Interacting with the decision maker ismor 2004
1 / 16

- PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Interacting with the Decision Maker – ISMOR 2004. “Facts, Figures and Facilitation”. Col N-J K Kvist (JFC); Sara Dean (NC3A). Content. Background of work undertaken Levels of interaction Influence at each level Issues experienced Discussion. Road Map Development

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about '' - khan

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Interacting with the decision maker ismor 2004

Interacting with the Decision Maker – ISMOR 2004

“Facts, Figures and Facilitation”

Col N-J K Kvist (JFC); Sara Dean (NC3A)


  • Background of work undertaken

  • Levels of interaction

  • Influence at each level

  • Issues experienced

  • Discussion

Overview of work

Road Map Development

High level reporting tool based on OPLAN

JFC concept

HQ ISAF development

Use for reporting at both levels

Planners lead but whole ISAF staff involved

MoE Development

Support the Road Map

Provide nuts and bolts behind reporting

Provide consistency in reporting

Both at JFC and HQ ISAF levels

OA lead

Overview of Work

The development process

Lines of Operations

& Tasks

Measures of

Effectiveness (MoE)



Model &




Model &




Merge &


Road Map


The Development Process



The government of afghanistan
The Government of Afghanistan

  • Capacity

  • Education

  • Language barrier

  • Priority issues and coordination

  • Understanding of the concept

Evolution of responsibilities
Evolution of Responsibilities

  • Over time:

    • J5 lead on Road Map issues

    • OA lead on MoE issues

    • OA lead on automation of Road Map and MoE

    • Interactions between OA/J5

      • Successful in theatre (constant)

      • Successful in JFC (but more disjointed)

From one to two road maps
From one to two Road Maps

  • The first (IMF):

    • External measures to the military mission, more the development indicators for Afghanistan

  • The second (ORM):

    • Internal measures to the military mission, mainly focused on the OPLAN implementation

Interacting with the decision maker ismor 2004

Enhance The NATO Mission Effect

Promote ATA Influence and Authority

A legitimate and functioning State that provides for the security and prosperity of its citizens and contributes to regional and global stability

Conditions adequate for the continued consolidation of stability in Afghanistan without the need for ISAF

Extend In-Theatre ISAF Operations

Promote Security Sector Reform

Facilitate AFG National Development



At the isaf level development phase
At the ISAF Level – Development Phase

  • With the development of the Road Map in theatre, the decisions on structure and vision were mainly made by HQ ISAF – then presented higher

  • Structure and vision presented to rest of ISAF HQ key leaders – coordinated J5/OA

  • Consensus reached by all key leaders to validate structure – but not at JFC

At the jfc level development phase
At the JFC Level- Development Phase

  • J5 and OA interact directly with updates on the progress of development to the Command Group.

  • Key decisions made on structure, focus and purpose of the Road Map – OA provide independent view

  • Structure and practicalities suggested by J5/OA and approved at higher level

  • Actual development undertaken in theatre

At the isaf level implementation phase
At the ISAF Level – Implementation Phase

  • ORM is under review

  • Decision support process:

    • Integrated in decision cycle

    • Includes:

      • Planner coordination

      • Subject Matter Expert (SME) input

      • Analysis Support

    • Results:

      • Status

      • Options

Oa integration in the orm decision support cycle
OA Integration in theORM Decision Support Cycle

Data Collection(SME)

Execute Road Map


Analysis of MoE


Assess ORM Progress

Develop Options


Corrective Action

Adjust ORM and MoE


Final Direction & Guidance


Initial Direction & Guidance


Prepare Update/Decision Briefing


At the jfc level implementation phase
At the JFC Level - Implementation Phase

  • COM JFC will receive regular updates

  • Support monthly OPLAN reviews

  • Initiate corrective action at JFC level

    • i.e. additional force requirements, changes to OPLAN or sustainment issues

  • Input to Six-monthly Mission Review

  • Bottom-line - informed decision-making

Issues concerning the decision makers
Issues Concerning the Decision Makers

  • Timeliness

  • Multiple decision makers

  • Responsibility for sections of the project

  • Acceptance of decision at lower level

Successes in the decision making process
Successes in the Decision Making Process

  • Road Maps developed

  • ISAF HQ reached consensus on the IMF issue

  • Multiple decision makers - communications

  • Slowly all nations are beginning to see the potential

  • OA now being recognised in both HQs as interacting with various decision makers


  • Similar experiences

  • OA integration within a military HQ

  • Multi-layered decision making process, is this an efficient way?

  • Evolutionary decisions rather than finished products for approval?