Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Your thoughts on the O.O.D.A. loop?

Rate this topic


Al Kufr
 Share

Recommended Posts

post-800-1093995140_thumb.gif

OODA loop is kinda hard to explain, so ill let these links do it for me.

This idea is used in war and in buisness(may interst some of you capitalist out there) or any competative situation.

Some people have called the OODA loop concept "simplistic," presumably because it only contains four major elements.  But the power and elegance of the OODA loop lie not in the number of parts, but in the richness of ideas it generates.  Sun Tzu noted, in about 400 B.C., that "There are only five notes in the musical scale, but their variations are so many that they cannot all be heard. ... The two elements, the unorthodox and orthodox (ch'i and cheng), give rise to each other like a beginningless circle-who could exhaust them?"

This is one of the best explanations of what the OODA loop is, but you need a Power Point viewer:

Download the viewer HERE.

And here is the Power Point presentation

Time as a Weapon

This is a short video and powerpoint presentation that exaplains the odda loop:

http://www.belisarius.com/modern_business_...t_richards2.mov

Power Point presentation:

http://www.belisarius.com/modern_business_...ards_charts.ppt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always found Sun Tzu's writings a little rudimentary. The O.O.D.A. loop is reminiscent of Tzu's tactics. What it basically boils down to is the establishment of a quick system of reactionary measures. You see and you act, rinse then repeat. Establishing an efficient O.O.D.A loop means you can barrage you opponent with an ever increasing stream of decisive measures. Of course [EDIT] Sun Tzu's measures [EDIT] in application, I'm sure, were nothing short of extraordinary in his era.

'The art of war's' reemergence as a business application mainly puts a warriors face on capitalism; an inspirational analogy...for better or for worse. Tzu's brand of ancient tactical warfare and its parallels with modern business models seem rather vague and indirect in application. It just seems gimmicky to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always found Sun Tzu's writings a little rudimentary. The O.O.D.A. loop is no exception. What it basically boils down to is the establishment of a quick system of reactionary measures. You see and you act, rinse then repeat. Establishing an efficient O.O.D.A loop means you can barrage you opponent with an ever increasing stream of decisive measures.  Of course in application I'm sure  these measures were nothing short of extraordinary in his era.

'The art of war's' reemergence as a business application mainly puts a warriors face on capitalism; an inspirational analogy...for better or for worse. Tzu's brand of ancient tactical warfare and its parallels with modern business models seem rather vague and indirect in application. It just seems gimmicky to me.

WOW i wasnt expecting this reaction, and your analysis is way way way way off. Boyds idea can be devastating if used correctly. Its not a quick system of "reactionary measures", its a way of getting inside your enemys mind-time-space in any competitive situation. How can you see attacking your enemys mind as a gimmicky? I think you as an Objectivist would recognize that as a powerful weapon.

Of course in application I'm sure  these measures were nothing short of extraordinary in his era.

in his era? This is kinda new, the military hasn eve applied it completly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea I was definetely mixed up....I was referring to the OODA loop as Sun Tzu's creation. I fixed it in the previous post, but you responded before the final edit. Its late...

And I was referring to Sun Tzu's 'Art of War' as a business application as gimmicky.

[edit] It just puts a historical context on already established business practices...in essence its nothing new. [edit]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea I was definetely mixed up....I was referring to the OODA loop as Sun Tzu's creation. I fixed it in the previous post, but you responded before the final edit. Its late...

Well, still i think Sun Tzu is still essential.

Warfare is the Way of deception
What could be more fundamental than that? In order to survive man must know reality, If your enemy is basing his actions on incorrect views of reality what could possibly give you a bigger advantage?

Sun Tzu (around 400 BC)

Probe enemy to unmask his strengths, weaknesses, patterns of movement and intentions. shape enemy's perception of world to manipulate/undermine his plans and actions. Employ Cheng/ch'i maneuvers to quickly and unexpectedly hurl strength against weakness.

Boyd

Operate inside adversary's observation-orientation-decision-action loops to enmesh adversary in a world of uncertainty, doubt, mistrust, confusion, disorder, fear, panic, chaos...and/or fold adversary back inside himself so that he cannot cope with events/efforts as they unfold.

Ideas from other leaders:

http://www.belisarius.com/modern_business_...n/samples_5.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What could be more fundamental than that? In order to survive man must know reality, If your enemy is basing his actions on incorrect views of reality what could possibly give you a bigger advantage?

http://www.belisarius.com/modern_business_...n/samples_5.htm

Tzu's logic went something like this: if you attack from the west make them believe your attacking from the east, and other variations. Couple that with the belief that an effective army must constantly remain on the offensive and you have the jist of his teachings. Sure he dressed it up with pretty metaphors and similes but its all the same.

He never made the affirmation of an objective reality with which absolute reason could be deduced. He never had the philosophical basis to understand the significance of man's life as a moral standard or the fact that his survival is dependent upon it. Your projecting a greater philosophical resonance to teachings that are far more rudimentary in realization and implementation.

Tzu's teachings are all based on the physical manipulation of man's reality. Many of Tzu's techniques were merely illusionary fronts. Tzu's physical illusions and a substantial philosophical disruption of ones own reality are two very different things with implicit moral distinctions. Assuming that myself as an Objectivist would or should value his teachings on this premise is a hollow assumption.

And what exactly is your enemies "mind-time-space?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OODA loop is kinda hard to explain, so ill let these links do it for me.

This idea is used in war and in business(may interest some of you capitalist out there) or any competitive situation.

It seems as if you are using warfare strategy as a model for business strategy, but the two activities are so unlike that the very attempt makes no sense to me.

The function of war is to hurt people and break things until you destroy your enemy and/or his ability to oppose you.

The function of business is to produce and trade things. It is to create values and to cooperate with other men by voluntary exchange to mutual advantage.

War is force. Business is reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems as if you are using warfare strategy as a model for business strategy, but the two activities are so unlike that the very attempt makes no sense to me.

The function of war is to hurt people and break things until you destroy your enemy and/or his ability to oppose you.

The function of business is to produce and trade things. It is to create values and to cooperate with other men by voluntary exchange to mutual advantage.

War is force. Business is reason.

But they are both competitions, if you took the time to see the powerpoint presentations you would see what i mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Al Kufr, I think it'd be best if you defined what you meant by "Competition"

well in the context of buisness, its competition for customers.

I've always found Sun Tzu's writings a little rudimentary. The O.O.D.A. loop is reminiscent of Tzu's tactics. What it basically boils down to is the establishment of a quick system of reactionary measures. You see and you act, rinse then repeat. Establishing an efficient O.O.D.A loop means you can barrage you opponent with an ever increasing stream of decisive measures.
And you dont really understand the ooda loop if you believe that explanation, i dont knwo where you got that explanation but its false and if you had taken the time to click any of the links you would have saved yourself a bad post.

Tzu's logic went something like this: if you attack from the west make them believe your attacking from the east, and other variations. Couple that with the belief that an effective army must constantly remain on the offensive and you have the jist of his teachings. Sure he dressed it up with pretty metaphors and similes but its all the same.

I think you are simplifying Sun tzu way too much, its really based on cheng and chi or orthodox and unorthodox methods or as the germans that developed maneuver warfare called it Nebenpunkte and Schwerpunkt.

"Hold them by the nose and kick them in the ass."

General George S. Patton, USA

"To hold them by the nose is the cheng and to kick them in the ass is the chi'."

Colonel John R. Boyd, USAF

He never had the philosophical basis to understand the significance of man's life as a moral standard or the fact that his survival is dependent upon it. Your projecting a greater philosophical resonance to teachings that are far more rudimentary in realization and implementation.
well what do you think his goal was? to altruisticly get killed by the enemy or to WIN?

And for you to just call using Sun Tzu as a "gimmick" i think undermines the seriousness of his ideas and effectiveness,REAL MONEY is involved here. Do you think a company like to Toyota or Starbucks or microssoft would waste time on a "gimmick"?

It seems as if you are using warfare strategy as a model for business strategy, but the two activities are so unlike that the very attempt makes no sense to me.

There are many factors that are the same,especially in the organizational aspects and the idea of "friction".

The function of war is to hurt people and break things until you destroy your enemy and/or his ability to oppose you.

The function of business is to produce and trade things. It is to create values and to cooperate with other men by voluntary exchange to mutual advantage

yeah, but how do you get MORE men to create values and to cooperate with YOU by voluntary exchange.

War is force. Business is reason.

"Force, if unassisted by judgment, collapses through its own mass."

Horace, circa 45 B.C.

War is more than blowing things up and having the biggest guns.

IF YOU WOULD ALL JUST CLICK THE DAMN LINK YOU WOULD SEE WHAT I MEAN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The function of war is to hurt people and break things until you destroy your enemy and/or his ability to oppose you.

The function of business is to produce and trade things.  It is to create values and to cooperate with other men by voluntary exchange to mutual advantage.

War is force.  Business is reason.

But they are both competitions, if you took the time to see the powerpoint presentations you would see what i mean.

Powerpoint presentations won't turn a non-essential (competition) into an essential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Powerpoint presentations won't turn a non-essential (competition) into an essential.

I didnt say it was an essential, i said it was the situation. If the function of business is to produce and trade things, how are you gonna get that done? How are you gonna create values effiently and effectively and have men CHOOSE to cooperate with you for mutual advantage and get to dominate the market? Why would a customer choose your product over somebody elses? How are you going to make the best product on the market?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didnt say it was an essential, i said it was the situation. If the function of business is to produce and trade things, how are you gonna get that done? How are you gonna create values effiently and effectively and have men CHOOSE to cooperate with you for mutual advantage and get to dominate the market? Why would a customer choose your product over somebody elses? How are you going to make the best product on the market?

Not by killing people or destroying things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not by killing people or destroying things.

HAHA, for craps sake, look at the fucking link tosee how it applies! How many times do i have to say it?

It explains how ideas on maneuver warfare apply to buisness!!

Am i in a room of people in the first grade, why is this so hard to grasp?

In armed conflict, maneuver warfare requires the ability to operate with rapid decision cycles (or "OODA loops," for observe - orient - decide - act).  Such mental and physical quickness produces "agility," to generate ambiguity, isolation, confusion, and panic in the opposing side. Commanders who can achieve these effects often gain victory without bloody and "decisive" battles.

In business as in war, agility rests on an underlying cultural foundation. Sun Tzu, writing sometime before 400 B.C., made the earliest known identification of the elements of such a high-performing culture. 

Chief among these is trust, which is so fundamental that he simply called it, "The Way." Mutual trust is now recognized as essential by every successful practitioner of agility from the US Marine Corps to Japanese industrialists to General Electric.  The destruction of trust as a result of corporate short-sightedness or lack of integrity among senior managers is the single most significant cause of business failures in the early 21st century.

Many of our articles explore the relationship between trust—along with Boyd's other cultural attributes, including "focus and direction" and "mission orientation"—and quick OODA loops.  You will also find advice on specific actions you can take to create this culture in your organization.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Observations

 

Sun Tzu believed that the moral strength and intellectual faculty of man were decisive in war, and that if these were properly applied war [ed. note: and business] could be waged with certain success.

—Brig Gen Samuel B. Griffith, USMC

 

What is the aim or purpose of strategy?  To improve our ability to shape and adapt to unfolding circumstances, so that we (as individuals or as groups or as a culture or as a nation-state) can survive on our own terms

—John R. Boyd

War Chaos and Business

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In short, the loop is a decision-making structure. A "fast" loop will adapt quickly to new or changing situations.

Al Kufr, it is not polite or realistic of you to post links to 300 pages worth of raw data and expect people to be on the same page as you. If you want us to evaluate this, you need to summarize it YOURSELF and post that summary. In other words, you need to do some WORK to make it comprehensible. We are not, for the most part, career military or chinese speakers, so we need it in ENGLISH and not in jargon.

Furthermore, your links provide general ideas, such as "confuse the enemy" or "attack a weak point," without ANY practical examples of HOW to do it. Those powerpoint presentaions are entirely incomplete, as they are not designed to stand alone, but presumably have a speaker talking with them. Since we can't hear the speaker, we literally have NO IDEA what you are talking about.

To expect us to is highly unrealistic and irrational. It is you, not us, who is acting like a first grader. You can't just point a link and make wild hand gestures and consider that an adequite explanation. And no, pointing to the incomprehenible link a second time and making ever more frantic gestures won't help either.

I don't know if the wording is fanciful and unclear by accident (like, it would be clear in its full context), or whether it is unclear in a deliberate attempt to intimidate your opponent into agreement by overwhelming him with jargon. Given my experiance with ex-military men, I suspect the latter. You're a fool if you think that WE are going to fall for that garbage here. Obfuscation is not a weapon and your failure to make yourself clear is YOUR failure; not OURS.

Sit down and translate this into PLAIN ENGLISH. Until then, kindly leave us alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In short, the loop is a decision-making structure. A "fast" loop will adapt quickly to new or changing situations.

Al Kufr, it is not polite or realistic of you to post links to 300 pages worth of raw data and expect people to be on the same page as you. If you want us to evaluate this, you need to summarize it YOURSELF and post that summary. In other words, you need to do some WORK to make it comprehensible. We are not, for the most part, career military or chinese speakers, so we need it in ENGLISH and not in jargon.

Furthermore, your links provide general ideas, such as "confuse the enemy" or "attack a weak point," without ANY practical examples of HOW to do it. Those powerpoint presentaions are entirely incomplete, as they are not designed to stand alone, but presumably have a speaker talking with them. Since we can't hear the speaker, we literally have NO IDEA what you are talking about.

To expect us to is highly unrealistic and irrational. It is you, not us, who is acting like a first grader. You can't just point a link and make wild hand gestures and consider that an adequite explanation. And no, pointing to the incomprehenible link a second time and making ever more frantic gestures won't help either.

I don't know if the wording is fanciful and unclear by accident (like, it would be clear in its full context), or whether it is unclear in a deliberate attempt to intimidate your opponent into agreement by overwhelming him with jargon. Given my experiance with ex-military men, I suspect the latter. You're a fool if you think that WE are going to fall for that garbage here. Obfuscation is not a weapon and your failure to make yourself clear is YOUR failure; not OURS.

Sit down and translate this into PLAIN ENGLISH. Until then, kindly leave us alone.

Ok, you are right, the ideas were easy to grasp for me, and I thought that the presentations were enough, but clearly they are not.

The post was not goal oriented, i should have first asked if anybody had ever heard of the ideas first instead of just putting it up.

Given my experiance with ex-military men, I suspect the latter. You're a fool if you think that WE are going to fall for that garbage here. Obfuscation is not a weapon and your failure to make yourself clear is YOUR failure; not OURS.

No clue what you are talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems as if you are using warfare strategy as a model for business strategy, but the two activities are so unlike that the very attempt makes no sense to me.

The function of war is to hurt people and break things until you destroy your enemy and/or his ability to oppose you.

The function of business is to produce and trade things. It is to create values and to cooperate with other men by voluntary exchange to mutual advantage.

War is force. Business is reason.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Very nicely put.

I usually refer to SunTzu, Hackworth and Boyd for studying history, warfare strategies etc...

SunTzu is useful for conflict resolutions whether in business or personal life, not so much to destroy my competitors but to prevent conflicts to begin with. ( which is also his thesis about war: to win without fighting)

But I use W. Edwards Deming's business principles in runing a business.

His book "Out of the Crisis" is a must for capitalists who value the individuals, cooperation between men in trade and principles of leadership.

See here about the man and his Mangement Methodology:Dr.Deming

I find it interesting that in the US, Sun Tzu is often quoted for business especially during the '90's bubble economy. In Japan,however, Deming is revered practically as a god after WWII because he had helped them rise from the ashes of war to an industrial powerhouse that it is today.

We should embrace this American original as one of our own.

Kien

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems as if you are using warfare strategy as a model for business strategy, but the two activities are so unlike that the very attempt makes no sense to me.

The function of war is to hurt people and break things until you destroy your enemy and/or his ability to oppose you.

The function of business is to produce and trade things. It is to create values and to cooperate with other men by voluntary exchange to mutual advantage.

War is force. Business is reason.

I didnt say it was an essential, i said it was the situation.

Not always.

If the function of  business is to produce and trade things, how are you gonna get that done?
1. Make something other people want.

2. Persuade them to buy it.

How are you gonna create values effiently and effectively

By THINKING.

and  have men CHOOSE to cooperate with you for mutual advantage'
By PERSUADING them that doing business with me is to their self-interest.

and get to dominate the market?

WHAT FOR? A person can be successful in business without being #1 in his market -- or even #10001.

Why would a customer choose your product over somebody elses?

It better suits his particular needs OR nobody else makes anything like it.

Business success doesn't require any interaction or consideration of competitors AT ALL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Make something other people want.

2. Persuade them to buy it.

Right,

By THINKING.

And what organizational methods are going to let your employes think, do you use decentralize decision making or command and control? What will help you become a quicker company?What ideas should you use? is cohesion important? what will you do to stop friction? How do you make sure that the best people are rewarded? What kind of organizational style will better allow information to move?

By PERSUADING them that doing business with me is to their self-interest.
but what methods are you gonna use to make that true?

It better suits his particular needs OR nobody else makes anything like it.

Business success doesn't require any interaction or consideration of competitors AT ALL.

do you think its wrong to consider competitors at all?

How do you adapt to your enviroment if you dont consider competitors and any new advances in technology?

Do you think people that were making horse drawn carriages 90 years ago should have ignored the invention of the automobile and just continued doing everything the same way withought considering anything in their environement?

"One cartoon was of two guys in a factory office. A chart on the wall showed that the business had dropped to zero. One guy was saying to the other,"It cant be our products quality. WE MAKE THE BEST BUGGY WHIPS IN THE WORLD!"

-Kurt Vonnegut, The Bagombo Snuff Box p.66

Are you saying business men should only have internal focus and not try to know about the entire reality around them?are competitors not a part of reality? is it not im portan to adapt to your environment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, you are right, the ideas were easy to grasp for me, and I thought that the presentations were enough, but clearly they are not.

The post was not goal oriented, i should have first asked if anybody had ever heard of the ideas first instead of just putting it up.

No, the presentations are definitely not enough. My summary, that a faster decision loop will produce a more adaptive force that is better suited to maneuver warfare, is pretty much all I got out of the presentations. Please, if there is more to it, I would like to hear about it.

For instance, the general ways I have seen to increase the speed of the decision loop have significant drawbacks:

1) You can increase the speed of the loop by removing calculations and levels and simplifying the decision structure.

Problem: A simplified decision structure is not capable of handling complex situations. Your organization will react quickly by reacting foolishly.

2) You can increase the speed of the loop by making the structure less management-heavy and leaving command decisions to the low-level commanders.

Problem: This is heavily reliant on not only having HIGHLY competant men in the lower ranks, but also on making sure that they have access to intelligence. But the very nature of their jobs demands that they CANNOT stop and see the strategic situation. The squad leader may know better than the general about the exact positions of the enemy soldiers in front of him, but the general will better know about the enemy that the squad leader cannot immediately see. There is a limit to how much you can put on a field man.

I think that having a faster loop is essential to maneuver warfare, but there are limits to how far the above strategies can be used without incurring the problems I listed. An overall increase in technology and competance is the better solution, rather than further structural changes.

Now, Boyd goes on at several points about "getting inside the enemy's loop" and such. But there is NO explanation as to how he does this.

In certain "tactical exercises" I have personally done this, but I would like to know how HE proposes to pull it off.

No clue what you are talking about.

You've never heard a military man use jargon to intimidate a civilian into thinking that the military man has superior intelligence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the presentations are definitely not enough. My summary, that a faster decision loop will produce a more adaptive force that is better suited to maneuver warfare, is pretty much all I got out of the presentations. Please, if there is more to it, I would like to hear about it.
Actually its not just good for warfare, its good for business, police, firefighters, Sport teams or any situation where you have to adapt to your environment.

And you have things in revers, Maneuver Warfare is effective BECUASE IT HAS A BETTER OODA loop, not because of the ooda loop. The object is not to apply the ooda loop, its to make sure you have a better ooda loop.

WE ALREADY USE THE OODA LOOP, THE WHOLE WORLD HAS AN OODA LOOP! we all observe, we all orient ourselves to a situation we all make a deecision and we all act. John boyd just noticed this.The question is, how do you use this idea? Look at the ooda loop again and look at the orientation section.

Now, you asked how do you get inside your enemys ooda loop, im gonna give you a very very very very very simple example, so simple it may seem stupid,but since you are new to this it has to be.

Lets say you are going to have a multiplication math competition in school and you want to prepare so you can get a 10000 dollar prize or whatever.

The competition will be about all the time tables between 1 and 12.

John boyd didnt say you need a fast ooda , he just said it needs to be quicker than your opponent. So how do you make sure you have a quicker ooda loop than everybody else?

Well the best thing to do is to take the initiative so you wont have to REACT to anything. And you can do this by memorizing all the multiplication math tables from 1 to 12 to shorten your ooda loop. So you wont have to think about any of the problems and you will be able to say the answer faster than anybody else. And if you are REALLY smart you can learn how to mulityply so you can adapt to a NEW mulitplication problem that is not from 1 to 12.

So instead of having an ooda loop that goes from observation(looking at the problem ) to orientation(how you are gonna orient to the problem, this is the complicated part and harder to explain) to decision(making the calculation) to action(saying the solution), you will now have what boyd called implicit guidence and control, you wont have to think about the math problem anymore all your competitors will be busy doing the math calculations in their head trying to adapt to the problem while you "instinctively" will already know the answer, you wont have to ADAPT to anythign becuase you have already done it.

Why do you think martial artist go through so much training? so they wont have to think about how to react, they will just instinctively know what to do and do it withought thinking. Becuase if you decide to think you leave a gap for your enemy to enter. Same thing goes for soldiers,why is so much trainign needed? becuase if they encounter the enemy and hesitate for one second and decide to think they will get blown away.

You get inside his ooda loop by doing it faster than he does.

But when you are in a new situation you just revert to the complete ooda loop.

For example,In the math competion, Lets say the teacher gives an extra credit question THATS NOT between the 1 to 12 time tables, what do you do?

Well if you were smart,you dont just memorize the time tables, you would also have to know how to multiply so you will KNOW what to do if the teacher ever gives you a problem thats not the 1 to 12 time tables, for example 13 x 8. if you know how to calculate multiplications and not just memorize time tables you will adapt to your new math situation and get the answer. You get inside everybodys "mind-time-space"

But this is a very simplified example of how to improve the ooda loop, and i had to leave many points so i dont melt your mind. The ooda loop is a cycle, this example only had one loop.

Problem: This is heavily reliant on not only having HIGHLY competant men in the lower ranks, but also on making sure that they have access to intelligence.

They ARE the intelligence,they look for a weakness and exploit it.

Maneuver warfare is not a set of rules, its a WAY of thinking.

But the very nature of their jobs demands that they CANNOT stop and see the strategic situation. The squad leader may know better than the general about the exact positions of the enemy soldiers in front of him, but the general will better know about the enemy that the squad leader cannot immediately see. There is a limit to how much you can put on a field man.
Thisis like asking, what do you mean freedom for americans? How can you let people run around free without being controlled by the goverment, wont there be chaos?...Not if we all have a unifying vision like, life, liberty, and the pursuit of hapiness.

Same thing in Maneuver warfare!!! except the commander sets the strategy(unifying vision) and the people at the bottom are let loose!!

The higher ups have not been eliminated but the diffrence is that the soldiers at the bottom have initiateve now, they dont have to wait for order from the top down(thats a slow ooda loop).

This way, you have many minds working against the enemy not just a few commanders. The marines are taught to create chaos and thrive on chaos.

In maneuver warfare there are no fronts!

Look at this quote:

in Vietnam I wanted to unleash my marines on the enemy, not control them.

The most dangerous wepaon on earth is the human mind. Now just imagine that?A military force where each individual member is allowed to use his mind independently.

Once a marine colonel adopts maneuver warfare or a civilian manager adopts the new freedom, he relinquishes control to those subordinates whom he tells to go out and think for themselves. If the marine colonel who thinks his marines are doing maneuver warfare knows where all his marines are (as I was always told to when I was a lieutenant and a captain under the old school) then whatever it is they are doing is not maneuver warfare. If his marines are taking initiative and fighting at the high tempo that maneuver warfare envisages, the commander cannot possibly know where all his marines are at any one time. So the commander or manager loses control in that he does not know where his people are or what they are doing a great part of the time. Whatever they are doing, they are not waiting for his orders. This can seem very threatening.

Why do you think the soviet union failed, i dont thave to tell you right?

A few minds making decisions. Top/down command and control

why do think capitalism works? because minds are let loose to run wild and free to solve thier own problems! Decentralized control.

If you want to learn more, this is the best place to start.

THINKING LIKE A MARINE

WHAT YOU REALLY DO WITH OODA LOOPS

The Principles of War as Applied to Business

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, referencing that damn diagram. How many times do I have to tell you that that thing is NOT properly labeled?

What do you mean by "get inside his loop?" By context I think you mean "have a faster loop than him," but that's a strange way of putting it.

And I know what you mean re:martial artists, etc.

Re: Giving up command: this is of course, reliant on the ability to GIVE the soldiers good intel. If the marines are given full autonomy, and they see no tanks and advance then that seems fine on the surface. But what if there ARE tanks and the general knows this because of air recon? This is why commanders exists and should not be "cut out of the loop," so to speak.

And that's a cute metaphor with capitalism, but it hardly carries over into military examples. I could use your example and apply it to business: suddenly Joe from accounting is making decisions on which steel formula to use because a command structure "is inefficient." Yet another example of how the brains need to do the thinking and the soldiers need to defer to their judgment.

I'm not coming out against giving small units some autonomy: I'm showing how it can be taken too far and how it is necessary to use new communications technologies and intelligence techniques if you want it to work.

And finally, you don't need to talk down to me: the problem with your examples isn't that they're overly complex; it's that they DON'T INCLUDE FULL EXPLANATIONS of all the terms and theories involved. Almost like you want me to take it on faith or something...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, referencing that damn diagram. How many times do I have to tell you that that thing is NOT properly labeled?
Actually thats not the diagram, those are articles that will help explain everythign i said in more deatil....if you really wana understand.

What do you mean by "get inside his loop?" By context I think you mean "have a faster loop than him," but that's a strange way of putting it.

Well, thats his way of putting it not mine.

Re: Giving up command: this is of course, reliant on the ability to GIVE the soldiers good intel. If the marines are given full autonomy, and they see no tanks and advance then that seems fine on the surface. But what if there ARE tanks and the general knows this because of air recon? This is why commanders exists and should not be "cut out of the loop," so to speak.
RIGHT, thats why they still exist for that same reason

I'm showing how it can be taken too far and how it is necessary to use new communications technologies and intelligence techniques if you want it to work.

Well of course,the military uses all that stuff, clearly

And that's a cute metaphor with capitalism, but it hardly carries over into military examples. I could use your example and apply it to business: suddenly Joe from accounting is making decisions on which steel formula to use because a command structure "is inefficient." Yet another example of how the brains need to do the thinking and the soldiers need to defer to their judgment.

Dont have a clue what you are talking about, but this is used by business to improve quickness.

I think its more like, Joe discoverd a new steel formula, lets spread this information out to the rest of the organization to improve effiency and effectiveness.

Not,

do we have permission to do reaserch on a new formula?

-you have to ask the boss

do we have permission to use this new formula?

-you have to ask the boss

do we have permission to spread this new formula?

-you have to ask the boss

SLOW SLOW SLOW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(How I'm going to create value efficiently and effectively in business.) By THINKING.

Right,

And what organizational methods are going to let your employes think,  do you use decentralize decision making or command and control? What will help you become a quicker company?What ideas should you use? is cohesion important? what will you do to stop friction? How do you make sure that the best people are rewarded? What kind of organizational style will better allow information to move?

but what methods are you gonna use to make that true?

It all depends of WHAT values I am going to produce, what resources I have available, what the production time frame is, etc. All the things you mention above are MEANS and there is no way to answer such a question without reference to the ENDS. Otherwise, all those methods are just floating abstractions

do you think its wrong to consider competitors at all?
That depends on what I am doing, business-wise.

My CyberNet has no competitors.

My eBay sales have loads of people doing what I am doing, but their success in no way affects my sales. In fact, I have learned a lot about the business by watching and analyzing how they do business.

My primary business is creating custom computer software for large corporate clients (Click here for my resume) and, when business is good for my competitors, it is even better for me because I am damn good at what I do.

How do you adapt to your enviroment if you dont consider competitors and any new advances in technology?

I have competitors -- sometimes -- but that rarely affects what I choose to do. I seldom interact with competitors and I'm certainly not at war with them.

Are you saying business men should only have internal focus and not try to know about the entire reality around them?are competitors not a part of reality? is it not importan to adapt to your environment?

Businessmen should have a REALITY focus. The reality is that competitors rarely play a part in my business decisions.

I'm concerned with my CUSTOMERS and CLIENTS and their self-interest. I deliver products and services that satisfy their self-interest and they give me money. That's the deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...