Concept development for comprehensive operations support with modeling and simulation

Abstract

Modern warfighting is not only conducted on the physical battlefield but also engages actors in the information and human landscapes. Across these landscapes many types of actors characterize a comprehensive environment. A commander and staff follow the operations planning process to translate a desired end-state to tactical effects and activities. Understanding the interactions between actors and factors that shape conflict and understanding how they can be influenced is highly challenging. Modeling and simulation methods that aim to describe and understand the behavior of complex systems can serve to structure information, derive problem insights, and identify effective interventions. These methods are not, however, common as part of operations planning and intelligence processes. This paper documents findings based on reported experiences from practice and based on concept development and experimentation workshops conducted with Dutch Armed Forces stakeholders. We identify eight challenges to the adoption of modeling and simulation in operations planning. We then present a decision support concept that incorporates several elements to counter the challenges identified in the form of a prototype approach called Comprehensive Operations Support with Modeling and Simulation (COSMOS). We describe the approach along several process steps, illustrated by examples from the concept development and experimentation case studies. We identify several avenues for future research assisting adoption of modeling and simulation in the operations planning process.

Military organisations and emerging technologies – How do unmanned systems find a role in future navies?

“…When developing and working with sociotechnical systems, there could be several parallel system boundaries (Kelly 1978;Trist 1981;Walker et al 2008;Baxter and Sommerville 2011;Vermaas et al 2011). Therefore, when developing military sociotechnical systems, different system boundaries need to be considered.…”

“…Designing a sociotechnical system involves designing roles and tasks for people to fulfil, as well as rules and regulations to handle the same (Franssen and Kroes 2009). Human, social, organisational and technical factors need to be considered in the design of sociotechnical systems, and it is not generally the technical integration is the complex part (Kelly 1978;Trist 1981;Walker et al 2008;Baxter and Sommerville 2011;Vermaas et al 2011). Baxter and Sommerville (2011) summarise the design of sociotechnical systems in three parallel and interacting activities: the Systems engineering process, Sociotechnical systems engineering and the Organisational change process, all of which need to be present to create an effective sociotechnical system.…”

“…(Department of Defence 2014, p. 2). The British Ministry of Defence defines Military Capability as 'development of the ability, both now and in the future, to have military influence and project force' (Ministry of Defence 2020, p. 5) while NATO defines capability as 'The ability to create an effect through employment of an integrated set of aspects categorized as doctrine, organization Another approach for understanding capability and concept development is to describe the military operational environment in terms of three landscapes: the physical, such as the terrain, technical systems and infrastructure; information, which is the combination of media, social media and other data in cyberspace; and the human landscape, which is the aggregate of cultures, ideologies and institutions (Veldhuis et al 2018). All these aspects are essential when planning an operation, and not merely the knowledge of how to use the technology against an opponent.…”