arborg.se – Research Methodology and Applications

Bo Strangert (RD6)

On formal procedures that support inventive planning

Case examples

There is an inherent need for inventive thinking in the R&D of complex endeavors. However, there are definitely no shortcuts or straight guidelines to use in planning tasks and achievements that involve complex phenomena. This should be a matter of course, although in the literature you can find an abundance of simple but unsubstantiated suggestions about how to think creatively, individually, or in group contexts.

Any complex endeavor involves both task-intrinsic needs of inventions and extrinsic contextual challenges. I have commented upon the latter type in the preceding papers RD3 and RD4. It includes all restrictions about project management and resources etc that are not intrinsically connected with the task/goal attributes per se.

The present remarks refer to support of task-intrinsic inventions. I attempted to categorize supporting procedures into two general types, called the formal architecture of planning and formal process coordination (see the papers RD3 and RD5). Their definitions are rather general and abstract, while all applications in projects will be specific and unique by necessity.

Therefore, I give some brief examples of application to the URAS case (RD1, A2) in order to clarify and prove the categorization.

The translation of a project idea into a formal architecture

of planning

Preconditions of the case

This case concerns the hot issue of collateral damage accompanying military peacekeeping missions, operations by police task forces, or similar activities where the use of violence can be expected. The development goal is about how to reduce risks of collateral damage and at the same time improve the security of participating service personnel, as well as to ensure an effective task performance. The particular project idea is to attain the goal by improving intelligence operations; that is, operations of reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition (RSTA) to safely identify targets in a way that clearly discriminates them from non-targets, as for instance civilians and their properties. (See the papers RD1 and A2 in arborg.se for a more detailed case description.)

Considerations for the overall project design

It was decided to treat the project as a complex endeavor in need of progressive inventions instead of a mere effort to improve existing safety measures. Figure 1 in RD5 illustrates the role of formal architecture and process coordination in planning.

The chosen overall formal structure of planning had three interconnected foci of activities:

• Develop a progressive goal structure.  Criteria of collateral damage, personnel safety, and effective task performance were scrutinized, as well as possible intercorrelations. The outcome indicated that there were no theoretical restrictions on correlations — a combination of the three desired goals could be attained, given suitable means. The next step was to formulate a progressive "ultimate goal structure" which could be used as a reference point for development (cf. the relation between b and c in Figure 2, RD5).

• Make a progressive search of means to ends. The plan was to explore, design, and test possible means to achieve subgoals, derived from the present goal structure. The means were searched for on a wide range of technical, tactical, and strategic levels, because the boundaries for the project domain were fuzzy and should be so to reinforce divergent thinking, especially in the early stages.

• Sustain a dynamic interplay of CD&E. Development work involved a dynamic interplay of CD&E within and between technical, tactical, and strategic perspectives during all stages. Theoretically, CD changed from abroad and a divergent spectrum of ideas and attributes to an integrated network structure. Methodologically, it was a corresponding shift over time from the use of surveys and laboratory experimentation to advanced simulation and field studies.

Examples of some principles of formal structuring

Form part-projects to deepen and extend the scope of development

Three part-projects were formed: one for the design of a technical device for RSTA (a mini-drone), another for investigating tactical topics of commanding intelligence operations, and a third for examining tactical and strategic possibilities of interoperability of forces. There was a schedule for regular meetings between the part-project teams. (See A2, Section 3 for a detailed account.)

If possible, avoid following prototypical and conventional lines

of development

In complex matters, it may not be enough to formulate a plan of tactical, organizational, economic objectives (e.g., TOEM) as input to a work method for requirement specification of military products (e.g., continuous TTEM). That is because of the common risk to give technical design issues a high priority and take the lead in development work at the expense of other interests. It's often due to the availability of sophisticated technical principles and procedures. The outcome can be that other, more ill-defined problems and qualities will be treated secondhand or missed. (The issue is further commented in A2, Section 3.)

In the present case, project management tried to minimize this risk by giving the technical part-project a subordinate position to the intelligence command project. The decision was to create a continuous interaction in CD&E between the two part-projects.

It's an old truth that practical experience and end-users opinions should be taken into account in development work. Of course, it should be done, but understand that their reports must be carefully analyzed and interpreted regarding their particular motives and situation. For example, you should not rely upon without doubt that a commander responsible for collateral damage will give an unbiased account of the incident (cf. A2, Section 8).

Communicate deviant results and confront reluctant stakeholders

in constructive dialogues

Diverse opinions and points of view are common among important stakeholders with interests in a complex project. Ensure that these agents receive correct information continuously, and be ready to handle views that are incongruent with the project goals! Welcome critical challenges as opportunities to detect flaws in planning and to probe alternative possibilities. In this particular case, superordinate commanders were regularly called to group meetings to be briefed and have the opportunity to debate upcoming problems. (See A2, Section 8, Exercise 9 for an example of observing and interpreting such group communication.)

Use of CD&E procedures for dynamic goal development

After the early stages of CD, which probably involve rather abstract concept definitions and model building, it is appropriate to introduce scenario construction. It may enrich inventions in two ways. First, translation of concept structures into possible scenarios can widen the CD to new perspectives and aspects not imagined in the preceding abstract analysis. Second, scenario construction can prepare for field experimentation.

In the URAS case, scenarios were constructed systematically by means of categorizing relevant factors in preparing an intelligence operation. It's called IPB, Intelligence preparation of the battlefield. The IPB-process included recognition of intelligence gaps, analysis of environment and its effects, evaluation of the threat, that is the opponent's qualities and resources, and finally, determining the courses of action against effects of the conjoined preconditions. (See A2, Section 9, for the example of scenario construction.)

Formal process coordination

The examples of general formal principles described above have to be operationalized in real time and space. It's a task of project management. This task process includes some recurrent general operations that can be foreseen and prepared, given the formally structured plan of development. Much of this formal process coordination deals with human resource management. For example, it includes timing and requirement specification of recruitment, selection, and placement of project personnel and expertise, as well as actions for instruction and training, providing good working conditions, promoting work motivation and personal growth, and more — all efforts to create an interactive social setting for inventions with continuous feedback about progress and new challenges.

Even though many management decisions and actions have to be uniquely situated and momentarily timed, plenty of events and interventions can be anticipated. These constitute the content of the formal process coordination.

______________