Readings Newsletter
Become a Readings Member to make your shopping experience even easier.
Sign in or sign up for free!
You’re not far away from qualifying for FREE standard shipping within Australia
You’ve qualified for FREE standard shipping within Australia
The cart is loading…
The recognition of the failure at the strategic and operational levels of war during the Global War on Terror, specifically in Iraq, has resulted in a quest for intellectual solutions to complex operational and strategic problems. To date this has resulted in a tacit acknowledgment that the Military Decision Making Process (MDMP) is not equipped to tackle ill defined problems and that a complementary approach is required. The emphasis on problem framing as defining a problem has been the hallmark of this new approach that is facilitated through institutional learning and a process of reframing rather than the advocating of predictive solutions. This monograph does not attempt to evaluate these new processes or seek to incorporate them within existing doctrine. Instead, it sets out the philosophy behind a design approach to planning. The broad design theory is an amalgam of the Israeli concept of Systemic Operational Design (SOD), Effects-Based Approach (EBA) and Systems of Systems Analysis (SoSA) as a systemic design process that is complementary to existing decision making tools. The monograph elucidates the philosophical functions that are contingent to this process. Importantly, this is not a 'how to'; manual providing a prescriptive approach, but an illumination, a theory of becoming that focuses on the why of the process, in order to offer a level of understanding. The distinction between Form, Function and Logic has been embraced as the method used for explaining the philosophy of design. This builds on the writing of Deleuze and his 'philosophy of difference'; and also in compartmentalizing between explaining the form of the design approach, from its functions and logic. The design approach produces more robust planning guidance, a frame of reference that enables reframing when the situation changes, an easily communicable strategy, across the whole of government and the explicit step of acknowledging our own biases and perspectives in shaping how we view th
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
$9.00 standard shipping within Australia
FREE standard shipping within Australia for orders over $100.00
Express & International shipping calculated at checkout
The recognition of the failure at the strategic and operational levels of war during the Global War on Terror, specifically in Iraq, has resulted in a quest for intellectual solutions to complex operational and strategic problems. To date this has resulted in a tacit acknowledgment that the Military Decision Making Process (MDMP) is not equipped to tackle ill defined problems and that a complementary approach is required. The emphasis on problem framing as defining a problem has been the hallmark of this new approach that is facilitated through institutional learning and a process of reframing rather than the advocating of predictive solutions. This monograph does not attempt to evaluate these new processes or seek to incorporate them within existing doctrine. Instead, it sets out the philosophy behind a design approach to planning. The broad design theory is an amalgam of the Israeli concept of Systemic Operational Design (SOD), Effects-Based Approach (EBA) and Systems of Systems Analysis (SoSA) as a systemic design process that is complementary to existing decision making tools. The monograph elucidates the philosophical functions that are contingent to this process. Importantly, this is not a 'how to'; manual providing a prescriptive approach, but an illumination, a theory of becoming that focuses on the why of the process, in order to offer a level of understanding. The distinction between Form, Function and Logic has been embraced as the method used for explaining the philosophy of design. This builds on the writing of Deleuze and his 'philosophy of difference'; and also in compartmentalizing between explaining the form of the design approach, from its functions and logic. The design approach produces more robust planning guidance, a frame of reference that enables reframing when the situation changes, an easily communicable strategy, across the whole of government and the explicit step of acknowledging our own biases and perspectives in shaping how we view th
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.