In the OODA loop, you don’t usually get paid for the observe and orient work. So if you’re in OO-dominant mode for too long you’ll run out of money unless you have a lot of capital. Conversely hand-to-mouth existence is all DA, no OO.
Capital (=PE) levels predict OO-dominance.
Conversation
Going out on a limb here, but I wonder if Boyd had such usage in mind.
1
1
He absolutely did. OODA theory came out of E-M theory which is all PE/KE dynamics. OODA was an attempt to deal with the fast transients paradox: better planes by E-M theory losing to worse planes. The explanation was better OO=faster transients.
3
3
It’s not money but PE in planes is very close to money. The analogy is quite direct. Good OO = high visibility cockpit with light responsive controls.
1
3
I understand your point; I’m saying this analogy is yours, not his. :)
1
2
Ah yes, though it’s so obvious I expect he’d have discussed it with business minded acolytes like Chet Richards re Toyota lean etc
I'm not convinced. OODA is a short cycle battle plan. Long term war strategy is more complex.
1



