Science, Strategy and War The Strategic Theory of ... - Boekje Pienter

This differs from traditional views on the meaning of command and control (C&C), andBoyd wants to emphasize just that (and here he is referring to his opening statements of thepresentation on the reigning command and control philosophy and associated problemswithin the US armed forces at the time). In fact, he continues to reconceptualize C&C andexposes his audience to a subtle word game to arrive at a description of C&C with a muchhigher emotive and cognitive association.The traditional definitions, Boyd explains, means to direct, order, or compel whilecontrol means to regulate, restrain, or hold to a certain standard as well as to direct orcommand. Thus, the description offered above is different than the kind that is beingapplied. In this sense, the C&C Boyd is speaking of seems, in his words, ‘more closelyaligned to leadership (rather than command) and to some kind of monitoring ability (ratherthan control) that permits leadership to be effective’. In other word, Boyd continues,‘leadership with monitoring, rather than C&C, seems to be a better way to cope with themulti-faceted aspects of uncertainty, change, and stress. On the other hand, monitoring, perse, does not appear to be an adequate substitute for control. Instead, after some sorting andreflection, the idea of appreciation seems better.[…] First of all, appreciation includes therecognition of worth or value and the idea of clear perception as well as the ability tomonitor. Moreover, next, it is difficult to believe that leadership can even exist withoutappreciation. Pulling these threads together suggests appreciation and leadership offer moreappropriate and richer means than C&C for shaping and adapting to circumstances’ 30 .This discussion sheds another light on the epitome of command and control, laidout before. In a new set of definitions Boyd not only replaces command and control withappreciation and leadership, he also subtly inserts some words which emphasize thecognitive character of the process (below those words are printed in italics to show thedifferences clearly). These changes and additions are quite relevant for they also lead to adescription which is much less directive in nature and much more in line with Boyd’sargument about the value of trust, implicit control, shared orientation, etc, he developed hereand in Patterns of Conflict. Underlying this change is the idea that initiative will not be fosteredby top down, directive command and control system. Indeed, after the newconceptualization of C&C, Boyd states that C&C represents a top-down mentality applied ina rigid or mechanical (or electrical way) that ignored as well as stifles the implicit nature ofhuman beings to deal with uncertainty, change, and stress (examples: The Battle of theSomme, Evacuation of Saigon, Mayaguez Affair, Desert I, Nifty-Nugget […]) 31 .Appreciation and Leadership 32 :Nature Appreciation and leadership permit one to discern, direct and shape what is to be done aswell as permit one to modify that direction and shaping by assessing what is being doneor about to be done (by friendlies as well as adversaries).What does this mean? Leadership must give direction in terms of what is to be done in a clear unambiguousway. In this sense, leadership must interact with system to shape the character or natureof that system in order to realize what is to be done.30 Ibid, p.32.31 Ibid, p.35.32 Ibid, p.34.242