The word “myth” simply means “a story or narrative by which we explain the past, link it to the present, and thereby create the future.” Myths can be either “true” or “false.”  The real issue is whether the narrative of that myth helpsyou in creating a future, by means of the way it helps you explain (or rationalize, justify, cast blame, hog the glory, …) what you already believe has happened or is happening.
Central to this courses is the myth that many organizations do not have a nice, simple, hierarchical, and regular structure — that instead, they have reporting, control and feedback relationships that are “spaghetti bowls” at their simplest, unplottable and untraceable and constantly changing at their most dynamic.
And central to the scientific method is the maxim that all ideas should be subject to being disproven. If you cannot think of a logical way to show that a theory is false, or cannot conceive of data that would make the theory invalid, then you’re probably dealing with dogmatic belief rather than a useful scientific theory.
Your mission this week: argue whether that myth is Correct (useful, logical, supported by the facts) or Incorrect (not useful, illogical, unsupported).
==> You will argue Correct if your last name (surname) has an odd number of letters in it
==> Or you’ll argue Incorrect if your last name (surname) has an even number of letters in it
Your argument will focus on attempting to apply this myth of Distributed Organizations to a small to medium business.
To do this, we’ll use the reading by Docauer to help us explore “centralized command and decentralized execution” as one expression of this myth. You may also need to research related concepts, such virtual organizations or network organizations, as you gather your evidence to support your position.
As Docauer’s  “Peeling the Onion: Why Centralized Control / Decentralized Execution Works (http://www.au.af.mil/au/afri/aspj/digital/pdf/articles/2014-Mar-Apr/F-Docauer.pdf.)” shows us, there’s a lot of belief invested by Airmen world-wide in this concept. But don’t worry – we’re not trying to make air combat power specialists out of you! But you’ll see in this reading, and these exercises, some very powerful ideas that directly apply to the management and leadership of “plain vanilla” business organizations – and the information needs that such management and direction require!
Points to ponder to help guide your analysis and thinking:

1. Given what you see in Docauer, does this concept of centralized control and decentralized execution imply a centrally controlled and directed organization, or one that is much more a distributed or shared control? Or is it something else? Is this doctrine an example of loosely-coupled or tightly-coupled organizational structures and processes? Explain your reasoning.
2. It might seem obvious that a globally mobile organization like the USAF is a mobile and distributed one – but is it really? Doesn’t military tradition and structure (not to say military law) argue for the sanctity of the chain of command? Examine the concept of personal contact mobility, as we’ve seen Cerra et al describe it, in such a military context. What would this suggest to you in terms of the BYOD revolution?
3. It might also seem obvious that since nearly everything a modern military does must be kept secret, that this means that every kind of communication, information exchange, and so on must be well protected, highly encrypted, etc. Compare and contrast what you think the military’s need for information security and assurance (the ability to depend upon their information systems being correct and available for decision making) with what you think the reliability, privacy, and integrity of a private business information system needs to achieve. In terms of the BYOD revolution, are the needs that much different?

The Test Case. Let’s apply some ideas about scalability here – in the reverse direction! Suppose you have friends who are starting a new air charter operation, and they want your help. They need some ideas about how to structure their organization and the ways in which it controls, directs, monitors and manages its activities. They’re looking to establish operations across about a dozen different base stations – so they’re already thinking in “distributed organization” terms. Given your assigned position in this debate (for or against, correct or incorrect), help your friends “see the light.” Argue dispassionately but convincingly that their situation is or is not “just right” for distributed organizational logic, structures, and relationships.
Remember, you need to think about the people/organizational side, rather than about all that technological stuff!
Remember: Think and Write in APA STYLE. Focus on addressing the topic, developing your argument, and supporting it with qualified, authoritative evidence, examples and arguments as you need to. FULLY CITE every source you use. (Note that this activity does NOT require an APA formatted submission; that said, clear, concise, thoughtful, 12 point Times New Roman double spaced are rules to live and think by.)
Write in the third person impersonal. Yes, these are your friends whom you are advising about their business aspirations; yes, business is personal. BUT, your arguments and advice are being drawn from outside of their experience (you really know very little about their business plans); you’re arguing “for” or “against” a distributed organizational approach based upon published literature and your own judgement.