Campaign Planning Process 28 March 2006 Step 4C – Campaign Evaluation UNCLASSIFIED.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Tips and Resources IASC Cluster/Sector Leadership Training
Advertisements

Professional Learning Communities Connecting the Initiatives
Operational Planning “The Multinational Framework”
CONSUMERS HAVE A RIGHT TO EXPECT AND PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE WOULD REQUIRE: –That to the extent possible, the service provider knows the consumer’s bio-psycho-
Campaign Planning Process 28 March 2006 Step 4A – Develop The Campaign Framework UNCLASSIFIED.
Leadership Development Nova Scotia Public Service
Case interrelations Relationships and integration Episode 3 - CAATS II Final Dissemination Event John Harrison Hu-Tech CAATS II Brussels, 13 & 14 Oct 2009.
700: Moving Through the Collaboration Continuum to Improve Permanency Outcomes Wednesday, March 20, 2013.
Planning and Strategic Management
Sustaining Community Based Programs CYFAR Conference Boston, 2005.
Military Decision Making Process (MDMP)
Opportunities for RAC Participation. Three Part discussion General presentation; Example of oil and gas decision making; and Panel Discussion of RAC involvement.
Purpose of the Standards
Introduction to Computer Technology
Charting a course PROCESS.
Crisis Action Planning Commander’s Guidance and Intent
Campaign Planning Process Step 3B – System Center of Gravity Analysis
Objective- and Strategic Analysis
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2008 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Reaching Goals: Plans and Controls Today’s smart supervisor.
Campaign Planning Process 29 March 2006 Step 7 – Prepare Operations Plan (OPLAN) / Operations Order (OPORD) & Assess UNCLASSIFIED.
Lessons from Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Programme & Aid Effectiveness.
MEDIATING NATURAL RESOURCE CONFLICTS: USEFUL TOOLS AND CONCEPTS MICHAEL BROWN SENIOR MEDIATION EXPERT STANDBY MEDIATION TEAM UN DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL.
~ pertemuan 2 ~ Oleh: Ir. Abdul Hayat, MTI 06-Mar-2009 [Abdul Hayat, The Project Management and IT Context, Semester Genap 2008/2009] 1 THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT.
Slide 1 A product of Turning Point The Turning Point Leadership Development National Excellence Collaborative Vision: Collaborative leadership is used.
Module 2 Stakeholder analysis. What’s in Module 2  Why do stakeholder analysis ?  Identifying the stakeholders  Assessing stakeholders importance and.
Multinational Planning Augmentation Team
National Commission for Academic Accreditation & Assessment Developmental Reviews at King Saud University and King Faisal University.
ISO 9001:2008 to ISO 9001:2015 Summary of Changes
Multinational Coordination Center
Military Decision Making Process – Multinational (MDMP-M)
Subcommittee on Design New Strategies for Cost Estimating Research on Cost Estimating and Management NCHRP Project 8-49 Annual Meeting Orlando, Florida.
Project Management Planning Minder Chen, Ph.D. CSU Channel Islands
ACADEMICS Feb 2012 This brief is classified: UNCLASSIFIED As of: 31 Jan 12 CAMPAIGN ASSESSMENT.
THE MILITARY DECISION MAKING PROCESS (MDMP)
Prepare and Issue the Coalition / Combined Task Force OPORD Multinational Planning Augmentation Team (MPAT) Purpose References Discuss the process of preparing.
JOINT TASK FORCE TRAINING Course of Action Comparison.
Strategies for Knowledge Management Success SCP Best Practices Showcase March 18, 2004.
Quality Assurance Review Team Oral Exit Report School Accreditation AUTEC School 4-8 March 2012.
UNCLASSIFIED Crisis Action Planning 01 January 2006 CTF Operation Order UNCLASSIFIED ing.
Kathy Corbiere Service Delivery and Performance Commission
The common structure and ISO 9001:2015 additions
Campaign Planning Process Guide / Brief Template
Campaign Planning Process Step 5 – Linking Planning to Execution
TCRF Strategic Planning Process A Stakeholders’ Consultative Retreat- Morogoro 26 th -27 April 2013.
MPAT SECRETARIAT Multinational Force Crisis Action Planning Overview COALITION/COMBINED TASK FORCE TRAINING.
Module 4: Planning Concepts. July 2009Recovery Analysis Objectives At the end of this module you will be able to:  Distinguish among various planning.
How good is our school? (4 th edition) Professional learning events November 2015.
Course of Action Comparison Purpose u Define course of action comparison and its role in the crisis action planning process u Discuss the associated task.
THIRD FLEET COMTHIRDFLT Crisis Planning & HA/DR Exercise Strong Angel THIRD FLEET HA/DR Team COMTHIRDFLT COMTHIRDFLT.
Campaign Planning Process 29 March 2006 Step 4E – Determine Prioritized Supporting Effects UNCLASSIFIED.
1 Project Management C13PM Session 2 Project Initiation & Definition Russell Taylor Business Department Staff Workroom
Helping Teachers Help All Students: The Imperative for High-Quality Professional Development Report of the Maryland Teacher Professional Development Advisory.
Chapter 5 Population Health Quality and Safety Learning Objectives 1. Explain why it is difficult to monitor healthcare quality and safety at the population.
1 Introducing the ARC: The New Performance Appraisal Tool for RCs and UNCTs March 2016.
Center of Excellence PEACE OPERATIONS COMMAND & CONTROL AND COMMAND & CONTROL AND TRANSITION ISSUES Lt Col (R) John Derick Osman Center of Excellence in.
MNF SOP Planning Options & Campaign Planning Process
Introduction to Software Project Management Lecture1.
BLM Decision Making Process
Campaign Planning Process Working Overview Slides
Aim __________________ Focus for Leaders
Campaign Planning Process Step 4 – Campaign Formulation
Reaching Goals and Objectives
Standing Operating Procedures
Project Audit and Closure
QAPI Design and Scope.
Teams What is a team? Maintaining Focus
Military Decision Making Process-Multinational (MDMP-M) Overview
Course of Action Development
Military Decision Making Process - Multinational (MDMP-M) Overview
Project Audit and Closure
Presentation transcript:

Campaign Planning Process 28 March 2006 Step 4C – Campaign Evaluation UNCLASSIFIED

2 Learning Objectives This module will cover Step 4C of the Campaign Planning Process. Aim of Step: –The Campaign Framework is evaluated against the CCTF Intent & Operational End State. This evaluation allows the Campaign Plan Directive to be developed. Starting Conditions: –DP Matrix is completed. –DP Matrix is coordinated with CTF Components & major actor / stakeholders.

UNCLASSIFIED 3 Learning Objectives Basic Process : –C5 PLANS & the CPG, supported by the Red Team (C2, C5, C7, & POLAD), accomplish this evaluation. –The developed Campaign Framework is now evaluated against the CCTF’s Intent & Operational End State for the following:  Feasibility in regard to key limitations (constraints & restraints) and major resources – Can it be done?  Suitability in addressing prevailing conditions of the operational environment – Will it accomplish the mission?  Acceptability in terms of strategic intent & objectives – Is it a politically acceptable plan of action? –This is cognitive evaluation (“gross error check”) & should NOT be a detailed wargaming analysis.

UNCLASSIFIED 4 Learning Objectives Ending Conditions: –DPs are validated (support CCTF’s Intent & achievement of the Operational End State). –DPs are thoroughly reviewed by major actor / stakeholders to ensure that a “coordinating / cooperative atmosphere” is established.  Note: Information classification may restrict direct review; the CTF C7, through the Civil-Military Operations Center (CMOC), should coordinate with the IA community to the maximum extent possible. –The Campaign Framework is confirmed as the set of DPs / SEs that will support the attainment of the desired Operational End State. End Product of the Step: None

UNCLASSIFIED 5 Preliminary Notes Coordination with the NCEs & with major actors / stakeholders is critical within multinational efforts. –Cultural sensitivities & participating nations’ input, together with input from major actors / stakeholders, is required. The CCTF’s, Command Group’s, & NCE’s “personal efforts” are required to ensure the plan is suitable, feasible, & acceptable with the international & major actor / stakeholder community.

UNCLASSIFIED 6 Preliminary Notes The Multinational Coordination Center (MNCC) & CMOC (& CTF C7 staff) will be key organizations within the CTF HQs for Campaign Framework evaluation checks & coordination.

UNCLASSIFIED 7 Step 4C – Campaign Evaluation Preliminary Action C5 PLANS organizes the CPG & Red Team. Special emphasis is placed on NCE evolvement. C7 (Civil-Military Operations Planners) organize to fully represent actor / stakeholder input that cannot be directly involved due to information classification. The CCTF (personal involvement) & Command Group need to be engaged with senior leaders of the major actor / stakeholder organizations.

UNCLASSIFIED 8 Step 4C – Campaign Evaluation Main Actions The CPG, with help of a RED Team, validates the DPs ability to support the attainment of CCTF’s Intent & the desired Operational End State. –DPs must NOT conflict with, or be negated by, the likely effects sought by other actors / stakeholders. DPs should be mutually reinforcing. –DPs should illuminate the SEs requiring close coordination with other actors / stakeholders.

UNCLASSIFIED 9 Step 4C – Campaign Evaluation Main Actions Each DP is assessed for its suitability, feasibility, & acceptability. –The method for validating the DPs is similar to Mission Analysis with each DP (condition) acting as the stimulus for discussion by the CPG. –The CPG maintains an ongoing dialogue with the Command Group for their assessment of the validity of the DPs (in small group settings). –This is the first occasion at which a “Red Team” may provide a check on the process, although such activity should not drive planning in a particular direction.

UNCLASSIFIED 10 Step 4C – Campaign Evaluation Main Actions At this point, the CCTF & Staff must ensure that major risks & omissions from the campaign framework are noted so that they might be subsequently mitigated. –In complex crisis response contingencies, risks & omissions will most likely be difficult civil-military issues. –Nevertheless, difficult issues must be identified & addressed in a cooperative effort with other actor / stakeholders.

CTF Components CTF Staff Command Group 30%50%20% Steps 1 to 3 Steps 4 & 5 Steps 6 & 7 1 – Commander’s Scoping 2 – Situation Review 3A – Mission Analysis 3B – S-COG Analysis 3C – Factor Analysis 4A – Develop the Campaign Framework 4C – Decisive Point (DP) Evaluation CTF Component Analysis 4B – Decisive Point (DP) Analysis & Supporting Effect (SE) Development WARNO 1OIPEMsn AnalysisWARNO 2 Strategic Military Direction (HHQ Warning Order to JTF / CTF)

UNCLASSIFIED 12 Summary Campaign Evaluation is a “sanity-check” to confirm the previous planning supports the CCTF’s Intent & establishes the conditions that will achieve the Operational End State. Major actor / stakeholders perspectives & view points of the participating nations are critical for Campaign Framework validation. Do NOT just focus on military conditions within the Campaign Framework; identify complex civil-military conditions that require coordination & cooperation.

UNCLASSIFIED 13 Quiz

Discussion UNCLASSIFIED

15 Backup Slides Enhancing Multinational Operations