text: Execution
  6-29. The IO officer's challenge is to rapidly assess how changes in IO execution affect the overall operation
  and to determine necessary follow-on actions. Based on the commander's input, the IO officer, in
  coordination with the rest of the headquarters’ functional and integrating cells, considers COAs, conducts a
  quick COA analysis, and determines the most feasible COA.
  6-30. If the selected COA falls within the decision-making authority of the G-3 (S-3), IO execution can be
  adjusted without notifying the commander. When changes exceed previously designated limits, the IO officer
  obtains approval from the commander. At this point, a more formal decision-making process may be required
  before issuing a FRAGORD, especially if a major adjustment to the operation order (OPORD) is needed. In
  such a case, the IO officer, working with the G-3 (S-3), participates in a time-constrained military
  decisionmaking process (MDMP) to develop a new COA.
  ADJUSTING IO TO AN UNEXPECTED THREAT REACTION
  6-31. The threat may react in an unexpected manner to IO or to the overall operation. If threat actions diverge
  significantly from those anticipated when the OPORD was written, the commander and staff look first at
  branch and sequel plans. If branch or sequel plans fail to adequately address the new situation, a new planning
  effort may be required.
  6-32. The IO officer prepares branches that modify defend weighted efforts when threat actions cause new
  friendly vulnerabilities, or when friendly attack or stabilize efforts prove ineffective. The intelligence and
  current operations integration cells work with the IO officer to maintain a running assessment of threat
  capability to disrupt friendly mission command, and look for ways to lessen friendly vulnerabilities.
  Concurrently, they look for opportunities to reestablish IO effectiveness. Under these conditions, the IO
  officer determines the adequacy of existing branches and sequels. If none fit the situation, they create a new
  branch or sequel and disseminate it by FRAGORD.
  6-33. If a new plan is needed, time available dictates the length of the decision-making process and the
  amount of detail contained in an order. The IO officer may only be able to recommend the use of IRCs that
  can immediately affect the overall operation: for example, electronic warfare, and MISO. Other IRCs proceed
  as originally planned and are adjusted later, unless they conflict with the new plan.
  OTHER EXECUTION CONSIDERATIONS
  6-34. Other considerations include, but are not limited to—
  * IO execution begins early.
  * IO execution requires flexibility.
  IO EXECUTION BEGINS EARLY
  6-35. Potential adversary and enemy commanders begin forming perceptions of a situation well before
  they encounter friendly forces. Recognizing this fact, commanders establish a baseline of IO that is practiced
  routinely in garrison and training. Selected IRCs (for example, MISO, OPSEC, combat camera, and military
  deception) begin contributing to an IO objective well before a deployment occurs. To support early execution
  of the overall operation, IO planning, preparation, and execution frequently begin well before the staff
  formally starts planning for an operation.
  IO EXECUTION REQUIRES FLEXIBILITY
  6-36. Actions by threat decision makers sometimes take surprising turns, uncovering unanticipated
  weaknesses or strengths. Similarly, friendly commanders may react unexpectedly in response to threat
  activities. Flexibility is key to success in IO execution. Effective commanders and well-trained staffs are
  flexible enough to expect the unexpected and exploit threat vulnerabilities/friendly strengths and protect
  against threat strengths/friendly vulnerabilities.