Articles

Planning for Multi-Domain Operations[1] (MDOs)

By our Fusion Advisor - Dom Morris

Posted 30 Nov 2020

Executive Summary

This paper asks whether the existing military planning process can deliver CDS’ aspirations for Multi-Domain Operations (MDOs). Whilst the military planning process may be pre-disposed toward the physical domain, we assert that with a few key adaptations, the methodology is well placed to deliver multi domain campaigning.

Context – From Conflict to Constant [Multi-Domain] Competition

The World has changed and so has conflict. There is no longer ‘home and away’, no longer ‘peace and war’. Instead, an era of Constant Competition sees our adversaries compete with us every day across multiple domains, trading multiple failures in exchange for the rare chance to reinforce success.

The very nature of Power is changing. Our Clausewitzian predilection, obsessed with the projection of power in the physical domain, no longer guarantees success. Historically, the State and elites had a monopoly on power, manifest in dominance of the physical domain. This monopoly is being eroded. It is becoming cheaper and easier for David to beat Goliath in non-physical domains. Indeed, as barriers to entry erode, there are now multiple Davids entering the arena in multiple domains; catalysed by technological advances and capable of turning a State’s power and rigidity against it.

The Military Planning Process… All the Ingredients for Multi-Domain Operations

The military has a tried, tested and proven planning process. It is purpose-built for dealing with uncertainty and complexity. It helps an organisation chart a path from an unacceptable situation to one that is (more) acceptable. Accordingly, it relies heavily on the making of assumptions and the management of risks associated with those assumptions.

The process has, at its core, the mechanism to assess a wide range of factors, actors and detail across multiple domains. The analysis of these various elements is translated into activity that can be sequenced, synchronised and resourced to achieve a desired endstate. The output of this process is a synchronised plan for a multi-disciplined group of people with varying capabilities to come together to change, to their own ends, the behaviour of actors and adversaries. Critically, despite its inherently multi-domain nature, it requires unified command and leadership – and thus an acceptance of responsibility vested in a single individual. (Useful detail may be found in ‘recommendations’ in the Policy Exchange article considering the utility of military planners in the Covid Campaign).[2]

Perhaps counter-intuitively, the military planning process’s greatest strength is that is truly agnostic. It is a methodology for thinking through a complex problem: it matters not what that problem is. Into the thinking process one plugs all relevant factors. In more traditional force-on-force scenarios, it is focussed on the complex interconnected demands and capabilities of the three Services, combining in Air, Land and Maritime domains to deliver Joint Effects upon an enemy. The same process is used today by our key military headquarters to analyse and plan their contribution to national crises, across the breadth of the engagement spectrum, both in the UK and abroad.

Planning’s Pre-Disposition to the Physical Domain

For all its strengths, the traditional military planning process is only as good as the quality of information upon which it is built and the breadth of domains from which that information is drawn. If Analysts and Planners focus on the physical domain, the process will produce a physical-heavy plan. To this end, in fitting it for the non-military, multi-domain environment, we recommend the following adaptations to deliver a truly multi-domain plan:

1. Ensure the provision of multi-domain data feeds for the planning process.

For planners to plan in the multi-domain they must have access to data with which to understand it; for example, without sentiment analysis they would be unable to plan for, and campaign effectively in, the cognitive domain.

So What? The MOD will have to invest heavily in multi-domain analytics.

2. Adopt real time planning.

The speed of change within both the information and cognitive domains means that a static, overly linear campaign plan is at risk of being overtaken by a single tweet in seconds. Fortunately, done properly, the military planning process is inherently iterative and designed to deal with changing circumstances.

So What? HQs will need to make sure they possess appropriately trained SQEP and planning expertise to be able to plug the right data into the right stage of the planning process.

3. Lines of Operation must explicitly recognise multiple domains.

It is only by weaving each domain into the campaign plan that teams will be forced to plan in multiple domains.

So What? Commanders must ensure every domain is represented in Strategic Planning Directives.

4. Treat Planning SQEP with the respect it deserves.

Historically, Plans has been highly esteemed in HQs. Slowly and surely this capability has been degraded in favour of Ops with the accompanying disinvestment in planning as a standalone, recognisable and (importantly) promotion earning discipline.

So What? Invest in, and reward, the Planning SQEP.

5. Embrace Fusion Planning as the only acceptable form of MDI Planning.

X-Whitehall expertise must be plugged into the planning process from the beginning, since the military will not own all domains into which or must be delivered.

So What? Every opportunity must be taken to plan together on exercise and on operations.

6. Establish Fusion Planning Doctrine.

All levels need to appreciate how to use the planning doctrine for multi-domain planning. This must happen, rapidly.

So What? The National Security Adviser is one of the few empowered with the mandate to commission this work. DCDC can and should provide the staff horsepower, but the military must not own this line of development.

7. Develop a multi-domain, cross-government Results Framework.

Measuring our impact upon multiple domains (as a product of and ) is a huge task; methodologies and capabilities must be developed quickly in partnership with X-Whitehall colleagues.

So What? Build upon the increasingly accepted cross-government Results Framework to shape planning doctrine around Inputs, Outputs, Impact, Outcomes, and the Results Chain demonstrated via the Theory of Change.

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/commander-strategic-command-general-sir-patrick-sanders-speech-at-the-air-and-space-power-conference & https://rusi.org/event/annual-chief-defence-staff-lecture-and-rusi-christmas-party-2019

[2] https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Operation-COVID-19.pdf