Date post: | 06-Aug-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | panagiotis-kostopoulos |
View: | 162 times |
Download: | 3 times |
MSETT Ltd
MSETT Copyright Sep 2014 1
OPERATIONAL PLANNING &
LESSONS LEARNED OPTIMIZING
Panagiotis Kostopoulos
Col/Pilot (Rtd.)
Operational Planning & CAX Support Manager
NATO CAX Forum 2014
3
�Complex security environment
�Close cooperation and coordination among
international organizations
�Comprehensive approach
�More deliberate and inclusive planning
�NATO Crisis Management Process (NCMS)
Introduction
4
Planning philosophy
• Horizontal / vertical collaboration
• Commanders & staff interaction -Services & functions
• Civil & military entities
• Operational Planning ?
World = global villageTime = essential element
5
Operations Planning Principles
� 1. Strategic Coherence
� 2. Comprehensive Understanding of the Environment
� 3. Mutual Respect, Trust, Transparency and
Understanding
� 4. Consultation and Compatible Planning
� 5. Efficient Use of Resources
� 6. Flexibility and Adaptability
6
Collaborative Planning
•Strategic assessment
Strategic Concept
•Strategic Plan
PoliticalStrategicC
OLL
AB
OR
AT
ION
Operational
Tactical
COLLABORATION
7
Comprehensive Approach
Ensures a coordinated and coherent response to
crisis by all relevant actors.
Actor: A person or organization,
including state and non-state
entities, within the
international system that uses
its power to influence others in
pursuit of its interests and
objectives.
8
PMESII system domains
� Political: any grouping of primarily civil actors that exercises authority or rule
within a specific geographic boundary or organization through the application of
various forms of political power and influence.
� Military: the armed forces and supporting infrastructure, acquired, trained,
developed and sustained to accomplish and protect national or organizational
security objectives.
� Economic: composed of the sum total of production, distribution and consumption
of all goods and services for a country or organisation.
� Social: the interdependent network of social institutions that support, enable
individuals and provide participatory opportunities to achieve personal
expectations in either stable or unstable environments.
� Infrastructure: the basic facilities, services, and installations needed for the
functioning of a community, organisation, or society.
� Information Systems: the entire infrastructure, organization, personnel, and
components that collect, process, transmit, disseminate /act on info.
Entity Information
Social
Political
Military
Economic
Infrastructure
9
Planning purpose
‘The Plan’Unacceptable
Conditions
AcceptableConditions
Info
Pol
Social
Mil
EconInfra
10
Planning Categories
… for CURRENT TASKS… for FUTURE TASKS
ADVANCE PLANNING CRISIS RESPONSE PLANNING
STANDING
DEFENCE PLAN
CONTINGENCY
PLAN
• Possible risk• Generic• Not executable• Basis for OPLAN
• Specific• Executable
OPERATION
PLAN (OPLAN)
• Response to crisis• COP-based• Specific• Execution capable
11
OPP Overview
Phases (operational level)
� 1. Initial Situational awareness
� 2. Operational appreciation of the Strategic
environment
� 3. Operational estimate
� 4. Operational plan development
� 5. Execution
� 6. Transition
� SA is the human perception of all available elements of
information in relation to a specific situation that allows for a
more holistic and informed interpretation of reality.
� Levels of Situational Awareness :
�Perception
�Comprehension
�Projection
12
Situational Awareness (SA)
13
Understanding
�Perception and interpretation of a particular situation in order
to provide the context, insight and foresight required for
effective decision-making.
� Flows from developing a detailed perspective of an actor,
group, environment or situation.
�Multi-agency and multisource process, which requires drawing
on all available expertise.
�Built over time including horizon scanning, development of
initial SA throughout the Operations Planning Process.
� Knowledge is the meaning rendered from data and information, using the skills acquired through experience or education, that contributes to the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject.
� KD process converts basic data to more usable info, information to awareness (what is happening) and awareness to understanding (why it is happening).
� The KD process covers the acquisition, integration, analysis, and sharing of information and knowledge from relevant military and non-military sources.
� It includes analysis of the relationships and interactions between systems and actors taking account of different PMESII and environmental factors.
� The KD process supports horizon scanning activities and the entire OPP, including the planning and execution of operations, as well as periodic operations assessment.
14
Knowledge Development (KD)
EconomyEconomy
JusticeJustice
InfrastructureInfrastructure
SocialSocial
SeaSea
InformationInformation
PoliticsPolitics
LandLand
AirAir
SpaceSpace
othersothers
Engagement space
15
Conclusions
� Operational Planning Process
� Different mindset – Comprehensive Approach (with other actors)
� Collaborative planning (Staff at all levels, Increased interaction)
� OPP Phases
� Phase 3 - Operational estimate (WHAT?, HOW?)
� Phase 4 - OPLAN development (write the plan)
� Situational Awareness
� Perception-Comprehension-Projection
� Common understanding (who, what, where, when, why)
� Knowledge development (acquisition, integration, analysis, and
sharing of information)
• Operational Planning Basic Training
• Operational Planning Advanced Training
• CAX support (OPLAN/SUPLAN development)
16
MSETT’s capabilities
Why a Lessons Learned process?
REDUCE
THE
RISK
OF
REPEATING
MISTAKES
IMPROVE
THE
CHANCE
THAT
SUCCESSES
ARE
REPEATED
• Lessons Learned describes activities relating to learning from experience to achieve improvements. In a military context, this means reduced operational risk, increased efficiency, and improved operational effectiveness.
� Lessons can be derived from any activity - daily events, exercises, training, etc.
� Learning, in any organization, involves three generic stages: identification, action, and institutionalization.
• Lesson Learned (LL) is an improved capability or increased performance confirmed by validation when necessary, resulting from the implementation of one or more remedial actions for an LI.
Introduction
PROCESS
TOOLS
STRUCTURE
MINDSET
LEADERSHIP
Critical success factors
NATO LL Capability
INFORMATION SHARING
Bi-SCD 080-006, 10 July 2013
NATO LL Process
Commander’s
Guidance
OBS
Command:
• Endorses Remedial Actions
• Commits resources
• Tasks an Action body
ENDORSEMENT
& TASKING VALIDATION
Verify
results
L E S SON
I DENT I F I ED
Understand root causes
Propose:
• Remedial Actions to resolve the problem
• Action Body to implement the Remedial Action.
ANALYSIS
Observe and document:
• Problem
• Procedure
• Good practice
OBSERVATION
LLLIAnalysis Phase Remedial Action Phase
Improved
capability
L E S SON -L E ARNE D
DISSEMINATION
• Post
• Publish
• Promote
DISSEMINATE
AB: prepares Action Plan, implements RA, reports progress
Tasking authority: monitors progress
IMPLEMENTATION
& MONITORING
SHARE SHARELL DATABASE
6. Validation
1. Process Initiation
2. Analysis Phase
3. Lessons identified
4. Endorsement &
Tasking
7. Lessons Learned
Event � Submitting observation (Obs)
Analysis of Obs � Root causes
� Remedial Action (RA) � Action Body (AB)
RA determined & AB identified = Obs � LI
AB completes the RA
LLSO monitors the implementation
Verify RA :
corrected the problem / ensures BP is repeated
All LI resulting in improved performance
or increased capacity become a LL
5. Implementation &
Monitoring
Authority approval (RA implementation)
Identified AB tasked
NATO LL Process
Content of an Observation
… HAPPENED?WHAT… HOW …
WHEN …
What was supposed to happen?
What actually happened?
What should be done?
Observation Report (ODCR) DTG
Rank & Last name
Operation / Exercise:
Originator:
Division Head:
Rank & Last name
Division/Area
Title:
Title of Observation which sums up the issue
Observation:
Limit the Observation to a single problem or issue. What happened?
Discussion:
Why did it happen?
Conclusion:
What can we learn from this?
Recommendation(s):
What can we do about this?
Action Body (AB):
Who should make the corrective action?
WHAT?
WHERE? WHEN?
WHY? HOW?
What was supposed to happen?
What actually happened?
What should be done?
27
How to optimize?
� Shrink the process
� MSETT’s TA evaluation process
� Appropriate questionnaires to everybody
(TA, Observers)
� Observers/Trainers reports
MSETT’s LL optimisation process
CAX/REAL LIFE
Observe and
document:
• Problem
• Procedure
• Practice
OBSERVATION
Understand
root causes
Propose
Remedial
Actions
ANALYSIS
LES
SO
N ID
EN
TIF
IED
• Tasks an Action
Body
• Implement
Remedial Actions
TASKING &
IMPLEMENTATION
• Monitor
progress
• Verify Results
MONITORING &
VALIDATION
• Post
• Publish
• Promote
DISSEMINATION
OBS LIANALYSIS PHASE
LES
SO
N LE
AR
NE
D
LLREMEDIAL ACTION PHASE
29
MSETT’s TA evaluation process
• EXCON and Operational Planners Vs TA
• Fully structured evaluation process
• Complete methodology based on the use of Game Theory and especially Signal and Voting Games.
• Negative training can be eliminated
• Method’s fundamentals are related to specific char. of a CAX:
– CAX analysis level & CAX purpose (military, civil, etc.)
– Exercise and Training Objectives
– TA’s quality criteria
– Simulation models’ realization level
– Scenario’s rationality – irrationality level
– CAX Support tools and real C2 systems reliability
Q. Collection Process
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
QUESTIONNAIRE
SET UP BY LLDpt
QUESTIONNAIRE
TO THE TA
QUESTIONNAIRE
BACK TO LLDpt
QUESTIONNAIRE CHECK,
DRAFT OF FINDINGS TO
THE DIRECTOR MANAGER
APPROVED FINDINGS
IN THE DATABASE
FINDINGS SHARED
WITH OTHER
ORGANIZATIONS
APPROVED FINDINGS
USED FOR NEXT EX
IMPLEMENTATION
Presentation deadline: From:
EXERCISE …….………TIME: ……..DATE: .........
BRANCH :CELL :
1) TOTAL NUMBER OF INJECTS PROCESSED / SENT: ........ / .........
2) AVERAGE ELAPSED TIME FROM BEGINNING TO END OF PR OCESS:
�SHORT TIME: …… RIGHT TIME: ……. LONG TIME: …….
3) TOTAL OUTCOME FROM INJECTS:
RELATED TO INJECTS WITH SUCCESFULL OUTCOME ACHIEVED�WELL PROCESSED: ……….�INCORRECT NATO STANDARDS: ………… �DELIBERATE NO PROCESSED: ………….
RELATED TO INJECTS WITH WRONG OUTCOME ACHIEVED�BADLY PROCESSED: ………………….�WRONG NATO STANDARDS: …………………..�DELIBERATE NO PROCESSED: ………………..
Observation /Remarks: ………………………………………..
LL observer/trainer report
• Encourage the perception that LLSOs are facilitators
not Action Bodies
• The LL process is personality-driven
• Share early, often and widely
• Quality observations fuel the LL process
• Learning from others is the optimal solution
• Every level can add value
32
Key Points