The EffectsBased Approach to Operations

1
The Effects-Based Approach to Operations

• Lt Col (Ret) J.P. Hunerwadel
• HQ AFDC/DJ

EBO DIF v1.12
2
The Effects-Based ApproachBasic Principles

• Effects-based operations (EBO) are
• Operations conducted against adversary targets
  that are planned, executed, and assessed in order
  to achieve specific effects that contribute
  directly to desired military and political
  outcomes
• -- AFDD 2, Operations and Organization
  (draft)
• Target An area, complex, installation, force,
  equipment, capability, function, individual,
  group, or system identified for possible action
  to support the commander's objectives, guidance,
  and intent
• -- AFDD 2-1.9, Targeting (draft)

3
The Effects-Based ApproachBasic Principles

• EBO
• Seeks to seamlessly meld planning, employment,
  assessment
• Planning states purpose, provides a coherent game
  plan says how military force should be applied
  guides employment
• Planning without employment assessment is just
  wargaming
• Employment is where military force is applied
  encompasses execution of planning and management
  of the ongoing battle rhythm
• Employment without planning assessment is
  target servicing
• Assessment includes all efforts to evaluate
  performance and progress effects-based
  assessment is predictive
• Assessment outside of planning employment is
  irrelevant to commandersthe old stove-piped
  BDA process

4
The Effects-Based Approach Basic
PrinciplesPlan Employ - Assess
Intelligence / battlespace awareness feeds the
entire process

• Planning before ops begin
• Objectives
• Courses of action
• Schemes of maneuver
• Specific effects
• Plans (OPLANs, JAOPs, etc.)

Planning

• Anticipatory assessment feeds further planning
• Predictive evaluation of ops
• Where are we going?
• Where do we
• need to go?

• Planning during ops
• Branch sequel planning
• Campaign phase
• transitions
• Strategy re-direction

Intelligence / Battlespace Awareness

• Evaluation of outcomes and progress
• Tactical
• Operational
• JFC
• Component
• Strategic (national)

Employment
Assessment

• Plan execution and
• ongoing battle rhythm
• AOD, MAAP, ATO
• Execution (unit level)
• Actions effects

5
The Effects-Based ApproachBasic Principles

• EBO
• Focuses upon the objectives and end state
• Objectives are the goals toward which every
  military operation must be directed should be
  clearly defined, decisive, and attainable
• Also a specialized form of intended indirect
  effect, but that should not obscure their central
  importance
• All actions should be planned so as to produce
  effects that attain them, minimize effects that
  hinder their attainment
• Objectives at all levels should be logically tied
  together goal of lowest tactical task must
  logically link to national strategic objectives
• Is about effects, not platforms, weapons, or
  methods
• EBO starts with desired outcomesobjectives and
  supporting effectsand determines resources
  needed to achieve them
• Does not start with available resources or
  capabilities and determine what can be
  accomplishedis not inputs based
• New technology is not requiredjust enables
  greater range of effects
• Many effects are not easily anticipated or
  quantified

6
The Effects-Based ApproachBasic Principles

• EBO
• Considers all possible types of effects
• Traditional destruction and attrition are just
  two of a wide array of possible effects
• Planners and leaders must understand the types of
  effects (covered later), how they
  interrelate, and what implications they carry
• Seeks to attain objectives most effectively, then
  most efficiently
• Effectiveness comes firstsometimes attrition is
  all thats leftthe plan must get the job done
• Within that constraint, EBO seeks to achieve
  objectives for the least cost in terms of lives,
  treasure, time, and opportunities

7
The Effects-Based ApproachBasic Principles

• EBO
• Recognizes that war is a clash of complex
  adaptive systems
• Planning must always account for and anticipate
  enemy adaptation
• War is complex and non-linearmany linear rules
  often assumed to apply in nature dont
• Proportionalitysmall inputs small outputs, big
  big
• In nature, the butterfly effect is well
  demonstrated
• Additivitywhole sum of the parts
• In nature, the whole always equals more
• Interactions and linkages between components
  often determine system behavior
• Replicablilitysame initial conditions always
  yield same results
• In nature, no plan survives first contact with
  the enemy
• The last wars strategy may be a poor choice for
  todays war
• Cause and effect is often intangible, indirect,
  and hard to trace

8
The Effects-Based ApproachBasic Principles

• EBO
• Focuses upon adversary behavior more than
  physical change
• Even attritions ultimate aim is to change enemy
  behavior (surrender or collapse)a much wider
  range of effects is possible today
• The moral is to the physical as three is to
  onewe should always seek to maximize our
  psychological impact on the enemy
• Requires thorough, intimate knowledge of the
  enemy and information superiority
• Changing his behavior means understanding how he
  thinks, what motivates him
• EBO carries a very high information-flow and
  analysis cost requires well thought-out MOEs and
  intelligence-gathering CONOPS

9
The Effects-Based ApproachBasic Principles

• EBO
• Always considers the law of unintended
  consequences
• There are always unintended negative
  consequencesmany can be anticipated those that
  are can be mitigated
• Not all can be anticipated planning and
  employment must be flexible
• Todays ISR systems provide a flood of data
  turning it into useful info / analysis requires
  careful intelligence and assessment planning
• Cuts across all disciplines, dimensions, and
  echelons of war
• Cross-discipline There is probably more than
  one way to accomplish the effect sought other
  disciplines may have the key
• Cross-dimensional Considering political,
  economic, informational, and cultural instruments
  of power as well as military means
• Cross-echelon The boundaries of the levels of
  war tend to blur tactical actions often have
  strategic consequences

10
The Effects-Based ApproachBasic Principles

• EBO
• Is a comprehensive way of thinking about conflict
• Applies equally well to smaller-scale conflicts
  and major theater wars
• Another vital consideration is the period
  following combat operationsstabilization,
  reconstruction, redeployment, etc
• Often overlooked in US planning
• EBO is even more important here than in
  combatNon-kinetic options have priority
• Cause and effect are much more complicated,
  harder to trace than in major combat ops
• Have not thought creatively about these problems
  for a long time
• Is not new
• Napoleon If I always appear prepared, it is
  because before entering on an undertaking, I
  have meditated long and foreseen what may
  occur.
• Modern technology and doctrine just enable a
  wider range of effects using these principles
  has always been part of well-waged war

11
The Effects-Based ApproachPlanning Considerations

• Basic methodology Actions Effects
  Objectives
• Actions Individual deeds or acts of will can
  be kinetic (physical, material) or non-kinetic
  (logical, behavioral, electromagnetic)
• Actions are conducted against targets at the
  tactical level of conflict
• Effects The full range of outcomes, events, or
  consequences that result from a particular action
  or set of actions
• Objectives Clearly defined, decisive,
  attainable, and measurable goals toward which
  every military operation should be directed
• Specialized form of intended indirect effects
• Ultimate desired effects in a particular context
  or situation
• Effects form the causal linkages between specific
  actions and ultimate outcomes (such as objective
  achievement)

12
The Effects-Based Approach MethodologyActionsE
ffectsObjectives
Planning Execution Assessment Unintended or
additional effects
(Depiction greatly simplified)

Direct Effects
Action
Indirect Effects
Objective
Direct Effects
Action
13
The Effects-Based Approach MethodologyBasic
Types of Effects

• Four basic categories
• Intended Desired outcomes, events, or
  consequences that contribute to achievement of
  objectives
• Unintended Unanticipated or undesired outcomes,
  events, or consequences can help or hinder
  achievement of objectives
• Direct The result of action with no intervening
  effect or mechanism between act and outcome
• Indirect Effect created through an intermediate
  effect or mechanism that produces a final outcome
  or result
• Eight types of indirect effects form contrasting
  pairs
• Physical and Behavioral (psychological)
• Functional and Systemic
• Sequential and Parallel
• Cumulative and Cascading

14
The Effects-Based Approach MethodologyBasic
Types of Effects

All Effects

• Objectives
• Special subset of intended indirect effects
• Ultimate desired effects for a
• particular context or situation
• Share other characteristics of IEs

Objectives
Intended Effects

• Indirect Effects
• (outer circle)
• Functional / systemic or psychological
• Seldom immediate
• Evaluated qualitatively, often subjectively
• a.k.a. second-, third-, etc., or higher-order

Unintended Effects

• Direct Effects
• (inner circle)
• Physical
• Immediate (usually)
• Evaluated empirically
• Quantifiable
• a.k.a. first-order effects

15
The Effects-Based Approach MethodologyBasic
Types of Effects

• Categories of indirect effects
• Physical change of physical state (e.g.,
  collateral damage)
• Behavioral change of behavior or intent (e.g.,
  surrender)
• Functional change in functional capability of a
  specific target (e.g., electrical distribution
  node at 20 capability)
• Systemic change in functional capability of
  larger system (e.g., regional electrical
  system (incl. node above) degraded 30)
• Sequential changes imposed in sequence (e.g.,
  CBO in WW II)
• Parallel changes imposed across many systems
  simultaneously (e.g., opening phase of
  DESERT STORM, all of OIF)
• Cumulative changes build over time toward an
  ultimate end (e.g., collapse of a combat unit
  after many casualties)
• Cascading catastrophic failure that may cause
  related failures in connected systems (e.g., 2003
  blackout in Northeastern US)

16
The Effects-Based ApproachOrigins and Influences

• Many threads of influence have combined to make
  comprehensive EBO possible
• Targets-based approachinputs-based tactical
  focus on sorties and ordnance deliveredthe
  tactical foundation for AF ops
• Objectives-based approachtargets flow from
  objectives and intent strategy-to-tasklinking
  objectives together at all levels
• Technologydiscrete, precise effects assessment
  now possible
• Complexity, information, and decision cycle
  theoriesinsights on complex adaptive systems,
  feedback, Boyds OODA loop
• Best practicessome approaches have proven more
  effective and efficient than attrition at the
  operational level
• Political realityattrition- and
  annihilation-based approaches to war are often
  politically difficult in the US today

17
The Effects-Based ApproachKey Relationships

• The relationship between targeting philosophies

Effects
Objectives
Targets
18
The Effects-Based ApproachKey Relationships

• EBO, complexity theory, and Boyds decision cycle

Action
Orientation
Decision
19
The Effects-Based ApproachCurrent Issues

• Does EBO improve current processes and how?
• Implementation of E-B principles should improve
  any process
• Current joint estimate process is well suited to
  EBOemphasizes consideration of adversary COAs,
  interactive wargaming
• Evolving EBO tools must avoid becoming too
  cumbersome to use
• Where does effects fit relative to current
  terms?
• AF doctrine makes clear that EBO is an evolution
  of strategy-to-task objective, end state,
  task are important to the concept
• Howeverno need to re-invent the wheel does
  tacking effects-based to somethings name make
  it effects-based?

20
The Effects-Based ApproachCurrent Issues

• Can elements be implemented outside of EBO
  construct?
• Yes, but that may defeat a major purpose of EBO,
  which is to emphasize integration, synergy, and
  cooperative effort
• How far down do we apply EBO techniques?
• Principles are applicable at all levels
• Applicability of a planning tool or methodology
  depends on how complicated you make it 48 steps
  is too complex to use tactically
• Can we conduct EBO with current organizations,
  people, and technologies?
• Yesforms of EBO principles have always been part
  of war well-wagedprinciples are a synthesis
  of many evolving threads
• Technologies, organizational reforms, and better
  education of people will help implement, but are
  not required

21
The Effects-Based ApproachDoctrine Road Ahead

• Air Force Doctrine
• Publish basic principles and taxonomy in AFDD 2
• Publish detailed taxonomy w/ examples in AFOTTP
  2-1.1
• Publish supporting concepts in AFDD 2-1.9,
  Targeting
• Joint Doctrine
• Include basics in JP 3-0 (Operations), JP 5-0
  (Planning), and JP 3-70 (Joint Strategic Attack)
• Incorporate more detail in 3-60, Joint Doctrine
  for Targeting
• Other Doctrine-Related Initiatives
• EBO Integrated Project Team (IPT)
• AF Assessment Task Force (AFATF)
• AF/XO lead developing assessment construct,
  methodology

22
The Effects-Based Approach AF Road Ahead

• Education EBO taught in some form at all levels
  of DE
• Will be enhanced by upcoming doctrine
  publications
• Training primarily AOC-focused some unit-level
  effort
• Experimentation
• Joint Expeditionary Force Experiment (JFEX) 04
  evaluated effects-based planning tools most have
  a ways to go
• JEFX 06 will incorporate E-B assessment and
  planning efforts
• JFCOM Multinational Experiment 4 will offer some
  insights
• Requirements
• Joint E-B assessment (JEBA) joint test and
  evaluation (JTE)
• Technology
• Developing tools to support effects-based
  planning, assessment

23
Backup Linked Slides
AO Draft
AO Draft UK EBO Conference v1.0
24
The Effects-Based Approach Assessment Construct
Assessment Level
Responsible Agent