Articles
The “D” in “OODA”
By: Frank Borelli
http://www.borelliconsulting.com/index.html
For any contemporary warrior who is not already familiar with Boyd's Cycle - the human decision making paradym - I say to you, "Go and study." First documented by Col. John Boyd (USAF Ret, now deceased), the Human Decision Making Cycle is comprised of the following four steps repeated in endless loops: Observe; Orient; Decide; Act. Anyone who has ever been in a fight knows that thinking faster than your opponent matters - and not just a little. Veteran combatants have given testimony as to the applicability and importance of Boyd's Cycle. More specifically, they've talked about how important it is for every warrior to understand what an "OODA Loop" is and how moving through it faster than your opponent means you'll be victorious. This week we take an in-depth look at the "D": Decide. In the above diagram you can see that there are only one input and two outputs from the Decision point: Input comes from the Orientation phase, and output goes either into a feedback loop or forward into Action. However, overarching the Decision point is "Implicit Guidance & Control". I have to believe that Col. Boyd put that there to appease the military minds that would be reviewing the work (eventually), and as a result of his own military background.
It is a reality of life for those in uniformed service that regulations and orders oversee nearly every part of the day.
Certainly they are a foundational piece in every decision made. "Am I going to get in trouble for doing this?" is a question often asked of oneself when forming that decision. To be honest, I wish that simply weren't true. Actually, since I'm making wishes, I wish Col. Boyd had simply left out "Implicit".
The Merriam-Webster definition of "Implicit": 1. capable of being understood from something else though unexpressed 2. being without doubt or reserve
If the Guidance & Control just weren't so "without doubt", then a little more lattitude in action would be perceived. And, indeed, such lattitude does exist in commands where the operators have to make tough decisions on a regular basis. The respected Commander is the one who listens to WHY his troops took in unapproved action and then approves it because it was sensible. The Commander that everyone groans and grumbles about is the micro-manager who says, "Oh, I understand exactly why... but it violated this General Order and I have no choice but to take action on it." Can you say "Mental flexibility is mandatory"?
In the movie "SWAT", the Special Operations Commander makes the statement: "Sometimes doing the right thing means not doing the right thing." Huh? Talking in circles he may have been, but he was right - even though it was purely accidental on his part. The question is this: What if, when you reach the Decision Point, all of your Observation and Orientation have lead you to a decision that goes against your regulations or orders? Unfortunately,
circumstances in conflict often create situations wherein the operator has limited choices and none of them are good. What if the Decision Point directly conflicts with the Implicit Guidance & Control?
Two things can happen: The Operator can go back into the feedback loop to repeat the first part of each OODA Loop in a never ending cycle - the end result of which is never Acting. The problem, as we all know, is that failing to Act is choosing NOT to Act by default. Taking no action is usually worse than taking a faulty action. "Don't just stand there. DO SOMETHING!" is a line everyone who has ever served has heard. On the good side, there is another option. Have faith in yourself and your ability to analyze the situation appropriately. Believe in the Decision you've reached and ACT. Do what you perceive is the right thing and be prepared to defend it to your superiors after the fact. This is where not having that "implicit" would have been good.
One of the things I learned from the good folks at Startegos International was that "Dynamic Inactivity" (doing the PeeWee Herman dance behind cover) is the result of this broken-record type of feedback loop. The operator is in a bad spot: his weapon is down, his partners are down, his only choices are all bad to worse... So, instead of doing ANYTHING, he expends a lot of energy from behind cover accomplishing nothing as his brain cycles endlessly through
Observe (damn that looks bad), Orient (wow I'm in a bad spot), Decide (I have to do that and maybe get shot and I can't do that), to ACT (do nothing in this case), and back to Observe again. But in the meantime, the enemy is closing him in a pincers movement and shortly his inaction will result in him being full of holes. THAT is a bad thing. The inability to perform Actions that rage against the machine might spell certain doom. So, how do we work against that? How do we train troops to avoid the deadly inactive feedback loop?
1) We educate them about it. Wait, I harken back to Basic Training days: "Don't just stand there! DO SOMETHING!" Okay. I think we have that one covered from a certain point of view.
2) We support our troops when they make decisions in ugly situations. Note that I didn't say "Bad" decisions in ugly situations. As pointed out before, sometimes the ONLY decision choices are ALL bad. The only thing worse, and what every Commander, Leader, Supervisor, etc needs to remember is this: If ALL of the choices are bad, the only thing worse is (often) doing nothing at all.
3) Unfortunately, we have to put our cops and soldiers in those ugly situations sometimes - in force-on-force scenario based training - and then do the after action review specifically to let them know that it's okay to have made the decision they made. It's not about whether or not they "won" the engagement. It's an evaluation of their decision making process and execution. Above all else, they have to be congratulated for having taken action in the face of an apparently ugly situation with no good outcome.
Failing to do this results in (I'm sorry to say) situations that resemble what happened at Columbine High School. I'm not saying those cops did anything wrong. They acted in accordance with their training and policies - as nearly every other cop in the country would have. But I guarantee you: SOME cop on that scene DID NOT want to sit outside on a perimeter and wait. He (or she) wanted to make entry into that school and take out the shooters. Why didn't he? Because of the Implicit Guidance & Control that outweighed his decision. Such situations are unacceptable. We have adults that are supposed
to know right from wrong. They are trained about the law, operations, physical skills, etc. We trust these people (both cops and soldiers for that matter) to walk around day in and day out with the power of life-and-death at the end of their arm... And then we second-guess everything they do until they get to the point where they're sometimes afraid to do anything at all. All we have to do is make them understand that, although we would be happy if they always acted within that Implicit Guidance & Control, we also understand if sometimes circumstances prevent it.
Next week, in the fifth and final part of this series, we're going to take a closer look at the Action segment of OO_DA and all of the inputs / feedbacks that affect it as it's repeated in the OO_DA Loops.
http://www.borelliconsulting.com/index.html
For any contemporary warrior who is not already familiar with Boyd's Cycle - the human decision making paradym - I say to you, "Go and study." First documented by Col. John Boyd (USAF Ret, now deceased), the Human Decision Making Cycle is comprised of the following four steps repeated in endless loops: Observe; Orient; Decide; Act. Anyone who has ever been in a fight knows that thinking faster than your opponent matters - and not just a little. Veteran combatants have given testimony as to the applicability and importance of Boyd's Cycle. More specifically, they've talked about how important it is for every warrior to understand what an "OODA Loop" is and how moving through it faster than your opponent means you'll be victorious. This week we take an in-depth look at the "D": Decide. In the above diagram you can see that there are only one input and two outputs from the Decision point: Input comes from the Orientation phase, and output goes either into a feedback loop or forward into Action. However, overarching the Decision point is "Implicit Guidance & Control". I have to believe that Col. Boyd put that there to appease the military minds that would be reviewing the work (eventually), and as a result of his own military background.
It is a reality of life for those in uniformed service that regulations and orders oversee nearly every part of the day.
Certainly they are a foundational piece in every decision made. "Am I going to get in trouble for doing this?" is a question often asked of oneself when forming that decision. To be honest, I wish that simply weren't true. Actually, since I'm making wishes, I wish Col. Boyd had simply left out "Implicit".
The Merriam-Webster definition of "Implicit": 1. capable of being understood from something else though unexpressed 2. being without doubt or reserve
If the Guidance & Control just weren't so "without doubt", then a little more lattitude in action would be perceived. And, indeed, such lattitude does exist in commands where the operators have to make tough decisions on a regular basis. The respected Commander is the one who listens to WHY his troops took in unapproved action and then approves it because it was sensible. The Commander that everyone groans and grumbles about is the micro-manager who says, "Oh, I understand exactly why... but it violated this General Order and I have no choice but to take action on it." Can you say "Mental flexibility is mandatory"?
In the movie "SWAT", the Special Operations Commander makes the statement: "Sometimes doing the right thing means not doing the right thing." Huh? Talking in circles he may have been, but he was right - even though it was purely accidental on his part. The question is this: What if, when you reach the Decision Point, all of your Observation and Orientation have lead you to a decision that goes against your regulations or orders? Unfortunately,
circumstances in conflict often create situations wherein the operator has limited choices and none of them are good. What if the Decision Point directly conflicts with the Implicit Guidance & Control?
Two things can happen: The Operator can go back into the feedback loop to repeat the first part of each OODA Loop in a never ending cycle - the end result of which is never Acting. The problem, as we all know, is that failing to Act is choosing NOT to Act by default. Taking no action is usually worse than taking a faulty action. "Don't just stand there. DO SOMETHING!" is a line everyone who has ever served has heard. On the good side, there is another option. Have faith in yourself and your ability to analyze the situation appropriately. Believe in the Decision you've reached and ACT. Do what you perceive is the right thing and be prepared to defend it to your superiors after the fact. This is where not having that "implicit" would have been good.
One of the things I learned from the good folks at Startegos International was that "Dynamic Inactivity" (doing the PeeWee Herman dance behind cover) is the result of this broken-record type of feedback loop. The operator is in a bad spot: his weapon is down, his partners are down, his only choices are all bad to worse... So, instead of doing ANYTHING, he expends a lot of energy from behind cover accomplishing nothing as his brain cycles endlessly through
Observe (damn that looks bad), Orient (wow I'm in a bad spot), Decide (I have to do that and maybe get shot and I can't do that), to ACT (do nothing in this case), and back to Observe again. But in the meantime, the enemy is closing him in a pincers movement and shortly his inaction will result in him being full of holes. THAT is a bad thing. The inability to perform Actions that rage against the machine might spell certain doom. So, how do we work against that? How do we train troops to avoid the deadly inactive feedback loop?
1) We educate them about it. Wait, I harken back to Basic Training days: "Don't just stand there! DO SOMETHING!" Okay. I think we have that one covered from a certain point of view.
2) We support our troops when they make decisions in ugly situations. Note that I didn't say "Bad" decisions in ugly situations. As pointed out before, sometimes the ONLY decision choices are ALL bad. The only thing worse, and what every Commander, Leader, Supervisor, etc needs to remember is this: If ALL of the choices are bad, the only thing worse is (often) doing nothing at all.
3) Unfortunately, we have to put our cops and soldiers in those ugly situations sometimes - in force-on-force scenario based training - and then do the after action review specifically to let them know that it's okay to have made the decision they made. It's not about whether or not they "won" the engagement. It's an evaluation of their decision making process and execution. Above all else, they have to be congratulated for having taken action in the face of an apparently ugly situation with no good outcome.
Failing to do this results in (I'm sorry to say) situations that resemble what happened at Columbine High School. I'm not saying those cops did anything wrong. They acted in accordance with their training and policies - as nearly every other cop in the country would have. But I guarantee you: SOME cop on that scene DID NOT want to sit outside on a perimeter and wait. He (or she) wanted to make entry into that school and take out the shooters. Why didn't he? Because of the Implicit Guidance & Control that outweighed his decision. Such situations are unacceptable. We have adults that are supposed
to know right from wrong. They are trained about the law, operations, physical skills, etc. We trust these people (both cops and soldiers for that matter) to walk around day in and day out with the power of life-and-death at the end of their arm... And then we second-guess everything they do until they get to the point where they're sometimes afraid to do anything at all. All we have to do is make them understand that, although we would be happy if they always acted within that Implicit Guidance & Control, we also understand if sometimes circumstances prevent it.
Next week, in the fifth and final part of this series, we're going to take a closer look at the Action segment of OO_DA and all of the inputs / feedbacks that affect it as it's repeated in the OO_DA Loops.
