I appreciate your input. Duly noted.Originally Posted by RTK
I noticed that claim before. Sorry I missed it earlier. In what ways are staffs too powerful? Too much authority? To much bureaucratic inertia? I recall you mentioned their size, as did several others, as a problem also.Originally Posted by Ken White
I agree that one type of decision-making is more 'timely' than the other as a fact -- and also appreciate the suggestion to use that word in place of relevant. As far as one making 'better' decisions than the other, I'm not entirely sure. I'll have to investigate it some more, though I will state that my assumption has been (and continues to be) that it's good to seek a 'best' solution as opposed to a 'sufficient' solution; I will further caveat that by stating I understand that it's not always possible or desirable to find the 'best' solution when constraints compel sufficiency (the implied questions being: what constraints; their origins/causes? real or perceived? imposed/self-created? etc). Is it a "fact"? I think that's an open debate.Originally Posted by Ken White
Not unacceptable. See above about my assumptions. Also -- when comparing the satisfaction of US staff officers, and the perception of staff work, with that of historical examples, there seems to be a major difference. How that affects output, I'd like to look into also.Originally Posted by Ken White
For discussion purposes, I'd like to detach the staff's planning and facilitating responsibilities. A knot is tied between the two, I understand, but I'd like to talk about the former before addressing the latter. In that regard, I think a semi-autonomous staff focused on/addressing/otherwise conducting planning would be in a greater position to conduct continuous planning (I understand this goes on already in a variety of ways through means other than MDMP). Rather than time-bounding COAs and then comparing them, the staff could build a continuous stream of action; adding and detaching activities and tasks to a central timeline. I'll have to take some time to think on the practical differences of the concept I'm attempting to explain in order to flush out it more fully. I know it sounds like what already occurs in some ways; X echelon planning Y months ahead; but it sounds different in my head. I promise. I'll get back to you on it when I've thought it more through.Originally Posted by Ken White
What is the cause or reasoning for the continual reassignment? Another poster mentioned DOPMA -- is the 'up or out' process a significant contributing factor in your opinion?Originally Posted by Tom Odom
Bookmarks