click to add title - nato · title: click to add title author: nicula created date: 6/27/2011...
TRANSCRIPT
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1
Workshop Wrap-up
Han de Nijs
Branch Head Operational Analysis
Capability Engineering Division
Allied Command Transformation
Aims and Objectives
Aim:
To coordinate and improve the contributions of Operational
Analysis to NATO operations and capability development
Objectives:
Review the various ways that OA is currently contributing to
NATO operations and capability
Discuss challenges, best practices, external insights and
potential improvements
Determine how to improve synergy, cohesion and coordination
between OA within NATO commands and force structure and
the nations
Conduct:
ACT hosted yearly 2-3 day event with wide OA participation
3
Theme: Institutionalizing OA
within NATO (1)
Relationship OA analyst and Decision Maker
Trust, Language, Awareness
Problem Structuring with Stakeholders
Supports Evidence Based Decision Making
OA embedded within the staff
not to replace military staff but complement them
not a contractor
Visibility of OA and its products
Public Relations
Selling the results
Theme: Institutionalizing OA
within NATO (2)
Characteristics of Analyst Excellence (creative, curious, initiative)
Integrity
Responsiveness
Team Member – Collaborative
Earns respect and is respectful
ACO new PE Structure OA relegated to less visible positions
OA equated with Operational Assessment
Demand OA in Exercises ≠ OA in Operations
Difference between Hard and Soft OA Junk Science & Insights
Combinations of Soft Techniques to enable Hard OA
Theme: Institutionalizing OA
within NATO (3)
Panel Discussion “…while analyst emerges himself into the problem….
amazed that he/she can produce valuable contributions and quality to the process… making sense of data that was different in granularity and quality..”
Perception of OA as part of a machinery that will hamper quick and responsive decisions
Aware of need for (political) ambiguity in language: enemy of analytical precision
Customer Care: after report delivery
80% solution but on time
Analysis is custom-work: one size does not fit all
Institutionalize analysis in the local processes
Customer may not be aware that they need analysis
Topic Clusters (1)
Ability of Analysts to concentrate on topics
Allowing data to speak for itself and build a structure
Robustness of “Subjective” data
Contribution of Social Science methods (Ragin)
Enduring trends and variability as noise
Analysis emerges from Daily Reporting & Assessment
Need for inner reflection & shielding on what constitutes progress – not stratcomm
Conceptual shifts and change of mindsets needed wrt defence/security/war in cyber domains
Difficulties in starting with problem formulations (surgeries)
Topic Clusters (2)
Richness in Simulation and Data Manipulations
techniques when applicable
COTS approaches for simulation
Shifts from scarce to superabundant data sets
Data visualization as means to formulate model
Analysis designing, formulating and structuring
as preparatory for experiment conduct
Comprehensive thinking as a means to capture
complexity and connecting the areas of
“complicated” problems
Topic Clusters (3)
Mind/Concept mapping: reasoning tool (HEART) to include human and social factors for contextual understanding in support of OODA loop
Maturity of social sciences to approach defence problems and behavior relevant for current paradigms in operations Rich academic fundament and applicability to defence
Ability to represent and model the aspects of DOTMLPFI
Social Network Analysis: explaining connectivity, closeness and centrality in military organizations
Training Analysis: Methods & Tools – linking with JALLC Training Objectives and Analysis Objectives
Obvious parallels with Exercise Analysis – JFCs and JWC
NATO OA Community
Discussions/Blog: www.linkedin.com
Annual OA Workshop – 2007-2011
Wikipages – Pubs and Proceedings: tide.act.nato.int
ACT StratComm: Transnet, Transformer & Webpages
Common Procedures: Handbooks, CoBP and Guides
Tools: Analyst Toolbox (UK), Systems Analysis
Methods: CD Assessment Game, Red Teaming, Brainstorm
OA Training JALLC Course
SAS 089 OA Training Course
ET.BZ OA Appreciation Course
RTO and SAS
NATO Centres of Excellence
NATO OA Community: Discussion
ACT Webpage and Transformer
Handbook, CoBP & Guides
In 2007 we discussed the need for an OA Handbook
CD&E (and OA) uses GUIDEx
RTO SAS publishes sufficient OA/OR reports SAS 026 – CoBP C2 Assessment
SAS 044 – Decision Support to CJTF and Component Commanders
SAS 068 – S&T Reach Back
SAS 074 – Psycho Social Models
SAS 087 – CoBP Soft OA
SAS 089 – OA in NATO Operations
Tools
Variety of Tools
Analyst Toolbox (UK)
Systems Analysis
(Influence Diagrams /
Systems Dynamics)
M&S – Visualization
Mind Mapping
Etc…….
15
Concept Development Assessment
Game
Maritime Situational Awareness
Operations Logistics Chain Management
MNE 7 Space Domain
SAIC / JFCOM
Blue/Red/Green/White
Dynamic/Static
Confrontation Phase
Challenge Phase
Open/Closed
Cards
Memorandum of Understanding
Repository of Cards
Exchange of Variations
Lessons Learned
Build and Share Expertise
Contract or Request Experts
OA Training
OA Appreciation Course
ET.BZ: Curriculum Development One week Staff Officer’s Course
One/One-Half Day Senior Officer’s Course
Two Hour Brief to FOGO
Participation Lead US & ACT
Nations: CAN, CZE, DEU
Interest / Contribution: GBR, NLD, SWE, NC3A
Afternoon Discussion on desirable content
15 September 2008 17
The RTO Objectives
To support the development and effective use of national
defence R&T and thus to maintain a technological lead
within the Alliance,
To meet the military needs of the
Alliance,
To provide advice to NATO and
national decision makers.
18
RTO Organization
North Atlantic Council
Science for
Peace &
Security Committee
Military
Committee
Allied Command
Transformation
Conference of
National Armament
Directors
NATO C3
Board
NATO C3
Agency
Allied Command
Operations
NATO Army
Armaments Group
NATO Naval
Armaments Group
NATO Air Force
Armaments Group
NATO Industrial
Advisory Group
NATO Underwater
Research Center RTO
HFM IST SAS SCI SET MSG
RTB
RTA
I M C
AVT
Expert
mem
bers
’
Level
Technic
al T
eam
s
Panel m
em
bers
’
Level
Panels
Board
mem
bers
’
Level
Leaders
hip
• To conduct studies on the
linkage between technology
and operations,
• To conduct analyses focused
on the operational
effectiveness and cost of
forces and systems,
• To promote the exchange
and development of methods
and tools for operational
analysis as applied to defence
problems.
S&T Reform
DPPC (NART): Place of RTA, NURC and NC3A-
ORA within new Agency Structure
RTB: R&T Coordination Study
S&T Organization
Chief Scientist at NATO HQ as Chair STB
Maritime S&T & Program Office for Collaborative S&T
OA & OR (ACT and NC3A) coordinate with Chief
Scientist
Investigate ORA capability for Chief Scientist
19
RTO SAS and NATO OA interaction
NB: ACO is represented through ACT
STO will develop NATO S&T Strategy
Chief Scientist coordinates on ORA
Way Forward: Adopt name change from OR/OA to ORA
Bi-SC input to S&T Strategy Follows advice from SAS-089: Concept for ORA
Guidelines on “Coordination”
Opens Discussions on robust ORA within SCs
Develop NATO Vision on ORA in parallel
Leverage “Coordination” function to showcase ORA
MN OA Team: WG5-4 Proposal
21
Proposal for a Framework consisting of
MOU template
Guidance on SOPs
Organizational Structure
Developed in a Bi-SC Directive
With appropriate national ‘endorsement’ and ‘understanding’
Review Proposal
Posting Docs on Website
Actions
Continue with Annual OA Workshop: 2012
Strengthen Community through communication: linkedin, articles, webpage, pubs
Strengthen fabric of HBs, Tools & Methods
OA Appreciation Course
Leverage SAS links
S&T Reform: maneuver for ORA visibility – with consequences for ORA within NCS
MN TF for Innovative Capability Development Seek National Review and SHAPE/JFCs buy-in
Thank You
VMASC
Presenters
Panel Members
Participants
Organizers
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Questions?
Han de Nijs
Branch Head Operational Analysis
Capability Engineering Division
001-757-747-3387