13.07.2015 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

8. CONCLUSION<strong>The</strong> history <strong>of</strong> science demonstrates beyond a doubt that the really revolutionary <strong>and</strong> significantadvances come not from empiricism.James B. Conant 1To think theoretically one must be ready to appreciate <strong>and</strong> accept the need to sacrifice detaileddescriptions for broad observations.James N. Rosenau 2SummaryThis study aimed to improve our underst<strong>and</strong>ing <strong>of</strong> Boyd’s work as embodied in A Discourseon Winning <strong>and</strong> Losing. To that end in chapters 3, 4 an 5, the formative factors have beendescribed in some detail. This discussion <strong>of</strong>fered insight into reasons why Boyd developedhis theory, <strong>and</strong> the pr<strong>of</strong>essional environment his ideas l<strong>and</strong>ed in, <strong>and</strong> in response to which hein no small measure developed his ideas. In addition it showed a number <strong>of</strong> key themes,concepts <strong>and</strong> metaphors he derived from his background as fighter pilot, designer <strong>of</strong> fighteraircraft, his involvement in the Military Reform Movement, his reading <strong>of</strong> military history,<strong>and</strong> in particular from his study <strong>of</strong> scientific literature. Chapters 6 <strong>and</strong> 7 provided a verycomprehensive account <strong>of</strong> Boyd’s work, demonstrating that Boyd’s work constitutes a theory<strong>of</strong> considerable sophistication, consistency <strong>and</strong> persuasiveness. It is also morecomprehensive, subtle <strong>and</strong> complex than the common rendering <strong>and</strong> the general perception<strong>of</strong> what Boyd argues. It addresses the gr<strong>and</strong> strategic, strategic, operational <strong>and</strong> the tacticallevel, developing specific advise (or the name <strong>of</strong> the game) for action at each level, but all inlogical relation to one another. Additionally it develops suggestions for comm<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong>control <strong>and</strong> organizational culture that are conceptually consistent with the overall thrust <strong>of</strong>his arguments on the nature <strong>of</strong> strategy <strong>and</strong> the essence <strong>of</strong> winning <strong>and</strong> losing. All are gearedtoward one aim which is to examine the dynamics <strong>of</strong> winning <strong>and</strong> losing, <strong>and</strong> eachpresentation as well as the essay contributes to that aim, <strong>of</strong>fering variations, elaborations <strong>and</strong>new conceptualizations <strong>of</strong> the essence <strong>of</strong> success, winning, or rather in its most abstract, thename <strong>of</strong> the game <strong>of</strong> organizational survival.<strong>The</strong> detailed discussion strongly indicates the importance <strong>of</strong> Boyd’s work. Alex<strong>and</strong>erGeorge has indicated that research that could improve conceptual <strong>and</strong> generic knowledge isdeemed very valuable, while Holsti states that studies linking variables from different levelsare few <strong>and</strong> any model <strong>of</strong> explanation that emphasizes dynamics <strong>and</strong> the interplay <strong>of</strong>variables at different levels over time is a distinct step forward 3 . Boyd’s work succeeds on1 Cited in Kaplan, p. 303.2 James N. Rosenau, <strong>The</strong> Scientific Study <strong>of</strong> Foreign Policy (2 nd edition, New York, 1980), p.26.3 Cited in Dennis J.D. S<strong>and</strong>ole (1999), p.12.280

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!