Military operations are often very unpredictable with various degree of uncertainty. They are usually complex in design, involving multilayers planning and preparation with various level of authority. Understand this difficult the army use MDMP, military decision making process, in its planning and preparation for any military operation/mission. In this paper the author will explain the MDMP, describe what occurs in the seven steps of the MDMP, the important of understand it process, how is time divide and manage for the MDMP, and the important of War Games our COAs
Military operations are often very unpredictable with various degree of uncertainty. They are usually complex in design, involving multilayers planning and preparation with
…show more content…
By design it would help military leaders select a course of action that is the best way to accomplish a mission. “No plan of operations extends with any certainty beyond the first contact with the main hostile force, Field Marshall Field Marshall Helmuth Karl Bernhard Graf von Moltke”. Due to the uncertainty unpredictability of most military operation combine with an complex and adaptive enemy, the MDMP’s goal is not eliminate all the variables but to the develop a framework for action in the midst of it. There are seven steps to the military decision making …show more content…
It could come from higher authority, or from ongoing mission through commander’s observation, and analyze of current mission/operation’s conditions to capitalize on opportunities which would accomplish higher commander’s intent. Step 2 is mission analysis. Analysis of all factors and variables is an upmost important step in MDMP. It helps commander and decision makers better visualize and appreciate the operation. During this step, that the commander intent is establish. It is a clear, concise statement of what the force must do to succeed and the desired end state. Step 3, course of action development, in this step planner use mission statement, commander’s intent to develop Course of action. Step 4, Course of action analysis or War Game, proving ground for COAs, help commanders and staff visually the operation. It highlight the strength and weakness of our force as well as that of the enemies. Step 5, Course of Action Comparison, in this step, planners compare, analyze and evaluate strength and weakness of each COAs. The product of this process is a course of action that would most likely be advantageous against enemy’s COAs. Step 6, Course of Action Approval, after analyzing the pro and cons of each COA, the planner come with the best COA and recommend it to commander for approval. It is up to the commander to approve the recommended COA, make any changes to the COA. Step 7, Orders
a. Army HR systems are integral to allowing HR professionals to accurately process and track promotions, movement of personnel, awards, strength reporting, generate metrics, assist with the assessment and tracking of individual medical/dental readiness, and mobilization transactions.
The Army Problem Solving Model was design to be use when time is not critical. The Army Problem solving model is a systematic way to arrive at the best solution. This system considers the risk and a detail analysis of each course of action to prepare an unbiased solution for the decision maker. In contrast with the Rapid Decision Makin and Synchronization Process (RDMS) was design to give the commander the ability make timely and effective decision without the expending too much time on processing or analyzing all the information.
Compare and Contrast the Army Problem Solving Model (Process) with the Rapid Decision making and Synchronization Process. (C100)
In order to receive a victory in the Battle of the Bulge, General Patton used Mission Command Analysis in order to understand how he can be successful for this mission. The first thing of understanding t...
Unified Land Operations defines the army operational design methodology (ADM) as “a methodology for applying critical and creative thinking to understand, visualize, and describe unfamiliar problems and approaches to solving them. The operational design methodology incorporated into army doctrine serves as a method to compliment the military decision making process (MDMP). Although the ADM it is often confused with replacing MDMP, its purpose is to address complex problems from a nonlinear approach. ADM helps the commander to answer questions to problems. However, only a collaborative effort of an operation planning team (OPT) will achieve the approach to answering complex problems. Doctrine alone does not provide the answer to complex problems, but rather offers a guide to solve them. To conceptualize the MDMP, planners must incorporate ADM to provide a better understanding, visualization, and description of the problem. The purpose of this paper is to provide the framework to support why ADM is required in the MDMP.
(U) Background: Over the course of United States history the Army has made changes to how it engages its foreign enemies. These tactics techniques and procedures are the result of lessons learned during conflict, mistakes made under fire, and the results of a nation at war. As a result the IPB process has changed to accommodate a dynamic and often fluid battlefield. However this has not changed the core concept behind IPB, the four steps still remain an integral part of the Commanders Military Decision Making Process (MDMP), and are essential in war gaming. IPB assist in providing valuable Intelligence to the War Fighter throughout all phases of operations. This paper will cover each step of the IPB Process as well as discuss products associated with each of those steps and how these products can be an asset to the Commander and the War Fighter.
___. Army Doctrine Reference Publication The Operations Process May 2012. Washington DC: Government Printing Office, 2012.
According to Army Doctrine Publication (ADP) 6-0 Mission Command, mission command philosophy is “the exercise of authority and direction by the commander using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations” (Department of Army 2012a). The commander employs mission command at all stages of the operation process. Army Doctrine Reference Publication (ADRP) 5-0 The Operations Process states that the operation process is the exercising of the mission command.... ...
In late November 2001 Task Force 58 launched from ships off the coast of Pakistan to conduct the longest ranged amphibious assault in history with 403 Marines and Sailors, 4 fast-attack vehicles, and a variety of supporting equipment,. General James N. Mattis successfully accomplished this in large part to the effective execution of mission command. Commanders can utilize mission command as a philosophy or a warfighting function. Mission command as a philosophy is the use of commander's intent and mission orders to empower agile and adaptive leaders. It enables commanders to counter the uncertainty of operations by reducing the amount of certainty required to act in a given situation. Commanders build cohesive teams, provide a clear commander's intent and guidance, encourage the use of disciplined initiative, and use mission orders through the operations process to effectively use mission command as a philosophy. Commanders drive this operations process using mission command through six steps. First, they must understand the operational environment and the problem. Second, a commander must visualize his desired end state and operational approach. Third, he must describe that visualization to subordinates using time, space, purpose, and resources. Fourth, commanders must direct forces throughout preparation and execution. Finally, through each of the first four steps, commanders need to lead through purpose and motivation and assess through continuous monitoring and evaluation. General Mattis successfully utilized mission command as a philosophy by understanding, visualizing, leading, describing, and assessing through the operations process as the commander of Naval Task Force 58.
Leaders today need to have an appreciation for the operation process, understand a situation, envision a desired future, and to lay out an approach that will achieve that future (Flynn & Schrankel, 2013). Plans need to be created that can be modified to changes in any factors considered. However, plans should not be dependent on specific information being precise or that require things to go exactly according to schedule. Instead, the staff NCO should be flexible where they can and always be prepared for the unexpected. Today’s military members are fighting an unconventional war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The enemy constantly changes their tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP’s) to counter the United States technological advances, making planning very difficult for leaders. There are multiple tools at a staff NCO’s disposal to try to anticipate an outcome of a current operation, but also assist with the development of concepts in follow-on missions. The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP) is just one tool a staff NCO can utilize. In order to stay ahead of the enemy, create effective plans and orders, it is critical for a staff NCO to assist the commander, and understand that the MDMP and planning are essential in defeating the enemy and conserving the fighting force.
“Operational design is a journey of discovery, not a destination.” Operational design provides a framework, with the guidance of the Joint Force Commander (JFC), that staffs and planning groups can use to give political leaders, commanders, and warfighters a comprehensive understanding of the nature of the problems and objectives for which military forces will be committed, or are planned to be committed. Furthermore, operational design supports commanders and planners to make sense of complicated operational environments (often with ill-structured or wicked problems), helps to analyze wicked problem, and devise an operational approach to solve the problem in the context of the operational environment.
We labeled pieces of paper one through seven and from there, read the tactics one by one to put them in the appropriate stages. After we reached a consensus for which tactic fell into which step, we went back through our groupings, and put them in the order they should occur. Additionally, all tactics we were not going to implement were removed and put in a separate pile. Once we were all in agreement about our final game plan, we calculated what our strategy would cost to implement. In addition to the financial investment estimate, we also determined the amount of time it would take to execute those tactics in the simulation timeframe. After our strategic plan had been entirely accomplished, we began executing our plan of action. Each member naturally aligned with tasks’ roles. Brandon took the lead in figuring out what was going to be necessary for successfully completing the simulation, i.e. further instructions, as well as being the one to actually put the information into the
Course of action development (COA). The COA analyzes relative combat power while generating maneuver options that would enable the tasks to be synchronized in the battlefield. The output of this stage is COA statement and a sketch that precisely shows how the mission will be accomplished explaining all the details of maneuver actions.
Once the action plan is in effect, the plan then relies on the implementation and the communication strategy for the idea to work. Communication objectives are obtained and the strategic tactics on how to communicate and disseminate the communication objectives formally and informally.
...roach, anticipation, operational reach, culmination, arranging operations, and forces and functions. Among those elements end state, center of gravity, and line of effort are particularly useful I developing operational approach. The feeders for operational art are commander’s experience, intellect, creativity, intuition, education, and judgment. However, operational design calls for problem identification, achieving common understanding of the situation and continuous and recursive refinement of situational understanding. Although operational design supports operational art with general methodology, by definition, they both differ by the fact that operational art is application that essentially uses cognitive faculties, whereas operational design is a process that integrates cognitive faculties, tools, and system to conceive of and construct viable approach.