Command and Control Research Strategic Plan New Approaches to “C2”

1. Command and Control Research Strategic PlanNew Approaches to “C2” March 5, 2010 Dr. David S. Alberts Director, Research OASD/NII – DoD CIO

2. DoD C2 Research Program (CCRP) • Missions • Develop an Understanding of the National Security Implications of the Information Age • Develop Advanced Concepts Leveraging the Capabilities Afforded by Emerging Information Technologies • Improve the State of the Art and Practice of C2 • Prepare Senior Officers and Civilians for Leadership Roles in the Information Age • Responsibilities • “Out of the Box” Thinking Applied to the National Security Challenges of the Information Age • Independent Assessment & Analysis of Emerging Issues, Concepts, and Approaches • Leadership for the C2 Research & Analysis Community • Center for Excellence in Experimentation • Educational Materials and Programs

3. C2 Strategic Research Plan • Part 1: Mission Driven C2 Challenges • Nature of 21st Century Missions • Implications for Command and Control • Part 2: State of C2 Theory and Practice • Gaps in Theory • Lack of analysis capability (metrics and tools) • Lack of experimentation and evidence • Shortfalls in Practice Gaps of critical understandings • Part 3: CCRP Research Initiatives • Focus and Priorities • Specific Initiatives

4. Part 1: Mission Driven C2 Challenges • What is the nature of 21st Century mission challenges? • What are the critical Command and Control challenges in the context of 21st Century missions? • What are the implications for C2?

5. 21st Century Missions are Complex Endeavors Sources of Mission Complexity Complexity of the Task and Environment + Complexity of ‘Self’ = Complex Endeavor

6. Complexity of Task and Environment Counter Terrorism Humanitarian Assistance Peace Keeping • The success of 21st Century Missions requires a multi-dimensional effects space • - political, social, economic, military • The complexity of the mission is a result of the interactions between and among the effects, particularly across dimensions, and the uncertainties associated with a cascading effects chain. Stability Operations Disaster Relief

7. Complexityof Self • Self = A large number of heterogeneous, independent entities that differ significantly with respect to: • Culture, values and norms; • Laws, policies, rules, and regulations; • Practices and processes; • Levels of trust; • Language; • Information and communications capabilities; • Approach to organization and management. • The complexity of ‘Self’ comes from the nature of the interactions between and among the participating entities and the dynamics of the situation that affect entity willingness, constraints, perceptions, and capabilities.

8. What are the critical Command and Control challenges in the context of 21st Century missions? • Complex Endeavors require the focusing and convergence of heterogeneous collections of entities • A “Collective” approach to accomplishing the functions associated with command and control that is suitable for Complex Endeavors is required • A set of entity systems and adequate infostructure is needed that can provide the levels of information sharing and collaboration required for mission success • Modifications to Entity C2 are needed for entities to be effective as participants in a Complex Endeavor

9. C2 Strategic Research Plan • Part 1: Mission Driven C2 Challenges • Nature of 21st Century Missions • Implications for Command and Control • Part 2: State of C2 Theory and Practice • Gaps in Theory • Lack of analysis capability (metrics and tools) • Lack of evidence • Shortfalls in Practice • Part 3: CCRP Research Initiatives • Focus and Priorities • Specific Initiatives

10. State of the Practice“C2” for Complex Endeavors • Collective C2 • Collective C2 is ad hoc and inadequate to meet the challenges associated with Complex Endeavors • Traditional C2 assumptions do not hold

11. Traditional C2 Assumptions • Without commanders there is no Command and Control • Unity of command is the sine qua non of Command and Control • Centralized Command, Decentralized Control • There are Strategic, Operational and Tactical levels • There must be a Headquarters supported by a large staff • Information flows follow the chain of command

12. State of the Practice“C2” for Complex Endeavors • Collective C2 • Collective C2 is ad hoc and inadequate to meet the challenges associated with Complex Endeavors • Traditional C2 assumptions do not hold • Entity C2 • Traditional approaches and practices are incompatible with effective C2 for Complex Endeavors • Existing systems are not adequate

13. “C2” for Complex Endeavors • New Approaches to Collective C2 are needed • Concepts Explored • Experimentation • Assessments • Entity C2 • Relationship of Entity to Collective C2 needs to be better • Implications for C2 systems need to be understood

14. New Approaches to Command and Control • There are many ways to accomplish the functions associated with Command and Control • No one approach fits all missions or situations • The most appropriate approach will be a function of the endeavor • Entities will need to be able to utilize more than one C2 approach • The Collective needs to be able to adopt an appropriate C2 approach • .

15. State of Theory “C2” for Complex Endeavors • A theory of “Collective C2” is emerging • Priority research questions include: • What collective approach / approaches are most appropriate for which regions of the mission space? • What are the implications for entity C2? • How much cross-entity information sharing and collaboration is required as a function of approach? • What entity information related policies and practices are needed to ensure appropriate behaviors? • What entity system capabilities are required? • New and improved metrics and tools are required to generate and analyze performance and effectiveness related to C2 for Complex Endeavors

16. C2 Strategic Research Plan • Part 1: Mission Driven C2 Challenges • Nature of 21st Century Missions • Implications for Command and Control • Part 2: State of C2 Theory and Practice • Gaps of critical understandings • Lack of analysis capability (metrics and tools) • Lack of evidence • Part 3: CCRP Research Initiatives • Focus and Priorities • Specific Initiatives

17. C2 Research Focus and Priorities • New Vocabulary for “C2” --- Focus and Convergence • New “Bottom Line” --- Agility • Explore Agility (Fragility) of various Approaches as a function of: • Mission characteristics • Collective characteristics • Entity characteristics • Stresses including information and cyber attacks • Developing methodologies, metrics, instrumentation, and analysis tools to support the above • Contribute to the development of “network sciences”

18. Why NII – DoD CIO?

19. It’s all about Networks • Complex Endeavors are now the business of DoD • Complex Effects Space • More than just military effects • Interactions in effects space significant • Lack of understanding of cross-domain cause-effects • Inability to predict • Operating in a Network-Centric Environment • Many v. Few • Unfamiliar v. Familiar • Complex “Self” • “Self” is composed of a large number of heterogeneous entities • Different objectives, values, constraints • No single entity in charge • Entities have significantly different perceptions Effects Network Networked Self

20. The Plan • The current statement of focus and priorities represent the views of the Director, Research OASD/NII and DoD CIO • Shared awareness needs to be developed if the CCRP is to be successful in having others (who have more funds and opportunities) • invest their funds in these lines of research • participate in collaborative effects and • share their empirical evidence • Thus a Strategic Plan for C2 Research needs to be developed as a community effort. • Meanwhile the CCRP continues to exercise community leadership • Chairing NATO Research Groups • Proving appropriate venues and tools for experimentation • Providing expertise to other research organizations • Supporting education

21. C2 Research Plan Milestones (plan for a plan) Date Tasks / Milestones Part 1: Mission Driven C2 Challenges Identify Critical C2 Challenges ……………………… April 15 2010 Identify Implications for C2 ………………………….. May 1 2010 Part 2: Mission Driven C2 Challenges Assess State of C2 Theory / Analysis ……………… July 1 2010 Community Survey June 2010 Identify gaps and shortfalls…………………………… Nov 1 2010 C2 Research Workshop October 2010

22. C2 Research Plan Milestones (plan for a plan) Date Tasks / Milestones Part 3 C2 StrategicResearch Plan Identify ∆ in C2 Community Research Priorities … Nov 1 2010 “Socialize” Priorities …………………………………. Aug 1 2010 C2 Community Meeting June 2010 C2 Research Workshop October 2010 C2 Research Strategic Communications Plan….….. Feb 1 2011 C2 Research “Infrastructure” Improvement Plan…... Mar 1 2011 CCRP Action Plan for FY12………………………….. Mar 1 2011