This monograph explains the ability of the military decision-making process to inform the decision-maker in the current operational environment. A comparison of the operational environment, as envisioned through the U.S. Army s doctrine, before and after the end of the Cold War establishes the framework by which commanders makes decisions. Moreover this comparison highlights the critical changes in that environment that the MDMP has yet to account for. Next, an analysis of naturalistic decision-making theory provides insight into how commanders inform the decisions they make. Subsequently, the military decision-making process (MDMP) is analyzed to determine the advantages and disadvantages of the process as compared to the current operational environment and the way experienced commanders naturally make decisions. This analysis establishes the logical evolutionary steps the MDMP must make in order to be a viable decision-making process in the current operational environment The fundamental dilemmas of decision-making within the U.S. Army are five fold. First, there currently is little experience within the U.S. Army at the operational level. Yet, since the end of the cold war the U.S. Army is increasingly becoming involved at the operational level of war, as the shift in focus of the Army s doctrine indicates. Second, Joint Doctrine does not prescribe a methodology for decision-making that is fundamentally different from the tactical MDMP contained in U.S. Army doctrine. Because of the deficiency in Joint Doctrine it is logical that a U.S. Army planner, for example, operating in a Joint Task Force (JTF) Headquarters will utilize the only decision-making process that the planner is familiar with the MDMP. Yet the MDMP is a tactical process. Third, the MDMP was a tactical decision-making process designed for the pre-cold war, tactical U.S. Army.