Tactics, command, leadership

Other parameters that can influence the control level are the
number of simultaneous goals that are set, available plans, under-
standing of the incident horizon and the cond ition at execution
level (depending on the decision domain). Note that these control
modes are theoretical constructions. In reality the degree of con-
trol varies continually, but, nevertheless, each can apply in each
of the decision domains. Control modes are, then, not tied to a
particular decision domain, and consequently within the fram-
ework of a single domain, one can work on the basis of scrambled
control just as well as strategic control. Note also that the degree
of control is then tied to a time scale and that the longest scale
for a particular decision domain cannot be longer than the lon-
gest time scale in the overall decision domain. Variations in de-
gree of control occur therefore within one and the same decision
domain.
Transitions between different control modes can depend on,
among other things, the quantity of information available or that
can be processed. Both the stress the decision maker is subjec-
ted to and span­of­control will influence the way in which infor-
mation is processed. Through increasing command capacity, one
can both avoid undesirable transitions between control levels and
guide decision domains into a certain control level my improving
the processing of information.
The aspects of feedback and feedforward can also be of signi­
ficance in the interaction between competence and control. Opp-
ortunistic control is normally compelled by feedback. This makes
the indication of feedback crucial, i.e. that correct signals and
relevant information are received from the system. In an equiva-
lent way strategic control is compelled to a large extent (but not
only) by feedforward, on the basis of short comings in information
about the system. Generally speaking, the greater the degree of
competence, the greater the likelihood of control being maintai-
ned in the system in both the short and long term, irrespective
of the decision domain. There is also, naturally, a connection bet-
ween control and available time and through this also space.
New technology has enabled flexibility through providing de-
cision makers as individuals at the measures level with a large
number of functions and alternatives for executing tasks under
different conditions (Sarter et al. 1995). This means that more
knowledge is required than previously of, among other things,
how the system functions in different conditions and at different