Command in the Objective Force
Abstract
This paper seeks to answer what type of command will best serve the Army's Objective Force in gaining the initiative, building momentum, and exploiting success to achieve land dominance in the future by synchronizing forces and by making better decisions than an opponent. Current U.S. Army doctrine outlines two variations of command in Field Manual 6-0, Command and Control; mission command and detailed command. The Objective Force contains many new concepts and will field new systems that will take advantage of information age technology. This monograph uses both Joint and Army Vision statements to provide information of what the future force's capabilities will be and how the Objective Force is expected to accomplish its missions. In order to establish a foundation to understand why mission and detailed command have been used in the past, several historical examples are analyzed. The advantages and disadvantages of each type of command in each historical example is discussed and assessed in accordance with the current principles of battle command: visualize, describe, and direct. The ability or inability of a commander to visualize, describe and direct by obtaining and using accurate information and in a timely manner is shown as a primary reason for the adoption of mission or detailed command. Although the official publications discussing the Objective Force continue to emphasize the importance of mission command, this paper argues that both types of command, mission and detailed, can and will be used throughout the force. For most of the force and for most of the time, mission command will continue to be the best type of command that will allow subordinates to make better decisions faster than an adversary.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- May 22, 2003
- Accession Number
- ADA416216
Entities
People
- Christopher W. Wilbeck
Organizations
- United States Army Command and General Staff College