Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference - 28 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference - 28 Sep 17 Australian Defence Force Academy, UNSW Canberra Dr. Donald Lowe and Dr. Andrew Flahive Joint and OperaGons Analysis Division Defence Science and Technology Group For further informaGon, please contact: Donald Lowe e: donald.lowe@dst.defence.gov.au p: +61-2-6128 6463 1

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED The relevance of Complex Systems less attention is given to the fact It is often recognised that the ADF that the Defence Department is a Complex System (CS) is also a Complex System C V Z CDF E D B A VCDF CA CAF CN CJC Designs Y W X G FD FID CIOG CASG JOC F J I XX ZZ YY CC AA M B H N K L WW QQ MM BB 2

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED Defence Force Design decision-making Defence decision-making Force design is also a process of processes are generated based numerous and connected upon the decision-rights decisions . C ascribed by this structure . V Z CDF E D B A VCDF CA CAF CN CJC Designs Y W X G FD FID CIOG CASG JOC F J I XX ZZ YY CC AA M B H N K L WW QQ MM BB 3

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED Defence Force Design decision-making The Defence Department has traditionally aimed to manage this process … Force Design Defence Organisation C V Project Doc Touch Z CDF CommiIee Project Doc E Doc Points D Project B CommiIee A VCDF CA CAF CN CJC Doc Designs? Doc Y Project Doc W X Project Can systems thinking help us G Doc FD FID CIOG Touch CASG JOC F Doc Touch CommiIee Points improve this process? J Points I Project Doc Doc Project Touch Doc XX ZZ Doc YY CC AA M Doc B CommiIee H Points N Project K Project Project L WW QQ MM BB 4

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED Some early thinking into systems that design other systems – Conway’s Law Force Design Defence Organisation C V Project Touch Doc Z CommiIee Project Doc E Doc Points D Project B CommiIee A CONWAY’s Law Doc Doc Designs? Y Project Doc W X Project Touch G Doc Touch F Doc CommiIee Points J “ … organizations which design systems (in the broad sense Points I Project Doc Doc Touch Project Doc Doc used here) are constrained to produce designs which M Doc B CommiIee H Points are copies of the communication structures of these N Project K Project Project L organizations.” 5

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED Our Approach… Articulate the Dependencies between Defence Systems in the Force Design Force Design Defence Organisation C V Z E D B A Enforces Y Appropriate W X G CommunicaKon F J I M B H N K L 6

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED The management of Defence projects oYen seems like this … Program Sponsor Projects 7

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED But could they be more like this … … or be[er yet … 8

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED A lesson from complex systems in nature – SeparaKon – Don’t get too close to your neighbours, – Cohesion – … but don’t get too far apart from them either, – Alignment – … and move in the same direcKon as them! These are local rules that regulate the overall system behaviour. 9

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED AdapGng this lesson § Flocking birds have a relaKvely simple objecKve To stay together and head in the same direcGon – They use rules are based upon distance and – direcGon G F § Force design has a more complicated J objecKve I M B To create a force that is funcGonally coherent and – H effecGve N K L In order to do this, we believe you need to apply rules that reflect functional aspects of the force design 10

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED Developing the (simplest possible) soluGon § Create funcGonal linkages between capability systems Force Design – Treat capability dependencies as service exchanges C V Z § Describe the funcGons of capability systems E using a minimalist set D B A – The SCMILE framework Y W X G F § Incorporate local rules in order to regulate J system behaviour I M – Direct providers and consumers of services to align B H expectaKons of the service exchange N K L 11

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED Developing the (simplest possible) soluGon Force Design Defence Organisation C V Z E D B A Enforces Y W X G F J I M B H Aiming for projects to N K L mimic flocking behaviour 12

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED A capability dependency as a service exchange Our approach is to model a capability dependency as a service exchange between a provider enKty § and a consumer enKty. There are two sides to a successful service exchange : § the consumer that wants it and has specific requirements regarding the service – the provider that needs to deliver a service that meets these requirements – A service-based approach is one that models a system (or system-of-systems) as an exchange of § services 13

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED A person as a set of SCMILE funcGons (and potenGal services) Think Talk Maggie from The Walking Dead* See Act * AMC, FOX Networks Person Function See Sensing Think Command & Control A cake baked “Live” by Glenn Act Engagement Walk Talk Information Mobility Walk Physical Mobility Logistics, Supply, Sustainment “Live” and Support 14

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED What is the SCMILE framework? It is important for the services chosen to have definitions that are, as far as is practical, (1) clear, (2) concise, (3) intuitive, (4) distinct and (5) complete as a set. Service Short Description Sensing The provision of information regarding the battlespace and wider operational environment. Command & Control The provision of sense-making, decision-making and instructions for agents and analysis of the battlespace and wider operational environment. Engagement The provision of effects , in and on the battlespace and wider operational environment. Information Mobility The provision of information storage and dissemination , covering infrastructure, activity and processes. Physical Mobility The provision of housing and locomotive ability (movement, transport and containment). Logistics, Supply, The provision of activities, physical materials and information that enable the normal Sustainment and Support functioning of a system or agent . 15

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED How are we applying the SCMILE approach to force design management? 16

Donald Lowe and Andrew Flahive Systems thinking in force design Systems Modelling Conference (Canberra, 28 Sep 2017) UNCLASSIFIED A small example of entering service exchange data … Consider a system The SME for capability … i.e. only one row and consisting of V considers the one column capabilities V, W, X, Y capability as and Z. • a PROVIDER and CONSUMER • a CONSUMER, S V W X Y Z In this example, we are of Sensing services to V ? ? ? ? only examining the and from the other PROVIDER SENSING service (this capabilities. W needs to be done for all X other five service Y exchanges). CONSUMER Z S V W X Y Z CONSUMER V ? ? ? ? Z V PROVIDER S V W X Y Z W ? V X ? PROVIDER W Y W ? Y ? X ? X Z ? Y ? Z ? 17