Science, Salt Water, Submarines and Symbiosis Knowledge for Development Seminar, Center for International Development Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University October 30, 2003 Science, Salt Water, Submarines and Symbiosis Doing R&D with the Navy Robert A. Frosch Part I: Theory Oct 30, 2003

Political Science Theory - I (As per Cote) Change in doctrine (and means) caused by: Civilian Executives intervene (Posen) Internal Structural Processes (Rosen) (struggles for power, therefore slow): Inter-service rivalry Intra-service competition and struggles for power (In my experience, both frequently true.)

Political Science Theory - II Conservatism encouraged by: weapon system sunk costs education & training sunk costs: conservatism for career preservation learned routines and tactics rarity of war leads to untested (therefore trusted) weapons, systems and tactics difficulty of changing interservice/interallied coordinated systems

Political Science Theory - II+ In this view, R&D is (presumably) a byproduct of political battles.

Macnamara’s Revolution: PPBS Planning, Programming & Budgeting System (PPBS) Plan from foreign policy and national strategy on down to detailed budgeting In the process develop detailed strategy, weapons system and people needs, and R&D ‘requirements’ R&D presumably a byproduct of military requirements?

However, a place for ‘pure science’, and the ‘linear sequence’, is implied (6.X is always RDT&E in the DoD budget): 6.1 Basic Research 6.2 Applied Research 6.3 Advanced Technology Development 6.4 Demonstration and Validation 6.5 Engineering & Manufacturing Development 6.6 RDT&E Management Support 6.7 Operational Systems development

Consequences of PPBS Theory Not an unreasonable idea, but impossible to carry out, so it became: A giant bureaucratic/budgeting tangle: No PPBS was ever finished, or ever complete: It became: “Please Pass the BS” And produced: The ‘military requirements’ muddle: Can’t do R&D without a ‘MilReq’, but how know possible MilReqs without R&D….?

Solutions to the PPBS ‘Military Requirements’ Muddle: MilReqs not required for 6.1 and 6.2, Which, in Navy, belong to the civilian Secretariat (which ‘owns’ the 6.X budget anyway). but hard to get to 6.3, 6.5 without a MilReq Therefore, ignore and proceed If/when successful, get a sponsor for the appropriate MilReq, and synthesize ‘benefit of clergy’ when necessary.

The Military-Industrial Complex Theory The Arms Merchants (Lobby) made me do it! Partly true What assumptions does this theory make about the actors? Is this good or bad, and when?

Another Theory Many Naval officers think! Many Scientists think! Sometimes Naval officers and Scientists think together! Symbiosis! Which Naval officers? Which Scientists? Note: Arms Merchants sometimes think, too! Is this good or bad, and when?

Some Frosch Theory The Customer for R&D is always wrong! But…what’s the real question? Use System Engineering thinking Use matrices of knowledge for the task To escape bureaucracy: find loopholes, use (purposeful) ignorance of rules, politics, and processes (‘synthetic innocence’) An experimental ship is a facility, not a ship, and therefore can be contracted to the Coast Guard yard under contract.

The Customer for R&D is Wrong What do they REALLY want? Eg fast airplane: why, to do what? How do they know what the possibilities are? What are we technologists selling? Do they also want to tell us how to do it? Time relationships of need and possibilities? Etc., etc., etc……..

System Engineering Thinking What are we really trying to accomplish? Where in the generalized environment does the proposed system fit? With other systems, including ‘natural’ Institutions and organizations Investment and operating costs: For how long? What else could it do? How hard will it be to change? How could it be manufactured? Who will run it, and how? Etc, etc, etc…...

Knowledge Matrices A more efficient, lower emissions auto engine involves: combustion chemistry electric spark/plasma physics fluid flow heat transfer mechanical systems materials etc., etc., etc….. And then the next level down of detail….. Etc.,etc.,etc…….

And, as will be illustrated: In the real world individual pure theories don’t control(sometimes the theories don’t apply at all): Mix and Match!

(Stay tuned!) (To be continued next week.) On to Practice (Stay tuned!) (To be continued next week.)