Synthesizing Two Approaches to Decision Making in Command and Control


  1. Bryant, D.J.
  2. Webb, R.D.G.
  3. McCann, C.
Corporate Authors
Defence R&D Canada - Toronto, Toronto ONT (CAN);Humansystems Inc, Guelph ONT (CAN)
Two competing theoretical perspectives, analytic and intuitive, have dominated the study of decision making over the past decade or more. In a complex domain such as military command and control, however, it seems neither perspective alone is sufficient to explain commanders’ decision making or guide the development of effective support. The constraints of time, information, and processing capacity, as well as the demands for accuracy and detail, vary substantially through different phases of an operation. In this paper, we propose that a better approach is to seek a synthesis of analytic and intuitive perspectives in which the two perspectives represent opposing poles of a continuum comprised of specific decision making strategies or procedures. Decision makers select specific procedures to fit the prevailing conditions. To better support decision making in command and control, we believe it will be critical to investigate ways in which analytic procedures can be used to identify contingencies and develop courses of action during planning that can later facilitate more intuitive decision making in the field. Ultimately, decision support provided for planning should seamlessly link to support provided during implementation phases of operations

Il y a un résumé en français ici.

Analytic decision making;Intuitive decision making;Contingencies;Decision support
Report Number
DRDC-TORONTO-SL-2002-113 — Scientific Literature
Date of publication
10 Jun 2002
Number of Pages
Reprinted from
Canadian Military Journal, 2003, p 29-34
Electronic Document(PDF);CD ROM

Permanent link

Document 1 of 1

Date modified: