The Advantage of Strategic Thinking in the Military

Research Paper

Army leaders and military officers are subjected to frequent immense and dynamic

missions which requires them to rely heavily on strategic thinking in order to shape the

future of military operations. The rapidly changing and increasing complexity of the

environment further necessitates and emphasizes the need of the military for

innovativeness to transform existing strategies and generate adaptive and resilient

solutions in order to develop and reinforce the strength of the military force and increase

leverage in terms of strategical advantage. Strategic thinking is an indispensable aspect

of any organizational structure that offers a diverse use in varying context where

strategic analysis is applied. It allows for the acquisition of new perspective as well as

offer different angles to view a specific problem through a creative and critical thinking

process that centers itself to continuously develop innovative, adaptable, and resilient

solutions against the drastically changing strategic processes and environment which is

a crucial aspect in the military where the priority lies to best serve the interests of the

national security. However, in spite of its notable significance particularly in the military

context, many officials and students are still perplexed to the seemingly unconventional

use and utilization of the concept of strategic thinking in the military scene which would

almost seem too complex and paradoxical in comparison to the nature of the work itself

that would seemingly appear to prioritize physical competence over intellectual

capability. Although strategic thinking may appear to be too far-fetched and extraneous

in serving the interests of the military force, it is an imperative driving force that supports

the innovation of the existing military practices that is in pursuit of a less rigid and non-
hierarchal organization structure as well as a proactive and future-oriented army leaders

that are continuously scanning the environment, and actively envisioning how

threatening developments are connected.

The advantages of thinking strategically in military is to simply set an advanced

plan for the betterment of the country. Continuing education and training will

provide one’s growth and development that includes the ability to think

strategically for the effectiveness of military success.

Strategy is a generally broad term used in a broad spectrum of fields and disciplines

that alludes to the use of more ambiguous concepts that has been raising debates and

questions of whether strategy-making is art, science, or a combination of both? In a

military context, strategy is the purposeful orientation toward success in a complex and

competitive conflict (Cavanaugh, 2016). It can be attributed to the exercise of power

where dominance can be associated to the force not with the most numbers nor to the

one that possess the most strength but to the one that recognizes their own strength

and exploit that strength to increase their leverage against the opposing forces which

can be observed during the winter war fought between the mighty Soviet Russia and the

little Nordic Nation of Finland in 1939, a one-sided battle between the Red army with 3

million troops along with thousands of tanks and planes against the Finnish army with

only 300,000 troops, 30 tanks, and just over a hundred planes. In spite of this huge gap

in number and strength, Finland was able to hold off the formidable strength of the

Russian forces through a smart strategy that made use of their own strengths.
To better understand strategic thinking, it is best to determine what is it and what it is

not. According to Liedtka (1998), Strategic thinking is built on a systems perspective,

intent driven, hypothesis driven, intelligently opportunistic (capitalizing on new

possibilities as the situation changes), and involves the ability to think in time (linking

past, present, and future elements). It is generally speculative and pragmatic that

makes use of logical reasoning and understanding in analyzing the nature and system

of opportunities in order to draw out the best course of action and solutions to a specific

problem. The confusion about the definition of strategic thinking is exacerbated by the

confounded concepts of strategic thinking and strategic planning. While there is no

specific definition in existence of strategic planning and strategic thinking, Liedtka

(1998) outlines several differences between strategic thinking and strategic planning

that include reliance on systems thinking, the role of measurement and control, and a

focus on the outcome (strategy) versus the process.

Strategic thinking has been a hot topic of debate between military officers and army

leaders. Due to its general complexity and hypothetical nature, the concept of

strategical thinking in the military has received numerous criticisms. Although strategic

thinking comes with unique challenges and opportunities along with restrictions and

limitations, it is without a doubt that the existing military practices and process can be

further improved by establishing the use of strategical thinking in the operational force of

the army that will help in enhancing the might and over-all performance of the military

force. Furthermore, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen stressed

the need to “think ahead at the strategy level” in his guidance to the Joint Staff because
we were “still more reactive than anticipatory.” Which strengthen the causality for the

concern of the need of the armed force to

As a result of the different approaches and varying results of the effectiveness of its use,

the general complexity of strategical thinking despite its well-established concept is

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen stressed the need to “think

ahead at the strategy level”

Strategic thinking capability has always been and will always be important for military leaders at
the highest level
However, understanding is important at multiple echelons as it “equips decision-makers at all
levels with the insight and foresight required to make effective decisions, to manage the
associated risks, and to consider second and subsequent order effects” (Dempsey, 2012).
Investing in strategic thinkers will create leaders who can better understand complex systems,
anticipate change, create greater coherence across operations, and generate faster adaptation
to unforeseen events
The military must promote and develop their own strategic thinkers: they must grow their own.
The opportunity in this is that the military has the chance to shape, develop, and mentor
leaders to best prepare them for assignments requiring strategic thinking. However, this
situation places a considerable burden on the institution to identify, select, develop, and retain
strategic thinkers

That means that in addition to cognitive skills related to thinking strategically, good strategic
thinkers will need to be able to communicate with a variety of audiences that may have
different cultures and worldviews
If the military approached the current environment recognizing and capitalizing on the
developmental opportunity, then it will enhance the strategic thinking capability of many in the
force.
Laich and Young (2011) asserted that the Army’s current system of rewards and punishments
and the personnel system in general promotes conformity and is blind to merit. This is not a
system conducive to identifying and developing strategic thinkers.

Today’s complex world creates an environment that requires much more of our leaders. It is not
enough to be technically and tactically proficient. We must be able to assess, understand, adapt,
and yet still be decisive. We have to think through complex multidimensional problems, taking
into account the diplomatic, economic, military, political, and cultural implications of every
action. (Gurney & Smotherman, 2009, p. 124)

to identify exemplar techniques, processes, and insights that could inform and change the
conceptualization and practice of strategic thinking in the military
References

Windsor, P. (2002). Strategic Thinking: An Introduction and Farewell.

https://books.google.com.ph/books?

id=hahJxaKovy0C&lpg=PR7&ots=seY2Qmn4aE&dq=disadvantage%20of

%20strategic%20thinking%20in

%20military&lr&pg=PR9#v=onepage&q=disadvantage%20of%20strategic

%20thinking%20in%20military&f=false

Sackett, A. L., Karrasch, A., Wevhrauch, W., Goldman, E. (1995). Enhancing The

Strategic Capability of The Army: An Investigation of Strategic Thinking Tasks,

Skills, and Development. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1006147.pdf

Kropp, F., Zolin, R. & Lindsay, N.J. (2009), "Identifying and implementing adaptive

strategy in the U.S. military", Lumpkin, G.T. and Katz, J.A. (Ed.) Entrepreneurial

Strategic Content (Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth,

Vol. 11), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 161-

192. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1074-7540(2009)0000011008

Waters, D. E. (2011). Understanding Strategic Thinking and Developing Strategic

Thinkers. Issue 63, 4th quarter 2011.

119_Waters.pdf?ver=8IWBVglvK52M7eJ7YzjWoA%3D%3D

Duyvesteyn, I.G.B.M. (2013). Strategic Illiteracy. The Art of Strategic Thinking in Modern

Military Operations. https://scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden.nl/access/item

%3A2963375/view

Bonadonna, R. (2018). Strategic thought and the Military officer.

https://thestrategybridge.org/the-bridge/2018/8/28/strategic-thought-and-the-

military-officer

Colonel Charles D. Allen, U.S. Army, Retired; and Colonel Stephen J. Gerras, Ph.D.,

U.S. Army, Retired. (2009). Developing Creative and Critical Thinkers.

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA515842.pdf

Gurney, D. H. & Smotherman, J.D. (2009). An interview with Raymond Odierno, USA,

Commander, Multi-National Force-Iraq. Joint Force Quarterly, 120-125.