Publications

Author: Ben Zweibelson

Introduction Excerpt: Is Design a necessary methodology for the U.S. Army? By codifying into service doctrine an entire chapter on design in FM 5-0, the Army appears to acknowledge the need for ontological approaches to complex systems. FM 3-24, Counterinsurgency also featured a new Design chapter when updated in 2006. Although the presence of design in doctrinal form validates a substantial requirement for alternative methodologies to JOPP and MDMP, Army design in current form suffers from an identity crisis as well as extensive tacticization via institutional bias. To take higher guidance without critical thinking and launch into MDMP prioritizes analysis and description over synthesis and explanation. Today’s increasingly complex conflict environments cannot function without Design consideration prior to any detailed planning processes initiating. 3 Yet Design by its logic is a cumbersome and problematic methodology when applied to traditional military planning processes.

Download PDF

To_Design_or_Not_to_Design_In_Conclusion

You may also like

1 May 2011

Newton’s Gravitational Pull and Modern Warfare Ritualization

Read More
1 May 2011

The Semiotic Square and Systemic Logic: A Technique for Multiple Futures

Read More
1 May 2011

The Art of Being a Soldier-Diplomat: From an Implicit Role to an Explicit Function

Read More