Command and Control Methodology: A Sliding Scale of Centralization

摘要

This study analyzes the dichotomy between the Army's doctrinal espousal ofmission orders and its practices of detailed orders, then proposes a hypothesis for its resolution. The hypothesis proposes that command methodologies are not discrete styles or techniques to be applied institutionally or by individual commanders. Rather, mission orders, directive control, detailed orders, etc., are points on a scale of centralization. A commander, during the course of an operation will transition up and down that scale based on changes in a set of situational factors. Those factors are derivatives of the ubiquitous mission, enemy, troops available, terrain, and time (METT-T). This study provides historical support for this hypothesis through a series of vignettes. These vignettes demonstrate how each METT-T factor affects the level of centralization individually and collectively. Included are two vignettes that demonstrate the difference between the leadership philosophy of Auftraqstaktik and command methodology in terms of centralization. The study concludes that, indeed, command is a sliding scale of centralization. The apparent dichotomy between Army practice and doctrine is a result of the doctrinal and institutional misunderstanding of the nature of command methodology.