QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 23 October 2007 Complex Adaptive Systems and Command & Control Lorraine Dodd IOCS presentation Ottawa meeting

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 2 It's all about type of engagement Purposeful relationship-based engagements can be : –collaborative –coercive –contractual –controlling …and can lead to action-based engagements as occur in: –conflict –crisis. All of these drive types of activity, and thence, the nature of inter-activity. Command creates conditions of balance for establishment of: –direction and operation Control manages feedback for maintenance of direction and operation.

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 3 compatibility overlap large  small  degrees of freedomrelatively tight collaborativecontractual controllingcoercive conflict crisis feasibility or do-ability critical tension

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 4 activities complimentary (e.g. maritime support to land-based forces) coordinated (e.g. forces taking part in same time-place planned activities) coherent (e.g. providing covering fire in assault operations – reacting to adversary) connected (e.g. reacting wholly to others' actions at real-time) leading to different types of interactivity procedural (mutually-exclusive but supporting) through pre-defined ordinate 'system' (e.g. clock, map, synch matrix) through well-practised 'feel for each other's ways' (real exercises) through always-on communication (capable of reacting to anything)

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 5 Physical forces + organic assets Operative support Logs Arty Engr CAS Info Direction and priorities policy MEANS WAYS values Accountable and regulated operations need F,A,B,C ISTAR directives WAYS to meet ENDS constraints F A B C restraints What about unregulated forces? What does being unaccountable mean for degrees of freedom?

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 6 imagine all potential options without prejudice and from multiple viewpoints desirable options possible options available options performable options required options obligated options permitted optionsachievable options do-able options how do we 'deem possible' our actions/options? how to promote inquiry and not advocacy?

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 7 Parameters, expectation and limit-setting optimal value of parameter parameter (e.g number of forces in region) expectation-driven goal-based plan don't mind as long as parameter stays within these tolerance limits

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 8 Action repertoires, direction and restraints on actions 'desired' action range of potential actions directed actions don't mind as long as action falls in acceptable range and achieves purpose no action submissive action aggressive action warning action defensive action

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 9 Now consider: parameter  corrective action trigger parameter actions current action still OK corrective action? need to adapt or correct and what happens when there is high noise or error in parameter position?

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 10 Now consider: effect of noise/error on corrective action trigger parameter actions carry on..? still OK everyone? need to adapt or correct? and what happens when there are many points of view about 'OK-ness' of parameter and 'OK- ness' of actions?

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 11 Social complexity: sources of power & accountability Need to first address different organisational perspectives Four broad types of power as they relate to the perspectives

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 12 Aspects for analysis Initially need multiple analytical frameworks –Based upon different perspectives Each perspective has its own dynamic and set of reference frames Each perspective has a different model for driving power –positional power (e.g. command hierarchy, veto/weapon-key, etc) –expert power (e.g. legal/medical expertise) –reward/punishment power (e.g. penal system, career, medals, etc) –referent power (e.g. local tribal leaders, hero, politicians?) Perspectives help to define nature of interactions, interdependencies, relationships and to understand reasons for particular infrastructures and need for adaptive C2 structures.

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 13 Use design-time conditions to get assemble-time flexibility to give operation-time agility It all comes down to what people in the organisation are able to do at operation-time knowledge (frames/learning) expert power formal (layered/hierarchy) positional power social (action potential) referent power organism (success/failure) reward/punishment enables adaptive-ness enables flexibility degrees of fixture four organisational perspectives

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 14 Positional Power – due to assigned rank or authority - as number / importance of relationships increases, freedoms for positional power increase. Expert Power – due to expertise and knowledge which is expected in operational relationships - trust and social-role norms are important. Reward and Punishment Power – due to 'inheritance' relationships that afford capacity to award (money, medal, promotion, imprisonment, setting boundaries) – needs surveillance system. Referent Power – due to relationships of reverence (eg leaders, role models) – this is hardest type to remove deliberately as it is not 'localised' within any formal organisational structures. types of power Foucault: "power is about relationship, it is not a possession" so power can only be relative Power provides the (relational) fulcrum on which to lever force. Types of power help to distinguish command, leadership and management

23 October 2007, IOCS Ottawa QinetiQ in confidence © Copyright QinetiQ 15 So…. … does all that change the way we need to think about CAS and C2? If so what does it mean for our conceptual and analytical frameworks? Answers on a postcard to ….