Command Red Team

Red Team Activities
to consider whether the staff is assessing the right measurements. Extreme tact may be
necessary to encourage the consideration of alternatives when the staff is facing
deadlines, its thinking is constrained by long-standing, hidden and unquestioned
assumptions, or it does not recognize or accept signposts of change. Effective adversary
emulation can also support devil’s advocacy. Overall, the goal of a devil’s advocate is to
encourage others to open themselves up to new information and interpretations. The
purpose of the technique is not to prove a particular point or present a better solution, but
to challenge the staff to reexamine assumptions and consider alternatives. Devil’s
advocacy and contrarian approaches are appropriate whenever decision making appears
to be based on strong consensus or established mind-sets. See Appendix B, “Devil’s
Advocacy,” for suggested devil’s advocacy techniques.
(2) Problem Framing. Framing the right problem is critical to establish the
trajectory for all subsequent problem-solving efforts. If the problem is not correctly
framed, then the resultant assumptions, mission statement, CONOPS, and definition of
the OE will be incorrect. Helping develop the conceptual models and operating
hypotheses that frame the problem is often the red team’s first contribution to a problemsolving
effort. The team’s detached vantage point, focus on alternatives, and promotion
of critical thinking can help the staff visualize all relevant variables and ensure a more
rigorous search for root causes and critical variables. In many cases, the context of a
problem and the basis for its solution cannot be fully understood unless relevant cultural
and perceptual factors are also understood. Defining the desired end state is as important
as framing the problem and involves many of the same red team processes.
(3) Key Assumptions Check. Many strategic errors in US history can be
traced in part to the unquestioned adoption of assumptions that ultimately proved to be
wrong. Subjecting key assumptions to heightened scrutiny is an important early step in
any project, and periodic reexaminations can help ensure decisions are based on sound
premises. Challenging assumptions can uncover hidden relationships and links between
key factors, identify developments that may bring other aspects of the problem into
question, identify opinions and clichés masquerading as facts and assumptions, identify
future conditions that could undermine current assumptions, and prepare the staff for new
or evolving conditions that might otherwise result in surprise. Challenging existing
assumptions can also provide an opportunity to propose alternatives that may carry less
risk. Finally, challenging assumptions can help ensure that the staff does not assume
away critical aspects of the problem.
(4) Quality of Information Check. Understanding the nature of the
information used to arrive at a decision is an important part of understanding the risks
associated with that decision. Checking the integrity and reliability of the information
used in analysis and decision making should be a continuous process. The red team may
be an ideal asset for performing quality of information checks due to its relative
independence, critical approach, and freedom to judge information without assuming
responsibility for the task of correcting the information. Quality of information checks
can reveal inadvertent errors in processing, translation, or interpretation; can check for
IV-3