TC 7-102 Operational Environment and Army Learning
Training Circular (TC) 7-102, Operational Environment and Army Learning, is a practical guide on how to integrate the conditions of an operational environment (OE) into robust, relevant, and realistic training, professional education, and leader development experiences. This TC presents critical design techniques and means that support the fundamental concepts of a continuously adaptive learner-centric model—the Army Learning Model (ALM)—for improved Army mastery to anticipate, understand, and adapt successfully to complex, uncertain, and/or ambiguous environments in decisive action.
The purpose of this TC is to guide the training developer, curriculum developer, and leader or commander on how to integrate OE conditions that enhance self-development, leader development, and unit or activity readiness. The intent is to achieve and sustain adaptive Army readiness to standards. Learning experiences range from personal one-on-one instructor-student or mentor-mentee dialogue to technology-enabled simulations and operational mission or training feedback that replicate a particular set of OE conditions in a task/action, conditions, and standards format. The Army’s Operational Environment Enterprise (OEE) delivers OE products, services and support to its Soldiers, civilians, leaders, and supported and supporting stakeholders for readiness. The OEE projects from the institutional training domain, that is, the Army’s institutional training and education system, and impacts the entire Army mission.
Contents
Introduction
The Operational Environment Enterprise (OEE) is an integrated training environment (ITE) resource that leverages technology-enabled presentations and other information for individual and collective learning experiences and expertise, as well as Army concepts and capabilities development with robust, realistic, and relevant OE conditions. The support provided by the OEE reaches across all Army learning domains with repositories of historical documentation; current observations and lessons learned; projected capabilities requirements, development, and experiment information; and facilitates integrated live, virtual, constructive, and gaming (LVCG) environments.
The Army’s institutional training domain includes but is not limited to Centers of Excellence (CoE), training base centers, schools, academies, and related programs that provide initial training and subsequent professional military education and training for Soldiers, Army leaders, and Department of the Army Civilians (DAC). The OEE leverages technology-enabled learning for individual and collective experiences and expertise, as well as Army doctrine, concepts, and capabilities development with robust, realistic, and relevant OE conditions.
The OEE enhances capabilities that create the intellectual agility and operational adaptability to prevent conflict, shape the environment, and when required, win our nation’s wars. Initiatives and innovations expressed through the OEE shape the Army for future OEs and mission requirements with concepts and capabilities synchronized and integrated across Army doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities (DOTMLPF).
The Army trains and educates its members to develop agile and adaptive leaders and organizations. A complementary requirement in both the operational and institutional Army is leader self-development. Applying the U.S. Army Mission Command Strategy FY 13-19 to deliberate and intuitive decisionmaking and effective action in dynamic conditions that require a perceptive awareness and clear understanding of the complexities in an OE.
This TC presents examples of “how to” develop effective learning experiences among the Army’s integrated programs of leader development (LD), training, and experience for the Soldier and Army Civilian. The charter for the training developer, curriculum developer, and leader or commander is to identify challenging conditions for a realistic OE to the task/action and standard being developed or institutionalized. These conditions include considerations of professional military and Army civilian education, individual and collective predeployment training, and operational missions. Efficiently and effectively embedding OE conditions in the Army learning continuum maintains the Army as an adaptive and dominant land force in conjunction with unified action partners, service members, and civilians.
The Army uses operational variables of political, military, economic, social, information, infrastructure, physical environment, and time (PMESII-PT) to analyze and describe the conditions of an OE. These operational variables influence each other to varied degrees dependent on time and conditions in a particular continuum of actions. An OE is complex and uncertain as variables increase or decrease in apparent or confirmed importance and effects. The dynamic nature of an OE is an essential consideration in how to train, educate, and self-develop Army members and leaders as adaptive, flexible, and versatile decisionmakers. The Army—people—must be proficient in shaping conditions in support of military plans and operations, and respond effectively to subtle or rapid changes in OE conditions in order to accomplish an Army mission in the context of unified action requirements and directives. The U.S. Army must demonstrate progressive expertise in operational adaptability. (See figure2.)
Chapter 1: Hybrid Threat Roles and Relationships in Training
A Hybrid Threat Force Structure is a training tool that should allow the U.S. Army to train against a challenging and plausible sparring partner that represents the range of possible opponents the Army could face in actual conflict. It enables training of all arms of the Army and prepares the Army for potential combat operations.
Chapter 2: Hybrid Threat Force Structure
This chapter and the organizational directories to which it is linked provide the Hybrid Threat Force Structure (HTFS) to be used as the basis for a threat organization in all Army training, except real-world-oriented mission rehearsal exercises. This includes the forces of Threat actors as well as key non-state actors. In most cases, the organizations found in the HTFS will require task-organizing (see chapter 3) in order to construct a threat order of battle appropriate for a training event.
Chapter 3: Task-Organizing
The concept of task-organizing for combat is not unique to the Threat. It is universally, performed at all levels, and has been around as long as combat. The U.S. Army defines a task organization as “A temporary grouping of forces designed to accomplish a particular mission” and defines task-organizing as “The process of allocating available assets to subordinate commanders and establishing their command and support relationships” (ADRP 1-02). Task-organizing of the Hybrid Threat must follow Hybrid Threat doctrine (see TC 7-100, FM 7-100.1, and TC 7- 100.2) and reflect requirements for stressing U.S. units’ mission essential task list (METL) in training.
Chapter 4: Equipment Options
The Hybrid Threat Force Structure (HTFS) organizational directories provide example equipment types and the numbers of each type typically found in specific organizations. The purpose is to give trainers and training planners a good idea of what a Threat Force Structure should look like. However, training requirements may dictate some modifications to this baseline. Therefore, training planners have several options by which they can modify equipment holdings to meet particular training requirements.