Editor’s Note: This post is part of the FTGN Army Broadening Series that we are running from March 15-30, 2021. Each day, we will publish new insights into the Army’s various broadening assignments, starting March 15th, 2021 with an overview of AIM 2.0 and a discussion on how to educate others on assignment selection criteria.
By Anthony Williams
In recent years, the Army transitioned to a new talent management model called the Army Talent Alignment Process (ATAP) hosted on a web-based system known as Assignment Interactive Module (AIM2). This web-based system was designed to match Soldiers’ skills, knowledge, and behaviors to pin-point Army assignments that complement their previous experience and personal interests. Despite this autonomy, some Soldiers have expressed skepticism for this process. These Soldiers feel inadequately prepared to navigate the market, relying heavily on career counselors and mentors to assist them in balancing job assignments that facilitate upward mobility while optimizing location considerations for their families.
However, in my experience, AIM 2.0 is an effective tool to align skills, behaviors, and interest to the needs of the Army. In an effort to improve AIM 2.0 efficacy, leaders must educate officers and NCOs on the criteria for effective assignment selection which includes career goals, location, and family consideration. Also, Soldiers must be willing to seek tough assignments in less than ideal locations in preparation for future leadership responsibilities, as they did under the legacy system.