Adapt or Decline: Evolving Military Personnel Strategy by Enhancing Flexibility and Permeability

The Challenges Ahead

The United States Military is facing a rapidly changing global security environment. Threats abound from near peer competitors and non-state actors. Climate change will be a major destabilizing force for the world. The widespread use of unmanned weapon systems and artificial intelligence will impact warfare in ways that are difficult to predict. The best way for the military to deal with this uncertainty is to employ dynamic leaders who can adapt to whatever the future holds. However, with an All-Volunteer Force (AVF) the military has no guarantee it can recruit and retain the leaders it most needs. This raises the question: Is the current personnel strategy sufficient to meet the needs of both the Military’s evolving future requirements and the men and women who will make up that future force?

The Risk of the Status Quo: Decline 

This is not just an academic concern. The military’s recruiting chief called 2024 “one of the toughest recruiting landscapes I’ve seen in over 33 years of service.” The military faces similar challenges with retention. This is a pivotal time for the US Army. The wars of tomorrow will look vastly different from the wars of yesterday. Our current advantages do not guarantee we’ll be the superior force in the future. The Army will need to learn, change, and grow. It cannot do that without retaining our most capable Soldiers. If these issues are not addressed, it could harm the military’s ability to react to future national security challenges with an all-volunteer force. As a result, it’s imperative to explore new approaches to recruit, engage, and retain the next generation of military leaders.

How Did We Get Here? 

The United States Military had traditionally relied upon a draft to fill its ranks during conflicts. This was the case during the Vietnam War where 25% of the over 2.5 million service members deployed to Vietnam were draftees. The profound impact of the loss of over 58,000 Americans and the War’s widespread unpopularity turned public opinion sharply against a mandatory draft. Congress responded by declining to extend the laws authorizing a draft. When the draft law officially expired on July 1, 1973, the all-volunteer force was born.

The AVF was a pivotal moment in American military history. Prioritizing voluntary service over conscription was a crucial step in the US military becoming a modern, professional military force. This expertise is cultivated by a dedicated focus on training and professional education across the force. However, despite its strengths, the AVF model has shown certain vulnerabilities over the past five decades. Recent years have seen a growing recruiting crisis, casting doubt on the AVF’s ability to consistently attract enough volunteers to sustain itself. Moreover, the AVF has inadvertently contributed to a widening gap between the civilian population and those who serve in the military. According to Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen H. Hicks, the number of military veterans in the US has dropped from 18% to approximately 7% of the population. This reduction in direct ties between the military and the general population makes it increasingly challenging for Americans to understand and appreciate the unique military way of life.

There have also been changes in the demographics of America and its military. Younger generations now make up most of our nation’s service members. 82% of the entire US Army are Millennials, and 35% of all junior officers are Gen Z. Each generation comes with a new set of values, priorities, and family dynamics. These younger generations often have a stronger focus on work-life balance and career flexibility. They still have a sense of service but must strongly believe in the cause. Military service should resonate well with younger generations, yet the data suggests otherwise. In a recent study, conducted by the Department of Defense, revealed a concerning trend: the propensity for youth to join the military continues to decline. Among the top reasons cited for not joining the military, 58% expressed a reluctance to leave their friends and family, while 38% cited concerns about living in unfamiliar locations.

Recruitment is only half the battle. Even if they join the service, the military can’t always keep them. Recent career engagement surveys echo the same apprehensions that deter many from joining the service. The surveys found that Soldiers leave the Army primarily for family concerns. Unlike senior leaders, younger Service Members are less willing to forgo family commitments. Since the late 1960s, the rate of two-career households has increased by 43%, and in eight out of ten couples both partners are expected to work and support their families. The top reason cited by leaders leaving the military is the “Impact of Army life on my significant other’s career plans/goals.” The rigid nature of military service can often make supporting a family challenging. Since families play a significant role in the decision of whether Soldiers join the military and continue to serve, the Army must look for ways to make it easier to serve and support a family.

Adapting to Service Members' Needs with A Flexible Service Program 

The Army must adapt to keep pace with the needs of our Service Members. Young leaders want to feel included and have agency over their careers. Fortunately, the military has the components it needs to meet the demands of today’s workforce. By better leveraging its National Guard and Reserves, the military can keep top leaders serving. I propose the Army create a Flexible Service Program that allows Soldiers to easily transfer between the Active, Reserve, and Guard components. This idea, also known as permeability, will allow Soldiers to serve in a capacity that fits their stage of life. Instead of exiting the military to build a family or take advantage of a civilian job opportunity, Soldiers in the program can transition from full time service to a part time position. If their life circumstances change, they can easily pick back up on active duty. This will help retain existing talent and allow the Army to take advantage of the skills part time Soldiers are learning in the civilian world.

This recommendation is neither new nor far-fetched. The Army National Guard tried to address this topic under the Army’s Defense Officer Personnel Management Act in 1980 and later in 2017. The changes did not make the finalized policy, but Army leaders are aware that changes are needed. The current process to transfer between Army components takes several months, requires multiple approvals, and extensive coordination between Active, Reserve, and Guard strength managers. A Soldier with a sick parent or civilian job offer cannot wait around six months hoping their transfer request is approved. With a force that highly values family and flexibility, it is imperative that the transfer process is streamlined and predictable.

Read More About the Benefits and Barriers of a Flexible Service Program 

Access the full research report to see the numerous benefits to instituting a flexible service program as well as barriers for consideration when adopting these policy changes. As the nation evolves, so must the military to remain effective. The old methods of recruitment and retention are no longer as effective as they once were, making adaptation essential to avoid decline. Young Americans place a high value on increased flexibility in their lives. Therefore, the Army should consider streamlined transitions between full-time and part-time service components. These changes are crucial for the Army to sustain a resilient and adaptable force.