ATTP 5-0.1 Commander and Staff Officer Guide - Army Electronic ...

COORDINATING STAFF STUDIES
Problem Solving, Staff Studies, and Decision Papers
11-69. Preparing a staff study normally involves coordinating with other staff officers and organizations.
At a minimum, action officers obtain concurrences or nonconcurrences from agencies affected by the
study’s recommendations. Other aspects of the study may require coordination as well. Coordination
should be as broad as time permits but should be limited to agencies that might be affected by possible
recommendations or that have expertise in the subject of the study.
11-70. Action officers anticipate nonconcurrences and try to resolve as many as possible before staffing
the final product. An action officer who cannot resolve a nonconcurrence has two options:
� Modify the staff study to satisfy the nonconcurrence, but only if the analysis and comparison
supports the change. If this is done after the final draft has been staffed, the officer must re-staff
the study.
� Prepare a consideration of nonconcurrence and include it and the statement of nonconcurrence in
Annex C to the staff study as discussed in paragraphs 11-61 through 11-63 and paragraph 11-67.
Statements of Nonconcurrence
11-71. A statement of nonconcurrence is a recommendation that the decisionmaker reject all or part of the
staff study. Statements of nonconcurrence are prepared in the memorandum format; e-mails may be
accepted at the commander’s discretion. They address specific points in the recommendations or the study,
stating why they are wrong or unacceptable. When possible they offer an alternative or a constructive
recommendation.
Considerations of Nonconcurrence
11-72. Action officers prepare considerations of nonconcurrence as a memorandum for record. They
present the reasons for the nonconcurrence accurately and assess them objectively. Then they state why the
study is correct and why the decisionmaker should reject the nonconcurrence.
Common Problems with Staff Studies
11-73. The following questions identify the most common problems found in staff studies. Review them
before beginning a staff study and periodically thereafter:
� Is the subject too broad?
� Is the problem properly defined?
� Are facts or assumptions clear and valid?
� Are there any unnecessary facts or assumptions?
� Are there any facts that appear for the first time in the discussion?
� Are there a limited number of options or courses of action?
� Are evaluation criteria invalid or too restrictive?
� Is the discussion too long?
� Is the discussion complete?
� Must readers consult the enclosures to understand the staff study?
� Does the conclusion include a discussion?
� Is the logic flawed or incomplete?
� Does the conclusion follow from the analysis?
� Can the solution be implemented within resource and time constraints?
� Do the conclusions and recommendations solve the problem?
� Is there an implementing directive?
� Have new criteria been introduced in the analysis or comparison?
14 September 2011 ATTP 5-0.1 11-11