How Should the Army Use Contractors on the Battlefield?

Assessing Comparative Risk in Sourcing Decisions

Frank Camm, Victoria A. Greenfield

ResearchPublished Apr 7, 2005

Can the Army improve the way it measures the risks of using civilian contractors in combat? This report proposes a method for comparing the “residual risks” of using military and contract sources to perform specific support activities on the battlefield. It applies the Army’s standard approach to risk assessment, which identifies sources of risk, or “threat”; the risks the threats present; the opportunities to mitigate these risks; and the risk that remains-the residual risk-when the Army chooses a particular course of action to mitigate risks. The approach considers choices of military and contract sources, with appropriate mitigation strategies, as alternative courses of action and compares the residual risks associated with each choice. The approach offers an orderly way to translate relative inherent capabilities of military and contract sources, terms of applicable status-of-forces agreements, and threats at any particular place and time on the battlefield into a comparison of the residual risks associated with military outcomes, the safety of contract personnel, resource costs, and other policy factors of greatest importance outside a particular contingency setting.

Topics

Document Details

Citation

Chicago Manual of Style

Camm, Frank and Victoria A. Greenfield, How Should the Army Use Contractors on the Battlefield? Assessing Comparative Risk in Sourcing Decisions. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2005. https://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG296.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

This publication is part of the RAND monograph series. RAND monographs were products of RAND from 2003 to 2011 that presented major research findings that addressed the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND monographs were subjected to rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.