The Recognition-Primed Decision Model

Abstract

A KEY Objective Force premise is to achieve a significant increase in operating tempo (OPTEMPO). Fundamental to increased OPTEMPO is gathering, integrating, and applying information that helps military planners anticipate and counter threats before an adversary can act. To act faster than the enemy can, the Army currently uses a procedural and cumbersome military decisionmaking process (MDMP) that military planners often abbreviate. (1) However, little guidance exists on how to abbreviate the process. U.S. Army Field Manual (FM) 101-5, Staff Organization and Operations, gives suggestions, but no real guidance. (2) To take full advantage of the Objective Force's new capabilities, the Army needs a strong, fast, flexible decisionmaking process. In 1989, Gary A. Klein, Roberta Calderwood, and Anne Clinton-Cirocco presented what they called the recognition-primed decision (RPD) model, which describes how decisionmakers can recognize a plausible course of action (COA) as the first one to consider. (3) A commander's knowledge, training, and experience generally help in correctly assessing a situation and developing and mentally wargaming a plausible COA, rather than taking time to deliberately and methodically contrast it with alternatives using a common set of abstract evaluation dimensions. (4) Klein, S. Wolf, Laura G. Militellio, and Carolyn E. Zsambok show that skilled decisionmakers usually generate a good COA on their first try. (5) J.G. Johnson and M. Raab replicated this finding, extending it to show that when skilled decisionmakers abandon their initial COA in favor of a later one, the subsequent COA's quality is significantly lower than the first one. (6) Johnston, J.E. Driskell, and E. Salas show that intuitive decision processes result in higher performance than do analytical processes. (7) The findings call into question the rationale behind MDMP, which assumes that good decisionmaking requires generating and evaluating three possible COAs to find the best solution. John F. Schmitt and Klein developed the Recognition Planning Model (RPM) from research on the RPD model and on several studies of military planning exercises to codify the informal and intuitive planning strategies skilled Army and U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) planning teams used. (8) The RPM has stimulated interest in the military ever since Schmitt and Klein described it. Individual Army and USMC battalion commanders have experimented with the RPM and found it useful. The British military has been conducting experiments with the RPM, demonstrating its face validity. (9) Peter Thunholm performed the most stringent research, contrasting performance for division-level planning groups in the Swedish Army that used either a variant of the RPM or the Swedish Army version of the MDMP. (10) Thunholm found that the RPM permitted an increase in planning tempo of about 20 percent. Thunholm also observed that RPM plans were somewhat bolder and better adapted to situational demands than MDMP plans, which tended to be more constrained by an over-compliance with current doctrinal templates. The Swedish Army has adopted a variant of the RPM, and Sweden's National Defence College provides training on tactical planning aided by that model only. Rather than trying to replace the MDMP, Schmitt and Klein sought to codify the way planners actually work. Therefore, the RPM does not feel awkward or unnatural to planners, who often say, We're already doing this, which is exactly the intent--to codify existing effective planning practices that reflect the best planning practices that have evolved over decades. The RPM, which reflects current theory and research, is a practical application of the RPD model. The RPM is consistent with natural practices and enables an increase in tempo without losing efficacy, which offers a potentially useful application for the Objective Force. RPM strategy is for commanders to identify their preferred COA so the staff can work on detailing and improving it. …