I__. - International Military Testing Association

Job Sets for Efficiency in Recruiting and Training (JSERT)’
Jane M. Arabian and Amy C. Schwartz’
U.S. Army Research Institute
for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
Alexandria, VA
The Army is facing radical changes brought about by the reduction in the siz:.of its
force. The challenges encountered by the Army will require different and more clllcicnl
ways of going about the business of recruiting, selecting and classifying young nlcll :md
women as they enter the service. Changes in enlisted end strength will have a dyn:tmic
impact on, for example, MOS fill and training seat utilization. In the past, changes in
authorizations have caused a manpower surplus or shortage in various MOS. The dcla~cd
entry program (DEP) has not been able to provide enough flexibility to compens:ltc fog
such near term authorization changes. Therefore, the Army has begun to evalu:ltc the
potential for a “job sets” concept to improve manpower and personnel managemctll I)!(
fostering more timely, accurate personnel classification.
This paper will describe the rationale and tailoring of the JSERT concept to the
particulars of the Army’s current manpower and personnel environment. The gcneml
approach was to devise two parallel tracks: 1) the pragmatic identification of occup:l(ions
(MOS) which would comprise a given “Job Set” and 2) an empirical research progr:lm i’or
confirming the “Job Sets”, devising a means for selecting an appropriate classification tcs!
battery, and developing a feedback/appraisal system for the JSERT concept.
Currently, in the vast majority of cases each recruit receives a contract for a spccii’ic
occupation, such as M-l turret mechanic. This contract is a legal commitment by the Army
to provide the individual with the specific training for M-l turret mechanics. This mc:lns
that if the Army finds that it doesn’t need as many M-l turret mechanics it had cstim:\l4
or that it needs more Bradley turret mechanics than expected, contracts must he rcnegotiated
and the individuals involved may decide not to enlist. This may be costly, both
in terms of dollars and loss of desirable individuals for service.
The Army has been able to accommodate small discrepancies in its estimates for
personnel by tapping into the pool of recruits in the Delayed Entry Program (DEl’).
However, this does not always provide a satisfactory solution; individuals’ contracls still
need to be honored. Given the anticipated changes in the size of the force and its
composition, it is expected that it will become even more difficult to estimate accurately
’ Paper presented at the 32nd Annual Conference of the Military Testing
Association, November 1990, Orange Beach, ALA.
’ All statements expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not
necessarily express the official opinions or policies of the U.S. Army Research Institute
or the Department of the Army.
226