This is great material as it condenses procedures any professional military leader, staff officer or NCO should know by heart and follow. By having such well structured and extensive training programs, the Heer (Prussian, Imperial or Third Reich) ensured uniform training, procedures and outlook across the force. This gave them significant advantages at the tactical and operational levels, although it was not enough to counter the forces arrayed against them in WW I and WW II (something about not taking on too much at the strategic level and picking better allies comes to mind).
The US Army specifically, and the US Armed Forces in general, have always been leery of having a General Staff in the Prussian/German model for various reasons (suspicions of elite groups in an egalitarian society, fear of dark conspiracies, etc.), but are we well served by this? We have a number of staff officer training courses (CGSOC, SAMS, various War Colleges, Strategist courses, etc.), but I have noticed the Army does not always make the best use of the graduates, particularly from SAMS and the Strategist courses. Life is weird.
I'd argue larger staffs decrease endurance. Spent 10yrs measuring HQ effectiveness and once manning passes much above the bare minimum, staff generate extra data to process, get trapped in detail and delay decision.
Fair point and thank you for that insight. Some of the things I noticed right away when the Army Division HQ grew to the point where it became a HQ and HQ Battalion was that staff synchronization and information management became much more difficult. We certainly had the people and equipment to run high intensity tactical operations over an extended period, but just getting things set up and functioning well as a team took quite a while.
No wonder they lost the war! Division commanders should spend all their time NOT making decisions and should instead watch hours of PowerPoint briefings from their dozens of supporting colonels.
This is great material as it condenses procedures any professional military leader, staff officer or NCO should know by heart and follow. By having such well structured and extensive training programs, the Heer (Prussian, Imperial or Third Reich) ensured uniform training, procedures and outlook across the force. This gave them significant advantages at the tactical and operational levels, although it was not enough to counter the forces arrayed against them in WW I and WW II (something about not taking on too much at the strategic level and picking better allies comes to mind).
The US Army specifically, and the US Armed Forces in general, have always been leery of having a General Staff in the Prussian/German model for various reasons (suspicions of elite groups in an egalitarian society, fear of dark conspiracies, etc.), but are we well served by this? We have a number of staff officer training courses (CGSOC, SAMS, various War Colleges, Strategist courses, etc.), but I have noticed the Army does not always make the best use of the graduates, particularly from SAMS and the Strategist courses. Life is weird.
Moreover, our staffs tend to be huge and unwieldy, which increases endurance, but reduces agility.
I'd argue larger staffs decrease endurance. Spent 10yrs measuring HQ effectiveness and once manning passes much above the bare minimum, staff generate extra data to process, get trapped in detail and delay decision.
Fair point and thank you for that insight. Some of the things I noticed right away when the Army Division HQ grew to the point where it became a HQ and HQ Battalion was that staff synchronization and information management became much more difficult. We certainly had the people and equipment to run high intensity tactical operations over an extended period, but just getting things set up and functioning well as a team took quite a while.
how was this actually used in german or any other nation. sounds splendid, but has anyone really used it?
Much of what appears in The Tactical Notebook addresses this very question. See, for example, the many articles that deal with the experience of Hermann Balck. https://tacticalnotebook.substack.com/p/william-and-hermann-balck?
No wonder they lost the war! Division commanders should spend all their time NOT making decisions and should instead watch hours of PowerPoint briefings from their dozens of supporting colonels.