The Commander's Role in the Operations Process

The other day in class we were learning about the commander's role in the operations process.  Now, I understand that this is getting in to unfiltered doctrine, here, but there'll be a youtube clip coming up to help keep us from losing our sanity.

So, within the operations process (how the Army plans and then does the things it does), the commander has specific roles, other than to stand around and supervise.  That may come as a surprise to some, but it's true... at least doctrinally.  The commanders role is to lead and assess by understanding, visualizing, describing and directing.  The figure below is one of the Army's convoluted ways of trying to visually depict this role.

Since I understand that reading doctrine and looking at Army doctrinal figures isn't the most entertaining way of grasping this idea, here's a clip that sums everything up quite well:



In this clip, when Buford and his cavalry arrived at Gettysburg he immediately understood the situation.  He understood the environment and how it would impact the coming battle, and fully understood the problem facing him and the Union in general.
Buford could visualize the battle unfolding as if before his eyes, and could see his own end state - what needed to happen.  He could see the results of not succeeding.
He then described both the situation as it would be if they were unsuccessful, and what his own cavalry needed to do, including their end state - deny Lee the high ground until Meade's army could arrive.  He described the desired effect.
Finally, Buford then directs his troops as to what they were to do.  But he didn't give detailed commands, he described his intent and what his end state was, and then told his men to execute.

Who knew doctrine could be so easy?