We've actually been applying design at USSOCOM for about a year now in the Strategy Division, and not only is the command allowing us tremendous freedom of intellectual maneuver, the products that we have developed are having a major impact far outside out Command. The Chairman, other GCCs, Key Partner Nations, throughout the interagency community.

Not everyone agrees with everything, but that is the point. It is driving new discourse, and breaking down some of the long held, misconceptions of what we are dealing with and how to move forward from here.

We do not follow some rigid doctrinal approach to design, but have combined elements of a variety of proposed processess out there. In simplest terms it insert a step in the front end of Mission Analysys that takes a holistic look at what exactly the problem is that you have been asked to address, and how it really functions, and then through that understanding being able to better see second and third order effects from various COAs, and also to be able to better advise the commander.

Takes MDMP out of the hands of the intel guys focusing the effort on a very threat-centric approach right up front. That part doesn't go away, it just has a better context to understand how that "threat" fits into the larger system. Often the solution lies somewhere other than by targeting the "threat" directly.

We met with a couple of the SAMS seminars and left some products with them to help them grasp this new concept. They were getting a lot of "you have to always bring the Commander answers." With Design, often you bring him questions as well. And that's a good thing.