True dat.Absolutely correct!!!If the world is changing too quickly for our doctrine writers, then I think an argument can be made we're making doctrine overly prescriptive.This is my minor quibble -- I wouldn't even go that far because if it's in a book, many will assume it is the only way (whether for career enhancing or staying alive...) to do things. I strongly believe most current manuals and even some from WWII when a rapidly changing Army needed more prescriptive literature are entirely too prescriptive. That inhibits flexibility of thought at best and stifles initiative at a moderate level and is prone to get regurgitated and expanded as the Manual is rewritten at worst.Prescriptive processes and suggestions should be restricted to TTP manuals (which are not doctrine) and unit SOPs.True again -- and transmutation of doctrine to manuals exacerbates the problem...Doctrine should be rather broad, but provide enough structure for the services to determine how to organize, equip, and train in general terms. However, doctrine shouldn’t prevent commanders from making whatever changes they need to make to organizations, processes, etc. when they employ, but we all know it does.
Agree with the rest of your post.
Bookmarks