Deciding to Adapt Organizational Architecture: Facilitators and Inhibitors to Change

Proceedings for the 1998 Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium Command and Control for the Next Millenium June 29-July1, 1998 Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, California Track 1 ArchitecturesThe purpose of this paper is to examine the factors that contribute to the decision to initiate change in organizational structure. The Adaptive Architectures for Command and Control (A2C2) research in 1997 examined, in part, the willingness of planning groups to choose to operate in an organizational structure different from the one in which they had prior experience. The experiment involved nine six-person teams each simulating a "Joint Task Force" conducting a complex military operation involving land, sea and air assets. (See Benson et al. (1998) for details on the conduct of this experiment.) The data reported in this paper are derived from planning sessions conducted by each team in which they were to analyze and choose among three alternative organizational architectures. The focus of the analysis conducted is on the decision making processes and the criteria the planning groups used in comparing the alternative organizational structures. Theoretical models that define processes for diagnosing need for change as well as specific "driving" and "restraining" forces for change provide parameters for analyzing the decision process data

An Investigation of ISR Coordination and Information Presentation Strategies to Support Expeditionary Strike Groups

12th ICCRTS, Adapting C2 to the 21st CenturyThis paper describes a planned experiment based on the combined research of the Adaptive Architectures for Command and Control (A2C2) and the Command-21 programs, both of which are sponsored by the Office of Naval Research. In line with the theme of this year’s symposium, “Adapting C2 to the 21st Century,” in this research we focus on the nexus of organizational design and information presentation strategies — both of which are undergoing dramatic changes in form and function within the US military. The formation of Expeditionary Strike Groups (ESGs) provides one example of the transformational vision provided in the Naval Operating Concept where Strike Groups offer the potential to revolutionize naval warfare in the littoral region. The ESG provides a flexible force package, capable of tailoring itself to accomplish a wide variety of mission sets. In this effort, we seek to explore how ESGs with alternative structures and processes, in this case specifically related to incorporation of an intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) officer and different information presen-tation strategies, can affect performance and information flow in an information rich planning and execution environment

Autonomous vs. Interdependent Structures: Impact on Unpredicted Tasks in a Simulated Joint Task Force Mission

2000 Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (CCRTS), June 11-13, 2000, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CAThis simulation experiment is the latest in a series conducted by the Adaptive Architecture for Command and Control (A2C2) research team. The focus was to evaluate the relative performance to two organizational structures on tasks that varied in terms of complexity and predictability. One structure represented a more traditional, functional form with interdependent nodes. The second structure was derived from computer-modeling to reduce the need for coordination by creating fairly autonomous divisional units. Results from a previous A2C2 experiment suggested that the more autonomous, divisional structure, while outperforming the functional structure in planned mission tasks, could be less effective with complex unpredictable tasks. Organization theory argues that coordination capability is an important factor in an organization’s ability to respond to an uncertain and complex environment. The question examined in this research was whether the different degrees of coordination capability developed by these two structures would influence the performance and process outcomes for both predictable and unpredictable tasks. The results show only limited differences in the results for the two structures, though these are in the direction predicted above. However, a more consistent finding suggests that training and improved teamwork processes override structural differences in influencing performance outcomes. Implications to future research and training implications are discussed.This work was supported by both the Office of Naval Research, Cognitive and Neural Sciences Division, Adaptive Architectures for Command and Control (A2C2) and the Institute for Joint Warfare Analysis (IJWA) at the Naval Postgraduate School

Analysis of Team Communications in “Human-in-the-Loop” Experiments in Joint Command and Control

1999 Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (CCRTS), June 29 - July 1, 1999, U.S. Naval War College, Rhode IslandSuccessful mission accomplishment depends on more than individual skills and knowledge. Communication is essential to team performance in complex tasks. Interaction processes that occur via team communications are critical for appropriate use of individual resources, especially when situations call for sharing resources and coordinated responses. This paper reports on results of an analysis of team communications to document the extent to which specific communication behaviors can be identified as indicative of high performance in teams who participated in Experiment Four under the Adaptive Architectures for Command and Control (A2C2) research program. Recently emerging findings on teamwork skills that characterize high performing teams were used as an organizing framework to examine team communications. Team communications can represent several important aspects of team performance such as shared situation awareness and coordination. High- and low-performing teams were identified using composite performance scores. Transcripts of videotaped scenario play were coded by two independent raters. Our goal was to examine the degree to which A2C2 participant teams exhibit cognitive behaviors reported to characterize highly successful teams and examine the relationship of these behaviors to mission performance

Translating Model-Based Findings to an Operational Arena: Data Interpretations from Research Participant/Experts

Proceedings for the 1998 Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium Command and Control for the Next Millenium June 29-July1, 1998 Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, California Track 1 ArchitecturesThe Adaptive Architectures for Command and Control (A2C2) research in 1997 examined the performance of alternative organizational structures in a simulated joint operational environment. It also evaluated the structural preferences of experimental teams representing Joint Task Forces. Teams were asked to choose between three alternative organizational designs that varied in degree of similarity to the structure in which teams had been previously trained, thus testing teams’ willingness to change. While a number of related papers in this Proceedings examine both the results of teams’ decision choice and the simulated performance of the alternative architectures, the purpose of this research is to capitalize on the military expertise of research participants. This paper presents the analysis of twenty-two officers with operational backgrounds who used models of organization theory to critique the experimentally derived structures. The contribution of this component of the A2C2 research is to enlighten our understanding of the critical features defined by operationally experience military officers as they considered structural adaptability and performance effectiveness in a joint mission context. This perspective is important to enhancing the generalizability of the laboratory-based A2C2 research to an actual joint operating environment

Expeditionary Strike Group: Command Structure Design Support

Paper for the C4ISR/C2Track: Paper # 364, 10th International Command and Control Research & Technology SymposiumAn Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG) is a new capability mix that combines the combat power of three surface combatants and one submarine with an Amphibious Readiness Group/ Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable) (ARG/MEU(SOC)). ESGs provide Combatant Commanders with more flexible, robust, and distributed offensive combat capability and enhance Naval expeditionary force survivability. Beginning in 2002, the Navy and Marine Corps began an experiment to explore the offensive and defensive capabilities of the ESG as well as different command structure options. This paper describes the initial effort by the Adaptive Architectures for Command and Control research program to support the analysis and design of ESG-1 command structures through modeling and analysis.Funding for this research was received from the Cognitive and Neural Science Technology Division of ONR

The Central Role of Discourse in Large-Scale Change: A Social Construction Perspective

This article reconceptualizes the change process from a rational planning perspective to an interpretive perspective emphasizing the social construction of meaning. Discourse is viewed as the core of the change process through which our basic assumptions about organizing are created, sustained, and transformed. To illustrate the dynamics of meaning systems, examples are provided of organizations shifting from mechanistic assumptions to become more adaptive, responsive, quality-oriented organizations. Implications for researchers and managers are included

Use of a Novel Organizational Structure to Support Complex Decisionmaking During Global Wargame 2000

Global Wargame 2000 addressed the theme of Network Centric Operations (NCO) with the objective of providing insight into future operations for a distributed, network-centric Joint Force. Network-centric operations are postulated to offer information advantages that include significantly improved capabilities for accessing and sharing information. These improved capabilities will be dependent on emergent technologies, new processes, and novel ways of organizing to enable operators to leverage the anticipated information advantage and reap the full benefits afforded by a distributed, networked organization. New variables and metrics to assess these benefits are currently under development. One variable, described as the “information domain” is influenced by several factors, including the performance of operators, the performance of sensors, and the characteristics and performance of the relevant information infrastructure, or infostructure, that links battlespace entities. Global Wargame 2000 was an attempt to gain insight into how to implement these new organizational forms and processes, with the information infrastructure provided by a networked set of well-informed but geographically dispersed forces. This paper will address some of the issues that contributed to developing an effective infostructure for an interoperable command and control organization during global Wargame 2000.This work was supported by both the Office of Naval Research, Cognitive, Neural and Biomolecular S&T Division and the Naval Postgraduate School, Institute for Joint Warfare Analysis (IJWA)

Assessments of Simulated Performance of Alternative Architectures for Command and Control: The Role of Coordination

1999 Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (CCRTS), June 29 - July 1, 1999, U.S. Naval War College, Rhode IslandThis paper presents the results of the fourth in a sequence of experiments conducted by the Adaptive Architectures for Command and Control research team. The focus of this study is on the relative effectiveness of three organizational structures in the conduct of a simulated Joint Task Force mission. Two of the three organizational architectures were optimized, using preexperimental modeling, to limit the amount of inter-nodal coordination. These two structures varied in level of workload (4-node vs. 6-node). The third structure was based on a more traditional, functional design that required more inter-nodal coordination than them model-based structures. Effectiveness was evaluated in terms of performance on the more predictable primary mission tasks as well as some less predictable tasks and a measure of general protection of the force. Overall, there is limited evidence that the 6-node structure designed to reduce inter-nodal coordination performed more effectively than the other two on the primary mission tasks. There is also limited evidence that the traditional structure that required more coordination in accomplishing primary tasks, was more effective than the model-based structures in responding to the less predictable tasks. This evidence supports the value of coordination capabilities in responding to situations of uncertainty