Complex operational problems

The complex operational environment requires an alternative to the usual military approach to solving problems. The military traditionally tend to adopt a direct and rationally analytical approach to a problem and to come up with a workable solution as quickly as possible. Military personnel are still somewhat solution-oriented, whereby there is a tendency to forget about any analysis of underlying causes or reasons. In this complex operational environment, however, it is precisely the task of gaining an understanding of the situation that demands a great deal of attention. It is pointless to go through detailed planning without having first investigated thoroughly the underlying cause of the problem.

4.4.1.1 Characteristics

The main characteristics of complex operational or ill-structured problems are as follows.

› No definitive or clear-cut solution. A well-structured problem can be clearly defined; it is easy to indicate what information is needed to resolve it. In the case of ill-structured problems, this is not necessarily possible. The required information depends on the definition of the problem, and the solution depends on the assumed cause of the problem. Ill-structured problems rarely have just one single cause. On top of that, the various interested parties interpret and assess the causes, implications and importance of the problem differently.

104

Understanding and formulating a complex situation thus depends partly on the chosen perspective, although this does not mean that no objective causes exist. Defining a complex operational problem is about seeking an interpretation that can be used by all parties.

› The problem definition indicates the way to the solution. In practice, problem definition and the development of a route to a solution are simultaneous cognitive processes. If, for example, a conflict is deemed to be the result of a failed economy, the way to a solution will differ from that in a case where failed government is regarded as the cause of the conflict.

› Each situation is essentially new and unique. Historical examples can be useful, but the differences between comparable situations are often significant. Political

objectives, interests of the actors involved, cultural and social conditions, etc, differ from case to case.

› No standard solutions. Tactical doctrine often provides standard formats for actions, procedures or drills which can be used with only minor adjustments. For complex problems at strategic and operational level, however, there are no ready-made solutions.

For this type of problem, doctrine can only offer instruments and handholds which help in the deliberations about the problem and in seeking the way to a solution, but cannot provide the solution itself.

› Solutions are ‘better or worse’, not ‘right or wrong’. There is no objective yardstick for success, so the opinions of different parties may differ with regard to the quality of a solution. The suitability of the solution thus depends on the one hand on the problem definition by the various parties and, on the other, on what success means to them.

› Interactive complexity. Operational problems are complex because of the extensive freedom of action of the various actors. The same action conducted at different times can have different results, so cause and effect are difficult to explain and predict.

› Watertight solutions do not exist. The quality of a solution can vary according to the timing. A solution that was initially regarded as good could ultimately have disastrous consequences if unintended secondary effects gradually become apparent. A situation assessment is also difficult because the results of actions taken often cannot be measured directly.

105

› There is no definitive solution. It is usually impossible to conclude at any given moment that an operational problem has been definitively resolved. Work on the solution will be continued until the situation is deemed ‘satisfactory’ or until national interests have changed or sources have been exhausted.

› A complex operational problem might be a symptom of another problem.

The definition of a problem largely determines the way to a possible solution. However, when solving one problem, a problem of a higher order may come to light, indicating that the first problem was a symptom of the second. One must not then merely attempt to deal with the symptoms, but indeed strive for a solution to the higher problem. Here too, however, there is a pitfall: if the problem of a higher order is too abstract in its definition, it is less likely that the various aspects of the specific problem will be solved.

› The problem solver must not fail. Assisted by his staff, the operational commander must accomplish his objectives and he remains responsible at all times for the consequences of his decisions.

To recap: because there is no single way of resolving complex operational problems (each problem is new and different), an operational commander must design the solution himself. There is no checklist, although there are aids in the form of planning processes.

But the rule that always applies is that the definition of the problem will always result in a particular route to a solution.

4.4.1.2 Defining and solving the problem

The analysis focuses primarily on defining the problem and on an initial conceptual approach; the commander plays a crucial role in this. A good analysis and description of the problem will usually indicate a possible way to tackle it, the design of an operation. The assessment of the problem and objectives formulated on that basis then become the ingredients of a structured planning process, in which the staff develop workable and feasible plans and orders in accordance with the commander’s directives. The first part of the decision making is creative and iterative in nature and mainly involves operational art and operational design. In ideal conditions, the second part, the planning, is a practical, logical and linear activity, but can by necessity also be an iterative process in practice.

106