1
|
|
2
|
- Why the focus on C&C?
- What do we mean by “organic design”?
|
3
|
- Failures
- The past few years have seen the fiascos associated with Nifty‑Nugget
and Proud Spirit C&C exercises together with the real world fiascos
epitomized by the evacuation of Saigon, Desert I and others.
- Response
- The institutional response for overcoming these fiascos is: more and
better sensors, more communications, more and better computers, more and
better display devices, more satellites, more and better fusion centers,
etc.—all tied into one giant fully informed, fully capable C&C
system. This way of thinking emphasizes hardware as the solution.
- Another way
- I think there is a different way—a way that emphasizes the implicit
nature of human beings. In this sense, the following discussion will
uncover what we mean by both implicit nature and organic design.
|
4
|
- Need insight and vision, to unveil adversary plans and actions as well
as “foresee” own goals and appropriate plans and actions.
- Need focus and direction, to achieve some goal or aim.
- Need adaptability, to cope with uncertain and ever-changing
circumstances.
- Need security, to remain unpredictable.
|
5
|
- Why insight and vision?
- Without insight and vision there can be no orientation to deal with
both present and future.
- Why focus and direction?
- Without focus and direction, implied or explicit, there can be neither harmony
of effort nor initiative for vigorous effort.
- Why adaptability?
- Adaptability implies variety and rapidity. Without variety and rapidity
one can neither be unpredictable nor cope with changing and unforeseen
circumstances.
- Why security?
- Without security one becomes predictable, hence one loses the benefits
of the above.
|
6
|
- With these thoughts in mind let’s take a look at some appropriate
samples from the historical environment that will, as we shall see,
prove useful before trying to evolve any operational philosophy or
command and control concept.
|
7
|
- Sun Tzu (around 400 B.C.)
- Probe enemy to unmask his strengths, weaknesses, patterns of movement
and intentions. Shape enemy’s perception of world to
manipulate/undermine his plans and actions. Employ Cheng/Ch'i maneuvers
to quickly and unexpectedly hurl strength against weaknesses.
- Bourcet (1764‑71)
- A plan ought to have several branches ... One should ... mislead the
enemy and make him imagine that the main effort is coming at some other
part. And ... one must be ready to profit by a second or third branch
of the plan without giving one’s enemy time to consider it.
- Napoleon (early‑1800’s)
- Strategy is the art of making use of time and space. I am less chary of
the latter than the former. Space we can recover, time never ... I may
lose a battle, but I shall never lose a minute. The whole art of war
consists in a well reasoned and circumspect defensive, followed by
rapid and audacious attack.
- Clausewitz (1832)
- Friction (which includes the interaction of many factors, such as
uncertainty, psychological/moral forces and effects, etc.) impedes
activity. “Friction is the only concept that more or less corresponds
to the factors that distinguish real war from war on paper.” In this
sense, friction represents the climate or atmosphere of war.
- Jomini (1836)
- By free and rapid movements
carry bulk of the forces (successively) against fractions of the enemy.
|
8
|
- N.B. Forrest (1860’s)
- Git thar the fustest with the mostest.
- Blumentritt (1947)
- The entire operational and tactical leadership method hinged upon … rapid,
concise assessment of situations … quick decisions and quick execution,
on the principle: ‘each minute ahead of the enemy is an advantage.’
- Balck (1980)
- Emphasis upon creation of implicit connections or bonds based upon trust,
not mistrust, that permit wide freedom for subordinates to exercise
imagination and initiative—yet, harmonize within intent of superior
commanders. Benefit: internal simplicity that permits rapid
adaptability.
- Yours Truly
- Operate inside adversary’s
observation‑orientation‑decision‑action loops to
enmesh adversary in a world of uncertainty, doubt, mistrust, confusion,
disorder, fear, panic chaos … and/or fold adversary back inside himself
so that he cannot cope with events/efforts as they unfold.
|
9
|
- The atmosphere of war is friction.
- Friction is generated and magnified by menace, ambiguity, deception,
rapidity, uncertainty, mistrust, etc.
- Friction is diminished by implicit understanding, trust, cooperation,
simplicity, focus, etc.
- In this sense, variety and rapidity tend to magnify friction, while
harmony and initiative tend to diminish friction.
|
10
|
- In other words
- Variety/rapidity without harmony/initiative lead to confusion, disorder
and ultimately to chaos.
- on the other hand
- Harmony/initiative without variety/rapidity lead to (rigid) uniformity,
predictability and ultimately to non‑adaptability.
- ? Raises the question ?
- How do we generate harmony/initiative so that we can exploit
variety/rapidity?
- Comment
- We must uncover those interactions that foster harmony and initiative—yet
do not destroy variety and rapidity.
|
11
|
- Disconnected bits and pieces
- Islands of disconnected effort
- Disconnected from other humans
- Disconnected from environment
- Disconnected from environment, but connected to some formality
- Linkages
- Common frequencies
- Common language
- Correlation among multiple sources
- Harmony of different efforts
- Inversely related characteristics
- Image of activities and changes thereto
|
12
|
- Interactions, as shown, represent a many-sided implicit
cross-referencing process of projection, empathy, correlation, and
rejection.
|
13
|
- Seems as though this insight is related in some way to orientation,
hence it ...
? Raises the
question ?
- What do we mean by orientation?
|
14
|
- Orientation, seen as a result, represents images, views, or impressions
of the world shaped by genetic heritage, cultural tradition, previous
experiences, and unfolding circumstances.
|
15
|
- How are these images, views, or impressions created?
|
16
|
- Referring back to our previous discussion, we can say: orientation is an
interactive process of many-sided implicit cross-referencing
projections, empathies, correlations, and rejections that is shaped by
and shapes the interplay of genetic heritage, cultural tradition,
previous experiences, and unfolding circumstances.
|
17
|
- Illumination
- Orientation is the Schwerpunkt. It shapes the way we interact with the
environment—hence orientation shapes the way we observe, the way we decide,
the way we act.
- In this sense
- Orientation shapes the character of present
observation‑orientation‑decision-action loops—while these present
loops shape the character of future orientation.
- Implication
- We need to create mental images, views, or impressions, hence patterns
that match with activity of world.
- We need to deny adversary the possibility of uncovering or discerning
patterns that match our activity, or other aspects of reality in the
world.
|
18
|
- Essential idea
- Patterns (hence, orientation), right or wrong or lack thereof, suggest
ability or inability to conduct many‑sided implicit
cross‑references.
- ? Raises question ?
- How do we set‑up and take advantage of the many‑sided
implicit cross‑referencing process of projection, empathy, and
correlation, rejection that make appropriate orientation possible?
|
19
|
- Message
- Expose individuals, with different skills and abilities, against a
variety of situations—whereby each individual can observe and orient
himself simultaneously to the others and to the variety of changing
situations.
- ? Why ?
- In such an environment, a harmony, or focus and direction, in
operations is created by the bonds of implicit communications and trust
that evolve as a consequence of the similar mental images or
impressions each individual creates and commits to memory by repeatedly
sharing the same variety of experiences in the same ways.
- Beneficial payoff
- A command and control system, whose secret lies in what’s unstated or
not communicated to one another (in an explicit sense)—in order to
exploit lower‑level initiative yet realize higher‑level
intent, thereby diminish friction and compress time, hence gain both
quickness and security.
|
20
|
- What happens if we cannot establish these implicit connections or bonds—via
similar mental images or impressions—as basis to cope with a
many‑sided uncertain and ever-changing environment?
|
21
|
- The previous discussion assumes interaction with both the external and internal
environment. Now, let us assume, for whatever reason or combination of
circumstances, that we design a command and control system that hinders
interaction with external environment. This implies a focus inward,
rather than outward.
- Picking up on this idea, we observe from Darwin that:
- The environment selects.
- Ability or inability to interact and adapt to exigencies of environment
select one in or out.
- Furthermore, according to the Gödel Proof, the Heisenberg Uncertainty
Principle, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics:
- One cannot determine the character or nature of a system within itself.
- Moreover, attempts to do so lead to confusion and disorder. Why?
Because in the “real world” the environment intrudes (my view).
- Now, by applying the ideas of Darwin, the Second Law, Heisenberg, and Gödel
to Clausewitz one can see that:
- He who can generate many non‑cooperative centers of gravity
magnifies friction. Why? Many non‑cooperative centers of gravity
within a system restrict interaction and adaptability of system with
its surroundings, thereby leading to a focus inward (i.e., within
itself), which in turn generates confusion and disorder, which impedes
vigorous or directed activity, hence, by definition, magnifies
friction or entropy.
|
22
|
- Point
- Any command and control system that forces adherents to look inward,
leads to dissolution/disintegration (i.e., system comes unglued).
- In a much larger sense
- Without the implicit bonds or connections, associated with similar
images or impressions, there can be neither harmony nor individual
initiative within a collective entity, therefore, no way that such an
organic whole can stay together and cope with a many‑sided
uncertain and ever-changing environment.
- or equivalently
- Without implicit bonds or connections, we magnify friction, produce
paralysis, and get system collapse.
|
23
|
- Insight
- The key idea is to emphasize implicit over explicit in order to gain a
favorable mismatch in friction and time (i.e, ours lower than any
adversary) for superiority in shaping and adapting to circumstances.
- ? Raises question ?
- How do we do this?
|
24
|
- Suppress tendency to build‑up explicit internal arrangements that hinder
interaction with external world.
- Instead
- Arrange setting and circumstances so that leaders and subordinates alike
are given opportunity to continuously interact with external world, and
with each other, in order to more quickly make many‑sided implicit
cross‑referencing projections, empathies, correlations, and
rejections as well as create the similar images or impressions, hence a
similar implicit orientation, needed to form an organic whole.
- Why?
- A similar implicit orientation for commanders and subordinates alike
will allow them to:
- Diminish their friction and reduce time, thereby permit them to:
- Exploit variety/rapidity while maintaining harmony/initiative, thereby
permit them to:
- Get inside adversary’s O‑O‑D‑A loops, thereby:
- Magnify adversary’s friction and stretch‑out his time (for a
favorable mismatch in friction and time), thereby:
- Deny adversary the opportunity to cope with events/efforts as they
unfold.
|
25
|
- We can see that implicit orientation shapes the character of:
- Insight and vision
- Focus and direction
- Adaptability
- Security
- Implication
- Since a first rate command and control system should possess above
qualities, any design or related operational methods should play to and
expand, not play down and diminish, implicit orientation.
|
26
|
- Comment
- Up to this point we have shown orientation as being a critical element
in command and control—implying that without orientation there is no
command and control worthy of the name.
- Very nice
- But, simply stated, what does this comment and everything else we’ve
discussed so far tell us about command and control?
|
27
|
- Illumination
- The process of observation‑orientation‑decision‑action
represents what takes place during the command and control process—which
means that the O‑O‑D‑A loop can be thought of as being
the C&C loop.
- The second O, orientation—as the repository of our genetic heritage,
cultural tradition, and previous experiences—is the most important part of
the O‑O‑D‑A loop since it shapes the way we observe,
the way we decide, the way we act.
- Implication
- Operating inside adversary’s O‑O‑D‑A loop means the
same thing as operating inside adversary’s C&C loop.
|
28
|
- How can we get effective command and control?
|
29
|
- In responding to this question let us take a look at some evidence
(provided by Martin van Creveld as well as myself) that may help in this
regard:
- Napoleon’s use of staff officers for personal reconnaissance
- Moltke’s message “directives” of few words
- British tight control at the Battle of the Somme in 1916
- British GHQ “phantom” recce regiment in WW II
- Patton’s “household cavalry”
- My use of “legal eagle” and comptroller at NKP.
|
30
|
- In the June 1967 War, “ ...
General Yashayahu Gavish spent most of his time either ‘accompanying’
units down to brigade level—by which, according to his own definition,
he meant staying at that unit’s command post and observing developments
at first hand—or else helicoptering from one unit to another; again, in
his own words, ‘there is no alternative to looking into a subordinate’s
eyes, listening to his tone of voice’. Other sources of information at
his disposal included the usual reporting system; a radio network
linking him with three divisional commanders, which also served to link
those commanders with each other; a signals staff whose task it was to
listen in to the divisional communications networks, working around the
clock and reporting to Gavish in writing; messages passed from the rear,
i.e., from General Headquarters in Tel Aviv, linked to Gavish by
‘private’ radiotelephone circuit; and the results of air reconnaissance
forwarded by the Air Force and processed by Rear Headquarters. Gavish did
not depend on these sources exclusively, however; not only did he spend
some time personally listening in to the radio networks of subordinate
units (on one occasion, Gavish says, he was thereby able to correct an
‘entirely false’ impression of the battle being formed at Brigadier
Gonen’s headquarters) but he also had a ‘directed telescope’ in the form
of elements of his staff, mounted on half tracks, following in the wake
of the two northernmost divisions and constantly reporting on
developments.”
- Martin van Creveld, Command in War,
1982, pp. 199-200.
|
31
|
- Point
- The previous discussion once again reveals our old friend—the
many‑sided implicit cross‑referencing process of projection,
empathy, correlation, and rejection.
- ? Raises question ?
- Where does this lead us?
|
32
|
- Nature
- Command and control must permit one to direct and shape what is to be
done as well as permit one to modify that direction and shaping by
assessing what is being done.
- What does this mean?
- Command must give direction in terms of what is to be done in a clear
unambiguous way. In this sense, command must interact with system to
shape the character or nature of that system in order to realize what is
to be done;
- whereas
- Control must provide assessment of what is being done also in a clear
unambiguous way. In this sense, control must not interact nor interfere
with system but must ascertain (not shape) the character/nature of what
is being done.
- Implication
- Direction and shaping, hence “command”, should be evident while
assessment and ascertainment, hence "control", should be
invisible and should not interfere—otherwise “command and control” does
not exist as an effective means to improve our fitness to shape and cope
with unfolding circumstances.
|
33
|
- Nature
- Command and control must permit one to direct and shape what is to be
done as well as permit one to modify that direction and shaping by
assessing what is being done.
- What does this mean?
- Command must give direction in terms of what is to be done in a clear
unambiguous way. In this sense, command must interact with system to
shape the character or nature of that system in order to realize what is
to be done;
- whereas
- Control must provide assessment of what is being done also in a clear
unambiguous way. In this sense, control must not interact nor interfere
with system but must determine (not shape) the character/nature of what
is being done.
- Implication
- Direction and shaping, hence “command,” should be evident while
assessment and determination, hence “control”, should be invisible and
should not interfere—otherwise “command and control” does not exist as
an effective means to improve our fitness to shape and cope with
unfolding circumstances.
|
34
|
- Reflection upon the statements associated with the Epitome of “Command
and Control” leave one unsettled as to the accuracy of these statements.
Why? Command, by definition, means to direct, order, or compel while
control means to regulate, restrain, or hold to a certain standard as
well as to direct or command.
- Against these standards it seems that the command and control (C&C)
we are speaking of is different than the kind that is being applied. In
this sense, the C&C we are speaking of seems more closely aligned to
leadership (rather than command) and to some kind of monitoring ability
(rather than control) that permits leadership to be effective.
- In other words, leadership with monitoring, rather than C&C, seems
to be a better way to cope with the multi‑faceted aspects of
uncertainty, change, and stress. On the other hand, monitoring, per se,
does not appear to be an adequate substitute for control. Instead, after
some sorting and reflection, the idea of appreciation seems better. Why?
First of all, appreciation includes the recognition of worth or value
and the idea of clear perception as well as the ability to monitor.
Moreover, next, it is difficult to believe that leadership can even
exist without appreciation.
- Pulling these threads together suggests that appreciation and leadership
offer a more appropriate and richer means than C&C for shaping and
adapting to circumstances.
|
35
|
|
36
|
- Nature
- Appreciation and leadership permit one to discern, direct and shape what
is to be done as well as permit one to modify the direction and shaping
by assessing what is being done or about to be done (by friendlies as
well as adversaries).
- What does this mean?
- Appreciation, as part of leadership, must provide assessment of what is
being done in a clear unambiguous way. In this sense, appreciation must
not interact nor interfere with system but must discern (not shape) the
character/nature of what is being done or about to be done;
- whereas
- Leadership must give direction in terms of what is to be done also in a
clear unambiguous way. In this sense, leadership must interact with
system to shape the character or nature of that system in order to
realize what is to be done.
- Implication
- Assessment and discernment should be invisible and should not interfere
with operations while direction and shaping should be evident to
system‑otherwise appreciation and leadership do not exist as an
effective means to improve our fitness to shape and cope with unfolding
circumstances.
|
37
|
- Suspicion
- The previous discussion suggests that the title “Organic Design for
Command and Control” is not appropriate.
- ? Why ?
- C&C represents a top‑down mentality applied in a rigid or
mechanical (or electrical) way that ignores as well as stifles the implicit
nature of human beings to deal. with uncertainty, change, and stress.
(Examples: The Battle of the Somme, Evacuation of Saigon, Mayaguez
Affair, Desert I, Nifty‑Nugget and Proud Spirit C&C exercises,
etc.).
- Resolution
- With these thoughts in mind, I suggest that the following title more
clearly reflects the spirit and content of this presentation.
|
38
|
|
39
|
- Understanding ‑ means to comprehend or apprehend the import or
meaning of something.
- Command ‑ refers to the ability to direct, order, compel with or
without authority or power.
- Control ‑ means to have power or authority to regulate, restrain,
verify, (usually against some standard) direct or command. Comes from
medieval Latin contrarotulus, a “counter roll” or checklist (contra,
against plus rotulus, list).
- Monitoring ‑ refers to the process that permits one to oversee,
listen, observe, or keep track of as well as to advise, warn, or
admonish.
- Appreciation ‑ refers to the recognition of worth or value, clear
perception, understanding, comprehension, discernment, etc.
- Leadership ‑ implies the art of inspiring people to
enthusiastically take action toward the achievement of uncommon goals.
|
40
|
- This edition of “Organic Design” is our attempt to recreate the last
version of the briefing actually presented by the late Col John Boyd,
USAF (1927 – 1997). The last
printed version known to exist carries the date May 1987. We have used that as the starting
point, and then modified the text based on changes we received from Col
Boyd, which continued until around 1991.
By that time, he had moved on to other activities, such as
“Conceptual Spiral,” his advice to then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney
during the First Gulf War, and his interest in other forms of conflict,
including business.
- The original 1987 edition, with pen-and-ink changes dictated by Boyd, is
available in PDF format at http://www.d-n-i.net.
- About the Editors
- Chuck Spinney was a colleague of Boyd’s both in the Air Force and in the
Office of the Secretary of Defense, where he participated in every
edition of “Organic Design.” Chuck is the author of Defense Facts of
Life and numerous monographs and op-eds. His commentaries on defense
issues appear from time to time and are archived at http://www.d-n-i.net.
- Chet Richards worked with Col Boyd on his first paper, “Destruction and
Creation,” on various editions of “Patterns of Conflict,” and near the
end of Boyd’s life, on business applications. He is a retired colonel in the Air
Force Reserve, and recently finished a book, Certain to Win, that
applies Boyd’s concepts to business.
- Ginger Richards is co-owner and president of Kettle Creek Corporation,
which owns Defense and the National Interest. She designed and maintains that site
as well as its sister, http://www.belisarius.com, which is more oriented
towards business.
|