Military Review English Edition March-April 2016 - Page 120

strategic perspective, and to understand the scope and the context of landpower’s role in national security are but a few of the developmental needs that our Army requires of its civilian cohort—these skills are not readily available in the public marketplace. Even though each civilian will still have functional and technical performance requirements that may be publicly attainable, these skills are far less valuable than expert landpower knowledge, commitment to the point of sacrifice, and character that guides professional stewardship of our corporate responsibilities framed in the context of Army culture and leading in an environment of perpetual change. To help illustrate this point, we can contrast the Army civilian professional with an auto industry employee. Most auto workers in a given plant on an assembly line contribute to building a vehicle. They insert a part, or connect a bolt, or attach a component— whatever is their task to keep the car or truck moving. There is no need for commitment. Compliance with task completion is what the individual is responsible for as each unit moves by. There is little or no need for competence in specialized knowledge—the task is either accomplished or it is not. And, demonstrating character is not even considered because completing a task is all that is required. In contrast, it takes a culturally assimilated Army Civilian Corps professional, employing his or her specialized landpower knowledge competently, to contribute to the optimal outcomes of a multifaceted problem set, share understanding of the technical standards of quality, and appreciate the moral obligation to succeed guided by the ethical aspects of his or her character, to create a combat system that can operate in a complex environment—that just happens to be a truck. The specialized knowledge necessary to have this level of shared understanding is not something that is readily available within the public sector. The driving force of change requires a culture that is committed to developing leaders who deal with uncertainty. It creates a climate that values and promotes specialized knowledge of the Army culture and the tenets of landpower across the breadth of its membership, and it creates an environment where all members are committed to leading change. The Army’s commitment to developing the Army civilian as a full-fledged member of the profession is strongly influenced by the velocity of change. Army Civilian Corps professionals 118 are not hired, they are grown. That investment in cultural growth develops Army professionals who are competent, committed teammates of character and who certify as such. Conclusion What does this all mean for the Army Civilian Corps and its future? We have dialogued about professional definitions and their utility to the Army Civilian Corps. We have examined the five aspects of a profession, the essential characteristics of the Army Profession, and their application to the Army civilian. We have even considered the effects of change and its impact on why the Army civilian is a necessary member of the profession. But to integrate the Army Civilian Corps as full-fledged members of the Army Profession, it is essential to certify those that meet the criteria. Certifying character, competence, and commitment are the three requirements to justify membership in the Army Profession.29 Competence, as previously discussed includes facets of military expertise and specialized knowledge that span the cohorts. There are those tasks within the facets of military expertise and specialized knowledge that do not apply universally. This realization should never be justification for excluding a cohort. As we have demonstrated, the breadth of knowledge that is the essence of landpower expertise is the criterion for professional certification in competence. The Army is creating certification requirements within its career programs. There is a required civilian leader development program for Army civilians. And, re ٥͕