The entire sciences of sociology and psychology just collapsed under this withering critique. Entire academic faculty departments have been tossed into the abyss. May they rest in peace.
These sciences are largely based on correlation (thus speculation) with the exception of physical or chemical inbalances that lead to predictable behavior. Several leaders in the field have stated as much. Social and psychological theories are in one year and out the next.

Selil, since you're jumping up and down defending the science behind this, show us where it is. I agree there is correlation (i.e. statitistics), but not necessarily a direct tie between cause and effect. So please post a couple of relevant "laws" (not theories) from these sciences. Ideally show us a law from psychology or sociology that allows to predict the behavior of a tribal group in country X based on tickling node W. Then list the desired effect, the node, the action, and how we measure it and why this approach is value added. I have seen a lot of very smart folks try, but have yet seen a successful example.

Again don't misinterpret my intent, I like an effects based approach, but I think the JFCOM model with the ONA, objective, subordinate effects (this is functional, and it is superior to task and purpose), then identifying key nodes (still functional, but not as simple as depicted in some of texts I have read), then actions to influence those nodes (could be functional, but usually actions are portrayed as physical actions that should result in an immediate, measurable effect), then measure it (dysfunctional), and measure how well the action is being performed (dysfunctional). Trend analysis is one thing, but that isn't what MOE is.

If used as I have described it here and as it is applied in targeting it works as an approach with associated TTPs. But again it is not the rigid version that you have seen, rather it is a loose framework of TTPs applied along lines of operation toward a common end state. Tom
Tom, I concur, and I have no issue whatsoever with EBA. An EBA can provide an umbrella type strategy that allows subordinates to take appropriate actions based on desired effects. This allows subordinates to synch their actions at the local level with higher.

My concern remains with EBO, and I don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water with EBO, because there has been some good work, but we have been using it now for a few years (at least three), so in theory we should have some lessons learned. Or, do we just keep replicating this staff behavior regardless of the results?

I do disagree with Selil and others on the models. Until I see a sound argument (not an emotional reaction) indicating otherwise, I do not think that we can predict social behavior accurately by nesting human systems into engineering like models. Maybe in a few more years we will be able to do so when our knowledge increases, but that is not the case now.

Bill