01/09/2004 Interacting with the Decision Maker – ISMOR 2004 Col N-J K Kvist (JFC); Sara Dean (NC3A) “Facts, Figures and Facilitation”

01/09/2004 Content Background of work undertaken Levels of interaction Influence at each level Issues experienced Discussion

01/09/2004 Overview of Work Road Map Development –High level reporting tool based on OPLAN –JFC concept –HQ ISAF development –Use for reporting at both levels –Planners lead but whole ISAF staff involved MoE Development –Support the Road Map –Provide nuts and bolts behind reporting –Provide consistency in reporting –Both at JFC and HQ ISAF levels –OA lead

01/09/2004 The Development Process Lines of Operations & Tasks Measures of Effectiveness (MoE) Model & software Evaluation Implementation Task interrelationship Merge & implementation Milestones Model & software Evaluation MoE Road Map OA J5

01/09/2004 The Government of Afghanistan Capacity Education Language barrier Priority issues and coordination Understanding of the concept

01/09/2004 Evolution of Responsibilities Over time: –J5 lead on Road Map issues –OA lead on MoE issues –OA lead on automation of Road Map and MoE –Interactions between OA/J5 Successful in theatre (constant) Successful in JFC (but more disjointed)

01/09/2004 From one to two Road Maps The first (IMF): –External measures to the military mission, more the development indicators for Afghanistan The second (ORM): –Internal measures to the military mission, mainly focused on the OPLAN implementation

01/09/2004 Enhance The NATO Mission Effect Facilitate AFG National Development A legitimate and functioning State that provides for the security and prosperity of its citizens and contributes to regional and global stability POL ES Conditions adequate for the continued consolidation of stability in Afghanistan without the need for ISAF MIL ES Extend In-Theatre ISAF Operations Promote Security Sector Reform Promote ATA Influence and Authority

01/09/2004 At the ISAF Level – Development Phase With the development of the Road Map in theatre, the decisions on structure and vision were mainly made by HQ ISAF – then presented higher Structure and vision presented to rest of ISAF HQ key leaders – coordinated J5/OA Consensus reached by all key leaders to validate structure – but not at JFC

01/09/2004 At the JFC Level - Development Phase J5 and OA interact directly with updates on the progress of development to the Command Group. Key decisions made on structure, focus and purpose of the Road Map – OA provide independent view Structure and practicalities suggested by J5/OA and approved at higher level Actual development undertaken in theatre

01/09/2004 At the ISAF Level – Implementation Phase ORM is under review Decision support process: –Integrated in decision cycle –Includes: Planner coordination Subject Matter Expert (SME) input Analysis Support –Results: Status Options

01/09/2004 OA Integration in the ORM Decision Support Cycle Analysis of MoE (OA) Corrective Action Adjust ORM and MoE (Planners/SME/OA) Execute Road Map (ISAF) Prepare Update/Decision Briefing (Planners) Data Collection (SME) Assess ORM Progress Develop Options (OA/SME/Planners) Final Direction & Guidance (COM ISAF) Initial Direction & Guidance (COS ISAF)

01/09/2004 At the JFC Level - Implementation Phase COM JFC will receive regular updates Support monthly OPLAN reviews Initiate corrective action at JFC level –i.e. additional force requirements, changes to OPLAN or sustainment issues Input to Six-monthly Mission Review Bottom-line - informed decision-making

01/09/2004 Issues Concerning the Decision Makers Timeliness Multiple decision makers Responsibility for sections of the project Acceptance of decision at lower level

01/09/2004 Successes in the Decision Making Process Road Maps developed ISAF HQ reached consensus on the IMF issue Multiple decision makers - communications Slowly all nations are beginning to see the potential OA now being recognised in both HQs as interacting with various decision makers

01/09/2004 Discussion Similar experiences OA integration within a military HQ Multi-layered decision making process, is this an efficient way? Evolutionary decisions rather than finished products for approval?