Case Study Of Snc's Failure Of Communication

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.

Candidate Jordan delivered an in depth five paragraph order. SNC posted security ensuring that the safety of the fire team was not put at risk. SNC had a good initial plan and proceeded to move the fire team towards the objective. SNC moved the fire team through the woods with minimal opposition; SNC maintained communication and good dispersion. Upon receiving enemy fire SNC suppressed the enemy by assaulting the enemy. SNC pushed through the objective to ensure that all enemy were killed. However, SNC forgot about the weapons cache and commenced to conduct a hasty 180, followed by a consolidated 360, and then an ACE report. SNC, in his haste to complete the problem, completely forgot that the mission was not only to subdue the enemy

SNC gave a detailed brief that outlined a precise plan that was coherent and directed towards mission accomplishment. SNC contradicted a well thought out plan of action with a monotone voice and his use of filler words, such as, uh and um, coupled with a lack of passion. The lack of passion was seen in his sense of urgency as SNC spent 80% of his time briefing his 5 paragraph order that adversely affected his sense of urgency. SNC was able to secure the objective quickly, but loss situational awareness of his surroundings and enemy position that initially created confusion when engaged by the enemy. SNC was able to make clear and concise decisions in an appropriate amount of time that efficiently utilized his fellow candidates. This expedited

SNC conducted an above average analysis of what he expected the enemy to do upon contact. SNC’s scheme of maneuver was vague and could not be executed without significant oversight. SNC’s tasking statements were weak and lacked a purpose. SNC’s formations, particularly his squad column fire team column while in the open area, did not provide effective security en route to his objective. Upon enemy contact SNC stood and began talking to his squad but did not use the ADDRAC format; SNC spoke at just over a conversational tone. SNC directed his squad to suppress the enemy sniper and continue to move to the objective; SNC’s squad laid still while one of the fire team members openly questioned SNC’s decision. SNC changed his mind and directed the

Candidate Lamb posted security prior to the beginning of his brief. Candidates Lamb's brief was delivered confidently, naturally, and not rehearsed. SNC was very comfortable delivery the 5 paragraph order. During his brief, SNC oriented his fire team and provided references to aid in the understanding of his order. Prior to execution, SNC developed an initial plan that included all the elements necessary to complete the mission. During execution, SNC was able to make decisions at points of friction. SNC was able to develop a sensible and comprehensive plan by gathering intelligence and taking suggestions. However, SNC did not rely solely on the suggestions of others to make informed decisions. At points of friction, SNC checked on the

SNC understood all of the instructions very well and used his time wisely in order to develop an initial plan for the problem. SNC covered all of the information pertained to the five paragraph order. SNC developed his initial plan for the fire team to conduct, however the plan did not include security. The plan helped benefit the fire team and gave the SNC more confidence as the mission progress evident his tone of voice his ability to specifically task individual candidates. SNC effectively communicated the tasks and ensured SNC’s subordinates understood the instructions by having them repeat the instructions he gave them. SNC was able to overcome friction while remaining in control, by adjusting his plan as the situation developed. SNC periodically

SNC failed to accurately calculate the azimuth with in standard. SNC confidently issued a well-organized five paragraph order in a clear, authoritative tone void of filler words. SNC’s Scheme of Maneuver was clear, concise, and illustrated SNC’s use of sound tactical judgment and ability to consider future requirements. SNC issued tasks to each fire team which were consistent with the mission and addressed potential casualties. SNC moved his squad with a sense of urgency and displayed the ability to rapidly make decisions when faced with enemy contact and maneuver as required. However, SNC’s decision to assault through a lone enemy’s fighting position was inconsistent with the mission; the mission was to resupply a desperate squad with

Candidate Huff did not brief the admin/logistics and command/signal paragraphs of his order. The rest of his order was briefed with shaky confidence involving heavy use of "ums." SNC did not establish security during his brief or during execution. SNC demonstrated inefficient use of his time by spending nearly sixty seconds re-slinging the teams rifles in the beginning of execution. Due to a lack of an initial plan following the brief, the team had to begin execution whileconducting reconnaissance and orienting to the problem. Once oriented, SNC was hesitant in deciding how to engage the problem. Once a scheme of maneuver was developed, he was able to communicate his guidance to the team members and begin driving his team toward mission

Candidate Fowler displayed a low sense of urgency taking about two minutes following the evaluator’s brief to write his order then briefed his fireteam for over five minutes. SNC provided an adequate brief to be able to execute the mission. The Mission paragraph contained an accurate task and purpose but also contained additional information that was not necessary. Additionally, when he repeated the mission, it was not at all verbatim. SNC provided a scheme of maneuver that was above average however; SNC’s tasks were merely assigned billets with no true task and purpose. Throughout the brief SNC was a little choppy, showing a little lack of confidence and weak understanding of his plan. SNC did not post security during his brief, but did improve

Candidate Lewton presented his brief confidently and with command presence. He showed a good understanding of the order and conveyed that in his brief hitting all the key points of the five-paragraph order. SNC failed to post security upon execution of the mission and did not realize this mistake. SNC’s initial plan was successful in getting one team member onto the wall with the first attempt. SNC was calm, confident and fully engaged throughout the mission. They were able to make it onto the second wall on their first attempt as well. Candidate Lewton used his subordinates giving orders from the rear and using his team as his eyes to survey the area for him. SNC’s fire team was able to make it to the ammo can but due to the time expiring,

Enemy combatants, in familiar terrain, chose to stand and fight from fortified positions; forcing commanders to improvise and adapt quickly to unforeseen circumstances. Support elements received the operational order within just one week of the expected execution date. Staff elements created analysis and plans on poor intelligence estimates and recent experience. Strategic planners also failed to establish command and control of the assault force. Lack of forethought for an integrated joint operation, although ultimately successful, led to the death of U.S. service members. Joint planning for Operation Anaconda, with its complex variables requiring integrated skills, failed to account for enemy variables, withheld information from support elements, and failed to establish effective command and control.

Terminology between the departments was an initial obstacle that needed to be addressed. The critique found that because each agency had a variety of terms for the same equipment, there was confusion when requesting or identifying it. Due to the lack of distinct planning for the wild land fires, the commanders did not have the ability to deploy the proper units when or where needed. Units were incorrectly sent to areas, or mistakenly instructed to “stand down” or stay in quarters when not needed.

Upon issue of his order to his fire team, it was immediately apparent that Candidate Woodgie took time to think about and develop a clear initial plan. SNC briefed a scheme of maneuver that both outlined his plan to negotiate the obstacles from start to finish and included anonymous, sequential, and thorough tasking statements that painted a very clear picture for his team what needed to be done. This was followed by both specific tasking statements but also the assignment of specific roles in the fire team. SNC also briefed very specific coordinating instructions as tactical control measures indicating an keen understanding of the five paragraph order format. More importantly, those clear instructions further amplified the plan for his

SNC conducted an incomplete 5 paragraph order which did not cover all of the information pertaining to the mission. For example, the mission was to locate, close with and destroy the enemy preventing them from setting up a hide sight. SNC did not cover the administration and logistics paragraph also; SNC failed to inform the fire team of the chow plan. SNC did not seem to understand the measure of his brief . During the brief SNC used an extended amount of time by repeating the situation multiple times causing confusion within the fire team. SNC did develop an initial plan prior to starting the execution; however SNC was not able to make adjustments to the initial plan. SNC ’s failure of future planning was evident during the enemy contact

Candidate Thompson’s order was initially out of order despite addressing the elements successfully. SNC caught himself half way through the order and began to realign his brief by covering details in his plan. SNC seemed unsure of his plan at first and staggered during the initial tasking statements, but once the plan developed his confidence increased throughout execution. Candidate needs to ensure that the team trusts his plan so they will follow his lead. SNC lead his team through his own execution, but at times the team was without direction, which stalled the flow of the operation. SNC addressed security, but directed candidates to hand off weapons to the security element which made them temporarily combat ineffective while they attempted