Origins
The general staff emerged from a fundamental problem of modern warfare: as armies grew larger, technology more complex, and operations more extended, no individual commander could personally manage all aspects of military affairs. Ancient and medieval generals relied on personal retinues and ad hoc advisors. But industrialized warfare demanded systematic institutions for planning, intelligence, logistics, and coordination that transcended individual commanders and persisted across campaigns. The Prussian response to catastrophic defeat in 1806 created the template that would eventually be adopted by virtually every modern military.
Napoleon’s annihilation of the Prussian army at Jena-Auerstädt shocked Prussian reformers into fundamental reorganization. Gerhard von Scharnhorst, heading a Military Reorganization Commission, established the foundations of what would become the Great General Staff. Rather than leaving planning to individual generals, the reformers created a permanent body of specially trained officers responsible for war planning, mobilization, intelligence, and operational coordination. These staff officers would be systematically educated, rotated between staff and line positions, and constitute an institutional brain that preserved military knowledge regardless of which commanders came and went.
The form matured under Helmuth von Moltke the Elder, who led the Prussian General Staff from 1857 to 1888. Moltke developed the staff into a planning institution capable of coordinating mass armies across multiple theaters using railroad timetables and telegraph communications. The stunning Prussian victories over Austria (1866) and France (1870-1871)—won by superior mobilization, logistics, and operational coordination—demonstrated the general staff’s effectiveness. Within decades, every major power had established similar institutions: Russia, France, Britain, Japan, the United States, and others all created general staffs modeled on Prussian principles. The form had become essential infrastructure for modern military power.
Structure & Function
The general staff represents a distinct institutional layer between political authority and operational forces. Its core functions include strategic planning (developing war plans and contingency options), intelligence (collecting and analyzing information about adversaries), operations (coordinating forces in the field), logistics (managing supply and movement), and doctrine (developing and disseminating tactical and operational concepts). Staff officers specialize in these areas while also maintaining connection to line commands, typically alternating between staff and troop assignments throughout their careers.
The organizational structure typically places the chief of staff at the apex, advising the head of state or defense minister on military matters and coordinating the general staff’s work. Below are specialized divisions or bureaus handling operations, intelligence, logistics, personnel, and training. In many systems, the general staff is distinct from the war ministry or defense department, creating tension between political-administrative and military-operational chains of command. The relationship between civilian leadership and military staff—who advises, who decides, who implements—remains a persistent challenge in civil-military relations.
Staff officer education distinguishes those selected for general staff duty. War colleges and staff academies provide advanced training in strategy, operations, logistics, and joint/combined warfare. Selection for staff training is typically competitive, marking officers for potential senior command. The shared educational experience creates informal networks that facilitate coordination and common doctrinal frameworks. Critics have noted that this socialization can produce groupthink and resistance to innovation, while defenders argue it ensures coherent military institutions. The tension between institutional continuity and adaptive innovation runs through general staff history.
Historical Significance
The general staff transformed military affairs by institutionalizing what had previously been individual genius. Napoleon succeeded through personal brilliance in commanding large forces, but his system depended entirely on him. The general staff made military competence reproducible: a well-organized staff could coordinate operations effectively regardless of whether the commanding general was a genius. This democratization of military capability enabled the mass armies of the 19th and 20th centuries, ensuring that industrialized nations could mobilize and employ millions of soldiers through systematic planning and coordination.
The staff system’s influence extended far beyond military affairs. Concepts developed for military planning—scenario analysis, contingency planning, logistics optimization, intelligence assessment—migrated to business, government, and other domains. The modern corporation’s strategic planning function derives partly from general staff precedents. Operations research, systems analysis, and management science all have roots in military staff work. The general staff thus contributed to broader transformations in how large organizations think about complex problems.
The form’s darker legacy includes the tendency toward planning for war rather than preventing it. General staffs develop plans that acquire institutional momentum, as the German Schlieffen Plan demonstrated in 1914. The need to mobilize quickly created pressure for preemptive action; elaborate timetables left little room for diplomacy once crisis began. Critics argue that general staffs can become autonomous actors pursuing institutional interests in war-readiness that may not align with political interests in peace. The challenge of subordinating powerful military institutions to democratic civilian control remains central to the general staff’s contemporary significance. Every modern military maintains some form of general staff, but the relationship between military planning institutions and political authority varies enormously—and consequentially—across regimes.
Key Developments
- 1806: Prussian defeat at Jena; Scharnhorst begins military reform
- 1808: Prussian Great General Staff formally established
- 1810: Berlin War Academy founded for staff officer education
- 1857-1888: Moltke the Elder develops modern staff system
- 1866: Austro-Prussian War; staff-coordinated victory at Königgrätz
- 1870-1871: Franco-Prussian War; general staff system proves decisive
- 1874: Russia establishes Main Staff modeled on Prussian system
- 1885: Japan creates General Staff Office following Prussian model
- 1899: French reform general staff after Dreyfus Affair
- 1903: US establishes General Staff Corps through Root Reforms
- 1914: General staff war plans trigger World War I mobilizations
- 1923: German General Staff abolished by Versailles Treaty (secretly reconstituted)
- 1939-1945: World War II demonstrates joint and combined staff requirements
- 1947: US National Security Act creates Joint Chiefs of Staff structure
- 1949: NATO establishes integrated military staff structure
- 1986: Goldwater-Nichols Act strengthens US joint staff authority