Dotmlpf System of Analysis Provides Defense Leaders

DOTMLPF system of analysis provides defense leaders of the 21st century a holistic interpretation of today's battlefield by identifying and grouping the most important factors into an understandable and complete model. Doctrine, organization, training, material, leadership, personnel, and facilities compose this acronym's structure and are partnered together in a unique pneumonic while adhering to the systematic traditions of the American army and it's defense partners around the globe.

The purpose of this essay is to explore this system and highlight the one facet of this composition which demonstrates the most significant contribution to the entirety. While many of these facets certainly should be considered as significant, the material aspect seems to hold a significant presence beyond the others. I will explain how material supersedes the other attributes by comparing and contrasting their various special attributes. It is important to realize during this analysis that the DOTMLPF system relies on the intercommunication between its members in order to realize its potential and while material considerations are most important, every component is unique and necessary in its own manner.

Doctrine is listed first in this acronym even though its theoretical basis is useless without the adequate material. It is important for those within the chain of command responsible for the development and evaluation of current doctrine to be aware of the availability of advantageous material items. Our most recent campaigns in the Middle East reflect the evolution of its doctrine within the material items available to the soldiers and their commanders on the battlefield. This material is most often molded into technology and historically dictates the planning of war. Accurate smart weapons and their material acquisition facilitate greater force protection, again demonstrating the influence of material on doctrine. Kelly (2003) reinforced this point explaining that the current material acquisition process can drive a current shift in doctrine towards homeland security and away from traditional defense measures (p.39). Here doctrine takes a backseat to the material acquisition factors within this system.

The organization of any unit provides the scope of its capabilities and abilities. Material availability once again seems to drive the organizing forces of any defense system. Material availability constructs the size of any organization and hence facilitates the formation of these organizations. While the global battlefield may sometimes appear to provide a sense of immediate availability, the truth on the ground often differs from textbooks and their answers. A commander does not divide his unit into strategic position without regard to the materials available to his leaders . Kelly (2004), a retired Marine Corp lieutenant general, suggested that the Marine Corps will eventually be forced to organize around their material asset skills in future versions of logistics management (p.20). Fountain (2007) confirmed this notion by explaining that organizational constructs, of all types, depend on the latest and most innovative materials. This concept once again places the material facet in a unique position of dictating the possibilities and limitations of the other domains within this holistic system.

The effect material has on the training aspect of this system has been proven throughout history. For most of the last 100 years, the material resources of our country required a draft system to fulfill strategic military goals for personnel. Here, at the starting point of basic training, we see its success dependent on the quality of material it has recruited. In today's Army, material resources affected by economic conditions provided unique opportunity to strengthen our forces with high quality training leading to efficiency and success. Readiness factors, a form of audits on the training procedures of any particular unit, will always include the details and quality of its material resources and thereby once again reinforcing the notion of material inclusiveness.

Leadership is extremely important. Leadership permeates throughout the entire organization and sets the tone for all it intends to accomplish or not accomplish. It is a form of communication, consisting of verbal and nonverbal actions intended to inspire those willing to follow. The effects of great leadership has been duly noted throughout the United States Army's rich history with men like Gen. George S. Patton synthesizing his leadership skills with his material assets available to him in World War II. Patton's leadership, and all it has to teach us, needs this stage, made and consisting of material resources that helped define his greatness through example. Tegnella (2007) expressed the need to focus and shift the leadership efforts to eliminating WMD proliferation demonstrating the material factors dictating the effects of the other components . Once again I would like to highlight here the codependence of each facet on one another, but also demonstrate that the material resources reserves a special place within the system.

In this discussion, overlapping themes are impossible to ignore and this, undoubtedly by design, improves the interdependence and reliability of the DOTMLPF approach to systematic analysis. So our next facet to compare and contrast with material, personnel, blends into some of the aforementioned categories as well. Since training and personnel have an explicit relationship, we see a similar relationship between personnel and material. It is shown not only in the acquisition of personnel, but in the maintenance and reenlistment of personnel as well. The challenges of today's soldiers are new and interesting. Many soldiers have experienced war fare in an entirely new method for extended periods of time. In order to support this model certain material needs are prerequisite. It is hard to imagine sustaining the force using the material and material acquisition techniques of just 20 years ago. The demands of our soldiers will always be changing, and it is important that the understanding of what materials will help us succeed on the battlefield change is in harmonic convergence with these changes in our fighting forces and their needs. The quality of materials affects the soldiers varying ways to further create dependence of our system on the material aspects of its nature.

In comparing the facilities to the material domain, we see a relationship that is almost strictly dependent and unique. Deciphering between facilities and materials may not always be easily accomplished. Once again, this crossover demonstrates the strong functionality of the system itself and shows the unique way in which balance may be achieved through an interweaving system of coordinating domains. Some examples of how materials affect facilities connected with defense of our nation are defined by the sourcing nature of the material aspect towards the character and quality of the particular facility. If one were to look at a picture of every military facility stationed around the world and at home, the disparity between similar styles and constructs would be evident. This variation on a singular theme is undoubtedly due to material resources available to the places where the facilities are located.