The Case For The Junior Joint Logistics Officer Training Program
Army corporal explains Standard Army Retail SupplySystem to Albanian army officers at U.S. Propertyand Fiscal Office warehouse in Lawrenceville,New Jersey (U.S. Air Force/Mark Olsen)The Case for the Junior JointLogistics Officer Training ProgramBy Wilson T. VornDickoughly 1,700 junior officers(O1-O3) matriculate annually intoone of five Service-specific logisticsofficer-training courses. Each coursehas its own staff, support, curriculum,budget, travel funding, and school.But with reduced resources during themultiple-year Continuing Resolutions,Rsequestration, and long-term decliningbudget horizon, the Department ofDefense (DOD) needs to recognize thatresources allocated in otherwise redundant processes are a waste. These costlyredundancies can drain the overall healthof the national security budget environment and create resource imbalances.Lieutenant Commander Wilson T. VornDick, USNR, is a Supply Corps Officer. He previously served onthe Director of the Navy Staff and at the U.S. Naval War College while completing separate advanceddegrees at Harvard University and the U.S. Naval War College.JFQ 73, 2nd Quarter 2014DOD already has been on a steadytrajectory to become more streamlined, joint, and efficient since theGoldwater-Nichols Department ofDefense Reorganization Act of 1986required more joint doctrine, training,and policy.1 If the axiom “business isbusiness” applies to DOD, then whydoes the department allow five distinctbusiness models and curricula to existwhere there is currently redundancy ofeffort? Why is there not combined orjoint junior-level logistics training amongVornDick105
the Services if 1) the Defense LogisticsAgency (DLA) and U.S. TransportationCommand (USTRANSCOM) are logistics headquarters with intermediate- andsenior-level logisticians completing oneor multiple joint tours there, and 2) thecurrent model gears its graduates towardthat same professional objective?2There are significant differencesin the ranks, tasks, and courses thateach Service assigns its organic logisticians, but there are still core businessfundamentals and competencies thatare shared. These include but are notlimited to food service operations,contracting, inventory control, supply chain management, environmentalprocedures, procurement, accounting,and disbursement. Ethics, stewardship,and accountability apply to each logisticsprofessional and should not requiredistinct instruction—no matter whetherthe student wears a khaki, blue, or greenuniform. At first glance it would seemthat each Service is basically operatingits own business school even though thegraduates eventually end up at the sameprofessional endstate with only differententry-level instruction. DOD has instituted mid-level and senior-level logisticstraining with varying degrees of successin the past. However, this cross-Servicearticle proposes that DOD should institute a holistic and unified approach totraining from the entry level up throughthe Junior Joint Logistics OfficerTraining program (J2LOT) instead.3Status Quo of LogisticsLogistics is no longer a second-ratecommunity or subspecialty. It is not therefuge of last resort for flight schooland infantry washouts. Over the last fewyears, each Service has methodically andpurposefully enhanced its logistics community standards by raising the bar ofadmission. Active and Reserve logisticsselection communities currently requireprevious business coursework, MBAs, aunique logistics skill set, or significantprior business experience among thequalifications for a competitive application package. The Services’ positionshave only been enhanced by the weakened economy and attractiveness of106skilled veterans in both the private andpublic sectors.Logistics Officer Matriculation.The nearly 1,700 Reserve and Activeduty officers who matriculate annuallycome more highly qualified than previous entrants. Surprisingly, the Armymakes up almost two-thirds of thisnumber with about 900 training at theArmy Logistics University in Fort Lee,Virginia.4 The Army is unique in that itsubdivides logisticians into three mainsupport roles under the Sustainmentumbrella: Transportation, Ordnance,and Quartermaster. It is important topoint out that the Army dwarfs the otherServices precisely because it rolls up theNational Guard and Army Reserve intoits training progression. Meanwhile,the Navy trains around 380 SupplyCorps officers, or “chops” as they areaffectionately called, at its educationcenter in Newport, Rhode Island.5 Aftercompleting the Basic School, nearly 200Marine officers attend the Basic LogisticsTraining portion of the Marine CorpsCombat Service Support School at CampLejuene, North Carolina. The Air Force’s37th Training Wing, based at Lackland AirForce Base, Texas, trains approximately150 officers for three logistics communities: Logistics Readiness, FinancialManagement, and Force Support. Finally,the Coast Guard instructs the smallest number of officers (fewer than 40)through its Acquisition and Engineeringcommunity.Duration and Progression ofTraining. The length for course completion ranges from 55 days for the Marinesto over 5 months for the Navy, with thelength of the Army and Air Force programs falling in between. The curriculumduration is completely dependent on eachService’s combination of courses, timingof candidate matriculation, and curriculum length.6 The Army is very specific inbreaking its overall training into varioussegments throughout the first few yearsof its officer continuum; the Army’s training command has various requirementsbeyond just logistics training to incorporate in its Army officer corps. The Navy,however, takes a more direct route. Oncethe initial officer accession/indoctrinationFeatures / Junior Joint Logistics Officer Trainingis completed either through the NavalAcademy, Officer Candidate School,Reserve Officer Training Corps, or otheraccession program, an officer is thenenrolled in the 5-month Supply CorpsBasic Qualification Course. The graduatewill then “roll” to the first 2–3 year tour7in the fleet unless that supply officer isfilling a more senior or technical position.In that case the officer will receive followon training such as the Supply OfficerDepartment Head Course. This situationis rare and only applies to a handful of officer selectees annually. Otherwise, mostgraduates will go on to complete theirfirst tour and will not receive any additional formal training in Newport.The Air Force training methodechoes the aforementioned Navy process.Once logisticians are accepted into thecommunity, they begin the 5-monthLogistics Readiness Officer OrientationProgram (LOOP), which incorporatessequential training modules intendedto prepare logistics officers for their firsttours as well as completion of a corelogistics competency. After graduation,Air Force logistics community memberswill continue with their own uniquecheck-in-the-box, follow-on training, andmilestones. These include qualificationpins, specialty codes, MBA programs,internships, joint assignments, andplacement at DLA, USTRANSCOM,or with the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS).This progression is replicated in the otherServices. Each follows the same generalprofessional and career progression despite their different approaches in traininglength and placement. This replicationand redundancy of effort is also manifested in the training material.Training Material. The overalltraining substance among the Serviceshas remained generally the same despitethe fact that each Service’s publicationswould seem to hide their similarities behind their distinct formats andstyles commensurate with their Servicetraditions. Food service operations,contracting, inventory control, supplychain management, logistics analysis,environmental procedures, procurement,accounting, fuels management, and disbursement have a place in each Service’sJFQ 73, 2nd Quarter 2014
entry-level publications and trainingmaterial. These materials are synced orpiggybacked with the initial trainingreceived at the entry-level training center,follow-on training, or hands-on trainingconducted during the first few assignments. Often these same materials arereincorporated later for more senior andspecialized logistics positions at DLA,USTRANSCOM, or JCS.Most of the training materials aresynonymous with other Services concerning the actual logistics job functionalareas. To clarify, aviation is a componentof each Service. As a result, each Serviceexposes its logisticians to some form ofaviation supply chain management. Theactual personal qualification standards(PQS) and approach to training may vary,but aviation supply chain fundamentalsare relatively the same. This is also truewith food service operations. The ArmyFood Program and the Navy’s Food ServiceOperation Handbook and Food ServiceManagement (P-486) are cases in point.8There are cosmetic differences such asacronyms usage and military roles andresponsibilities, but the guidance and instructions are in line. The various logisticsofficer communities may have differentaccession numbers, training locations,uniforms, and PQS, but the job requirements and training material are equivalent.Once again core business fundamentals andcompetencies are mirrored in each Service’sentry-level training program.Short-term Gains withLong-term EfficienciesMillions are spent annually in operating each Service’s entry-level logisticsofficer training pipelines. The mostexpensive variable is the fixed cost ofoperating and maintaining the trainingcommands (salaries, installation maintenance, and support). While the disparityin per diem rates and other supportcosts per student could be significantdepending on location, some costs areuniform among the Services such asbaseline military salaries. Yet it is almostimpossible to capture the full cost of theprograms because each Service utilizesits own accounting methodology andinformatics to account for its footprint.JFQ 73, 2nd Quarter 2014Associated Costs for Training. Astandardized accounting methodologyand informatics would be invaluable forthe Services moving forward, and notjust in greater ease for assessing J2LOTcost considerations. For example, the AirForce estimated that in fiscal year 2012,a logistics readiness officer costs 27,514to train over 22 weeks.9 The NavalCenter for Cost Analysis uses manpowerper-day/under-instruction formula of 123 a day.10 Under this formula, a Navysupply corps officer would cost an estimated 13,000 to train over 22 weeks.The Army’s Analysis Installation andPersonnel Costing Division projects thata 2nd lieutenant quartermaster could costas little as 1,622.66 for one segment oftraining.11 But Army statisticians furtherestimate that if other benefits, pays, initialofficer acquisition, and support costsare factored in, a quartermaster jumpsto 124,769.72. The overwhelmingconclusion from the data is that there aretremendous short-term and long-termcost considerations in training an entrylevel logistician. However, these costscould be dramatically lowered througha unified or partially unified J2LOTapproach.Long-term Cost Savings. The essential financial considerations for DODto judge in weighing the cost-benefitanalysis of implementing J2LOT are theunrealized benefits, efficiencies, and gainsthat DOD stands to lose if it does notact. The personal connections, long-termefficiencies, and “jointness” that J2LOTwould spawn are an incredible windfallfor the whole government. First, J2LOTwould create a wholeness of logistics effect at the O1-O3 level by increasinginteroperability. This would not onlyfill the Active-duty forces but spill overinto the Reserve forces as well. J2LOTcould embolden new personal qualification standards with a pin or certificatethat would provide an easily recognizedyardstick of logistical expertise for thecombatant commanders and Services tomeasure. Meanwhile, J2LOT could alsoadd valuable Joint Qualification Systemcredit, which is required for future advancement.12 Second, J2LOT offers thenext generation of military logisticiansthe opportunity and forum to networkand seek efficient solutions in their careers sooner rather than later. Officerstoday wait as long as a decade into theircareer to begin this synergy. It is not farfetched to envision a scenario in the nearfuture in which officers who previouslytrained together at J2LOT work togetherin solving a complex logistics problemduring a joint humanitarian operationin Africa. Finally, J2LOT would fosterfurther coordination and integration oflegacy Service-specific logistical chains,administrative processes, and informatics. Regrettably, most of these intangiblebenefits cannot be readily quantified ormanifested immediately.Begin the Transformation NowThe time is ripe for J2LOT’s synchronization and savings to be realized. Thisconcept is not new. During World WarII the Army, Army Air Corps, and Navyall had their logistics officer courses tiedto the Harvard Business School.13 From1943 to 1946, thousands of logisticianslearned in a hybrid environment ofcivilian professors and military officersas instructors taught through casestudy methodology.14 This process wasdisbanded in favor of a Service-specificprocess that was responsive to the Services’ individualized needs after WorldWar II. Now, more than 70 years later,the current model is becoming increasingly unsustainable in a modern warfareenvironment that makes joint andcost-sensitive requirements of utmostconcern for combatant commanders.Lessons Learned and Efforts UnderWay. The Services have seen the writingon the wall and have responded to thisdemand signal with various approaches.Each Service is in the process of or hasjust concluded efforts at refining itsoverall logistics training. The Army reformatted its logistics community trainingand career progression in 2007, whichincludes Logistics Officer (MOS #FA 90)mid-level training at the Army LogisticsUniversity.15 The Marine Corps fusedits Logistics Officer (MOS #0402) withMotor Transport Officer (MOS #3502).Air Force logisticians are in the process ofreviewing and streamlining their logisticsVornDick107
Airmen from 380th Expeditionary Logistics Readiness Squadron hold pump under F-15 Eagle aircraft for hot-pit refueling in southwest Asia, March 2012(U.S. Air Force/Arian Nead)training with ideas to incorporate interoperability with other Services. While theNavy has not drastically restructured itssupply corps officer community in decades, the enlisted ratings have undergonetremendous streamlining and consolidation.16 The logistics specialist rate is acase in point;17 it is basically tasked withmaintaining the Navy supply system andinventory. It underwent two major consolidations in 2003 and 2009.18 It is clearfrom the various logistics personnel transformations and consolidations that theServices are capable of making the switchto the J2LOT approach.There already is joint training andharmonization of efforts among Servicecommunities such as medical, special operations, and combatant commands. SomeServices cross-train their personnel whenthere is no organic Service-equivalenttraining available (common betweenMarine Corps and Army logistics).108Meanwhile, several Services have cutout duplicitous training processes in oneService to combine it with a capability inanother, resulting in cost savings. This isthe current flight training arrangementbetween Naval Air Training Commandand the Air Force’s Air Education andTraining Command. But a prime exampleof both joint efforts working in synergyis the Uniformed Services University forHealth Services in Bethesda, Maryland.This institution has prepared both militaryand Uniformed Public Health Servicemedical officers under one roof using ageneral program of study since 1972.19Upon graduation, medical officers arefarmed out to a smorgasbord of government and military entities. In a similarmanner, J2LOT would build on theseprevious synchronization efforts with thecritical goal of providing a standardizedlevel of training for the military’s emerging business leaders.Features / Junior Joint Logistics Officer TrainingImplementationGovernment analysts, private sectorconsultants, and the Services’ logisticsleaders have already taken a stab atbetter coordinating joint logistics andtraining. These efforts were stymiedprimarily because they focused on a topdown or middle-out approach. DODmight be best served by focusing on theJ2LOT bottom-up approach while continuing to advance the top and middleapproaches. There are a variety of internal and external options for DOD toinstitute J2LOT. Within the departmentthere is the option for inter-Servicememorandums of agreement, JCSinstructions, and Office of the Secretaryof Defense (OSD) policy directives.Alternatively, congressional legislativechanges to Title 10 or Presidential directives could mandate J2LOT as well.Title 10 grants the combatant commanders the authority to oversee allJFQ 73, 2nd Quarter 2014
aspects of military operations, jointtraining, and logistics using the forces assigned to them, while the military Servicesecretaries are generally responsiblefor recruiting, organizing, supplying,equipping, and training their Servicepersonnel.20 The Chairman of the JointChiefs of Staff and Joint Staff are responsible for formulating joint trainingpolicy and doctrine.21 U.S. Joint ForcesCommand was DOD’s lead in providingjoint training until it was disestablishedin 2011 and its functions were divviedout to other commands.22 In light ofthese legal structures, the most realisticapproach for implementing J2LOTwould be for DOD to identify the Officeof the Under Secretary of Defense forPersonnel and Readiness (OUSD-P&R)with the overall responsibility as was donein previous joint training initiatives.23 Theexample process that follows has workedwith some fruitful albeit slowly manifested results.24 Typically, OUSD-P&Reventually assigns one of its principals ordeputies to act as the executive agent. Tocarry out that responsibility, the executive agent would then establish threestanding groups: the Executive SteeringGroup, Senior Advisory Group, and JointIntegrated Process Team. Consisting ofSenior Executive Service civilians andsenior flag officers, each group wouldhave its own unique set of tasks andresponsibilities in order to plan, support,collaborate, and implement J2LOT ina time-phased approach. An initial pilotprogram would be recommended, and,if successful, it would transition into arollout period of 2 to 3 years. This hybridand complex method is preferable forDOD because it allows the Services theopportunity to properly address grievances, assuage concerns, build consensus,and evaluate and execute J2LOT.Approach to TrainingThe optimal construct for the J2LOTwould be a combined or hybrid trainingprogram. The first option would be tocreate one unified school with a corecurriculum in conjunction with followon, Service-specific onsite training. Asecond option would be to mirror thefirst option and then conduct follow-JFQ 73, 2nd Quarter 2014on, Service-specific offsite training ateach Service’s current logistical training command. The final option wouldincorporate holding both the combinedcurriculum and the Service-specific follow-on training at the current logisticaltraining commands’ education centers.Each option presents its own uniqueset of obstacles. However, J2LOT’sbenefits would dwarf any of these initialchallenges.An Inclusive andViable ConstructIt would be feasible, efficient, and fiscally inviting to train other Federalagencies that have similar logisticscourses under the J2LOT umbrella.Logisticians from the Department ofHomeland Security, Department ofState, and U.S. Agency for InternationalDevelopment would be ideal candidatesbecause of the increasing amount ofinteragency responsibilities that arenow shared in the hybrid environmentof modern conflict and crisis management. It would also be possible for theinteragency or one of its members tocreate its own organic logistics-trainingprogram similar to J2LOT. It is conceivable that any entry-level officer oradministrator with logistical duties fromacross the government spectrum couldbe a candidate. DOD could expandJ2LOT enrollment to include international members as well. North AtlanticTreaty Organization members, UnitedNations, and other partner-nations’ military logisticians could all train side byside. The recent logistical cooperationamong the U.S. interagency community, nongovernmental organizations,U.S. military, and other nations afterthe 2010 earthquake in Haiti highlightsthis possibility.J2LOT also raises the specter ofwhether a similar method and modelcould apply to other military Servicespecific support communities where thetraining and positions are analogous oroverlap significantly. The military’s various intelligence communities are a case inpoint since their junior officer training isboth resource-intensive and redundant.Could the J2LOT framework be appliedamong the military intelligence communities? Could that same joint militaryintelligence training incorporate entrylevel analysts from other intelligencecommunity members such as the DefenseIntelligence Agency? Finally, could publicaffairs, chaplain corps, and the judgeadvocate general each fashion its owncombined training pipeline in the future?ConclusionJ2LOT is not intended to destroy anyService-specific community or uniquelogistics ability though it may causecontroversy among and between thevarious Services, OSD staffs, and theJoint Staff. Upon completion of thetraining, it is not the intention ofJ2LOT to begin swapping Army 2ndlieutenant transportation officers ina Ranger battalion with Navy supplycorps ensigns from the fleet, just as it isnot proposed that an Air Force 2nd lieutenant logistics readiness officer replacea Marine Corps 2nd lieutenant logisticsofficer in a Marine Expeditionary Unit.On the contrary, J2LOT reinforces thedifferent Services’ ancillary roles andidentities. J2LOT is not a revolutionagainst the various Services or DODwrit large. Instead it is a movement thatis part of a gradual evolution of DODinto a more lean, mean, and purpleforce. Simply put, J2LOT seeks a harmonization where redundancy of training effort or curriculum exists. At thesame time it carries forward core businessprinciples and competencies, saves scarceresources, and increases efficiencies.One of the 1,700 logistics officers intraining this year could well be the flagofficer in charge of USTRANSCOM orDLA in 2040. DOD’s current trajectoryindicates that the operating environmentin 2040 will be even more “joint” thanit is today. There is a window of opportunity for DOD to begin joint logisticstraining and harmonization efforts. Butthis window is closing. Waiting for mostofficers to enter their intermediate andadvanced career phases before learningjoint logistics is too late. The incentivesexist now for DOD to create a curriculum and school at the basic officer level.DOD needs to get its logistics trainingVornDick109
more joint and whole because, as U.S.Navy Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan noted,“Logistics [is] as vital to military success asdaily food is to daily work.”25 JFQNotes1Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, P.L. 99-433,U.S. Code 10, § 151–155.2U.S. Defense Logistics Agency, availableat www.dla.mil/Pages/default.aspx ; U.S.Transportation Command, available at www.transcom.mil/ .3See U.S. Joint Forces Command and theJoint Staff, Joint Logistics Education, Training,and Experimentation Transformation (JLETT)Working Group presentation, August 26, 2009,available at www.dtic.mil/doctrine/training/conferences/wjtsc09 2/wjtsc09 2wgjlett readahead.ppt ; JLET Way-Ahead OpenForum Discussion, March 31, 2010, availableat www.dtic.mil/doctrine/training/.1/wjtsc10 1wgjlet wayahead.ppt ; Departmentof Defense (DOD), Joint Concept for Logistics,August 6, 2010, available at www.dtic.mil/futurejointwarfare/concepts/jcl.pdf ; Chairmanof the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction (CJCSI)1800.01D, Officer Professional Military Education Policy (OPMEP), September 5, 2012, available at www.dtic.mil/cjcs directives/cdata/unlimit/1800 01.pdf ; and CJCSI 3500.01G,Joint Training Policy and Guidance for theArmed Forces of the United States, March 15,2012, available at www.dtic.mil/cjcs directives/cdata/unlimit/3500 01.pdf .4Logistics Training Command, ServiceWeb sites, and personal qualification standards(PQS). Matriculation numbers and curricula arebased on cursory interviews with each LogisticsTraining Command as well as consulting theirWeb sites and PQS. See U.S. Army, available at www.almc.army.mil/index.asp ; U.S. MarineCorps, available at www.mccsss.marines.mil/ ; U.S. Navy, available at www.netc.navy.mil/centers/css/nscs/ ; and U.S. Air Force(USAF), available at www.37trw.af.mil . Because of its small program size, the U.S. CoastGuard does not have a comparable commandor Web site.5The Navy Supply Corps School wasmoved from Athens, GA, to Newport NavalStation in Newport, RI, in 2011. It is nowknown as the Wheeler Center.6Logistics Training Command, ServiceWeb sites, and PQS.7“Tour” is analogous with assignment orposition.8U.S. Army Regulation 30-22, Army FoodProgram (Washington, DC: Headquarters Department of the Army, July 24, 2012, updatedAugust 24, 2012), available at www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/r30 22.pdf ; U.S. Navy, Food110Service Operation Handbook, 1st ed. (Mechanicsburg, PA: Naval Supply Systems Command (NAVSUP), January 2010), availableat %20Operation%20Handbook.pdf ; and NAVSUP, Food Service Management, NAVSUP Pub. 486 (Mechanicsburg, PA:NAVSUP, January 2010, updated), available at /06/P486-Food-Service-Management-JAN-2010.pdf .9See USAF Air Education and TrainingCommand, available at www.aetc.af.mil/ .USAF notes that these estimates should not beused for budgeting purposes.10See Naval Center for Cost Analysis, available at www.ncca.navy.mil/index.cfm .11U.S. Army’s Analysis Installation and Personnel Costing Division, available at http://asafm.army.mil/ .12John Warner National Defense Authorization Act of 2007, P.L. 109-364, § 516–519.13“HBS Archives Photograph Collection:Wartime Schools, 1942–1945: A Finding Aid,”Harvard Business School Online Archives,available at http://oasis.lib.harvard.edu/oasis/deliver/ bak00087 .14Primus V, “Statistics, No Lies,” HarvardMagazine, March–April 2013, available at ies . Upon completion, graduates received a Harvard certification. As a sidenote, Robert McNamara taught courses andsupervised the Office of Statistical Control forthe Army Air Corps. This office sought to increase the efficiency of aerial bombing throughapplied statistics.15Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) isused for both Marines and Army. The Air Forceuses the Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC).The AFSC uses 21R1 for a Logistics ReadinessOfficer. The Navy uses a four-number officerdesignator starting with 31; therefore, a SupplyOfficer is designated as a 31XX.16A rate or rating is the Navy term forMOS.17U.S. Navy, “Navy Logistics Jobs,”available at ly-logistics.html .18The storekeeper rate absorbed theaviation storekeeper rate in 2003. The newstorekeeper and postal clerk rates fused into thelogistics specialist rate in 2009.19Uniformed Services University of HealthService, Web site, “About,” available at www.usuhs.mil/ .20Commanders of combatant commands:assignment; powers and duties, U.S. Code 10,§ 164. See also Joint Publication 1-02, Department of Defense Dictionary of Military andAssociated Terms (Washington, DC: The JointStaff, November 8, 2010, as amended throughDecember 15, 2013), available at www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new pubs/jp1 02.pdf .21U.S. Code 10, §§ 3013(b), 5013(b), and8013(b).Features / Junior Joint Logistics Officer Training22Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of StaffInstruction 3500.01B, Joint Training Policyfor the Armed Forces of the United States, U.S.Code 10, § 153. See also U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Military Training:Actions Needed to Enhance DOD’s Program toTransform Joint Training, GAO 05-548 (Washington, DC: GAO, June 21, 2005), 4, availableat www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-548 .23Ibid., 6. See also GAO, Military Training: Funding Requests for Joint Urban Operations Training and Facilities Should Be Based onSound Strategy and Requirements, GAO 06-193(Washington, DC: GAO, December 8, 2005),available at www.gao.gov/products/GAO06-193 .24GAO, Actions Needed to Enhance DOD’sProgram to Transform Joint Training, GAO05-548, 7.25Alfred Thayer Mahan, Armaments andArbitration (New York: Harper and Brothers,1912).JFQ 73, 2nd Quarter 2014
106 Features / Junior Joint Logistics Officer Training JFQ 73, 2nd Quarter 2014 the Services if 1) the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and U.S. Transportation . Army Logistics University in Fort Lee, Virginia.4 The Army is unique in that it . The length for course comple-tion ranges from 55 days for the Marines to over 5 months for the Navy .
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
Bruksanvisning för bilstereo . Bruksanvisning for bilstereo . Instrukcja obsługi samochodowego odtwarzacza stereo . Operating Instructions for Car Stereo . 610-104 . SV . Bruksanvisning i original
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
10 tips och tricks för att lyckas med ert sap-projekt 20 SAPSANYTT 2/2015 De flesta projektledare känner säkert till Cobb’s paradox. Martin Cobb verkade som CIO för sekretariatet för Treasury Board of Canada 1995 då han ställde frågan
