Mission Command: The Command Panacea?Mission Command: The Command Panacea?A Study of the Potential Impact of MissionCommand Philosophy on the Irish <strong>Defence</strong> <strong>Forces</strong>in Peace Support OperationsComdt Johnny Whittaker“Every soldier carries a marshal’s baton in his knapsack”(Napoleon, cited by Johnson, 2003: 101.)Introduction 1Mission Command (MC) 2 philosophy was first documented and developed by the Prussianarmy in response to its crushing defeat by Napoleon’s army at Jena in 1806. Since that time,MC has continued to develop across the entire spectrum of military operations, and hasbecome the command philosophy of choice among many of the world’s militaries. Given thattoday’s world is defined by a complex and multi-faceted security environment, an appropriatecommand philosophy is essential to mission accomplishment. The Irish <strong>Defence</strong> <strong>Forces</strong> (DF)operate within this environment, providing up to ten per cent of its personnel to PSOs atany one time as part of its commitment to the United Nations Standby Arrangement System(UNSAS). The DF have “to respond to . . . the more complex and demanding nature ofinternational peace support operations,” 3 wherein “PSO mandates are increasingly robust andcomplex.” 4 Against this backdrop the DF’s rigid hierarchical organisational structure, uniqueculture, and absence of a promulgated command philosophy potentially present difficultiesfor commanders at all levels engaged in PSOs.The Genesis and Definition of Mission CommandAfter their crushing defeat at Jena, the Prussians re-examined their highly centralised system ofcommand and took fundamental steps to reposition their philosophy of war-fighting and howthey led. They developed a concept they called Auftragstaktik. 5 After much soul-searching,the entire military machine underwent an overhaul which had the Auftragstaktik concept at itsheart. Since the first demonstration of its utility by the Prussians, MC has continued to evolveand has been adopted and employed by a range of successful military bodies, most notablyNATO in the 1990s.So what is Mission Command? In summary, MC is a style of military leadership developedto allow leaders to perform in complex, change-intensive and high-pressure environments, bypromoting decentralised command, alignment, speed of action, and initiative (Figure 1).1 Given the imposed space implications, this article represents an abridged version of my original thesis. Its reduction in size necessitated the omission ofmuch of the supporting research and analysis undertaken and methodologies employed to answer the research question posed.2 Mission Command means freedom to make decisions in a situation that one is faced with without referral, but operating within set guidelines and inpursuance of a superior’s intent. The ability to decide on how to resolve a problem, given an end requirement (Spacie, cited in Essens, Vogelaar, Tanercanand Winslow, The Human in Command: Peace Support Operations, 2007, p. 205).3 Department of <strong>Defence</strong> (2007) Land Component Handbook, Department of <strong>Defence</strong>, Dublin, <strong>Defence</strong> <strong>Forces</strong> Press Office.4 Department of <strong>Defence</strong> (2008) Strategy Statement, Department of <strong>Defence</strong>, Dublin, <strong>Defence</strong> <strong>Forces</strong> Press Office.5 Author’s emphasis. The term can be translated loosely to ‘mission-type order’, what we today call Mission Command.1
<strong>Defence</strong> <strong>Forces</strong> <strong>Review</strong> <strong>2010</strong>In essence it is a methodology that allows staff to understand their commander’s intentions.The staff are told what needs to be achieved and why, but not how. For the purpose of thisessay MC will be defined as “a system of decentralized command under which a subordinatecommander is assigned a mission without being told how it should be accomplished.” 6LEADERSHIP IN HIGH STAKES ENVIRONSMETHODOLOGY VISION / PLANNING COMMUNICATIONMISSIONPLANNINGSCENARIOREHEARSALBRIEFING• CASCADE• ALIGNMENT• CLARITY• DIRECTIONDE-BRIEFING• PROGRESS• REVIEW• IMPROVEMENT• INTELLIGENCE• SUCCESSES• MISSION SCOPEDEVELOPMENT OF BEST POSSIBLECOURSE OF ACTIONFigure 1: Steps of Mission Command (Riley, 2005:4) 7AimThe aim of this essay is to present the reader with an overview of MC; providing the readerwith a background of how and why it has evolved within the military over time and thereafterto inform the reader of the current discourse which surrounds this highly relevant topic. Havingtraced its origins and defined MC, the author will now outline how the human-in-command(i.e. the human element of command) is central to the debate on MC, and how in turn thisis supported by several supporting pillars, namely; organisational culture, organisationalstructure and morality/values.The Human-in-Command ApproachIn their seminal work, McCann and Pigeau state that in order for command and control(C2) to be effective across the full spectrum of operations, “it is essential that it be humancentred.”8 They argue that because of the allure of technology, C2 has become “obscuredin conceptualization of rigid structure and process” and that the human element has been“chronically under-emphasized and under-researched.” To counteract this, they present a new6 McCann, C. and Pigeau, R. (2000) The Human in Command: Exploring the Modern Military Experience, New York, Kluwer Academic/Plenum, p. 217.7 Riley, A. (2005) ‘Mission Command – A toolkit for leadership under pressure’, Cognition EoS Ltd. (online) (cited 08 October 2008). Available from:http://www.cognition-eos.com/news.html. The fundamental principles of MC are broken down into three key leadership activities, which form acontinuous cycle of planning, communication and review. The process is designed to be repeated at each level of command using the same format; thisdrives alignment8 Op Cit, p. 164.2