The Army Capstone Concept: the Army wants your comments

[marct]

In my view design is an umbrella for planning but we're likely just making word salad anyways.

"Design" is more of a power word than "plan"; it conveys more of a "God like" height .

More seriously, I think it reflects the extreme engineering orientation of a lot of military doctrine. Not that that is bad per se, but it can have certain, hmmm, let's say "epistemological limitations" when it comes to dealing with lived reality.

Selil, you mentioned ISO. Did you ever look at the old ISO 9004? It's an intriguing example of how fuzzy "design" has to get once you add nasty people into it (like the "enemy") who insist on doing things their own way.

If TRADOC wants to officially ask me to review the document (FM for Design), release the document to me, and acknowledge that release. I will provide a synopsis of my findings. <- Why that? Stupid people making threats about professors getting FOUO info when they disagreed with the findings. And, heck I won't even charge them $15K that they pay others

15k?!?!?! Drat!

[selil]

More seriously, I think it reflects the extreme engineering orientation of a lot of military doctrine. Not that that is bad per se, but it can have certain, hmmm, let's say "epistemological limitations" when it comes to dealing with lived reality.

The engineering bend to education and waging war I think is an effect of attempting to put everything in quantifiable terms. The push of the quants relies on the engineers to make it happen. Though the word design is definitely part of the qual side of the house. "Good" design can have horrible metrics.

Selil, you mentioned ISO. Did you ever look at the old ISO 9004? It's an intriguing example of how fuzzy "design" has to get once you add nasty people into it (like the "enemy") who insist on doing things their own way.

I'm currently a SME on the ISO/TC WG for "Societal Security". I was appointed by the US ANSI chair to help with the technical questions they had. Not much for me now but it was interesting for awhile. So, I've also worked with 900X, 2700X and a few other ISO standards.

15k?!?!?! Drat!

I know I'm cheap but I am a gray beard. I just never was a general.

[William F. Owen]

I have to say, I'm really intrigued by this "Design" stuff because it's proto-form "Systemic Operational Design" failed under fire in real operations, in terms of being unable to produce clear and concise orders.
The classic being the one that told an Infantry Brigade Commander to "Render the enemy incoherent within the operational area."

Moreover, what I read about "Design" makes no sense. I've come to the conclusion that planning is the product of skilled people, based on experience. "Understanding the problem" cannot be held to be a separate or discrete process, as in military operations you have to plan for not having understood the problems correctly, because the enemy is trying to make a mess of your plan - and often you have to compensate for your guys making a mess of your plan!!!

[MikeF]

I have to say, I'm really intrigued by this "Design" stuff because it's proto-form "Systemic Operational Design" failed under fire in real operations, in terms of being unable to produce clear and concise orders.
The classic being the one that told an Infantry Brigade Commander to "Render the enemy incoherent within the operational area."

Moreover, what I read about "Design" makes no sense. I've come to the conclusion that planning is the product of skilled people, based on experience. "Understanding the problem" cannot be held to be a separate or discrete process, as in military operations you have to plan for not having understood the problems correctly, because the enemy is trying to make a mess of your plan - and often you have to compensate for your guys making a mess of your plan!!!

Hi Wilf,

I agree. Much of the late 1990's systems based problem solving techniques were useless in the field. Even down on the battalion level, I've received orders that said we were focused on security, governance, economics, and no social reforms. I'd say, "No Sh*t, but what do you want me to DO?" I rarely got a response.

Design, as I understand it is a means to take a complex situation, sort through it, and finish with a simple order. In terms of MDMP, it's a way to really wrestle and determine your facts and assumptions before jumping into IPB and COA development.

Here's a brief outline of how I did it on the company level for y'all's critique.

Phase One: Shaping the Environment

1. Understanding the Environment
- Conflict Ecosystem- fill in the bubbles of Dr. K's chart.
- Cultural Immersion- develop empathy and understanding of the internal stakeholders' grievances and vulnerabilities
- Prepare a General Area Survey. How did/do the previous and current stakeholder's define the problem?
- Develop a Hypothesis on the Situation

2. Testing the Environment
- Conduct reconnaissance and surveillance to gather intelligence to confirm/deny hypothesis.
- Conduct leader engagements to gather intelligence to confirm/deny hypothesis

3. Defining the Environment
- Full out planning process. Facts and Assumptions are determined based off initial efforts and decisions are made. Commander determines how the world is and how he wants to influence it. Simple OPORD is endstate.

4. Influecing the Environment
- Develop the Message
- Conduct Psychwarfare to get the truth out
- Conduct Deception operations as needed to assist in your initial penetration during clearance.
- Disruption Operations. Targeted raids, ambushes to prepare the environment by disrupt the enemy's infracstructure, maneuver, and morale.

[marct]

Hi Folks,

Bill Jakola has sent me a copy of the final approved draft of FM 5.0 for posting here. You can download it from here (NB: this is the updated location)
Cheers,

Marc

[wm]

The following extracts from FM 5.0 point out what I find to be a fatal flaw in the "Design" construct.

3.26 Commanders use design to ensure they are solving the right problem. When commanders use design, they closely examine the symptoms, the underlying tensions, and the root causes of conflict in the operational environment. From this perspective, they can identify the fundamental problem with greater clarity and consider more accurately how to solve it. Design is essential to ensuring commanders identify the right problem to solve.

3-36. Three distinct elements collectively produce a design concept as depicted in figure 3-1. Together, they constitute an organizational learning methodology that corresponds to three basic questions that must be answered to produce an actionable design concept to guide detailed planning:

• Framing the operational environment—what is the context in which design will be applied?

• Framing the problem—what problem is the design intended to solve?

• Considering operational approaches—what broad, general approach will solve the problem?

The first paragraph (3.26) says that design helps one figure out what problem one is supposed to solve. That is, the design frames the problem. But the second paragraph (3-36) says that the problem frames the design. Unless "design" is being equivocally in these two paragraphs, this seems to say that design aids one to understand the problem by understanding the problem.
Or, maybe I'm just as dense as Hacksaw.

[Ron Humphrey]

The following extracts from FM 5.0 point oput what I find to be the fatal flaw in the "Design" construct.

The first paragraph (3.26) says that design helps one figure out what problem one is supposed to solve. That is, the design frames the problem. But the second paragraph (3-36) says that the problem frames the design. Unless "design" is being equivocally in these two paragraphs, this seems to say that design aids one to understand the problem by understanding the problem.
Or, maybe I'm just as dense as Hacksaw.

Without trying to either defend or attack said statement
Riddle me this


Plan to build a house

< make it a steel house
-no nevermind make it out of bamboo
< and build it in a jungle next to a waterfall

Seems to me sometimes a problem can very well define direct the design-

Ready for incoming

[Pete]

"Design" is more of a power word than "plan"; it conveys more of a "God like" height .

1. In the beginning there was chaos and the chaos was the infantry, for the infantry was alone.

2. And fear was with the infantry and they cried unto the Lord saying, "Lord, save us for we are afraid."

3. And the Lord heard their grunts and set some of the infantry on beasts of burden and these he called cavalry, and the cavalry became armor.

4. And when the Lord had seen what he had done, he laughed saying, "Well, you can't win them all."

5. The infantry and the armor again cried out to the Lord saying, "Lord, save us for we are afraid." And the Lord heard their cries and decided to end their weepings.

6. And the Lord said unto them, "Lo and behold, I send you a race of men noble in heart and spirit," and the Lord created the Gunners.

[William F. Owen]

1. And when Moses returned to his people he found them all reading "FM-3" and "FM-5", and he was mightly displeased.

2. And Moses spoke to his people saying "You have to f**king kidding me, with this ####"

3. But the people cried, "We were lost and so sought comfort in the words of false profits. Verily we did know it was words of no meaning, and empty of content. Save us from this sophistry and confusion for it angers us, so are without purpose."

4. So Moses spoke to his people and said, "Go now, and get your Packs of Alice, and Framed Bergens, and fill them with the rocks you see around, then assemble back here within the passing of two minutes, for it will be a long night, with much pain and gnashing of teeth."

Amen.

[marct]

Miserere mei, Deus, secundum magnum misericordiam tuam

If you prefer the prettied up, doctrinal version, it's here
and here

[Rob Thornton]

Hi Marc,

I think the discussion on the differences between uncertainty and complexity merits more discussion. What is the real basis for our claim? If complexity is the the quality of being intricate and compounded how does that really apply to us?

I think comparatively, perhaps to how we trained for many years in our relatively simple CTCs and other exercises, experiments, etc., war has provided an opportunity (to ground forces, or those serving on the ground) to see that it is complex by nature. The more the objectives and conditions include other actors - be they populations, combatants, governments, competitors, etc. the more "complex" it becomes.

However, I'm not sure, as you say, that this discovery is entirely useful at this point. What would be more useful is do detail out the possible contributors to what we believe may make it more complex, and how their interaction frustrates or impedes the realization of the objective(s) as part of the conditions. Then perhaps we can figure out how to address those aspects better through the various DOTMLPF processes.

Uncertainty is another matter though. What I think about uncertainty that is important to us is whether or not we will have to do something. That something is in relation to how we have defined the environment and those aspects or contributions that make it more complex and impede our achieving the objective. There is a political aspect to this I think, as some of those uncertain things are tasks which may have to be done, but may be things which military forces are not prepared to do, or in some cases perhaps should not do (or even cannot do). We need to address this by determining exactly what we think those tasks are and when we think they will have to be done, and then have a good discussion on whether or not we have the capability (ability to do them), the authority to do them, - and if they are things we cannot do ourselves - e.g. the objective is contingent upon someone else doing the tasks, we need to discuss how to mitigate it.

If we are going to default to the use of complexity and uncertainty that may be OK, but we need to narrow it down some and place it in context up front (the more the better) as it applies to military forces employed to achieve a political purpose. We need to be specific about what factors make this complex, and we need to name our poison with respect to uncertainty.

Best, Rob