Complexity and Command at the Operational Level of War

  • Vince Berardini
Part of the Topics in Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality book series (TSRQ, volume 21)


The operational level of war for the U.S. military lies between two boundaries: tactics and strategy. Similarly, complexity lies between two boundaries: equilibrium and chaos. The symmetry is perhaps coincidental, but it highlights an important point, that is, both share common attributes. This paper explores those and describes the military as a complex organization confronting complex adversaries operating in complex environments. If we assume the character of war constantly changes, as many in the military claim, it follows that the character of future war must also change. What models and tools will enable operational level practitioners better understand this co-evolutionary dynamic? Complexity research offers a new perspective.


Armed Conflict Complex Adaptive System Strategic Level Military Intervention Joint Publication 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Axelrod RM, Cohen MD (1999) Harnessing complexity: organizational implications of a scientific frontier. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Foley C (2008) The thin blue line: how humanitarianism went to war. Verso, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Gates RM (2009) A balanced strategy: reprogramming the pentagon for a new age. Foreign Aff 88(1):28–40Google Scholar
  4. Joint Publication (JP) 1-02, Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, 12 Apr 2001 (as amended through 5 June 2003)Google Scholar
  5. Joint Publication 3-0, Joint Operations (September 2006, w/Update 2010)Google Scholar
  6. Joint Publication (JP) 5-0, Joint Operation Planning (2011)Google Scholar
  7. Jullien F (2004) A treatise on efficacy: between Western and Chinese thinking. University of Hawaii Press, HawaiiGoogle Scholar
  8. Miller JH, Page SE (2007) Complex adaptive systems: an introduction to computational models of social life. Princeton studies in complexity. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  9. Page SE (2007) The difference: how the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  10. Page SE (2009) Understanding complexity. The Teaching Company, ChantillyGoogle Scholar
  11. Schaeffer J, Burch N, Bjornsson Y, Kishimoto A, Muller M, Lake R, Lu P, Sutphen S (2007) Checkers is solved. Science 317(5844):1518–1522. doi: 10.1126/science.1144079 MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Schelling TC (2006) Micromotives and macrobehavior. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Simpson P (2007) Organizing in the mist: a case study in leadership and complexity. Leadersh Organ Dev J 28(5):465–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Smith R (2005) The utility of force: the art of war in the modern world. Penguin Group, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Stacey R (2007) The challenge of human interdependence: consequences for thinking about the day to day practice of management in organizations. Eur Bus Rev 19(4):292–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. US, Department of the Army. FM 5-0, The Operations Process. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. March 2010Google Scholar
  17. US Joint Forces Command, The Joint Warfighting Center Joint Doctrine Series, Pamphlet 10, Design in Military Operations: A Primer for Joint Warfighters, September 2010Google Scholar
  18. Vego MN (2000) Operational warfare. U.S. Naval War College, NewportGoogle Scholar
  19. von Clausewitz C, Howard M, Paret P (1976) On war. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  20. Watts DJ (2011) Everything is obvious: once you know the answer. Crown Business, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vince Berardini, Senior AnalystROLAND & ASSOCIATES CorporationMonetaryUSA

Personalised recommendations