One of the stupidly frustrating things about Army operations is that there is a lack of trust in subordinate leaders. I think that is one reason why OPORDs are so voluminous, overly detailed and restrictive - not to mention poorly written and confusing.
Embracing this concept, as well as changing leader education and development, would surely help make the U.S. Army more lethal and effective.
We can absolutely channel our own American nature to accomplish the same things as Auftragstaktik at any moment with the very words “Figure it out” and “Get it done.” We only do this every day for 418 years… we may indeed centuries in be born this way.
IF THE BOSS SAYS SO, and he takes responsibility.
But; As a system? Caeruleum* primum delendum est.
Because the spirit of the USSR economy survived inside a 5 sided ring. 💍
And at large in society in our schools.
The bureaucracy must be gone or these are wishes, indeed last wishes.
There was an earlier query in this series of posts on the link between the 5 paragraph field Ops order and Auftragstaktic. Here is my take on this.
in the winter of 1793-1794 Scharnhorst wrote a memo to Major Karl Friedrich von dem Knesebeck. The subject of the letter was Scharnhorst agreement with the Major on an essay the officer wrote "On the Need to Have Light Troops." Knesebeck had written the essay for the members of Military Gesellschaft. The essay and subsequent discussion touched off a firestorm within the group because of one General Officer that was in complete disagreement with Knesesbeck's essay on how the Prussians could learn from the French use of the tirailleur. The bottom line is a later reply by Scharnhorst on the need for sound organization and mutual support which were critical to victory. The entire argument was premised on Scharnhorst's earlier analysis of Morengo and his educational work towards a standard analytical staff technique. During this period, his entire premise was how to teach the third rank of the line battalion to think and fight as individuals. See chapter 2 and 3 of the book The Enlightened Soldier. In 1808, after 5 years of reorganization of the War College this new idea of "Mission Concept" was incorporated into training where the leader and individual were to be able to act without orders, or even contrary to orders if they did not appear consistent with the developing situation and achievement of objectives. One can surmise that the Genesis of the op order was a product of the criteria outline of the essay submissions for the members of the Militarishe Gesellschaft and the curriculum at the war college. The basis for this is the Commissions appointed in 1811, and the Regulations of 1812. for this last bit, see chapter 5 - translating Theory into Practice.
One of the stupidly frustrating things about Army operations is that there is a lack of trust in subordinate leaders. I think that is one reason why OPORDs are so voluminous, overly detailed and restrictive - not to mention poorly written and confusing.
Embracing this concept, as well as changing leader education and development, would surely help make the U.S. Army more lethal and effective.
We can absolutely channel our own American nature to accomplish the same things as Auftragstaktik at any moment with the very words “Figure it out” and “Get it done.” We only do this every day for 418 years… we may indeed centuries in be born this way.
IF THE BOSS SAYS SO, and he takes responsibility.
But; As a system? Caeruleum* primum delendum est.
Because the spirit of the USSR economy survived inside a 5 sided ring. 💍
And at large in society in our schools.
The bureaucracy must be gone or these are wishes, indeed last wishes.
A Will and Testament.
And to think this can be done through education…
*Blue
There was an earlier query in this series of posts on the link between the 5 paragraph field Ops order and Auftragstaktic. Here is my take on this.
in the winter of 1793-1794 Scharnhorst wrote a memo to Major Karl Friedrich von dem Knesebeck. The subject of the letter was Scharnhorst agreement with the Major on an essay the officer wrote "On the Need to Have Light Troops." Knesebeck had written the essay for the members of Military Gesellschaft. The essay and subsequent discussion touched off a firestorm within the group because of one General Officer that was in complete disagreement with Knesesbeck's essay on how the Prussians could learn from the French use of the tirailleur. The bottom line is a later reply by Scharnhorst on the need for sound organization and mutual support which were critical to victory. The entire argument was premised on Scharnhorst's earlier analysis of Morengo and his educational work towards a standard analytical staff technique. During this period, his entire premise was how to teach the third rank of the line battalion to think and fight as individuals. See chapter 2 and 3 of the book The Enlightened Soldier. In 1808, after 5 years of reorganization of the War College this new idea of "Mission Concept" was incorporated into training where the leader and individual were to be able to act without orders, or even contrary to orders if they did not appear consistent with the developing situation and achievement of objectives. One can surmise that the Genesis of the op order was a product of the criteria outline of the essay submissions for the members of the Militarishe Gesellschaft and the curriculum at the war college. The basis for this is the Commissions appointed in 1811, and the Regulations of 1812. for this last bit, see chapter 5 - translating Theory into Practice.
Was the continuation of this essay published?