Why teaching comprehensive operations planning requires transformational learning

References

• Bohm, D., 2004. On dialogue. New ed. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Chan, S., 2001. Complex adaptive systems. ESD.83 Research Seminar in Engineering Systems 31 October 2001/6 November 2001. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Available from: http://web.mit.edu/esd.83/www/notebook/Complex%20Adaptive%20Systems.pdf [Accessed 5 May 2015].
   Google Scholar
• Checkland, P., 1999. Soft systems methodology: a 30-year retrospective; systems thinking, systems practice. New ed. Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Chief of the Defence Staff by the Canadian Defence Academy – Canadian Forces Leadership Institute, 2005. Leadership in the Canadian forces: conceptual foundations. NDID Number: A-PA-005-000/AP-004. Kingston: Canadian Defence Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Daellenbach, H.G. and Flood, R.L., eds., 2002. The informed student guide to management science. London: Thomson learning.
   Google Scholar
• Dijk, G., 2010. Comprehensive approach (1/5) … and why it is a big NATO issue [online]. NATO: The Interallied Confederation of Reserve Officers. Available from: http://www.cior.net/News/2010/COMPREHENSIVE-APPROACH-%E2%80%A6–and-why-it-is-a-big-NATO.aspx [Accessed 5 Dec 2012].
   Google Scholar
• Downes-Martin, S., 2011. Operations assessment in Afghanistan is broken: what is to be done? Naval war college review, 64 (4), 103–125.
   Google Scholar
• Elmgren, M. and Henriksson, A.-S., 2010. Universitetspedagogik [University Pedagogy]. Stockholm: Norstedts.
   Google Scholar
• Erdeniz, R., Forthcoming. Military operations planning: a methodological dilemma?
   Google Scholar
• Flood, R.L. and Carson, E.R., 1993. Dealing with complexity: an introduction to the theory and application of systems science. 2nd ed. New York: Plenum.
   Google Scholar
• Hitchins, D.K., 2007. Systems engineering: a 21st century systems methodology. Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, M.C., 2000. Systems approaches to management [electronic resource]. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
   Google Scholar
• Kegan, R., 2000. What ‘form’ transforms? A constructive-developmental approach to transformative learning. In: J. Mezirow, ed. Learning as transformation: critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 35–69.
   Google Scholar
• Lauder, M., 2009. Systemic operational design: freeing operational planning from the shackles of linearity. Canadian military journal, 9 (4), 41–49.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, H.W., 2010. A journey through the systems landscape. London: College Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Mezirow, J., ed., 2000. Learning as transformation: critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2005. Guidelines for operational planning (GOP) final revision 1. Mons: Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2010a. Allied command operations comprehensive operations planning directive, COPD Interim V1.0. Mons: Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2010b. Bi-strategic command knowledge development, pre-doctrinal handbook, final draft. Mons and Norfolk: Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe and Allied Command Transformation.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2010c. AJP-01(D) Allied Joint Doctrine. Brussels: NATO Standardization Agency.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2011. NATO assessment handbook, Interim version 1.0. Mons and Norfolk: Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe and Allied Command Transformation.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2012. AAP-6 NATO glossary of terms and definitions, edition 2012, version 2. Brussels: NATO Standardization Agency.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2013. Allied command operations comprehensive operations planning directive, COPD Interim V2.0. Mons: Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe.
   Google Scholar
• Osinga, F.P.B., 2007. Science, strategy and war: the strategic theory of John Boyd. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Rynning, S., 2012. NATO in Afghanistan: the liberal disconnect. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schroden, J., 2013. Operations assessment at ISAF: changing paradigms. In: A. Williams, J. Bexfield, F.F. Farina and J. de Nijs, eds. Innovation in operations assessment: recent developments in measuring results in conflict environments. The Hague: NATO, 39–67.
   Google Scholar
• Senge, P.M., 2006. The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. Revised and updated ed. London: Random House Business.
   Google Scholar
• Utbildningsväsendets författningsböcker [Education laws and regulations] (UFB). 2011/12 D. 3, Universitet och högskolor 2011/12. 1. Uppl., 1. tr., 2011. Stockholm: Norstedts Juridik.
   Google Scholar
• von Clausewitz, C., 1984. On war. Princeton, NJ: Princeton U.P.
   Google Scholar
• Whitten, J.L. and Bentley, L.D., 2007. Systems analysis and design methods. 7th ed. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
   Google Scholar
• Zweibelson, B., 2012. Seven design theory considerations: an approach to ill-structured problems. Military review, 92 (6), 80–89.
   Google Scholar