The Staff Study

Individual Requirement

Introduction and Overview

Purpose

To provide instruction on how to

correctly write a staff study, further

improve your problem solving and

written communication skills, and to deliver a decision brief to standard.

References

• Field Manual (FM) 5-0, Army Planning andOrders Production

• Army Regulation (AR) 25-50, Preparing and

Managing Correspondence, 3 June 2002

• Staff Officers Guide (SOG), Chapter 7, staff

study example

Outline

• Staff study background

• Standard format requirements

• Common staff study errors

• Summary

• Questions

• Conclusion

“To solve a problem, a staff officer must research

the problem to identify issues, develop and eval-

uate alternatives, and recommend effective action

based on relevant facts…. Because a staff study

generally conforms to the problem-solving model, it is

both a formal military problem-solving process and

the written form of a decision briefing.”

FM 5-0 (Appendix D)

Overview

Staff Study Format

• Problem

• Recommendation

• Background

• Facts

• Assumptions

• Courses of Action

• Criteria

• Analysis

• Comparison of COAs

• Conclusion

Decision briefing follows very similar format

Problem StatementParagraph 1

Must be concise, specific, and answer the“4 W’s”: who, what, where, when. “Why” isoptional but helpful to decision maker

EXAMPLE:“To determine the best4-wheel drive, full- size

SUV, costing under $40,000, for me to purchase in the

Kansas City area, during 20xx to replace my old car.”

(Scope the problem down up front)

RecommendationParagraph 2

• Based on final staff study results

• Must recommend a specific COA

• Must solve the problem

BackgroundParagraph 3

• Answers “why the problem exists”

• Chronologically presents problem/symptoms

• Provides a lead-in to your staff study

• Concise, short paragraph

• Sets the stage for presentation of pertinent

facts and assumptions

10

FactsParagraph 4

• Foundation for remainder of staff study• Must use complete sentences and conveycomplete ideas. Stated as given.• Facts relevant to problem and all COAs• Organize facts efficiently:

- Group facts by verifiable source- Use sub-paragraphing to list facts- List facts from most to least important Must provide references used-

11

AssumptionsParagraph 5

• Must pass two tests:- Is the assumption valid?- Is the assumption necessary?

• Must be based on a fact you’ve already presented (believe it’s true but can’t verify)• Must make sense and be defendable• Should use to help shape the problem orsupport evaluation or screening criteria

12

Courses of ActionParagraph 6

• List all COAs you will study

• Identify each COA by short title and amore detailed description

• Must briefly describe where your COAscame from

13

CriteriaParagraph 7

• List all criteria to judge the COAs

• Clearly define each criteria to ensurereader can understand them

• There must be a fact or assumption fromparagraph 4 or 5 that supports each criteria

14

• Places specific limitations on the COAs• Show the “must have” attributes a COA

must possess to warrant further study

• Screening criteria have two parts:

- Short Title: 1 or 2 words- Definition: Clear, concise definition that

includes the words “must” or “must not”

Go / No-Go proposition

Screening CriteriaParagraph 7a

15

Evaluation CriteriaParagraph 7b

(1of 2)

• Measures, evaluates, and analyzes

remaining COAs• Presented in priority order

• Written in detailed narrative form

• Don’t “short-cut” the format exampleprovided in the SOG

16

• Evaluation Criteria have five parts:- Short Title: 1 or 2 words- Definition: Stated precisely- Unit of Measure: Objective, quantifiable- Benchmark: Minimum point of advantage (source?)- Advantage Formula: State whether more or less is better

Each EC subparagraph includes all the above

Evaluation CriteriaParagraph 7b

(2 of 2)

17

Weighting of CriteriaParagraph 7c

• Establishes importance of one evaluationcriterion over another

• Reflects important guidance and intentfrom key players

Explains your DECMAT criteria weighting

AnalysisParagraph 8

• 8a. Presents screened outCOAs :- Explain whichCOAs failed your screening

criteria

• 8b. Analysis of survivingCOAs :- Shows whether each COA is advantaged or disadvantaged compared to benchmark

- Uses COA raw data and tells whether it’sbetter, worse, or equal to the benchmark

Comparison of the COAs Paragraph 9

• 9a. Evaluation Criteria Comparison:- Visual depiction of a COA ranking against evaluation criteria, based on rawdata

• 9b. Results of Quantitative Techniques: - Refers to raw data matrix - Refers to DECMAT (consistency ratio) - Presents detailed discussion of DECMAT sensitivity analysis results

ConclusionParagraph 10

• Objectively answers the problemstatement• Tell the good news and the bad news

• Address each EC

• Tell how your COA is advantaged or

disadvantaged against each EC

• Finish strong, sell your recommendation--

but don’t omit shortfalls “Truth in lending”

21

Common Staff Study Errors(1 of 3)

• Procrastination.

• Short-cutting format requirements, therebysacrificing clarity for the reader.

• Not providing enough detail in thefacts section. Write complete sentencesand convey complete ideas (I don’t knowwhat you know unless you tell me).

22

• Using an SC or EC that is not supportedby a previously presented fact or assumption

• Not telling whether the recommendedCOA is advantaged or disadvantagedagainst each EC in conclusion paragraph

• Raw data matrix and DECMAT errors

Common Staff Study Errors(2 of 3)

23

• Choosing a COA before doing the analysisand evaluation, then trying to make yourproduct fit your choice

Common Staff Study Errors(3 of 3)

Summary

• The staff study is a written decision briefing

• Keys to success in writing a good staffstudy are:

- Follow the problem-solving process

- Write clearly and effectively

- Do thorough and accurate research

- Make it easy for the decisionmaker

Use the Staff Officers Guide

Questions

Conclusion

The litmus test of any staff study is

whether the decision-maker can follow it,

understand it, and “get it” in a single read .

Writing a good staff study is relatively hard.

Reading a good staff study is extremely

easy.