Presented to: Change Management Group 23 October 2003 Sense and Respond Logistics: Co-Evolution of an Adaptive Enterprise Capability No comments Presented to: Change Management Group 23 October 2003

Transforming Defense …The new American Way of War The New Rules Fight first for information superiority Speed of command Access to information-shared awareness Dispersed forces-noncontiguous operations Demassification Elimination of process lines (e.g. organize, deploy, employ, sustain; ops, intel, logistics) Elimination of structural lines (e.g. Joint ops at the small unit level) Dynamic self-synchronization Alter initial conditions Develop high rates of change Compression of levels of war NETWORK CENTRIC WARFARE HIGH RATES OF CHANGE CLOSELY COUPLED EVENTS LOCK IN/OUT SPEED OF COMMAND SELF- SYNCHRONIZATION

Transforming Defense …deter forward …or defeat with modest reinforcement Increasing the “speed of command” of a networked, distributed force contributes to more rapid force projection as well as increasing complexity and ambiguity- How can DoD adapt? Alter Initial Conditions What’s Valued Networking Sensing Envelope Management Speed/endurance Numbers Risk Tolerance Staying Power Intensity Assure, Dissuade, Deter Restore Decisively Defeat Duration

Approaches to Logistics Sense and Respond Just-in-Time Mass-Based Prime Metric: Days of Supply More is better Mountains of stuff measured in days of supply Uses massive inventory to hedge against uncertainty in demand and supply Mass begets mass and slows everything down Flow Time On-time is better Inventory is reduced to a minimum and kept moving Uses precise demand prediction and static optimization to purge uncertainty Works great, except when it doesn’t Speed/Quality of Effects Adaptive is better Inventory is dynamically positioned throughout Uses transportation flexibility and robust IT to handle uncertainty Initial S&R models look promising Supports distributed, adaptive ops Network-Centric Warfare Global Information Grid Military model is different than the commercial model – need to adapt not adopt commercial model.

What’s the Behavior Telling Us? “Predictive, optimized, linear supply chain” Current Logistics Concepts (Predominant Approach) “Adaptive, responsive demand networks” Sense & Respond Logistics (Predominant Approach) Sources of Stuff (Theater, CONUS, etc) Joint Sea Base Joint Force Capabilities Packages Army Stuff Navy Stuff USAF Stuff USMC Stuff Common Stuff Other Stuff Distributed Operations “TraditionalC2” Forward Ops “Context & Coordination” Transition from linear supply chain to adaptive demand network

End-to-End S&R Point-of-Effect to Source of Support  Support Networks D GLOBAL VIRTUAL SUPPORT NETWORK GLOBAL DISTRIBUTED OPERATIONS DECISION SUPPORT TOOLS GLOBAL ASSET VISIBILITY & SOURCING Adaptive C2 System Source of Supply D  Commodity Network  Resources (Physical and Info) D Source of Service  Services Network D Source of Maintenance Maintenance Network Virtual S&R C2 Hub D D  Source of Manufacture Effects drive capabilities which drive requirements for Joint Capability Packages which consume resources which create Demands on the Support Network System. The area between the Points-of-Effect and the Demand Nodes is the “Logistics No-man Land”. Standards-based virtual S&R C2 hub, as part of component-based architecture, allows for Suppliers to “plug in” and exchange information and transactions and expedite responses. There are different kinds of support networks that support different types of logistics activity and require different support policies and strategies to support an S&R system. S&R concepts apply to the full spectrum of Logistics capabilities and types of products and capabilities, end-to-end from Point-of-Effect to Source of Support. Agile Manufacturing Network  Filtered Demand Signals  D Demand Node Effect Node Real-Time, Effects-Driven Demand and Support Networks

S&R Project Goals Catalyze transformation of a joint, adaptive logistics capability throughout DoD Develop a formal concept for S&R Logistics in the context of Joint Adaptive Operations Identify and document measures to evaluate potentially transformational logistics concepts Go beyond standard logistics flow measures to measures of survivability, agility, coherence, and speed/quality of effects Incorporate a S&R logistics module into experimentation that allows DoD to gather operational data and evaluate the Sense and Respond concept; inform system design Create a prototype information system that supports logistics adaptation to changes in the operational environment Use rapid prototyping and an experimentation campaign to capture learning and inform capability build Allow opportunities for discovery and invention - Evolve and refine an S&R logistics operational concept to include relevant parts of existing Joint and Service concept development efforts and business analogs Create a set of contextualized testable claims about S&R Logistics to focus experimentation and capability co-evolution

S&R Project Approach Explore the behavioral aspects of networks and how they impact operational, organizational, process, and technology designs Operate networked teams synergistically across networked threads to achieve the desired outcome Concept Technical Functional Experimentation Leverage knowledge and technology from industry and academia Execute within operational context set by Joint Operations from the Sea Base Exploit full range of experimentation opportunities Evolve vs. “build” new capabilities Employ co-evolution strategy to influence change rapidly

Co-Evolutionary Process Strategy and Concept Co-Evolution and Spiral Development S&R Experimentation Framework Implications Across DoD and Beyond

Co-Evolutionary Process Strategy and Concept Co-Evolution and Spiral Development S&R Experimentation Framework Implications Across DoD and Beyond I would like to see the Coevolution chart look more like: > Concepts and Ppinciples > Designs for Action > Technology and methodology support > Operational Validation

C2 Ops Intel Strategy and Concept Log Strategy / Vision NCW EBO EBL Network Centric Log System Capability Academics Lessons Learned Business/Industry C2

S&R Goals in Transformation Context DoD Military Operations Transformational Concepts Effects-based Operations Cognitive Decision Support Joint/Allied Adaptive Warfare Power Projection and Assured Access Integrated Operations, Logistics, Intelligence Coordination of Strategic, Operational, Tactical Levels Network-Centric Warfare Sense and Respond Logistics Goals NII Transformation Goals Make information available on a network that people depend on and trust. Populate the network with new, dynamic sources of information to defeat the enemy Implement full spectrum security Military Logistics Transformation Concepts Opportunistic Adaptation Real Time Management and Control Prediction and Anticipation Capabilities Packages and Modularity Short Term Inventory Optimization Seamless Logistics Range of Military Operations Experiences and Lessons Learned Sustaining Base and Commercial Technology OFT Transformation Guidance and Strategy Can we replace "Prediction" with "Knowing Earlier>Anticipation"? Do we really mean Short term inventory OPTIMIZATION? How about Short-term inventory SATISFICING"? --although it is unfamiliar, it is a term coined by Nobel Laureate Herbert Simon precisely to deal with the fact that the convept of optimization is alien to a dynamical, non-linear system. NII transofrmation goals should introduce the concept of Managing by Wire in which decision-makers are supprted with role specific designs that enable them to cycle through the OODA loop faster, increasing speed of command.

S&R Concepts to Transform DoD S&R business analog is an adaptive managerial framework originally developed by IBM Key ideas: Assume demand is ultimately unpredictable, so success depends on speed of pattern recognition and speed of response The best supply chain is no longer one that is highly optimized, but one that is highly flexible Organizes business units and subunits into “modular capabilities” that negotiate with one another over commitments Networks “self-synchronize” via a common environment and set of shared objectives; typically business financial and customer satisfaction measures Depends on sophisticated IT support to enable data sharing, “knowing earlier,” commitment tracking, and role reconfiguration Business literature and practice reflect application of network centric theory and principles HEADQUARTERS After "...subunits into 'a system of modular capabilities'" add " in which accountable decison-makers negotiate (and re-negotiate) commitments with one another....." Change common environment to "common context" Change commitment tracking to "dynamic inter-role commitment management" NATO Integrated Event-Driven Rapid Deployment Force

Sense and Respond Logistics Concept Support network is dynamic Support doctrine anticipates event-driven, reconfigurable support nets Emphasizes distribution flexibility and support network responds to need Negotiation-based relationships All entities use commander’s intent, planned effects, and detailed situation awareness to negotiate and synchronize Roles and commitments of entities are dynamically defined within a specific context All entities are described in terms of current capabilities, not as static forces Networks are robust and difficult to analyze and attack More robust to node failure Adapts to real-time demand signals Supports distributed, adaptive operations Network adaptivity allows logistics decisions to be made continuously and anticipatorily Emphasis on information and distribution allows a greater degree of operational flexibility and risk management No pause—log does not constrain ops speed Mechanisms are transparent to warfighters; but results are very apparent Make the admiral's point that the way to mitigate risk in an unpredictable environment is to expand the number of capabilities available to the dispatcher/decision-maker. S&RL is a source of operational advantage and a force multiplier

For whom is this view designed For whom is this view designed. I think it important to show how this information gets synthesized into role-specific MBW support.

Co-Evolutionary Process Strategy and Concept Co-Evolution and Spiral Development S&R Experimentation Framework Implications Across DoD and Beyond

Co-Evolution and Spiral Development Concepts Process Technology Organization Incremental Capability Releases See previous comment on the layers that coevolve

Spiral Development ≠ Co-Evolution Concepts Technologies Software Engineering Doctrine Experimentation Policies Processes TTPs Implementation Spiral Development Model Co-Evolution Strategy -Industry definition and practice of spiral development is primarily focused on technology spirals and does not satisfy DoD’s need to include feedback loops into concepts, technology, and doctrine development. Co-evolution includes the DoD definition of spiral development but extends the practice to include rapid development of new capabilities—continuous implementation that includes changing the culture and allowing for discovery and invention. SHH: I think the idea of co-evolution incorporates the concept of ongoing interactions between these elements -- interactions that impact on the learning of each element. I think the circles would be better displayed as a network of interacations, rather than as a sequential process. For example, if new concepts interact with doctine, the result is likely to be a change in both. Focuses on software development processes characterized by cyclic, concurrent engineering Cycles driven by risk considerations No feedback loop into concepts, technologies, doctrine Focuses on continuous implementation of concepts, processes, policies, technologies, and organizations characterized by continuous assessment and feedback from the bottom up Concurrent concept and technology development Cycles driven by design experiments that force co-evolution of concepts, technologies, doctrine at the domain intersections

Co-Evolutionary Process Strategy and Concept Co-Evolution and Spiral Development S&R Experimentation Framework Implications Across DoD and Beyond

S&R Experimental Framework S&RL Primitive Vignettes SV 04 GE VII . . . others UC 04 Operational Context LTAs LOEs Workshops Game Play Demonstrations / Experiments Seminars Concepts IT Prototype Architectures Experimental Use Cases S&R Experimental Framework SHH To reinforce the coe-evolution idea, the lower right quadrant would be better if it showed two dirctional arrows connecting the three elements--coevalent, non-linear coevolution of all three

Co-Evolutionary Process Strategy and Concept Co-Evolution and Spiral Development S&R Experimentation Framework Implications Across DoD and Beyond

Implications across DoD and Beyond Private Sector Technology S&RL Competitive Advantage Policy Acquisition

Synchronizing S&R and the Force-Centric Logistics Enterprise Overall Objective: Develop a coherent, convergent DoD Logistics Transformation Strategy that reconciles and builds on S&RL, FLE, and PBL initiatives Near-term: Identify linkages and specific leverage points in programs and initiatives in these areas: Concept Process Metrics Experimentation Apply S&RL concepts and co-evolution strategies and processes, end-to-end and at all levels (strategic, operational, tactical—these blur in the S&R concept) to evaluate current and design future initiatives Present a concept for joint prototyping and experimentation to explore these interactions directly SHH: to me a Process is one type of capability. It has the potential for producing one or more effects. I'd prefer preplacing Process with Capabilites in this chart. OH OH!No blurring here!! In the S&R concept, strategic refers to the allocation of resources prior to an engagement, It incorporates the ROle and Accountabaility design, and the investment in creating the capababilites in the design at a spedified quantity, and in populating the roles with competent people people who accept accountability for producing the defined effects with the capabilities in their charge. Tactics refer to the reallocation of of assets during an engagement. THis occurs when the dispatching role orchestrates the response to a particular event. Operations refer to the use of assets during an engagement (accountable people producing the effects that they are commited to produce, instance by instance. (I think the military reverses the meanings of tactics and operations, but am not sure)

Linkages Concept: Apply NCW, EBO, and EBL (Effects Based Logistics) Concepts to Logistics Transformation Metrics: Emphasize customer-back approach: Primary Logistics objective: Support to joint, adaptive, distributed operations effectiveness and capabilities; Secondary objective: Efficiency, cost and footprint reductions Build on Balanced Scorecard concept to drive Logistics system behavior and design by adding a more comprehensive set of effects-based, operational metrics Drive Supply Chains directly by military operational demand signals and increase supplier visibility over operational drivers to reduce risk and uncertainty and increase effectiveness Process: Link S&RL Operational process model directly to SCOR process model Experimentation: Bring suppliers into end-to-end prototype and experimentation plan, including SV04 and Joint Sea Basing, to explore dynamics and policies SHH I don't like the term Balanced Scorecard, because its creator, Bob Kaplan intended that each of the elements, including scustomer satisfaction, be a measure of internal operatiing performance. The whole idea behind S&R is measuring the gap between the value sought by the customer and the value delivered by the supplier. In this case, we are calling the enemy the customer, and must understand the negative value that informs the decision about which effects (benefits) are to be delivered.

Emerging Insights: Achieving the Tipping Point Move now towards a joint, adaptive logistics capability based on the S&R concept Charter a joint effort to co-evolve a network-centric capability rapidly from the bottom up Lead disruptive change Force cross-enterprise behavior Foster an innovative public-private partnership Industry Academia Add: THe warfighters have already made significant progress in demonstrating sense and respond behavior. It is incumbent upon DOD leadership to make at least as much progress in transforming the managerial framework so adaptive h=behavior is systematically fostered and exploited.