representing influence activities through system dynamics

11
CLASSIFICATION CLASSIFICATION © Crown Copyright 2009 CLASSIFICATION 1 CLASSIFICATION Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics Lawrence Dack [email protected] Jim Sanderson Nicky Schranz Jess Allen Patrick Beautement Lawrence Dack

Upload: larya

Post on 24-Feb-2016

33 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics. Lawrence Dack [email protected]. Jim Sanderson Nicky Schranz Jess Allen Patrick Beautement Lawrence Dack. Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics. Influence Operations System Dynamics - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

CLASSIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION

© Crown Copyright 2009

CLASSIFICATION

1

CLASSIFICATION

Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

Lawrence Dack

[email protected]

Jim SandersonNicky SchranzJess AllenPatrick BeautementLawrence Dack

Page 2: Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

CLASSIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION

© Crown Copyright 2009 Suitable for Public Release

UNCLASSIFIED

2

Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

Influence Operations

System Dynamics

SD Models of Influence

Observations

Questions

Page 3: Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

CLASSIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION

© Crown Copyright 2009 Suitable for Public Release

UNCLASSIFIED

3

Influence Operations

• Gen. Stanley McChrystal: “... accomplish three tasks

simultaneously:– Influence insurgent-minded individuals to adopt a neutral disposition.

– Influence neutral-minded individuals to adopt a supportive disposition.

– Retain supportive individuals."

• Gen David Petraeus: COMSAF COIN guidance 2nd Aug 2010

24 points, including:– Secure and serve the population

– Build relationships

– Be a good guest

Page 4: Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

CLASSIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION

© Crown Copyright 2009 Suitable for Public Release

UNCLASSIFIED

4

Afganistan Stability / COIN Dynamics

"When we understand that slide,

we'll have won the war"

Page 5: Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

CLASSIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION

© Crown Copyright 2009 Suitable for Public Release

UNCLASSIFIED

5

The Case for System Dynamics

potentialrecruits

actualrecruitsenlistments

chance ofpersuasion

Salary package Role attractiveness15000 4

Need to understand the big picture and dynamic behaviour

Levers for change • Constants, parameters, numbers

• Regulating negative feedback loops• Driving positive feedback loops• Material flows• Information flows• The rules of the system• The distribution of power over the rules• The goals of the system

Page 6: Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

CLASSIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION

© Crown Copyright 2009 Suitable for Public Release

UNCLASSIFIED

6

Representing Influence (1) – Transition Ops

Page 7: Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

CLASSIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION

© Crown Copyright 2009 Suitable for Public Release

UNCLASSIFIED

7

Representing Influence (2) – The Complex Operating Environment

SoDs

ActorsSupport

tasksMissionTasks

DemandReserves

RegionsCoalitionsActivities

Conquest

Plans

Supporters

Resource Generation

Resources

Groups

Planning

Attitudes

QoLPerception

Decisions

Behaviour

Actions

Memory

Influence

PermissivenessConsequences

Events

Events

Resources

Interventions

Effectiveness

SoIs

Approval

Page 8: Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

CLASSIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION

© Crown Copyright 2009 Suitable for Public Release

UNCLASSIFIED

8

Critique• COIN Model:

– Strengths: Comprehensive scope

– Weaknesses: Accessibility, V&V

– Threats: Misunderstanding of purpose

• TM:– Strengths: Succinct, explainable, instantaneous results

– Weaknesses: Structural assumptions hardwired into model, Homogenous

actors, packaging and interpretation of results

– Threats: Changes to the context

• HCCM:– Strengths: Generic, Highly configurable, Can craft bespoke displays

– Weaknesses: Hard thought required to create specific model from general case,

‘Iceberg’ logic, More expertise required to use

– Threats: Data availability

Page 9: Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

CLASSIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION

© Crown Copyright 2009 Suitable for Public Release

UNCLASSIFIED

9

Concluding Remarks• Influence Operations require:

– A broad understanding of complex inter-relationships

– Sense-making which goes beyond simple cause-and-effect

– Decision-making which balances short and long-term goals, and handles

uncertain or incomplete information

• System Dynamics models offer:– Clear representation of relationships within the big picture

– Evaluation of the impact of feedback and parameter changes

– Responsive modelling timescales

• Modelling challenges along the way:– Building: Goldilocks options between the specific and the generic, between

fidelity, scope and comprehensibility

– Running: configuring incomplete knowledge

– Exploitation – understanding the significance of what is reported and the

appropriate weight to place on it

Page 10: Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

CLASSIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION

© Crown Copyright 2009 Suitable for Public Release

UNCLASSIFIED

10

Page 11: Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

CLASSIFICATION

CLASSIFICATION

© Crown Copyright 2009

CLASSIFICATION

11

CLASSIFICATION

Representing Influence Activities through System Dynamics

Lawrence Dack

Lead Modeller

[email protected]

Jim Sanderson – Theme leadNicky Schranz - ArchitectJess Allen – Human FactorsPatrick Beautement – Complexity ‘guru’Lawrence Dack - Modeller