionnaire resulted in these two tasks being rated more critical.

Not all tasks that were rated differently in the two questionnaires

were rated to be more critical in the mission-based questionnaire. Of the

four tasks on which there were significant difference in the Hasty Attack

scenario, two were rated as more critical when using the mission-based

questionnaire, but two other tasks were rated as more critical when using

the ISD-based questionnaire. The tasks Directs Movement Out of Attack

Position and Directs Targets of Opportunity be Engaged were rated as having

a larger effect on mission accomplishment when using the mission-based

questionnaire, but the tasks Issues FRAGO and Submits SITREP were rated as

having a larger effect on mission accomplishment when using the ISD-based

questionnaire. This implies that the raters felt that the first two tasks

were more critical in the context provided by the scenario than in other

contexts while the last two tasks were seen as less critical in this

context. A similar result was obtained from the analysis of the tasks

contained in the scenario Defend Battle Position. Of the two tasks for

which significant differences were obtained, one task (Designates Targets

to TOW Section) was rated as being more critical in the mission-based

questionnaire while the other (Requests Illumination) was rated as being

more critical in the ISD-based questionnaire. For the 35 different ratings

that were made using the three scenarios for which there was not a significant main effect for questionnaire type, there were eight significant

differences. Five of the eight tasks were rated as more critical when the

tasks were embedded in the scenarios contained in the mission-based

questionnaire, while three were rated as more critical when the tasks were

contained in the scenario-free ISD-based questionnaire.

Since both a significant main effect for questionnaire type and a

significant questionnaire type x task interaction were obtained in the

analysis of the tasks appearing in the scenario Occupy Battle Position, the

post hoc comparisons that were conducted were designed to determine whether

the difference between the two ratings for each task was larger or smaller

20

m ' .

" . , " *-.-•. "'- ", ." ."-" *4* "•"•• . • ,'*** ". 4% q ," 4.* " b" ' *% ," ," ," .". 4 -" ,"." " ' ' ."% .'. .V. " .'-.'' . -
Table 5

Summary of t-tests Comparing Mean Mission Success Ratings

Obtained from Mission-Based and ISD-Based Questionnaires

Mean Rating

Scenario

Mission-Based ISD-Based

Task Numbera Questionnaire Questionnaire t p

Movement to Contact (N-56) (N-63)

89 3.71 3.41 1.77 ns

67 4.11 3.49 4.11 .01

161 3.93 4.21 -1.67 ns

51 4.38 4.30 .66 ns

137 4.22 4.24 -.11 ns

138 4.12 4.21 -.61 ns

149 3.78 3.59 1.10 ns

26 4.34 4.38 -.33 ns

160 3.96 4.17 -1.25 ns

70 4.30 3.72 4.18 .01

Hasty Attack (N-55) (N-63)

113 4.18 4.51 -2.28 .05

66 3.84 3.68 .95 ns

65 3.96 3.87 .58 ns

73 3.93 3.60 2.10 .05

137 4.38 4.24 1.09 ns

138 4.31 4.21 .73 ns

105 4.25 3.75 3.54 .01

54 4.47 4.27 1.58 ns

64 4.02 3.76 1.80 ns

139 4.20 4.09 .70 ns

32 4.38 4.13 1.86 ns

152 4.25 4.11 .96 ns

140 4.04 3.90 .56 ns

160 3.67 4.17 -2.64 .01

Defend Battle Position (N=55) (N-60)

135 2.85 3.62 -4.12 .05

155 3.73 3.50 1.38 ns

137 4.23 4.23 -.04 ns

138 4.15 4.20 -.31 ns

25 3.91 3.53 2.21 .05

119 3.49 3.50 -.06 ns

161 3.93 4.18 -1.50 ns

103 3.91 3.70 1.12 ns

51 4.45 4.28 1.35 ns

157 3.96 3.85 .64 ns

160 4.07 4.15 -.45 ns

aNumbers correspond to task numbers used in ISD-Based Questionnaire.

21

J-'. , ,- , m .. y' , . - - . .' ." " .' .% . .° ," . .° .-..* * "' ., .- .- . , ..' .'. ' .2 .'7
k

than would be expected based on the overall main effect for questionnaire

type. Myer's (1979) method of post hoc analysis was used to construct F

ratios. This method required the construction of a contrast between tasks

to be applied to each questionnaire type. It then examined the variance

between these contrasts across questionnaire types. The contrast developed

for a task compared the rating of a task on one questionnaire or the other

to the mean rating of the remaining tasks obtained on the same questionnaire. The F-test examined whether the difference between the focal task

and the mean of the remaining tasks was the same for both types of questionnaires. That is, it determined whether the difference in the ratings

of a task obtained from each of the two questionnaire types was different

than the difference in the ratings of all the other tasks.

The results of these post hoc comparisons are presented in Table 6.

Three significant contrasts were found. The difference in the ratings of

the task Designates Tank Targets was larger than would be expected based on

the overall difference in the ratings of the other tasks using the two

types of questionnaires, while the differences in the ratings of two tasks,

Directs Chemical Alarms be Emplaced and Prepares a Firing Plan, were

smaller than would be expected. In summary, although the tasks appearing

in the scenario Occupy Battle Position tended to be rated significantly

more critical when they appeared in the mission-based questionnaire than

when they appeared in the ISD-based questionnaire, the specific effect also

depended upon the task being rated. For one task, this difference was

larger than would have been expected from the overall difference between

the two types of questionnaires, and for two tasks, this difference was

smaller than would have been expected.

Effects of Different Scenarios. To determine whether the ratings of

tasks in the mission-based questionnaire were affected by the scenarios in

which they appeared, the mission success ratings obtained using different

scenarios were compared for each of the six tasks that were contained in

more than one scenario. The comparisons were made using one-way repeated

measure analyses of variance. The results of these ANOVAs are contained in

Table 7. Significance between scenario effects was obtained for only two

of the six tasks--Requests Indirect Fires and Submits SITREP. Examination

of the mean ratings for these tasks in Appendix E shows that the task

Requests Indirect Fires was rated as being less critical in the Initiate

Indirect Fire phase of Defend Battle Position (X - 4.09) and in the Occupy

Suppressive Fire Position phase of Movement to Contact (X = 4.16) than in

the Immediate Action phase of Movement to Contact (X - 4.32), in the Hasty

Attack (X - 4.39), or in the Initiate Direct Fire phase of Defend Battle

Position (X 4.39). The task Submits SITREP was rated as being more

critical in the Develop Situation phase of Movement to Contact (X - 4.02)

and in Defend Battle Position (X - 4.09) than in the Hasty Attack (X -

3.68) or in the Occupy Suppressive Fire Position phase of Movement to

Contact (X - 3.88).

Discussion

The effects of providing a context for judging the effects of task

performance on mission success was found to vary from task to task. Some

tasks were judged to be more critical when they were rated in the mission22

! .-.... . -. ... ---. - .. ..--- :---.-- . y -. . ...... . .. .. . .-.
r.:i7 * -• ** -. -*a -_ -

Table 6

Analysis of Rating Method by Task

Interaction for Occupy Battle Position

Mean Ratings

Mission-Based ISD-Base Ss

. Task Methoda Method Contrast Fc

68 3.89 3.53 .02 <1 ns

34 4.47 4.04 .29 <1 ns

100 4.21 3.69 .55 1.35 ns

99 4.11 3.64 .24 <1 ns

57 3.64 3.31 .08 <1 ns

29 3.70 3.35 .06 <1 ns

- 22 4.38 3.89 .38 <1 ns

23 4.24 3.47 4.78 11.71 .01

6 4.28 3.85 .07 <1 ns

102 4.38 3.85 .63 1.55 ns

2 4.15 3.61 .77 1.89 ns

85 3.81 3.61 .97 2.36 ns

40 3.96 3.90 3.03 7.41 .01

78 4.07 3.76 .10 <1 ns

20 4.19 3.97 .73 1.79 ns

21 4.02 3.58 .11 <1 ns

19 4.30 3.76 .82 2.01 ns

121 4.19 4.14 3.34 8.17 .01

125 4.15 3.82 .07 <1 ns

159 4.21 4.02 .67 1.65 ns

120 4.28 3.89 .01 <1 ns

154 3.96 3.74 .74 1.80 n

158 3.64 3.11 .73 1.78 ns

Total 4.10 3.72

a

n - 53

b

n = 62

C ms error (Ss within methods X tasks) - .4086

23

,... .. .. -,-. ,.- ,..- ,.-, ,-. .....- ', ., .. . .-. , ** .. .. . ... ..... .... .• ,- ~. - , " ,. .: '
I"I

Table 7

Table Summarizing Analyses of Variance of Scenario Effects

on Mission Success Ratings for Six Platoon Leader Tasks

Platoon Leader Task (Task #)

Source of Variation df MS F

Directs Enemy be Engaged (51)

Within Subjects

Between Scenario 2 .22 .97 ns

Residual 110 .23

Requests Indirect Fires (137)

Within Subjects

Between Scenario 4 .99 2.68 .05

Residual 216 .37

Requests Indirect Fires be Adjusted (138)

Within Subjects

Between Scenario 1 .03 .25 ns

Residual 56 .14

Requests SPOTREPS (149)

Within Subject

Between Scenario 1 .03 .25 ns

Residual 56 .14

: Submits SITREP (160)

Within Subjects

Between Scenario 3 2.16 4.66 .01

Residual 162 .46

Submits SPOTREP (161)

Within Subjects

Between Scenario 1 .08 .21 ns

Residual 55 .39

based questionnaire than when they were rated in the ISD-based questionnaire, but other tasks were Judged to be less critical in the mission-based

questionnaire. Which rating was more accurate could not be determined

since no independent measure of task criticality was available. Nevertheless, this analysis showed that the presence of a context does affect the

criticality ratings of some tasks. Excluding the scenario Occupy Battle

Position in which there was a significant main effect for questionnaire

type, the criticality ratings of approximately one-fourth of the tasks were

found to be affected by the method used to assess task criticality. Of

course, this proportion could be expected to vary with differences in the

24

.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- - -.. , " " " " -' ." -" - ".' , , " -' ."," .-. ." ' " " " .. ' " " " .' " ." " " " " ,
scenarios that were used. That is, with a different set of scenarios, the

proportion could be smaller or larger than the proportion obtained in the

present study. However, the actual percentage of tasks affected by the

type of questionnaire used to assess mission success would probably be

larger than 25 percent of the tasks since the same task would probably

appear in more than one scenario. Even if the questionnaire type had no

effect for a task in one scenario, it could have an effect in another scenario.

Since a significant main effect for questionnaire type was obtained

for the scenario Occupy Battle Position, the evidence obtained in the

present study suggests that the mission success ratings of substantially

more than 25 percent of the tasks would be affected by the type of

questionnaire used. The post hoc analyses of the 23 tasks that were contained in that scenario simply identified the tasks in which the difference

in the ratings obtained from the two types of questionnaires was greater or

less than the difference that would have been expected based on the overall

difference between the two methods. Thus, while only three tasks were

greater or less than this expected difference, all of the 23 tasks received

higher criticality ratings in the mission-based questionnaire than in the

ISD-based questionnaire. Thus, the percentage of tasks whose mission success ratings were affected by the type of questionnaire used to measure

mission success must be greater than 25 percent.

The analyses of the mission success ratings for the six tasks appearing in more than one scenario showed that the scenarios had a significant

effect on two of the tasks. Since so few tasks were involved in these

analyses, the results can only be considered as suggestive of potential

scenario effects. Nevertheless, it is possible that the effects due to

scenario differences may be large if the scenarios themselves differ

widely.

Selecting Tasks for Training

Results

Effects of Questionnaire Type. The practical implications of using

the mission-based questionnaire instead of the ISD-based questionnaire for

assessing task criticality can be illustrated by comparing the tasks that

would be chosen for training using these two methods. This illustration

should be considered as only suggestive since the comparison could only be

made with the 51 tasks that were included in both questionnaires.

Since the Mission Success scale most directly measured task criticality and since it was contained in both the mission-based questionnaire

and the ISD-based questionnaire, the mean ratings obtained on this scale

were used to select the tasks. Since six of the tasks in the mission-based

questionnaire appeared in more than one scenario or in more than one phase

of the same scenario, these tasks had more than one rating on the Mission

Success scale. For the four tasks in which the previously described ANOVAs

failed to result in a significant difference among the ratings, the overall

mean across scenarios was used for the illustration. For the two tasks in

25

.
77- .- 

which the ANOVAs did result in a significant effect for scenarios, the

highest mean rating received by the task was used for the illustration.

The actual number of tasks that can be selected for training depends,

of course, upon many factors such as the time and resources available for

training. If all of the tasks performed in a Military Occupational

Specialty (MOS) could be trained, then the method used to assess task

criticality would obviously have no effect whatsoever on the tasks selected

for training. However, as the percentage of tasks that can be trained

decreases, the effects of the method used to assess task criticality would

increase. The maximum effect would occur when only one task could be

selected for training. For the purpose of the illustration, it was assumed

that half of the tasks (25) would be selected for training.

The selection was made by rank ordering the 51 tasks on the basis of

their mean mission success rating. The 25 tasks with the highest mean

scores would be selected for training, while the remaining 26 tasks would

be rejected. The tasks that would be selected and rejected using mission

success ratings from the mission-based questionnaire and from the ISD-based

questionnaire are presented in Table 8. Eighteen of the tasks would have

been selected for training regardless of the questionnaire used to assess

their criticality. Similarly, 18 tasks would have been rejected using

either questionnaire. However, seven of the tasks that would have been

selected using the mission-based questionnaire would not have been selected

for training had the ISD-based questionnaire been used, and seven of the

tasks that would have been selected using the ISD-based questionnaire would

not have been selected had the mission-based questionnaire been used.

Selecting Tasks for Training Based on Estimated Value. The Mission

Success scale developed during this project represents an attempt to devise

a measure of task criticality that corresponds to the TRADOC definition of

the term. The research that has been conducted during this project has

shown that task criticality as measured by the Mission Success scale is

influenced by the mission and the context in which a task is performed.

Measuring the criticality of all tasks performed in a particular duty

position would be a slow process if it were necessary to determine their

effects over the different missions and contexts in which they are

performed.

Bessemer, Drucker, and Hoffman (1983) examined data obtained from the

present study to determine the feasibility of using mission success ratings

obtained without scenarios to select tasks for training. They used a multiattribute utility approach in which they assumed that the mission success

rating for a task in a particular mission could serve as a measure of its

utility for that mission. The sum of the mission success ratings of a task

over the different missions in which it appeared would reflect the total

value of that task for training. Bessemer et al. (1983) then explored the

possibility of estimating the value of a task by multiplying its mission

success rating obtained from the scenario-free ISD-based questionnaire by

the number of missions in which the task appeared in the mission-based

questionnaire. This product, which was in essence a weighted mission success score, was found to be significantly related (rho - .76) to the total

value of the task obtained using the mission-based questionnaire.

26

"-.- .-.-. .'.-.,..*.'- - ," " " " " -• ".
Table 8

Tasks Selected or Rejected for Training Using

Mission Success Ratings Obtained from

Mission-Based and ISD-Based Questionnaires

Tasks Selected Tasks Rejected

Both Mission-Based ISD-Based Both

Questionnaires Questionnaires Questionnaires Questionnaires

6 2 40 21

20 19 65 25

22 23 140 29

26 71 153 64

32 78 157 66

34 100 160 67

51 105 161 68

54 73

102 85

113 89

120 99

:21 103

125 119

137 135

138 149

139 154

152 155

159 158

Note. Numbers correspond to task numbers used in ISD-Based Questionnaire.

See Appendix C for task titles.

Discussion

For purpose of illustration, it was assumed that half of the tasks

could be selected for training. Considering only the 51 tasks that were

included in the mission-based questionnaire, the analysis showed that 28%

of the 25 tasks chosen for training using criticality scores obtained from

one type of questionnaire would have been rejected using the other type of

questionnaire. Since all of the these tasks that would have been selected

by one method while being rejected by the other were in the upper half of

the criticality distribution on one of the questionnaires, this is an

important discrepancy. It is certainly possible that tasks that are critical to mission success may be overlooked as a result of the method used to

assess task criticality. Of course, as the percentage of tasks selected

for training increases beyond 50 percent, this possibility decreases. On

the other hand, as the percentage of tasks selected for training decreases

below 50 percent, this possibility increases.

27

• .',, -- , ." .. "."'-" . ..'- .. ". .. -L . ..''. ,.' ' .L .L .? ' .L.-'.T.' . .-'.. .: .' , C.-*'. ' i .' ' . ..... '.'S .. ,- ., .,
For situations in which relatively few tasks can be selected for

training, the methodology used to assess their criticality can have a large

impact in determining those that are chosen. While it would be desirable

to provide raters with descriptions of the different missions and contexts

in which the tasks are performed, this procedure could require more time

and resources than are often available to training developers. The procedure suggested by Bessemer et al. (1983) offers a viable alternative that

can approximate mission success ratings obtained with scenarios, but without the actual need for scenarios. All that would be required is the

weighting of each task rating by the number of missions in which the task

is performed during combat.

Analysis of Mission Success Ratings

Results

The five combat effectiveness scales (e.g., Firepower, Mobility) were

included in the mission-based questionnaire on the basis that these factors

had a greater effect on the outcome of a mission than the factors that were

recommended by the ISD model (e.g., Time to Learn, Time Available). If so,

then mission success ratings would be expected to correlate higher with the

five combat effectiveness scales than with the three ISD-based scales.

Moreover, if the five combat scales affected mission success to a greater

extent than the factors represented by the three ISD-based scales, ratings

*on the five combat scales would be better able to predict mission success

ratings in a regression formula than would the three ISD scales.

Correlations With Mission Success Ratings. The correlations between

C- mission success ratings and ratings on the three ISD-based scales are

presented in Table 9. The intercorrelations between the three ISD-based

scales are also presented in the table. When computing the intercorrelations among the scales, tasks were treated as the "subjects" of the

analysis with mean ratings across raters as the data values for each task

on each rating scale. Two of the three ISD-based scales were highly correlated with mission success ratings. The correlation between the Mission

*i Success scale and the Damage/Injury scale was .84, while the correlation

between the Mission Success scale and the Time to Learn scale was .61.

Time Available was unrelated to mission success. Time to Learn ratings

also correlated highly with Damage/Injury ratings (.52) and with Time

Available ratings (.51), but Damage/Injury and Time Available were

unrelated.

The correlations between mission success ratings and ratings on the

five combat effectiveness scales are presented in Table 10. The intercorrelations between the five combat effectiveness scales are also

presented in the table. All five combat effectiveness scales correlated

significantly with mission success. The highest correlations with mission

success ratings were obtained by the Sustainability scale (.81) and the

Firepower scale (.78), although high correlations were also obtained by

Survivability (.67) and Mobility (.51). The intercorrelations among four

of the five combat effectiveness scales (Firepower, Mobility, Survivability, and Sustainability) were statistically significant. The high

28

* o. . . . . .. - -
Table 9

Intercorrelations Among ISD-Based and

Mission Success Scales Across 161 Tasks

Appearing in the ISD-Based Questionnaire

Scale

Mission Damage/ Time

Scale Success Injury Available

Damage/Injury .84**

Time Available .08 -.10

Time to Learn .61** .52** .51**

** < .01

correlation between Survivability and Sustainability (.90) suggests that

*- the respondents did not differentiate between the two factors. The only

scale which did not always correlate significantly with the other scales

was the Command scale. It correlated significantly with the Firepower

(.27) and Mobility (.35) scales, but not with the Survivability or

Sustainability scales.

Table 10

Intercorrelations Among Combat Effectiveness and

Mission Success Scales Across 66 Tasks

Appearing in the Mission-Based Questionnaire

Scale

Mission Fire- SurvivaScale Success power Mobility Command bility

Firepower .78**

Mobility .51* .27*

Command .32* .28* .35**

Survivability .67** .41** .45** -.17

Sustainability .81"* .56** .40** .06 .90**

*. < .05

< .01

29
Although it was anticipated that the Mission Success scale would

correlate higher with the five combat effectiveness scales than with the

three ISD-based scales, this result was not obtained. In fact, the Mission

Success scale correlated higher with the Damage/Injury scale (.84) than

with any of the five combat effectiveness scales. Time Available was the

only ISD-based scale that was unrelated to mission success.

To further explore the relationship between the three ISD-based scales

and the five combat effectiveness scales, the intercorrelations between the

eight scales were calculated for the 51 tasks appearing in both the ISDbased and mission-based questionnaires. The intercorrelations were actually based on a total of 66 sets of ratings since each rating of a task was

treated as a separate task whenever it appeared in a different scenario.

The intercorrelations are presented in Table 11. The results show that the

Damage/Injury scale correlated highly or moderately with all of the combat

effectiveness scales except the Command scale. Time Available did not

correlate highly with any of the five combat effectiveness scales, although

Time to Learn showed a moderate correlation with Firepower (.34) and

Command (.29). These intercorrelations show that the Damage/Injury scale

was just as highly related to the five combat effectiveness scales as it

was to the two other ISD-based scales.

While the Damage/Injury scale appeared related to the five combat

effectiveness scales and to the Time to Learn scale, the Time Available

scale was related only to the Time to Learn scale. The direction of the

Table I1

Intercorrelations Among ISD-Based Scales and

Combat Effectiveness Scales Across 66 Task Ratings

Scales

Damage/ Time Time to Fire- Mobil- Com- SurvivaScales Injury Avail. Learn power ity mand bility

Time Available -.38**

Time to Learn .40** .35**

Firepower .65** .16 .34*

Mobility .38** .23 .23 .27*

Command .02 .14 .29* .28* .35**

Survivability .54** .02 .06 .41** .45** -.17

Sustainability .55** .02 .18 .56** .40 .06 .90**

* < .05

< .01

30
4."

correlation between Time Available and Time to Learn shows that tasks that

were rated as allowing the platoon leader the least time to begin were also

the easiest tasks to learn.

Regression Analyses. The results of the regression analysis of the

mission success scores obtained from the ISD-based questionnaire are

contained in Table 12. The Damage/Injury scale showed the largest contribution to the regression equation although Time to Learn also contributed

significantly. On the other hand, the remaining ISD factor, Time Available, did not contribute significantly to the regression equation. Damage/

Injury and Time to Lealrn were retained with significant betas in a reduced

model. The multiple R (.74) between these two scales and miss ion success

ratings is significantly larger (p < .01) than the zero order R of either

the Damage/ Injury scale (.70) or Time to Learn scale (.38).

Table 12

Summary of Regression Analysis of Mission Success

Ratings Obtained in the ISD-Based Questionnaire

Standardized Regression Weights

Damage/ Time to Time 2

Injury Learn Available R R

Full Model .74** .19** .06 .86** .75**

Reduced Model .71** .24** .86** .74**

n** . < .01

The results of the regression analysis of the mission success scores

obtained from the mission-based questionnaire are contained in Table 13.

Four of the five combat effectiveness scales contributed significantly to

the regression equation, although the Sustainability and Firepower scales

zhowcd the largest contributions. The Survivability scale was the only

combat effectiveness scale that did not contribute to the regression equation. The fact that it did not contribute to the regression equation can

be attributed to its high correlation with the Sustainability scale (.90).

Thus, even though survivability was highly correlated with mission success

(.67), the variance that it accounted for in the mission success ratings

was already accounted for by sustainability ratings.

It had been anticipated that the five combat effectiveness scales

would be better able to predict mission success ratings than would the

three ISD-based scales. Although both sets of scales were able to predict

these ratings, the combat effectiveness scales were better able to predict

them. While the three ISD-based scales could account for 75% of the

variance in the mission success ratings, the five combat effectiveness

scales could account for 86% of the variance.

31

%7
Table 13

Summary of Regression Analysis of Mission Success Ratings

Obtained in the Mission-Based Questionnaire

Standardized Regression Weights

Fire- Surviva- Sustainapower Mobility Command bility bility R R2

Full Model .44** .14* .14* .08 .43* .93** .86**

Reduced Model .43** .15** .11* .50** .93** .86**

*pj < .05

** £* < .01

Interactions with Scenarios. To examine the possibility that the

contributions of the combat effectiveness scales to mission success would

vary over the different scenarios, a regression analysis was conducted that . would examine the interaction between scenarios and the scales. The

analysis was conducted by performing the following sequence of steps:

() entering the ratings scales for the reduced equations, (2) entering a

set of coded vectors representing the scenarios in which the tasks were

rated, (3) entering the set of product terms of each scfnario variate times

each rating scale, (4) and examining the changes in R . The results of

this analysis are presented in Table 14.

Table 14

Summary of Interaction Analysis of Scenarios by Task

Effects on Mission Success Ratings

2 2 R R R A~R R

Ratings Components .93 .86

(Fire Power, Mobility,

Command, Sustainability)

Scenarios-Coded Vectors .94 .87 .01 1.80

Interactions Terms .96 .92 .05 3.36**

** .. < .01

32

.. -, **- * -
The set of scenario variates did not significantly change the percent

of variance accounted for in mission success ratings. The set of four

combat effectiveness ratings could account for 86% of the variance in

mission success ratings, but adding the scenario variates to the regression

equation increased this to only 87%. Multicolinearity constrained the

inclusion of the set of product terms so that three of the twelve product

terms could not be included in the regression solution. However, the set

of product terms that were etered into the regression solution significantly (p < .01) increased R from .87 to .92. To uncover the specific

nature of these interactions, separate regressions were calculated for each

of the four scenarios. Reduced equations for these separate regressions

are presented in Table 15.

Table 15

Summary of Regression Analyses of Mission

Success for Each Scenario

Standardized Regression Weights

Fire- SustainaScenario power Mobility Command bility R

Movement to Contact .93 - .93 .86

Hasty Attack .93 - - .93 .86

Defend Battle Position - .35 .66 .99 .98

Occupy Battle Position .66 .28 .40 .93 .86

For two of the scenarios, Movement to Contact and Hasty Attack, only

one combat effectiveness scale, Firepower, entered the regression equation.

For the scenario Defend Battle Position, two scales, Sustainability and

Mobility, entered the regression equation, while all scales except the

Command scale entered the equation for the scenario Occupy Battle Position.

While all four combat effectiveness scales entered the regression equation

when the analysis was performed over all four scenarios, they never entered

the equations together when the analyses were performed separately. And

although the regression weights do appear to vary substantially across the

four scenarios, the importance of this variation is diminished when the

correlations between the overall reduced composite (i.e., the equation

derived across scenarios) and mission success ratings are examined within

each scenario. That is, when predictions of mission success ratings are

made within each scenario using the single regression equation that was

derived for all four scenarios combined, the correlations are .90, .94, .97

and .90 for Action on Contact, Hasty Attack, Defend Battle Position, and

Occupy Battle Position, respectively. These correlations approximate

closely the multiple correlations for the four regression equations

developed within each scenario suggesting that the relative weights among

33

'-', " .. "- ........ '../.'-.-':-'.'.-'.'.-.-".-.."..."....".,.D"....".....".."'.".."..'.".-..."......"..".."..-'..."-".",..,.."..-........"..",.".'.
the rating scales are less important than the scales themselves. That is,

the multicolinearity among the components is large enough that shifting the

relative size of the regression weights does little to affect the overall

predictability of mission success ratings by the combat effectiveness

scales.

Cross-Method Comparisons. The final correlational analysis involved a

validation of the regression composite for the ISD-based criticality scales

against mission success ratings obtained from the mission-based questionnaire rather than from the ISD-based questionnaire. Similarly, it involved

a validation of the regression composite for the combat effectiveness

scales against mission success ratings obtained from the ISD-based questionnaire rather than from the mission-based questionnaire. Thus,

estimated mission success values derived from the regression composite for

the ISD-based criticality scales were correlated with actual mission success ratings obtained from the mission-based questionnaire, and estimated

values derived from the regression composite for the combat effectiveness

scales were correlated with actual mission success ratings obtained from

the ISD-based questionnaire. These correlations were based on 66 ratings

made of 51 tasks. The tasks that were rated more than once (i.e., tasks

that were contained in separate scenarios or in different phases of the

same scenario) were treated as separate tasks for this analysis. The

results of these analyses are presented in Table 16. The table also contains the correlations between the composite indices and mission success

ratings separately for the subset of tasks within each scenario.

The correlation between the two sets of regression composites was .67

for the total sample of 66 tasks, while the correlation between the two

sets of mission success ratings was .57. Although the correlations between

the two sets of composites were fairly consistent from scenario to scenario, the correlations between the two sets of mission success ratings were

higher for the tasks appearing in the two defensive scenarios than in the

two offensive scenarios.

The ISD-based composite, which correlated .76 with mission success

*- ratings obtained using the ISD-based questionnaire, correlated almost as

* well with mission success ratings obtained from the mission-based questionnaire (.69). In fact, the ISD-based composite correlated slightly higher

with mission success ratings obtained using the mission-based questionnaire

than with ratings obtained using the ISD-based questionnaire among the

tasks included in each of the two offensive scenarios. The regression

composite comprised on the combat effectiveness scales, on the other hand,

correlated much higher with mission success ratings obtained using the

mission-based questionnaire (.93) than with the ratings obtained from the

ISD-based questionnaire (.45). This difference was especially pronounced

for the tasks included in the two offensive scenarios. While the combat

effectiveness composite correlated almost as well as the ISD-based scale

composite with mission success ratings obta.. using the ISD-based

questionnaire for the tasks appearing in the two defensive scenarios, it

correlated much less than did the ISD-based composite with these ratings

for tasks appearing in the two offensive scenarios.

34

.......................... *-.*.-**.s.
Table 16

Correlations Among ISD-Based and Mission-Based Rating Scale

Composites with ISD-Based and Mission-Based

Ratings of Mission Success on 66 Tasks

ISD-Based Mission-Based

Composite with Composite with

ISD H-B ISD M-B ISD-Based ISD-Based

Scenario Success Success a Success Success a Compositeb Successc

Movement to

Contact .74** .80** .24** .90** .73"* .54"*

Hasty Attack .71** .80** .25* .94** .67"* .49*

Defend Battle

Position .75** .60** .65** .97** .64** .71**

Occupy Battle

Position .85** .81** .72** .90** .71"* .77*

Total Sample of

Scenario Tasks .76** .69** .45** .93"* .67"* .57**

a M-B Success - Mission-Based Success b ISD Composite with Mission-Based Composite

c ISD Success with Mission-Based Success

• < .05

* * p < .01

Discussion

An important issue raised in this study concerned the nature of the

mission success judgments themselves. What do respondents consider when

they rate the effects of task performance on the accomplishment of the

mission? The correlations between mission success scores obtained on the

ISD-based questionnaire and the ISD-based criticality factors suggests that

respondents equate mission success with amount of equipment damage and/or

personal injury and, to a lesser extent, with the amount of time required

to learn a task. The time available before performing the task was not

equated with mission success even though it is one of the three factors

included in the ISD model for assessing task criticality. The correlations

between mission success scores obtained on the mission-based questionnaire

and the combat effectiveness scales suggests that respondents also equate

mission success with sustainability and fire power, and to a lesser extent,

with survivability, mobility, and command and control. Statistically, the

regression analyses showed that mission success ratings in the ISD-based

questionnaire equated with ratings on the Damage/Injury scale, while

35

-.7, . . .- . .. ..,-,.?.*. *-,.,-.....,-. ''' .. .L .-"- j ., •"""" • "y.,'-,i - , 

,o.. - - ". ." : -" "-" '," - ' " "-"--- •" ' ." " '" -.-A ° ' ' ,. . . ",'-. "-"- .'- . ." -",r,"-",-"-". .'"'r'J .
mission success ratings in the mission-based questionnaire equated ratings

on the Sustainability and Firepower scales.

The expectation that mission success ratings would be related more to

the five combat effectiveness scales than to the three ISD-based scales was

only partially confirmed by the study. Two of the three ISD-based criticality scales were as related to mission success as measured on the ISDbased questionnaire as were the five combat effectiveness scales on the

mission-based questionnaire. Only Time Available seemed unrelated to

mission success among the three ISD-based scales or the five combat effectiveness scales. The Damage/Injury scale, however, was similar to the five

combat effectiveness scales since it reflected actual consequences of task

performance. That is, it was like the Firepower scale, the Mobility scale,

or any of the other combat effectiveness scales in the sense that it

referred to an effect that resulted from the performance of the task. In

fact, Damage/Injury ratings correlated as high with four of the five combat

effectiveness scales as they did with the other two ISD-based criticality

scales. The fact that the ISD composite related to mission success ratings

appears to be due to the contribution of the Damage/Injury scale to the

regression equation. Its beta weight in the formula (.74) was approximately four times as large as that of the Time to Learn scale (.19) and

twelve times as large as that of the Time Available scale. Time to Learn

appears to reflect the difficulty involved in learning to perform a task

during training and does not reflect any consequence of task performance

during combat. Nevertheless, the scale correlated .61 with mission success

ratings. This may be due to an assumption on the part of the raters that

tasks that are difficult to learn may show a larger distribution among

soldiers in their abilities to perform them than tasks that are easy to

learn. It may further be assumed that this variation in learning may

result in wider differences in the performance levels of these tasks in

combat. Since there would be a greater chance of poor task performance for

tasks that are difficult to learn, then it would follow that they would be

more critical than tasks that are easy to learn. This is not because they

are inherently more critical in the sense that the quality of their performance can have a larger effect on the mission outcome, but that they are

less likely to be performed adequately and therefore are more likely to

have an effect on the mission outcome.

Time available, on the other hand, reflects a characteristic of the

task that precedes its performance. It therefore differs from any of the

combat effectiveness scales which all reflect characteristics of tasks that

occur subsequent to their performance. While it can be assumed that this

characteristic would also be related to consequences in the sense that

tasks offering the platoon leader a great deal of time enable the platoon

leader to perform the task better (e.g., they can get help in doing the

task), the ratings of most tasks on this scale indicated that the raters

felt that few tasks would offer the platoon leader more than several

minutes before he must start the task. Thus, there would be insufficient

time to take whatever actions would lead to improved task performance.

Based on this argument that tasks that are difficult to learn are more

likely to have an effect on the outcome of a mission (because tasks that

are hard to learn are more likely to be performed wrong, not because they

have an inherently greater effect on the outcome), then it would be

36

• -" .-" .- *. - *- - - - " "- ,"--., . . . ... - -.- . .------? . ... .. . -- *. .- : - ? .
* expected that the Mission Success scale would be more highly correlated

with the Time to Learn scale than with the Time Available scale.

In summary, the data obtained during this study seems to indicate that

respondents consider the consequences of task performance when rating its

effects on the mission. For this reason, the Damage/Injury scale correlated as well with mission success ratings as did the combat effectiveness

scales in the mission-based questionnaire. Since Time to Learn also could

affect the performance of a task, and therefore its consequences, it too

correlated with mission success, although not quite to the same level.

Time Available, which should have the least effect on the performance of a

task, did not correlate significantly with mission success ratings at all.

The important point to be considered here, however, is whether the Damage/ , Injury and Time to Learn scales themselves can predict mission success

ratings as well as the combat effectiveness scales. While both sets of

scales were found to predict mission success ratings, the combat effectiveness scales appeared to do the better job. They could account for 86

percent of the variance in the mission success ratings while the ISD-based

" scales could account for only 74 percent of the variance.

One of the findings was that for the tasks that appeared in both

questionnaires, the ISD-based composite (i.e., Damage/Injury and Time to

Learn) predicted mission success ratings in both the ISD-based questionnaire and the mission-based questionnaire almost equally well, while the

combat effectiveness composite (i.e., Sustainability, Firepower, Mobility,

and Command) predicted mission success ratings far better in the missionbased questionnaire than in the ISD-based questionnaire. In fact, the

combat effectiveness composite was able to account for 86 percent of the

variance in the mission success ratings in the mission-based questionnaire,

but only 20 percent of the variance in the ISD-based mission success ratings. In contrast, the ISD-based criticality scales could account for 58

percent of the variance on the mission success ratings in the ISD-based

questionnaire, and 48 percent of the variance of mission success from the

* scenario questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this research was to develop a measure of task criticality that conforms to the TRADOC requirement that tasks be selected for

training according to their effects on mission accomplishment. The current

ISD guidelines for assessing task criticality bear, at best, only an

indirect relationship to mission success. The research described in this -report explored the possibility of obtaining more direct measures of tasks

criticality based on ratings of the effects of task performance on the

successful accomplishment of the unit mission. The research also examined

the importance of providing raters a description of the mission and the

context in which the tasks are performed when judging the effects of task

performance on mission accomplishment.

The measure that was developed, the Mission Success scale, was found

to have high interrater reliability although contrary to expectations, the

reliability of the scale did not increase when raters were provided

scenarios describing the mission and the context in which the tasks were

37

,Y ;., ;.;'; ,.,i~ .' "- " -""" .".'" ''- -" . "-:," '". .'"- .. ' - . .- " ."'"- * " '."".-'- .......
performed. Correlations of mission success ratings with ratings of factors

generally acknowledged to determine mission success and with the criteria

recommended by ISD for determining task criticality showed that raters

considered relevant factors (e.g., firepower, survivability, damage to

equipment) when judging task criticality on the Mission Success scale.

Further evidence of the construct validity of the scale came from the high

correlation (.93) between mission success ratings and a regression composite on combat effectiveness factors.

Because of the resources required to identify the different combat

situations that affect task criticality, and because of the time required

to prepare scenarios describing these situations, it is unlikely that

training developers will be able to duplicate the procedures used during

the research described in this report. Unfortunately, the results suggest

that a lack of the mission context provided by scenarios detracts from the

validity of the mission success ratings as measures of task criticality.

Bessemer et al. (1983), however, using data obtained from the present

study, demonstrated that mission success ratings obtained with scenarios

can be approximated by multiplying mission success ratings obtained without

scenarios by the number of missions in which a task is performed.

Subsequent to the performance of this research, the U.S. Army Training

Board (1983) advocated the use of direct ratings of two factors for assessing task criticality--(1) the importance of a task for mission accomplishment and (2) the importance of a task for survivability. The results

obtained during the present study strongly support this general approach to

the measurement of task criticality. The findings by Bessemer, et al.

(1983) indicate that the method can be improved by weighting these ratings

by the number of missions in which the tasks appear, particularly when only

few tasks can be selected for training.

Although the results of the present study demonstrated the construct

validity of the Mission Success scale as a measure of task criticality, the

external validity of the scale can only be established by relating mission

success scores to consequences of task performance observed during combat.

While battle simulations incorporating human performance factors will

eventually enable these effects to be estimated, the current state-of-theart is not sufficient to enable these estimates to be made at the present

time.

I.3

.: ' 38
REFERENCES

Bessemer, D.W., Drucker, E.H., & Hoffman, R.G. Comparison of task

selection criteria for military training. Paper presented at the

meeting of the American Psychological Association, Anaheim, California,

1983.

Ebel, R.L. Estimation of the reliability of ratings. Psychometrika, 1951,

16, 407-424.

- Myers, J.L. Fundamentals of experimental design (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn

& Bacon, 1979.

TRADOC Circular 351-4. Job and task analysis. Fort Monroe, Virginia:

United States Army Training and Doctrine Command, 1978.

TRADOC Pamphlet 350-30. Interservice procedures for instructional systems

development. Fort Monroe, Virginia: United States Army Training and

Doctrine Command, 1975.

TRADOC Regulation 350-7. A systems approach to training. Fort Monroe,

Virginia: Headquarters, United States Army Training and Doctrine

Command, 1982.

U.S. Army Training Board. Collective training workshop. Fort Eustis,

Virginia, 1983.

39
APPENDIX A

Selection of Tasks for Criticality Assessments

and Tank Company Mission Survey

* - .
SELECTION OF TASKS FOR CRITICALITY ASSESSMENTS

1

Drucker and O'Brien (1981) identified 191 tasks that were performed

by tank platoon leaders during combat operations. This number was

considered too large to be included in the criticality assessments,

particularly in the mission-based questionnaire, since more time would be

" required to judge this number of tasks than would be available to the

subjects. Consequently it was decided to select the tasks to be judged

from those identified by Drucker and O'Brien earlier, and to limit the

number to that which subjects could handle within a single class period.

One of the purposes of the project was to develop a methodology for

preparing training objectives for tactical leadership tasks and to demonstrate the methodology by preparing training objectives for a sample of

tactical tasks performed by tank platoon leaders. These training objectives could then be used to prepare programs for training platoon leaders

on simulators as soon as the simulators became available. Consequently,

* the tasks chosen for criticality assessment on the two questionnaires were

selected according to the degree to which platoon leaders could benefit

from practicing these tasks on a simulator and the degree to which mission

accomplishment could be enhanced by this training. In particular, two

criteria were used to select the tasks for criticality assessments--(1) the

importance of using enemy forces and/or coordinating friendly forces when

training platoon leaders to perform the mission during which the tasks were

performed and (2) the degree to which the platoon leader could affect the

outcome of these missions. The first criterion was selected since enemy

and friendly force actions could be introduced more efficiently on simulators than in field exercises. The second criterion was selected to

maximize the effectiveness of this training.

To obtain information on these criteria, instructors at the Command,

Staff, and Doctrine Department of the Army School at Fort Knox were asked

to rank order 21 company missions on these two criteria. They were also

asked to rank order the phases of each mission on the criteria. The

questionnaire used for this survey, the Tank Company Mission Survey, is

contained later in this Appendix.

Rankings were made by 18 instructors. The mean ranking received by

each of the 21 missions on each of the two criteria is contained in Table

A-I. The missions whose outcomes were Judged to be most affected by the

actions of the platoon leader were the Hasty Attack, Defend Battle Position, Movement to Contact, and Tactical Movement. The missions for which

it was judged most important to use other forces during training were the

Hasty Attack, Movement to Contact, Defend Battle Position, and Deliberate

Attack.

Since Hasty Attack, Defend Battle Position, and Movement to Contact

were rated high on both criteria, they were selected for the contexts that

1 Drucker, E.H., & O'Brien, R.E. Mission-based analyses of army training

requirements. Volume I: Final Report (HumRRO Final Report FR-MTRD(KY)-

81-2). Alexandria, VA: Human Resources Research Organization, February

1981.

A-1

• • .~~.' *., . . -. . • ., ,% . . % - . .•. ,% .% •.... .%. . . %.,. b 
Table A-1

Mean Ranking Received by Company Missions

on Two Criteriaa

Criterion

Company Mission Outcomeb Importancec

Hasty Attack 4.0 3.5

Defend Battle Position 5.3 5.1

Movement to Contact 6.4 4.9

Deliberate Attack 8.1 5.2

Counterattack 8.1 5.6

Delay 9.4 7.8

Displace to Alternate

Battle Position 8.7 9.6

Tactical Movement 7.7 11.2

Occupy Battle Position 8.0 12.6

Consolidate on Objective 8.3 12.3

Plan Offensive Operations 11.7 10.7

Plan Defensive Operations 11.9 10.9

Withdraw 12.8 11.0

By Pass 14.2 12.2

Tactical Road March 12.3 14.8

Exploitation and Pursuit 15.2 12.4

Reorganize 13.4 14.9

Occupy Forward Assembly Area 13.6 14.9

Holding 16.9 12.9

Occupy Rear Assembly Area 16.7 18.6

Administrative Road March 19.0 20.2

Note. Low rank values indicate large platoon leader effects on mission

outcome or high importance of using enemy/friendly forces during train!-g;

possible rank values range from 1.0 to 21.0.

a

n = 18

bOutcome Platoon leader effect on mission outcome.

cImportance of using enemy or friendly forces during platoon leader

training.

A-2
would be prepared for the mission-based questionnaire. Deliberate Attack,

which ranked sixth on the mission outcome criterion and fourth on the

coordinating forces criterion, was not selected since the platoon leader

tasks performed during this mission were also performed during Hasty

Attack. Counterattack, which ranked high on both criteria, was not chosen

for the same reason. Instead, Occupy Battle Position was chosen as the

*, fourth mission that would be included in the mission-based questionnaire.

Thus, the tasks selected for the questionnaire would be those performed

during two offensive missions and two defensive missions. Moreover, by

selecting these two offensive missions and these two defensive missions,

platoon leaders could practice the transition from one mission to another

since the missions in each pair would normally be performed in sequence.

After the missions were selected, the tasks performed during these

missions were examined. The number of ta. - performed during each mission

was still too large for the mission-based questionnaire. Therefore, the

rankings of the mission phases were used to further limit the number of

"" tasks. The mean rankings of the mission phases on the two criteria are

• "contained in Table A-2. On the basis of these results, tasks performed

only during the following phases were selected for criticality assessment

in the mission-based questionnaire:

Mission Phase

Movement to Contact Action on Contact

Hasty Attack Fire and Maneuver

Occupy Battle Position Occupy and Organize Battle

Position

Using the rankings on the two criteria, the tasks performed during the Fire

and Maneuver phase of Defend Battle Position would also have been selected

for the mission-based questionnaire. Since the tasks performed during this

*phase were the same as those performed during the Fire and Maneuver phase

of the Hasty Attack (as were the tasks performed during the Counterattack),

the tasks performed during the Surveillance, Indirect Fire, and Direct Fire

phases were chosen instead. The specific tasks that were included in each

mission phase are shown in the mission-based questionnaire which is contained in Appendix B.

Since the ISD-based questionnaire would not contain descriptions of

the contexts in which the tasks were performed, more tasks could be

included in it than in the mission-based questionnaire. However, since 191

platoon leader tasks had been identified earlier, and since each each task

would have to be rated on six different scales, the number of tasks

selected for the questionnaire was reduced. Tasks that were performed only

in missions ranked among the bottom third of the combined distribution on

the two criteria were eliminated from the questionnaire. The tasks that

were eliminated appeared in only one or more of the following seven

missions: Bypass, Holding, Withdraw, Occupy Rear Assembly Area, Occupy

Forward Assembly Area, Administrative Road March, and Tactical Road March.

A total of 30 platoon leader tasks were eliminated in this manner leaving

A-3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . • m -.. . • . . ..... 3= ... .. ,,,,..,,, ........lo "" " - -- , , ,,. - . _ .... .... * " 
161 tasks for the questionnaire. The 161 tasks are shown in Appendix C of

this report which is the ISD-based questionnaire.

Table A-2

Mean Rankings Received by Company Mission Phases

on Two Criteriaa

Criterion

Company Mission Phase Outcomeb Importancec

Movement to Contact

Movement 1.9 2.0

Action on Contact 1.1 1.0

Hasty Attack

Suppressive Fires 1.9 1.9

Fire and Manpower 1.1 1.1

Occupy Battle Position

Move to Battle Position 2.0 1.9

Occupy and Organize

Battle Position 1.0 1.1

* Defend Battle Position

Surveillance 4.0 3.8

Indirect Fire 4.1 4.4

Direct Fire 2.1 2.3

Fire and Maneuver 2.0 1.7

Counterattack 2.8 2.8

Note. Low rank values indicate large platoon leader effects on mission

success or high importance of using enemy/friendly forces during training;

possible rank values range from 1.0 to 2.0 for Movement to Contact, Hasty

Attack, and Occupy Battle Position, and from 1.0 to 5.0 for Defend Battle

Position.

an 15

- b

bOutcome = Platoon leader affect on mission outcome.

c Importance= Importance of using enemy or friendly forces during platoon

* leader training.

A-4

*. -
NAME DATE

DIVISION POSITION

TANK COMPANY MISSION SURVEY

The Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO) and the U.S. Army

Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) are developing

a new method for measuring task criticality. Officers in AOAC will soon be

* asked to judge the criticality of a sample of platoon leader tasks using the

*. new method. Since the method is rather complex, we are trying to reduce the

number of tasks whose criticality will be assessed. The tasks will be chosen

from missions whose outcomes are most affected by the actions of platoon

" leaders and whose training most requires the use of opposing enemy forces

- and/or coordinating friendly forces.

Because of your experience in the Command, Staff, and Doctrine Department

* of the Armor School, you are asked to judge the degree to which mission outcomes are affected by the actions of platoon leaders and rate the importance

of using opposing enemy forces and/or coordinating friendly forces during platoon leader training. The instructions inside this booklet will tell you precisely what to do. If you have any questions, please call Mr. Eugene Drucker

* at 4-5618 or 4-8113.

When you have finished, please put the materials back in the envelope and

* return them to the point of contact in your Department Office.

A-5

PT5458b

.................................. .. ... . .......
1. Company missions or activities differ in the degree to which platoon leader

actions can affect their outcomes. The success or failure of some missions or

activities may depend greatly upon the actions of the platoon leaders, while

*the success or failure of other missions or activities may depend little upon

the actions of the platoon leaders.

* A. Remove the WHITE cards from the envelope.

B. Each WHITE card contains the name of a mission or activity performed

by a tank company. Please sort the cards into three equal piles according to

the degree to which the actions of the platoon leaders affect their outcomes.

One pile should contain the names of the seven missions or activities whose

outcomes are most determined by the actions of the platoon leaders. Another

* " pile should contain the names of the seven missions or activities whose outcomes are least determined by the actions of the platoon leaders. The remain-

*ing pile should contain the names of the seven missions or activities whose

outcomes are determined to an intermediate degree by the actions of the platoon leaders.

C. Select the pile containing the names of the seven missions or activities whose outcomes are most determined by the actions of the platoon leaders.

Circle the letter "M" on each of the seven cards. Then sort the cards again

according to the degree to which the actions of the platoon leaders affect the

outcomes of the missions or activities. Circle the number "l" on the card for

the mission or activity that is affected most by the actions of the platoon

- leaders, the number "2" on the card for the mission or activity that is

- affected second most, and so on until one number is circled on each card.

D. Select the pile containing the names of the seven missions or activities whose outcomes are determined to an intermediate degree by the actions of

*the platoon leaders. Circle the letter "I" on each of the seven cards. Then

* sort the cards again according to the degree to which the actions of the platoon leaders affect the outcomes of the missions or activities. Circle the

number "l" on the card for the mission or activity that is affected most by

the actions of the platoon leaders, the number "2" on the card for the mission

or activity that is affected second most, and so on until one number is circled

* on each card.

PT5458b A-6
- .

. 2. Most company missions or activities are performed in phases. For each of

* the following missions or activities, please rank order the phases according

to the degree to which their outcomes are determined by the actions of the

platoon leaders. Write the number "l" by the phase whose outcome is most

* determined by the actions of the platoon leaders, the number "2" by the phase

whose outcome is determined second most, and so on if there are more than two

phases.

When you have finished ranking the phases, please rate the contribution

of the platoon leaders to the outcome of each phase. If the platoon leaders

play an extremely important role in determing the success or failure of the

phase, place an "X" in the space next to the word IMPORTANT. If the platoon

leaders do not play an important role in determing the success or failure of

the phase, then place an "X" in the space next to the word UNIMPORTANT. Use

the other three spaces to show intermediate amounts of importance. The

greater the importance of the platoon leaders to the outcome of the mission

or activity phase, the closer the "X" should be to the word IMPORTANT. The

less the importance of the platoon leaders to the outcome of the mission or

activity phase, the closer the "X" should be to the word UNIMPORTANT.

PHASE OF COMPANY MISSION IMPORTANCE OF PLATOON LEADERS' ROLE IN DETERMINING

OF ACTIVITY THE OUTCOME OF MISSION OR ACTIVITY PHASES

MOVEMENT TO CONTACT

__Movement Phase IMPORTANT: :_ : : : :UNIMPORTANT

__Action on Contact Phase IMPORTANT:__ : : :UNIMPORTANT

HASTY ATTACK

___Suppressive Fires Phase IMPORTANT: :_: : :_:UNIMPORTANT

__Fire and Maneuver Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

BYPASS

___ Suppressive Fires Phase IMPORTANT: : :-:-: : UNIMPORTANT

Conduct Bypass and Continue

___Movement to Contact Phase IMPORTANT: : : : :UNIMPORTANT

*I HOLDING

" __Occupy Hasty Defense Phase IMPORTANT:- : -:: : :UNIMPORTANT

Defend Position Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

PT5458b A-8

. I .l 9 .**...ii II . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . . .... . . .. . . . . .
E. Select the pile containing the names of the seven missions or activities whose outcomes are least determined by the actions of the platoon leaders.

Circle the letter "L" on each of the seven cards. Then sort the cards and

circle the numbers as before.

F. Return the WHITE cards to the envelope and complete the rest of the

questionnaire.

PT5458bA-
.- 4 T - 70 

PHASE OF COMPANY MISSION IMPORTANCE OF PLATOON LEADERS' ROLE IN DETERMINING

OR ACTIVITY THE OUTCOME OF MISSION OR ACTIVITY PHASES

DELIBERATE ATTACK

____Suppressive Fires Phase IMPORTANT: : UNIMPORTANT

Fire and Maneuver Phase IMPORTANT: :_:___ : :UNIMPORTANT

Assault Phase IMPORTANT: : :::_ : UNIMPORTANT

EXPLOITATION AND PURSUIT

Movement Phase IMPORTANT: : UNIMPORTANT

Action on Contact Phase IMPORTANT: :* : . .UNIMPORTANT

OCCUPY BATTLE POSITION

Move to Battle

Position Phase IMPORTANT: : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Occupy and Organize

Battle Position Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

DEFEND BATTLE POSITION

Surveillance Phase IMPORTANT: : : : :UNIMPORTANT * 

Indirect Fire Phase IMPORTANT: : : : - :UNIMPORTANT

Direct Fire Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Fire and Maneuver Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Counterattack Phase IMPORTANT: : :- : : : UNIMPORTNAT

DISPLACE TO ALTERNATE BATTLE POSITION

Move to Alternate

Battle Position Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : : UNIMPORTNAT

Occupy and Organize

Battle Position Phase IMPORTANT: : : :_ : :UNIMPORTANT

WITHDRAW

__Covering Fire Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Breaking Contact Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

DELAY

Surveillance Phase IMPORTANT : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Indirect Fire Phase IMPORTANT: : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Direct Fire Phase IMPORTANT:__ :_ : : :UNIMPORTANT

• ._Fire and Maneuver Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : : UNIMPORTANT

Counterattack Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Withdrawal Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

PT5458b A-9

* . *-...*.--.-*'~.
PHASE OF COMPANY MISSION IMPORTANCE OF PLATOON LEADERS' ROLE IN DETERMINING

OR ACTIVITY THE OUTCOME OF MISSION OR ACTIVITY PHASES

COUNTERATTACK

Suppressive Fires Phase IMPORTANT: : : : :-:UNIMPORTANT

Fire and Maneuver Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

OCCUPY REAR ASSEMBLY AREA

Move Into

Assembly Area Phase IMPORTANT: : : :_ :_ :UNIMPORTANT

Organize Defense of

Assembly Area Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Conduct Sustaining

__Actions Phase IMPORTANT: : : :_ : :UNIMPORTANT

• OCCUPY FORWARD ASSEMBLY AREA

Move Into

- ____Assembly Area Phase IMPORTANT: : ____ :UNIMPORTANT

Organize Defense of

Assembly Area Phase IMPORTANT: __: : : :UNIMPORTANT

Conduct Sustaining

Actions Phase IMPORTANT: : : :_: :UNIMPORTANT

PLAN OFFENSIVE OPERATIONS

Receipt of

Warning Order Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Receipt of

* Operation Order Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

----Complete Readiness Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

PLAN DEFENSIVE OPERATIONS

Receipt of

Warning Order Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : : UNIMPORTANT

Receipt of

____Operation Order Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : : UNIMPORTANT

____Complete Readiness Phase IMPORTANT:____: :UNIMPORTANT

ADMINISTRATIVE ROAD MARCH

Depart Old Area Phase IMPORTANT: * :___: UNIMPORTANT

Movement Phase IMPORTANT: __: : : :UNIMPORTANT

Arrive New Area Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

PT5458b A-10
* - -. .* -. - ~ - ~ .~q.7- *-. W T T*.F.~-_ . .W. .r r . - W- W _

• PHASE OF COMPANY MISSION IMPORTANCE OF PLATOON LEADERS' ROLE IN DETERMINING

OR ACTIVITY THE OUTCOME OF MISSION OR ACTIVITY PHASES

TACTICAL ROAD MARCH

S____Depart Old Area Phase IMPORTANT:_ : : :-:-:UNIMPORTANT

__"_Movement Phase IMPORTANT: -:- : :-: UNIMPORTANT

Arrive New Area Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

TACTICAL MOVEMENT

* Conduct Tactical

I 1 Movement Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

-. CONSOLIDATE ON OBJECTIVE

Sweep Enemy from

____Objective Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

-* Prepare for Enemy

"* Counterattack Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Prepare to Continue

Attack Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

REORGANIZE

"- Conduct Resupply Phase IMPORTANT: :: _ : :UNIMPORTANT

Perform Maintenance Phase IMPORTANT: : : _ _ :_ :UNIMPORTANT

Reestablish

Communications Phase IMPORTANT:___ : :- : :UNIMPORTANT

* Reassign Personnel Phase IMPORTANT: : : :_:_ :UNIMPORTANT

PT5458b A-il

* - . *. . * * . * ..

* .. * --. . **- * S * P..** * .*~- - * -- * - --

.°, S** * * * . - *
3. During combat, military commanders must react to the actions of the enemy

and coordinate their own actions with those of other friendly forces. The

opportunity to react to a "thinking" enemy or to coordinate with friendly

forces is often not included in platoon leader training.

A. Remove the YELLOW cards from the envelope.

B. Each YELLOW card contains the name of a mission or activity performed

by a tank company. Please sort the cards into three equal piles according to

the importance of using enemy forces and/or coordinating friendly forces when

training platoon leaders to perform the missions or activities. One pile

should contain the names of the seven missions or activities for which it is

most important to use these forces when training platoon leaders. Another

pile should contain the names of the seven missions or activities for which it

is least important to use these forces when training platoon leaders. The

remaining pile should contain the names of the seven missions or activites for

which it is intermediate in importance to use these forces when training pla-

-, toon leaders.

C. Select the pile containing the names of the seven missions or activities for which it is most important to use enemy forces and/or coordinating

friendly forces when training platoon leaders. Circle the letter "M" on each

of the seven cards. Then sort the cards again iccording to the importance of

using these forces when training platoon leaders to perform the missions or

activities. Circle the number "1" on the card for the mission or activity in

which it is most important to use these forces, the number "2" on the card for

the mission or activity in which it is next in importance, and so on until one

number is circled on each card.

D. Select the pile containing the names of the seven missions or activities for which it is intermediate in importance to use enemy forces and/or

coordinating friendly forces when training platoon leaders. Circle the letter

"I" on each of the seven cards. Then sort the cards again according to the

importance of using these forces when training platoon leaders to perform the

missions or activities. Circle the number "" on the card for the mission or

activity in which it is most important to use these forces, the number "2" on

the card for the mission or activity in which it is next in importance, and so

forth until one number is circled on each card.

PT5458b A-12

.. . . ........... ,, ......... . •. •... ... , ...... ,. ... .. .. .,.\ -, . .. ,.,-,
, _, , , 

E. Select-the pile containing the names of the seven missions or activities for which it is least important to use enemy forces and/or coordinating

friendly forces when training platoon leaders. Circle the letter "L" on each

of the seven cards. Then sort the crds and circle the numbers as before.

F. Return the YELLOW cards to the envelope and complete the rest of the

questionnaire.

PT54 58b A-i13

. ..
7. 

 T7 17 T. F 

4. For each of the following missions or activities, please rank order the

phases according to the importance of using opposing enemy and/or coordinating

friendly forces when training platoon leaders. Write the number "1" by the

phase in which it is most important to use these forces when training platoon

leaders, the number "2" by the phase in which it is second in importance, and

so on if there are more than two phases.

When you have finished ranking the phases, please rate the importance of

using opposing enemy and/or coordinating friendly forces when training platoon

leaders to perform each phase. If you feel that it is extremely important to

use these forces during platoon leader training, place an "X" next to the word

IMPORTANT. If you feel that it is not important to use these forces during

platoon leader training, place an "X" next to the word UNIMPORTANT. Use the

other spaces to show intermediate amounts of importance. The greater the

importance of using opposing enemy and/or coordinating friendly forces when

training platoon leaders to perform the phases, the closer the "X" should be

*" to the word IMPORTANT. The less the importance of using these forces when

*[ training platoon leaders to perform the phase, the close the "X" should be to

the word UNIMPORTANT.

IMPORTANCE OF USING OPPOSING ENEMY AND/OR

' PHASE OF COMPANY MISSION COORDINATING FRIENDLY FORCES WHEN TRAINING

OR ACTIVITY PLATOON LEADERS

MOVEMENT TO CONTACT

*" Movement Phase IMPORTANT: : __: : :UNIMPORTANT

Action on Contact Phase IMPORTANT: : : __: :UNIMPORTANT

HASTY ATTACK

Suppressive Fires Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Fire and Maneuver Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

BYPASS

_Suppressive Fires Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Conduct Bypass and Continue

Movement to Contact Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

HOLDING

_Occupy Hasty Defense Phase IMPORTANT: _ :_: : : UNIMPORTANT

Defend Position Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

PT5458b A-14

- .. .. °
IMPORTANCE OF USING OPPOSING ENEMY AND/OR

PHASE OF COMPANY MISSION COORDINATING FRIENDLY FORCES WHEN TRAINING

OR ACTIVITY PLATOON LEADERS

DELIBERATE ATTACK

____Suppressive Fires Phase IMPORTANT: :UNIMPORTANT

Fire and Maneuver Phase IMPORTANT: : __:_* :UNIMPORTANT

Assault Phase IMPORTANT: :-:-:-:-:UNIMPORTANT

EXPLOITATION AND PURSUIT

Movement Phase IMPORTANT: _ __:_ * :UNIMPORTANT

7 Action on Contact Phase IMPORTANT: : ____ : :UNIMPORTANT

OCCUPY BATTLE POSITION

Move to Battle

Position Phase IMPORTANT: : __ __: :UNIMPORTANT

Occupy and Organize

Battle Position Phase IMPORTANT: : : : :_:UNIMPORTANT

DEFEND BATTLE POSITION

Surveillance Phase IMPORTANT: _ : : :_:UNIMPORTANT

Indirect Fire Phase IMPORTANT: : ____:UNIMPORTANT

Direct Fire Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Fire and Maneuver Phase IMPORTANT: : : : :_:UNIMPORTANT

* Counterattack Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

DISPLACE TO ALTERNATE BATTLE POSITION

Move to Alternate

Battle Position Phase IMPORTANT: " : : :_:UNIMPORTANT

* Occupy and Organize

-* Battle Position Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

WITHDRAW

Covering Fire Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Breaking Contact Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

DELAY

Surveillance Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Indirect Fire Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Direct Fire Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Fire and Maneuver Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Counterattack Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Withdrawal Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

PT5458b A-15
',,.' -' ," ]''. ", ", " ' ." - , . _ -- .- .. .- . . -_, ., II I~ - l i o I

IMPORTANCE OF USING OPPOSING ENEMY AND/OR

PHASE OF COMPANY MISSION COORDINATING FRIENDLY FORCES WHEN TRAINING

OR ACTIVITY PLATOON LEADERS

COUNTERATTACK

_Suppressive Fires Phase IMPORTANT: : : : :_:UNIMPORTANT

Fire and Maneuver Phase IMPORTANT: : :- :UNIMPORTANT

OCCUPY REAR ASSEMBLY AREA

Move Into

* Assembly Area Phase IMPORTANT: :_: : : :UNIMPORTANT

Organize Defense of

Assembly Area Phase IMPORTANT: :_:_: : :UNIMPORTANT

Conduct Sustaining

Actions Phase IMPORTANT: : :_: : : UNIMPORTANT

OCCUPY FORWARD ASSEMBLY AREA

Move Into

Assembly Area Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Organize Defense of

Assembly Area Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Conduct Sustaining

Actions Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

PLAN OFFENSIVE OPERATIONS

Receipt of

* Warning Order Phase IMPORTANT: ." _. _ :_: UNIMPORTANT

Receipt of

Operation Order Phase IMPORTANT: :____ :UNIMPORTANT

Complete Readiness Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

PLAN DEFENSIVE OPERATIONS

Receipt of

Warning Order Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

Receipt of

Operation Order Phase IMPORTANT: : : . . :UNIMPORTANT

* Complete Readiness Phase IMPORTANT: : - : : :UNIMPORTANT

ADMINISTRATIVE ROAD MARCH

Depart Old Area Phase IMPORTANT: : : - : :UNIMPORTANT

Movement Phase IMPORTANT: : : . : :UNIMPORTANT

Arrive New Area Phase IMPORTANT: : : : : :UNIMPORTANT

PT5458b A-16
IMPORTANCE OF USING OPPOSING ENEMY AND/OR

*PHASE OF COMPANY MISSION COORDINATING FRIENDLY FORCES WHEN TRAINING

OR ACTIVITY PLATOON LEADERS

TACTICAL ROAD MARCH

* _____Depart Old Area Phase IMPORTANT: : : :____:UNIMPORTANT

Movement Phase IMPORTANT: __UNIMPORTANT : 

__Arrive New Area Phase IMPORTANT: ___: ___ ___:UIMPORTANT

TACTICAL MOVEMENT

Conduct Tactical

1 Movement Phase IMPORTANT:_____: __ :UJNIMPORTANT

CONSOLIDATE ON OBJECTIVE

Sweep Enemy from

____Objective Phase IMPORTANT: :-:-:-:- __:UNIMPORTANT

Prepare for Enemy

Counterattack Phase IMPORTANT: :-:-:-:-:UNIMPORTANT

Prepare to Continue

__Attack Phase IMPORTANT: : . ___ :UNIMPORTANT

* REORGANIZE

__Conduct Resupply Phase IMPORTANT: : :UNIMPORTANT

__Perform Maintenance Phase IMPORTANT:________ : : :UNIMPORTANT

Reestablish

__Communications Phase IMPORTANT: :-:-:-:-:UNIMPORTANT

*Reassign Personnel Phase IMPORTANT. :-:-:-:-:UNIMPORTANT

A-17

PT5458b

....................................................
V W 

. 

.F . 

 

 . 

. 

APPENDIX B

Mission-Based Questitonna ire

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
NAME DATE

BRANCH

PLATOON LEADER TASK SURVEY

FORM A

The U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

(ARI) and the Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO) are developing

a method for preparing training objectives for leadership tasks. The method

will be used to prepare training objectives for critical platoon leader tasks

performed during tank platoon operations.

Because of your experience in armor, you are asked to rate various platoon leader tasks along a number of different dimensions. The criticality of

these tasks will be determined on the basis of these ratings, and training

objectives will be prepared for the tasks found to be most critical.

The instructions inside this booklet will describe in detail how the

ratings are to be made. If you have any questions, raise your hand and they

will be answered.

Not to be shown to unauthorized persons

Not to be reproduced in any form

without the specific permission of the

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR, ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR PERSONNEL

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

B -1

PT5463a

........................... 7. . . . .
INSTRUCTIONS

This questionnaire contains four scenarios describing different missions

performed by a tank team--Action on Contact, Hasty Attack, Occupy Battle

Position, and Defend Battle Position. Following each scenario are lists of

tasks performed by the platoon leaders and six different rating scales. The

rating scales are:

1) Effect of task performance on effective application of fire

power by the platoon

2) Effect of task performance on effective mobility and maneuver

by the platoon

3) Effect of task performance on effective command, control,

communication, and coordination within the platoon.

4) Effect of task performance on survivability of men and equipment within the platoon

5) Effect of task performance on the capability of the platoon to

sustain its combat effectiveness

6) Effect of task performance on the successful accomplishment of

the team mission

Your job will be to read each scenario and then rate the tasks on each of

"" the six scales. The instructions before each set of rating scales will describe

how the scales are to be used.

Most platoon leader tasks include two components--decisions and actions.

Although only the actions are stated in the lists of tasks, you should consider

-* both the decision and the action when you rate each task. For example, one of

the tasks you will rate is "directs cease fire." Before a platoon leader can direct his platoon to cease fire, he must first decide to cease fire. Therefore when you rate this task, you must consider both the decision to cease fire

and the command to cease fire.

Indicate your rating for each task by placing an "X" in the appropriate

*% space.

PT5463a B-2

,*.;v'.'-:' .' ",'- -, 1".., v".-v'.": ". ..." -:I . K .".'.. -Q ;-- ".'.. "..' -.-.- ->-.". .. - ...'."" ..... . . ".

' ' " ' ' '' '..a ' n~i s ' " " " ' - '-" '" "' ', ''_'-, '.:--___- 'U ". ,
SCENARIO

HASTY ATTACK

FIRE AND MANEUVER

1. General Situation. A/2/37 Armor, consisting of two tank platoons, one infantry

platoon, and one TOW section, is conducting a movement to contact. The mission of

the team is to conduct a movement to contact East along Highway N2, secure Hill

210, and from that position support B/2/31 Infantry's attack to seize the bridge

over GREEN River. The lead platoon has been fired on by an enemy tank and an

ATGM located on Hill 210. Terrain in the area of operations consists of rolling

hills with sparsely wooded areas between the hills, visibility is 5000 meters,

and there has been no precipitation during the last 72 hours. A FIST is with the

team command group and the task forces command group and B/2/31 Infantry follows

the team along Highway N2.

2. Special Situation. The team commander has received a SITREP from the lead

platoon leader and has told him to continue to engage the enemy. The team

commander assembles the other platoon leaders on Hill 199 and issues his FRAGO

for the attack on Hill 210. The team will attack in ten minutes with two platoons abreast, infantry platoon on the right. The attack position is Hill 199,

the assault position is the fence line 300 meters West of Hill 210. Artillery

fire will shift when the assault position is reached, direct suppressive fires

will shift when the assault is within 100 meters of the objective, and the TOW

section will support the attack from Hill 189. The fire and maneuver element

platoon leaders have returned to their platoons. The maneuver tank platoon

. leader issues a hasty attack FRAGO; directs movement into attack position,

into attack formation, and out of attack position; requests and adjusts indirect

* fires and directs engagement of targets of opportunity; directs fire and maneuver

be conducted; directs movement into assault formation and requests indirect fires

be shifted; directs assault be started and requests suppressive fires be shifted;

*requests indirect fires and directs suppressive fires be stopped; and submits a

* SITREP.

cez -p

~B-3

PT5463a

"o ;i':,> .... -
. Tv . 

. . . W . 

ILA r.

Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the fire and

maneuver platoon during the Hasty Attack described in the scenario. How he

performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the

effective application of fire power by the platoon. How he performed other

tasks may have had a large effect on the effective application of fire power

• by the platoon.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader

of the fire and maneuver platoon according to how much of an effect their

performance could have had on the effective application of fire power by the

platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included in the task.

CONDUCT FIRE AND MANEUVER

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

* PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Issues FRAGO

2. Directs movement into

attack position

3. Directs movement into

attack formation

4. Directs movement out of

attack position

* 5. Requests indirect fires

* 6. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

7. Directs targets of opportunity be engaged

8. Directs fire and maneuver

be conducted

CONDUCT THE ASSAULT

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement into

assault formation

B-4

PT5463a

............. ............... . . ..-.. , *, ..,.. . . . , . , . - ... -, *, .-b, *- . * .
EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

2. Requests indirect fires

be shifted_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

3. Directs assault be started ____ ________ ________

4. Requests suppressive fires

be shifted ______ _ _ _ _____ _ _ _ ____

*5. Requests indirect fires be

stopped_______ ___

6. Requests direct suppressive

fires be stopped____________ _______

7. Submits SITREP__ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _

B -5

PT5463a

.. '.**%.%s..............................................................................
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the fire and

maneuver platoon during the Hasty Attack described in the scenario. How he

performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the

effective use of mobility and maneuver by the platoon. How he performed

other tasks may have had a large effect on the effective use of mobility and

maneuver by the platoon.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the fire and maneuver platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could have had on the effective use of mobility and maneuver by the

platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included in the task.

CONDUCT FIRE AND MANEUVER

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY AND MANEUVER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Issues FRAGO

2. Directs movement into

attack position

3. Directs movement into

attack formation

, 4. Directs movement out of

attack position

5. Requests indirect fires

6. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

, 7. Directs targets of opportunity be engaged

8. Directs fire and maneuver

be conducted

CONDUCT THE ASSAULT

LZFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY AND MANEUVER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement into

assault formation

B-6

PT5463a

"V.
EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY AND MANEUVER

*PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

*2. Requests indirect fires

be shifted________________________

* ~3. Directs assault be started ____ ________ ________

4. Requests suppressive fires

be shifted_________________________

5. Requests indirect fires be

stopped_____ _____ _____ __ ___

6. Requests direct suppressive

fires be stopped_____

7. Submits SITREP ____ ________ ________

B-7

PT5463a
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the fire and

maneuver platoon during the Hasty Attack described in the scenario. How he

performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on effective

command, control, communication, and coordination within the pl~toon. How

he performed other tasks may have had a large effect on the effective command,

control, communication and coordination within the platoon.

* Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the fire and maneuver platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could have had on effective command, control, communication and

coordination within the platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included

in the task.

CONDUCT FIRE AND MANEUVER

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE COMMAND, CONTROL,

COMMUNICATION, AND COORDINATION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

I. Issues FRAGO

" 2. Directs movement into

attack position

3. Directs movement into

attack formation

' 4. Directs movement out of

attack position

5. Req,,ests indirect fires

6. Requests indirect fires

bc adjusted

7. Directs targets of opportunity be engaged

8. Directs fire and maneuver

be conducted

CONDUCT THE ASSAULT

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE COMMAND, CONTROL,

COMMUNICATION, AND COORDINATION

. PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

,.

1. Directs movement into

assault formation

PT5463a B-8

.......
EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE COMMAND, CONTROL,

COMMICATION, AND COORDINATION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

2. Requests indirect fires

be shifted

3. Directs assault be started ____ ________ ________

*4. Requests suppressive fires

be shifted ____ ________ ____ ____

*5. Requests indirect fires

be stopped_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

6. Requests direct suppressive

fires be stopped____________________

* ~7. Submits SITREP ____ ________ ________

B-9 PT5463a
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the fire and . maneuver platoon during the Hasty Attack described in the scenario. How he

.i performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the survivability of men and equipment within the platoon. How he performed

other tasks may have had a large effect on the survivability of men and equipment within the platoon.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the fire and maneuver platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could have had on the survivability of men and equipment within the

platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

CONDUCT FIRE AND MANEUVER

EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Issues FRAGO

* 2. Directs movement into

attack position

- 3. Directs movement into

attack formation

" 4. Directs movement out of

attack position

* 5. Requests indirect fires

6. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

7. Directs targets of opportunity be engaged

8. Directs fire and maneuver

be conducted

CONDUCT THE ASSAULT

EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

" PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement into

assault formation

B-10

PT5463a

°,, "-', ,,,-,- .,", .,-.. .". - " ',- -, ".- , ,,- ".,'-,'j-,, -'-~ j - '-. ** ,*. . - . ,' ,'- , ,'- '- , .* ** '- , * , * -, *-j - ,'-. * --' ', ,
EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

2. Requests indirect fires

be shifted_____ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _____ _____

3. Directs assault be started ____ ________ ________

4. Requests suppressive fires

be shifted_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

*5. Requests indirect fires

be stopped_____ _____ _____

6. Requests direct suppressive

fires be stopped_____ _____ ___ _______

7. Submits SITREP ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ ________

PT5463a B1
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the fire and

maneuver platoon during the Hasty Attack described in the scenario. How he

*performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the capability of the platoon to sustain its combat effectiveness. How he performed other tasks may have had a large effect on the capability of the platoon to sustain its combat effectiveness.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the fire and maneuver platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could have had on the capability of the platoon to sustain its combat

. effectiveness. Remember to consider the decisions included in the task.

CONDUCT FIRE AND MANEUVER

EFFECT ON SUSTAINMENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Issues FRAGO

2. Directs movement into

attack position

3. Directs movement into

attack formation

4. Directs movement out of

attack position

* 5. Requests indirect fires

6. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

, 7. Directs targets of opportunity be engaged

8. Directs fire and maneuver

be conducted

CONDUCT THE ASSAULT

,5 EFFECT ON SUSTAINJIENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

. 1. Directs movement into

assault formation

B-12

*PT5463a

--o. .-- . . . . . . . . .
EFFECT ON SUSTAINMENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

*2. Requests indirect fires

be shifted ______ _ _ _ _____ _ _ _ ____

* ~3. Directs assault be started _________ ________ ____

4. Requests suppressive fires

be shifted _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ _____ _ _ _

*5. Requests indirect fires

be stopped__ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _____

6. Requests direct suppressive

fires be stopped_____ _____ _____ ___ _______

* ~7. Submits SITREP ____ ________ ____ ____

B-13

PT5463a
* Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the fire and

maneuver platoon during the Hasty Attack described in the scenario. How he

performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the suc-

* cessful accomplishment of the team mission. How he performed other tasks may

have had a large effect on the successful accomplishment of the team mission.

* Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the fire and maneuver platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could have had on the successful accomplishment of the team mission.

Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

CONDUCT FIRE AND MANEUVER

EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Issue FRAGO

2. Directs movement into

attack position

3. Directs movement into

attack formation

4. Directs movement out of

attack position

* 5. Requests indirect fires

6. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

7. Directs targets of opportunity be engaged

8. Directs fire and maneuver

be conducted

CONDUCT THE ASSAULT

EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

* PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement into

assault formation

B-14

PT5463a
EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

*PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

2. Requests indirect fires

be shifted_____ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

3. Directs as-ault be started __________

4. Requests suppressive fires

be shifted_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

5. Requests indirect fires

be stopped _ _ _ _ ________ _____ _ _ _

6. Requests direct suppressive

fires be stopped_____ _____ ___ _______

7. Submits SITREP ____ ________ ________

B-15

PT5463a

.................. .. .. .. ..................
SCENARIO

MOVEMENT TO CONTACT

ACTION ON CONTACT

1. General Situation. A/2/37 Armor, consisting of two tank platoons, one

infantry platoon, and one TOW section, is conducting a movement to contact. The

mission of the team is to conduct a movement to contact East along Highway N2,

secure Hill 210, and from that position support B/2/31 Infantry's attack to

seize the bridge over GREEN River. Enemy stragglers reported fleeing on foot

East of RJ N2-N4 and enemy light reconnaissance vehicles are reported in the

vicinity of Hill 210. Terrain in the area of operations consists of rolling

hills with sparsely wooded areas between the hills, visibility is 500 meters,

and there has been no precipitation during the last 72 hours. A FIST is with

the team command group and the task force command group and B/2/31 Infantry

follows the team along Highway N2.

I.

/0 ,Ir ... ".. i

o I --

AD

2. Special Situation. The first platoon of A/2/37 Armor, the lead unit of the

team has been moving East of RJ N2-N6 in a bounding overwatch formation. The

*' trail section of the platoon has occupied an overwatch position on Hill 189 and

the lead section (platoon leader commanding) has reached the forward edge of

*. Hill 204 when it is fired on by an enemy tank and an ATGM on Hill 210. The platoon leader orders the lead section to pop smoke and move into a defilade position. He then directs the enemy be engaged, requests indirect fire, develops the

situation, and submits a SITREP. The other platoons move to suppressive fire

positions, engage the enemy, request indirect fire, and submit SITREPs.

- 1' . - (-"

*PT5463a B-16

. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' ' .f

5 5 5 S -
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Action on Contact described in the scenario. How he performed

some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the effective application of fire power by the platoon. How he performed other tasks may have

had a large effect on the effective application of fire power by the platoon.

*3 Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on the effective application of fire power by the platoon. Remember

to consider the decisions included in the task.

IMMEDIATE ACTION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

" PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs smoke be popped

2. Directs movement into

defilade position

3. Submits SPOTREP

4. Directs enemy be engaged

- 5. Requests indirect fires

* 6. Requests indirect fires be

adjusted

DEVELOP THE SITUATION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

' PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

. o1. Requests SPOTREPS

2. Develops the situation

* 3. Submits SITREP

PT5463a B -17

. . .
The following tasks were performed by the platoon leader of the second platoon

* during the Action on Contact described in the scenario. Please rate them

* according to how much of an effect their performance could have had on the

effective application of fire power by the platoon. Remember to consider the

decisions included in the tasks.

OCCUPY SUPPRESSIVE FIRE POSITION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

*PLATOON LEADER TAS~K None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement to overwatch position ____ __________________

2. Directs enemy be engaged ____ ________ ________

* ~3. Requests SPOTREPS ____ ________ ________

* ~4. Requests indirect fires_____ _________ ____

5. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted___________________ ____

* ~6. Submits SITREP ____ ________ ________

PT5463a
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Action on Contact described in the scenario. How he performed

some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the effective use of

mobility and maneuver by the platoon. How he performed other tasks may have

had a large effect on the effective use of mobility and maneuver by the pla- toon.

I. Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on the effective use of mobility and maneuver by the platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

IMMEDIATE ACTION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY AND MANEUVER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs smoke be popped

2. Directs movement into

defilade position

3. Submits SPOTREP

4. Directs enemy be engaged

5. Requests indirect fires

6 6. Requests indirect fires

be shifted

DEVELOP THE SITUATION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY AND MANEUVER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Requests SPOTREPS

2. Develops the situation

*. 3. Submits SITREP

B-19

PT5463a
4-' -A-A

* The following tasks were performed by the platoon leader of the second platoon

* during the Action on Contact described in the scenario. Please rate them

according to how much of an effect their performance could have had on the

* effective use of mobility and maneuver by the platoon. Remember to consider

the decisions included in the tasks.

OCCUPY SUPPRESSIVE FIRE POSITION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY AND MANEUVER

*PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement to overwatch position ____ ________ ________

* ~2. Directs enemy be engaged ____ ________ ________

* ~3. Requests SPOTREPS ____ ________ ________

4. Requests indirect fires ____ ________

5. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted_________________________

6. Submits SITREP____ ____ ____ ________

PT5463a B2

i *-:* ** * . :** .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7
*i Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first pla-

*toon during the Action on Contact described in the scenario. How he performed

*. some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on effective command,

,. control, communication, and coordination within the platoon. How he performed other tasks may have had a large effect on effective command, control,

communication, and coordination within the platoon.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

* the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on effective command, control, communication, and coordination within

the platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

IMMEDIATE ACTION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE COMMAND, CONTROL,

COMMUNICATION, AND COORDINATION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs smoke be popped

-- 2. Directs movement into

defilade position

3. Submits SPOTREP

4. Directs enemy be engaged

5. Requests indirect fires

6. Requests indirect fires

be shifted

DEVELOP THE SITUATION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE COMMAND, CONTROL,

COMMUNICATION, AND COORDINATION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Requests SPOTREPS

2. Develops the situation

3. Submits SITREP

B-21

PT5463a
The following tasks were performed by the platoon leader of the second platoon

during the Action on Contact described in the scenario. Please rate them

according to how much of an effect their performance could have had on effective command, control, communication, and coordination within the platoon.

Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

OCCUPY SUPPRESSIVE FIRE POSITION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE COMMAND, CONTROL,

COMM'UNICATION, AND COORDINATION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement to overwatch position

2. Directs enemy be engaged

3. Requests SPOTREPS

4. Requests indirect fires

* 5. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

6. Submits SITREP

B-22

PT5463a

* . . -

-bU ~ * C I . ~**. - * d
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Action on Contact described in the scenario. How he performed

some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the survivability of

*' men and equipment within the platoon. How well he performed other tasks may

have had a large effect on the survivability of men and equipment within the

platoon.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on the survivability of men and equipment within the platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

IMMEDIATE ACTION

EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs smoke be popped

2. Directs movement into

defilade position

. 3. Submits SPOTREP

4. Directs enemy be engaged

" 5. Requests indirect fires

6. Requests indirect fires

be shifted

DEVELOP THE SITUATION

EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Requests SPOTREPS

2. Develops the situation

3. Submits SITREP

--23

PT5463a
w*E.lL.

The following tasks were performed by the platoon leader of the second platoon

during the Action on Contact described in the scenario. Please rate them

according to how much of an effect their performance could have had on the

survivability of men and equipment within the platoon. Remember to consider

the decisions included in the tasks.

OCCUPY SUPPRESSIVE FIRE POSITION

EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement to overwatch position

., 2. Directs enemy be engaged

, 3. Requests SPOTREPS

4. Requests indirect fires

5. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

* 6. Submits SITREP

B-24

PT5463a
-. - W ,- -Q 

Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Action on Contact described in the scenario. How he performed

*- some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on. the capability of the

platoon to sustain its combat effectiveness. How he performed other tasks may

have had a large effect on the capability of the platoon to sustain its combat

effectiveness.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

* have had on the capability of the platoon to sustain its combat effectiveness.

Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

IMMEDIATE ACTION

EFFECT ON SUSTAINMENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

-" 1. Directs smoke be popped

2. Directs movement into

defilade position

3. Submits SPOTREP

4. Directs enemy be engaged

* 5. Requests indirect fires

6. Requests indirect fires

be shifted

DEVELOP THE SITUATION

EFFECT ON SUSTAINMENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Requests SPOTREPS

2. Develops the situation

3. Submits SITREP

PT5463a B-25

. ...
The following tasks were performed by the platoon leader of the second platoon

during the Action on Contact described in the scenario. Please rate them

according to how much of an effect their performance could have had on the

capability of the platoon to sustain its combat effectiveness. Remember to

consider the decisions included in the tasks.

OCCUPY SUPPRESSIVE FIRE POSITION

EFFECT ON SUSTAINMENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement to overwatch position

2. Directs enemy be engaged

3. Requests SPOTREPS

4. Requests indirect fires

5. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

6. Submits SITREP

B-26

PT54 63a
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first *.latoon

during the Action on Contact described in the scenario. How he performed some

of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the successful accomplishment of the team mission. How he-performed other tasks may have had a large

effect on the successful accomplishment of the team mission.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on the successful accomplishment of the team mission. Remember to

consider the decisions included in the tasks.

IMMEDIATE ACTION

EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs smoke be popped

2. Directs movement into

defilade position

* 3. Submits SPOTREP

4. Directs enemy be engaged

5. Requests indirect fires

- 6. Requests indirect fires

be shifted

DEVELOP THE SITUATION

EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Requests SPOTREPS

*2. Develops the situation

.- 3. Submits SITREP

B-27

PT5463a
* ..... . . ... . ~. .

The following tasks were performed by the platoon leader of the second platoon

during the Action on Contact described in the scenario. Please rate them

according to how much of an effect their performance could have had on the

successful accomplishment of the team mission. Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

OCCUPY SUPPRESSIVE FIRE POSITION

EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

*PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement to overwatch position ____ __________________

2. Directs enemy be engaged ____ ________ ________

3. Requests SPOTREPS ____ ________ ________

4. Requests indirect fires______ ________ ____

5. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted ____ ________ ________

6. Submits SITREP____ ____ _____ ________

PT5463a B-28
SCENARIO

OCCUPY BATTLE POSITION

OCCUPY AND ORGANIZE PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

1. General Situation (Figure 1). A/2/37 Armor, consisting of two tank platoons, one infantry platoon, and one TOW section, arrives at COLFAX RIDGE (BP FOX) with

the mission to occupy and defend the BP. Enemy reconnaissance units are operating

East of OTTER Creek. To reach BP FOX the enemy must cross OTTER Creek, a difficult

but fordable obstacle, and then cross terrain which provides cover but very little

concealment. Enemy avenues of approach are: dighway N6, directly into the BP;

Highway N2, diagonally across the front of the BP; and the SPRING Creek woodline,

directly into the left quarter of the BP. COLFAX Ridge is the key terrain. Visibility is 5000 meters and the ground will support all track vehicles. A FIST is

on the BP and the team commander has outposted Hills 127 and 106.

2. Special Situation (Figure 2). The first platoon's mission is to occupy and

defend BP FIA. The platoon leader directs his platoon into the BP; directs the

TCs to position their tanks to cover the main avenue of approach; and to occupy

turret defilade positions, camouflage the tanks, and post ground and air guards.

177

rc

44-C_6.

B-29

P 546 3a

*. 6fr, - o o -..-. . . . - , . - . - - .. • . , , . • . - .- -. -% - . oo - - ,
"* 3. Special Situation Continued (Figure 3). The first platoon leader designates

sectors of fire and tank targets; checks positions for suitability, and directs

*. movement of tanks for good fields of fire; he assigns alternate positions, directs

range cards be prepared, and chemical alarms set up; he then orders obstacles,

mines and flares be installed. Next he coordinates with the FIST leader, the TOW

'* section leader, and adjacent platoon leaders, and then completes his platoon fire

* plan. After completing the fire plan, the platoon leader reconnoiters the assigned

alternate position, selects and announces withdrawal routes, and plans displacement. Lastly he requests the team fire plans and that wire communications be

installed.

A~osbc~Z.

"9

,a7

i~~~r Aq

B-30

PT5463a

- ................... , ,, I l................-......I.......... ...............................
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Occupation of the Battle Position described in the scenario.

How he performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the

effective application of fire power by the platoon. How he performed other

tasks may have had a large effect on the effective application of fire power

by the platoon.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on the effective application of fire power by the platoon. Remember

to consider the decisions included in the task.

OCCUPY PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement into

designated position

2. Directs avenues of approach

be covered

3. Directs tanks be put in

turret defilade

4. Directs tanks be camouflaged

5. Directs ground guards

be posted

6. Directs air guards be posted

ORGANIZE PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Designates sectors of fire

2. Designates tank targets

- 3. Checks positions for

suitability

4. Directs tanks move to good

fields of fji:e

PT5463a B-31

* **r.J.*
EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

*PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

5. Assigns alternate positions ____ ________ ________

*6. Directs range cards be

prepared__ ___

7. Directs chemical alarms

be emplaced_____

8. Directs obstacles, mines,

and flares be installed_____ _____ ____ ___________

9. Coordinates with FIST

leader_____ _____ _____ _____ ___ __

*10. Coordinates with TOW

section leader_____ _____ _____ ____ ______

11. Coordinates with adjacent

platoon leaders_____ _____ _____ ___ _______

* ~12. Prepares a fire plan ____ ________ ________

*13. Reconnoiters assigned

alternate position ____ ________ ________

*14. Selects and announces

withdrawal routes_____ _____ _____ __ ________

15. Plans displacement____ ______ ____

* ~16. Requests team fire plan ____ ____ ________ ____

* 17. Requests wire communications

be installed ____ ________ ________

B-32

PT5463a
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first pla-

.- toon during the Occupation of the Battle Position described in the scenario.

. How he performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the

effective use of mobility and maneuver by the platoon. How he performed other

tasks may have had a large effect on the effective use of mobility and maneuver

* by the platoon.

*' Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on the effective use of mobility and maneuver by the platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

OCCUPY PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY AND MANEUVER

. PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement into

designated position

- 2. Directs avenues of approach

be covered

3. Directs tanks be put in

turret defilade

4. Directs tanks be camouflaged

5. Directs ground guards

be posted

6. Directs air guards be posted

ORGANIZE PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY OF MANEUVER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Designates sectors of fire

" 2. Designates tank targets

3. Checks positions for

suitability

4. Directs tanks move to good

fields of fire

B-33

PT5463a

°'".. . . • - - O . ° . - • . * . *. .* .. ~- . *o . .- *. . *.• , .*-. o.. -. -
EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY AND MANEUVER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

5. Assigns alternate positions

" 6. Directs range cards be

prepared

7. Directs chemical alarms

be emplaced

8. Directs obstacles, mines,

and flares be installed

9. Coordinates with FIST

leader

10. Coordinates with TOW

section leader

• 11. Coordinates with adjacent

platoon leaders

12. Prepares a fire plan

13. Reconnoiters assigned

alternate position

14. Selects and announces

withdrawal routes

15. Plans displacement

..' 16. Requests team fire plan

17. Requests wire communications

be installed

B-34

-PT5463a

.,.-,.....-.-. -.,.. ..... . -. ,.. ,- . . ..... . ... ...- .-..- . , .,., .... ,,, .,.. ...? ,,,. . . . , . . . .. ... .,
. 

_.. . .

Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Occupation of the Battle Position described in the scenario.

How he performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on

effective command, control, communication, and coordination within the platoon.

How he performed other tasks may have had a large effect on effective command,

control, communication, and coordination within the platoon.

*. Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on effective command, control, communication, and coordination within

the platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

OCCUPY PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE COMMAND, CONTROL,

COMMUNICATION, AND COORDINATION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement into

designated position

2. Directs avenues of approach

be covered

3. Directs tanks be put in

turret defilade

. 4. Directs tanks be camouflaged

5. Directs ground guards

be posted

6. Directs air guards be posted

ORGANIZE PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE COMMAND, CONTROL,

COMMUNICATION, AND COORDINATION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

• 1. Designates sectors of fire

2. Designates tank targets

3. Checks positions for

suitability

B-35

PT5463a

* *. ,-z.
EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE COMMAND, CONTROL,

COMMUNICATION, AND COORDINATION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

4. Directs tanks move to good

fields of fire

5. Assigns alternate positions

6. Directs range cards be

prepared

7. Directs chemical alarms

be emplaced

* 8. Directs obstacles, mines,

and flares be installed

* 9. Coordinates with FIST

leader

10. Coordinates with TOW

section leader

11. Coordinates with adjacent

platoon leaders

12. Prepares a fire plan

13. Reconnoiters assigned

alternate position

* 14. Selects and announces

withdrawal routes

- 15. Plans displacement

0 16. Requests team fire plan

17. Requests wire communications

be installed

PT5463a B-36
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Occupation of the Battle Position described in the scenario.

How he performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the

survivability of men and equipment within the platoon. How he performed other

tasks may have had a large effect on the survivability of men and equipment

within the platoon.

*. Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

, have had on the survivability of men and equipment within the platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

OCCUPY PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement into

designated position

2. Directs avenues of approach

be covered

3. Directs tanks be put in

turret defilade

4. Directs tanks be camouflaged

5. Directs ground guards

be posted

6. Directs air guards be posted

ORGANIZE PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Designates sectors of fire

2. Designates tank targets

3. Checks positions for

suitability

4. Directs tanks move to good

fields of fire

B-37

PT5463a

i ...-.- ..- ,.-..;.? . ,..: .. ;.-.. .; .> -..... . ;. . * *-. .. ; . *..-...*... .. . .; .; .;.. . .. ;. -¢ . . .;... .

• ' " t 'd l i -' l' - i ." *: " " " " . . ." ' ' ' ' - .. ' . * - "'
EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

5. Assigns alternate positions __ _ __ _ __ _ __ ____ _ _ _

6.Directs range cards be

prepared_____ _____ _____ _____ __ ___

7.Directs chemical alarms

be emplaced_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

8. Directs obstacles, mines,

and flares be installed_________ ___ __ _____ ____

9. Coordinates with FIST

leader _____ __________

10. Coordinates with TOW

section leader

11. Coordinates with adjacent

platoon leaders_____ _____ ___ _______

12. Prepares a fire plan ____ ________ ________

*13. Reconnoiters assigned

alternate position_________ ______ ____ ____

14. Selects and announces

withdrawal routes_____

15. Plans displacement_________ _____ _____ ____

* ~16. Requests team fire plan ____ __________________

17. Requests wire communications

be installed_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

B-38

PT5463a
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Occupation of the Battle Position described in the scenario.

How he performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the

capability of the platoon to sustain its combat effectiveness. How he performed other tasks may have had a large effect on the capability of the platoon to sustain its combat effectiveness.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on the capability of the platoon to sustain its combat effectiveness.

Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

OCCUPY PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

EFFECT ON SUSTAINMENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement into

designated position

2. Directs avenues of approach

be covered

3. Directs tanks be put in

turret defilade

4. Directs tanks be camouflaged

5. Directs ground guards

be posted

6. Directs air guards be posted

ORGANIZE PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

EFFECT ON SUSTAINIENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Designates sectors of fire

2. Designates tank targets

3. Checks positions for

suitability

4. Directs tanks move to good

fields of fire

PT5463a B-39
EFFECT ON SUSTAINMENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

*PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

* ~5. Assigns alternate positions ______ ___________ ____

*6. Directs range cards be

prepared __________ __________ ____

7. Directs chemical alarms

be emplaced_________ _____ ____

8. Directs obstacles, mines,

and flares be installed_____ ____ ___________

9. Coordinates with FIST

leader

10. Coordinates with TOW

section leader

11. Coordinates with adjacent

platoon leaders_____ ___ _______

12. Prepares a fire plan____________ _______ ____

13. Reconnoiters assigned

alternate position_____ _____ _____ __ ________

14. Selects and announces

withdrawal routes ____

15. Plans displacement ____ ________ ________

16. Requests team fire plan_____ _____ __ _____________

17. Requests wire communications

be installed_____ _____ ____ _____ _____

PT5!463a B-40
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Occupation of the Battle Position described in the scenario.

How he performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the

successful accomplishment of the team mission. How he performed other tasks

may have had a large effect on the successful accomplishment of the team

mission.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on the successful accomplishment of the team mission. Remember to

consider the decisions included in the tasks.

OCCUPY PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Directs movement into

designated position

2. Directs avenues of approach

be covered

3. Directs tanks be put in

turret defilade

4. Directs tanks be camouflaged

5. Directs ground guards

be posted

6. Directs air guards be posted

ORGANIZE PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Designates sectors of fire

* 2. Designates tank targets

3. Checks positions for

suitability

4. Directs tanks move to good

fields of fire

PT5463a B-41

.......................
EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

5. Assigns alternate positions

6. Directs range cards be

prepared

7. Directs chemical alarms

be emplaced

8. Directs obstacles, mines,

and flares be installed

9. Coordinates with FIST

leader

10. Coordinates with TOW

section leader

11. Coordinates with adjacent

platoon leaders

12. Prepares a fire plan

13. Reconnoiters assigned

alternate position

14. Selects and announces

withdrawal routes

15. Plans displacement

16. Requests team fire plan

17. Requests wire communications

be installed

PT5463a B -42

.................... *.-..*..... . . .
SCENARIO

DEFEND BATTLE POSITION

DEFEND PLATOON BATTLE POSITION

1. General Situation (Figure 1). At 0600 hours (BMNT) 1/A/2/37 Ar-or receives a

report from OP127 that 6 BMPs and 2 tanks are moving south toward OTTER Creek,

FIST engages. At 0605 hours OP106 reports 9 E-2s and 3 tanks crossing OTTER

|- Creek, FIST engages. At 0610 hours both OPs report enemy crossing OTTER Creek in

force and under cover of smoke, FIST engages, team commander orders OPs to displace to SPRING Creek and Hill 87, at 0612 hours 10 rounds enemy artillery falls

on BP FOX, team commander orders MOPP 3. At 0614 hours TOW engages BMP crossing

SPRING Creek on Highway N2.

2. Special Situation (Figure 2). At 0530 hours first platoon leader requests

artillery illumination of OTTER Creek crossings and team patrol reports: illumination negative, patrol reports indicate enemy engineers working around destroyed

OTTER Creek bridge. At 0615 hours the platoon notices activity around Hill 106

and requests indirect fire on Hill 106. At 0618 hours he sees 2 BNTs 800 meters

north of DUCK LAKE, he points out the targets to the left TOW section, monitors

their fire, and submits SPOTREP. At 0620 hours the enemy lays a sm-wke screen

between Hill 127 and Hill 106, the platoon leader directs targets be engaged with

TIS (Thermal Image Sights). Sporadic enemy artillery falls on BP FOX. At 0625

hours 8 BMP and 2 tanks encounter minefield BAKER and another force of 12 BMPs and

* 6 tanks encounter minefield CHARLIE. The platoon leader orders the platoon sergeant to engage the left force while his section engages the right force; he also

requests artillery concentrations AD0550 and AC0550. At 0630 hours 4 BMPs and 2

tanks emerge from the smoke at the gap between minefield BAKER and DUCK LAKE,

another 6 BMP and 3 tanks emerge from the smoke at the gap between DUCK LAKE and

minefield CHARLIE. The platoon leader directs the entire platoon to engage the

right enemy force, asks the right TOW section to reinforce his fire, and the left

TOW section to engage the left enemy force. The platoon leader then submits SITREP.

,.-- •*.

.K

. . /PT5463a .- r

0,W 4 lob***)

*PT5463a B-43

"" ° '. .". .° .-. '."o"," " -. ".". .. "- , . . . .' . . " ." . ... . . . . . . .. ,
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Battle Position Defense described in the scenario. How he

performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the effective application of fire power by the platoon. How he performed other tasks

may have had a large effect on the effective application of fire power by the

platoon.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on the effective application fire power by the platoon. Remember to

consider the decisions included in the task.

MAINTAIN SURVEILLANCE IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Requests illumination

2. Requests team patrol

reports

INITIATE INDIRECT FIRES IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Requests indirect fires

2. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

INITIATE DIRECT FIRES IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

* PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

" 1. Designates targets to

TOW section

2. Monitors TOWs

3. Submits SPOTREP

B-44

PT5463a
EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE APPLICATION OF FIRE POWER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

4. Directs targets be engaged

with TIS

5. Directs enemy be engaged

6. Requests indirect fires

7. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

8. Requests TOW section

reinforce platoon fire

* 9. Submits SITREP

PT5463a B-45

.. . . * . **-* . . .
*Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Battle Position Defense described in the scenario. How he

performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the effective use of mobility and maneuver by the platoon. How he performed other tasks

may have had a large effect on the effective use of mobility and maneuver by

the platoon.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on the effective use of mobility and maneuver by the platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

MAINTAIN SURVEILLANCE IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY AND MANEUVER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Requests illumination

2. Requests team patrol

reports

INITIATE INDIRECT FIRES IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY AND MANEUVER

- PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Requests indirect fires

" 2. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

INITIATE DIRECT FIRES IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY AND MANEUVER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Designates targets to

TOW section

2. Monitors TOWs

3. Submits SPOTREP

B-46

PT5463a

.........................-... ............
EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE USE OF MOBILITY AND MANEUVER

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

4. Directs targets be engaged

with TIS

- 5. Directs enemy be engaged

6. Requests indirect fires

* 7. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

8. Requests TOW section

reinforce platoon fire

9. Submits SITREP

B-47

PT5463a

-. . . . . . .
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Battle Position Defense described in the scenario. How he

performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on effective

command, control, communication, and coordination within the platoon. How he

performed other tasks may have had a large effect on effective command, control,

communication, and coordination within the platoon.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on effective command, control, communication, and coordination within

the platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

MAINTAIN SURVEILLANCE IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT OF EFFECTIVE COMMAND, CONTROL,

COMMUNICATION, AND COORDINATION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Requests illumination

2. Requests team patrol

reports

INITIATE INDIRECT FIRES IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE COMMAND, CONTROL,

COMMUNICATION, AND COORDINATION

* PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

-1. Requests indirect fires

-. 2. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

INITIATE DIRECT FIRES IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE COMMAND, CONTROL,

COM UNICATION, AND COORDINATION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Designates targets to

TOW section

B-48

*! PT5463a

i -"- ''' .'' .i "-,." "-.". .: . . . '- .- .. ". . .".-".."' . . ... ". ... '"'.-"" "+
EFFECT ON EFFECTIVE CO.'2IAD, CONTROL,

COMM. UIN ICATION, AND COORDINATION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

2. Monitors TOWs

3. Submits SPOTREP

4. Directs targets be engaged

with TIS

5. Directs enemy be engaged

* 6. Requests indirect fires

7. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

* 8. Requests TOW section

reinforce platoon fire

" 9. Submits SITREP

B-49

PT5463a

* .*. . - .I..*. * -i. . . . * *
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Battle Position Defense described in the scenario. How he

performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the survivability of men and equipment within the platoon. How he performed other

tasks may have had a large effect on the survivability of men and equipment

within the platoon.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

*' have had on the survivability of men and equipment within the platoon. Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

MAINTAIN SURVEILLANCE IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

p*1. Requests illumination

" 2. Requests team patrol

reports

INITIATE INDIRECT FIRES IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

- PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

- 1. Reques 3 indirect fires

2. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

INITIATE DIRECT FIRES IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

- PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Designates targets to

TOW section

2. Monitors TOWs

3. Submits SPOTREP

B-50

" PT5463a

. . . . . . ..

°
EFFECT ON THE SURVIVABILITY OF MEN AND EQUIPMENT

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

4. Directs targets be engaged

with TIS

5. Directs enemy be engaged

6. Requests indirect fires

* 7. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

8. Requests TOW section

reinforce platoon fire

" 9. Submits SITREP

B-51

PTS463a

..................................
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Battle Position Defense described in the scenario. How he

performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever on the capability of the platoon to sustain its combat effectiveness. How he performed

other tasks may have had a large effect on the capability of the platoon to

sustain its combat effectiveness.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effective their performance

could have had on the capability of the platoon to sustain its combat effectiveness. Remember to consider the decisions included in the tasks.

MAINTAIN SURVEILLANCE IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON SUSTAINMENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

* PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Requests illumination

2. Requests team patrol

reports

INITIATE INDIRECT FIRES IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON SUSTAINMENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

P LATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

* 1. Requests indirect fires

. 2. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

INITIATE DIRECT FIRES IN PLATOON SECFION

EFFECT ON SUSTAINmENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Designates targets to

TOW section

2. Monitors TOWs

" 3. Submits SPOTREP

B-52

PT5463a
EFFECT ON SUSTAINMENT OF COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

4. Directs targets be engaged

-' ~with TIS__ _ _ __ _ _ _ _____ _ _ _ _

5. Directs enemy be engaged ____ ________ ________

6. Requests indirect fires_____ ___ ____________

*7. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

8. Requests TOW section

reinforce platoon fire ____ ________ ________

9. Submits SITREP_________ _____ ____

PT5463a B-53
Listed below are the tasks performed by the platoon leader of the first platoon during the Battle Position Defense described in the scenario. How he

performed some of these tasks may have had no effect whatsoever onthe successful accomplishment of the team mission. How he performed other tasks may have

had a large effect on the successful accomplishment of the team mission.

Please rate the following tasks that were performed by the platoon leader of

the first platoon according to how much of an effect their performance could

have had on the successful accomplishment of the team mission. Remember to

consider the decisions included in the tasks.

MAINTAIN SURVEILLANCE IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

* 1. Requests illumination

2. Requests team patrol

reports

INITIATE INDIRECT FIRES IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Requests indirect fires

2. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

INITIATE DIRECT FIRES IN PLATOON SECTOR

EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Designates targets to

TOW section

2. Monitors TOWs

3. Submits SPOTREP

B-54

PT5463a
EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

*PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

4. Directs targets be engaged

with TIS ____ ________ _______

5. Directs enemy be engaged ____ ________ ________

6. Requests indirect fires____________________

*7. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted _________________ ____

8. Requests TOW section

reinforce platoon fire_____

* ~9. Submits SITREP ____ ________ ________

B-55

PT5463a
|'q.q .y.9 

q. 

 7 . . 

. °

*..

- .

.

%%.* ~ %%4*4
NAME DATE

BRANCH

PLATOON LEADER TASK SURVEY

FORM B

The U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

* (ARI) and the Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO) are developing

. a method for preparing training objectives for leadership tasks. The method

will be used to prepare training objectives for critical platoon leader tasks

performed during tank platoon operations.

Because of your experience in armor, you are asked to rate various platoon leader tasks along a number of different dimensions. The criticality of

-. these tasks will be determined on the basis of these ratings, and training

" objectives will be prepared for the tasks found to be most critical.

The instructions inside this booklet will describe in detail how the

ratings are to be made. If you have any questions, raise your hand and they

*' will be answered.

Not to be shown to unauthorized persons

Not to be reproduced in any form

without the specific permission of the

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR, ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR PERSONNEL

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

PT5463b

C-1
INSTRUCTIONS

This questionnaire contains a list of tasks performed by the platoon

*" leader of a tank platoon and four different rating scales. The rating scales

.. are:

1) Amount of time required to learn the task

2) Amount of time available before performance of the task must begin

3) Amount of damage or injury that can result from how the task is performed

4) Effect of task performance on the successful accomplishment of

the team mission

Your job will be to rate the tasks on each of the four scales. The instructions before each set of rating scales will describe how the scales are to be used.

Most platoon leader tasks include two components--decisions and actions.

Although only the actions are stated in the list of tasks, you should consider

both the decision and the action when you rate each task. For example, one of

the tasks you will rate is "directs cease fire." Before a platoon leader can

direct his platoon to cease fire, he must first decide to cease fire. Therefore

when you rate this task, you must consider both the decision to cease fire and

the command to cease fire.

Indicate your rating for each task by placing an "X" in the appropriate

space.

-,

'- PT5463b

C-2

."'''....--
Platoon leader tasks differ in the severity of the consequences resulting from

* their performance. How some platoon leader tasks are performed may result in

no consequences whatsoever. How others are performed may result in destruction

of equipment and/or loss of life.

Please rate the following platoon leader tasks according to the amount of damage

to equipment and/or injury to personnel that can result from their performance

by the platoon leader. Remember to consider the decisions that are included

*in the task.

AMOUNT OF EQUIPMENT DAMAGE AND/OR INJURY TO PERSONNEL

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Analyzes OPORD

2. Assigns alternate

positions

3. Awaits permission to

bypass

4. Awaits time or permission to attack

5. Awaits time or permission to open fire

6. Checks positions for

suitability

7. Chooses a course of

action

. 8. Clarifies mission

9. Conducts necessary

coordination

10. Conducts reconnaissance

11. Controls application

of direct fire

12. Controls interval

between tanks

13. Controls interval with

lead platoon

14. Controls speed of

tanks

15. Coordinates fire

distribution

* PT5463b C-3

....................................................................
AMOUNT OF EQUIPMENT DAMAGE AND/OR INJURY TO PERSONNEL

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

16. Coordinates indirect

fires

17. Coordinates tank

sectors of fire

18. Coordinates security of

flanks with other team

elements

19. Coordinates with adjacent

platoon leaders

20. Coordinates with FIST

leader

21. Coordinates with TOW

section leader

* 22. Designates sectors of

fire

" 23. Designates tank targets

24. Designates targets to

forward observer

25. Designates targets to

TOW section

26. Develops the situation

27. Directs after operations

maintenance be performed

28. Directs air guards be

kept alert

29. Directs air guards be

posted

30. Directs alternate positions be prepared

31. Directs appropriate

movement

32. Directs assault be

started

"" PT5463b

C-4

* * , ".-, . -. *. -/ ;-' . *-.. .... : * -. .".... ... -... ... .. ... ~. *.....- *. .-.- ..- . ._ .-
AMOUNT OF EQUIPMENT DAMAGE AND/OR INJURY TO PERSONNEL

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate large Extreme

33. Directs attack be conducted

34. Directs avenues of

approach be covered

35. Directs battle position

be prepared

36. Directs battle readiness

be maintained

37. Directs bounding

overwatch

38. Directs bounding

reverse overwatch

39. Directs cease fire

40. Directs chemical alarms

be emplaced

41. Directs coil formation

42. Directs coil or herringbone formation

43. Directs communications

be checked

44. Directs covering fires

be provided

45. Directs covering fire

position be held

46. Directs critical points

be crossed

47. Directs defense of

position

48. Directs defensive position be prepared

49. Directs drcplacement

50. Directs emergency repairs

be made

51. Directs enemy be engaged

PT5463b C-5

-"....."... .f '.; , -,." , ; ';r '- , " ',""'';V'' ;.' ,,":.':''-,:';: : :
* AMOUNT OF EQUIPMENT DAMAGE AND/OR INJURY TO PERSONNEL

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

52. Directs enemy covering

obstacles be engaged____ __ _ ________

53. Directs enemy on objective be destroyed____ ___ ________

54. Directs fire and maneuver

be conducted____ ______ _ ____

* ~55. Directs fire be held____ ___ ____ ____ ____

56. Directs flank tanks be

tied in with other tea

elements____ _________ _ ___

57. Directs ground gurards

be posted____ ___ ________

58. Directs herringbone

formation ___ ___ ____ ____ ____

*59. Directs holding of

covering fire position____ ___ __ __ ____ ____

60. Directs individual

positions be prepared____ ___ __ __ ____ ____

*61. Directs line of departure be crossed____ ____

62. Directs main guns be

oriented_________ _ ___

63. Directs movement be

initiated ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

64. Directs movement into

assault formation ___ ___ ___ ___

*65. Directs movement into

attack formation____ ___ ____

66. Directs movement into

attack position____ ___ ____ ____ ____

67. Directs movement into

defilade position____ ___ ___ _ ____ ___

68. Directs movement into

designated position ___ __ ___ ___

PT5463b

c- 6

fc-S2
- .r .

AMOUNT OF EQUIPMENT DAMAGE AND/OR INJURY TO PERSONNEL

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

69. Directs movement into

flank position

. 70. Directs movement into

overwatch position

71. Directs movement into

support position

. 72. Directs movement into

suppressive fire position

73. Directs movement out of

attack position

74. Directs movement to

flank

75. Directs movement to occupy

position to support breaching operation

76. Directs movement to pass

through breach

- 77. Directs move out in

previous formation

78. Directs obstacles, mines,

and flares be installed

79. Directs open fire

80. Directs passage of lines

be conducted

81. Directs phase lines be

crossed ____ ____ ____ ____

r 82. Directs position be held

83. Directs preparation for

bypass

. 84. Directs pre-f ire checks

be conducted

85. Directs range cards be

prepared

PT5463b

c-7

...........................................
AMOUNT OF EQUIPMENT DAMAGE AND/OR INJURY TO PERSONNEL

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

86. Directs readiness actions

be performed ___ ___ ____ ___ ___

87. Directs release point be

crossed____

88. Directs resupply be

performed____ ____ ____ _____ ____

89. Directs smoke be popped____ __ _ ____ ____ ____

90. Directs specified movement ____ ___ ____

*91 Directs start point be

crossed

92. Directs successive delay

position be occupied____ ___ ___ _ ____ ____

*93. Directs supplies be

distributed____ ____ ____ _____ ____

*94. Directs suppressive

fires ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

*95. Directs suppressive fires

be shifted ___ ___ ____ ___ ___

96. Directs suppressive fires

on flank targets____ ___ ____ ____ ____

97. Directs surprise targets be

engaged ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

*98. Directs surveillance be

conducted

99. Directs tanks be

camouflaged____ ____ ____ _____ ____

100. Directs tanks be put in

turret defilade ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

*101. Directs tanks move into

firing position ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

*102. Directs tanks move to

good f ields of f ire____ ___ ___ _ ____ ____

* PTS463b

C-8
,

,,_ ,,, ,,, ,, , u , 

AMOUNT OF EQUIPMENT DAMAGE AND/OR INJURY TO PERSONNEL

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

103. Directs targets be engaged

with TIS (Thermal Image

System)

104. Directs targets in assigned

sector be engaged

105. Directs targets of opportunity be engaged

106. Directs team on battle

position be joined

107. Directs team on objective be joined

108. Directs the attack be

accelerated

109. Directs 3-man crews be

organized

110. Directs traveling

111. Directs traveling

overwatch

112. Directs traveling reverse

overwatch

113. Issues FRAGO

114. Issues OPORD

115. Issues warning order

116. Makes an estimate of

the situation

117. Makes a tenative plan

118. Monitors indirect fires

119. Monitors TOW

120. Plans displacement

121. Prepares a fire plan

PT5463b

C-9
AMOUNT OF EQUIPMENT DAMAGE AND/OR INJURY TO PERSONNEL

*PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

122. Prepares an operation plan ____ ___ ____ ____ ____

123. Provides target data to

forward observer____

*124. Reassesses tactical

situation____ ___ ____ ____

125. Reconnoiters assigned

alternate postion____ ___ ________

126. Reestablishes communications with TCs____ ___ ____ ____ ____

127. Reestablishes commnunications with the team____ ___ ____

* 128. Reports crossing phase lines ___ ___ ____ ____ ___

129. Reports TOW effects____ ___ ____ ____ ____

130. Requests and adjusts

preparatory fires____ ___ ____ ____ ____

131. Requests artillery fire

and infantry support ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

132. Requests Class I, III, and

V supplies____ ____ _____ ____

133. Requests direct covering

fires ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

*134. Requests final protective

fires____ ____ __ __

135. Requests illumination____ ___ ____ ____ ____

136. Requests indirect final

protective f ires___ ___ ____ ____ ____

137. Requests indirect fires

138. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted____ ______ ___ _ ____

*139. Requests indirect fires

be shifted____ _____ ____

PT5463b

C-10
AMOUNT OF EQUIPMENT DAMAGE AND/OR INJURY TO PERSONNEL

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

140. Requests indirect fires be

stopped

141. Requests permission to

counterattack

142. Requests permission to

cover displacement

143. Requests permission to

displace

144. Requests permission to

fire and maneuver

145. Requests permission to hold

146. Requests permission to

join team on battle position

147. Requests permission to

withdraw

148. Requests readiness reports

149. Requests SPOTREPS_

150. Requests supply status

151. Requests suppressive fires

- 152. Requests suppressive fires

be shifted

153. Requests suppressive fires

be stopped

154. Requests team fire plan

155. Requests team patrol

reports

- 156. Requests TOWs open fire

157. Requests TOW section

reinforce platoon fire

158. Requests wire communications be installed

PT5463b

C-11

.............. P. -
AMOUNT OF EQUIPM ENT DAMAGE AND/OR INJURY TO PERSONNEL

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

159. Selects and announces

withdrawal routes ___ ___ ____ ____

160. Submits SITREP____ ___

161. Submits SPOTREP ___ ___ ____ ____ ___

PT5463b

C-i12
7 7

Platoon leader tasks differ in the amount of time required for learning. Some

platoon leader tasks may be learned very quickly. Others require more time to

be learned.

Please rate the following platoon leader tasks according to how much time would be required for learning by most new officers. Remember to consider the decisions included in the task.

AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED FOR LEARNING

PLATOON LEADER TASK One Hour Several Two Days

None Or Less Hours One Day Or More

1. Analyzes OPORD

2. Assigns alternate positions

3. Awaits permission to bypass

4. Awaits time or permission

to attack

5. Awaits time or permission

to open fire

6. Checks positions for suitability

7. Chooses a course of action

- 8. Clarifies mission

9. Conducts necessary coordination

10. Conducts reconnaissance

11. Controls application of direct

fire

12. Controls interval between

tanks

13. Controls interval with lead

platoon

14. Controls speed of tanks

15. Coordinates fire distribution

16. Coordinates indirect fires

PT5463b

C-13

"- ./ . i .. '. . - . - . ~-* ..- .. . ----. .* .- . .,--, ... .. -.. -* > \.....--... . . . . <. i .
AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED FOR LEARNING

*PLATOON LEADER TASK One Hour Several Two Days

None Or Less Hours One Day Or More

17. Coordinates tank sectors

of fire_____ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

*18. Coordinates security of

flanks with other team

elements_____

*19. Coordinates with adjacent

platoon leaders_____ _________ __ ___ ____

20. Coordinates with FIST

leader ______ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _

21. Coordinates with TOW

section leader_____ ___ __ ____

22. Designates sectors of fire _____

23. Designates tank targets ____ ________ ________

24. Designates targets to

forward observer ____

25. Designates targets to

TOW section_____ _________ _____ ____

26. Develops the situation _________ ________ ____

27. Directs after operations

maintenance be performed ____ ________ ________

*28. Directs air guards be kept

alert_____ _____ _____ ___ __

29. Directs air guards be

posted_____ _____ _____ ___ __

30. Directs alternate positionsbe prepared _________ ________

31. Directs appropriate movement___ __ _________ ____

32. Directs assault be started ____ ________ ________

33. Directs attack be conducted ___ ________ ________

34. Directs avenues of approach

be covered ____ ________

* PT5463b

C-14

. . .. . . . . . . . . .
AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED FOR LEARNING

PLATOON LEADER TASK One Hour Several Two Days

None Or Less Hours One Day Or More

35. Directs battle position

be prepared ____________________________ ______

36. Directs battle readiness

be maintained ____

37. Directs bounding overwatch ____ ________ ________

*38. Directs bounding reverse

overwatch

39. Directs cease fire ____ ________

*40. Directs chemical alarms

be emplaced ____ ________ ________

41. Directs coil formation

*42. Directs coil or herringbone

formation ____

*43. Directs communications be

checked_____ _____ _____ ____ __ ___

44. Directs covering fires be

provided_____ _____ _____ __ ___

*45. Directs covering fire

position be held_________ _______ ___ ____

*46. Directs critical points

be crossed__ _ _ _____ __ _ _ ______ _ _ _ _

*47. Directs defense of

position_____ _____ _____ _____ __ ___

48. Directs defensive position

be prepared

* ~49. Directs displacement ____ ________ ________

*50. Directs emergency repairs

be Trade _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

* ~51. Directs enemy be engaged ____ ________ ________

52. Directs enemy covering

obstacles be engaged ____ ________ ________

PT5463b

C-15
AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED FOR LEARNING

PLATOON LEADER TASK One Hour Several Two Days

None Or Less Hours One Day Or More

53. Directs enemy on objective

be destroyed

54. Directs fire and maneuver

be conducted

55. Directs fire be held

* 56. Directs flank tanks be tied

in with other team elelents

57. Directs ground guards

be posted

- 58. Directs herringbone

formation

59. Directs holding of covering

fire position

60. Directs individual positions

be prepared

61. Directs line of departure

be crossed

62. Dir" -ts main guns be

oriented

63. Directs movement be

initiated

64. Directs movement into

assault formation

65. Directs movement into

attack formation

* 66. Directs movement into

attack position

* 67. Directs movement into

defilade position

* 68. Directs movement into

designated position

69. Directs movement into

flank position

" PT5463b -16
AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED FOR LEARNING

* PLATOON LEADER TASK One Hour Several Two Days

None Or Less Hours One Day Or More

" 70. Directs movement into

overwatch position

71. Directs movement into

support position

72. Directs movement into

suppressive fire position

, 73. Directs movement out of

attack position

* 74. Directs movement to

flank

* 75. Directs movement to occupy

position to support breaching operation

76. Directs movement to pass

through breach

77. Directs move out in

previous formation

* 78. Directs obstacles, mines,

and flares be installed

79. Directs open fire

80. Directs passage of lines

be conducted

81. Directs phase lines be

crossed

82. Directs position be held

- 83. Directs preparation for

bypass

84. Directs pre-fire checks

be conducted

- 5. Directs range cards be

prepared

.- PT5463b

C-17

%%
AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED FOR LEARNING

PLATOON LEADER TASK One Hour Several Two Days

None Or Less Hours One Day Or More

86. Directs readiness actions

be performed

87. Directs release point be

crossed

88. Directs resupply be

performed

89. Directs smoke be popped

90. Directs specified movement

91. Directs start point be

crossed

92. Directs successive delay

position be occupied

93. Directs supplies be

distributed

94. Directs suppressive fires

95. Directs suppressive fires

be shifted

" 96. Directs suppressive fires

on flank targets

97. Directs surprise targets be

engaged

98. Directs surveillance be

continued

99. Directs tanks be camouflaged

100. Directs tanks be put in

turret defilade

101. Directs tanks move into

firing position

102. Directs tanks move to good

fields of fire

103. Directs targets be engaged

with TIS (Thermal Image Sights)

PT5463b C-l8

C-18.. ...
AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED FOR LEARNING

PLATOON LEADER TASK One Hour Several Two Days

None Or Less Hours One Day Or More

104. Directs targets in assigned

sector be engaged

105. Directs targets of opportunity be engaged

106. Directs team on battle

position be joined

107. Directs team on objective

be joined

108. Directs the attack be

accelerated

109. Directs 3-man crews

be organized

110. Directs traveling

ill. Directs traveling

overwatch

112. Directs traveling reverse

overwatch

113. Issues FRAGO

114. Issues OPORD

" 115. Issues warning order

116. Makes an estimate of

the situation

117. Makes a tentative plan

118. Monitors indirect fires

119. Monitors TOWs

120. Plans displacement

121. Prepares a fire plan

* 122. Prepares an operation plan

123. Provides target data to

forward observer

" PT5463b C-19

* -19
AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED FOR LEARNING

PLATOON LEADER One Hour Several Two Days

None Or Less Hours One Day Or More

124. Reassesses tactical

situation_____ _____ _____ _____ _____

125. Reconnoiters assigned

alternate position ____ ________ ________

* 126. Reestablishes commnunications with TCs______________ __ ___ ____

127. Reestablishes communications with the team ____ ________ ________

*128. Reports crossing phase

lines _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

* 129. Reports TOW effects ____ ________ ________

130. Requests and adjusts

preparatory fires_____ __ ________

131. Requests artillery fire

and infantry support ____ ________ ________

132. Requests Class I, III,

and V supplies______________ ___ __ ____

133. Requests direct covering

fires_____ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

134. Requests final protective

fires__ _ _ _ _____ _____ _____ ___ __

135. Requests illumination_____ ______ ________ ____

136. Requests indirect final

protective fires ____ ________ ________

* 137. Requests indirect fires ____ ________ ________

*138. Requests i-direct fires

be adjusted ____ ________ ________

*139. Requests indirect fires

be shifted _ _ _ _ ________ ________

*140. Requests indirect fires

be stopped ____ ________ ________

*141. Requests permission to

counterattack ____

PT5463b C-20
AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED FOR LEARNING

PLATOON LEADER One Hour Several Two Days

-None Or Less Hours One Day Or More

142. Requests permission to

5 ~~cover displacement_____ _____ _____ __________

* 143. Requests permission to

displace_____ _____ _____ _____ __ ___

144. Requests permission to

fire and maneuver ____

*145. Requests permission to

bold__ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _

146. Requests permission to

join team on battle position ____ ________ ________

147. Requests permission to

withdraw_________ ______ ___

148. Requests readiness reports ____ ________ ________

* ~149. Requests SPOTREPS ____ ________ ________

* ~150. Requests supply status_____ _____ _____ ____

151. Requests suppressive fires_____ ____

* 152. Requests suppressive fires

be shifted ___________________

153. Requests suppressive fires

be stopped _________ ____ _ _ _ __ _ _ _

* 154. Requests team fire plan_____ _____ __________ ____

155. Requests team patrol

reports_____ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _

* 156. Requests TOWs open fire ____ ________ ________

- 157. Requests TOW section reinforce platoon fire_________ _____ ____

-158. Requests wire communications

be installed_________ _____ ____

159. Selects and announces withdrawal routes_____ ____ ______

pT5463b

C-21

S. . . .. **.5~*.*. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
AMIOUNT OF T11ME REQUIRED FOR LEARNING

PLATOON LEADER TASK One Hour Several Two Days

None Or Less Hours One Day Or More

- 160. Submits SITREP______________ ________

2 161. Submits SPOTREP ____ ________ ________

- PT5463b

C-22
Platoon leader tasks differ in their effects on mission accomplishement. How

the platoon leader performs some tasks may have no effect whatsoever on the

successful accomplishment of the team mission. How he performs other tasks may

have a large effect o- the successful accomplishement of the team mission.

Please rate the following platoon leader tasks according to how much of an

effect their performance could have on the successful accomplishement of the

'- team misssion. Remember to consider the decisions included in the task.

EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

1. Analyzes OPORD

2. Assigns alternate

positions

3. Awaits permission to

bypass

4. Awaits time or permission

to attack

5. Awaits time or permission

to open fire

6. Checks positions for

suitability

* 7. Chooses a course of

action

8. Clarifies mission

9. Conducts necessary

coordination

10. Conducts reconnaissance

S11. Controls application of

direct fire

12. Controls interval

between tanks

13. Controls interval with

lead platoon

14. Controls speed of tanks

* PT5463b

C-23

I "- - -.- ...... ,- ... .-.......---.-. -. '. -......-- '-- ---- '- <",--- -
EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

15. Coordinates fire

distribution

16. Coordinates indirect

fires

17. Coordinates tank sectors

of fire

18. Coordinates security of

flanks with other team

elements

19. Coordinates with adjacent

platoon leaders

20. Coordinates with FIST

leader

21. Coordinates with TOW

section leader

22. Designates sectors of

fire

23. Designates tank targets

24. Designates targets to

forward observer

. 25. Designates targets to

TOW section

. 26. Develops the situation

27. Directs after operations

maintenance be performed

28. Directs air guards be

kept alert

29. Directs air guards be

posted

30. Directs alternate positions be prepared

31. Directs appropriate

movement

PT5463b

C-24
EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

32. Directs assault be started

33. Directs attack be conducted

34. Directs avenues of approach

be covered

35. Directs battle position be

prepared

36. Directs battle readiness be

maintained

37. Directs bounding overwatch

38. Directs bounding reverse

overwatch

39. Directs cease fire

40. Directs chemical alarms be

emplaced

41. Directs coil formation

42. Directs coil or herringbone formation

43. Directs communications be

checked

44. Directs covering fires be

provided

45. Directs covering fire position be held

46. Directs critical points be

crossed

47. Directs defense of position

48. Directs defensive position be prepared

49. Directs displacement

50. Directs emergency repairs

be made

PT5463b C-25
EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

51. Directs enemy be engaged

52. Directs enemy covering

obstacles be engaged

53. Directs enemy on objective

be destroyed

54. Directs fire and maneuver

be conducted

55. Directs fire be held

56. Directs flank tanks be tied

in with other team elements

57. Directs ground guards be

posted

58. Directs herring',one

formation

59. Directs holding of covering

fire position

60. Directs individual positions be prepared

61. Directs line of departure

be crossed

62. Directs main guns be

oriented

63. Directs movement be

initiated

64. Directs movement into

assault formation

65. Dir'ects movement into

attack formation

66. Directs movement into

attack position

67. Directs movement into

defilade position

68. Directs movement into

designated position

PT5463b C-26

--"--"- '.-2."-¢ .'-.'-.-"..-i-'-..-;-":.'.- ' i-' ":- - '--.-.-....-..-.-.....-...-......-.......--"......"-.-.--...-.

,. .¢. ' -- .. .. '- "- - "- ..'..# .,, ..................................................... ,......-.-....."...,-..,'.." ',.
EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

69. Directs movement into

flank position

70. Directs movement into

overwatch position

71. Directs movement into

support position

72. Directs movement into

suppressive fire position

73. Directs movement out of

attack position

74. Directs movement to flank

* 75. Directs movement to occupy

position to support breaching operation

76. Directs movement to pass

through breach

77. Directs move out in

previous formation

78. Directs obstacles, mines,

and flares be installed

79. Directs open fire.

80. Directs passage of lines

be conducted

81. Directs phase lines be

crossed

82. Directs position be

held

83. Directs preparation for

bypass

84. Directs pre-fire checks

be conducted

85. Directs range cards be

prepared

PT5463b

C-27

.. -.... -. - - , -- ,- *--.-- 't .- -.- - . , ." - , -_ / '--,.." " -. ''.,--..<.
EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

86. Directs readiness actions

be performed____ __ _ ____

87. Directs release point be

crossed____ ____ ____ _____ __ ___

*88. Directs resupply be

performed ____ ____ ____

* ~89. Directs smoke be popped____ _ __ ____ ____ ____

90. Directs specified movement_________ ___ _

91. Directs start point be

crossed ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

92. Directs successive delay

position be occupied____ ___ ___ _ ____ ____

93. Directs supplies be

distributed____ ____ _____ ____

94. Directs suppressive fires ___ ___

95. Directs suppressive fires

be shifted ___ ___ ____ ____ ___

*96. Directs suppressive fires

on flank targets ___ ___ ____ ____ ___

97. Directs surprise targets be

engaged _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _

*98. Directs surveillance be

conducted ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

99. Directs tanks be camouflaged _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _

100. Directs tanks be put in

turret defilade ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

101. Directs tanks move into

firing position____ ___ ____ ____ ____

102. Directs tanks move to

good fields of fire____ ___ ___ _ ____ ____

PT546 3b

C-28

.** .
EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

103. Directs targets be engaged

with TIS (Thermal Image

Sights)

104. Directs targets in

assigned sector be

engaged

105. Directs targets of

opportunity be engaged

106. Directs team on battle

position be joined

107. Directs team on objective be joined

108. Directs the attack be

accelerated

109. Directs 3-man crews be

organized

S110. Directs traveling

111. Directs traveling

overwatch

" 112. Directs traveling

reverse overwatch

. 113. Issues FRAGO

114. Issues OPORD

* 115. Issues warning order

116. Makes an estimate

of the situation

117. Makes a tentative

plan

* 118. Monitors indirect

fires

* 119. Monitors TOWs

120. Plans displacement

PT5463b

C-29

-.~ ~~ -~ . .* .. .* .* .. . . .
EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

121. Prepares a fire plan

122. Prepares an operation

plan

123. Provides target data

to forward observer

124. Reassesses tactical

situation

125. Reconnoiters assigned

alternate position

126. Reestablishes communications with TCs

127. Reestablishes communications with the team

128. Reports crossing phase

lines

129. Reports TOW effects

130. Requests and adjusts

preparatory fires

. 131. Requests artillery fire

and infantry support

132. Requests Class I, III,

and V supplies

133. Requests direct covering

fires

134. Requests final protective fires

135. Requests illumination

136. Requests indirect final

protective fires

137. Requests indirect fires

138. Requests indirect fires

be adjusted

PT5463b

C-30

K----- -*- *.*-.*
EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

139. Requests indirect fires

be shifted

140. Requests indirect fires

*, be stopped

141. Requests permission to

counterattack

142. Requests permission to

cover displacement

143. Requests permission to

displace

144. Requests permission to

fire and maneuver

145. Requests permission to

hold

146. Requests permission to

join team on battle

position

147. Requests permission to

withdraw

• 148. Requests readiness

reports

149. Requests SPOTREPS

- 150. Requests supply status

151. Requests suppressive

fires

- 152. Requests suppressive

fires be shifted

153. Requests suppressive

fires be stopped

154. Requests team fire

plan

155. Requests team patrol

reports

PT5463b

C-31

° . ° o ,• o' .' .'o. . ." . .. . .'" * " . ** . . o . . *....* ... - .
L

EFFECT ON SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT OF MISSION

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Small Moderate Large Extreme

156. Requests TOWs open fire

* 157. Requests TOW section

reinforce platoon fire

158. Requests wire communications be installed

159. Selects and announces

withdrawal routes

160. Submits SITREP

. 161. Submits SPOTREP

* PT5463b

C-32

S*- o*.'**. . . . . . .. ~ --
7 T T- T R . T T T -

TIME AVAILABLE BEFORE STARTING TASK

One

Minute Several Several One Day

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Or Less Minutes Hours Or More

18. Coordinates security of flanks

with other team elements

19. Coordinates with adjacent platoon

leaders

20. Coordinates with FIST leader

21. Coordinates with TOW section

leader

22. Designates sectors of fire

23. Designates tank targets

24. Designates targets to forward

observer

25. Designates targets to TOW section

26. Develops the situation

27. Directs after operations

maintenance be performed

28. Directs air guards be kept alert

29. Directs air guards be posted

30. Directs alternate positions be

prepared

31. Directs appropriate movement

32. Directs assault be started

33. Directs attack be conducted

34. Directs avenues of approach be

covered

35. Directs battle position be

prepared

36. Directs battle readiness be

maintained

PT5463b

C-34
Platoon leader tasks differ in the amount of time that is available to the

platooqi leader before they must be started. Some platoon leader tasks must

be started immediately. Others may be delayed for various periods of time

before being started.

Please rate the following platoon leader tasks according to how much time the

platoon leader would have available before starting the task. Remember to

consider the decisions included in the task.

TIME AVAILABLE BEFORE STARTING TASK

One

Minute Several Several One Day

*PLATOON LEADER TASK None Or Less Minutes Hours Or More

1. Analyzes OPORD____ ____ ____ ____ ____

* ~2. Assigns alternate positions____ ____ ____ ____ ____

* ~3. Awaits permission to bypass____ ____ ____ ____ ____

4. Awaits time or permission to

attack__ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _____ __ __

*5. Awaits time or permission to open

fire_____ ____ _____ ___ _

6. Checks positions for suitability _____ ____ ____ ____ ____

7. Chooses a course of action__ __ ____ ____ ____

* ~8. Clarifies mission____ ____ __ __ ____ ____

9. Conducts necessary coordination ____________

10. Conducts reconnaissance____ ___ _ ____ ____ ____

*11. Controls application of direct

fire ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

12. Controls interval between tanks ____

*13. Controls interval with lead

platoon ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

14. Controls speed of tanks____ ___ _ ____ ____ ____

* ~15. Coordinates fire distribution___ _ ____ ____ ____ ____

* ~16. Coordinates indirect fires____ ____ ____ ____ ____

17. Coordinates tank sectors of fire ___ _ ____ ____ ____ ____

* PT5463b

C-33
TIME AVAILABLE BEFORE STARTING TASK

One

Minute Several Several One Day

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Or Less Minutes Hours Or More

37. Directs bounding overwatch

38. Directs bounding reverse overwatch

39. Directs cease fire

40. Directs chemical alarms be

emplaced

41. Directs coil formation

42. Directs coil or herringbone

formation

43. Directs communications be checked

44. Directs covering fires be

provided

45. Directs covering fire position

be held

46. Directs critical points be crossed

47. Directs defense of position

48. Directs defensive position be

prepared

49. Directs displacement

50. Directs emergency repairs be made

51. Directs enemy be engaged

52. Directs enemy covering obstacles

be engaged

53. Directs enemy on objective be

destroyed

54. Directs fire and maneuver be

conducted

55. Directs fire be held

56. Directs flank tanks be tied in

with other team elements

PT5463b C-35
LTIME AVAILABLE BEFORE STARTING TASK

One

Minute Several Several One Day

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Or Less Minutes Hours Or More

57. Directs ground guards be posted

58. Directs herringbone formation

59. Directs holding of covering fire

position

60. Directs individual positions be

prepared

61. Directs line of departure be

crossed

62. Directs main guns be oriented

63. Directs movement be initiated

64. Directs movement into assault

formation

65. Directs movement into attack

formation

66. Directs movement into attack

position

67. Directs movement into defilade

position

68. Directs movement into designated

position

69. Directs movement into flank

position

70. Directs movement into overwatch

position

71. Directs movement into support

position

72. Directs movement into suppressive

fire position

73. Directs movement out of attack

position

PT5463b

C-36

"-. . . +. -' - *" ' . ... " . ' .. * . -.-. * . . . .*.. .. . ..... ... .
TIME AVAILABLE BEFORE STARTING TASK

One

Minute Several Several One Day

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Or Less Minutes Hours Or More

74. Directs movement to flank

75. Directs movement to occupy

position to support breaching

operation

76. Directs movement to pass through

breach

77. Directs move out in previous

formation

78. Directs obstacles, mines, and

flares be installed

79. Directs open fire

80. Directs passage of lines be

conducted

* 81. Directs phase lines be crossed

82. Directs position be held

83. Directs preparation for bypass

84. Directs pre-fire checks be

conducted

85. Directs range cards be prepared

86. Directs readiness actions be

performed

87. Directs release point be crossed

88. Directs resupply be performed

89. Directs smoke be popped

90. Directs specified movement

91. Directs start point be crossed

92. Directs successive delay position

be occupied

PT5463b

C-37
LM

TIME AVAILABLE BEFORE STARTING TASK

One

Minute Several Several One Day

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Or Less Minutes Hours Or More

93. Directs supplies be distributed ___ _ ____ ____ ____ ____

94. Directs suppressive fires____ __ __ ____ ____ ____

*95. Directs suppressive fires be

shifted ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

*96. Directs suppressive fires on

flank targets____ _____ ____ __ __ ____

97. Directs surprise targets be

engaged ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

* ~98. Directs surveillance be conducted ____ ________ ___

99. Directs tanks be camouflaged____ ____ ____ ____

*100. Directs tanks be put in turret

defilade ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

101. Directs tanks move into firing

position ____ ____ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _

-102. Directs tanks move to good fields

of fire ____ ____ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _

*103. Directs targets be engaged with

TIS (Thermal Imiage Sights) ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

*104. Directs targets in assigned

sector be engaged____ _____ ____ ____ ____

105. Directs targets of opportunity

be engaged ____ ____ ___ ___ ___

106. Directs team on battle

position be joined ___ ___ ____ ____

*107. Directs team on objective be

joined__ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _

* ~108. Directs the attack be accelerated____ ____ ____ ____ ____

* ~109. Directs 3-man crews be organized ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

* PT5463b

C-3 8
TIME AVAILABLE BEFORE STARTING TASK

One

Minute Several Several One Day

PLATOON LEADER TAS1, None Or Less Minutes Hours Or More

110. Directs traveling

111. Directs traveling overwatch

112. Directs traveling reverse

overwatch

113. Issues FRAGO

114. Issues OPORD

115. Issues warning order

116. Makes an estimate of the

situation

117. Makes a tentative plan

118. Monitors indirect fires

119. Monitors TOWs

120. Plans displacement

121. Prepares a fire plan

122. Prepares an operation plan

123. Provides target data to forward

observer

124. Reassesses tactical situation

125. Reconnoiters assigned alternate

position

126. Reestablishes communications with

TCs

127. Reestablishes communications with

the team

128. Reports crossing phase lines

129. Reports TOW effects

PT5463b

C-39

* * - . . . . . . .
TIME AVAILABLE BEFORE STARTING TASK

One

Minute Several Several One Day

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Or Less Minutes Hours Or More

130. Requests and adjusts preparatory

fires

131. Requests artillery fire and

infantry support

* 132. Requests Class I, III, and V

supplies

133. Requests direct covering fires

134. Requests final protective fires

135. Requests illumination

136. Requests indirect final

protective fires

137. Requests indirect fires

138. Requests indirect fires be

adjusted

139. Requests indirect fires be

shifted

140. Requests indirect fires be

stopped

141. Requests permission to counterattack

142. Requests permission to cover

displacement

143. Requests permission to displace

144. Requests permission to fire and

maneuver

145. Requests permission to hold

• 146. Requests permission to join team

on battle position

PT5463b

C-40

"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-"-?- ------ ,.---'- --..- -.-.-- ?'--i--------.------ ..--. ? -. - - - .-- -.-.------. .
TIME AVAILABLE BEFORE STARTING TASK

One

Minute Several Several One Day

PLATOON LEADER TASK None Or Less Minutes Hours Or More

147. Requests permission to withdraw ___ _ ____ ____ ____ ____

148. Requests readiness reports ___ ____ ____ ___ ___

149. Requests SPOTREPS____ ____ __ __ ____ ____

150. Requests supply status____ ___ _ ____ ____ ____

151. Requests suppressive fires

152. Requests suppressive fires be

shifted _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _

153. Requests suppressive fires be

stopped_____ ____ ____ _____ _ ___

154. Requests team fire plan____ ___ _ ____ ____ ____

155. Requests team patrol reports____ ____ ____ ____ ____

156. Requests TOWs open fire____ ___ _ ____ ____ ____

157. Requests TOW section reinforce

platoon fire_____ ____ _____ ____

*158. Requests wire communications be

installed_____ ____ _____ ____

159. Selects and announces withdrawal

routes

* ~160. Submits SITREP____ ____ __ __ ____ ____

161. Submits SPOTREP____ ____ ___ _ ____ ____

* PT5463b

C-4 1
APPENDIX D

Means and Standard Deviations of Platoon Leader Tasks

Rated Using the [SD-Based Questionnaire

. . . nunn m _ m- -

V J.j.!L2.~.s s t C~.~
Table D-I

Means and Standard Deviations of Platoon Leader

Tasks Rated Using the ISD-Based Questionnairea

SCALE

Damage/Injury Time Available Time to Learn Mission Success

Task Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

1 3.52 1.43 3.00 1.00 4.12 1.05 4.45 0.85

2 3.28 1.05 3.18 0.68 3.32 1.00 3.63 0.76

3 2.92 0.95 2.86 0.77 2.20 1.03 3.08 0.83

4 3.14 1.13 2.84 0.91 2.08 1.06 3.75 0.90

5 3.66 1.12 2.17 0.85 2.02 1.06 3.94 0.90

6 3.47 1.18 3.29 0.81 3.52 1.03 3.88 0.72

7 3.95 1.20 2.77 0.81 3.75 1.10 4.49 0.62

8 3.40 1.20 2.86 0.83 3.14 1.11 4.28 0.72

9 3.32 1.17 3.59 0.68 3.67 1.02 3.97 0.75

10 3.61 1.12 3.67 0.64 4.26 0.92 4.17 0.82

11 3.75 0.98 2.49 0.95 3.89 1.02 4.15 0.89

12 2.92 0.85 2.22 0.84 3.03 1.10 3.00 0.71

13 2.92 0.82 2.28 0.89 3.00 1.14 3.12 0.72

14 2.91 0.74 2.17 0.78 2.84 1.15 3.05 0.67

15 3.54 1.05 2.67 0.94 3.88 1.12 3.98 0.76

16 3.65 1.01 2.95 0.84 4.11 0.96 4.14 0.90

17 3.57 1.03 2.86 0.89 3.52 1.04 3.98 0.72

18 3.57 1.05 3.19 0.66 3.13 1.00 3.88 0.65

19 3.22 1.04 3.22 0.58 2.97 1.01 3.77 0.58

20 3.19 1.22 3.19 0.67 3.23 0.96 3.98 0.83

21 3.05 1.13 3.19 0.64 3.02 0.98 3.58 0.94

22 3.38 1.10 3.02 0.72 3.30 1.06 3.89 0.77

23 3.23 1.14 2.55 0.85 2.94 0.97 3.48 0.95

24 3.08 1.14 2.63 0.80 3.06 1.08 3.64 1.00

25 3.03 1.14 2.56 0.85 2.89 0.99 3.56 0.94

26 4.03 0.88 2.50 0.98 4.02 1.12 4.37 0.65

27 2.94 1.12 3.34 0.85 2.86 1.32 3.42 0.79

28 3.06 1.18 2.35 0.98 2.09 0.82 3.28 0.74

29 3.11 1.19 2.37 0.98 2.11 0.88 3.37 0.78

30 3.23 1.07 3.12 0.93 2.72 1.06 3.60 0.75

31 3.34 1.08 2.37 0.86 3.16 1.11 3.71 0.74

32 3.72 1.03 2.03 0.79 2.95 1.17 4.14 0.77

33 3.95 1.01 2.11 0.87 3.22 1.27 4.06 0.98

34 3.65 1.08 2.72 0.82 3.05 1.19 4.03 0.79

35 3.66 1.09 2.98 1.02 3.30 1.15 4.14 0.68

36 3.35 1.14 2.77 1.11 2.84 1.22 3.92 0.74

D-1

............. . . . . . .. . . . ...-,.. '.. .... . . .
SCALE

Damage/Injury Time Available Time to Learn Mission Success

Task Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

37 3.35 0.99 2.22 0.78 2.92 1.12 3.71 0.79

38 ...25 0.98 2.29 0.75 2.92 1.16 3.65 0.81

39 2.77 1.25 1.86 0.75 2.29 1.01 3.16 1.06

40 3.54 1.25 2.64 0.86 2.83 0.99 3.88 0.98

41 2.50 0.98 2.42 0.84 2.56 1.13 2.69 0.88

42 2.52 0.98 2.31 0.76 2.58 1.03 2.74 0.90

43 3.00 1.20 2.54 0.85 2.42 1.02 3.62 0.90

44 3.48 1.05 2.14 0.83 2.81 1.04 3.83 0.85

45 3.35 1.02 2.18 0.79 2.75 1.04 3.77 0.82

46 3.22 1.04 2.38 0.78 2.87 1.11 3.57 0.98

47 3.86 0.93 2.69 0.95 3.61 1.29 4.05 0.72

48 3.54 1.05 2.92 0.96 3.38 1.18 4.05 0.69

49 3.46 1.00 2.35 0.84 3.17 1.08 3.83 0.67

50 2.94 0.90 2.60 0.93 2.84 1.14 3.32 0.71

51 4.11 0.95 1.91 0.84 2.62 1.18 4.31 0.71

52 3.63 0.99 1.95 0.84 2.59 1.16 4.11 0.74

53 4.03 1.00 1.98 0.87 2.75 1.16 4.32 0.77

54 4.02 0.84 2.09 0.79 3.25 1.18 4.29 0.76

55 3.26 1.03 1.97 0.83 2.39 1.03 3.69 0.86

56 3.14 1.09 2.75 0.79 2.69 0.91 3.71 0.61

57 2.85 1.00 2.71 0.73 2.25 0.91 3.31 0.79

58 2.49 0.90 2.41 0.78 2.46 1.01 2.78 0.81

59 3.06 1.09 2.44 0.81 2.61 0.94 3.53 0.78

60 2.97 1.05 2.94 0.89 2.83 1.06 3.17 0.96

61 2.82 1.03 2.30 0.94 2.23 0.89 3.49 0.95

62 2.97 1.15 2.34 0.80 2.48 0.91 3.55 0.88

63 3.06 1.18 2.29 0.77 2.44 1.04 3.51 0.81

64 3.23 1.07 2.22 0.77 2.86 1.04 3.75 0.77

65 3.28 1.08 2.20 0.80 2.89 1.03 3.86 0.79

66 3.16 1.04 2.30 0.82 2.81 1.01 3.68 0.83

67 3.14 1.13 2.35 0.81 2.72 1.02 3.49 0.73

68 3.05 1.05 2.43 0.86 2.70 0.99 3.52 0.71

69 2.92 0.99 2.46 0.78 2.77 1.02 3.44 0.71

70 3.15 1.12 2.32 0.80 2.88 0.95 3.72 0.77

71 2.98 1.12 2.39 0.78 2.78 0.94 3.55 0.73

72 3.29 1.06 2.28 0.79 2.84 0.95 3.77 0.79

73 3.28 1.16 2.33 0.74 2.77 1.00 3.59 0.71

74 3.14 1.06 2.40 0.77 2.72 0.95 3.55 0.78

75 3.29 1.10 2.58 0.71 3.03 1.04 3.77 0.75

76 3.46 1.08 2.44 0.81 2.95 1.05 3.72 0.77

77 2.83 0.98 2.40 0.77 2.38 0.97 3.23 0.77

78 3.23 0.96 3.27 0.86 3.36 1.06 3.75 0.82

79 3.71 1.20 1.73 0.74 2.28 0.97 4.33 0.82

80 2.97 1.16 2.95 0.95 3.19 1.00 3.84 0.81

81 2.63 0.93 2.38 0.83 2.25 0.87 3.44 0.81

82 3.75 1.06 2.34 0.82 2.51 1.01 3.98 0.83

83 2.98 0.98 2.70 0.81 2.69 0.97 3.46 0.69

84 2.86 1.38 2.91 1.02 2.77 1.00 3.61 1.02

D-2
SCALE

Damage/Injury Time Available Time to Learn Mission Success

Task Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

85 2.75 1.33 2.98 0.97 2.83 1.00 3.59 0.99

86 2.85 1.19 2.95 1.05 2.77 1.08 3.40 0.91

87 2.57 0.93 2.56 0.86 2.23 0.89 3.17 0.85

88 2.94 1.22 3.06 0.88 2.92 0.96 3.69 1.00

89 3.05 1.11 2.16 0.78 2.44 1.01 3.41 0.80

90 2.86 1.12 2.38 0.70 2.84 1.01 3.44 0.76

91 2.60 1.07 2.42 0.91 2.16 0.84 3.29 0.91

92 3.42 1.07 2.59 0.75 2.95 1.09 3.81 0.69

93 2.86 1.25 3.05 0.81 2.59 0.93 3.52 0.92

94 3.68 1.11 2.02 0.79 3.00 1.01 4.08 0.78

95 3.63 1.14 1.92 0.76 2.92 0.98 4.13 0.81

96 3.58 1.12 2.05 0.76 2.91 1.02 4.05 0.83

97 3.88 1.13 1.72 0.84 2.71 1.06 4.05 0.85

98 3.12 1.07 2.84 0.84 2.47 0.85 3.68 0.84

99 3.08 1.14 2.89 0.89 2.64 1.01 3.64 0.95

100 3.14 1.22 2.68 0.80 2.48 0.98 3.69 0.85

101 3.37 1.13 2.37 0.77 2.56 0.94 3.79 0.85

102 3.54 1.11 2.41 0.82 2.78 1.00 3.84 0.85

103 3.11 1.24 2.25 0.89 2.76 0.98 3.69 0.88

104 3.40 1.18 2.02 0.81 2.50 0.94 3.81 0.90

105 3.35 1.07 2.00 0.88 2.37 0.89 3.75 0.86

106 3.06 0.98 2.61 0.66 2.68 1.00 3.63 0.81

107 3.05 0.98 2.60 0.66 2.62 0.94 3.63 0.77

108 3.74 0.99 2.03 0.78 2.77 1.08 3.98 0.75

109 3.11 1.16 2.89 0.78 2.59 1.14 3.43 1.01

110 2.50 0.91 2.25 0.77 2.45 0.87 3.10 0.71

111 2.74 0.94 2.23 0.77 2.48 0.89 3.25 0.74

112 2.78 1.01 2.24 0.80 2.61 0.97 3.27 0.73

113 3.75 1.41 2.80 0.74 3.83 1.02 4.52 0.67

114 3.64 1.38 3.42 0.71 4.23 0.92 4.55 0.69

115 3.30 1.41 2.86 0.77 3.61 1.06 4.36 0.82

116 3.65 1.26 3.02 0.77 4.10 0.96 4.47 0.71

117 3.52 1.25 3.23 0.66 3.94 0.96 4.36 0.68

118 3.28 1.11 2.52 0.86 3.17 1.02 3.84 0.83

119 3.00 1.06 2.58 0.88 2.97 1.06 3.52 0.82

120 3.31 1.13 3.17 0.72 2.56 0.96 3.87 0.77

121 3.42 1.21 3.41 0.56 3.83 0.94 4.13 0.81

122 3.48 1.26 3.57 0.67 4.27 0.88 4.10 0.95

123 3.37 1.14 2.92 0.76 3.31 0.99 3.92 0.81

124 3.55 1.20 2.80 0.72 3.58 1.08 4.19 0.79

125 3.15 1.03 3.38 0.58 3.28 0.98 3.81 0.72

126 3.18 1.32 2.59 0.80 2.53 0.91 3.94 0.90

127 3.28 1.35 2.54 0.78 2.53 0.82 4.05 0.81

128 2.72 1.27 2.08 0.74 2.08 0.62 3.43 0.93

129 2.34 1.05 2.41 0.77 2.14 0.64 3.11 0.89

130 3.34 1.12 2.56 0.89 3.47 1.07 3.98 0.75

131 3.35 1.28 2.59 0.90 3.43 1.06 4.17 0.75

132 3.17 1.33 3.22 0.73 3.09 0.85 3.89 0.90

D-3

- . M
SCALE

Damage/Injury Time Available Time to Learn Mission Success

Task b Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

133 3.49 1.17 2.29 0.82 2.77 0.87 4.06 0.85

134 3.78 1.26 2.19 0.87 3.08 1.13 4.32 0.76

135 3.08 1.12 2.42 0.89 2.81 0.87 3.63 0.92

136 3.63 1.26 2.20 0.89 3.08 1.09 4.21 0.81

137 3.68 1.17 2.34 0.82 3.32 1.08 4.24 0.76

138 3.63 1.19 2.29 0.80 3.23 1.06 4.21 0.79

139 3.65 1.19 2.18 0.81 3.20 1.09 4.09 0.85

140 3.28 1.22 2.12 0.84 2.77 1.03 3.98 0.92

141 3.49 1.21 2.61 0.81 2.88 1.08 3.86 1.12

142 3.26 1.09 2.47 0.76 2.60 0.89 3.69 0.80

143 3.52 1.21 2.39 0.77 2.56 0.89 3.92 0.81

144 3.63 1.23 2.26 0.89 2.75 1.08 3.89 0.99

145 3.32 1.17 2.38 0.75 2.52 0.93 3.63 0.89

146 3.05 1.02 2.58 0.75 2.42 0.81 3.56 0.82

147 3.52 1.22 2.42 0.79 2.66 0.98 3.95 0.85

148 2.54 1.15 2.72 0.77 2.38 0.87 3.37 0.90

149 2.75 1.28 2.41 0.77 2.49 0.95 3.59 1.04

150 2.63 1.21 2.64 0.74 2.44 0.95 3.52 0.96

151 3.40 1.30 2.17 0.80 2.75 0.96 4.06 0.88

152 3.35 1.18 2.17 0.82 2.67 0.94 4.11 0.84

153 3.28 1.24 2.14 0.81 2.56 0.96 3.90 0.91

154 2.84 1.21 2.98 0.85 2.69 0.94 3.73 0.77

155 2.71 1.22 2.84 0.80 2.51 0.90 3.50 0.78

156 3.26 1.24 2.03 0.82 2.38 0.83 3.87 0.97

157 3.18 1.25 2.31 0.81 2.44 0.85 3.84 0.90

158 2.45 1.08 3.13 0.88 2.52 0.91 3.10 0.78

159 3.34 1.20 2.98 0.72 3.22 0.94 4.00 0.80

160 2.86 1.45 2.52 0.73 3.19 1.04 4.17 0.90

161 2.94 1.48 2.36 0.76 3.06 1.02 4.20 0.88

a n = 61 to 65

bNumbers corresponds to task numbers used in ISD-Based Questionnaire.

See Appendix C for task titles.

D-4

........................................ "-

.. . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPENDIX E

Means and Standard Deviations of Platoon

Leader Tasks Rated Using the Mission-Based Questionnaire

"i7
~ .0 00 a. %O 0 0: 0:000

0n co 440'(7 em tl 4 , ''( 

.4 a4 aV 4 In10 OD- 0 i 1t- .0

.44

0 FAO 0 OOO 0

40

16 .. in -00 0 0%aC) Se 0.4 00

0l U00 -a . 0 co.

a 4 I4~N A.-~ 9 ;c i;r 4e s4c

41 Ln e

.40n c en't. In a n el c m e

*?0 co Go - ae 4w

1 ~ ~ -- cooI 00- 0 00.004

14. 40 f!C iU r I

44 ;: - cOoI 4470 -n D moo

0.4 4A 0uu

0~~ d-Oj.~ loo-

.4 0 0

44 44 4.*C6 ou $(1 M

.. . . . .. . .
C; 0000o0000 o 060000 -. 00

*0! Il 0f'O00 OS 0

00 % 0:0 .r'O ' 0 N' -.. C!

%GClc .9 . - .00 

9.3093 10; 000- 0 00000 0 00-

to0 0.. I w W r.'0 000N110 01*

44 4 a, CPI 0 1-In 'U 0'O n 4 -0. 4.

41 000 000 00 00909 - - 0 A ,4

.6 I 0em mm mo ne

.. 40' %Vt -T a,4 m m 1 m0f ON-W,-

-' 10 ' m40 in4A 0 Ln v m0 in i kot fn' %n -l-0

ji -4 -44

U~~.f 0' 0O'NO U44 *~0' g~4h

0 0 'or-,-.oo.~ ,-',-.oo.. .. 0 0

141 000 00 E-2
~ )000-000-0. cooo-.. 000000000

4 -0 00 0 0 0 ~0 0 0 0 0 - 0

onm% -t m w 4 %D n. ~ wi~#

.

44 -w 0 U e. . c4 ol c 0 OanU D c c m4w

00'00 oa 19 10r..U a: c aO )U a o m~ a r c: * n-.-400~ 000000 000 0 000 a A

r-t~~..0O 44 a, r- a'-.,..0.9lo 9 0.'- 1 a f a

m e e m -z.0 O '-* 1.. m.r( M T- av - w m. .

.4 00 U)0U m' O.0 0 % wmar r0m0-s m

c:( 0-.--.0000 00000 .9 9r-.000cr~ 0000 

c: ta 0 -*0.- -'.

0 a co . .0 m 4 0 0% &n 0 Ln0 q140m .

U .0cc i -, aa i rZv. c4 00 o a w0 0&A (4 N--a

442 - - -0 -- ---- - - -~~ -- -

44

0 .'.0~~ a: It" i- o -0a'000ne 1 c

4cc (0 c4 -D -n0m.8. .. m r- c

. 100 - 000- 000)0-- .-. 4(00U'4...a

a 9 tN'.Du .ne9n r'ttN n ' 4*0o! a'a'(009

0 m~ I G0(-r0O .Go ol '0 a "m a '('4a0a

44 .0

06

4Ea. n%4 . ~ '. 0 ~ ~ . N N '' U 4 ( a
4. O

~ ) 00 00 0 -

o a c4 - i-s nc

.4 41 0 -4 C

M 0 W

r. c 00 0 000

00

A -- A a w w A C

t4 r. r.LA0 e

41

.4~~ ) '. ~ 0.~ 

.00

*d A

E-
APPENDIX F

Rankings of Tasks on Rating Scales

Using the ISD-based Questionnaire

I

bI
Table F-1

Rankings of Tasks on Rating Scales

Using the ISD-Based Questionnaire

Scale

Damage/Injury Time Available Time to Learn Mission Success

Rank Taska Mean Taska Mean Taska Mean Task a Mean

1 51 4.11 97 1.72 122 4.27 114 4.55

2 53 4.03 79 1.73 10 4.26 113 4.52

3 26 4.03 39 1.86 114 4.23 7 4.49

4 54 4.02 51 1.91 1 4.12 118 4.47

5 33 3.95 95 1.92 16 4.11 1 4.45

6 7 3.95 52 1.97 116 4.10 26 4.37

7 97 3.88 55 1.97 26 4.02 117 4.36

8 47 3.86 53 1.98 117 3.94 115 4.38

9 134 3.78 105 2.00 11 3.89 79 4.33

10 113 3.75 94 2.02 15 3.88 134 4.32

11 82 3.75 104 2.02 121 3.83 53 4.32

12 11 3.75 32 2.03 113 3.83 51 4.31

13 108 3.74 108 2.03 7 3.75 54 4.29

14 32 3.72 156 2.03 9 3.67 8 4.28

15 79 3.71 96 2.05 115 3.81 137 4.24

16 137 3.68 128 2.08 47 3.61 138 4.21

17 94 3.68 54 2.09 124 3.58 136 4.21

18 35 3.66 33 2.11 120 3.58 161 4.20

19 5 3.68 140 2.12 17 3.52 124 4.19

20 139 3.65 44 2.14 6 3.52 160 4.17

21 116 3.65 153 2.14 130 3.47 131 4.17

22 34 3.65 89 2.16 131 3.43 10 4.17

23 16 3.65 5 2.17 48 3.38 11 4.15

24 114 3.64 14 2.17 78 3.36 35 4.14

25 144 3.63 151 2.17 137 3.32 32 4.14

26 138 3.63 152 2.17 2 3.32 16 4.14

27 138 3.63 45 2.18 123 3.31 121 4.13

28 95 3.63 139 2.18 35 3.30 95 4.13

29 52 3.63 134 2.19 22 3.30 152 4.11

30 10 3.61 65 2.20 125 3.28 52 4.11

31 96 3.58 136 2.20 54 3.25 122 4.10

32 18 3.57 12 2.22 138 3.23 139 4.09

33 17 3.57 37 2.22 20 3.23 94 4.08

34 124 3.55 64 2.22 159 3.22 151 4.06

35 102 3.54 il1 2.23 33 3.22 133 4.06

36 48 3.54 112 2.24 139 3.20 33 4.06

37 40 3.54 103 2.25 160 3.19 127 4.05

38 15 3.54 110 2.25 80 3.19 97 4.05

39 147 3.52 144 2.26 118 3.17 96 4.05

40 143 3.52 13 2.28 49 3.17 48 4.05

F-I

= " -', i . . . . ..... . - - °- -
Scale

Damage/Injury Time Available Time to Learn Mission Success

Rank Taska Mean Taska Mean Taska Mean Taska Mean

41 117 3.52 72 2.28 31 3.16 47 4.05

42 1 3.52 38 2.29 8 3.14 34 4.03

43 141 3.49 63 2.29 18 3.13 159 4.00

44 133 3.49 133 2.29 132 3.09 140 3.96

45 122 3.48 138 2.29 136 3.08 130 3.98

46 44 3.48 61 2.30 161 3.06 108 3.98

47 6 3.47 66 2.30 134 3.06 82 3.98

48 76 3.46 42 2.31 24 3.08 20 3.98

49 49 3.46 157 2.31 34 3.05 17 3.98

50 121 3.42 70 2.32 75 3.03 15 3.98

51 92 3.42 73 2.33 12 3.03 9 3.97

52 151 3.40 62 2.34 21 3.02 147 3.95

53 104 3.40 82 2.34 94 3.00 126 3.94

54 8 3.40 137 2.34 13 3.00 5 3.94

55 22 3.38 28 2.35 119 2.87 143 3.92

56 123 3.37 49 2.35 19 2.97 123 3.92

57 101 3.37 67 2.35 92 2.95 36 3.92

58 152 3.35 161 2.36 76 2.95 153 3.90

59 131 3.35 29 2.37 32 2.95 144 3.69

60 105 3.35 31 2.37 23 2.94 132 3.89

61 45 3.35 101 2.37 95 2.92 22 3.89

62 37 3.35 46 2.38 88 2.92 40 3.88

63 36 3.35 81 2.38 38 2.92 18 3.88

64 159 3.34 90 2.38 37 2.92 6 3.88

65 130 3.34 145 2.38 98 2.91 156 3.87

66 31 3.34 71 2.39 65 2.89 120 3.87

67 145 3.32 143 2.39 25 2.89 141 3.86

68 9 3.32 74 2.40 141 2.88 65 3.86

69 120 3.31 77 2.40 70 2.88 157 3.84

70 115 3.30 58 2.41 46 2.87 118 3.84

71 75 3.29 102 2.41 64 2.86 102 3.84

72 72 3.29 129 2.41 27 2.86 80 3.84

73 153 3.28 149 2.41 90 2.84 49 3.83

74 140 3.28 41 2.42 72 2.84 44 3.83

75 127 3.28 91 2.42 50 2.84 125 3.81

76 118 3.28 135 2.42 36 2.84 104 3.81

77 73 3.28 147 2.42 14 2.84 82 3.81

78 65 3.28 68 2.43 85 2.83 101 3.79

79 2 3.28 59 2.94 60 2.83 75 3.77

80 156 3.26 76 2.44 40 2.83 72 3.77

81 142 3.26 69 2.46 135 2.81 45 3.77

82 55 3.26 142 2.47 66 2.81 19 3.77

83 38 3.25 11 2.49 44 2.81 105 3.75

84 78 3.23 26 2.50 102 2.78 78 3.75

85 64 3.23 118 2.50 71 2.78 64 3.75

86 30 3.23 160 2.52 140 2.77 4 3.75

87 23 3.23 43 2.54 133 2.77 154 3.73

88 46 3.22 127 2.54 108 2.77 76 3.72

89 18 3.22 23 2.55 86 2.77 70 3.72

90 20 3.19 25 2.56 84 2.77 56 3.71

F-2

i .- . i. iq - ' . , ? . ... • ,, -. ,. . ..-. .. ,ii. .... ... ? .i .i. i~?.. '" •:i: i .
rq

Scale

Damage/Injury Time Available Time to Learn Mission Success

Rank Taska Mean Taska Mean Taska Mean Taska Mean

91 157 3.18 87 2.56 73 2.77 37 3.71

92 126 3.18 119 2.56 69 2.77 31 3.71

93 132 3.17 130 2.58 103 2.76 142 3.69

94 66 3.16 75 2.58 151 2.75 103 3.69

95 125 3.15 146 2.58 144 2.75 100 3.69

96 70 3.15 92 2.59 53 2.75 88 3.69

97 100 3.14 126 2.59 45 2.75 55 3.69

98 74 3.14 131 2.59 74 2.72 98 3.68

99 67 3.14 50 2.60 67 2.72 66 3.66

100 56 3.14 107 2.60 30 2.72 38 3.65

101 4 3.14 106 2.61 97 2.71 99 3.64

102 98 3.12 141 2.61 68 2.70 24 3.64

103 109 3.11 24 2.63 154 2.69 145 3.63

104 103 3.11 40 2.64 83 2.69 135 3.63

105 29 3.11 150 2.64 56 2.69 107 3.63

106 135 3.08 15 2.67 106 2.68 106 3.63

107 99 3.08 100 2.68 152 2.67 2 3,63

108 24 3.08 47 2.69 147 2.88 43 3.62

109 106 3.06 83 2.70 99 2.64 84 3.61

110 63 3.06 57 2.71 107 2.62 30 3.60

ill 59 3.06 34 2.72 51 2.62 149 3.59

112 28 3.06 148 2.72 112 2.61 85 3.59

113 146 3.05 56 2.75 59 2.61 73 3.59

114 107 3.05 7 2.77 142 2.60 21 3.58

115 89 3.05 36 2.77 109 2.59 46 3.57

116 68 3.05 113 2.80 93 2.59 146 3.58

117 21 3.05 124 2.80 52 2.59 25 3.56

118 25 3.03 4 2.84 42 2.58 74 3.55

119 119 3.00 98 2.84 153 2.56 71 3.55

120 43 3.00 155 2.84 153 2.56 62 3.55

121 83 2.98 3 2.86 101 2.56 59 3.53

122 71 2.98 8 2.86 41 2.56 150 3.52

123 80 2.97 17 2.86 127 2.53 119 3.52

124 62 2.97 115 2.86 126 2.53 93 3.52

125 60 2.97 99 2.89 158 2.52 68 3.52

126 161 2.94 109 2.89 145 2.52 63 3.51

127 88 2.94 84 2.91 155 2.51 155 3.50

128 50 2.94 48 2.92 82 2.51 67 3.49

129 27 2.94 123 2.92 104 2.50 61 3.49

130 69 2.92 60 2.94 149 2.49 23 3.48

131 13 2.92 16 2.95 ill 2.48 83 3.46

132 12 2.92 80 2.95 100 2.48 90 3.44

133 3 2.92 86 2.95 62 2.48 81 3.44

134 14 2.91 35 2.98 98 2.47 69 3.44

135 160 2.86 85 2.98 58 2.46 128 3.43

136 93 2.86 154 2.98 110 2.45 109 3.43

137 90 2.86 159 2.98 157 2.44 27 3.42

138 84 2.86 1 3.00 150 2.44 89 3.41

139 86 2.85 22 3.02 89 2.44 86 3.40

140 57 2.85 116 3.02 63 2.44 148 3.37

F-3
Scale

Damage/Injury Time Available Time to Learn Mission Success

Rank Taska Mean Taska Mean Taska Mean Taska Mean

141 154 2.84 53 3.05 146 2.42 29 3.37

142 77 2.83 88 3.06 43 2.42 50 3.32

143 61 2.82 30 3.12 55 2.39 57 3.31

144 112 2.78 158 3.13 156 2.38 91 3.29

145 39 2.77 120 3.17 148 2.38 28 3.28

146 149 2.75 2 3.18 77 2.39 112 3.27

147 85 2.75 18 3.19 105 2.37 il1 3.25

148 111 2.74 20 3.19 39 2.29 77 3.23

149 128 2.72 21 3.19 79 2.28 87 3.17

150 155 2.71 19 3.22 81 2.25 60 3.17

151 150 2.63 132 3.22 57 2.25 39 3.16

152 81 2.63 117 3.23 87 2.23 13 3.12

153 91 2.60 78 3.27 81 2.23 129 3.11

154 87 2.57 6 3.29 3 2.20 158 3.10

155 148 2.54 27 3.34 91 2.16 110 3.10

156 42 2.52 125 3.38 129 2.14 3 3.08

157 110 2.50 121 3.41 29 2.11 14 3.05

158 41 2.50 114 3.42 28 2.09 12 3.00

159 58 2.49 122 3.57 128 2.08 58 2.78

160 158 2.45 9 3.59 4 2.08 42 2.74

161 129 2.34 10 3.67 5 2.02 41 2.69

Numbers correspond to task numbers used in ISD-Based Questionnaire.

See Appendix C for task titles.

F-4

.. ".

i. . . . S

S.-. .. . . . . S S .. S 5 55%

S' , . .

.. S 45
APPENDIX C

Rankings of Tasks on Rating Scale Using

the Mission-Based Questionnaire

am

-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
----- - - --

* 0 *l m

U8 0

al u .o . . . . .. 9 9 9 C! 9 a 4- -s 21 47 IT - .9 -a a -W -a 4 T 4 1

r4 U

w I f 1 C

0 ul

a7 c-s - v 00000a4111-

U .0

U) a y hI

4 U, La a 10 m L nIw00% )a

L ~ ~~ ~ ~ u a r 0 C c

a2 U.'5.3, 4,. ~ 0 'Nm5e.en U m en.'5enenUenc e

0a r i C 4c 4 C n5-ciV C 4r , 4c nC -

go .4 g4 .0 Q t

a. z 00 000 ZO0 0x~ 0 In 00in 0

*n ay m~ %0 - - -n9 - -

5- C Q

.4 r

0M0 001 00 9z 0''aW~W~~

La a

0 0n( m0 0

In W% -' x 4 xo, 00MM 0 0 0%a C

a 0n

3t ' 1 1

C) 0 00 l- -- 00 a''aa''r-Q0 ~ 0D

9 'a

"0 - --- m

mAn%0 C 0qe 4r

*J (S.. . S ('.~(4 (.- 'G-1.CVN S.
u 0

a1 - 0.0 l196u

U3A

o og so to0 00 0 0 m o aa 0 2 00 0 2so00 U o 00 6 o, 0 l 0 0o00'IQI M z 

41 IL

41 -a- -V - S- 7 v' nmr)e -0 -- nc nc -2 

00

41M '4 4N 4 m m.I~1I. 1

1

N1

1 

'n I~I (1 NIIm

.0 .0 u I Ile'~ .. I u 1 106a..I IC.C.C6 . 1 C. 1. 1L 4 O I.0

4) 0 0 0 0 'o so0 00 0 0 0 0

* u

#A C NN.N 0 00'w.w.NI'I1 0 0 10a wIT )

N 000 r .000 ILI 1 0. u u u 0. A. A. P. A

U) u

'40

'4 I NI I 4 I en-I M IN c4 4 04I M 1d I In.l M n -4C

A ~ D.C. ~ 41 C.C ~ I6 9 I A. IL IA...1 u..0 . u Iwa 0. 0. I 0.0.0.4

J3 Al C.0C000 000 C i 0 0 000 41 u

41 M 0- - - -

1% 0 ) -V,- nm.

-4l 0 0 1 !I I

A

S0

0 0= 

41 N ~ 1 w0'' 10 10 0I).

-i M -s i nn %n

C-
-a -t% i 140Da 0.E

AM7 

0

In %D~ In~~pp

o 000 8~ -4 U

i W 

.6 C ,% I: DaW

46 1

a 0% w - 0 Ln0 0

6 @8 0

.4 In66o

.~~I U Ok0 * l C7I 1 0 c 0 0 C',-,1

enc n1 40 nvuP

4.4 A4 D(4c *1n 

O.Gc 0 Cud ~8 en en 4 C44C4 440u0 :

*a u CA u o 4 0>C @ 40 0 ". u 

me0 C4 C" 44C 4

Al .43 U 8 0 LfO -C 

*6 fl6S 96 6l( cU a0 , "0"

'o . 4m . 4Q040

r- a "4

is* 00O a, Q S n 4a 6 "a 1 C4 In 0. 0m0

A 'A > aa01. 4

0 @8 601 0 a .4 4)i 0 0 9. a

* p.Up 4 Lo 0%C4 p4 OD 4 .- .0

@8 0~0O000O0 @ 0-44- 40

C4 C4 C4 '- a 4m

0u 0 a CL. I 1 14 1C W 4u

a@8. . . .9, .. . .. 84448A.43 .46 0

to u *a480 P'

0~~: @ ~80 go@44 

8 338 888 0 0 w u44 - w

.4 a m~ mi .4 L4.40446U 0 *0 .@8 D 00 0 'D-40V4m.- 00 066A 

~~ in ~ 4 84 en 4 t06 

cc 0. C-1 'I. @8, p 

.4 @~4r.iin.0n . 84 ,4 84G-3o. p