Design of command and control organizational structures ... · AZ to destroy RED 3d Infantry...
Transcript of Design of command and control organizational structures ... · AZ to destroy RED 3d Infantry...
© 2010, Aptima, Inc.
Design of command and control organizational structures: from years of modeling to empirical validation
Paper 145
Georgiy Levchuk (Aptima Inc.)Krishna Pattipati (UConn)
Presented at 15th ICCRTS
Date: 6/24/2010
Summary
Goals Research cycle Focus of presentation Experiment details Results Conclusions
© 2010, Aptima, Inc. 2
Goal of research: develop “virtual windtunnel” for design of C2 organizations
Enable commanders to perform their mission better, “aligned” with the technology and the organization
Create organizational structures from modular components that “fit” the mission, the technology, and the people
Test new C2 concepts before they are deployed
© 2010, Aptima, Inc. 3
Virtual Windtunnel for C2 design
Traditional
Expert/user
Best Organization Structure & Processes
DescribeDescribe
DesignDesign
VisualizeVisualizeBest organizational structure
and processes
Research cycle in C2 design and analysis
© 2010, Aptima, Inc. 4
Theory of team formation and decision making
Algorithms to find optimal (“congruent”)C2 structures
Detailed simulations to evaluate expected performance and processes
Empirical studies of C2 architectures
Studies of expert decision making
© 2010, Aptima, Inc. 5
Foundational theory
Variables:Control (“who owns what”)Command (“who commands whom”)Communication (“who can talk to whom”)Role (“who is responsible for what”)Mission execution (“who does what”)Adaptation (“what to change”)
Objectives:Fast & efficient execution (resource availability, SA, fast communication, manage task-resource match)Workload (need to balance & minimize)Achieved by:Distribution of resources, roles, tasks
Objectives of this paper
© 2010, Aptima, Inc. 6
Design “optimal” C2 organizations and compare them to “traditional” ones in team-in-the-loop experiments
Use two different mission setups
SME
Algorithms
SME-based C2
Optimal C2
Compare
Team-in-the-loop virtual experiment
Comparison, Average of all runs
05
101520253035404550
Phase I Phase II average
Missions
# of
suc
cess
ful o
pera
tions
OPTIMALSME
Elements of C2 organization
(a) Resources composition
(d) Communication Structure
(c) Command Nodes & Structure
BLACKBLACK
BLACKBLACK
BLUEBLUE
GREENGREEN
BROWNBROWN
REDRED
REC-21
ENG-2
NF-1 INF-2
BLUEBLUE GREENGREEN BROWNBROWN REDRED
HLO-1 HLO-2
MP-1
BLUEBLUE GREENGREEN BROWNBROWN REDRED
INF-3 REC-3
MP-2
INF-4
HLO-3
(b) Control Structure
MP-1
MP-2
HLO-1
HLO-2
HLO-3
0002Helicopter Section3
1010Military Police Team2
0001Mechanized Infantry4
0100Engineering Team2
0020Reconnaissance Team3
MP
ENR
REC
FIREDescription#e
my modular division consisting of gade-level combat teams
Domain of the studyDM1 (1st BCT)
DM2 (3rd BCT)
MIMIMIMI
DM3 (4th BCT)
DM4 (CAB)DM4 (CAB)
DM5 (Support)
Experimental scenario
LUE force elements:Rifle & Weapons Co; Motorized, Dismounted, and Recon Troops; Howitzer & Towed Field Artillery; Tank Co; Mech and Combat Engr; Military Police and Intel Co; Helicopters (OH58D, AH64, UH60, CH47); Civil Affairs
ssion Phase I (combat): 82d AIRBORNE DIVISION clears the city AZ to destroy RED 3d Infantry Division
RED targets: Infantry, Tanks, Fighting vehicles, Howitzers (towed and self-propelled), Mortar artillery, Anti-aircraft guns
BLUE ops: site and area security, enemy forces, force-on-force engagement, seize/occupy objective
LDX
II
PL RED
AALION
PAZ
OBJ FISH
X
OBJ CAT
OBJ DOG
LDX
II
PL RED
AALION
PAZPAZ
OBJ FISH
X
OBJ CAT
OBJ DOG
ZSU_11ZSU_11
BMP_23BMP_23
OS_1OS_1
OS_2OS_2 SS_1SS_1
OS_3OS_3
T62_11T62_11
T62_12T62_12
T62_13T62_13
T62_14T62_14
T62_15T62_15
BMP_11BMP_11
BMP_12BMP_12
BMP_13BMP_13
BMP_14BMP_14
BMP_15BMP_15
2S1_112S1_11
2S1_122S1_12
T62_21T62_21
T62_22T62_22
T62_23T62_23
T62_24T62_24
T62_25T62_25
BMP_21BMP_21
BMP_22BMP_22
BMP_24BMP_24BMP_25BMP_25
2S1_212S1_21
2S1_222S1_22
ZSU_21ZSU_21•AS_2•AS_2
•AS_1•AS_1
•RRFLco_11•RRFLco_11
•RRFLco_12•RRFLco_12
•RRFLco_13•RRFLco_13
•BM21_11•BM21_11
•D3_11•D3_11
•D3_12•D3_12
•D3_13•D3_13
•BM21_12•BM21_12
•RRFLco_21•RRFLco_21
•RRFLco_22•RRFLco_22
•RRFLco_23•RRFLco_23
•BM21_21•BM21_21
•D3_21•D3_21
•D3_23•D3_23
•BM21_22•BM21_22
•RRFLco_32•RRFLco_32
•RRFLco_33•RRFLco_33
•BM21_31•BM21_31•D3_31•D3_31
•BM21_32•BM21_32
•D3_22•D3_22
•D3_32•D3_32
•D3_33•D3_33
•RRFLco_31•RRFLco_31
•RRFLco_42•RRFLco_42
•RRFLco_43•RRFLco_43
•BM21_41•BM21_41•D3_41•D3_41
•BM21_42•BM21_42
•D3_42•D3_42
•D3_43•D3_43
•RRFLco_41•RRFLco_41
DM3 (4BCT)•4-64 AR (-) •3-69 AR •3-7 IN (M) •6-8 CAV •MI
DM1 (1BCT)•1-504 PIR BN•2-504 PIR BN•3-73 CAV SQDR•2-319 FA BN•1/A/4-64 AR (MBT) •1/C/4-64 AR (IFV)
DM2 (3BCT)•1-505 PIR BN•2-505 PIR BN
DM4 (CAB)•1-17 CAV•1-82 Atk Av Bn•2-82 Avn Bn•3-82 Gen Sprt Av Bn•122 Avn Sprt Bn
DM5 (Support)•FA BN•MP BN•ENGR•CA
ssion Phase II (stability): reinforced by ts of 2d CAF Division, conducts stability erations to ensure security of city & ablishment of vital infrastructure functionsRED ops: IED & VBIED, Small-arms attacks, mortar attacks, snipers, riots, criminals
BLUE ops: site and area security, facility reconstruction, crowd control, patrolling, searches, civilian ops, hostage situation, aid delivery, police
Process/efficiency (drivers of performance)– External coordination (dependency on others vs unity of
command)– Internal coordination (balance of work among commanders)
Performance/effectiveness:– Operations Completed Successfully – Response Time
Metrics
Sample results:
Operations completed successfully
Operation response time
External coordination load
Internal coordination load
Processes Performance
High coordination is detrimental to performance– External coordination: commanders spend time on requests and synchronization
activities and less time on executing operations– Internal coordination: managing different resources results in planning and
monitoring overload
Optimization model has detailed knowledge of expected tasks, allowing for a more optimal distribution of resources to balance coordination and work
– Smaller number of commanders per operation results in decreased external coordination and in turn frees commanders to manage their assets and conduct engagements
– Better workload distribution removes bottlenecks and improves response time
Future research efforts must be focused on analysis of command and communication structures
– Hard to manipulate in empirical studies
Conclusions