Complexity Science
Strategy based within my organization is derived from a couple of
command echelons above my own. In this case, my command’s strategy is nested
within Special Operations Command Africa’s (SOCAFRICA) Supporting Plan to
United States Africa Command’s (USAFRICOM) Theatre Campaign Plan, which is
considered to be one of five major combatant commands across the globe. This
command and control construct is inherent within the United States military’s
oligarchy structure, and ensures top down orders are followed in support of
national and international interests that may not be seen, or fully
comprehended at the company, or platoon level, yet nevertheless, needs to be
followed in a timely manner.
As far back as Roman times up until the Vietnam War, Guerilla warfare
has been the traditional means of defeating our nation’s enemy. However, as
early as World War II, special operations was created out of the necessity to
accomplish a particular mission, which in turn was part of a larger strategy
that entailed future concerns such as political stray voltage, the American
people’s perceptions, international perceptions, financial blowback, and future
strategic planning and lessons learned.
Porter (1996), offered, “Competitive
strategy is about being different. It means deliberately choosing a different
set of activities to deliver a unique mix of value.” When Afghanistan
and Iraq began, SOCAFRICA employed skillsets that enabled the soldiers on the
ground to acquire time-sensitive information in support of current U.S.
military objectives. This strategy significantly changed the way SOCAFRICA does
business in the Middle East, as well as in the current area of operations,
Africa.
Nowadays, this skillset is by far leveraged as the primary strategy,
coupled with other methods, of getting ahead of our nation’s and partner
nation’s enemies in fighting the war against terrorism and Violent Extremist
Organizations (VEO). What makes the use of this skillset so valuable is the
flexibility and adaptability to a wide range of environments, cultures where
military presence may, or may not be accepted. Being certified in this
skillset, as well as a manager of those with the same, or similar skillset,
allows me the unique perspective of understand the value, and wide potential
usage of it for multiple purposes in multiple locations, laterally, or
bi-laterally (with other forces).
By with and through lessons learned and after action reports, SOCAFRICA
has been able to take past experiences, evaluate what has brought value added
events to SOCAFRICA, and what has not. Through this analysis and evaluation, it
has been determined that certifying and updating this skillset’s Course of
Instruction (COI) has been a special operations necessity in order to provide
expertise in this area with a flexible and adaptable Course of Action (COA)
should the environment change again, as it will. It turns out that this
skillset has been a long-time emerging strategy that was not realized for its
true value until just recently. Hamel (1998) shared, “the most fundamental insight of complexity theory is
that ‘complex behavior need not have complex roots,’” (as cited by Langton).
Currently, SOCAFRICA is in the approval process of a five year strategic
plan that primarily focuses on the employment of this skillset as it relates to
the U.S. AFRICOM Area of Responsibility (AOR). With that said, adjustments to
this skillset includes modifications of platforms from which it is employed, partner
nations in which to leverage, emerging Concept of Operations (CONOPs), and
authorizations allowing such activities to occur legally. As in-house
sustainment training gets implemented here at SOCAFRICA, understanding the
purpose and employment of this skillset by all the command’s directorates will
ensure a greater unified synchronization of effort from SOCAFRICA as a whole
improving over effectiveness in the future as the environment changes. While
assisting in this shift of strategic development and employment, I will be
departing for a new command, bringing with me the experience of staff related
perceptions to a most likely a lower echelon command, enhancing their
understanding, and hopefully, their capability.
References:
Hamel, G. (1998). Strategy innovation and the
quest for value. Sloan Management Review,
39(2). P. 7-14. Retrieved from http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/ehost/detail/detail?sid=7917c1f6-334a-44fd-95a4-653b41a3b89e%40sessionmgr102&vid=0&hid=118&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=159467&db=bth
Porter, M. E. (1996, December). What is
strategy? Harvard Business Review,
74(6). P.61-78. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/ehost/detail/detail?sid=8ff13b03-9c3a-4649-a245-9cec9e94da90%40sessionmgr4009&vid=0&hid=4201&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=9611187954&db=bth
No comments:
Post a Comment