The Swedish Defence Research Agency has received a commission to consider the conditions and new requirements for the options for a possible review of the Swedish Armed Forces Study Manual. Conclusions - The Study Manual of 2007 have limitations and is deemed insufficient for current requirements. It is assessed to offer too limited guidance. It also doesn't address concept development which is of increased importance for the Swedish Armed Forces. - None of the investigated frameworks are deemed to cover all types of studies the Armed Forces require. - The courses of action that has been investigated in addition to a reprint of the old manual, are "Unity" (which means a new framework is developed), and "Pluralism" (which means two or three frameworks are identified in a new study manual, to be adapted to various studies). - The course of action with the highest score is "Pluralism", as it was deemed most adaptable and to include the least development risk. - The key factor for assuring the quality of studies is the study team. The chosen framework is deemed to have a lesser impact. - Current studies are assessed to be challenged by how to address financial issues and uncertainties. - A new study manual has to be strengthened in the how to aspect on how challenges are addressed. Recommendation A review of the study manual is recommended. The reasons for this recommendation is identified weaknesses in the current edition, where the main ones are the weakness regarding concept development, uncertainties, one-dimensional comparisons of alternatives and a certain amount of vagueness in the practical guidance. The current situation for armed forces studies, where the study manual and CD&E competes without clear guidance on choice of frameworks, is also not deemed satisfactory. The recommended course of action for a new study manual is "Pluralism", The "Unity" course of action is also deemed acceptable, but requires a bigger development effort and a commensurate bigger development risk.