contrast, a 1994–1995 self-report survey conducted by the U.S. Army Research Institute (ARI) revealed that 21 to 49 percent of personnel reported difficulty at some time in completing physically demanding tasks, although often this difficulty was handled by working around problems and reassigning tasks. The GAO recommended that the services assess whether a significant problem exists in physically demanding occupations and identify solutions. Recommended solutions included establishing valid performance standards to increase job sustainment, utilization of personnel, and safety; providing additional job training; and redesigning tasks (GAO, 1996).

From 1972 to 1980, the Canadian Forces employed a fitness testing procedure that consisted of a 1.5-mi run, with scoring based on the (Cooper) Institute of Aerobic Fitness program. Because of the morbidity and mortality risk associated with attempting to pass the test after inadequate training, a new testing strategy was sought. The program that was developed subsequently, the Canadian Forces Exercise Prescription test (ExPres), includes a preliminary health screen; an evaluation of aerobic and muscular strength and endurance that is based on the Canadian Standardized Test of Fitness (including a submaximal step test, sit-ups, push-ups, and bilateral test of grip strength); an individually tailored rehabilitative exercise program (prescription) based on the results of the evaluation; and ongoing training (Lee et al., 1990). To establish Minimal Physical Fitness Standards that complied with Canadian Human Rights Commission legislation (which mandates that performance standards must be demonstrably related to the requirements of the job), the ExPres test was validated against a battery of five tasks representing various jobs a typical military person would be expected to perform (Stevenson et al., 1992, 1994). While the ExPres is considered a reasonable measure of general physical ability, it is not considered an adequate assessment of task-specific performance, particularly for the infantry and others with occupations that demand high strength; thus, there has been ongoing effort to develop gender-neutral, task-specific performance tests and standards that can be administered with a minimum of equipment and in minimal time (Chahal et al., 1992). This effort has been further intensified as a result of the abolition, in 1992, of body fat standards for Canadian Forces on the grounds that an insufficient relationship could be demonstrated between body fat and physical performance (Personal communication, S. W. Lee, Ottawa, Canada, 1997). A Battle Efficiency Test, now in use for testing of Canadian Army infantry personnel, has been criticized for its failure to measure all necessary components of fitness and for its time-consuming nature (Lee et al., 1995). An indoor standardized obstacle course has been developed but awaits validation (Jette et al., 1990a). In addition, a physical fitness standards study has identified a series of tasks as being representative of the physical requirements of the average Canadian Forces soldier. These tasks include trench-digging, marching, casualty evacuation, and manual material handling (Lee et al., 1995). Additional job-specific fitness maintenance and/or testing programs have been developed for Canadian Forces firefighters and pilots.

The primary objections that have been raised to MOS-specific performance tests are: the large number of tests the military would be required to devise and administer, the frequency with which people are assigned to new MOSs and/or promoted, and the lack of task specificity for any one MOS. Although the Canadian studies sought to develop one test of strength, endurance, and aerobic fitness that would be generalizable to all job requirements, no data were available on the implementation of this test.