C2 now and in the future

1
C2 now and in the future

• Catalysing the art of C2

2
Agenda

• C2 now - NNEC Assessment, general thoughts-
  Human oriented aspects of C2
• Future factors of influence
• Challenges

3
Agenda

• 1. C2 now - NNEC Assessment general thoughts -
  Human oriented aspects of C2
• 2. Future factors of influence
• 3. Challenges

4
NNEC Assessment Objectives

• Request by HQ ACT to conduct a NNEC assessment of
  the NRF rotations 9 through 14supported by COS
  SHAPE
• To assess the current level of NRF NNEC
  capability achievement by applying NNEC Maturity
  Level (NML) models to each of the Lines of
  Development (DOTMLPFI).
• To develop a support program to allow NATO to
  incorporate insights and observations from NNEC
  related assessments immediately following NRF
  rotations.
• To provide specific recommendations on areas in
  need of enhancement and a suggested timeline for
  implementation.

5
Lines of development

• Doctrine
• Organization
• Training
• Material
• Leadership
• Facilities
• Personnel/culture
• Interoperability

6
Data Collection

• The C2CoE is executing an Assessment, not an
  evaluation or a certification.
• Data collection by
• Observations
• Questionnaires
• Interviews

• Tools used
• CTEF (TNO)
• NCAT (NCOIC)
• Cooperating partners
• HQ-SACT
• CJOS
• JAPCC
• DARS
• TNO
• NLDA
• NLD AF reserve

7
Human orientated C2 aspects

• Role of the leadership
• Position of liaision
• Information management
• Exploiting social networks
• Organizational structures

8
NRF findings

• Technology
• Security objections
• Procurement procedures
• Legacy issues
• Available funds
• Industrial interests
• Standardization processes

9
NRF findings

• Leadership
• Disciplinary limitations in multinational staffs
• Language problems
• Cultural differences
• Leadership style

• Liaisons
• No doctrine concerning employment
• Messengers vs authorities in the decision making
  proces
• Gapfillers for insufficient networking systems

10
NRF findings

• Information Management
• Position and role of IM/IKM is not clarified
• Every unit has a own IM plan, there is a lack of
  a solid overarching plan
• Mostly re-distribution and document managing
• Users are often not involved in the IM plan
  development

• Social Networks
• Inherent to military organizations
• Building must be stimulated
• Results in higher quality of shared situational
  awareness and trust

11
NRF findings

• Organizational structure
• No standardized command post structure yet
• Mission tailored structure delivers two main
  disadvantages - external sharing of
  information is difficult due to non-standard
  job definition - internal relatons/responsibilit
  ies are shifting

12
Trend analysis
YOU
People Innovation
Organizational Innovation
Process Innovation
Technology Innovation
13
Challenges and oportunities

• Leadership must keep on adapting to the existing
  development
• Development of overarching doctrines and LOPs
  in order to streamline procedures and processes
• Standardization of organizational structures
• Development of a solid information sharing/IM
  structure
• Structuring the use of Liaisons
• Force people/make them understand the necessity
  to create social networks

YOU
14
Agenda

• 1. C2 now - NNEC Assessment general thoughts-
  Human oriented aspects of C2
• 2. Future factors of influence
• 3. Challenges

15
Future trends
The best way to predict the future is to invent
it. Alan Kay, Computer Scientist

• What is the scope of Future
• A technology generation lasts about 3 till 5 year
• The world is changing fast
• Berlin Wall down, 911, Afhanistan, Present
  financial crisis
• No guarantee for the future
• We need unimaginable ideas

• Kurzweils SINGULARITY
• Change is exponential
• Overestimation in short term
• Underestimation in long term
• Ray Kurzweil, Inventor,
• entrepreneur, visionary

16
Influences on the future
Wars
ENVIRONMENT
Players
Users
FOCUS
FUTURE
Groups
BEHAVIOUR
Generations
CONDITIONS
Security
Individuals
17
Wars the future of warfare
INVOLVES Society Government Armed
forces Units Soldiers
5GW Unrestricted
4GW Insurgency
Performance / impact
3GW Mechanized
2GW Firepower
1GW Manpower
Napoleon WW1
WW2 NOW
Emerging
18
Players
Non go- vernmental Intergo- vernmental Inter-
national National
Internal orientation
Service Armed Forces Government
Society
19
Users
20
Groups Interaction (Brooks Law)
Time Required
Staff Numbers
21
Generations
Class Foto Meeting Logbook Encyclopedia
Link Instant Messaging Forum Blog, Wiki Hyves,
Twitter
Human
capital
AGE GAP

Y generation
X generation Baby Boomers Age
19 23 27 31 35
39 43 47 51 55
59 63 Decade 10 00
90
80 70 Ref
WOT 9/11
Peace divident Major threat
Civil unrest
22
Security

• Open information exchange in our present
  environment does by nature conflict with the
  present security policy, which is based on fully
  separated domains (using barb wire, shielding,
  hardwired cryptos and air gaps).
• From Risk Avoidance to Risk Management requires a
  major
• PARADIGM SHIFT with emphasis on
• Essential cooperation with others
• Partners
• UN
• NGOs
• Risk management
• Selectively protect the real secret
• Declassify the rest ASAP
• Preventing sharing is dangerous also
• User centric security policy
• Practical approach

23
Individuals
Strategic level
Operational level
Tactical level
24
Agenda

• 1. C2 now - NNEC Assessment general thoughts -
  Human oriented aspects of C2
• 2. Future factors of influence
• 3. Challenges

25
Challenges

• Nature of war and players are changing
• Make coordination with third parties a part of
  the Command and Control proces
• Getting used to a multi-lateral information
  distribution structure within organisations
• Change from hierarchical structurs to
  organisations with more trust and
  responsibility on lower levels
• Make use of the capabilities of the digital
  generation but do not loose the Digital
  immigrants
• Open up to third information flow to parties
• Make the individual soldier aware of his nieuw
  role with all his roles

YOU
26
Questions?