Which important individual military skill is the worst-taught?

Communications should be a skill taught from first grade all the way through grad school....and beyond. We could place our troops in positions which would require them to communicate early in their career, with positive reinforcing critiques...Officers could demand more of their NCOs in the comm dept. Public speaking is man's greatest fear, so it does fall right in line with that idea. Weakness does equate to fear in many avenues in our life. Nothing new there.

Capt Richard I P.
Although I don't think plan is an individual skill it is listed so I picked it. The Army as a whole has taken a giant step backwards with regards to planning. One of the principles of mission command is use mission orders. With the almost exclusive use of the CONOP in Iraq and Afghanistan our junior leaders think that is a sufficient order. Now, I believe it is a good tool for what it was meant to be (concept of the operation) but in no way covers the detail that even a hastily prepared OPORD does.

This has affected how we plan for training. The use of the eight step training model is almost unheard of, trying to get my NCOs to use it for Sergeants Time Training required a NCOPD on the subject. Lack of using the eight step training model has impacted training management.

For example, a company commander wants to conduct a squad live fire exercise. He briefs the battalion commander the basic concept at T+6 or 8, he fails to follow the first three steps of the eight step training model and when he attempts to brief the commander at T+4 or 5 for approval he has no resources, certified trainers, hasn't conducted a recon, etc.

You can't effectively train the other listed skills until you are trained on how to plan training/operations.

Teaching Soldiers to communicate is our most challenging problem. It is the hardest to master, and it takes time and patience.

There are several reasons for this: First, is that some people are afraid that if they communicate, they will not get credit for having completed a task or objective - that somehow, by communicating, they are losing control of their mission. These people also tend to micromanage, and are usually poor leaders anyway, because they don't communicate enough information to the Soldiers.

Second, is the person, who believes that if he/she communicates too much information, that that information will somehow lead to mission failure. This is usually a result of not understanding what it is that Soldiers need to know in order to ensure mission success. I was recently experiencing this with my previous company - they would not communicate a status of our contract to us (which was in forced rebid) or the status of the planned change (due to "secrecy"). This has lead to doubt, fear, and rumor mills flying rampant throughout the team that is responsible for running the contract - and as a result, a number (nearly half) of the personnel on the team have quit and found other work.

The third reason someone fails to communicate effectively, is they don't understand that by failing to communicate, they are directly leading to the failure of a mission. If I don't know who, what, or where the enemy is, or when they are going to be there, I can't engage them. If I don't know how the enemy is equipped, I can't provide my guys with an effective defense, or tell them what the enemy may have (identification-wise).

While parts of a mission might be classified, letting your Soldiers know the basics will hardly, if ever, lead to someone blabbing and causing problems down the line. Soldiers, when ever possible, also need to know "why" they are doing something - it may not seem like they need to, and perhaps it's just BS - but helping them understand the "why" actually motivates them to accomplish the mission, even if it is a BS detail. For example: Twice a year, Fort Bragg conducts clean sweep - Soldiers (and leaders) hate clean sweep - but the reason it takes place is because as the training areas get used, all sorts of trash gets left behind. This trash has to be policed up from time to time, so that the training areas remain an effective location to train - it's not just about making the base pretty. Imagine rolling in on your bivouac area, and there's trash scattered everywhere... You'll be pretty pissed off that you have to clean all of it up before you can really make effective use of the area. Soldiers who are told this, are much more likely to understand that even though it sucks, there's a logical reason behind the mission.

Leaders need to communicate regularly, and with enough detail, that Soldiers understand the 5W's and the H, whenever possible and training them on when it's appropriate to talk about what they are doing is a separate detail that leaders need to make sure they understand as well.