p.1 If I always appear prepared, it is because before entering on an undertaking,
I have meditated for long and foreseen what may occur.
Napoleon Bonaparte
p.1 Systemic Operational Design gains and maintains the initiative by enabling
the operational commander to recognize and exploit emerging opportunities through its unique process of iterative design.
p.2 The threat is constantly changing and adapting. Therefore,
the joint approach to operational planning and design must be capable of adapting in an environment characterized by change.
p.2 Uncertainty defines the contemporary operational environment. The planning
and design models used by joint forces at the operational level must be able to adapt to that uncertainty.
p.6 The threat modeling approach that drives both the Joint Operation Planning
and Execution System and the Military Decision-Making Process is Intelligence Preparation of the Battlespace (IPB). Intelligence
Preparation of the Battlespace is a sequential, analytical approach that predicts the most probable threat courses of action...
The steps of Intelligence Preparation of the Battlespace define the total battlespace environment, describe the battlespace’s
effects on threat and friendly courses of action, evaluate the capabilities of any threat forces that may operate in that
battlespace, and determine potential threat courses of action... The friendly courses of action are wargamed against
the predicted threat courses of action. The outcome of this wargame determines which friendly course of action the commander
selects for execution. Throughout each step, Intelligence Preparation of the Battlespace’s predictions determine
the friendly force’s strength, composition and disposition.
p.9 The decision-making process may come to a halt and regress back to a
previous step in order to incorporate the new information, or it may complete its current sequence to the end, and begin the
next sequence with the new information.
p.10 most of the problems a commander is likely to face are ill-defined.
The first step, clearly define the goal, can never be completed if the goal is ill-defined by its nature. This dilemma
stalls the decision making process in the first step and prevents the completion of the subsequent steps. Traditional decision-making
is worse than useless; it can interfere in the solving of unstructured problems... Not only can problems be unstructured
because of ill-defined goals, but they can also be unstructured if the initial state is not defined, the terminal state is
undefined, or the procedure for transforming the initial state into the terminal state is undefined. Decision-making
in natural settings is interactive because the goals determine how to assess the situation, and what is learned about the
situation changes the nature of the goals.
p.12 The circumstances under which accurate perception is
most difficult are exactly the circumstances under which intelligence analysis generally takes place: dealing with highly
ambiguous situations based on information processed incrementally under pressure for early judgment.
p.20 an effects-based approach that considers systemic behavior is
a marked improvement over the traditional reductionist task-based processes.
p.22 Measures of Effectiveness are the criteria used to evaluate how actions
have affected system behavior or capabilities. In terms of systems analysis, Measures of Effectiveness describe the intended
changes to the elements or relationships within the system.
p.24 Complex adaptive systems are systems that contain agents or populations
that seek to adapt. Most complex adaptive systems have distinctive interaction patterns that are neither random nor completely
structured.
p.25 A system is complex that has a great many independent agents
that are interacting with each other in a great many ways. A system is adaptive when it responds to the interactions
with its environment by undergoing spontaneous self-organization while actively seeking to turn whatever happens to its advantage.
Complex adaptive systems such as social systems are in a state of continuous change as new information is learned and assimilated...
Long-term prediction of complex adaptive systemic behavior is complicated further by the inevitable rise of emergent
properties. Emergent properties are properties of the whole system that the separate parts do not have. Emergence
occurs as complex adaptive systems respond to environmental changes through the evolutionary process of adaptation.
The system’s emergent structures constantly adjust and readjust in response to input from the environment. Analysts
cannot understand emergent properties by examining the separate parts, so predicting which emergent structures will arise
from interacting parts is impossible for all practical purposes.
p.29 Effects-Based Operations is holistic in that it utilizes a systems
concept that is concerned with both wholes and their hierarchical arrangement, not just with the whole. This systemic approach
considers not just the separate components of the system, but also those properties that arise when the disparate parts come
together.
p.35 The cognitive map is an abstract representation of the current
context. It helps make sense of the context much like a topographic map helps make sense of the terrain. The scale and fidelity
of the map depends on the type of operation to be conducted. Maps reflect the changes on the ground by being continually updated.
p.41 Operation framing exploits the differences and tensions within the
system in order to influence the system more towards the designer’s aim. Operation framing positions forces
in space and time and provides a frame for key ideas on how the operation will unfold. Operation framing sets the stage for
conducting action in order to learn. Acting in order to learn is neither new nor exclusive to military operations.
p.50 By actively searching for emergences, Systemic Operational Design
provides a mechanism for the organization to adapt to the constantly changing operating environment.
p.52-53 Systemic Operational Design does not seek to attain
perfect knowledge. It strives for useful and timely understanding. It emphasizes developing a conceptualization
of the system that provides a sound basis for action and learning. This conceptualization addresses why the system
is the way it is today, how the system will self-regulate or resist attempts to change it, and what aspects of it have the
potential to escalate both positively and negatively. It is not reasonable to expect that designers will develop a completely
correct conceptualization of a system that is constantly changing by its very nature, but it is also not necessary. It is
vital, however, that it be useful for learning about the system so that successive conceptualizations are more right and more
useful... It recognizes that the system will continually change and adapt, not just in response to friendly actions,
but also in response to the rest of its environment.
p.55 The system diagram shows the various agents and their relationships
within the system. The Design Team identifies relationships whose transformation would produce a more desirable system
trend. It also identifies points of leverage where energy might be injected into the system to initiate the desired transformation.
