Insights and Best Practices Focus paper, Commander's Critical Information Requirements, third...

7/22/2019 Insights and Best Practices Focus paper, Commander's Critical Information Requirements, third edition (2013) Depl

1/20


2/20

Disclaimer: The views in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the

official policy or position of the Joint Staff, the Department of Defense (DOD), or the United

States Government (USG).

This is the Third Edition of the Commanders Critical Information Requirements (CCIRs)

Insights and Best Practices Focus Paper, written by the Deployable Training Division (DTD) ofthe Joint Staff J7 and published by the Joint Staff J7.

Third Edition: July 2013

Second Edition: April 2011

First Edition: July 2007

Written by Deployable Training Division. POC is Mr. Mike Findlay.

Deployable Training Division, Deputy Director Joint Staff J7, Joint Training

116 Lake View Parkway

Suffolk, VA 23435-2697

Email:[email protected]

Accessibility: DTD papers are available in PDF format on the following websites:

Joint Lessons Learned Information System (JLLIS) (CAC enabled and registration required):

https://www.jllis.mil/JSCC/apps/index.cfm

Joint Doctrine, Education, and Training Electronic Information System (JDEIS) (CAC enabled):

https://jdeis.js.mil/jdeis/index.jsp?pindex=0

All Partners Access Network (APAN) (Registration required):

https://community.apan.org/default.aspx

Joint Electronic Library (Public website):

http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/index.html

Joint Staff J7 Joint Training Intelink (CAC enabled):

https://intelshare.intelink.gov/sites/jcw/jt/default.aspx

Releasability: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication. Approved for public

release; distribution is unlimited.


3/20


4/20

This page intentionally left blank


5/20

1

CCIR:Information requirement identifiedby the commander as being critical tofacilitating timely decision making.

- Joint Publication (JP) 1-02

I found that common understanding to be the essential enabler

for fast-paced, decentralized operations. But the effort required

to attain and maintain that level of shared understanding is

remarkable - it takes changing how the entire commandprocesses and shares information - and runs starkly against the

grain of most layered command structures and processes - and

challenges the desire of many individuals and organizations to

control information.- Senior Flag Officer 2013

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. CCIRs directly support mission command and commander-

centric operations (see definition at right).1CCIRs, as

a related derivative of guidance and intent, assist joint

commanders in focusing support on their decision

making requirements. We observe that CCIRs at most

operational level headquarters are developed tosupport two major activities:

Understanding the increasingly complex environment (e.g., supporting assessments thatincrease this understanding of the environment, defining and redefining of the problem, and

informing planning guidance).

Commander decision making, by linking CCIRs to the execution of branch and sequel plans.

This is a necessary and broader view than the more widely recognized role of CCIRs only

supporting well-defined decision points. Commanders direct involvement in guiding CCIR

development provides the necessary focus for a broad range of collection, analysis, andinformation flow management to better support decision making.

CCIRs at the higher echelons must support understanding of the increasingly complexenvironment characterized by global

interrelationships, massive informationflow, non-traditional and less

predictable adversaries, humanitarian

considerations (e.g., disaster relief),

and interdependence with our joint,interagency, and multinational

partners. These CCIRs must support

decisions on both lethal and nonlethalactions as we operate as part of a unified action and comprehensive, whole of government(s)

approach.

Insights:

CCIRs support commanders situational understanding and decision making at every echelonof command (tactical, operational, and theater-strategic). They support different decision sets,focus, and event horizons at each echelon.

Commanders at higher echelons have found that a traditional, tactical view of CCIRssupporting time sensitive, prearranged decision requirements is often too narrow to be

effective. This tactical view does not capture the necessity for better understanding the

environment nor the key role of assessment at the operational level. Further, operationalCCIRs, if focused at specific tactical-level events, have the potential to impede

subordinates decision making and agility.

Consider the role of CCIRs on directing collection, analysis, and dissemination of informationsupporting assessment activities a key role of operational headquarters in settingconditions.

2

1Joint Chiefs of Staff,Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, Joint Pub 1-02,

(Washington, DC: 8 November 2010), p 52.2See Assessment Focus paper (July 2013). URL on inside front cover.


6/20

2

Develop CCIRs during design and planning, not on the Joint Operations Center (JOC) floorduring execution.

CCIRs help prioritize allocation of limited resources. CCIRs, coupled with operationalpriorities, guide and prioritize employment of collection assets and analysis resources, and

assist in channeling the flow of information within, to, and from the headquarters.

Information flow is essential to the success of the decision making process. Clear reportingprocedures assist in timely answering of CCIRs.

Differentiate between CCIRs and other important information requirements like wake-upcriteria. Much of this other type of information is often of a tactical nature, not essential for

key operational level decisions, and can pull the commanders focus away from an operationalrole and associated decisions down to tactical issues.

CCIR answers should provide understanding and knowledge, not simply data or isolated bitsof information. Providing context is important.

CCIRs change as the mission, priorities, and operating environment change. Have a process toperiodically review and update CCIRs.


7/20

2.0 UN

operatio

spend m

to betterenviron

accomplfind thatdeepene

design a

Globaliz

type andand also

informat

those deopen eco

interdep

presenceenvironeconomi

impacte

broader

The infoour adve

exponen

many waWe are s

that willheadqua

decentra

The lack

supporticonsistin

not be as

templatework as

terms of

military

Many ofinterdep

other to

informatexclusiv

and mak

ERSTAN

al environ

ch of their

understandent and the

shing theirthis understby assess

d planning.

tion directl

scope of oudictates wh

on is requir

isions. Tonomic syste

ndent glob

has broadeent is more, social, in

by them.

erspective

mation revsaries have

ially, both i

ys. The shetill working

aid decisioters to assis

ization, fed

of predicta

g informatig of loosely

predictable

s that may hell against

their militar

spects of t

our decisiondent team

ucceed in t

on requiremindset w

decisions.

ING TOD

ent has cha

ime workin

her progress i

ission. Wending,ent, drives

affects the

r decisionst kind of

ed to make

ays morem of

l markets, r

ed securitythan a militormational,

e regularly

f this envir

lution has cunpreceden

speed and

r volume oon our abili

making. Att in answeri

ration and

ility of our

on requiremorganized

as were ma

ave workedthese adver

y capabilitie

e mission a

s and inforwith our joi

days comp

ents are intth our joint,

YS COM

ged how w

g

adily-acces

responsibiliary battlefieand infrastr

hear from t

nment.

learly chanted ability t

volume. Th

informatioy to sift thr

the same tig subordin

ommon dat

adversaries

ents. Our adetworks wit

y of our fo

against a praries. Lastl

s; likewise,

d environ

ation requit, interage

lex security

rdependentinteragenc

3

LEX EN

e view CCI

sible comm

ties beyondld; its a netcture syste

e warfighte

ed the waytransmit a

is has affect

can camough this in

e, we are rtes CCIRs

abase desig

omplicates

versaries arh no discer

mer conve

edictable,, our adver

neither can

ent.

rements arecy, and mul

environme

. We have s, and multi

IRONME

s. As note

nications,

a solely milwork of int

s that imp

rs about the

we operated receive d

ed our infor

flage the crormation a

ecognizing, either dire

of our coll

our decisio

e both natioible hierarc

tional adve

ore doctrinsaries no lo

our CCIRs

tied to ourtinational p

t. Likewise

een the neeational part

T. Today, operation

nd ubiquito

itary concerrrelated polct on our d

requiremen

nd make dta and it is

mation requ

itical inford find the r

he need fortly or throu

ection and a

requireme

states andhical struct

saries. Deci

lly-based ager can be

e simply fo

artners. Wartners. We

our decisio

for an inclners in how

complexl command

us media

n. Theitical, militacisions and

t to maintai

cisions. Wegrowing

irements in

ation we neelevant nug

higher levegh tailored

nalysis asse

ts and

non-state ere. They m

sion suppor

versary maefined sole

cused on th

fight as ondepend on e

s and

sive versuswe assess,

ers

ry,are

a

and

ed.ets

ts.

titiesy

t

notly in

each

lan,


8/20

3.0 BR

REQUI

comman

action,have bro

decisionlevel HQinclude

executio

term assbroadeni

supporti

CCIRs d

focusedwhich ar

operatin

environcomponRequire

here as

(Uniqueabout th

informat

coalitioncivil aut

effectivedecision

may inclinfrastru

Operatio

3See disc4The thre5ISAF Joi

ADER VI

EMENTS

ers are full

hole of govdened thei

requiremenrole.3Thes

oth traditio

requireme

ssment, sitng of their

g all three

octrinally c

n the advere focused o

in the pop

ent of COInt, Host Naents (HNI

nique Infor

IRs), to betthost natio

on the com

, bi/multilatorities or o

ly partner, d, and integr

de the statture, or sec

nal level co

ssion on missi

event horizot Command

W AND R

(CCIRs).

immersed

ernment(s)CCIRs to s

s of their ope decision ral, time se

ts as well a

ational undCIRs has p

vent horizo

ntain two c

sary and enfriendly fo

lation-centr

add a thirion Inform) which we

ation Req

er focus on. A Unique

ander nee

ral, host naher key sta

evelop plante with civi

s of provinrity forces

manders f

on sets of a C

s are current oas the origina

LE OF C

any joint

in the unifi

pproach anpport the

erationalquirementssitive

s the longer

rstanding,ovided a de

s.4

mponents:

ironment; aces and sup

ic

tionrefer to

irements

nformationR is

s from

ion, USeholders to

, makelian activiti

ial, district(see figure).

cus on atte

MD in Mar 2

perations, futl source of the

4

It is iwhat th

how th

functio

througand wh

or stati

MMAND

d

nd design aeper focus

priority inte

nd friendlyporting cap

s. Dependi

or local gov5

pting to uhow to

with th

militaroperati

recogni

environ

decisiocomma

for theactivitimission

in the o

013 Joint Ope

re operations,definition of

portant to haey "can" kno

y prepare the

in that envir

what will likat is just noise

by any mean

RS CRI

nd planningor the colle

lligence req

force inforbilities. W

g on the ci

ernance, ec

derstand thevelop and

ir partners,

and non-mnal and stra

e that their

ment are int

s of other ders have

any potents of all theaccomplis

erational e

rations paper,

and future plaost Nation In

e commanderand what the

selves and th

nment, and h

ly drive eventto disregard.

s.-

ICAL INF

requiremention and an

uirements (

ation requihave seen

cumstances

nomic dev

broader enimplement,

the full co

litary actiotegic object

decisions w

erdependen

stakeholderound it nece

ial lethaltakeholderment and in

vironment

pg 46. (URL o

ns. See figureformation Req

think throug"need" to kn

eir entire team

w they must s

s at higher levNot easy, exa

Senior Flag Officer

RMATIO

ts. Thislysis effort

IR), which

ements (FFome comm

, informatio

lopment,

vironment ain conjunct

plement of

s to achievves. They

ithin this

with the

. Thesessary to acc

nd nonletas they purfluence beh

(see figure).

n inside cover

on page 7.uirements (H

w,

to

ort

elst

2013

N

are

R)ands

ndion

ount

alsuevior

)

IR).


9/20

5

Centralized,

High Approval

Level

Decentralized,

Low Approval

LevelTime

The CCIRs associated with this broader comprehensive approach are different than those that

support only traditional time sensitive, current operations-focused decisions. Commanders haveexpanded these types of CCIRs to include information required in assessments that better drive

the far reaching planning decisions at the operational level.

We are also seeing the important role of CCIRs in prioritizing resources. This prioritization of

both collection and analysis resources enhances the quality of understanding and assessments,and ultimately results in the commander gaining better situational understanding, leading to

better guidance and intent, and resulting in a greater likelihood of mission success.

We have seen challenges faced by operational level commanders and staff that have singularly

followed a more traditional decision point-centric approach in the use of CCIRs. Their CCIRsare focused on supporting decisions for

predictable events or activities, and may

often be time-sensitive. This current

operations focus of their CCIRs oftenresults in unclear prioritization of

collection and analysis efforts supporting

assessment and planning in the futureoperations and future plans event

horizon. In such situations, collection

and analysis efforts supportingassessment and planning become ad hoc

and under-resourced.

As noted on the figure to the right,

assessment is central to deepening the understanding of the environment. We are finding thatmany commanders identify their critical measures of effectiveness as CCIRs to ensure

appropriate prioritization of resources. This prioritization of both collection and analysis

resources enhances the quality of assessments, better situational understanding, and betterguidance and intent.

Supporting Subordinates Agility. CCIRs can support (or hinder) agility of action. CCIRs

should address the appropriate commander-level information requirements given the associateddecentralized / delegated authorities and approvals. Alignment of CCIRs supporting

decentralized execution and authorities directly support empowerment of subordinates, while

retention of CCIRs at the operational level for information supporting decentralized activitiesslow subordinates agility, add unnecessary reporting requirements, and shift the operational

level HQs focus away from its roles and responsibilities in setting conditions.

The decentralization of both the decisions and alignment of associated CCIRs is key to agility

and flexibility. Operational level commanders help setconditions for subordinates success through mission-

type orders, guidance and intent, and thought-out

decentralization of decision/mission approval levels

together with the appropriate decentralization ofsupporting assets. They recognize the value of

decentralizing to the lowest level capable of integrating

these assets (see figure). Operational commanders

Assess

Commanders Assessment

What happened? (Analysis)

Why? So What? (Assessment)

What do we need to do?- Continue

- Reprioritize- Redirect

Assessment

Task AssessmentAre we doing th ings ri ght ?

Operational EnvironmentAssessment

Are we doing th e righ t things?

Campaign Assessment

Are we accom plis hing the missio n?

Interagency / Component

actively involved

in assessment Guidance / Intent

Planning Drawn from guidance Synchronized t hrough

CONOPS Resourcing:

appropriate to thedesired outcomes

Components / Outside Actors Orders vs requests Supporting / Supported

relationships

Insights

Need periodic revalidation of the basis of assessments

Dont confuse activity with progr ess


10/20

6

enable increased agility and flexibility by delegating the requisite tactical level decision

authorities to their subordinates commensurate with their responsibilities. Decentralizingapproval levels (and associated CCIRs) allows us to more rapidly take advantage of

opportunities in todays operational environment as noted in the above figure. We see this as a

best practice. It allows for more agility of the force while freeing the operational commander to

focus on planning and decisions at the operational level.Together with decentralization of authorities, operational commanders also assist their

subordinates by helping answer the subordinates CCIRs either directly or through tailored

decentralization, federation, and common database design of collection and analysis assets.

Insights:

Broaden CCIRs at the operational level to support both traditional, time-sensitive executionrequirements and longer term assessment, situational understanding, and design and planning

requirements. Seek to provide knowledge and understanding, vice data or information.

Use CCIRs in conjunction with operational priorities to focus and prioritize collection andanalysis efforts supporting all three event horizons.

Many of the operational level decisions are not snap decisions made in the JOC and focusedat the tactical level, but rather require detailed analysis and assessment of the broaderenvironment tied to desired effects and stated objectives.

Operational level commanders have learned that the delegation of tactical level decisions totheir subordinates has allowed them to focus their efforts on the higher level, broader

operational decisions.

Support decentralized decision authorities by helping to answer their related CCIRs, not byretaining those CCIR (and associated reporting requirements) at the higher level. Retaining

CCIR at higher level for decisions that have already been delegated to a subordinate adds

unnecessary reporting requirements on those subordinates, slows their agility, and shiftshigher HQ focus away from its more appropriate role of setting conditions.


11/20

4.0 CCI

develop

This pro

responsivalidatio

reportinmodifyidoctrine,

effective

Planners

planninghorizons

J2 is res

PIRs whfor devel

to the co

CCIRs sevent hoinformat

anticipat

operatioset of as

enabling

future op

Operatioof their

planningrequire

horizons

operatiospecific

require

assessmsubjecti

informat

(Diplom

Economiand envi

Branch a

require

6Branchesorganizati

flexibility

enemy actioperationa

DEVEL

ent of CCI

ess lays ou

ilities for dn, dissemin

, and maintg CCIRs).it still effec

process.

help develo

process acr(see figure

onsible for

le the J5 anoping FFIR

mander fo

pport decisizons boton require

ed decision

s event horessment/an

more far-re

erations an

nal level coCIRs durin

process. Wents transce

. Some deci

s event hornd time se

ents, while

nt focused,e. They ma

on require

tic, Inform

c) partner aonmental c

nd Sequel

ents at all l

are options bn and comma

o plans by an

on, availabilitl area. Joint C

PMENT,

s. We hav

specific

evelopment,tion, monit

nance (i.e.,hile not intively captu

p CCIRs du

oss all threeelow). Typ

developing

J35 are res; both are s

r approval.

ions acrosstime sensi

ents suppor

in the curre

zon, and thlyzed infor

ching deci

future plan

mands dedesign an

normally snding all th

ions in the

zon may hasitive infor

thers are b

and may bealso includ

ents on DI

tional, Mili

tions and cnditions.

xecution:

vels, the co

ilt into the bad relationshi

icipating situa

of friendly ciefs of Staff,

PPROVA

seen very

ring,

currentes an

ing the

eventically, the

roposed

ponsiblebmitted

hese

ll threeiveting

nt

broaderation

ions in

s.

elop manythe

ee decisionee event

urrent

e veryation

oader,

much moree

E

ary,

pabilities

hile many

plexity of

e plan. Suchs, or changing

tions that coul

pabilities or roint Operatio

7

, AND DI

uccessful u

CIRs supp

todays env

ranches may ithe very natu

alter the basi

esources, or es, Joint Pub 3

SEMINAT

e of the CC

rt branch6

ronment m

nclude shiftine of the joint

c plan. Such s

en a change i-0, (Washingt

ION. ComIRs process

nd sequel7

kes the pre

priorities, chperations itse

ituations coul

the weatheron, DC: 11 Au

anders dri(see figure)

lan decisio

ictive

nging unitf. Branches a

be a result of

f season withigust 2011).

e.

d

n the


12/20

8

development of all the potential specific decisions (and supporting CCIRs) that an operational

commander may face difficult. However, this difficulty doesnt mean that we should stopconducting branch and sequel planning at the operational level just the opposite. We must

continue to focus on both the why, so

what, what if, and whats next at the

operational level to drive collection andanalysis and set conditions for the success of

our subordinates. The complexity does

suggest, though, that some of our branch andsequel planning at the operational level may

not result in precise, predictive decision

points with associated CCIRs that we may beaccustomed to at the tactical level.

Additionally, unlike the tactical level, much

of the information precipitating operational

commanders major decisions will likely not come off the JOC floor, but rather through

interaction with others and from the results of thought-out operational level assessments. Muchof this information may not be in the precise form of answering a specifically worded and time

sensitive PIR or FFIR, but rather as the result of a broader assessment answering whether we areaccomplishing the campaign or operational objectives or attaining desired conditions for

continued actions together with recommendations on the so what.

Most CCIRs are developed during course of action (COA) development and analysis together

with branch and sequel planning. We normally see decision points transcending all three eventhorizons with associated PIRs and FFIRs (and in some cases, unique IRs such as HNIRs) as

depicted on the above figure. These PIRs and FFIRs may be directly associated with developed

measures of effectiveness (MOE)8. Analysis of these MOEs helps depict how well friendly

operations are achieving objectives, and may result in the decision to execute a branch or sequel

plan.

Some decision points in the current operations event horizon may have very specific and timesensitive information requirements, while those supporting branch and sequel execution are

normally broader and may be much more subjective. They will also probably include

information requirements on DIME partner actions/capabilities and adversary PMESIIconditions. Some examples:

Current operations decisions: These decisions will likely require time sensitive information onfriendly, neutral, and adversarys actions and disposition. Examples of decisions include:personnel recovery actions; shifting of ISR assets; targeting of high value targets; and

employment of the reserve.

Branch plan decisions: These decisions will likely require information from assessment onareas like: the adversarys intent and changing PMESII conditions, DIME partner, coalition,and host nation capabilities and requests, and target audience perceptions (using non-

7Sequels are subsequent operations based on the possible outcomes of the current operations victory, defeat, or

stalemate. In joint operations, phases can be viewed as the sequels to the basic plan. JP 3-0.8MOE definition: A criterion used to assess changes in system behavior, capability, or operational environment

that is tied to measuring the attainment of an end state, achievement of an objective, or creation of an effect. JP 1-

02.


13/20

9

traditional collection means such as polls). Examples of decisions include: shift of main

effort; change in priority; refocusing information operations and public affairs messages;redistribution of forces; command

relationship and task organization

changes.

Sequel plan decisions: These types ofdecisions will be based on broadercampaign assessments providing

geopolitical, social, and informational

analysis and capabilities of partnerstakeholders. Examples of decisions

include: transitions in overall phasing

such as moving to a support to civilauthority phase; force rotations; or

withdrawal.

Planners normally develop decision

support templates (DST) to lay out these kinds of decisions and the associated CCIRs in moredetail (see figure). They help link CCIRs to the decisions they support. The adjacent figure

depicts some of the information provided to the commander to gain his guidance and approval.These DSTs also help provide the clarity to collection and analysis resources to focus effort and

information flow.

Insights:

Commanders drive development of CCIRs.

Planners help develop CCIR during the design and planning process across all three eventhorizons.

CCIRs at the operational level will likely include information requirements on DIMEpartner actions and capabilities and environmental conditions.

CCIRs change as the mission, priorities, and operating environment changes. Have a processto periodically review and update CCIRs to ensure relevance.

Decision Support Templates

Time

Sensitivity

RiskPotential ActionDecision Criteria

(PIR & FFIR)

DP

11

22

33

44

55

OPERATIONS

TIME

PH I PH II PH III

OPERATIONS

PH I PH II PH III

TIME

Branches

Sequels


14/20

5.0 CCI

JOC (an

making.

recomm

The figu

depicts aComma

CCIRs dcombata

exercise.

linked Cdecision

decision

of brancplans, or

priority

effort.recommcurrent

status on

commanand stak

and stak

decision.

Many ofoff the J

level ass

specificaassessm

recomm

this broa

If

If

Th

Status PI

Status FFI

A

G

R

A

N

P

MONIT

other staff

o promote

nd promine

e on the rig

Combatantds display

ring a non-t evacuatio

It identifie

IRs to, with the

taking the

plans, seqchanges to

r weight of

e alsond postingCIRs and t

the

ers dashbholder awa

holders are

the CCIRsC floor bu

ssment. M

lly wordednt answerin

ndations o

assessme

Deci

- Tak

________

________

n Consider Ac

IR

ot Achieved

artially Achieved

And

RING AN

personnel t

awareness

nt display o

ht

of

and

orm

elhe

eir

ard and cureness of C

monitoring

recipitatingrather thro

ch of this i

ranch or seg whether

the so wh

t may be sh

sion Rqmt

Action #1

tion #1

G

N

Ach

Not

REPOR

o focus limi

nd attentio

CCIRs wit

ent operatiIRs.

and get a fe

operationalgh interacti

formation

uel orientee are acco

t. The figu

red.

-

ieved

Assessed

10

ING. Proacted resourc

to the com

in the JOC

ns section

The se

CCIRs

updateinterac

may bmedia

associ

depictJOC c

adjace

requirethe co

aware

l for the pr

commandeon with oth

ay not be i

CCIR, butplishing the

re on the ne

tive attentios in suppor

anders in

and other a

f the HQ p

ior leaders

in many ve

assessmenttion with st

provided ithat address

ted CCIRs,

d in the figart such as

t figure for

ments. Thimander to

ess of the v

ximity and

rs major ders and fro

the precis

rather as thcampaign

xt page dep

n to CCIRsof comma

ormation re

ssessment a

rtal to facil

ip is provi

nues to incl

s, battlefieldkeholders.

some fores the decisi

and status o

re above.that portray

selected de

status ofmaintain sit

arious criter

likelihood

cisions willthe results

form of an

e result of abjectives to

cts some e

is essentialders decisi

quirements,

eas.

tate compo

ed answers

de operatio

circulationhis inform

of presentaon require

f those CCI

e often seed in the

ision

CCIRs enaational

ia that the s

f the potent

likely not cof operation

wering a

broadergether with

amples of h

foron

we

ent

to

nal

andtion

tionent,

s as

a

les

aff

ial

meal

ow


15/20

11

In many of the other longer term

assessment venues, we see various othermeans of providing this information

together with some form of

recommendations. We captured several

best practices in assessment venues onthe adjacent figure. These

recommendations are normally tied to

an identified potential decisiondeveloped in the future plans or future

operations event horizon.

Every command also identifies some

form of CCIR reporting hierarchy,specifies the submission priority

requirements, notification means (e.g.,

telephonically, in a designated briefing, etc.) and specific recipient (e.g., Commander, JOC

Chief, CoS, etc.) of the information. We have seen the requirement to clearly specify: whatconstitutes notification, i.e., phone call or email; to

whom, the aide, CoS, DCOM, or Commander; and

how soon does it have to be done (i.e., at the nextCUB, staff update, etc.). The figure to the right depicts

how one operational headquarters has provided

direction to its staff, subordinates, and stakeholders inreporting priorities for the various categories of

information. Recognize that this example categorizes

CCIRs as time sensitive information. Every commandhas to determine how to frame their CCIRs in terms of

both time sensitive and other high priority informationsuch as assessment results.

Insights:

Prominently display CCIRs within the JOC, other assessment areas, and on the HQ portal tofacilitate component and stakeholder awareness of CCIRs.

Clearly specify what constitutes notification, to whom, how soon it has to be done, and how toprovide status of notification efforts and results.

CCIR

FFIR/PIR

FLASH SIR

SIR

SIGACTS

(ACROSS THE DIME)

STANDARD REPORTS

(INCLUDE HN INFORMATION

REQUIREMENTS )

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SUBMISSIONPRIORITY

FLASH

IMMEDIATE

PRIORITY

ROUTINE

Assessment

Collection

Team effort: Staff, Subordinates,Stakeholders, Commander

Collect on results of both Lethal andnon-lethal actions

Use non traditional means (e.g. Polls) Importance of Battlefield Circulation

Anal ysis

Hqs focus: Task, OE, Campaign level Balance Quantitative & Qualitative aspects

Dedicated cell supported by working groups Need for Collaboration & Inclusion

Key Commander role

Display Techniques

Trend or Stoplight chart for task, effect, objs

Geographic Orientation

(PMESII)

Storyboard

Recommendation

The so what word picture

The way ahead

(Continue, Reprioritize, Redirect)

Storyboard

Recommended Planning

Guidance & Intent (across DIME)

Periodic Review and Refinement

of Objectives, Conditions, & MOE.P M

ESII

PMESII condition(Green, Amber, Red)

Initial

Current & on planassessment, & Trend

51 2 3 4

A Projectedstatus

(DTG)

G A RG: On plan

A: Off plan but ok

R: Off plan need work

N: Not applicable yet

N

- Insights and Best Practices -


16/20

12

Wakeup / Noti fication Criteria (Extract)Type of Event CDR DCO COS J3 JOC

ChiefJ-_ Other

FRAGO for

action


17/20

GlossaryAbbreviations and Acronyms

GL-1

APAN All Partners Access Network

CCIR Commander's Critical InformationRequirement

COA Course of Action

COIN Counterinsurgency

CONOPS Concept of OperationsCoS Chief of Staff

CUB Commanders Update Brief

DCOM Deputy CommanderDIME Diplomatic, Informational,

Military, Economic

DST Decision Support TemplateDTD Deployable Training Division

FFIR Friendly Force Information

Requirement

HNIR Host Nation Information

RequirementsHQ Headquarters

ISAF International Security AssistanceForce

ISR Intelligence, Surveillance, and

ReconnaissanceJDEIS Joint Doctrine, Education, and

Training Electronic Information System

JLLIS Joint Lessons Learned InformationSystem

JOC Joint Operations CenterJP Joint Publication

MOE Measure of Effectiveness

OE Operational Environment

PIR Priority Intelligence RequirementPMESII Political, Military, Economic,

Social, Information, and Infrastructure

SIGACT Significant ActivitySIGEVENT Significant Event

SIR Specific Information Requirement;

Serious Incident Reports


18/20

This page intentionally left blank


19/20


20/20

Date post:	10-Feb-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	richard-j-campbell-httpstwittercom
View:	223 times
Download:	0 times

Insights and Best Practices Focus paper, Commander's Critical Information Requirements, third...

Documents