Evolution of military information management: The transformation of military organisation often neglects the culture and maturity of its information management

• Autorzy: Mattila Juha , Parkinson Simon

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.35467/sdq/103236

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Information and Communications Technology (ICT) has made major advances in linking physical dimension through information to cognitive dimension as described by John Perry et al. (2004) in their model for Information Superiority. The information technology linkage between the physical and cognitive dimensions has created new ways of effect both for the red and blue force. The paper focuses on the information dimension and searches for better models to describe the structure of blue force information, especially from the Enterprise Architecture (EA) approach. Enterprise Architecture has been developed to better communicate the complex structures of military capabilities. Major EA frameworks (TOGAF, DODAF) recognise the layer of information between business and technology, but in practice, the focus turns more to the technology as has happened in several Command, Control, Communications, Computing, Information, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) and Enterprise Resource Management (ERM) programmes. The paper develops a tool for architects to use in measuring the maturity of information management in the current military organisation and in defining the possible paths of evolution in information management available for the military. The outcome of this paper is a roadmap picturing the evolution of military information management. Enterprise Architects may use the roadmap in analysing and developing both C4ISR and ERM capabilities in military organisations. The primary research question for this paper is: What may cause so many failures in defining Enterprise Architecture at information management level and then in implementing C4ISR and ERM tools? The paper first defines six stages for management of unstructured information from various former studies and information architecture models (Cook, 1996). The basic stages of evolution of unstructured information are defined as print, file, page, social media content, semantic content, and intelligent content. These six stages and a generic military structure are processed through an evolutionary model derived from evolutionary theory for technical development described by Joel Mokyr (1998). The Mokyr model helps to recognise the paths of evolution, the forces that may influence the development and the ways that have been taken in achieving goals. The outcome is a roadmap that describes the evolution of past and possible future for military information management and explains different drivers and constraints on roads. The roadmap is aligned with other similar roadmap tools Enterprise Architects are using. The roadmap is further tested against experiences gained from several C4ISR and ERM focused military transformations. The overall research approach follows the hypotheticodeductive model (Brody, 1993) and the roadmap part applies the theory of evolution in sociotechnical systems (Bertalanffy, 1969). Military organisations have followed the general evolutionary path (print – file – page – social media content – semantic – intelligent content) in developing their management of unstructured information. The general path includes two definite leaps that require more effort: 1) from files to pages, and 2) from unstructured content to more structured content. There have also been more discrete shortcuts together with downgrades defined by cultural and doctrinal powers of the force. Meanwhile, it is possible to accelerate evolution by taking shortcuts. A consistent effort to change technology, processes, and people at the same time is needed when, for example, taking force from publish-pull pages to semantic information management. It might be easier to start with structured information and then, gradually, include unstructured information. Strong forces may also pull back already achieved development if the change has not been made to stick properly. Losing the thin trust for shared information management early in implementation may prevent individuals from sharing for a long time. Not providing the expected level of availability of the service for the knowledge base may lose the confidence of process owners. Since information is essential for cognitive level sense making, decision making, and learning, Enterprise Architects should include information maturity in their roadmaps of technical and business process development. The roadmap for military information management is to help analysis of the current situation and provide possible paths towards future stages aligned through business, information, and technical layers. The research in this paper only covers the approach of evolution. The systems and business strategy approached are studied in other papers. This article does not illustrate the integrated roadmap of business, information, and technology, which can be found in further papers by the writers. The research is based mainly on qualitative data in proving the roadmap. There is room for further assurance when the information sharing cultures of the military are enabling it.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

information science; information management; enterprise architecture; military transformation; C4ISR; enterprise resource management

• Wydawca: Akademia Sztuki Wojennej
• Czasopismo: Security and Defence Quarterly
• Rocznik: 2016
• Tom: Vol. 12, No. 3
• Strony: 46--73
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 55 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Mattila Juha

• Aalto University, Finland

autor

Parkinson Simon

• RMIT University, Australia

Bibliografia

• 1. Andriani, Pierpaolo and Carigani, Giuseppe (2012): Exaptation, innovation, and modular system. Presented to the School of Management, Cranfield University, November 9, 2012.
• 2. Alberts, David & Hayes, Richard (2003): Power to the edge. Command… Control… in the information age. CCRP Publications. ISBN 1-893723-13-5.
• 3. Bastedo, Michael N. (2004): Open systems theory. The SAGE Encyclopedia of educational leadership and administration. Retrieved from http://www-personal.umich.edu/ ~bastedo/papers/bastedo.opensystems.pdf.
• 4. Berman, Jules J. (2013): Principles of big data. Preparing, sharing and analyzing complex information. Morgan Kaufmann, Waltham. ISBN 978-0-12-404576-7 Pp.xx.
• 5. Bertalanffy, Ludwig von (1968): General system theory. Revised edition. George Braziller, Inc. New York.
• 6. Bodenschatz, Eberhard (2009): Complex systems. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. Retrieved from https://www.mpg.de/36885/cpt08_ComplexSystems-basetext.pdf.
• 7. Brody, Thomas (1993): The philosophy behind physics. Edited by Luis de la Pena and Peter e. Hodgson. Sprinter-Verlag, Berlin. ISBN 3-540-55914-0 Pp.84-94.
• 8. Byrne, Barry (2016): IKON, a case study of a multi award winning knowledge management programme in a 9000+ organization. A keynote presentation in ECKM 2016,2 September, Belfast, Northern Ireland.
• 9. Bytheway, Andy (2014): Investing in information. The information management body of knowledge. Springer, London. ISBN 978-3-319-11908-3.
• 10. Cattani, Gino (2005): Preadaptation, Firm Heterogeneity, and Technological Performance. Article published in Organizational Science, Vol.16, No. 6, November-December 2005, pp. 563-580.
• 11. Chang, Carl K. (2013): Situational Software Engineering. Keynote presentation in WIC conference October 29, 2013.
• 12. Choo, Chun Wei (1998): The knowing organization. Oxford University Press, New York.
• 13. Christensen, Clayton M. (2011): The Innovator’s Dilemma. HarperCollins, New York.
• 14. CIO US DOD (2014): DOD Architecture Framework 2.02. Retrieved from http://dodcio. defense.gov/Library/DoD-Architecture-Framework/.
• 15. CJCSI 3340.02B (2013): Joint enterprise integration of warfighter intelligence. See: http:// www.dtic.mil/cjcs_directives/cdata/unlimit/3340_02.pdf.
• 16. Cook, Melissa, A. (1996): Building Enterprise Information Architectures, Reengineering information systems. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, ISBN 0-13-440256-1.
• 17. David, Paul A. (1994): Why are institutions the ‘carriers of history’? Path dependence and the evolution of conventions, organizations and institutions. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 1994, Vol. 5, Issue 2, Pp. 205-220.
• 18. DeMarco, Tom; Lister, Timothy (2003): Waltzing with Bears. Managing risk on software projects. Dorset House Publishing Co, New York. ISBN 978-0-932633-60-6.
• 19. DeMars: Dansk Forsvars Management Ressources tryrings system. Retrieved from https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeMars.
• 20. Farley, Robert (2010): Over the Horizon: Wikileaks and the Information Battlefield. World Politics Review, October 27, 2010. Retrieved from: http://www.worldpoliticsreview. com/articles/6842/over-the-horizon-wikileaks-and-the-information-battlefield.
• 21. Flood, Robert L. & Carson, Ewart R. (1993): Dealing with complexity: An introduction to the theory and application of systems science (2nd Edition). Plenum Press, New York. ISBN 978-1441932273.
• 22. Guha, Ramanathan V. (2013): Light at the end of the tunnel. Keynote in ISWC 2013, 21- 25 October, Sydney, Australia. Retrieved from: http://iswc2013.semanticweb.org/ content/keynote-ramanathan-v-guha.html.
• 23. Gunderson, Lance H. and Holling, C.S. (2002): Panarchy. Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems. Island Press, Washington.
• 24. Harrison, Rachel (2013): TOGAF 9 Foundation study guide. 3rd edition. Van Haren Publishing, Zaltbommel. ISBN 978-90-8753-741-8.
• 25. Hidalgo, Cesar (2015): Why information grows? The evolution of order, from atoms to economies. Allen Lane, London. ISBN 978-0-241-00355-8.
• 26. INCOSE (2015): Systems engineering handbook. A guide for system life cycle processes and activities. 4th edition. John Wiley & Sons Inc. New York. ISBN 978-1-118-99940-0.
• 27. James, Andrew, S (2013): Emerging technologies and military capability. S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. Retrieved from https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp-content/ uploads/2014/07/PB131101_Emerging_Technologies_and_Military_Capability.pdf.
• 28. Lagus, Antti (2010): Architecture for Communications in Defence Forces. Original in Finnish: Puolustusvoimien viestintaratkaisun arkkitehtuuri. Verkostopuolustus 2010, Spring. Puolustusvoimien Johtamisjarjestelmakeskus, Jyvaskyla. ISSN-L1798-6672.
• 29. NATO (2016): NATO Architecture Framework 4.0 draft. Retrieved from http://nafdocs. org/introduction/.
• 30. NIT (2013): NATO unveils Afghan Mission Network Operations Center at Kabul airport. Retrieved from http://northiowatoday.com/2013/07/15/nato-unveils-afghanmission-network-operations-center-at-kabul-airport/.
• 31. Maier, M.W (1998). “Architecting Principles for Systems-of-Systems.” Systems Engineering. 1(4).
• 32. Mattila, Juha (2010): Development of land forces C4I for the end state of 2016. Original in Finnish: Maavoimien johtamisjarjestelman kehittaminen 2016 puolustusvoimia varten. Viestimies no 1/2010.
• 33. Mattila, Juha (2012): Summary of the contract. Original in Finnish: Urakan päätössanat. Viestimies 4/2012. Mattila, Juha (2014): Lessons from developing Army Command, Control and Information System for Finnish Land Force during 2007 – 2009. Retrieved from http://c4isys. blogspot.sg/2014/03/lessons-from-developing-army-command.html.
• 34. Mattila, Juha (2016): Architecture for Information Management Transformation; Part G of Introduction to ICT rationalization program of the Finnish Defence Forces from Enterprise Architecture viewpoints. Retrieved from http://c4isys.blogspot. sg/2016/03/architecture-for-information-management.html.
• 35. Mattila, Juha (2016): Using evolutionary theory in explaining the system of systems development. Retrieved from http://c4isys.blogspot.sg/2016/04/using-evolutionarytheory-in-explaining.html.
• 36. Mattis, James (2013): 19 Unforgettable quotes from retiring General James ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis. Business Insider. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/generalmaddog-mattiss-best-quotes-2013-1?IR=T&r=US&IR.
• 37. McChrystal, Stanley, et. al. (2015): Team of teams. New rules of engagement for a complex world. Penguin Random House. New York. ISBN 978-1-59184-748-9 Pp. 118-124.
• 38. MOD UK (2012): The MOD Architecture Framework. Retrieved from https://www.gov. uk/guidance/mod-architecture-framework.
• 39. Mokyr, Joel (1998): Science, technology, and knowledge: What historians can learn from an evolutionary approach? Presented to the Conference on The Evolution of Science, Santa Fe, May 16, 1998.
• 40. Mokyr, Joel (2002): The Gifts of Athena. Historical origins of the knowledge economy. Princeton University Press, Princeton. ISBN 0-691-12013-7.
• 41. Mukherji, Ananda (2002) “The evolution of information systems: their impact on organizations and structures”, Management Decision, Vol. 40, Issue: 5, pp.497 - 507.
• 42. Muth, Jorg (2011): Command culture. Officer education in the U.S. Army and the German Armed Forces 1901-1940, and the consequences for World War II. University of Texas Press, Denton. ISBN 978-1-57441-533-9.
• 43. Open Group: The Open Group Architecture Framework, TOGAF 9.1. Retrieved from https://www.opengroup.org/togaf/.
• 44. O’Reilly, Tim (2005): What is web 2.0? Retrieved from: http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/ web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html. (Accessed on September 14, 2016).
• 45. Peltonen, Erkki and Honkasalo, Kari (2006): From punch card to information network. Original in Finnish: Reikakortista tietoverkkoon. Puolustusvoimien tietotekniikkalaitoksen historiikki. Puolustusvoimien Tietotekniikkalaitos, Espoo.
• 46. Perry, Walter and Signori, David and Boon, John (2004): Exploring Information Superiority. A Methodology for Measuring the Quality of Information and Its Impact on Shared Awareness. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica CA.
• 47. Reuters (2013): Iraq war logs in Bradley Manning case ‘hit us in the face’: US officer. August 01. See: http://www.ndtv.com/world-news/iraq-war-logs-in-bradley-manning-casehit-us-in-the-face-us-officer-530119.
• 48. Schmidt, Eric and Cohen, Jared (2013): The new digital age, Reshaping the future of people, nations and business. John Murray, London. ISBN 978-1-84854-621-9.
• 49. Szeredi, Peter & Lukacsy, Gergely & Benko, Tamas (2014): The semantic web explained. Cambridge University Press.
• 50. Thorpe, Richard; Jones, Oswald; Macpherson, Allan, and Holt, Robin (2008): The evolution of business knowledge in smaller firms. An article in Evolution of business knowledge, Edited by Harry Scarbrough. Oxford University Press. Oxford. ISBN 978- 0-19-922960-4.
• 51. Trist, Eric & Bamforth, K. (1951): Some social and psychological consequences of the longwall method of coal getting. Human Relations, Vol 4, 1951 pp.3-38.
• 52. UK MOD Joint Doctrine Note 2/13: Information superiority. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ file/239342/20130813_JDN_2_13_Info_Super.pdf.
• 53. UK MOD (2011): MOD information strategy 2011. Better informed, better defence. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/ attachment_data/ file/27388/mod_information_strat2011.pdf.
• 54. Wisnowski, Denis (2011): Semantic technology in the Do Business Mission Area. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzW3Gc_yA9A.
• 55. Whitworth, Brian and Ahmad, Adnan (2010): The evolution of computing. In The Encyclopedia of human-computer interaction. 2nd Edition. Interaction Design Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/book/ the-encyclopedia-of-human-computer-interaction-2nd-ed/socio-technical-systemdesign.