Army Officers Learn From The Military Decision Making Process

The Bay of Pigs fiasco, the Challenger Disaster, and the U.S. failure to anticipate the attack on Pearl Harbor – all notable examples of how groupthink tends to plague groups with high cohesiveness (What is Groupthink, n.d.). Oxford Dictionaries defines groupthink as “the practice of thinking or making decisions as a group in a way that discourages creativity or individual responsibility” (Groupthink, n.d.). With this in mind, it is no surprise that groupthink is going to be a major problem in an organization, such as the military, that values uniformity and a strict chain of command. There is a lot of research on groupthink and evidence of groupthink is apparent in nearly every social group, no matter the size. So, how does a junior officer in the military go about minimizing groupthink among his subordinates and peers without affecting values such as uniformity and chain of command? In order to minimize groupthink, you must minimize the symptoms by encouraging honesty, accountability, and differing opinions. This paper will demonstrate how a junior officer can combat groupthink within the decision making process, standard operating procedures, and the culture of the command.

During our military careers we are faced with many different situations and problems. We will need to present solutions to these situations and problems. The Army has four types of military briefings for us to choose from to effectively communicate our solutions. These four military briefings are decision briefings, information briefings, mission briefings and staff briefings. Each situation will have a factor in determining which type of military briefing is needed. To know which military briefing is to be used, we must understand the purpose of each briefing. This paper will give a narrative on each of the four military briefs and the steps involved for the presentation of each brief. I will begin with decision briefings. Before I can begin with decision briefings, I must give a brief discussion on the Army’s problem solving process.

The US Army’s Doctrine Reference Publication (ADRP) 5-0 provides a comprehensive overview of how the Army plans operations, expanding upon its doctrine publication (ADP) 5-0, The Operations Process. This and other doctrine materials are produced by the Army’s Combined Arms Doctrine Directorate, United States Army Combined Arms Center (CAC) at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Most famously, then CAC Commander Lt. General David Petraeus, before his later ignominious downfall as Director of CIA, spearheaded the production in 2006 of Army Field Manual FM 3-24, Counterinsurgency. Ft. Leavenworth is also home to the Army’s Command and General Staff Officer’s Course (CGSOC) (the basics of Army planning methodology), the School of Advanced Military

An unannounced monitoring inspection was conducted on 1/6/16. I arrived at the operation which is located at 1616 Iowa St, Texarkana about 8:19 am. I was greeted by Bobbie Gray the assistant director. I handed her business card and then explained the purpose of my inspection and reviewed the subchapters I would be observing. Ms. Gray called Callie Donelson the director who came to the center approximately 45 minutes later. Upon Callie's arrival I handed her a business card and explained what subchapter I was observing.

Prior to starting the Critical Thinking course I used difference leadership methods’ taught in the Reserve Officer Training Core (ROTC) and Squadron Officer School; there were additional leadership classes, including battle staff strategies requiring in-depth thinking. After retiring September 2008, with twenty seven years of Air Force and Reserve time, I begin using random means of thinking.

According to Drs. Paul & Elder, thinking generates purposes, raises questions, uses information, utilizes concepts, makes inferences, makes assumptions, generates implications, and embodies a point of view. These eight basic structures are present in all thinking. Every time we think, we think for a reason within a perspective established on expectations leading to inferences and significances. We use models, philosophies and schemes to infer data, evidences, and understandings in order to answer inquiries, answer problems, and settle issues. Furthermore, it would seem that the marriage between the elements of thought and the Army Problem Solving Process would be a match made in heaven. Now before we go too far, let us agree that all of us

Non Commissioned Officers (NCOs) are the first flight of stairs on the leadership ladder and regarded as the spinal column of an Army. In unit environment, “they put together the skills of individual soldiers and connect the operational plan to individual action of each soldier” (AHQ Project Study 66 Infantry Division, 2012). But, the expected role of NCOs under multi-dimensional employment and future trend of war fighting will demand independent decision making strength which will ultimately necessitate wide horizon of thinking, logical and effective reasoning and foresightedness. Conceptualization of this cognitive thinking approach for the NCOs’ would propagate BD Army to achieve par excellence.

The dialect used in Catch-22, is the absurd language associated with the military bureaucracy. An example of such language is the line, “Shooting skeet eight hours a month was excellent training for them. It trained them how to shoot skeet” (Heller 45). The language typically features nonsensical logic and some type of physical/mental conditioning described within it. This language of the military bureaucracy symbolizes the absurdity of the American bureaucracy.

According to Army Doctrine Reference Publication 1-02, Operational Terms and Symbols, “The Military Decisionmaking Process (MDMP) is an interactive planning methodology to understand the situation and mission, develop courses of action, and produce an operation plan or order”. (2016a, pg. 1-62) There are seven steps to MDMP. They are receipt of the mission, mission analysis, course of action development, course of action analysis, course of action comparison, course of action approval and orders production, dissemination, and transition. This focused area writing assessment will focus on specific tasks inside of step two, mission analysis. It will expound upon the tasks, identify critical facts and

Teacher-centered learning has been the predominant teaching style or teaching method of choice for decades if not centuries in the world. Teaching in the Army has been no different than the rest of the world and in other institutions where teacher-centered has been so dominant and change to a learner-centered style has been slow to take place.

The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP) is a decision-making model to assist military members in making sound military decisions and to compile operation orders. This paper will describe MDMP and apply it to a recent job-related decision of the author; preparation for a combat logistics patrol (CLP) while deployed in Iraq. The paper will identify the steps in the model and describe how critical thinking impacted the decision.

The MDMP is the Army's solution to decision-making and assists the commander and staff in developing a plan and estimates. The MDMP is analytical and detailed through all levels. The commander decides the procedures to use in each instance, his plan hinges on clear visualization, and he uses the entire staff to make his plan. The steps in the MDMP are the following:

The role of the military officer in any country is one of respect. The speed at which new information will be established and old knowledge become outdated is going to increase rapidly as an officer. With this knowledge continuing education is going to be critical for you to stay relevant in your career as an upcoming 131A.

Effective and service-oriented project and program development manager, legislative analyst, advocate and outreach director offering 11 years of management and decision-making experience in the United States Army. Demonstrate strong cross functional leadership and networking skills as Director of Veterans Outreach for U.S. Senator Mark Kirk, which created policy movement and legislative suggestions for veterans at both the state and federal level and supporting VA Whistleblowers throughout the state of Illinois which lead to Federal Field Hearings.

As military members we are educated to think very linearly about strategy. For many years we have been trained to have a strategic thought process based on the use of a methodology that espouses three major steps: Ends (Objectives), Ways (Strategic Concepts), and Means (Resources). (Barber 1997)