The Need for Organisational Resilience - Chapter 4

making. This allows subordinate forces, and hence the whole force, to operate faster, and with greater

agility, than the adversary, which keep him off-balance and unable to respond coherently. This end-

state focus supports the initiative of Commanders at all levels by freeing them to focus on the desired

results, even when the CONOPS should be adapted to changing events, when communications are

disrupted, or additional guidance or directives are lacking. The Commander’s intent also provides

subordinates with the platform to develop a vision of their end-state, as it supports that of the force as

a whole.

Without unity of effort and the necessary trust to plan and execute a joint and multinational

campaign or major operation, there can be little chance of success. Shared operational understanding

of the problem and environment couples with a mutual understanding of strengths and weaknesses

provides the foundation of cooperation and trust, which is vital in the planning and successful

execution of joint and multinational operations. This should stem from the highest levels. Mutual

understanding also rests on a common application of joint doctrine. Familiarity with the procedures of

each service and nation is best achieved through joint and multinational training. A common approach

should be inherent in thought and practice; joint and multinational training should be undertaken

whenever possible, but it is particularly important, should time be available, prior to any operation.

The greater the degree of standardization (in terms of both equipment and doctrine), the better the

prospects are for fruitful cooperation, mutual understanding, and ultimately, for success. (North

Atlantic Treaty Organization and NATO Standardization Agency (NSA) 2010, 6–3)

[TEXT BOX ENDS]

Whereas mission oriented-tactics are more of an art of command, methodical battle is a

more traditional – more widespread at that time – ‘scientific’ approach to complexity and

uncertainty. It represents a centralised attempt to make precise and unambiguous decisions

in a virtually ‘perfect’ plannable environment. In principle, detailed plans are conceived and

subordinate ranks receive detailed orders, defining the what as well the how. Initiative to

adapt the how because the why has changed, is considered a source of error and thus

discouraged; it is seen as a way of potentially undermining a well-developed plan.

6 | P a g e