An organization theory of troops (forces) and their activity.

The analysis of the contemporary stage in development of human cognitive activity shows that the process of science differentiation is going on. For instance, at present the organization theory (1) is formed and structurally evolved from the contents of the various scientific schools. It has all attributes of an independent science: its subject, objects and research methods, its inherent laws, principles, hypotheses, terminology and concepts.

The identified universality of an organization phenomenon, a unified organizational nature of formation, functioning and development of any processes and systems served as a prerequisite for this theory development. This is precisely what urged to identify, study and represent such unity as a universal holistic concept of global organization, to elaborate the unified organization theory based on the knowledge of universal laws of organization systems. (2)

The recognition of the right of the organization science to existence did not start either with a fundamental theory or its basic concepts, but with such specific pragmatic venues as the organization of labor, production and management. And only by approaching these studies object-wise did the scholars and practitioners reveal and identify the common organizing background of all the processes and systems that surround people.

Existence of the general organization theory by no means excludes the presence of the particular theories focused on intrinsic management objects in various institutions of social, economic and other kinds of activity.

Of course, the activity in the military sphere can be no exception, too. The armed forces and their activity are vivid peculiar forms of organizational systems and processes.

Prior to analyzing the incorporation of organizational issues into military science, it is necessary to say a few words about the essence of organization.

The application of the term "organization" in contemporary science and practice is varied. The term is used in the expressions that reflect and develop the most diverse spheres of life. At the same time, in the notion of the term "organization" one can single out a number of self-consistent and most commonly encountered definitions that reflect a very broad spectrum of well-established concepts and applications. (3)

* First, organization (from Latin organizo meaning neat arrangement, association) most often means the association of people for attainment of common objectives.

* Second, the expression "organization of a system" is used in studies, analyses and description of the purpose, form, internal arrangement, structure, procedure and mechanism of the formation, operation and interaction of organization. In this context, the understanding of the term "organization" is focused on defining and perceiving the inner composition, structure, functional-and-procedural division, distribution, specialization and interaction of the components of this system. In other words, organization (from French organization meaning arrangement) is deemed to mean the inner ordering, consistency and interaction of parts of the whole that are determined by its structure.

* Third, organization presents itself as the most widely spread version of man's purposeful activity that provides to this or that extent the efficient solution of any problem that he faces. In this context, organization emerges as the planned and executed purposeful, intellectual and material process of establishment of relationships, links, dependencies, development of forms and procedures.

It is the establishment of the quantitative, qualitative, spatial, temporal and other linkages between particular components that makes the essence of organization as a process.

In other words, organization is a multitude of meaningful processes or actions that are conducive to the formation of the requisite linkages.

So, one can make the conclusion that the extremely broad and versatile perception, understanding and application of the term "organization" reflects systems and processes. They can have subjective, objective and mixed nature, and they can manifest themselves in material, intellectual and mixed forms.

How are things going with the study of organization questions in military science? The subject domain of military science includes: a nature of combat, methods of its preparation on the strategic, operational and tactical level; the composition, organization and technical support of the armed forces; troops (forces) control (command) in the times of peace and war; military training and education; economic support of construction, preparation and deployment of the armed forces; previous military experience.

The specified subjects of study have formed the basis of the well-known military science subdisciplines classification (4) (Fig.).

But, there is no special section that is engaged in study of general theoretical issues of organization of troops (forces) and their activity.

If one draws analogy with the "civil" science, it would be largely reminiscent of the situation when there were a lot of different pragmatic scientific venues in it that had assisted the organization theory in forming and positioning itself at the present time.

[FIGURE OMITTED]

The absence in military science of a special sub discipline of general organization questions has resulted in its failure to reveal the generic content that is associated with the object of study in particular sub disciplines of organization domain. Such conclusion is confirmed by the fact that military science subdisciplines are devoid of a uniform set of concepts, methodological system, approaches, methods, tools for examining the objects and subject of the organization theory of troops (forces) and their activity, and this, in its turn, leads to the fact that today in the armed forces a number of the problems related to organization questions remain unsolved. Of the highest priority among them are the problems of defining the rational structure of military control agencies and military units of all levels, as well as organization of warfare and special actions.

In such a manner, the hypothesis has emerged assuming that military science should have (by analogy with a troop control theory) the autonomous sub discipline--"organization theory of troops (forces) and of their activity" that is represented by a well-knit system of scientific knowledge pertaining to organization questions. The military units of all levels and their activity must be the object of study of the organization theory, and organizational relationships should be the subject of research. The latter represents relations between parts in the holistic formation, as well as between the part and the whole.

It is assumed that the organization theory of troops (forces) and their activity must be engaged in seeking for analogies, analysis in the construction and functioning of different military organization systems, with development and formulation of the particular laws and regularities of organization in military matters, with defining the mechanisms of their manifestation in practical work, and should elaborate, on this basis, the principles of the arrangement and functioning of military organization systems.

The proposed hypothesis about the development of the new field of knowledge determines the need for making the forecast about its place in the prevailing military science system. At the same time, established must be not only its position or its significance, but, to a large extent, the configuration for developing the cause and effect relationships of this theory with the other fields of knowledge.

We suppose that, in military science, the organization theory of troops (forces) and of their activity must, similar to a management theory, play the integrative and connecting role between the subdisciplines of military science (Fig.). In their turn, applied pragmatic questions of organization in the different spheres of military activity must be based on the general organization theory of troops (forces) and of their activity: operations (battle actions) organization theory, the theory of military control agencies and of military units, the organization of research, etc.

The significant positioning, in military science, of the theory of organization of troops (forces) and of their activity is determined, in general scientific context, by the significance of theory in real life. Theory provides the holistic perception of the regularities and essential linkages of the definite universe, highlights objective linkages and relationships between the objects and phenomena of the surrounding world, and brings into view the problem solving approach. Not without reason was it conceded, that there is nothing more practical than good theory.

Certainly, the suggested approach can also invoke skeptical remarks among military scientists. But, only the development of proposed theory can become the criterion of its appropriateness in the structure of military knowledge.

NOTES:

1. Ya. V. Radchenko, Teoriia organizatsii, GAU, Moscow, 1998; E.A. Smirnov, Teoriia organizatsii, INFRA-M, Moscow, 2000; B.Z. Milner, Teoriia organizatsii, INFRA-M, Moscow, 2001.

2. A.A. Bogdanov, Tektologiia. Vseobschaia organizatsionnaia nauka, Ekonomika, Moscow, Vols. 1, 2, 1989.

3. B.Z. Milner, Teoriya organizatsii, Op. Cit.

4. M.A. Gareyev, "Metodologicheskie problemy voyennykh nauk", Voyennaya Mysl, No. 8, 1994, pp. 47-51.

Col. A.M. KUZMINTSEV

Candidate of Military Sciences

Deputy Department Head, Military Aerospace Defense Academy