[...] normally those responsible for producing doctrine are colonels and their immediate assistants, military or civilian, working for their superiors, the generals. [...] The generals arrive at certain "conclusions". Next, it is up to the colonels to justify those conclusions and flesh them out. Though the generals themselves hardly ever write doctrine, invariably it is over their signatures that it is issued. In theory, the readership consists of officers of all ranks. The objective is to help them develop a common vision concerning the way their country's armed services understand their mission and go about carrying it out. In practice, doctrine, with its frequent elaboration of the obvious, its tendency to split hairs (as in trying to define the difference between air superiority and air supremacy), and dry, often very convoluted, language aimed at covering all possibilities, is hardly ever read by anybody at all.
Martin van Creveld (2011). The Age of Airpower (New York: PublicAffairs), S. 235f.
Eine kritische Beurteilung der aktuell formulierten Doktringrundlagendokumente der Schweizer Armee befindet sich hier:
Notwendige Operationelle Fähigkeiten in 25+Jahren – eine kritische Auseinandersetzung mit den Grundzügen einer Doktrin für die Abwehr eines militärischen Angriffs
