1 / 23

CDT Quillin

CDT Quillin. Decision Brief Unclassified. Purpose. To gain a decision on the best coarse of action to deal with the EO and SHARP situation in the army. Problem Statement. The current EO and SHARP situation is a problem that is prevalent in the United States Army. Recommendation.

aria
Download Presentation

CDT Quillin

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CDT Quillin Decision Brief Unclassified

  2. Purpose • To gain a decision on the best coarse of action to deal with the EO and SHARP situation in the army.

  3. Problem Statement • The current EO and SHARP situation is a problem that is prevalent in the United States Army.

  4. Recommendation • Develop a COA to involve soldiers to make them participate more and pay more attention, in order to help prevent SHARP and EO incidents.

  5. Outline • Background Information • Facts on the problem • Discussion: COA Screening Criteria Surviving Criteria Evaluation Criteria Analysis of COA’s Comparison of COA • Conclusion • Restated Recommendation • Decision

  6. Background • Current EO/SHARP training has not significantly reduced the amount of occurrences. • Landscape of Army is changing, so training should change.

  7. Facts Bearing on the Problem • Current Program is outdated and boring. • Sexual Harassment training and EO training are not taken seriously by many leaders therefore the soldiers do not take it seriously. • EO and SHARP incidents are still a big problem in the army even after current training program.

  8. Assumptions • If a better way of presenting this training is made then less SHARP and EO incidents will occur. • The current cost will be reduced by using a different approach for SHARP and EO training.

  9. Courses of Action • COA 1 (Use actors and involve the crowd) • COA 2 (Use Current program of PPT, Lecture and written test) • COA 3 (Use a mix of the current program and include actors and hands on activities) • COA 4 (Use online training for soldiers)

  10. Screening Criteria • Must involve soldiers. • Must cost less than current program. • Must be distinguishably different than current program. • Must give soldiers the best oppurtunity to learn.

  11. Surviving COAs • COA 1 (Use actors and involve the crowd) • COA 2 (Use Current program of PPT, Lecture and written test) • COA 3 (Use a mix of the current program and include actors and hands on activities) • COA 4 (Use online training for soldiers)

  12. Evaluation Criteria • Short Title: Total Time of Training • Definition: The Total amount of time used to train soldiers on EO and Sharp. • Unit of Measure: Hours • Benchmark: 4 Hours • Formula: Less is better. Less than 4 hours is an advantage, greater than 4 hours is a disadvantage.

  13. Evaluation Criteria • Short Title: Computer Time • Definition: The amount of Time on the computer to train on Sharp and EO. • Unit of Measure: Hours • Benchmark: 2 Hour • Formula: Less is better. Less than 2 hours is an advantage, greater than 2 hours is a disadvantage.

  14. Evaluation Criteria • Short Title: Hands on Training • Definition: The amount of time the soldier is involved in EO and SHARP training. • Unit of Measure: Hours • Benchmark: 1 Hour • Formula: More is better. More than 1 hours is an advantage, Less than 1 hours is a disadvantage.

  15. Evaluation Criteria • Short Title: Tangible Test • Definition: If the Training has a tangible test to see if the soldier passed or not. • Unit of Measure: Yes or no • Benchmark: Yes or no • Formula: Yes is good no is bad

  16. Analysis of COAs COA 1 Use actors and involve the Crowd Advantages • Hands on time >1 Hour • Soldiers are more involved • No boring PowerPoint time <2 Hours • Class time <4 Hours Disadvantages • No test to test out individual soldiers • Could be hard to standardize training

  17. Analysis of COAs COA 3 (Use a mix of the current program and include actors and hands on activities) Advantages • Hands on time >1 Hour • Soldiers are more involved • Computer Time <2 Hours • Tangible Test • Class time <4 Hours Disadvantages • Requires the most coordination and is the longest training

  18. Analysis of COAs COA 4 (Online Training) Advantages • Tangible Test Disadvantages • Computer Time >2 Hours • Hands on time >1 Hours • Class Time = 4 Hours

  19. Comparison of COAsEvaluation Criteria • Time in class <4 Hours • Hands on training >1 Hour • Computer Training <2 Hours • Tangible Test Yes or no • COA 1 (2.5 Hours) < COA 3 (3.5 Hours) < COA 4 (4 Hours) • COA 3 (2.0 Hours) > COA 1 ( 1.0 Hours) > COA 4 ( .5 Hours) • COA 1 (0 Hours) < COA 3 (1 Hour) < COA 4 ( 4 Hours) • COA 3 (Yes)> COA 4 (Yes) > COA 1 (No)

  20. Decision Matrix

  21. Conclusion • COA 1 and COA 3 were tied on the decision matrix on their point values. However, I have decided that COA 3 is the best COA. This approach includes a hands on portion with the actors and a tangible test which gives it a distinct advantage over any other COA.

  22. Recommendation • Go with COA 3 for future SHARP and EO training.

  23. Questions???

More Related