Excellent. The principles have the beauty and power of simple common sense.
The OODA example is provocative. The training of pilots presumably focusses on undertaking the thinking steps very quickly in circumstances where a lot is at stake. In broader life, people who do this type of thinking really well are often said to have good instincts. It is almost as if some 'magic' involved in the thinking-acting process that others can not replicate.
To get this result, I wonder if OODA type models involves two thinking dimensions. One involves 'preparation thinking'. This is the thinking and training needed to build good fast-paced OOD. My understanding is that training is used to develop a set of heuristics along the lines of 'if this, then that'. This creates an programmatic element to the thinking, which is needed to create quicks links between OO and D and A. My feeling is that preparation thinking represents an effort to create certainty from uncertainty, rather than encourage humility.
The other dimension involves 'override thinking' which is done 'in the moment'. This is the thinking needed to make good decisions when the heuristic leans one way, but something doesn't quite add up. This too involves trained reactions, but involves more humility as a base (ie an acceptance that things do not always add up).
OODA is an example of individual thinking. The pilot does the thinking, makes the decision and takes the action. The process has strong collective backing (training plus information being fed to the pilot) but it is not really a collective process. While useful, I am not sure that it quite makes your point.
Excellent. The principles have the beauty and power of simple common sense.
The OODA example is provocative. The training of pilots presumably focusses on undertaking the thinking steps very quickly in circumstances where a lot is at stake. In broader life, people who do this type of thinking really well are often said to have good instincts. It is almost as if some 'magic' involved in the thinking-acting process that others can not replicate.
To get this result, I wonder if OODA type models involves two thinking dimensions. One involves 'preparation thinking'. This is the thinking and training needed to build good fast-paced OOD. My understanding is that training is used to develop a set of heuristics along the lines of 'if this, then that'. This creates an programmatic element to the thinking, which is needed to create quicks links between OO and D and A. My feeling is that preparation thinking represents an effort to create certainty from uncertainty, rather than encourage humility.
The other dimension involves 'override thinking' which is done 'in the moment'. This is the thinking needed to make good decisions when the heuristic leans one way, but something doesn't quite add up. This too involves trained reactions, but involves more humility as a base (ie an acceptance that things do not always add up).
OODA is an example of individual thinking. The pilot does the thinking, makes the decision and takes the action. The process has strong collective backing (training plus information being fed to the pilot) but it is not really a collective process. While useful, I am not sure that it quite makes your point.