Command Analysis Group
Command Analysis Group
A structural framework for organizational authority, conduct, and visibility.
Developed openly by Brandon S. Goe, an IBEW journeyman wireman and a senior noncommissioned officer in the U.S. Army Reserve. Working papers deposited at Zenodo under CC-BY 4.0. Built so anyone who would implement the framework has everything they need to do so.
Three companion specifications
The framework is published as three working papers, each standing on its own and citing the others. SCT names the structural-authority core. SCL is the conduct framework that operates downstream of SCT-confirmed command. ECC is the visibility-instrumentation domain that operates strictly downstream of confirmed command.
Explore
The Framework
Plain-English summary of Structural Command Theory and its two companion specifications. Begins with what the framework names and where its discriminants are; ends at the open questions the empirical-research program is being built to answer.
Read the framework →The Papers
The three working papers — Goe 2026a (SCT), 2026b (SCL), 2026c (ECC) — deposited at Zenodo with permanent DOIs. APA citations, abstracts, full-text downloads. CC-BY 4.0.
See the papers →The Books — three volumes, available now
The inaugural volumes of all three streams released August 1, 2026: The Code in the Conduit for tradesmen, The Machine That Sees Itself (Honest Authority) for executives, and The Practitioner's Handbook (SCT Tool Kit) for practitioners deploying the framework.
See the books →Updates
Public change log of the framework, the papers, and the books. Dated, reverse-chronological, RSS-subscribable. The framework is built in public; the changes are visible.
See what is changing →About
Where the work comes from: the trade, the rank, the framework's origin. AI-assistance disclosure. ORCID linked.
Read the origin →FAQ
Proactive answers about licensing, AI assistance, evidentiary maturity, scholarly engagement, and the books.
Read the FAQ →Recent updates
Challenge the framework
The framework's authority depends on its ability to survive scrutiny. If you find a flaw in the structural logic, a place where the discipline contradicts itself, or empirical work that would refute it, the work asks you to write.