Operations planning revisited: theoretical and practical implications of methodology |
| |
Authors: | Robert Erdeniz |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Division of Philosophy, Department of Philosophy and History, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden;2. Division of Operational Art, Department of War Studies, SEDU Swedish Defence University, Stockholm, Sweden |
| |
Abstract: | Parts of NATO’s contemporary planning framework called the comprehensive operations planning directive (COPD), and parts of the operation-level planning process should be revised since they suffer from methodological inconsistency. This claim is defended by discussing contradicting methodological properties and heuristics applied when framing and managing a military problem in accordance with the COPD. The methodological inconsistency within the COPD; in other words, simultaneously applying contradictory methodological properties, implies one theoretical and three practical implications. The theoretical implication is summarised in a meta-theoretical framework and explained by discussing five methodological properties: non-linearity, emergence, independently changeable generalisations, invariance and boundaries. The three practical implications of methodology imply that methodology is guiding: the problem-frame, conceptual development and action. To improve military planners’ understanding and management of these four identified implications, NATO is recommended to develop a “handbook of methodology.” The purpose of such a handbook should be to emphasise the utility of methodology when planning military operations. |
| |
Keywords: | Operations planning methodology COPD complexity causalist approach systemic approach |
|
|