The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP)

The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP)

The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP)

Name: __________________________________ Date: ___ Essay Paper Assistance

Name: __________________________________ Date: ___ Essay Paper Assistance

Instructions: The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP) exam is worth 60% of the C600 block grade and is due after lesson C634. Specifically, this exam has seven requirements for you to apply the MDMP to a tactical scenario. All work must be your own. Do not discuss this examination or your answers with anyone other than a Department of Distance Education (DDE) instructor. Your answers to exam questions must be typed and double-spaced throughout, using Times New Roman 12-pitch font and one-inch margins. This exam does not have an associated CGSC Form 1009W Grading Rubric. Overview: In Leavenworth Papers #11 Rangers: Selected Combat Operations in World War II,  Dr. Michael J. King notes that The rescue of 511 American and Allied prisoners from a Japanese POW compound near Cabanatuan in the Philippines by elements of the 6th Ranger Battalion, reinforced by Alamo Scouts and Filipino guerrillas, was the most complex operation that Rangers conducted during World War II. It was also one of the most successful.  That rescue has been chronicled in the 2005 movie The Great Raid and several books including Hour of Redemption by Forrest Bryant Johnson, The Ghost Soldiers by Hampton Sides, and is the focus of Chapter 6 of King s work. Although the movie and other references may help you understand the scenario more, this examination scenario is based solely on the information provided in King s work. You may refer back to the C600 online lessons and readings to review key concepts about MDMP. ADRP 1-02 dated September 2013 and FM 6-0 dated May 2014 are the primary doctrinal references for this examination. Additionally, you should review the Military Review article by Dr. Tom Clark and the three student aids posted with the exam. Read Chapter 6 Cabanatuan  of Leavenworth Papers #11, and then provide your responses to the seven requirements which begin on page three of this document. A PDF version of the CSI publication is available in Blackboard, posted with this exam. It is also available online at www.cgsc.edu/carl/download/csipubs/king.pdf . The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP)

CLICK HERE TO ORDER YOUR PROFESSIONAL PAPER

If you state information from the lessons, readings, doctrinal manuals or other references as part of your answer, you must include a citation in accordance with ST 22-2. You may use parenthetical citations, endnotes or footnotes. CGSC does not tolerate cheating, plagiarism, or unauthorized collaboration. Therefore, you should review CGSC Bulletin #920, Academic Ethics Policy (February 2011) and the DDE Academic Ethics brief posted on the course information page. Violation of academic ethics will result in an investigation and possible removal from the course. ***** FOR INSTRUCTOR USE ONLY*********** SCORING Requirement #1 Running Estimate (10 points) _______/10 Requirement #2 The Problem (10 points) _______/10 Requirement #3 The Mission (10 points) _______/10 Requirement #4 Purpose and Task (30 points) _______/30 Requirement #5 Commander s Critical Information Requirements (10 points) _______/10 Requirement #6 Commander s Judgment (10 points) _______/10 Requirement #7 COA Analysis, Comparison & Recommendation (20 points) _______/20 Total (100 points) _______/100 INSTRUCTOR COMMENTS: Grader: ________________________ Mission Analysis: Through mission analysis, the commander and staff should understand the problem and the resources available to solve that problem. Each staff member is responsible for conducting his or her own running (staff) estimate that provides very detailed information within his or her area of responsibility.

The staff then analyzes that information and synthesizes (packages) it into the mission analysis brief. The essence of staff work involves distilling mountains of information into nuggets of knowledge. One method through which staff officers do this is to process the facts (or WHAT) into information (by asking SO WHAT?), analyze the information to increase knowledge (by asking WHICH MEANS?), and apply judgment to gain an understanding (by asking THEREFORE?) REQUIREMENT #2: The Problem (10 Points. Approximately one-half of a double-spaced page) Using previous course material, the Military Review article, and the student aid, articulate LTC Mucci s problem including at least ONE critical element for each mission variable (METT-TC). REQUIREMENT #1: Running Estimate (10 Points. Three to four double-spaced pages) You are the S-3 of the 6th Ranger Battalion conducting mission analysis on 27 January 1945 at the Ranger base camp at Calasiao on the Lingayen Gulf. Provide a complete movement estimate that LTC Mucci and his staff would use to develop plans and analyze various courses of action. Although you have the benefit of hindsight, write your running estimate as you would have on 27 Jan (in the present or future tense) rather than as an AAR in the past tense. Although there are some guides and formats to a generic estimate, as well as a sample medical estimate included with this examination, you can modify those formats or develop one to help you present your analysis to LTC Mucci.

Your movement estimate should include, but is not limited to: ú Time available to conduct the operation before the Japanese decide to move or murder the POWs, and how much time to allocate to planning, preparation and execution. ú Maintaining secrecy in varied terrain during day and night operations. ú The appropriate balance of speed and security. ú The best time of day to initiate actions on the objective. ú The anticipated distances covered by, time required to, and rates of movement for: o the Ranger advance to the POW Camp o actions on the objective o the movement of Rangers & former POWs and 6th Army to a link-up point o Japanese counterattacks. ú How Filipino civilians and guerrillas, as well as the US Army Air Corps can help expedite friendly forces or impede enemy forces. Essentially, your estimate should explain to LTC Mucci how the Rangers can get to the compound before the Japanese make the fatal decision, and how the task force and former POWs can link up with 6th Army before the Japanese catch that vulnerable group. The goal of the estimate is to help LTC Mucci plan for this mission by providing him specific information he probably doesn t know, rather than general ideas which he probably does know. The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP)

For example, stating that the POWs will move slowly is not helpful to LTC Mucci, while ESTIMATING that the POWs could move at one mile per hour for three hours before needing two hours for food and rest could be helpful to LTC Mucci and his staff. REQUIREMENT #3: The Mission (10 Points. Approximately one double-spaced page) While developing his commander s estimate, LTC Mucci brainstormed three different words to use for his ESSENTIAL TASK in the mission statement: Liberate, Raid, Secure. Citing your references, (a) provide a current US Army doctrinal definition for EACH of the three words (or dictionary definition if no doctrinal definition exists), and then (b) select and justify which one to include as the essential task in the Rangers mission statement. Note: You are not required to write a mission statement only to select and justify which one word LTC Mucci should use as the essential task in his mission statement. COA Development: A COA is a broad potential solution to an identified problem  (FM 6-0 pg 9-16). Serving initially as lead planner, Captain Robert Prince developed a broad plan which included a truck movement, dismounted infiltration, flawless actions at the POW camp, and an elaborate exfiltration. With virtually no room for error, CPT Prince refined and rehearsed the plan to resource his main effort, nest the supporting efforts, and eliminate wasted efforts. As a result, every Ranger, Alamo Scout and Guerrilla in every platoon and special element contributed to the success of the mission.

REQUIREMENT #4: Purpose and Task (30 Points total. 6 Points each. One to two double-spaced pages. See example response. You must write in sentences rather than bulletized form.) SELECT FIVE OF THE EIGHT ELEMENTS FROM THE LIST BELOW. ú The Filipino Guerrillas ú The Alamo Scouts ú 1st Platoon Charlie Company ú 2nd Platoon Charlie Company ú 2nd Platoon Foxtrot Company ú The Filipino Civilians ú The Radio Team in Guimba ú The 6th US Army For each element selected, (a) list the most important contribution (TASK) that it made during the operation, (b) explain why that contribution was needed (PURPOSE), and (c) explain how that contribution was synchronized with at least ONE other action that preceded, followed or occurred concurrent with it. When possible, use a tactical mission task from current US Army doctrine, even if the author did not use a proper task. Example Response for the US Army Air Force: The American airplane disrupted (Task) the Japanese Guards so that the Rangers could crawl close to the POW camp undetected (Purpose). The Black Widow flew over the camp at 1840, three-quarters of an hour before the attack was to begin,  (King p 64) while the Rangers were crossing the open field outside of the POW Camp. NOTE: Just as a sentence has a subject and verb, a mission statement has a task (the WHAT of the mission statement) and a purpose (the WHY). Although somewhat confusing, the task is what the specific unit will do, while the purpose must always be linked to the benefit the task provides to another friendly unit, the detriment the task imposes on the enemy, or the impact the task has on the terrain. The previous example shows how the Air Force helped the Rangers. The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP)

However, a hypothetical response of The Air Force flew over the compound (TASK) to collect information (PURPOSE)  is not acceptable since the Air Force is collecting the information and is not the beneficiary of that information. A more appropriate response may be The Air Force provided information to the Rangers (TASK) which helped the Rangers plan for the operation (PURPOSE). As you can see, the PURPOSE of one unit s mission (in this instance helping the Rangers plan) is directly linked (or nested) to the TASK of another unit (such as the Rangers task to plan their mission). Commander s Critical Information Requirements: Commanders use information and judgment to make decisions. In many instances, several pieces of information contribute to one decision. In those instances, the commander may arrange the information in an IF, AND/OR, THEN sequence, illustrated by this simple example: IF my team is still in the playoff hunt AND my brother can purchase game tickets AND the winter roads are clear enough to drive OR I can afford train tickets THEN I will go to the last regular season game REQUIREMENT #5: Commander s Critical Information Requirements (CCIRs) (10 Points.

Approximately one-half of a double-spaced page) Construct a logical IF, AND/OR, THEN sequence justifying LTC Mucci s decision to assault on 30 January. You are not required to include OR in your response, but should include elements related to the enemy, your own multinational force, the POWs, and local support. (Keep in mind that a decision to delay on 29 January does not justify an assault on the 30th, because conditions could have been worse.) Commander s Judgment: While CCIR helps the commander make an anticipated decision, commanders must often make decisions that they and their staffs did not anticipate. LTC Mucci s decision to delay his actions on the objective until 30 January 1945 may have been his most difficult and most important decision. In hindsight, his judgment was correct. Despite the benefits, LTC Mucci accepted the risk that the Japanese would detect his force, or sense that 6th Army was too close and consequently kill or move the POWs. REQUIREMENT #6: Commander s Judgment (10 Points. Approximately one-half of a double-spaced page) Compare and contrast LTC Mucci s decision to delay actions on the objective on 29 Jan with his decision to conduct actions on the objective on 30 Jan. In other words, explain how the conditions on 29 Jan differed from those on 30 Jan, resulting in LTC Mucci s decision to delay on 29 Jan and assault on 30 Jan. (Keep in mind that his reason for delaying was different from the benefit of delaying.) COA Analysis, Comparison and Recommendation: According to page 9-25 of the 2014 FM 6-0: War-gaming is a disciplined process, with rules and steps that attempt to visualize the flow of the operation, given the force s strengths and dispositions, enemy s capabilities and possible COAs, impact and requirements of civilians in the AO, and other aspects of the situation.  It further states that COA analysis enables commanders and staffs to identify difficulties or coordination problems as well as probable consequences of planned actions for each COA being considered. It helps them think through the tentative plan. COA analysis may require commanders and staffs to revisit parts of a COA as discrepancies arise. COA analysis not only appraises the quality of each COA but also uncovers potential execution problems, decisions, and contingencies. In addition, COA analysis influences how commanders and staffs understand a problem and may require the planning process to restart.  The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP)

REQUIREMENT #7: COA Analysis, Comparison & Recommendation (20 Points. Three to four double-spaced pages) On 27 January, while the Rangers are still in their base camp planning and preparing for their mission, LTC Mucci approaches you and says: I m very concerned the locals may not be able to provide enough carts to move the POWs back to Guimba. Please wargame these three contingencies and give me your recommendation and rationale.  ú Continue to move toward Guimba, recognizing that movement will be slow. ú Stay in the camp and defend while the 6th Army sends a regimental combat team to link up with us. ú Move outside the camp to the first concealed location, and establish a defensive perimeter while the 6th Army sends a regimental combat team to link up with us. A recommended approach is to (a) list the most relevant facts and assumptions, (b) establish & define the measurable evaluation criteria, (c) analyze each COA against each evaluation criterion, (d) compare the COAs, and (e) make and justify a recommendation. NOTE: The MDMP is an adaptation of the Scientific Method. A Problem is an Observation, Mission Analysis- Research, Mission- Hypothesis, and Course of Action Analysis (Wargame)- Experiment. Like a scientist, the tactician can use a simple process to analyze and compare options. List facts and assumptions. Here, you do not need to repeat facts and assumptions from your Requirement #1 Running Estimate. Focus on facts and assumptions which you may not have included in your movement estimate when you assumed the locals could provide enough carts. Place all facts and assumptions before the analysis of your COAs, rather than listing (and repeating) facts for each COA. Establish measurable evaluation criteria. If you were buying a car, you might consider cost, carrying capacity, and fuel economy. DO NOT USE SCREENING CRITERIA. LTC Mucci feels that each of HIS suggestions is feasible, suitable, distinguishable and acceptable to him. None is yet complete, but he is confident his staff will make them so. Likewise, broad undefined terms such as the Principles of War are normally not useful criteria for evaluating a unique problem. As in an experiment or car purchase, evaluation criteria must be variables, rather than constants. If experimenting with pendulums, pendulum length, weight, and arc are each variables, which the scientist measures when analyzing the period of motion. In this scenario, the speed of the POWs movement is a constant (and should be listed as a fact or assumption); while the time until link-up with 6th Army is different for each COA (in which one or both forces are moving different distances) and could serve as a useful evaluation criteria. The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP)

Analyze each COA against each evaluation criterion. Although there is a tendency to organize the course of action analysis by the evaluation criteria, Step 4 of the MDMP (FM 6-0 p 9-25 through 9-34) focuses on an analysis by course of action. In other words, you don t have to write a paragraph for each evaluation criterion as you explain your COA analysis. For instance, we would NOT have a paragraph in which we analyze the Time from initiation of the assault until completion of link-up with 6th Army  in which we use comparative terms (such as fastest and slowest), and then have another paragraph which analyzes the COA against another evaluation criterion. Instead, we should analyze each COA against the evaluation criteria (be sure to include ALL of the criteria), using our facts and assumptions. For example, if we assume that without carts the POWs could walk at 1 mph during daylight and .5 mph at night, and further assume that the Rangers will begin their assault at 2000 hrs, then through analysis we may estimate that the POWs and Rangers could get to Guimba in about 60 hours. For part c, your answer should be approximately a half-page narrative for each contingency presented in Requirement #7. Compare the COAs to each other using a decision matrix or other technique. Clearly indicate if high or low scores are best, and explain any weighting you apply. Make and justify a recommendation.