SEJPME
MODULE 15 JTF Level Command Relationships and Joint Force Organization.pdf

The service components at geographic combatant

Info icon This preview shows pages 8–11. Sign up to view the full content.

The Service Components at Geographic Combatant Command-level and the Service force commanders at JTF- level continue to be important contributors to mission accomplishment. These Service organizations may be dual-hatted to perform both administrative control, or ADCON and operational responsibilities. One example is Combined Joint Task Force, or CJTF- 82, which originally served as both the National Command Element for U.S. forces in Afghanistan, reporting directly to the Commander, United States Central Command, or USCENTCOM, and as the International Security Assistance Force, or ISAF Regional Command East. Service organizations may also be focused solely on their ADCON, or Title 10 role, such as with U.S. Army Central Command, or ARCENT. We have also seen dual hatting at the JTF level for simplicity and savings in personnel. For example, the Multinational Corporation, or MNC-I in Iraq while a joint headquarters, was also the Army forces, or ARFOR. QUIZ 1Rather than defaulting to a joint force (JTF) task organization comprised of Service force components and functional components, which of the following statements best describe another option that field commanders have to craft their task organization? Field commander are established both battlespace owners (BSO), and functional task forces aligned within a logical battlespace geometry to support their CONOPs.
Image of page 8

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

Battlespace Geometry- As noted earlier, we see joint commanders establishing control measures such as JOAs and areas of operation, or AOs within the battlespace, and identifying BSOs. They then empower these BSOs with the requisite authority commensurate with their responsibilities. Several insights to battlespace geometry have been collected and are summarized here. Take a moment to review them. We will elaborate on each one of these in the next few pages. Delineate AOs within the battlespace together with clearly outlined command relationships, mission approval levels, and coordinating authorities. This allows agility of operations. We're seeing less reliance on boundaries as the only means to control the fight. Commanders are increasingly using 'supported' and 'supporting' command relationships (discussed in the next lesson), decentralized mission approval levels, coordinating authority, situational awareness tools, liaison, and commander crosstalk rather than relying solely on boundaries to conduct operations.
Image of page 9
Today's battlespace is very complex. Many joint players operate in the BSO's AOs. The BSOs need the 'support' of these other players (for example targeting, intelligence, etc.) even though they may not own them. Likewise, functional task forces normally need the support of BSOs to accomplish their tasks. BSOs are becoming increasingly more comfortable with these non- assigned players in their battlespace. They recognize that these players are part of the team, and are keeping them better informed of planned activities, and accomplishing important tasks in pursuit of overall mission accomplishment. Click the button to view some examples of joint players.
Image of page 10

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

Image of page 11
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.
  • Fall '18
  • United States Navy, Commander, International Security Assistance Force, task force, Unified Combatant Command, Marine Air-Ground Task Force

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern