Military Planning 2.0 with Mind-Mapping

We have not had a real breakthrough in planning processes for a long time.  Military planners have long had a 1/3-2/3 rule that says for any given mission, senior planners or headquarters elements take 1/3 of available time to plan and give 2/3 of the time to subordinate units or commanders for preparing to execute the mission.  This rule was ingrained in me even as a cadet in the Fighting Texas Aggie Corps.  The rule is a good one even for today, but technology in the form of real-time mind-mapping (MM) makes this a nearly obsolete paradigm and greatly enhances the concept to execution process.   What I am about to explain is relevant for any large operation such as disaster or other crisis management involving large numbers of stakeholders or players.

First let me explain how MM works in a military or similar crisis planning environment:  Instead of filling in blanks from a PowerPoint chart along the military decision-making process, the concept of operations (or called “operational design” lately) is done on a mind map.  Typically, the base document is done in a small, multi-functional or multi-specialty group and then these experts break off and create more detailed plans along their functional lines.  Then ensues a productivity nightmare where one poor  person gets stuck combining all the disparate files.  This is just the plan development.  The plan is then sent to the executing unit and ostensibly the 2/3 time begins.  The executing unit not only needs to prepare, but needs to validate the provisions of the plan to ensure they make sense.  As any experienced military person will tell you, what looks right in the planning office may well be stupidity from the ground.  Depending on the number of errors in the plan from the perspective of the executing unit, more productivity is killed passing messages and file sback and forth.  Once both headquarters and executors agree on the plan, then comes the challenge of managing the execution.  Here again, productivity is drained by creating and maintaining yet new documents like Excel charts or other PowerPoint tables to track execution items.  My work even with US special operations has shown this continues to be a challenge despite all our technology.  In fact, sometimes technology is the problem – especially for the military and other government agencies.  There are too many specialized systems that are not practiced often enough and our fall-back as been trying to make MS Office products do a job they were never designed for.  What’s important to note is that human nature IS to fall back on the familiar even if its not the best way.

Military planning 2.0 w/mind-mapping.  What today’s mind-mapping software offers is the ability to go from concept to execution management not only in a single visual canvas (ie your computer screen), but with a single software program.  Several companies now offer real-time, collaborative mapping so a headquarters planner and the executor can exchange plans and feedback instantly so 1/3-2/3 rules are gone in their traditional sense.  Special features of mind-mapping software like MindManager, for example, allow asynchronous, rolling comments associated and embedded with each topic.  This simple feature eliminates the need for back-and-forth emails on an issue.  Military planners know well the challenge of keeping dozens to hundreds of email content accessible, contextual, and organized during a planning process.  It becomes key when presenting a plan, for example, and the senior leader wants to know the “5 Ws” or their subordinates’ input on an issue.  The presenter need only click the topics comment icon and all the background information appears with names and date stamps.

What is additionally unique is that when you capture your operational plan in a mind-map, the whole of the plan is in view and any stakeholder/user can instantly drill down to the sections most relevant for their needs.  Furthermore, if you understand most mind-mapping programs, then you know that at each topic you can hyperlink or attach nearly anything.  Therefore, for example, when a topic note explains via text the plan, a contextual hyperlink can immediately open relevant images or other supporting materials.

Another advantage is in battle management.  Military operations officers know well the challenge of conducting hand-offs at shift changes and making sure that their replacement has a firm grasp on new issues.  Mindmanager 8, for example, has a “bookmark” feature that allows one shift operator to indicate new additions to the map.  The replacement need only to review the bookmarks and the program literally “walks” you to each one with a mouse click.  Similarly, the use of the aforementioned comments feature allows one to make “side notes” on issues and those too can be quickly and easily reviewed systematically.  These features worked beautifully during several geographic combatant command-level exercise I participated in.  (See example battle management map for medical operations)

This scratches the surface on what is possible by adopting and applying mind-mapping technology to the military decision-making process.  If you’d like learn more, send me an email.

Sterilized example of actual battle management map

Advertisement