I have given this a lot of thought and I have come to the conclusion that there should be three improvements and two in-depth analyses.

The text was really just a skimming introduction to an abstraction of the planning process and attempt to see how a number of popular theories converge. How you use it depends on your purposes. For example, while it can be used as a small aide in perceiving how an environment is being shaped and what might be the circumstances we need to plan for or adapt to, it is still an abstraction and is in a tactical sense not necessarily, not even usually, as fast as making a regular quick plan, perhaps based on recognition decision making. This is more operational and strategic. That is also one of the places where the text is in need of improvement - in better laying out in a methodological sense where this tool fits in the arsenal. The matter of fact is that all planning is about using a different approach or perspective when going through the OODA cycle. Planning cannot, or at least should not, be done without some form of situational awareness and a thought process that lays out the pieces of a plan and maps that to the situation, or however you're thinking.

I feel that this leads to the second improvement and in-depth usage example needed. As it stands, it does not much explain how to use it in a more advanced fashion. Of particular interest is paradigmatic evolution. Considering my lack of in-situation perspective of historical events, it would be better to dwell in psychology.

The third improvement needed is detection of adversary plans, but I do not feel ready to say much on it yet and I think that if you're really interested this theory as it is today does not add very much and how you use it again depends on what you need it for. "The way is in training"...

In other words, I am going to leave this as an introduction. I think it would be valuable with a real meat show, but as the conniving bastage I am, I want to be more steps ahead before doing that. I need to figure out a few more things. It may turn up as a self-development book or something.

Thanks for taking the time to read it and giving suggestions. It offered something to think about and a little bit of experience with how it was received.

Martin (and I could remove that silly remark about models and frameworks in the beginning of the text...)