text: Chapter 6
  EVALUATING IO
  6-22. During execution, the IO officer works with the intelligence cell and integrating cells to obtain the
  information needed to determine individual and collective IO effects. Evaluation not only estimates the
  effectiveness of task execution, but also evaluates the effect of the entire IO effort on the threat, other relevant
  audiences in the area of operations, and friendly operations. Task execution is evaluated using measures of
  performance. Task effectiveness is evaluated using measures of effectiveness, which compare achieved
  results against a baseline. Additional information on assessment and the unique considerations involved in
  assessing IO are found in chapter 8.
  6-23. Based on the IO effects evaluation, the IO officer adjusts IO to further exploit enemy vulnerabilities,
  redirects actions yielding insufficient effects, or terminates actions after they have achieved the desired result.
  The IO officer keeps the G-3 (S-3) and commander informed of IO effects and how these impact friendly
  and adversary operations. Some of the possible changes to IO include:
  * Strike a target or continue to protect a critical asset to ensure the desired effect.
  * Execute a branch or sequel.
  DECISION MAKING DURING EXECUTION
  6-24. Decision making during execution includes:
  * Executing IO as planned.
  * Adjusting IO to a changing friendly situation.
  * Adjusting IO to an unexpected enemy reaction.
  EXECUTING IO AS PLANNED
  6-25. Essential to execution is a continuous information flow among the various functional and integrating
  cells. The IO officer tracks execution with intelligence and current operations cells, as well as with the
  targeting staff. The IO officer, in concert with the IO working group, maintains a synchronization matrix.
  This matrix is periodically updated and provided to the headquarters’ functional and integrating cells. Using
  the matrix, the IO officer and working group keep record of completed IRC tasks. As tasks are completed,
  the IO officer passes the information to the intelligence cell. The IO officer and working group use this
  information to keep IO synchronized with the overall operation.
  6-26. The IO officer determines whether the threat commander and other identified leaders are reacting to
  IO as anticipated during course of action analysis. The IO officer, in concert with the IO working group,
  looks for new threat vulnerabilities and for new IO-related targets. The IO officer proposes changes to the
  operation order (OPORD) to deal with variances throughout execution. The G-3 (S-3) issues FRAGORDs
  pertaining to IO, as requested by the IO officer. These FRAGORDs may implement changes to the scheme
  of IO, IO objectives, and IRC tasks. The IO officer updates the IO synchronization matrix and IO assessment
  plan to reflect these changes.
  6-27. Given the flexibility of advanced information systems, the time available to exploit new threat
  command and control vulnerabilities may be limited and requires an immediate response from designated
  IRCs. Actions to defeat threat information efforts need to be undertaken before exploitation advantage
  disappears. The G-3 (S-3) may issue a verbal FRAGORD when immediate action is required.
  ADJUSTING IO TO A CHANGING FRIENDLY SITUATION
  6-28. As IO is executed, it often varies from the plan. Possible reasons for a variance include:
  * An IO task is aborted or assets redirected.
  * An IO-related target did not respond as anticipated.
  * The threat effectively countered an IO attack.
  * The threat successfully disrupted friendly mission command.
  * The initial plan did not identify an emergent IO-related target or target of opportunity.