Spec Ops Leaders Want Return to Fundamentals

[max161]

I'm with Max on this. ADM Olsen is making all the right noises about FID and SFA. With upcoming SFA proponency, he'll have ample opportunity to make his mark.

In fact, he may be able to teach some of his Army bretheren something -- like leading a re-juvenation of FID in the Army!

I am somewhat embarrassed that it looks like it's going to take a SEAL to lead the way where the Army once held sway. (Dude! That rhymes!!)

Old Eagle: Don't worry there are many at USASOC who are helping to shape the indirect approach. SF has not lost its way!!

[Schmedlap]

I am thinking about how (and gathering my strength) to apply bayes theorem, generate some fancy genetic algorithms and use the black-scholes model to examine some stock picks (or I might get a monkey and a dart board).

Can you actually use Excel to do calculus? I'm brushing up on my calculus in order to try my hand with Black-Scholes (I'm taking a graduate course in options trading). In the past, I simply bought put options when I expected a stock to tank and call options when I thought it was grossly overvalued and volatile. But, I'll see how much money I can lose with the assistance of mathematical models.

Long story short this guy with no formal engineering education started out as a draftsman, worked his way up to a senior public works engineer position, and was able to survey, select, combine and simplify several hundred years worth of hydraulics work into some workable equations (he was in his 70's when he presented these equations) that we still use today to predict hydraulic phenomena which were previously unquantifiable/unpredictable at an acceptable level (he died in 1897).

That deals with phenomena that can be recreated and tested to confirm its validity beyond a shadow of a doubt. That, to me, implies greater simplicity of the subject matter and greater certainty along the way as to whether you're on the right track. I don't see any parallel to social science. But I'm also not attempting to discourage your work - it would be neat if you came up with something useful.

[Tom Odom]

Eric is a very sharp guy and he thinks before he opens his mouth so when he says something it is worth listening to. If he taks this on, he will do it right.

[Surferbeetle]

Schmedlap,

You are correct that Microsoft Excel does not do Calculus. The embedded Excel Solver function will get you through many business based maximization or minimization problems however. Mathematica has a bolt-on for excel that will allow you to do calculus with excel. I have not used it and instead have a free standing copy of Mathematica (they are up to version 6.0 and you can run it on an apple, linux, or windows machine) for the heavy stuff but I am not proficient with the program. Wolfram offers some rather pricey seminars (physical and web-based) which look interesting however until I have some money to burn I have gone the cheap route and am using a Schaums (Cliff notes for Math and Engineering topics) to look at things. Wolfram has sponsored some Black Scholes work by Zvi Wiener and Simon Benninga (I am not sure if it was peer reviewed). These two do provide their Mathematica code, however for a simple water and dirt engineer, trying to understand and implement what they are doing is working me pretty hard. Chapter 8, pg 262, Corporate Finance (ISBN 0-324-28932-4) got me started with the black-scholes option pricing model (they offer a treatment in an excel CF2 Ch 08 Tool Kit.xls file as well at the Thompson website however you will need the code that comes with your book to get in).

I am cheap when it comes to fees and scared of the downside in options so I have been running mainly index funds...

For Calculus one of my friends continually sings the praises of MatLab (here is the wiki link ), I found Maple to be good, and i was able to do a simple pollution dilution model in Mathcad .

MBA school offers the opportunity to run some interesting simulations which will help you to think about business and management techniques. Harvard Business School is putting out some fun simulations software packages which I have used and recommend. (No, I didn't go to Harvard).

Water is pretty interesting stuff and analyzing it can be as hard or easy as you want to make it depending on how good a prediction that you need. Archimedes, Bernoulli, Chezy, Darcy, Froude, Leonardo, Mach, Manning, Prandtl, Reynolds, Poiseuille, Sextus Julius Frontinus, and Stokes are just a few of of the greats. There are some heavy duty software packages out there these days to help handle the really painful parts of analysis and it's fun to think about what some these guys would have been able to do with them...

As you know (good grief how many tours have you done?) there are experiences in War which are very visceral, very physical, and you can't escape from them once you are in it. There are no time outs to really catch your breath or clear your head (as opposed to that point of never-ending now when nothing is happening). Trying to model this type of experience at the tactical level is probably impossible with current techniques ( a good game of HALO is a fun way to try, but it doesn't capture the things that brand your soul ). What I am thinking about is more of a predictive, COIN, game theory, nash equilibrium, fused with civil affairs lessons learned, and using mba and civil engineering techniques ( evolutionary/genetic algorithms look interesting) approach. There are folks that are way ahead of me on modeling this stuff and I have no paid experience in this particular modeling arena, nor do I expect to be able to produce anything quickly, its just something that I think about. Long story short I made it back, not everybody did, and perhaps this is a way that I can give back.

Regards,

Steve

[Rank amateur]

I'll see how much money I can lose with the assistance of mathematical models.

A lot and I don't need a spreadsheet to figure it out. I work on the theory that the more money the stock broker makes on the transaction, the worse the investment is for me.

[120mm]

Bill,
Don't forget the sausage and pretzel for first breakfast to help smooth things out! When I go for just the beer, first thing, I often tend to fall down.

It's been almost a month since I had that last....

Living in Bayern just rocks, sometime!!!

[Bill Moore]

I am somewhat embarrassed that it looks like it's going to take a SEAL to lead the way where the Army once held sway. (Dude! That rhymes!!)

It would be interesting to count the number of counterinsurgency and unconventional warfare experts that have emerged from outside the ranks of Special Forces. Just a hand full on the U.S. side include, USAF COL Lansdale in the Philippines who advised Magsaysay against the Huks (although he didn't do so well in Vietnam), numerous combat arms officers from the Army who were cut off behind the lines after the Japanese invaded the Philippines did an outstanding job running guerrilla operations, GEN Abrams in Vietnam, GEN Petraeus in Iraq, Mr Kilcullen in Iraq, and outside the U.S. the list goes on ranging from Mao to Lawrence of Arabia to Templer.

It doesn't take a school or a qualification course for a man to see what is happening and what needs to be done if he is intelligent and capable of seeing and hearing without bias. I'm not surprised or embarassed to see a USN SEAL leading needed change in SOCOM. Nothing like necessity to force adaption.

I think that there are times that those outside a particular area of expertise may be more capable of implementing needed change than those who are currently the so called experts. I'll need to work on this concept, but in short if one assumes he is an expert, he probably assumes he has the answers based on his education and experience (perhaps this is why Lansdale who did so well in the Philippines, but flopped in Vietnam), thus he is less receptive to learn. That can apply to organizations also. Let's say we have two organizations/units, one who has been doing COIN for years and one who didn't do COIN before, but the second unit realized they needed to learn it to accomplish their mission. The second unit was hungry for knowledge and eager to learn. Compare that to a unit that approaches the problem with the attitude that hey we know this stuff already, nothing new here. The first unit might start off better based on their legacy skills and knowledge, but if they fail to continuously learn and adapt, there is a good chance that the second unit could end up surpassing the unit that was originally regarded as the COIN experts in capability.

The key it seems is the will to adapt, and this somewhat ties into Kilcullen's "Red Queen" or co-evolution comment. It also ties into the underlying theory of "Eating Soup with a Knife". The key is to develop adaptive leaders and organizations. We say we do this, and we do, but are we adapting quick enough?

[selil]

It would be interesting to count the number of counterinsurgency and unconventional warfare experts that have emerged from outside the ranks of Special Forces.

Reading through many of the books that have been written in the past and recently there is a "code phrase" that springs out usually in the first chapter of most of the books. In describing the US commander it usually is phrased along the lines of, "with quiet introspection", "with a thoughtful demeanor", "considering the ramifications closely", "thinking outside the box", etc. etc.

It is a way that the authors are excusing their own (or the subjects) intellectual consideration and meta cognitive reasoning. In other words we are talking about some pretty smart cookies who are hiding that behind code phrases for their intellectual processes. We all can see the outcomes, the physical reality of their thinking, but when you dig a little deeper there is some pretty good brain power in the noggin assembly whizzing away.

[Surferbeetle]

I think that there are times that those outside a particular area of expertise may be more capable of implementing needed change than those who are currently the so called experts. I'll need to work on this concept, but in short if one assumes he is an expert, he probably assumes he has the answers based on his education and experience (perhaps this is why Lansdale who did so well in the Philippines, but flopped in Vietnam), thus he is less receptive to learn. That can apply to organizations also.

The key it seems is the will to adapt, and this somewhat ties into Kilcullen's "Red Queen" or co-evolution comment. It also ties into the underlying theory of "Eating Soup with a Knife". The key is to develop adaptive leaders and organizations. We say we do this, and we do, but are we adapting quick enough?

About 80% of the kids coming through MBA school with me were in their mid 20's, had accounting, finance, and business backgrounds and took to the simulations and techniques I have discussed previously like ducks to water. They are about the ages of my kids. When our kids were young we bought them simple simulations like Oregon Trail, Math Blaster, Alge-Blaster, etc. and this was common in their peer group. Many of the older crowd look down on video games (HALO, Gears of War, etc.) but there are some positive things to them as well and I would argue that this has also shaped this generation for success in leveraging computational and decision making power. Making sure that there are opportunities in the military and government for folks like these, that they perceive as beneficial, would be wise on our part.

It also behooves us older folks to educate ourselves as to what is going on with the younger generations so that hopefully we can meet them and show them some of the things that we understand and have learned in an interactive manner that will result in a conversation. The US Military is a good training institution for self-discipline, confidence, and leadership but we have a long ways to go to even get semi-current on what's happening in some of the educational arenas in our universities and tech schools. There are things to be said for both 'top-down' and for 'decentralization' methods when it comes to executing missions however I am not sure that we have hit an optimal equilibrium point in our organizations.

My 0.02 cents.