How to Measure Insurgencies
How to Measure Insurgencies - SWJ Blog by J. Eli Margolis.
Quote:
Earlier this week, America’s top two officials in Iraq testified before Congress about the war in Iraq. Ambassador Crocker described slow but sure progress; General Petraeus spoke more strongly, citing goals met and “substantial” progress.
I was surprised. After a steady public debate of stalemate and withdrawal, the pair put forward recommendations to remain. The disconnect between how America sees Iraq and how our two most knowledgeable professionals view it is great.
Why?
I believe that the answer lies in measures. Media reports and independent assessments like the Brookings Institution’s “Iraq Index” have opened the floodgates on statistics. Analyses abound. But, as a recent Salon piece demonstrates, not all have been disciplined. Indeed, the public discourse has abandoned methodology entirely...
A justice-equity approach
I have the feeling that sharper minds than mine are going to be contributing on MOE, but in any event, I could not resist getting in first digs for my favorite idea. Also, I hope I'm not doing something wrong being such a newbie who might not know these kinds of threads are just pointers to the blog or something, but anyway, here goes. The problem is that one must try to measure stuff which is basically not measurable. As an academic, we run into this all the time, trying to measure "intangibles," but it seems to me that in a fight for hearts and minds, one must try to apprise the more intangible side of justice -- equity. To explain, equality is always measurable, but equity (or the shape, smell, taste, feel, or what-have-you of justice) is not always measurable. There are many different approaches to equity, Aristotle's distributive justice being the most well-known, but I would put forward the social exchange version of equity as being most applicable in terms of meeting a commander's needs. In this version, one would need to measure the inputs (what a collection of people have put into a situation in terms of effort), and the outputs (what a collection of people regard as the beneficient outcomes). True justice always tries to restore the relative position of equity, or proportion, that existed prior to the imbalance which gave rise to perceptions of unfairness. In clearer terms, what must happen is the elimination of relative deprivation, or the feeling that others are getting more rewards (outputs) for putting in less effort (inputs). Hence, equality in cooperative effort becomes the best standard for measuring equity.
2.1.2 Attributes of a Good Metric
Maybe this will help. Here are a couple of extended quotes from Metrics Guidebook for Integrated Systems and Product Development produced by the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE):
It is important that a metric and its measures reflect the defined goals and objectives of the organization.
How can we tell if a metric is good? A good metric promotes understanding of our performance or
progress, as well as our processes, and always motivates action to improve upon the way we do business.
This perspective applies from the smallest task through product development to total company operations.
A strong metrics program creates an environment in which teams “can make decisions based on data rather
than hunches, to look for root causes of problems rather than react to superficial symptoms, to seek
permanent solutions rather than rely on quick fixes.”
The following are the basic characteristics of a good metric:
1. It is accepted as having value to the customer or as an attribute essential to customer satisfaction
with the product.
2. It tells how well organizational goals and objectives are being met through processes and tasks.
3. It is simple, understandable, logical and repeatable.
4. It shows a trend, more than a snapshot or a one-time status point.
5. It is unambiguously defined.
6. Its data is economical to collect.
7. The collection, analysis, and reporting of the information is timely, permitting rapid response to
problems.
8. The metric provides product and/or process insight and drives the appropriate action(s).
In summary, for a metric to be effective it must (1) present data that is useful, thus motivating action(s) to be taken, (2) be able to show status over a period of time, (3) support corporate and product goals and objectives (built from strategic and tactical business plans), and (4) be meaningful to the customer.
2.1.3 What a Metric is Not
1. Metrics are not charts or any other form of display tool, although charts and graphics may display
the results of a metric.
2. Metrics are not a team or personnel control tool. Metrics are a process and product control tool. If
used against team members, fear, short-term reaction, and “gaming” the system become the output.
3. Metrics are not one-time snapshots or statusing measures. For metrics to be effective, they need to
be collected and assessed over time.
4. Metrics are not forever. Different phases of the product lifecycle require different metrics. The team
has a responsibility to update the metrics set consistent with the critical processes associated with the
product lifecycle phase.
5. Metrics are not schedules, though some schedules lead to good metrics.
6. Metrics are not “counts of activity,” although counts of activity or statistics may be significant. Data
becomes a useful metric when it is transformed to information or knowledge that can result in action.
Ask Your MOM (Measures Of Merit)
Very important thread here. Col. Warden calls them MOM (measures of merit) for some the reasons pointed out here, the Air Force used to call them that before they went off the deep end. Point being you need to choose an indicator that has the highest strategic value, like this one.
On another thread where we are talking about refugee resettlement ideas. This is one of the most strategic Measure Of Merit that there is. People leaving a country or system are voting on the viability of that country or system with their feet. When you see that happening you don't need to measure much else, but you do need to stop it and if possible reverse it.
Metrics can be manipulated
Communist Russia was famous for its metrics that didn't work. I am afraid that if we give more attention to metrics in Iraq we will see the same effect. For example if tomorrow some bomb killed 50 Americans I wouldn't be surprised if the remainder of the month the number of operations was restricted in order to keep the monthly casualty figures down. Now already the number of casualties seems to be surprisingly stable month by month.
Personally I prefer to hear a good consistent story of what the US wants in Iraq. The US supports a "democratic" government that seems at least partially to be a marionet of warlord Al Sadr. The tribal policy in the Sunni areas hasn't much support in Baghdad and isn't generalised into a general Sunni policy. So to me the story at the moment seems full of contradictions. The only improvement compared to a year ago is the tribal policy. But on the other side of the balance is a chaotic Iran policy that seems more driven by a desire to beat up yet another country than by a consistent vision.
For me each contradiction in the story has the risk to become a new battleground.
Metrics for domestic COIN too
I've just found this thread and skimmed it.
In the UK with the new emphasis on 'Prevent' in our national CT / security strategy up has popped a need for metrics. In particular for counter-radicalisation and preventing violent extremism.
I am sure law enforcement, maybe intelligence, can think of "bean counts", but as this work involves partners who have never been directly involved, examples local hospitals and schools - it is not easy.
The only metric I've found in a literature search has been opinion polling of the extent of support for the ideas that support extremism. Hardly easy to "sell" to government, especially as polling can provide suprises.
Just a few thought from a comfortable armchair.
davidbfpo