In this present paper we propose to address how these attractive and persuasive ideas can be translated into implementable approaches in real operations.

We draw on our research on adaptation and complexity in defence

p.2 A key premise of Adaptive Campaigning is that in such operations, the hostile elements and those supporting them or obstructing friendly forces, will largely be operating below the discrimination thresholds of surveillance systems. Thus the force does not expect to find itself in an information-rich environment, but rather expects to have to take action first in order to stimulate reactions from which it can glean some information – in other words, it expects to "fight for, rather than with, information." ...

These ideas are encapsulated in a modified form of Boyd’s familiar OODA loop. Adaptive Campaigning proposes Act – Sense – Decide – Adapt (ASDA) as a more relevant form for the challenges of operating in an environment with high operational uncertainty. By placing ‘Act’ first this formulation stresses the need to act even with little information, and by immediately following that with a ‘Sense’ the point is made that whether the purpose of the action is to stimulate a reaction from which to learn something, or to produce an effect, in both cases it is necessary to have the right sensing mechanisms already deployed, cued and ready to collect. The ‘Decide’ function follows to determine what is learned from the sensed feedback that results from the action, and what to do next.

These first three elements correspond closely to the four elements of OODA, albeit with a different emphasis on where the cycle starts, and with the ‘Orient’ function of OODA incorporated into the ‘Decide’ functions of ASDA. The object of the decision is to choose the next action, and here we recognise that actions can be internal (make a change to one’s own system i.e. adapt) as well as external. So ‘Adapt’, the fourth element of ASDA, explicitly adds the need to invoke adaptation and consider what, if anything, should be changed on every cycle, before continuing to the next cycle with another external ‘Act’.

Successful application of the ‘Adapt’ element results in the land Force improving its ability to focus its effort on the right objectives at the right time and in the right place.

p.3 There can be little doubt that the only effective response to all the complexity of the tasks and of the physical, human and information environments that they find themselves in, is embracing and practicing adaptivity at every level.

p.4 It is unlikely that adaptive mechanisms whose parameters have been chosen arbitrarily, or even with some design in mind, will result in effective adaptation. In practice, the only way we know for such complex and finely tuned mechanisms to arise is through the process of adaptation itself – in other words, we have to use adaptation to produce more adaptation.

p.5-6 Moreover the entire context is dynamic: allegiances shift, relationships and networks develop, individual powers and influences wax and wane, local objectives evolve, and natural forces and human activity continually modify the physical systems and environment. All this activity is neither chaotic, nor predictably patterned, although it is possible to make some forecasts with some confidence.

In such a situation simple linear causal chains are the exception, not the rule. Most events or properties can be ascribed to the result of many preceding interacting causal and influence processes, no one of which can be unambiguously defined as the cause. Similarly, the consequences of any single event or property unfold through many interacting pathways and may have ramifications well beyond the sphere of the single event. Although some particular events may be quite limited in their origins and effects, this is certainly not the usual case, and there is no in-principle cutoff of either antecedents nor consequents.

What we are describing here could be termed a complex Causal and Influence Network... Being adaptive requires us to develop a model of the [Causal and Influence Network] we are dealing with, sufficient for guiding and interpreting our observations, and choosing our next internal and external actions... humans are generally competent at adaptive behaviour where the scale of the [Causal and Influence Network] that needs to be taken into account is within the range of ‘normal’ social or competitive interactions, and where the scale of the adaptive behaviour that is needed is close to the scale of what an individual can do.