A practical approach to effects-based operational assessment

Air & Space Power Journal, Summer, 2008 by Clinton R. Clark, Timothy J. Cook

Editorial Abstract: Operational assessment is the joint force air component commander's process for evaluating joint air, space, and cyber operations. The authors provide a commonsense methodology that greatly enhances the evaluation of effects-based operations, enabling strategists to answer two fundamental questions: "Are we doing things right?" and "Are we doing the right things?" The answers to these questions will assist decision makers in executing more efficient and effective operations while considering operational risk.

EFFECTS-BASED OPERATIONS (EBO) are "actions taken against enemy systems designed to achieve specific effects that contribute directly to desired military and political outcomes." (1) Huh? Perhaps more clearly, EBO is simply a "way of thinking" about military operations. (2) An effects-based approach to operations (EBAO) offers a "better way of expressing what Ebo really is," and Air force doctrine has recently adopted the term EBAO to add clarity to these concepts. (3) The crux of EBAO lies in the explicit linkage of tactical actions to operational and strategic military effects. Ultimately, its goals call for the efficient and effective use of scarce resources to produce the commander's desired effects.

The joint force air component commander (JFACC) derives specified and implied tasks from the joint force commander's (JFC) guidance. Translated into the JFACC's mission, these tasks serve as the basis for determining his or her operational objectives. The JFACC utilizes the joint air and space operations center (JAOC) as the primary means of commanding and controlling the planning, execution, and assessment of operations designed to fulfill his or her objectives. Within the JAOC, the strategy division has responsibility for developing, refining, disseminating, and assessing the JFACC's air and space strategy. (4) The operational assessment (OA) team supports the division throughout the strategy-development process; however, it focuses primarily on "evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency" of joint air operations. (5) in other words, the team provides joint air operational-level assessments to the JFACC. Thus, this article confines itself to OA.

Several senior Air force leaders have shown interest in developing and refining OA methodologies and tools, believing that the service needs a sound, effects-based OA methodology to implement EbAo successfully. This article details an effects-based OA framework that emerged from a survey of existing OA techniques, an in-depth review of joint and Air force doctrine, and consultation and collaboration with numerous strategists and war fighters.

The Evolution of Operational Assessment

Responsible for attaining multiple operational objectives that compete for scarce air, space, and cyber resources, the JFACC makes resource-allocation decisions for each air tasking order (ATO), based on his or her assessment of the operation. Consequently, the OA team exists to help the JFACC make informed decisions. Fundamentally then, OA deals with decision making--a potentially complicated and confusing process, though one that need not rely exclusively on "gut feel." (60 To develop and refine its OA methodologies, the JAOC can leverage a large body of decision-making techniques that have been successfully implemented across "a wide variety of situations." (7) According to John S. Hammond, Ralph L. Keeney, and Howard Raiffa,

an effective decision-making process fulfills these six criteria:

* it focuses on what is important.

* it is logical and consistent.

* it acknowledges both subjective and objective factors and blends analytical with intuitive thinking.

* it requires only as much information and analysis as is necessary to resolve a particular dilemma.

* it encourages and guides the gathering of relevant information and informed opinion.

* it is straightforward, reliable, easy to use, and flexible. (8)

All of the OA techniques in use across the JAOCs through mid-2006 violated two or more of these criteria. This section briefly reviews the evolution of OA and the most common practices in the field today.

Going with Your Gut

Assessing the situation is an integral component of decision making. Before a strategy division and its OA team existed, commanders relied exclusively on gut feel to guide their assessment, drawing on years of tactical experience to process all of the intelligence and mission reports and using their intuition to assess how things were going. Although producing a sound assessment depends upon such experience, the absence of an analytic approach for interpreting the data can leave room for bias and ultimately lead to bad decisions.

Adm Chester Nimitz demonstrated the shortcomings of this method when he assessed the preparatory bombardment of Iwo Jima, believing the explosive tonnage dropped by his forces "sufficient to pulverize everything on the island." The Marines, however, discovered an entirely different set of circumstances. During the bombing campaign, the Japanese actually increased the number of major defensive fortifications from 450 to over 750. (9) by relying exclusively on his experience, Admiral nimitz reached a conclusion exactly the opposite of reality; namely, he believed that he had rendered the island indefensible, but in reality the Japanese had substantially increased their defensive capability.