The ends, ways, and means framework is a concept often used in the field of ethics and political science to analyze the morality of a particular action or policy. The framework consists of three elements: the ends, the ways, and the means.
The ends refer to the desired outcome or goal of an action or policy. This could be something as broad as achieving world peace or as specific as passing a particular legislation. The ends serve as the motivation for the action or policy, and they should be considered carefully before proceeding.
The ways refer to the methods or strategies used to achieve the desired ends. These methods should be chosen carefully, as they can have significant consequences. For example, if the end is to achieve world peace, one way to do so might be through diplomacy and negotiation. However, another way might be through military force. While both methods may ultimately lead to the same end, the means used to achieve that end can have very different consequences.
The means refer to the resources and actions taken to implement the chosen ways. These resources might include financial resources, human resources, or physical resources. The means should be chosen with care, as they can also have significant consequences. For example, if the chosen way to achieve world peace is through diplomacy, the means might include funding for diplomatic efforts, hiring trained diplomats, and building diplomatic facilities.
When considering the morality of a particular action or policy, it is important to consider all three elements of the ends, ways, and means framework. The ends should be noble and justifiable, the ways should be chosen carefully to minimize negative consequences, and the means should be chosen with an eye towards efficiency and effectiveness. By considering all three elements, we can ensure that our actions and policies are ethical and aligned with our values.
Rethinking Strategy: A History of the Ends, Ways Means Model
As part of the process of analyzing strengths and weaknesses, surveying how different elements of national power can be utilized, indeed, thinking carefully about DIMEFIL makes sense and can certainly generate insights into the types of solutions available to solve national security problems. This approach is not a transformation, but a retooling of the military based on perceived ends. Another description of strategy by prominent defense community intellectuals suffers from a similar problem: "Strategy is fundamentally about identifying or creating asymmetric advantages that can be exploited to help achieve one's ultimate objectives despite resource and other constraints, most importantly the opposing efforts of adversaries or competitors and the inherent unpredictability of strategic outcomes. The Lykke Model In the decades following its publication in Military Review, the so-called Lykke model of military strategy has become widely influential among members of the US defense community, particularly those in the US Army. McChrystal, Commander's Initial Assessment Kabul, Afghanistan: Headquarters International Security Assistance Force, 2009. Common definitions of strategy, including the ever-present Lykke model, foster this way of thinking because they do not clearly describe what makes strategy a distinct concept. Legs with different sizes cause the stool to tilt: "If military resources are not compatible with strategic concepts, or commitments are not matched by military capabilities, we may be in trouble.
That seems to be a very natural choice to make! Now, and in the future, we "will have to seek creative and relevant solutions with fewer resources. Lawrence Freedman defines strategy as "the art of creating power. Comparative analysis has long been a part of the military campaign planning process and is fundamental to intelligence analysis and the scientific method. If this relationship is vague, the entire campaign is seriously flawed and you might be at risk. Even if the counterterrorism plus option was considered viable, it was just as means-based as the counterinsurgency options. Doctrine becomes the center for how the Army thinks and fights. Echevarria II, "Op-Ed: Is Strategy Really a Lost Art? Second, the concept of a comprehensive or whole-of-government approach to solving strategic problems fosters an overemphasis on simplistically applying resources--the means.
Ends, Ways, and Means without Geostrategic Context is a Crapshoot • The Havok Journal
By this logic, whatever the problem is, simply apply all the elements of national power--diplomatic, information, military, economic, financial, intelligence, and law enforcement DIMEF1L --and the problem is solved. From this perspective, Lykke's model is useful and sensible; it keeps us from ignoring the constraint of resources, which in theory, should prevent us from implementing unrealistic strategies. If we can turn strategy into planning, we will. Raynor, "Why Hard-Nosed Executives Should Care about Management Theory," Harvard Business Review 81, no. The direction of the strategy is by its nature rather proactive, in that is seeks to control the environment rather than reacting to it.
Dempsey, "Desired Leader Attributes for Joint Force 2020" memorandum, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, June 28, 2013 , 1. However the ways used to achieve this goal proved to be a disaster and caused more grief to Iraqi people and others in the middle east region. Rumelt defines strategy as "a coherent set of analyses, concepts, policies, arguments, and actions that respond to a high-stakes challenge. Objectives will always answer the question of what is trying to be achieved. This concept must be explicit enough to provide planning guidance to those who are responsible for implementing and resourcing the concept.
This approach may seem overly scientific or intellectual, but military commanders already have experience in the area of developing and choosing from multiple proposals. During this period of time, "problems could be solved with massive funding or expensive solutions. In general a 3 player. A third major problem with definitions of strategy is the propensity to describe good strategy or to list the things that strategy should do rather than to actually define what strategy is. In an attemp to answer this question, you can understand the effect of your strategy on your circumstances.
Ends + Ways + Means = (Bad) Strategy by Jeffrey W. Meiser :: SSRN
Hence, you always need to pay attention to the end before you use your means, no matter what your means are. Furthermore, Gray's definition does not give us any idea of what strategy actually is: what does it mean to say that strategy is the use that is made of force for the ends of policy? Under this approach, the strategist simply fills in each box or, better yet, creates a diagram showing each element of national power as a line of effort directed at an enemy center of gravity or critical vulnerability. Lieutenants should leave the unit with a thorough understanding of Command Supply Discipline. First, defining strategy as a theory of success requires us to make a claim about how our proposed actions will actually cause success to happen. McChrystal provided lines of effort but not a theory of success. What emerges from journalistic accounts of the 2009 Obama administration strategy-making process is the observation that the entire discussion by civilian officials and military officers was about the number of troops, not strategy. Unlike the clearly articulated ends of Cold War security strategies, national objectives in a globally networked information age are more difficult to define and thus to achieve.
Perhaps, but have you really thought about it? Cerami and James F. It is the objectives that you should focus on when answering the questions. Consideration of the ends, ways and means within the strategic context drive changes and provides a rational approach to transforming an organization. Far too often strategy is an exercise in means-based planning; it is inherently uncreative, noncritical, and limits new and adaptive thinking. These efforts imply the US defense community has failed to develop and utilize these skills over the past 15 years.
In practice, a specific strategy will have a goal and it will use resources, but aligning resources with goals is part of the strategic planning process, not the strategy itself. Transfer your strategic objective to other places. The current reset of the U. At the very least, the surge did not result in the durable disruption to the Taliban that it was supposed to cause. Unlike traditional means, knowledge is relatively cheap and easy to balance with ends and ways. The appearance of choice was a facade; there was "only one genuine option," the middle one--40,000 troops for comprehensive COIN. A good strategy creates opportunities, magnifies existing resources, or creates new resources.
The second is the problem of formulation. Watts, Regaining Strategic Competence Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, 2009 , 19. I like thinking and talking about strategy in games which has led me to the creation of this website. In August 2009, International Security and Assistance Force Commander General Stanley McChrystal presented President Barack Obama with two strategies and three levels of troop deployment: 10,000 troops for a ramped up training mission or 40,000 or 85,000 troops for counterinsurgency COIN operations. Strategy is strategy, goals are goals, and resources are resources.
