Training/Course Information

Re: Training/Course Information

Postby Wolfpack » Thu Feb 12, 2015 7:42 pm

COMEVIL wrote:Let's not over think this. This was a course, directed by VADM Branch (URL), to help make us more like a URL community. That trend has been ongoing now since URL's served as the N2/N6. This is just an introduction to the IDC --- consider it an orientation.


One comment, while I do NOT think the IDC should be part of the IDC, there has been some goodness that has come out of URL leadership. My two cents.
  • 0

Wolfpack
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:14 am
Location: Wash DC
Reputation: 6

Re: Training/Course Information

Postby COMEVIL » Thu Feb 12, 2015 9:47 pm

Wolfpack wrote:
COMEVIL wrote:Let's not over think this. This was a course, directed by VADM Branch (URL), to help make us more like a URL community. That trend has been ongoing now since URL's served as the N2/N6. This is just an introduction to the IDC --- consider it an orientation.


One comment, while I do NOT think the IDC should be part of the IDC, there has been some goodness that has come out of URL leadership. My two cents.


Like how NOT to do things??? :D :D :D I kid, I kid....
  • 0

User avatar
COMEVIL
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:54 am
Reputation: 33

Re: Training/Course Information

Postby yoshi » Thu Feb 12, 2015 11:28 pm

@Wolfpack:
Point 1- I do buy into the commonalities of the IDC, although I'm not sure they are correctly/sufficiently understood. I disagree in that I DON'T think its too late for those of us who may have come up differently, without an IDC. Certainly, our experiences affect our perspectives, but no one is confused - we are an IDC and will remain so. With respect to a common culture, I think culture develops from shared experiences, beliefs, mores, etc. I think we have struggled with establishing a common IDC culture, but not because we are from different communities. Perhaps these courses will help change that. I believe full integration of all the IDC communities and missions in as many of our commands as possible (to the maximum extent practicable) will provide generate culture and define IDC (for those not in it). We are way better in this regard than we used to be (ISs at NIOC Pensacola and other places, cross detailing, etc), but I don't think we've contemplated or scratched the surface of the possible (still managing separately).
Point 2 - I don't know what I don't know (what the restraint was)- please forgive my lack of understanding. I have a hard time accepting answers which lead to reinforcing bad processes/practices when we are filled with smart, creative people. I simply don't understand why this course couldn't exist outside of NETC - bidded out through a NIOC or other command, fielded it, and taught for far less, as we do some other courses. Perhaps it is related specifically to accessions? I'll take your word for it, as I've not worked at OPNAV.
Point3 - If I remember correctly, NAVCYBER was not the TYCOM during this time. I believe FCC/C10F had the TYCOM functions from ~2012 until 01January of this year (IDFOR assumed). Doesn't seem like they were involved. Don't sweat it, though, not going to tell you off for your NAVCYBER estimation (for what it's worth, I think you are pretty accurate). :)
  • 0

yoshi
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 5:10 am
Reputation: 15

Re: Training/Course Information

Postby Wolfpack » Thu Feb 12, 2015 11:38 pm

yoshi wrote:Point3 - If I remember correctly, NAVCYBER was not the TYCOM during this time. I believe FCC/C10F had the TYCOM functions from ~2012 until 01January of this year (IDFOR assumed). Doesn't seem like they were involved. Don't sweat it, though, not going to tell you off for your NAVCYBER estimation (for what it's worth, I think you are pretty accurate). :)


Exactly. There were three organizations with TYCOM functions and none would take the lead for the IDC it was nothing short of maddening (The third being NAVO in Mississippi). C10F had some, mainly IW, NAVCYBER concentrated on IP, NAVO on Metoc, and nobody really picked up the slack for Intel but C in N2N6, and that was hit and miss (by my own admission). It was a disaster, and I have high hope for NAVIDFOR. They seem to have gotten most of it right, at least I hope so.

The issue with not going through the school house concerns how accessions are handled. I forget the specifics (probably blocked much of is out, so much happier to be aware form the Pentagon). So it was a series of trade offs. There was no elegant solution.
  • 0

Wolfpack
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:14 am
Location: Wash DC
Reputation: 6

Re: Training/Course Information

Postby yoshi » Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:06 am

I, too, have high hopes for IDFOR. Should be able to more directly answer the chronic problems in the Fleet (USFFC COM is IDFOR COM's boss), problems which were unrecognized and/or poorly understood by the organizations responsible for their piece of TYCOM. I think that's why Gortney (and Harris) pushed so hard for the TYCOM. IDFOR didn't get it all, but they got a lot and should do much better.

Interesting to hear of the unwillingness to assume the lead IDC role; similar to what i saw. It's really too bad. The documents (MOAs between USFFC, NCF, CPF, and FCC/C10F) pointed to FCC/C10F for IP and IW, OCEAN-O in MS for METOC stuff. Can't remember Intel, but i know the N2 at NCF handled all the Fleet intel (FIDs, FIAFs, and at sea) stuff. I'll chalk up the unwillingness to either institutional loyalty or failure to understand what needed to happen (or had already happened) between the 4 star Fleet and the IDC.
  • 0

yoshi
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 5:10 am
Reputation: 15

Re: Training/Course Information

Postby 12345qwert » Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:42 pm

COMEVIL wrote:Let's not over think this. This was a course, directed by VADM Branch (URL), to help make us more like a URL community. That trend has been ongoing now since URL's served as the N2/N6. This is just an introduction to the IDC --- consider it an orientation.

Instructor: "IP Officers raise your hands. OK, here is what your role is in the IDC."

Instructor: "IW Officers raise your hands. This is how the IP community supports you and where you best interact."

Call me cynical, but this isn't rocket surgery. And, most importantly, these new Officers will learn more about the IDC and how to interact/play nice/leverage others in the Corps by getting out there and doing it than by any amount of formal instruction. Sort of like when a Cryppie realizes it might be a good idea to talk to METOC about his collection plan.


Not to beat a dead horse here - but with as few "formal, required training" opportunities as we have as IWOs, the idea of adding two weeks in the classroom to simply introduce our new accessions to the IDC (at the VERY beginning of their career, before they even understand their own community) seems like a GREAT idea - with not-so-great timing. I won't rehash my earlier point, but I guess my question is, why DOESN'T it make sense to move this training slightly later in the training pipeline (after completing your IDWO JQR or after your first tour)? Really appreciate the insight from "Wolfpack" on why the course was developed ("to create an IDC culture"), would just offer that you aren't going to create that culture until each new accession has some idea about their identity/role/etc within the IDC. Understand that this is not rocket science - but do think training dollars are limited - and there is relatively little cost to moving this course back in the pipeline, compared to the benefit of each officer "retaining" MORE the course's intent (creating an IDC culture).

These are all good ideas - and (in theory) any training is better than none - just tend to agree with the yoshi's sentiment ("is the juice worth the squeeze?") when it comes to having a course that is entirely instructor driven and "teaches us" how to work together instead of allowing our junior officers to interact with their counterparts in the IDC AFTER they've received their formal community training and some time working at their first command, giving each individual the opportunity to share their own experiences (along with the instructor's briefs) on how we can work together. This would ALSO flow very nicely into what I assume is occuring at the mid-career course and make for a much more cohesive training strategy for IDC officers throughout their career. Believe there is ALSO a senior-IDC course that gets O-5s/O-6s together up at NPS (there was a few years ago at least). This would create three opportunities throughout an IDC officer's career to engage with fellow IDC officers, form relationships, and learn from each other about how our communities work together.
  • 0

12345qwert
Registered Member
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2013 11:34 pm
Reputation: 9

Re: Training/Course Information

Postby COMEVIL » Wed Feb 18, 2015 8:26 pm

12345qwert wrote:
COMEVIL wrote:Let's not over think this. This was a course, directed by VADM Branch (URL), to help make us more like a URL community. That trend has been ongoing now since URL's served as the N2/N6. This is just an introduction to the IDC --- consider it an orientation.

Instructor: "IP Officers raise your hands. OK, here is what your role is in the IDC."

Instructor: "IW Officers raise your hands. This is how the IP community supports you and where you best interact."

Call me cynical, but this isn't rocket surgery. And, most importantly, these new Officers will learn more about the IDC and how to interact/play nice/leverage others in the Corps by getting out there and doing it than by any amount of formal instruction. Sort of like when a Cryppie realizes it might be a good idea to talk to METOC about his collection plan.


Not to beat a dead horse here - but with as few "formal, required training" opportunities as we have as IWOs, the idea of adding two weeks in the classroom to simply introduce our new accessions to the IDC (at the VERY beginning of their career, before they even understand their own community) seems like a GREAT idea - with not-so-great timing. I won't rehash my earlier point, but I guess my question is, why DOESN'T it make sense to move this training slightly later in the training pipeline (after completing your IDWO JQR or after your first tour)? Really appreciate the insight from "Wolfpack" on why the course was developed ("to create an IDC culture"), would just offer that you aren't going to create that culture until each new accession has some idea about their identity/role/etc within the IDC. Understand that this is not rocket science - but do think training dollars are limited - and there is relatively little cost to moving this course back in the pipeline, compared to the benefit of each officer "retaining" MORE the course's intent (creating an IDC culture).

These are all good ideas - and (in theory) any training is better than none - just tend to agree with the yoshi's sentiment ("is the juice worth the squeeze?") when it comes to having a course that is entirely instructor driven and "teaches us" how to work together instead of allowing our junior officers to interact with their counterparts in the IDC AFTER they've received their formal community training and some time working at their first command, giving each individual the opportunity to share their own experiences (along with the instructor's briefs) on how we can work together. This would ALSO flow very nicely into what I assume is occuring at the mid-career course and make for a much more cohesive training strategy for IDC officers throughout their career. Believe there is ALSO a senior-IDC course that gets O-5s/O-6s together up at NPS (there was a few years ago at least). This would create three opportunities throughout an IDC officer's career to engage with fellow IDC officers, form relationships, and learn from each other about how our communities work together.


Full disclosure -- I'm not yet sold on the concept of the IDC. Like Yoshi, I think we either need to be all in or move on. So far I wouldn't say we are all in, leaving us with half measures like this course and the ridiculous (in its current state) IDC Mid-career course. BL: you can't create a culture with a two week course, no matter where you put it in an Officer's career. You can't form relationships by sitting in a classroom for two weeks then passing out a roster at the end of the course. These relationships need to happen out of necessity or for mission enhancement. When they do they are typical engrained in the organization or process and passed down from Officer to Officer. Examples are plentiful -- working with METOC to determine environmental effects on RF propagation; maintained a close relationship with your IP counterpart to ensure proper support for SI networks; educating Intel Officers standing watch in SUPPLOT on how to properly sanitize information. A two week course at the beginning of a career will never teach this. A corps that truly functions as a corps will. Until then, the easy button from a URL Officer attempting to make us more like the URL is a two week class. Like I said, call me cynical.
  • 0

User avatar
COMEVIL
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 792
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:54 am
Reputation: 33

Re: Training/Course Information

Postby Sum1 » Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:05 am

**Note: I'm also not really sold on the course. I think it's a good idea, but in the hierarchy of requirements and constrained fiscal environment, I think there are better ways to spend our money.**

With that said, this is what I'd do:

1. Move the course somewhere after completion of primary designator qualification.

2. Have a day or two of community introductions, and then make the rest of the two weeks ENTIRELY practical in nature... create a problem, outline a plan, have the different representatives present from the various IDC communities apply their individual specializations to the problem set in a collaborative environment, and then produce something (a product, COAs, etc) that drive an operation or support operations.

I may be tainted by my time at the COCOM, but real fusion and inter-community relationships are built in places where they are forced to work together. This just happens to happen most often on major staffs. An intel officer sitting in a squadron in Diego Garcia is going to have very little interaction with an IWO, while an IWO riding boats out of NIOC Hawaii will have almost no interaction with METOC officers. I think the best way to learn the IDC is to force them to come together into a mini-staff and address a problem.

Call it an "IDC OPT" :)

Just my 2 cents.
  • 0

Sum1
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 883
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:43 am
Reputation: 13

Re: Training/Course Information

Postby Wolfpack » Thu Feb 19, 2015 2:30 pm

COMEVIL wrote: Full disclosure -- I'm not yet sold on the concept of the IDC. Like Yoshi, I think we either need to be all in or move on. So far I wouldn't say we are all in, leaving us with half measures like this course and the ridiculous (in its current state) IDC Mid-career course. BL: you can't create a culture with a two week course, no matter where you put it in an Officer's career. You can't form relationships by sitting in a classroom for two weeks then passing out a roster at the end of the course. These relationships need to happen out of necessity or for mission enhancement. When they do they are typical engrained in the organization or process and passed down from Officer to Officer. Examples are plentiful -- working with METOC to determine environmental effects on RF propagation; maintained a close relationship with your IP counterpart to ensure proper support for SI networks; educating Intel Officers standing watch in SUPPLOT on how to properly sanitize information. A two week course at the beginning of a career will never teach this. A corps that truly functions as a corps will. Until then, the easy button from a URL Officer attempting to make us more like the URL is a two week class. Like I said, call me cynical.


I started out as a SWO. Did not want to be a SWO, but it what I ended up being out NROTC. Baby SWOS, back in the early 1990s, was very effective in developing the SWO culture and ethos from day one. It was not the "SWO eat their young" or the backstabbing mantras we all know, but one where is was about what it meant to be a SWO - built on the traditions and capabilities in WWII and later. Sure, I was totally disillusioned later (and transferred), but it was effective. I fully reject the idea that the idea of creating a culture and community cannot be started in two weeks. It is better to start with a common foundation and build on it over time than try to come back AFTER individuals have already started to create a specific community POV. An Ensign just in the Navy does not know enough on the IDC to have pre judged options on what is right or wrong about specific communities. They come in much like a sponge, ready to absorb. Maybe we are all either too cynical or optimistic, but I firmly believe that there is nothing in the process now to improve the IDC. It we let it fester along without attempting to improve it, than we will get what we deserve when the IDC falls part, the URLS communities come swooping in to pick at us like vultures and there is little left. I have no doubt they are looking for that to occur (especially after the most recent O4 board).
  • 0

Wolfpack
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:14 am
Location: Wash DC
Reputation: 6

Re: Training/Course Information

Postby Sum1 » Thu Feb 19, 2015 2:39 pm

What happened at the most recent O-4 board?

As far as the comparisons to SWOS, I think there's some utility to bringing people together after they learn to speak the language of their community a little bit. There are commonalities present between IWOs and the other IDC members, and those commonalities is where relationship building will start, but what happens when the young Sailors don't even know what THEIR job is, much less the job of the other members? Death by powerpoint is fine, but I wonder if it would be as effective as alternatives.
  • 0

Sum1
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 883
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:43 am
Reputation: 13

PreviousNext

Return to Information Dominance Corps

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest