Policy 3/4: Theory, Critical Thinking, and Applied Analysis

Welcome back, hope everyone had a good holiday. Quick admin note: I’ve graded the tests and will be sending everyone an email with grade sheet attached prior to Wednesday. Nice job by everyone; let me know wed if there are any questions.  Also note the “resources” section of the blog has been expanded considerable with quite a few more articles on Pacom (per request!)

Our first discussion on wed will focus on theory and critical thinking and its relationship to writing policy.  This is far more important (and influencial) than most people think.  Theory often inadvertently drives our take on policy–rightly or wrongly.  Throughout the Cold War, for example, it was generally held that if a nation had any “communist” leanings it was automatically a satellite of the Soviet Union.  While in retrospect this turned out to be incorrect, most of our CW policy was written on this theory–to the detriment of national strategy.

The first article by Stigler notes the importance of theory as an underlyer for policy, and how it is devised.  Pay particular attention not only to the derivation of theory and the support of hypothesis vs law; how much theory today is based on this? This is especially important in irregular warfare and asymmetric operations; is our theory based on what we know, or what we assume? Stigler describes a four step process in evaluating theory with regard to national security: state the theory, assesses the evidence, evaluate applicability, and consider contrasting theories.  Note that while this seems simple in theory (pun intended), this can be subject to a host of factors you’ve already studied, mainly the influences you may encounter in the staffing process (viewpoints, service positions, politics, etc).  This is hard–which is why it’s linked to critical thinking.  Critical thinking is absolutely essential to a staff officer to be effective.  In her article Walsh notes that critical thinking is generally conducted in three stages: a clarification of the task, the “finding” of information, analysis, evaluation, and delivery. In my experience in policy, the “finding” of data and analysis are the most critical (and most difficult) simply because of the quantity of information available to the policy maker–and bias that often occurs during analysis.  This will lead us into a discussion of a number of logical fallacies the policy maker often encounters–and how to avoid them.

The second part of class will be an exercise to apply some of these concepts to a memo that Richard Clarke sent up the chain warning of the future threat.  We’ll be looking at it in detail–and seeing how it could have been “done better.” This will be a prep for a short (ungraded) position paper for next time.

Introduction to Policy

“Three things you never want to see being made: law, policy, and sausage”

                                    –famous staff officer quote.

 

Welcome to the second part of the course: Policy.  The policy module possesses a very wide ranging and diverse set of topics, which is completely appropriate given how diverse policy is in the staff environment. Policy represents official agency positions on various topics and issues and as such is subject not only to tremendous debate within the organization but also influences from outside of the normal agency framework; this is especially true in the interagency, where policy has to be coordinated to be effective.  Writing and executing effective policy can be a challenge—and will be your direct responsibility as a staff officer.

 

For the first part of class tonight we’ll be reviewing the schedule and providing a quick overview of the Policy module.  Note there is an ungraded position paper that will be required following module 4; please review the syllabus before coming to class.

 

The first reading provides a description of a number of the concepts we’ll be examining in the Policy module.  The Organizational environment is critical in policy making and is composed of a number of elements, including the Responsibility of the organization, the Organizational Behavior traits the organization possesses, the Process by which the organization functions, and the Knowledge base of both the individuals and the organization as a whole.  Note the key difference between critical thinking and analysis; while most organizations possess a high knowledge base and can perform effective critical thinking, it is often in analysis that policy suffers.  The article then notes the complex national security environment that effects the drafting of policy; we’ll be reviewing these briefly, but the overriding consideration that must always be remembered is that these elements have significant effect—an effect that in the modern information age is only getting more profound.

 

The second reading provides a brief history of military staffs and differentiates between the types of staffs we have today in DOD.  Although brief, this is an important reading, laying the foundation for the types of staffs we’ll be talking about during the module.  Finally the case study provides a number of writings on the Sept 11 attack that you will ultimately be summarizing a two page point paper for staff review.

LD16/17

Tonight we’lll be wrapping up our “Leadership” section of the course with two case studies; the General with a new idea III corps and the “capstone” case study on the Naval Recruiting District Atlanta.

The Army case study is intended to illustrate a number of points.  First what means were used (policy, structure, technology, people) in order to implement change?  Remember last week’s discussion on Simon’s four levers of control (Diagnostic Systems, Belief Systems, Boundary Systems, and Interactive Control Systems). When reading through the case prior to class, note the size and complexity of the General’s task (and especially his inbox and schedule)–how does he employ each of these measurement and control systems? What measures did the General use to see if he was succeeding? Finally, did you note any principles of leadership that the General used that were particularly noteworthy or innovative?

The “Naval Recruiting District Atlanta” case is intended on being the final classroom exercise, so we’ll be spending some time and going through the entire ADIA process for the case–it serves as a good warmup for the exam.  I’ll be handing out the exam with instructions at the end of class.

Measurement

Tonight we begin wrapping up our discussion of the ADIA process (and the leadership model) with an examination of measurement.

Measurement is an essential  part of any strategy and a must for an effective organization.  In order to gauge our effectiveness we must measure and interpret data to determine whether our strategy is appropriate.  While there are few who would disagree with this premise, the devising and use of measures is intensely controversial.  Too often measurement is not realistic, does not reflect the actual state of affairs, and can drive strategy by taking on a life of its own—actions often pursue the goal of obtaining a better “score” in measurement than actually achieving an objective.  As strategists we must be extremely conscious of this fact; history is full of examples of us “winning” on paper right up to the moment of actual loss.

Management systems require a leader to do four things: Sense important data about internal and external environments, Convert that data into useful information, Translate that information into decisions, and Judge whether the feedback/measurement will ensure the desired outcome.  Organizations generally measure inputs, outputs (both are internal to the organization) and outcomes (external) in terms of effectiveness and efficiency.  Measurements usually come in three different types: natural measurements readily indicate status, Surrogate measurements are used in lieu of natural measurements, and Complex measurements are composed of several different types.  Regardless of the type being used, these measures should be unambiguous, comprehensive, direct, operational, and above all understandable.  This is, of course, in a perfect world.

When going through the readings in Mod 14 keep the above factors in mind, especially when reviewing the various officer performance reports given in the case study.  How are they different? Which in your view is most effective?  Do you have examples where measurements were effective in your organization—or not?

Module 15 introduces the concept of performance controls.  Performance controls are other means of control, focusing on the same basic question as measurements (“are we getting there”).  In “Control in an Age of Empowerment” Simons describes four “levers of control” that are used by leaders: diagnostic systems that measure progress by scanning for abnormal activity, Belief systems that control performance through inspiration, boundary systems that set limits on what ‘not’ to do, and interactive systems that permit leaders to inject themselves into the decision making process.  We’ll be looking at these systems and how they (and measurement in general) applies to the JFK case study.