1 / 16

Interacting with the Decision Maker – ISMOR 2004

Interacting with the Decision Maker – ISMOR 2004. “Facts, Figures and Facilitation”. Col N-J K Kvist (JFC); Sara Dean (NC3A). Content. Background of work undertaken Levels of interaction Influence at each level Issues experienced Discussion. Road Map Development

khan
Télécharger la présentation

Interacting with the Decision Maker – ISMOR 2004

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Interacting with the Decision Maker – ISMOR 2004 “Facts, Figures and Facilitation” Col N-J K Kvist (JFC); Sara Dean (NC3A)

  2. Content • Background of work undertaken • Levels of interaction • Influence at each level • Issues experienced • Discussion

  3. Road Map Development High level reporting tool based on OPLAN JFC concept HQ ISAF development Use for reporting at both levels Planners lead but whole ISAF staff involved MoE Development Support the Road Map Provide nuts and bolts behind reporting Provide consistency in reporting Both at JFC and HQ ISAF levels OA lead Overview of Work

  4. Lines of Operations & Tasks Measures of Effectiveness (MoE) Task interrelationship Model & software Milestones Evaluation Model & software Implementation Evaluation Merge & implementation Road Map MoE The Development Process OA J5

  5. The Government of Afghanistan • Capacity • Education • Language barrier • Priority issues and coordination • Understanding of the concept

  6. Evolution of Responsibilities • Over time: • J5 lead on Road Map issues • OA lead on MoE issues • OA lead on automation of Road Map and MoE • Interactions between OA/J5 • Successful in theatre (constant) • Successful in JFC (but more disjointed)

  7. From one to two Road Maps • The first (IMF): • External measures to the military mission, more the development indicators for Afghanistan • The second (ORM): • Internal measures to the military mission, mainly focused on the OPLAN implementation

  8. Enhance The NATO Mission Effect Promote ATA Influence and Authority A legitimate and functioning State that provides for the security and prosperity of its citizens and contributes to regional and global stability Conditions adequate for the continued consolidation of stability in Afghanistan without the need for ISAF Extend In-Theatre ISAF Operations Promote Security Sector Reform Facilitate AFG National Development MIL ES POLES

  9. At the ISAF Level – Development Phase • With the development of the Road Map in theatre, the decisions on structure and vision were mainly made by HQ ISAF – then presented higher • Structure and vision presented to rest of ISAF HQ key leaders – coordinated J5/OA • Consensus reached by all key leaders to validate structure – but not at JFC

  10. At the JFC Level- Development Phase • J5 and OA interact directly with updates on the progress of development to the Command Group. • Key decisions made on structure, focus and purpose of the Road Map – OA provide independent view • Structure and practicalities suggested by J5/OA and approved at higher level • Actual development undertaken in theatre

  11. At the ISAF Level – Implementation Phase • ORM is under review • Decision support process: • Integrated in decision cycle • Includes: • Planner coordination • Subject Matter Expert (SME) input • Analysis Support • Results: • Status • Options

  12. OA Integration in theORM Decision Support Cycle Data Collection(SME) Execute Road Map (ISAF) Analysis of MoE (OA) Assess ORM Progress Develop Options (OA/SME/Planners) Corrective Action Adjust ORM and MoE (Planners/SME/OA) Final Direction & Guidance (COM ISAF) Initial Direction & Guidance (COS ISAF) Prepare Update/Decision Briefing (Planners)

  13. At the JFC Level - Implementation Phase • COM JFC will receive regular updates • Support monthly OPLAN reviews • Initiate corrective action at JFC level • i.e. additional force requirements, changes to OPLAN or sustainment issues • Input to Six-monthly Mission Review • Bottom-line - informed decision-making

  14. Issues Concerning the Decision Makers • Timeliness • Multiple decision makers • Responsibility for sections of the project • Acceptance of decision at lower level

  15. Successes in the Decision Making Process • Road Maps developed • ISAF HQ reached consensus on the IMF issue • Multiple decision makers - communications • Slowly all nations are beginning to see the potential • OA now being recognised in both HQs as interacting with various decision makers

  16. Discussion • Similar experiences • OA integration within a military HQ • Multi-layered decision making process, is this an efficient way? • Evolutionary decisions rather than finished products for approval?

More Related