MISR and the Shift from Crisis Management to Chaos Management

The challenge of shifting from traditional crisis response to what might be called “chaos management” represents one of the most significant shifts facing the U.S. military since the end of the Cold War.

The Maritime Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (MISR) program at the Naval Aviation Warfighting Development Center provides a real world example of working the shift. The MISR program’s evolution between 2020 and 2025 offers a unique window into how military organizations adapt to what Admiral Paparo has called the need, in effect, for “new mental furniture” in 21st century warfare.

Admiral Samuel Paparo advocates new conceptual frameworks for military adaptation in 21st-century warfare. In his congressional testimonies, published remarks, and professional interviews, he frequently emphasizes the need for innovative thinking, agility, and cognitive transformation within military organizations.​

For example, in official testimony before Congress in April 2025, Admiral Paparo described the Indo-Pacific Command’s approach as requiring “novel concepts,” “reshaping the cognitive domain,” and “systems-level adaptation to out-think and out-adapt our competitors.” He further stressed the imperative for military leaders to “re-examine our frameworks for understanding and operating in the modern battlespace” as a matter of strategic necessity.​

Paparo’s public communications throughout 2024 and 2025 similarly highlight the importance of developing new operational models and mental agility, making repeated references to “new ways of thinking,” “transforming our approach to decision-making,” and “equipping ourselves for tomorrow’s threats”. These statements, found in panel remarks, defense industry interviews, and congressional posture hearings, reinforce the call for new conceptual frameworks as a hallmark of his leadership ethos.

MISR represents a practical validation of the theoretical shift from managing discrete crises to operating effectively within persistent complexity and uncertainty.

The Traditional Crisis Management Framework

The concept of naval forces as crisis management capabilities emerged from Cold War strategic thinking that assumed international problems were discrete events requiring rapid military intervention. Naval task forces would deploy to crisis areas, apply decisive force to restore stability, and withdraw once order was reestablished. Success was measured by speed of deployment and decisiveness of action.

This approach worked effectively in an international system characterized by relatively stable great power relationships and clear geographical boundaries. When crises emerged, whether through regional conflicts or challenges to American interests, naval forces could deploy rapidly from sea-based platforms, overwhelm opposition through superior training and technology, and establish conditions for political resolution.

The crisis management model emphasized several core capabilities that became hallmarks of American naval power: rapid global deployment, combined arms coordination across air, sea, and land domains, and the ability to operate independently with minimal external support. These capabilities made naval forces ideally suited for interventions where other military services would require extensive preparation time and logistical infrastructure.

However, the crisis management paradigm contained assumptions that have become increasingly problematic in the contemporary security environment. It presumed that military problems had clear solutions achievable through superior force application. It assumed successful intervention would result in stable post-conflict conditions requiring minimal ongoing presence.

Most fundamentally, it was built around the idea that chaos was a temporary condition that effective military action could eliminate.

The Reality of Persistent Complexity

The modern security environment challenges every aspect of traditional crisis management thinking. Contemporary conflicts are not discrete events with clear resolutions but ongoing competitions operating across multiple domains simultaneously. Adversaries do not present conventional military targets but operate through networks blending state and non-state actors, conventional and unconventional methods, and military and civilian infrastructure.

Technological change has accelerated beyond traditional military planning cycles. Artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, cyber capabilities, and advanced sensor networks create operational environments that change faster than conventional force development can accommodate. Perhaps most significantly, the international system itself has become more complex and unpredictable.

Rather than facing discrete crises resolvable through military intervention, the United States confronts ongoing strategic competitions with peer adversaries who are themselves adaptive and learning. China’s approach to strategic competition deliberately operates within ambiguous zones that make traditional crisis response inappropriate and potentially counterproductive.

These conditions create what might be termed “persistent competition” environments where distinctions between peace and conflict become meaningless. Military forces must operate continuously within strategic uncertainty, technological change, and adaptive opposition. Success requires not the ability to resolve chaos into order, but the capability to maintain effectiveness within ongoing chaos.

MISR’s Evolution: From Platforms to Networks

The MISR program’s development trajectory between 2020 and 2025 illustrates this transformation in practical terms. When the program began, it operated within traditional crisis management thinking. The focus was on “better utilization of ISR platforms” and optimizing existing reconnaissance strike complexes built during the 1980s.

CDR Pete “Two Times” Salvaggio’s initial description in 2020 revealed thinking still anchored in crisis management assumptions. The program aimed to improve how dedicated ISR platforms operated within the battlespace and optimize functionality of established reconnaissance strike architectures. While innovative, this approach still assumed that military problems could be solved through better application of existing capabilities.

By 2025, under CDR Timothy “HaveQuick” Bierbach’s leadership, MISR had transformed into something fundamentally different. The program had evolved from platform optimization to what Bierbach calls “the shift in warfighting associated with the digital domain.” Rather than focusing on specific platforms, MISR now emphasizes sensor networks and distributed decision-making capabilities.

This evolution reflects the theoretical shift from crisis management to chaos management. Instead of seeking to eliminate uncertainty through better information gathering, MISR now focuses on enabling effective decision-making within uncertain and rapidly changing conditions. The program’s emphasis on “warrior solution architects” who can dynamically connect various payloads to create effective constellations demonstrates adaptive capacity rather than procedural optimization.

The Architecture of Distributed Operations

The most significant validation of chaos management theory appears in MISR’s work on distributed operational concepts. Rather than concentrating ISR capabilities for centralized analysis and dissemination, the program now emphasizes Local Area Networks (LANs) that enable combat clusters to operate with significant autonomy. This architectural shift mirrors the distributed operations concepts described in chaos management theory. Rather than creating single points of failure through centralized command and control, distributed approaches build redundancy and adaptive capacity throughout the system. When individual platforms, units, or communication nodes are disrupted, the overall system maintains capabilities by reconfiguring around remaining assets.

LCDR Jason “Cuddles” Falk’s description of current MISR operations reveals this transformation: “A distributed force works with Local Area Networks, which means that the force can operate with combat clusters leveraging LANs rather than having to rely on centrally delivered ISR content.” This represents exactly the kind of organizational plasticity that chaos management theory identifies as essential for modern warfare.

The program’s platform-agnostic approach enables what might be called “operational plasticity” – the ability to rapidly reconfigure force structures and tactical approaches based on emerging conditions. Rather than deploying with predetermined operational plans, distributed forces can assess local conditions and develop appropriate responses using available capabilities.

Technology Integration and Adaptive Learning

MISR’s approach to the “payload revolution” illustrates how chaos management enables accelerated technology adoption. Rather than waiting for perfect technological solutions or comprehensive doctrine development, the program integrates available capabilities and learns how to use them effectively through operational experience.

The program’s work with the JUMP 20 Group 3 uncrewed aircraft system during the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit’s exercise demonstrates this approach. Instead of developing extensive doctrine before deployment, Marines integrated the system during ARGMEUEX and discovered its operational value through practical application. The system’s first flight aboard a San Antonio-class amphibious warship became a learning opportunity that immediately enhanced operational capability.

This experimental approach extends beyond unmanned systems to include artificial intelligence, advanced communications, and enhanced sensor capabilities. The key insight validated by MISR is that distributed operations create frameworks for technology integration rather than requiring technologies to be integrated into predetermined frameworks.

Cultural Transformation: From Procedures to Adaptation

Perhaps the most significant validation of chaos management theory appears in MISR’s approach to training and education. Traditional military culture emphasizes planning, predictability, and control through detailed operational plans that anticipate problems and prescribe solutions for expected scenarios. The MISR program has explicitly rejected this approach in favor of developing what it calls “mental furniture” for 21st century warfare.

Commander Bierbach’s partnership with Marine Corps Training and Education Command at Quantico emphasizes education over training, developing cognitive frameworks through condensed practical experiences rather than procedural repetition. This approach directly validates chaos management theory’s emphasis on developing “negative capability” – the ability to remain effective in uncertain situations without rushing toward premature clarity. MISR officers are trained to be “puzzle solvers” and “Jedi Knights” rather than procedural technicians.

The program’s emphasis on “safe-to-fail” learning environments where personnel can experiment with new concepts without operational consequences demonstrates institutionalized adaptive learning. This represents exactly the kind of organizational learning capability that chaos management theory identifies as essential for thriving within complex environments.

Strategic Competition and Persistent Presence

The MISR program’s development validates theoretical insights about strategic competition environments where adversaries continuously adapt their approaches. Traditional crisis management assumes superior force can overcome opposition and create stable conditions, but strategic competition involves dynamic, co-evolutionary conflicts that never reach stable resolutions.

The program’s emphasis on distributed sensor networks and rapid decision-making capabilities enables responses to ambiguous threats through persistent adaptation rather than discrete intervention. Rather than waiting for adversary actions to cross clear thresholds justifying conventional military responses, MISR-enabled forces can continuously adapt to changing strategic conditions.

The 22nd MEU’s integration of JUMP 20 capabilities during ARGMEUEX demonstrates how chaos management enables persistent presence without creating attractive targets for adversary anti-access strategies. Distributed operations present much more difficult targeting challenges while maintaining power projection capabilities across strategic distances.

Network Warfare and Emergent Capabilities

The MISR program’s integration of unmanned systems and mesh networking technologies creates possibilities for operational concepts that exemplify chaos management principles. Rather than using unmanned systems as replacements for manned platforms performing traditional missions, the program enables emergent capabilities arising from interaction between manned and unmanned systems operating within adaptive networks.

The development of what MISR calls “layered reconnaissance strike networks” illustrates how technological capabilities support chaos management by creating operational architectures that maintain effectiveness even when specific platforms or communication links are disrupted. The redundancy and adaptive capacity built into these networks mirror the organizational resilience that chaos management seeks to develop. The program’s work with “loyal wingman” concepts and manned-unmanned teaming demonstrates real-time collaboration between human operators and autonomous systems that adapt their roles based on changing tactical conditions. This represents exactly the kind of emergent capability that chaos management theory predicts will become essential for future warfare.

The MISR program’s educational approach provides compelling validation of chaos management training requirements. Traditional training emphasizes developing proficiency in specific procedures through repetitive practice under controlled conditions. While this builds competence in known situations, it provides limited preparation for novel challenges characterizing chaotic environments.

Commander Bierbach’s description of MISR training reveals a fundamentally different approach: “We need to educate our people, and then in a short period of time, condense it by doing practical experiences or practical application, and then gaining experiential knowledge.” This methodology focuses on developing adaptive capacity and learning agility rather than procedural compliance. The program’s emphasis on scenario-based learning that deliberately introduces novel challenges requiring adaptive responses demonstrates exactly what chaos management theory prescribes. Rather than perfecting responses to predicted situations, MISR officers practice developing effective responses to unexpected problems using available resources.

The success of Marine graduates from the program, who quickly deployed to 7th Fleet operations and demonstrated immediate operational impact, validates this educational approach. Moving from 10 to 40 students per class with guaranteed Marine Corps participation shows institutional recognition of the program’s value.

Rather than optimizing for specific predicted scenarios, the program focuses on developing adaptive capacity that can respond to whatever requirements actually emerge. The program’s platform-agnostic philosophy prioritizes capabilities that enhance flexibility and learning rather than specialized optimization. The ability to integrate new payloads rapidly across various platforms demonstrates exactly the kind of modularity and reconfigurability that chaos management theory suggests should replace specialized optimization.

Industrial partnerships with companies like Lockheed Martin demonstrate new acquisition approaches that reflect chaos management principles. Richard Whitfield’s description of rapid prototyping – “Go from concept to a prototype in a box within 15 to 18 months” – shows acquisition processes prioritizing technologies that enhance adaptive capacity over those providing superior performance in predetermined roles.

Strategic Advantages in Major Power Competition

The MISR program’s development provides particular validation for chaos management advantages in great power competition, especially in the Indo-Pacific theater. Traditional crisis management approaches assume military forces can achieve decisive results through concentrated application of superior capabilities, but peer adversaries like China have developed strategies specifically designed to avoid decisive confrontations.

The program’s distributed operations concepts enable persistent engagement through networks of capabilities that can adapt their configuration based on changing strategic conditions. Rather than deploying large, fixed installations presenting attractive targets, MISR-enabled operations maintain influence through small, mobile capabilities that present difficult targeting challenges.

The 22nd MEU’s successful integration of distributed ISR capabilities during maritime interception operations and amphibious assaults demonstrates how chaos management approaches provide resilience against anti-access/area denial strategies that peer adversaries have developed to counter traditional American military approaches.

Perhaps the most significant validation of chaos management theory appears in how the MISR program has institutionalized organizational learning and continuous adaptation. Traditional military organizations develop capabilities through lengthy processes that can take years or decades to complete. The pace of change in modern operational environments makes these development cycles inadequate.

The MISR program demonstrates what organizational theorists call “learning organization” capabilities – institutions capable of rapidly identifying effective practices, sharing knowledge across organizational boundaries, and implementing improvements faster than adversaries can develop countermeasures.

The program’s integration with Marine Corps operations through exercises like Kaiju Rain 25 shows how learning organizations can break down service boundaries to accelerate innovation. Colonel Joshua Mayoral’s description of bringing together “joint, interagency and allied partners to refine integration” demonstrates the kind of distributed learning that chaos management requires.

Challenges and Limitations

While the MISR program provides compelling validation of chaos management concepts, it also reveals some limitations of the theoretical framework. The program operates within experimental environments that may not fully capture the political and bureaucratic constraints affecting broader military transformation.

Political leaders often demand predictable, controllable responses to security challenges. The MISR program’s success in experimental settings doesn’t necessarily prove that political systems can accommodate military approaches emphasizing adaptation over predetermined planning, particularly when those approaches cannot guarantee specific outcomes.

The program also operates within the Navy’s relatively small, culturally cohesive organization. Whether similar approaches can work within larger, more bureaucratic military services remains unclear. The Marine Corps’ cultural advantages in adaptability may not translate to organizations without similar traditions of decentralized leadership and initiative.

The MISR program’s success suggests several implications for broader military innovation that extend beyond validation of chaos management theory. The program demonstrates that educational approaches emphasizing cognitive framework development can accelerate capability adoption faster than traditional training-heavy models. The “fight tonight” philosophy evident in MISR operations proves more effective than distant force development timelines, particularly when supported by adaptive acquisition approaches that prioritize rapid integration over perfect solutions. This suggests fundamental changes needed in defense acquisition and force development processes.

The program’s success in cross-domain integration shows that breaking down traditional service and domain boundaries enables more effective responses to complex threats. Marines operating across land, sea, air, cyber, and space domains simultaneously represent exactly the kind of capability integration that modern warfare requires.

The most strategically significant validation of chaos management theory appears in MISR’s demonstration that distributed decision-making can operate faster than centralized alternatives. CDR Bierbach’s observation that “a local reconnaissance strike network now can operate much more rapidly in terms of decision cycle than a single national reconnaissance strike complex” has profound implications for military effectiveness. In high-end conflicts where engagement timelines compress to seconds or minutes, this speed-of-light decision-making capability could prove decisive. Forces that can maintain effectiveness while adversaries struggle with uncertainty and complexity gain strategic advantages that transcend traditional measures of military capability.

The program’s ability to integrate new technologies and adapt operational approaches faster than adversaries can develop countermeasures demonstrates exactly the kind of learning advantage that chaos management theory identifies as essential for strategic competition.

The Future of Military Adaptation

The MISR program’s validation of chaos management principles suggests broader implications for military effectiveness in the 21st century. As technological change accelerates and operational environments become increasingly complex, the ability to adapt and evolve may become more important than any specific capability or technology.

The program’s success in developing adaptive capacity while maintaining operational reliability suggests that military forces can make the transition from crisis management to chaos management without sacrificing effectiveness. The key appears to be institutionalizing learning capabilities and adaptive thinking while preserving the discipline and coordination that military effectiveness requires.

The distributed operations concepts that MISR has developed provide a template for how military organizations can maintain effectiveness even as technological and tactical conditions change rapidly. By building adaptive capacity into fundamental operational architectures, forces can continue providing strategic value even when they cannot predict specific challenges they will face.

The MISR program’s evolution provides compelling empirical validation for theoretical arguments about chaos management in several key areas. The program demonstrates that military organizations can successfully transition from crisis management to chaos management approaches while maintaining operational effectiveness.The program’s educational innovations show that developing adaptive cognitive frameworks can accelerate capability development faster than traditional training approaches. The success of distributed operations concepts validates theoretical arguments about organizational architectures needed for complex operational environments.

Strategic Implications for American Military Power

The MISR program’s validation of chaos management principles has significant implications for American military strategy in an era of major power competition. The program demonstrates that technological and organizational innovation can provide qualitative advantages that offset quantitative disadvantages in platform numbers or force size.

The program’s success in developing capabilities for persistent presence and continuous adaptation appears well-suited for strategic competition environments where success requires sustained engagement rather than discrete intervention. The ability to operate effectively within strategic ambiguity may indeed become the most important military competency for great power competition.

The program’s integration of allied capabilities and cross-domain operations validates theoretical arguments about the importance of coalition warfare and multi-domain approaches for complex security environments. These capabilities appear essential for maintaining American strategic advantages in increasingly competitive international systems.

The MISR program’s evolution from 2020 to 2025 provides remarkable validation for theoretical arguments about the transition from crisis management to chaos management. The program demonstrates that military organizations can successfully adapt to persistent complexity and uncertainty while maintaining operational effectiveness. The program’s educational innovations, distributed operational concepts, and adaptive technology integration illustrate practical approaches for developing chaos management capabilities. The success of Marines and sailors trained through MISR programs in operational deployments validates these approaches beyond experimental environments.

Most importantly, the program demonstrates that the ability to thrive within complex, unpredictable environments can be systematically developed rather than left to chance. The “mental furniture” that Admiral Paparo describes as essential for 21st century warfare can be built through appropriate educational and organizational approaches.

The MISR program suggests that military forces adapting chaos management principles will have significant advantages over those remaining locked into traditional crisis management thinking. Forces that can learn faster than adversaries can adapt, operate effectively within uncertainty, and integrate new capabilities rapidly appear positioned for success in complex strategic competitions.

The future belongs to military organizations that embrace complexity rather than seeking to eliminate it, that develop adaptive capacity rather than optimizing for predicted scenarios, and that institutionalize learning rather than relying on established procedures. The MISR program’s success provides compelling evidence that such transformation is not only theoretically sound but practically achievable.

The evidence from MISR is clear: chaos management is not merely theoretical speculation but practical reality. Military forces willing to embrace this transformation appear positioned for strategic advantage in an uncertain world.

Note: I am publishing a book next year specifically looking at the concept of chaos management as it applies across many types of organizations, not just the military.