text: Chapter 2
  * Identification of execution shortfalls concerning intelligence, means, capability, or authority).
  * A concept sketch.
  2-30. The MDO ensures that each deception plan is properly constructed. Using the approved COA or
  concept as a base, the MDO integrates any revised commander’s guidance, updated intelligence analysis, and
  revisions to the primary COA to refine and complete the deception plan. The initial step in this process is to
  review all previous planning products and adjust them as required. From this point, the planner begins the
  ten-step Army tactical deception planning process:
  * Step 1—Determine the deception goal and the deception objective.
  * Step 2—Identify and analyze the deception target.
  * Step 3—Identify desired perceptions of the deception target.
  * Step 4—Develop deception observables and means.
  * Step 5—Develop the deception story.
  * Step 6—Develop the deception event schedule.
  * Step 7—Develop OPSEC and other protection measures.
  * Step 8—Develop feedback criteria.
  * Step 9—Develop a termination plan.
  * Step 10—Produce Appendix 14 (Military Deception) to Annex C (Operations).
  Step 1—Determine the Deception Goal and the Deception Objective
  2-31. The deception goal is the desired contribution of the DWG to friendly mission success. The deception
  goal is usually recommended in the running estimate and confirmed by the commander’s planning guidance
  at the conclusion of mission analysis. The commander is responsible for providing the deception goal. The
  MDO or DWG often develops a deception objective based on that goal.
  2-32. The deception objective is the purpose of the deception expressed as the enemy’s actions or inactions
  at a critical time and location. Like the deception goal, the running estimate contains the deception objective.
  The commander confirms the deception objective in the commander’s planning guidance at the conclusion
  of mission analysis.
  Step 2—Identify and Analyze the Deception Target
  2-33. The deception target is the enemy decision maker who has authority to make the decision to achieve
  the deception objective. During mission analysis, MDOs identify potential deception targets. The target
  directs the action or inaction of the enemy force or capabilities. Friendly forces need existing conduits to the
  deception target or a reasonable expectation to establish conduits.
  2-34. To fully analyze a target for deception, planners—
  * Characterize enemy decision making.
  * Analyze the human factors affecting a deception.
  * Conduct conduit analysis of the deception target.
  * Understand the enemy’s intelligence and counterintelligence organizations and capabilities.
  * Analyze the enemy’s potential vulnerability to deception.
  * Understand enemy deception and counterdeception doctrine and resources.
  Characterize Enemy Decision Making
  2-35. To affect enemy decision making, planners must first understand and characterize its functional
  components by analyzing and describing the enemy’s decision-making structure and style. Decision-making
  structure refers to how the enemy organizes relevant information to collect, transmit, analyze, and deliver to
  support decision making. Decision-making structure provides the basis for conduit analysis. Planners select
  a model that is conducive to rapid understanding. This type of model enables intelligence analysts and MDOs
  to better understand the overall enemy decision-making structure and subsequently communicate the reason
  for a certain operational approach or series of deception events.