ATP-5-0-2-1 Staff Reference Guide Volume 1 Download
Page 52 of 440
Chapter 2 36 ATP 5-0.2-1 07 December 2020 Note. This WARNORD is traditionally known as WARNORD #2. It does not have to be the second WARNORD published, but Soldiers might use the term. Do not wait until after the brief to put together this WARNORD. To save time, a staff member must be assigned to compile it. Publish as soon as possible after the mission analysis brief. For Soldiers conducting reconnaissance and security operations, this WARNORD serves as their OPORD. They will begin conducting operations soon after WARNORD #2 is issued and well before the remainder of the unit. STEP 3. COA DEVELOPMENT 2-108. A COA is a broad potential solution to an identified problem. The staff, with guidance from the commander, develops valid COA(s) to provide visual representation of the COA(s), synchronize the warfighting functions, and meet the commander's guidance. Valid COAs are COAs that meet the screening criteria-feasible, acceptable, suitable, distinguishable, and complete. The COA begins conceptually, but by the end of COA development, the COA starts to develop details necessary for subordinates to take action. Figure 2-4 depicts the purpose, inputs, processes, and outputs of COA development. Figure 2-4. The MDMP Step 3. COA development overview 2-109. In COA development, commanders and staffs must appreciate the unpredictable, uncertain, and ambiguous nature of an operational environment. Staffs tend to focus on particular COAs for specific sets of circumstances, but flexible COAs that provide the greatest options for a wide range of circumstances are best. 2-110. Commanders and staffs should focus on known variables, which often provide sufficient guidance, to analyze COAs that provide flexible options to a commander during execution. Clearly identifying which variables a unit can control, which are outside of its control, and the implications of each is important. Even with few facts available, reducing key issues to either an ability to do "X" or an inability to do "X" is a starting point. Such a reduction is preferred over trying to derive a wide range of possibilities. Additionally, seeing facts as generating flexibility rather than constraining flexibility is more productive. Staffs work to confirm or deny assumptions before developing options. Staffs must also determine risks associated with