OODA loop: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older editNewer edit →
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 6: Line 6:
:—''Airplane!'' (1980)<ref>Oh, go on: <br><youtube width="200" height="120" >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0X0ZYbnHxA</youtube></ref>}}When in direct, bilateral conflict — you know, dog-fighting, [[chess]], [[cricket]], [[Brexit|in/out referendum on membership of the European Union]] — an “OODA loop” is a player’s [[Decision-making|decision]] cycle: “'''o'''bserve, '''o'''rient, '''d'''ecide, '''a'''ct”.
:—''Airplane!'' (1980)<ref>Oh, go on: <br><youtube width="200" height="120" >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0X0ZYbnHxA</youtube></ref>}}When in direct, bilateral conflict — you know, dog-fighting, [[chess]], [[cricket]], [[Brexit|in/out referendum on membership of the European Union]] — an “OODA loop” is a player’s [[Decision-making|decision]] cycle: “'''o'''bserve, '''o'''rient, '''d'''ecide, '''a'''ct”.


The idea is that you must take in what is happening (''observe''), synthesise a theory of what the other guy is up to (''orient''),<ref>“Orient” doesn’t seem as good a word to me as “synthesise”, especially as that would have made the acronym “OSDA”, which all [[ninja]]s will find pleasing.</ref> figure out what to do about it (''decide'') and then do it (''act'') ''before'' your opponent gets through its own decision cycle works out what you’re up to and changes up what it is planning to do to back. Whoever changes tack first spoil’s the other one’s clever plan.
The idea is that you must take in what is happening (''observe''), synthesise a theory of what your opponent is up to (''orient''),<ref>“Orient” doesn’t seem as good a word to me as “synthesise”, especially as that would have made the acronym “OSDA”, which all [[ninja]]s will find pleasing.</ref> figure out what to do about it (''decide'') and then do it (''act'') ''before'' she gets through ''her'' decision cycle, works out what you’re up to and changes up what she is planning to do to back.


Hand-to-hand combat is a [[wicked environment]]. You ''can’t'' just execute on your plan ignoring how the other guy will react and adapt.
Hand-to-hand combat is a [[wicked environment]]. You ''can’t'' just execute on your plan ignoring how the other guy will react and adapt. By getting inside the punch, you can set up a dynamic where your are dictating opponent is never gets out of reaction mode. Hence the OODA loop. Keep the other guy off kilter.  


The OODA loop concept was invented by contrarian US Air Force Colonel John Boyd. Boyd’s classic dog-fighting manoeuvre, when being pursued, was abruptly to fly straight up, stalling his plane, catching his pursuer off-guard, and forcing her to fly straight under him, then dropping down on the attacker and giving her the full nine yards.<ref>Speaking of dogfighting, those public-spirited kill-joys at Wikipedia tell us [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_whole_nine_yards the legend that “the whole nine yards” originated from the total length of a Spitfire’s machine gun belt] (hence, “to shoot everything you have at once”) is an urban myth. The phrase dates back to the late 19th century, before there were any Spitfires. Boo.</ref>
The OODA loop was invented by contrarian US Air Force Colonel John Boyd. Boyd’s classic dog-fighting manoeuvre, when being pursued, was abruptly to fly straight up, stalling his plane, catching his pursuer off-guard, and forcing her to fly straight past, then dropping down on the attacker and giving her the full nine yards.<ref>Speaking of dogfighting, those public-spirited kill-joys at Wikipedia tell us [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_whole_nine_yards the legend that “the whole nine yards” originated from the total length of a Spitfire’s machine gun belt] (hence, “to shoot everything you have at once”) is an urban myth. The phrase dates back to the late 19th century, before there were any Spitfires. Boo.</ref>


The player who can do it ''faster'' — thereby rendering the other player’s observation and orientation= obsolete before it can decide and act — is “inside her opponent’s OODA loop” and, as long as she can continuously keep her OODA loop cycling fast enough, will have the opposition constantly reacting to what she is doing, chasing the game, having to change tactics without ever getting onto the front foot.  
The player who acts ''fastest'' renders the other player’s observation/orientation/decision obsolete before the slower player can act — gets “inside the opponent’s OODA loop”. As long as she can ''keep'' cycling through the decisions fast enough, she will have the opposition constantly scrambling to ''react:'' chasing the game, adjusting ''defence'' without ever getting to ''attack''.  


So, generally, ''having'' the ball, rather than chasing around after it.
So, generally, ''having'' the ball, rather than chasing around after it.


It shouldn’t really have taken a maverick Top Gun Actor to tell the world that in combat situations — [[Finite and Infinite Games|finite games]] — are usually won by the attacking team, but there you have it.<ref>You can get inside an attacker’s OODA loop by intercepting a pass, I suppose).</ref>
It shouldn’t have taken a maverick Top Gun Actor to tell the world that combat situations — [[Finite and Infinite Games|finite games]] — are usually won by whoever has the initiative team, but there you have it.<ref>You can get inside an attacker’s OODA loop by intercepting a pass, I suppose).</ref>


Famously, the Brexit side of the Brexit Referendum was marshalled by a chap, Dominic Cummings, who remains a big fan of the OODA loop theory, and used it to great advantage to keep the Remain side permanently destabilised.  
Famously Dominic Cummings is a big fan of the OODA loop theory, and used it to great advantage during the Brexit referendum campaign to keep the Remain permanently destabilised. Whether he knows about it or not, we rather think Donal Trump is a natural OODA looper, too.  


Now getting inside your opponent’s punch is all well and good so long as it is your opponent, of course, and Matthew Syed has rightly pointed out<ref>“Looping the Loop”, ''Sideways'', [https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000sr4s BBC podcast].</ref> that dogfighting as a strategy for peacetime governance didn’t work out so well for Cummings since the idea wasn’t the [[finite game]] of defeating utterly an opponent in a binary, winner-take-all showdown, but the [[infinite game]] of keeping as many people happy for as long and often as possible.
Now getting inside your opponent’s punch is all well and good as long as it ''is'' your opponent, of course. Matthew Syed has pointed out<ref>“Looping the Loop”, ''Sideways'', [https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000sr4s BBC podcast].</ref> that dogfighting didn’t work  so well as a strategy for peacetime governance for Mr Cummings since he was no longer engaged in the [[finite game]] of defeating outright an opponent in a winner-take-all showdown, but rather the [[infinite game]] of keeping as many people happy for as long and often as possible.


Throwing OODA loops is an exhausting, destructive, destabilising business. It works best for [[zero-sum game|zero-sum]], short-duration fixed-rule games where keeping other players at a disadvantage is the optimal outcome. But if your game is “keepy uppy” — which in the broadest sense most of political and social life is —   
Throwing OODA loops is an exhausting, destructive, destabilising business. It works best for [[zero-sum game|zero-sum]], short-duration fixed-rule games where keeping other players at a disadvantage is the optimal outcome. But if your game is “keepy uppy” — which in the broadest sense most of political and social life is — results will be more variable.  
 
Of course, part of the infinite game is to know when you are also in a finite game — opposition party lobs plenty of grenades at those committed to orderly governance — so or is it true to say OODA loops have no place in polite society. Put pick your moment. 


{{sa}}
{{sa}}

Revision as of 19:52, 14 March 2022

File:Fighter planes.png
John Boyd getting inside some Russki’s OSDA Loop yesterday. (Ok this is badly photoshopped drivel)
In which the curmudgeonly old sod puts the world to rights.
Index — Click ᐅ to expand:
The Devil’s Advocate
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

AIR CONTROLLER MACIAS: Maybe we ought to turn on the search-lights now?
REX KRAMER: No. That’s just what they’ll be expecting us to do.

—Airplane! (1980)[1]

When in direct, bilateral conflict — you know, dog-fighting, chess, cricket, in/out referendum on membership of the European Union — an “OODA loop” is a player’s decision cycle: “observe, orient, decide, act”.

The idea is that you must take in what is happening (observe), synthesise a theory of what your opponent is up to (orient),[2] figure out what to do about it (decide) and then do it (act) before she gets through her decision cycle, works out what you’re up to and changes up what she is planning to do to back.

Hand-to-hand combat is a wicked environment. You can’t just execute on your plan ignoring how the other guy will react and adapt. By getting inside the punch, you can set up a dynamic where your are dictating opponent is never gets out of reaction mode. Hence the OODA loop. Keep the other guy off kilter.

The OODA loop was invented by contrarian US Air Force Colonel John Boyd. Boyd’s classic dog-fighting manoeuvre, when being pursued, was abruptly to fly straight up, stalling his plane, catching his pursuer off-guard, and forcing her to fly straight past, then dropping down on the attacker and giving her the full nine yards.[3]

The player who acts fastest renders the other player’s observation/orientation/decision obsolete before the slower player can act — gets “inside the opponent’s OODA loop”. As long as she can keep cycling through the decisions fast enough, she will have the opposition constantly scrambling to react: chasing the game, adjusting defence without ever getting to attack.

So, generally, having the ball, rather than chasing around after it.

It shouldn’t have taken a maverick Top Gun Actor to tell the world that combat situations — finite games — are usually won by whoever has the initiative team, but there you have it.[4]

Famously Dominic Cummings is a big fan of the OODA loop theory, and used it to great advantage during the Brexit referendum campaign to keep the Remain permanently destabilised. Whether he knows about it or not, we rather think Donal Trump is a natural OODA looper, too.

Now getting inside your opponent’s punch is all well and good as long as it is your opponent, of course. Matthew Syed has pointed out[5] that dogfighting didn’t work so well as a strategy for peacetime governance for Mr Cummings since he was no longer engaged in the finite game of defeating outright an opponent in a winner-take-all showdown, but rather the infinite game of keeping as many people happy for as long and often as possible.

Throwing OODA loops is an exhausting, destructive, destabilising business. It works best for zero-sum, short-duration fixed-rule games where keeping other players at a disadvantage is the optimal outcome. But if your game is “keepy uppy” — which in the broadest sense most of political and social life is — results will be more variable.

Of course, part of the infinite game is to know when you are also in a finite game — opposition party lobs plenty of grenades at those committed to orderly governance — so or is it true to say OODA loops have no place in polite society. Put pick your moment.

See also

References

  1. ↑ Oh, go on:
  2. ↑ “Orient” doesn’t seem as good a word to me as “synthesise”, especially as that would have made the acronym “OSDA”, which all ninjas will find pleasing.
  3. ↑ Speaking of dogfighting, those public-spirited kill-joys at Wikipedia tell us the legend that “the whole nine yards” originated from the total length of a Spitfire’s machine gun belt (hence, “to shoot everything you have at once”) is an urban myth. The phrase dates back to the late 19th century, before there were any Spitfires. Boo.
  4. ↑ You can get inside an attacker’s OODA loop by intercepting a pass, I suppose).
  5. ↑ “Looping the Loop”, Sideways, BBC podcast.
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=OODA_loop&oldid=62403"