AFDD 2-1.9, page 74

64 Aggregate of TA products: Includes all the results of TA relevant to particular effects and objectives. However, OA may not be able to wait on a complete TA picture before delivering “actionable” advice to commanders. OA measures are qualitative, and while they build upon what objective data is available, they sometimes entail informed but subjective judgment concerning accomplishment of effects. Several key elements of PBA feed OA: › Target system assessment: An estimate of the overall effectiveness of force employment against selected enemy target systems. This is a component-level fusion of FA products against targets in a particular system, using them to assess overall impact upon a system’s capabilities. It is particularly important that this assessment be based on desired effects rather than simple empirical measures of damage. Many times, effects against systems like electricity and communications can be achieved with little physical damage. › Evaluation of enemy action and intent is a critical prerequisite to evaluation of progress toward objectives. Some of this assessment can be empirical: disposition of enemy units, amount of enemy electronic or aerial activity, and so on. Much, of necessity, will entail qualitative evaluation, especially as assessors tackle the problem of enemy intent. This part of OA will likely be accomplished in tandem with the equivalent portions of CFC-level campaign analysis and with federated and reachback support. Risk assessment considers the risks of friendly attrition, political cost from collateral damage and other unintended indirect effects, the cost of lost opportunities involved in pursuing the chosen COA, and the consequences of failure to achieve the objective(s) to develop a comprehensive picture of the potential costs of friendly action. This is a vital input to evaluation of progress and recommendations for future action. The full range of military operations—stability, engagement, deterrence, and other aspects of smaller-scale contingencies—are more important here than in TA. In smaller conflicts, it may be necessary to consider “strategic” issues, such as how effectively other instruments of national power (like diplomatic, informational, and economic) are integrated with military efforts. This may also require evaluation of coalition efforts. The largest share of responsibility for this form of assessment normally rests with the CFC, but some may be relevant to the component level and component assessment inputs will be usually be required to accomplish campaign assessment. Evaluation of progress toward objectives is one of the two most important elements of OA. This is fundamentally an effects-based and qualitative evaluation, building upon empirical data, but involving significant analyst and commander judgment. Sometimes there will be very little objective data pointing toward accomplishment. As discussed in the sections on effects, many indirect effects are hard to measure until they happen. Planners and commanders must be patient and counsel patience in light of this—success may be around the corner, even if this is hard to see predictively. Recommending future action is the other vitally important aspect of OA. Based on analysis of the other elements, OA recommends continuing, modifying, or completely changing the component strategy. Resulting recommendations may include such things