On the Introduction of Effects Based Assessment into NATO’s Processes, Organization and Tools

In 2006 the NATO Military Committee (MC) provided guidance to the two NATO Strategic Commands on key aspects of Effects Based Approach to Operations (EBAO). Whilst Allied Command Transformation (ACT) had already started work on EBAO in its experimental program in 2003, this guidance proved a starting point for EBAO thinking and development throughout ACT and Allied Command Operations (ACO). EBAO introduced ‘effects’ as a means to focus on outcome, results or end-state of an operation. To ensure this, the need for continuous analysis of the operational environment to provide improved situational understanding, and the necessity of feedback to the commander to allow the choice and synchronization of actions based on their contribution to the achievement of effects, was identified. Earlier feedback mechanisms allowed for a direct, causal relationship between actions and its effects, however, experiments simulating current operational theatres demonstrated that the derivation of appropriate measures for the assessment of effects proved to be a difficult and elaborate. NATO has not emphasized assessment: campaign assessment is practiced in current NATO operations in Kosovo, Active Endeavour and ISAF, but these assessment practices are lacking the foundation of doctrine, tactics, techniques and procedures, and are short of proper investment in analysis capability – manpower, resources and tools. The problem is compounded by the realization that current assessment analysis capability cannot adequately deal with complexity in an operational environment. Within that environment which encompasses political, military, social, economic, infrastructure and information domains, and integrates the actions of diplomatic, civil and economic players, the growing understanding is that causality is complex and networked, that the rules from yesterday do not always work today, and that predictability is reduced. Over the last decade, considerable academic progress has been made to understand system complexity, particularly complex adaptive systems which demonstrate learning behaviour essential for survival and characteristic for conflict situations. Although these efforts have focused on understanding adaptive mechanisms, insights on what complexity and adaptation brings to effects based assessment practices must be sought. NATO’s overall ability to deliver on current and future operations can only benefit from the development of a flexible and pragmatic effects-based assessment methodology. This paper focuses on the need for further development of methods for effects based assessment, based on recent work done within NATO and the nations. It stresses the need for proper design, derivation, selection, and assessment of measures, in order to be robust and appropriate for all respective action and effect chains of the tasks and activities that have significance for commander and staffs. Furthermore, the need for appropriate and practical data collection processes, modelling and simulation, tools, methods, techniques and training is discussed.