• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

CHAPTER II

The Military Decision-Making Process (MDMP)

The deliberate application of the MDMP is the most time-consuming planning process. This process is used when ample time is available to develop, analyze, and compare multiple friendly and enemy COAs. This planning process follows a very detailed and deliberate methodology. Multiple COAs are carefully analyzed and compared; a recommended course of action is presented to, and approved by, the commander. Ultimately, an operations order or operations plan is produced. The deliberate technique can also help form the foundation upon which other abbreviated planning processes are constructed. The analyses created using the deliberate technique can and should be used during future planning sessions when ample time may not be available and the current situation, with minor changes, still applies. For a more detailed description of the MDMP, see CALL Newsletter 93-3, Jul 93, The Battalion and Brigade Battle Staff, and FM 101-5 (Drag Edition, 12 Feb 97).

MISSION ANALYSIS

The purpose of the mission analysis is to assist the commander and staff in seeing the terrain, seeing the enemy, and seeing themselves within the context of their assigned mission. The desired endstate of the mission analysis process is a clearly defined unit mission statement, and a thorough staff assessment of the operation by each BOS. The mission analysis begins with the receipt of a mission, and ultimately culminates with the development of a restated mission and initial staff estimates. Sometimes the restated mission is obvious, other times it is not. If the mission statement does not accurately reflect the intent of higher headquarters, significant problems will occur, and time may be wasted. The staff conducts a very detailed analysis to determine the following:

• Initial Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB), including the following:
  • Define battlefield environment.

  • Describe battlefield effects.

  • Evaluate the threat.

  • Determine threat COAs.

• Specified, implied, and essential tasks.

• Area of interest.

• Available assets.

• Constraints.

• Facts and assumptions relevant to the mission (current/projected combat power, logistics status, personnel status, etc.).

• Risk assessment.

• Initial CCIR.

• Initial reconnaissance plan.

• Initial time analysis.

• Restated mission.

This staff analysis is normally a very formal process which culminates in a formal brief by the staff to the commander. While the staff is conducting its analysis, the commander is also conducting his own. The commander's analysis provides a frame of reference which helps him to quickly assess the staff's work, and also assists him in developing his initial intent and guidance. Mission analysis marks the beginning of the staff estimate process, yet it is not a one-time effort. It is a continuous process that must be constantly re-evaluated as the situation develops and new information becomes available. Products that result from the mission analysis include:

See the Terrain:

• Modified combined obstacle overlay/avenue of approach overlay

• Photos or imagery products

• UAV products

• Terra-based products

See the Enemy:

• Enemy SITEMPs

• Initial event template

• PIR

• R/S Concept

See Ourselves:

• Specified/implied task list

• Constraints

• Detailed timeline

• Risk analysis

• Restated mission

• Warning order

Note: The enemy SITEMPs must be done prior to the mission analysis brief. They are used to brief the commander on likely enemy COAs. The event template is not required for the mission analysis brief. However, it should be done prior to COA development. It will assist you in identifying where specific enemy activities may occur as you develop your COAs.

Once the commander approves the proposed restated mission, he is prepared to issue his guidance to the staff. The purpose of the commander's guidance is to provide the commander the opportunity to clearly articulate to the staff his vision, intent, and any additional planning guidance necessary. When using the deliberate technique, the commander provides his planning guidance to the staff upon completion of the mission analysis briefing (see chart 3). The intent of the commander's guidance is to establish guidelines and parameters for the staff to work within during the planning process.

Using the deliberate technique, the commander's guidance may be very formal, including written guidance to all staff sections, or issued verbally. When time is not significantly limited, the commander's guidance can be more general in nature, providing the staff maximum flexibility and latitude. As time becomes more constrained, the commander's guidance must become more specific and directive. FM 101-5 (Drag Edition, 12 Feb 97) states that the commander's guidance should address the following:

• Number of Enemy and Friendly COAs to consider.

• Initial CCIR.

• Reconnaissance guidance.

• Risk guidance.

• Deception guidance.

• Combat support/service support priorities.

• Time plan.

• Type of order to prepare.

• Type of rehearsal to conduct.

Once the commander approves the restated mission and provides his guidance, the staff should then prepare and issue a warning order. The warning order should include the following:

• Enemy situation

• Mission statement

• Proposed intent

• Initial coordinating instructions

• Reconnaissance and surveillance guidance and instructions

For additional information regarding the commander's intent, see chapter 5, FM 101-5 (Drag Edition, 12 Feb 97), and Appendix C of this newsletter.

After the commander issues his guidance, the staff should now have ample time to develop multiple friendly COAs. The purpose of the COA development phase is to develop COAs that are flexible, feasible, suitable, acceptable, complete, and fully integrate all combat multipliers. The staff should use the doctrinal process discussed in FM 101-5 (Drag Edition, 12 Feb 97) to develop the COAs. This process is outlined below:

8. War-game the battle and assess the results.

Each of these steps serves a function and must be carefully followed as the staff conducts the wargame session. If any of the steps are omitted, the outcome becomes less effective. After the COAs are analyzed, they are compared against one another using the evaluative criteria approved or assigned by the commander. The evaluative criteria can be determined by analyzing the commander's intent, restated mission, specified/implied tasks, or other information provided to the staff. The staff should have adequate time to conduct a detailed and deliberate analysis and comparison of multiple friendly and enemy COAs. These wargame sessions may cover the entire operation or a particular phase of the operation. Once the COAs are war-gamed, the staff then conducts a detailed comparison of each COA. This comparison ultimately leads to a staff recommendation to the commander. The products that result from the COA analysis are:

• Final task organization

• Refined event template

• Refined PIR

• Updated operational graphics

• Synchronization matrix/wargame worksheet

• Decision support template

• Refined reconnaissance and surveillance plan/graphics

• Fire support plan/graphics

• Engineer support plan/graphics

• Air defense plan/graphics

• CSS plan/graphics

DECISION

Upon receiving the staff's COA decision brief, the commander must then make a decision. He must accept, modify, or reject the staff's recommendation. Based on the commander's decision and final guidance, the staff refines the COA and completes the plan, and prepares to issue the order.

The deliberate technique is analytical in nature. It is characterized by a detailed and deliberate process, and maximum flexibility of the staff. It is also sequential in nature. The involvement of the commander is somewhat limited when compared to the abbreviated forms of the MDMP. The advantages of using the deliberate approach are:

• Analyzes and compares multiple friendly and enemy COAs.

• Attempts to identify the best possible COA (within resource constraints).

• Results in a very detailed operations order/operations plan.

The disadvantage is: Very time-consuming process.

LEADERS/STAFF RECONNAISSANCE
AND THE PLANNING PROCESS

An effective leaders/staff reconnaissance can have a significant impact on the planning process. This reconnaissance can assist the commander and staff as they develop their tentative plan. A leader's reconnaissance conducted early in the planning process will assist the commander and staff in confirming or denying their initial assessment. It may also allow the commander and staff to immediately focus on a specific COA, or eliminate COAs that are no longer acceptable based on the reconnaissance. The leaders/staff reconnaissance may take many forms. It may be a map reconnaissance, a physical reconnaissance of the actual terrain itself, or a viewing of the terrain from a vantage point. When conducting a reconnaissance with the staff, the commander must conduct a risk analysis to determine if the benefits of the reconnaissance outweigh the risks. During defensive operations, the reconnaissance of engagements areas can be conducted effectively with little risk associated. During offensive operations, conducting such a reconnaissance involves much more risk. In this situation, it may not be practical for the commander and staff to conduct a reconnaissance during the planning process. When this occurs, the commander may have to rely on the reconnaissance effort of his scout platoon or other available assets. The commander and staff must make every effort to get the reconnaissance assets deployed as soon as possible to facilitate early collection. The information collected must then be analyzed, and incorporated into the planning process as appropriate. The initial plan may have to be slightly adjusted, or major modifications may have to be made based on the reconnaissance and surveillance effort. The earlier the need for modifications can be identified, the easier they can be incorporated and synchronized into the plan. The leader/staff reconnaissance applies to both the deliberate and abbreviated forms of the MDMP.

THE DILEMMA

The deliberate approach to the MDMP is a proven process. The process works well, but requires significant amounts of time to develop, analyze, and compare multiple friendly and enemy COAs. The modern day battlefield does not always provide us the luxury of having ample time to complete such a process. Fast-paced operations require an accurate and detailed situational awareness about the terrain, the enemy, and ourselves. This level of a detailed situational awareness requires time to develop -- time we do not always have. On one hand, we need to issue orders and instructions immediately to facilitate ample troop-leading time for subordinates. On the other hand, we do not have the desired level of situational awareness to issue detailed, integrated, and synchronized orders and instructions. We generally do not acquire this level of situational awareness until later in the planning process. This is an extremely complex problem that requires us to implement the MDMP using different techniques and procedures to facilitate incorporating the necessary changes to the original plan.

---

Chapter I - Decision-Making Overview
Chapter III - Abbreviating the MDMP

NEWSLETTER

Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list

Enter Your Email Address