58 Mission Command ? MILITARY REVIEW

Major Blair S. Williams, U.S. Army, is a Joint planner at U.S. Strategic Com- mand. He holds a B.S. from the U.S. Military Academy (USMA), an M.S. from the University of Missouri, and a Ph.D. from Harvard University. He has served in a variety of command and staff positions, including deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as an assignment as an assistant professor of economics in the Department of Social Sciences at USMA.

_____________

PHOTO: U.S. Army SSG Clarence Washington, Provincial Reconstruc- tion Team Zabul security forces squad leader, takes accountability after an indirect fire attack in Qalat City, Zabul Province, Afghanistan, 27 July 2010. (U.S. Air Force photo/SrA Nathanael Callon)

If we now consider briefly the subjective nature of war—the means by which war has to be fought—it will look more than ever like a gamble . . . From the very start there is an interplay of possibilities, probabilities, good luck, and bad that weaves its way throughout the length and breadth of the tapestry. In the whole range of human activities, war most closely resembles a game of cards.

—Clausewitz, On War. 1

CARL VON CLAUSEWITZ’S metaphoric description of the condition of war is as accurate today as it was when he wrote it in the early 19th century. The Army faces an operating environment characterized by volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity.2 Military professionals struggle to make sense of this paradoxical and chaotic setting. Succeed- ing in this environment requires an emergent style of decision making, where practitioners are willing to embrace improvisation and reflection.3 The theory of reflection-in-action requires practitioners to question the structure of assumptions within their professional military knowledge.4 For commanders and staff officers to willingly try new approaches and experiment on the spot in response to surprises, they must critically exam- ine the heuristics (or “rules of thumb”) by which they make decisions and understand how they may lead to potential bias. The institutional nature of the military decision making process (MDMP), our organizational culture, and our individual mental processes in how we make decisions shape these heuristics and their accompanying biases.A heuristic is a mental shortcut that allows an individual to make a decision, pass judgment, or solve a problem quickly and with minimal mental effort. As leaders, we must process vast amounts of information and make decisions, sometimes within time constraints.What are the advantages and disadvantages of a leader relying on heuristics inregards to making ethical decisions?

*Post must be 200 to 250 words

*Clear, concise and straight to the point