Analysis of Future Warfighting Trends for Soft OA Dominance

1. ISMOR Syndicate Feedback: Falstaff ISMOR 28

2. Will Soft OA become dominant? • No • Still lots of Hard Problems requiring more attention (logistics, stockpiles, force structures, cost) • But it will be significant part • Soft is suited to structuring problems and soft power • Sometimes this is all that is needed/ time for • Should always drive the analysis process • Don’t be casual about making assumptions • Compute where we can, judge where we cant • And Hard/ Soft boundary is blurring • Don’t agonise on what we call it (judgement/ evidence) Mixture of Hard and Soft required

3. Future of “Warfighting” Analysis • Continuing need but delivered differently • Warfighting is blurring; interdependence of a wide range of activities • Still need for analysis to support long lifetime systems in development (e.g. F-35, penetration weapons) • Complemented by soft OA studies • New focus = distributed set of connectable small warfighting models in a big, broad (soft) framework • Analysis of combat at small scale has wider utility (flexibility?) • Challenge – getting Stakeholder buy into lower fidelity models in this framework • Including internationally where there is a different culture • Only then can Campaign and Corp models RIP! (reduced maintenance cost)  Transfer experience to the new models New focus – small models in a framework

4. Re-Use of Analysis Evidence • Enduring value: Insights, principles, empirical evidence • E.g. the value of surprise, value of concealment/ cover • Methods of analysis • Knowledge of impact even if we don’t understand mechanism • Not enduring: Model outputs • In principle could be used if (but in practice not) • Assumptions explicit and sensitivity studies very broad • Then could adapt to changed/ changing circumstance • Not enduring: Models in general • Some have a long history because context hasn’t changed (e.g. blue water naval warfare) • But human factors were too difficult  better in newer models but lack basic understanding • Accreditation in US never achieved aims – got stuck at Val stage • Many modern models have a short life cycle – better methods and tools Enduring: Insights and empirical data

5. Future Worlds? • What characterises Future Worlds and Future Scenarios • Likelihood (dominant) and Impact (reluctant to address true worst cases - nationally sensitive) • Extreme future worlds – aligned to key axes of interest? • A set of worlds to test robustness of plans/ strategy? • What are the dynamic factors, and do they have warning times? • Should we pull in more from business/ economic experience? • How far into the future can we really see? • Historical analysis of futures? Rates of change/ rate of shocks • Relationship of scenarios to future worlds • More explicit in assumptions/ may not be “concurrently” consistent More work required – broader experience?

6. End of Scenario Based Planning • Its use (and misuse) will continue! • Needed for quantitative evidence • Must understand the question/ decision fully before embarking on scenario analysis • Place for objective/ end state formulation • Always seek to understand the key issues early • Check scenarios test extremes of question/ decision span • Note CONOPS / CONEMP development covers similar ground Beware misuse of Scenarios!

7. Is Defence Change unique to UK • NO – but UK change is very significant • US – also changing • Last QDR identified • Acquisition changes  management changes to come • Non conventional warfare focus • Expect next QDR will align with SDSR • Expect resource issues to dominate • NATO – also changing • New members – become integrated (doctrine and equipment) • others  professional force, not conscript • All nations have budget / resource issues (inc FR) • Some others don’t have resource issues • Drug cartel submarine – what are the threat drivers/ rate Affordability for all – except the criminals?

8. Keynote speakers Keynote speakers from the senior decision making community Themed days aligned with keynote topics Content Workshops supporting SAS panel activities Tutorials – sharing and learning Shorter – 2/3 days Greater emphasis on affordability topics Planning advisory group Take a more active role in supporting David (and his successor) Contain Customer (MOD), dstl, industry, US, Europe and novice reps Attendance – who to target, how to show benefit to (need for some “market research” to understand their needs) Decision Makers/customers, Military. Europeans, Juniors/novices, Industry (Primes and consultants), Government, Refresh the mailing list, replace retired contacts Links to other Organisations Combined MORS/ISMOR meeting Closer links to ORS INFORMS/MAS SAS panel Cornwallis Future ISMOR Must become more relevant to the ISMOR constituency, which is broader than just practitioners