![]() ![]() FM 5-0 states that the, “ Prerequisites for effective mission command are the use of mission orders, full familiarity with the commander’s intent throughout the force, and mutual trust and understanding between commanders and subordinates.” A CONOP is not a mission order it is a subparagraph of an OPORD. One issue with the CONOP is the lack of doctrinal format, which is dependent on the unit’s SOPs. This, however, is not the case and there are, in fact, huge differences. As GEN Eisenhower said, “In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.”Ī generally held belief exists that a CONOP and OPORD cover the same details. Thus, the order type does not guarantee mission success however, the level of planning that occurs can tip the scales. This, however, does not mean an OPORD will guarantee mission success so true was this for Operation Rock Move in Afghanistan, which ultimately resulted in an operational-level defeat of U.S. Conversely, the capture of a terrorist cell leader in Afghanistan is conducted with a far less detailed ad hoc CONOP, which will likely be unsuccessful due to the lack of planning. 2011) when conducting Operation Clean Sweep, which is a yearly event to clean up trash and move pine cones further away from the roads at Fort Bragg. ![]() The Army develops a twenty one page OPORD with annexes (4th BCT, 82nd ABN DIV, "OPORD 11-19 4th BCT OPERATION CLEAN SWEEP," 29 Mar. Unless otherwise cited the data and analysis presented in this article is derived from these two surveys. Additionally, from my observations as an Observer Controller Trainer (OC/T) at the Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC) a survey conducted of 61 graduates from the Maneuver Captains Career Course (MCCC) and a comparative survey of CONOPs submitted by combat arms units during JRTC rotations. The criticisms in this essay are based on my experience as a Special Forces Non-Commissioned Officer and Infantry Officer during tours in support of Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. What follows is a critical look at the CONOP process. As a result, we have reduced well thought out orders to a process that goes against the tenets of counter insurgency doctrine, which emphasizes the importance of mission command. And, because approval is the ultimate goal, planning and mission analysis receives minimal attention as a leaders time is spent developing the CONOP product. These requirements are necessary for CONOP approval thus, CONOPs are often written in a way that will secure higher headquarters (HQs) approval, even if the information is not completely accurate. Therefore, commanders have added additional requirements when submitting CONOPs and these requirements differ depending on what level of CONOP submitted. Providing only the concept of the operation paragraph does not provide sufficient information to a conduct a mission. ![]() Though it was originally developed to streamline and expedite the orders process, it has done the opposite, forcing leaders to expend time, effort and energy to push the CONOP through the approval process from the lowest to the highest levels time that should be spent on mission planning. The CONOP has replaced the traditional five paragraph OPORD however, unlike the OPORD, the CONOP does not have a standardized format, nor agreed upon content and varies from unit to unit. Welton ChangĪnyone who has deployed has encountered the CONOP, which is the concept of the operation portion of a operations order (OPORD). Thomas Doherty - With contributions from Mr. Failing to Plan is Planning to Fail: When CONOPs Replace OPORDs ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |