Design for military operations

[Hacksaw]

To be clear... I'm not exactly a proponent or critic of Design... Always thought I did design to support my commander's understanding of the situation so that he could provide adequate guidance, but if it helps some from jumping to solutions before they understand the situation/problem... I can live with another construct for what I consider common sense...

translation of text in question...

Adopt approaches that create conditions on the ground that allow military forces to conclude full spectrum operations and what remains is an environment that is self governing (as in self regulating system) that Coalition members can live with...'

or

leave a situation that doesn't necessarily smell like a bouqet of roses, but doesn't smell like a heaping pile of pig turds

Live well and row

PS: I'm in the midst of an exercise design to, in part, determine the applicability of design in a time constrained tactical environment... I think its nuts

[Ken White]

...PS: I'm in the midst of an exercise design to, in part, determine the applicability of design in a time constrained tactical environment... I think its nuts

However, I know you'll try to adapt it to the, umm -- faster moving? Er, yeah, those are okay words; faster moving -- No. More rapidly evolving, tactical situations.

I truly wish you success...

[DaveDoyle]

I think I am familiar with the scenario Hacksaw referenced in his post. Unfortunately, if the team is applying "design" to an isolated event, rather than an evolving environment it probably won't seem that useful.

We've been applying design against several long term scenarios that require planning teams to take our construct and develop plans and orders for events while we continue to apply design as the environment changes.

Apparently ARCENT is using design for a series of complex problems and link their design team into planning cells within the staff to deal with a series of plans and orders. This seems to me to be a beneficial method for keeping design useful. The earlier posts about the USSOCOM Strategy Directorate also indicate a useful use for design.

One additional comment - the current SAMS version of design has elements that would seem to come from SOD, but links more closely to some of the academic components of design theory.

My impression is that with the different schools of thought out there regarding design (SOD, CACD, USMC doctrine, SAMS Art of Design, FMI 5-2) that design is getting a bad reputation.

I'm still interested in hearing from folks that are out there using design in its various forms.

Appreciate the input from our senior council members too. Thanks.

[Cavguy]

All,

Some interesting comments on design from the CAC blog - read down.
http://usacac.leavenworth.army.mil/B...e-command.aspx

[William F. Owen]

All,

Some interesting comments on design from the CAC blog - read down.
http://usacac.leavenworth.army.mil/B...e-command.aspx

OK, so correct me if I'm wrong here, but it seems to me that these guys seem to think that operational planning is how you plan to conduct operations.

I have always assumed that operational planning was how you "prepared" for operations. You can't produce a plan for how you will conduct a battle. No one who has ever been successful against a competent enemy ever has. It's far more to do with freedom of action, than realising objectives.

That was why Patton, Slim and a few others were able to plan major operations in 24 hours and issue Op Orders on one page. None of these guys even tried to anticipate everything. It was all about preparation, not prediction.

[Ken White]

That was why Patton, Slim and a few others were able to plan major operations in 24 hours and issue Op Orders on one page. None of these guys even tried to anticipate everything. It was all about preparation, not prediction.

Because they were smart enough to realize it is impossible to predict the future in excessive detail and to try is to waste time and effort. It's a fool's game.

Serious questions, two of them:

How much of all this emphasis today on 'planning,' IPB, MDMP and Design is due solely to the fact that overlarge staffs can afford to expend the effort?

What is going to happen in a major conflict when those large staffs are unaffordable due to casualties and other personnel issues -- and the time to do all that is simply not available?

[Hacksaw]

I suppose you could say I spent the better part of 8 of my last 9 years in the Army as a planner of one sort or another...

1. The most, and probably only, important step in MDMP is Mission Analysis... done correctly - it greatly resembles what Design proposes is missing... ergo Mission Analysis is routinely done poorly which is why anyone thought Design was necessary in the first place.

2. As a tactical-level planner... All I really have to do is get resource allocation (Task Org), logical BCT areas of operation, fire control measures, and task/purposes correct. Subordinate commanders (the U.S. Army almost always puts pretty smart guys in command of BCTs... If I do much more, I unnecessarily constrain warfighters

3. A good wargame (no one is allowed to violate the realities of the time-space continuum) will identify all the Dec Points you need and give you good triggers for when changes are needed in TASKO, boundaries, FC measures, and task/purpose.

The tyranny of the orders process will not allow us to issue one page orders no matter how attractive the idea, but the shorter the better, not to mention a good set of graphics is all most commanders need...

Live well and row

[DaveDoyle]

Ken,
Great point. Pulling a design team out costs people and wouldn't be possible without overages in manning. Pulling planners out to join a design team to assist in "parallel planning" also requires additional people. I suppose that's why design takes place at divisions and above...

Do more minds looking at something automatically make it better? If all of these people are planning and designing what are they not doing?

Playing devil's advocate though, design theory (at least as we study it at SAMS) acknowledges that you can never "predict" the future completely, but you can use design to understand potential futures to be better prepared to make decisions.

Hacksaw may be best suited to talk about shortfalls in design for results in crisis action planning. Ongoing design efforts can complement decision making and planning for immediate requirements. But, you probably would have difficulty starting a design from a cold start for an emergency unless you have the patience to build understanding while dealing with the crisis.

Got to go, but I do want to comment on the differences between design and thorough mission analysis in a planning process.

Dave