Flexibility in Operational Logistics

  • Moshe Kress


Field commanders and military scholars recognize the need for flexibility in planning and executing military operations. In operational art the concept of flexibility is embedded in the tenet of freedom of action. At any given time before or during a military operation, the commander seeks to maximize the number of feasible courses of actions. The more the operational options that are available for possible implementation, the larger is his flexibility and his freedom of action. In the decision-sciences literature, flexibility is sometimes defined similarly as the number of optional alternatives left over after one has made an initial decision 2,3. By increasing the range of optional alternatives, flexibility essentially reduces the number and the severity of the operational constraints.


Operational Logistics Military Operation Operational Flexibility Demand Node Weapon System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Kress, M., “Flexibility in Operational-Level Logistics”, Military Operations Research, V. 5. No. l,pp 41-54, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gupta S. K., and Rosenhead, J., (1968),“Robustness in sequential investment decisions”, Management Science, 15, B18-B29, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Resenhead, J., Elton, M., and Gupta, S.K., (1972), “Robustness and Optimality as Criteria for Strategic Decisions”, Operational Research Quarterly 23, 413-441, 1972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kovacs, A., “Using Intelligence”,Intelligence and National Security, V. 12, No. 4, pp 145-164, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    von Clausewitz, C., On War, Princeton University Press, p 119, 1976.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schneider, J. J., The Structure of Strategic Revolution, Presidio, Novato CA, p. 51, 1994.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mandelbaum, M., and Buzacott, J., “Flexibility and Decision Making”, European Journal of Operational Research, V. 44, No. 5, pp 17-27, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Williams, N., “The Revolution in Military Logistics”, Military Technology, V. 21, No. 11, pp 50-51, 1997.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brabham, MajGen J. A., “Operational Logistics: Defining the Art of the Possible”, Marine Corps Gazette, April 1994, p 27, 1994.Google Scholar
  10. Haas, P. M., “Palletized Loading System: Not Just Another Truck”, Army Logistician, September-October 1996, p 14, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gerchak, Y. and Henig, M., “Component Commonality in Assemble-To_ Order Systems: Models and Properties”, Naval Reseach Logistics, 36, pp 61-68, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gerchak, Y., Magazine, M. J., and Gamble, B., “Component Commonality with Service Level Requirements”, Management Science, V. 34, No. 6, pp 753-760, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    FM 100-5, Operations, Department of the Army, Washington DC, p 12-3, 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Moshe Kress
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Military AnalysesIsrael

Personalised recommendations