For military strategy, intent is the desired outcome of a military operation. It is a key concept in 21st century military operations and is a vital element to facilitate subordinates' initiativeAlberts, D.S., Garstka, J.J. and Stein, F.P. (1999). Network Centric Warfare 2nd ed. (revised), Washington, D.C.: DoD Command and Control Research Program. pp. 75–93. . and collaboration and cooperationAlberts, D.S. and Hayes, R. (2007). Planning: Complex Endeavours, Washington, D.C.: DoD Command and Control Research Program. pp. 94. Accessed July 4, 2008. . amongst team members in joint operations.Gustavsson, P. M. (2011). PhD Thesis Modelling, Formalising, and implementing Intent in Command and Control Systems, Leicester: De Montfort University. Accessed via ResearchGate.
Intent content In the reviewed open military doctrine literature, intent is a critical component for command and control. The many definitions that exist of intent are mostly similar, but the actual intent content differs and is unclear. Intent content can mainly be found as concept descriptions in doctrinal handbooks relating to development or impact usage of intent.
The following examples represent the doctrinal intent of the United Kingdom, Sweden, Canada, United States, and NATO. British Army Doctrine defines it as "Intent is similar to purpose. A clear intent initiates a force's purposeful activity. It represents what the commander wants to achieve and why; and binds the force together; it is the principal result of decision-making. It is normally expressed using effects, objectives and desired outcomes....The best intents are clear to subordinates with minimal amplifying detail."Operations, chapter 6: "Command of Operations". Swindon: Ministry of Defence, pp. 11. Swedish Armed Forces – Integrated Dynamic Command and Control (IDC2)Josefsson, A. (2007) Ledningskoncept för integrerad dynamisk ledning (IDC2) C2 concept for integrated dynamic command and control. Stockholm: Swedish Armed Forces. define intent to "Intent is a concise formulation of the overall goals and purpose. The focus is to describe operations, restrictions and resource allocation." Canadian Forces Joint Publication 5.0: "Commander's Intent. This summary should provide the Commander's overall intent and establish the purpose of the plan. It is an important focusing statement for subordinate commanders. (1) Military Objectives. (2) Desired Military End-State. (3) Transition Conditions".Chief of the Defence. (April 2008). The Canadian Forces Operational Planning Process (OPP), pp. 5E - 2. US Field Manual 5.0 (2010) constitute the US Army's view on planning, preparing, executing, and assessing operations. "The commander's intent is a clear, concise statement of what the force must do and the conditions the force must establish with respect to the enemy, terrain, and civil considerations that represent the desired end state (FM 3–0). The commander's intent succinctly describes what constitutes success for the operation. It includes the operation's purpose and the conditions that define the end state. It links the mission, concept of operations, and tasks to subordinate units."U.S. Army. (2010). The Operations Process, para. 2-90. Accessed January 20, 2011. NATO allied Joint publication 1 (AJP-01; 2010)provide the keystone doctrine for the planning, execution and support of Allied joint operations. "The intent defines the end-state in relation to the factors of mission; adversary, operating environment, terrain, forces, time and preparation for future operations. As such, it addresses what results are expected from the operation, how these results might enable transition to future operations, and how, in broad terms, the Commander expects the force to achieve those results. Its focus is on the force as a whole. Additional information on how the force will achieve the desired results is provided only to clarify the Commander's intentions."NATO. (2010). AJP-01(D): Allied Joint Doctrine. Brussels, para. 0538. US Joint Publication 3.0 (2010) provides the doctrinal foundation and fundamental principles that guide the Armed Forces of the United States in the conduct of joint operations across the range of military operations. "Commander's intent is a clear and concise expression of the purpose of the operation and the military end state." and continues with "It also includes where the commander will accept risk during the operation. The initial intent statement normally contains the purpose and military end state as the initial inputs for the planning process."U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. (2010). Joint Publication 3-0 – Joint Operations. pp. IV-25. Accessed January 20, 2011. Other doctrinal work that have been used in this survey are US Field Manual 6.0 (2003) describe doctrine on C2 for tactical Army echelons (corps and below);U.S. Army. (2003). Mission Command: Command and Control of Army Forces, Washington D.C., para. 1–68. Accessed March 10, 2009. US Field Manual 3–0 (2008) presents overarching doctrinal guidance and direction for conducting operations and is one of the two capstone doctrine handbooks for US Army;U.S. Army. (2008). Operations, Washington, D.C., para. 5–55. Accessed August 19, 2013. SwAF – Regulations for ground operations (Regler för markoperationer) (2009)Svensson, M. P. (ed.). (2009). Reglemente för markoperationer (RMO), 3rd ed. Stockholm: Swedish Armed Forces Headquarters, pp. 143. M7739-350009. UK Glossary of Joint and Multinational Terms and Definitions (2006)Ministry of Defence. (2006). United Kingdom Glossary of Joint and Multinational Terms and Definitions, 7th ed. Carmarthenshire, pp. C-16.
In military doctrinal handbooks the identified intent artefacts generally express the initial state and situation, the desired end state and outcome, and how to get to the desired end state. Artefacts describing the initial situation are: own and other forces, adversaries, operating environment, terrain, time, preparation for future operations. Artefacts describing the outcome are: purpose, goals, mission, effects and end state. Artefacts describing how to reach the outcome are: concept of operations, tasks to subordinate units, risk willing, how results might enable transition to future operations, objectives, transition conditions, restrictions in conducting operations, allocation of resources, and expectations of force usage.
Another way to identify intent artefacts is from how people actually communicate intent. Klein (1998) presents the results of information types that is identified in intent communication.Klein, G. (1998). Sources of Power - How People Make Decisions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp.225-229. The seven information types of intent are according to Klein are: (1) Purpose of task which describes why the task is performed, (2) objective of task, presents a picture of the desired outcome, (3) sequence of steps in the plan. Klein identifies this to be a source of problem since too detailed descriptions may limit the subordinates initiative, (4) rationale for plan includes all the information that where present when making the decision, (5) key decisions that may have to be made, i.e. if there is a choice to be made the commander can provide the intent in how he wants it to be conducted, (6) antigoals, describe unwanted outcomes, and (7) constraints and other considerations describes weather and rule of engagement etc.
Intent content definition The doctrinal artefacts are mapped into the structure provided by Klein and the resulting seven facets are grouped in: (a) Initial Situation describing initial situation and state and consists of Klein's rationale for the plan, (b) Outcome is describing outcomes and consists of Klein's Purpose of task, objective of task, and antigoals, and (c) Execution that is describing how to reach the outcome and consists of Klein's sequence of steps, key decisions and constraints and other considerations.
Intent is then defined to consist of the following eight facets. Mission/Goal – The purpose of the task (the higher-level goals). It provides the rationale why the missions and task are to be executed. It is a high-level definition of the overall intent and is regularly stated in one sentence following on the form of Who, What, When, Where and Why. A Mission/Goal can be described by using the Actions, Effects or a compound State, i.e. situation. Mission/Goal belongs to the intent group outcome. End-State – The objective of the task in form of a representation of the desired outcome. The desired outcome is described as a state, e.g. completion of a task, the effects from tasks, or even the execution of tasks over time. The purpose is to provide a picture of the End-State. According to Klein (1998) in his investigation, the end-state objective was only missing once in the thirty five examined Commander's intent statements. Effect is in this work defined as the physical and/or behavioural state of a system that results from an action, a set of actions, or another effect. The End State is a more detail description of the Mission/Goal statement and can be described in several sentences. An End State can be described by using the Actions, Effects or a compound State, i.e. situation. End State belongs to the intent group outcome. Sequence – The sequence of steps in the plan – This is the plan that describes what do in general terms such as Courses of Actions and Course of Effects. Sequence belongs to the intent group execution describing how to reach the desired outcome and include concept of operations, tasks to subordinate units, how results might enable the transition to future operations, allocation of resources, and expectations of force usage. Initial State – The situation that builds the rationale for the plan, what information was available, who was making the decisions, under what time pressure and similar circumstances. Initial State encompass own and other forces, adversaries, operating environment, terrain, time, preparation for future operations. Initial State belongs to the intent group initial situation. Key Decisions – The key decisions that may have to be made and guide the commander in how to make choices. Key Decisions belongs to the intent group execution and describes how to reach the desired outcome and encompass how results might enable the transition to future operations, transition conditions and expectations of force usage. Antigoals – Antigoals describe undesired outcomes. Antigoals are meaningful when to clarify alternatives action plans and what the resulting outcome might be. Antigoals are described in the same way as End State with the difference in that antigoals describe the unwanted outcome. In the surveyed doctrinal descriptions of intent, antigoals were not mentioned. Antigoals belong to the intent outcome. Constraints – Constraints and other considerations that should be taken into account and can vary from policy to weather and terrain. Constraints belongs to the intent group execution and encompass risk willing, restrictions in conducting operations, allocation of resources, and expectations of force usage. An eight facet Expressives is proposed in Gustavsson to capture the style of organizations and commanders: experience, risk taking, use of power and force, diplomacy; ethics; norms; morale; creativity; and unorthodox behaviour. The use of Expressives can range from situations where participants (e.g. commanders) express their style to other participants (e.g. subordinates), or by Staff that develop models over the participants (commanders and subordinates) to be used in Course of Action development and war gaming. In both cases Expressives are a support to better understand the collaboration participants' capabilities and conduct of operations.
Intent in command and control Commander's intent