![]() Part of the planning process is to predict the outcome from our actions taken. The COE consists of complex problems, and our planning process demands we know as much as possible about the situation if we are to develop actions to create the necessary conditions for the desired endstate. Within the operational environment, we are trying to determine causation to develop actions to reach a desired outcome (endstate). These effects encompass the full range of possible outcomes (or consequences of actions) across the full spectrum of conflict and occur at all levels of war. Actions will result in effects, both positive and negative. It is imperative to understand that regardless of what planning process or paradigm is used, our actions create effects, and there has to be an attempt to measure our effects by doing more than just measuring performance. Understanding effects – academic underpinnings ![]() Indicator – (Army) In the context of assessment, an item of information that provides insight into an MoE or MoP.MoE - (DoD) A criterion used to assess changes in system behavior, capability or operational environment that is tied to measuring the attainment of an endstate, achievement of an objective or creation of an effect.Measure of performance (MoP) – (DoD) A criterion used to assess friendly actions that is tied to measuring task accomplishment.Endstate – (DoD) The set of required conditions that defines achievement of the commander’s objectives.(Joint Publication (JP) 3-0, Joint Operations) Determination of the progress toward accomplishing a task, creating a condition or achieving an objective. See Field Manual (FM) 3-07, Stability Operations. A continuous process that measures the overall effectiveness of employing joint force capabilities during military operations. Assessment – (Department of Defense (DoD)) 1.Definitionsĭoctrinal definitions from Army Doctrinal Reference Publication (ADRP) 1-02, Terms and Military Symbols: This article will outline how MoEs are currently understood and used in Army doctrine, and will give recommendations on how doctrine can be adjusted to give more useful guidance on the use of MoEs to Army leaders, particularly those conducting stability operations in the contemporary operating environment (COE). Given the central function of MoEs in evaluating mission success, and the difficulty of conducting successful stability operations, doctrinal guidance on this topic should be as clear, useful and straightforward as possible. For leaders seeking to measure the effectiveness of stability operations at the tactical level, this adds confusion to an already complicated and difficult task. Measures of effectiveness (MoEs), while commonly defined across Army doctrinal publications, are explained in different and sometimes confusing ways throughout several manuals. ![]() “Measure what is measurable, and make measurable what is not so.” –Galileo Galilei Guidance on characteristics of MoEs compared across selected stability-related joint and Army doctrinal publications. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |