|
|
|
|
Warrior Analysts: How Can We Be Better Combat Multipliers?Booz
Allen Hamilton, McLean, Virginia
|
 |
Combat
Analyst: Deploying Quantitative Support to the Combatant Commander (January
2003) |
|
The
Global War on Terrorism: Analytic Support, Tools and Metrics of Assessment
(December 2004) |
Additionally,
there have been significant discussions for many of the past years at the annual
symposium. In this special meeting, we attempt to consolidate many of
those discussions and go beyond their scope to have an even greater impact on
the analytical community and the military in general.
This
MORS special meeting is intended to address a wide variety of topics and
encourage a wide array of participants. Specific
topic areas including combat analysis and assessment, GWOT, strategic and
operational metric development, education, training and development of combat
analysts, and procedures for collecting and analyzing data to develop lessons
learned.
All of
these topics have broad implications at both the strategic and the operational
levels. All also are of interest to
Combatant Commanders and Directors of Analytical Operations throughout the
world. We attempt, in this forum,
to bring together this grouping to determine the best way forward in these areas
across the services and the commands.
3.
Goals and Objectives
The
overall goal for this special meeting and for each working group is to identify
how the individual analyst in a combat command can be a greater combat
multiplier for the commander. We will approach this in each working group by identifying:
|
The
topics and approaches of analytical success. |
|
The
topics and approaches of analytical challenges. |
|
The
topics and approaches that have remained constant across conflicts, regions
and time, and those that have changed or need to change. |
|
The
challenges that can be addressed quickly and the challenges requiring more
detailed analytical effort. |
To be
successful, each working group must bring together individuals across the
services, include interagency interactions and tap combatant commands around the
world. Only through sharing the
insights of all these different components of the analytical effort will we be
able to provide the community with the best possible insights from this special
meeting.
4.
Approach
Special
Meeting Day 1
The
focus on the first day of the special meeting will be to set the stage for the
discussions. We will start with an
overview of the impact of analytical support from a Combatant Commander's
viewpoint. We will continue with a
panel of recently deployed analysts from various services and regions.
Prior to breaking into working groups to begin the analysis, we will
summarize the two previous related special meeting outcomes to establish a
starting point for the discussions. We
will close with a meeting of the working group chairs and the synthesis chair.
In summary:
|
Opening
from MORS President |
||||
|
Remarks
from host |
||||
|
Presentation
from Keynote speaker (TBD) |
||||
|
Panel
discussion with recently deployed analysts (including from PACOM) |
||||
|
Summary
of take-aways from the following completed MORS workshops:
|
||||
|
Charge
to working groups |
||||
|
Break
to working groups for initial meetings/discussions |
Special
Meeting Day 2
Day 2 of
the special meeting will begin with a refocusing of the discussion through a
presentation from another speaker. The
synthesis group will then present their findings and recommendations to the
group. We will then move back to
the working groups to continue their analysis.
We will finish the day with the working group chairs presenting findings
and status to the synthesis group.
Special
Meeting Day 3
We begin
with the synthesis group presenting charges to the working group participants.
The working groups then move to their designated rooms to complete their
work and begin to develop their presentation of findings and recommendations.
In the afternoon, a plenary speaker will address the group at large about
a relevant topic (possibly someone from the IED Defeat office.)
We will conclude with the working group out briefs and the final comments
by the Special Meeting chairs.
Working
Group Structure and approach: Working
groups will prepare a report on their activities to present to other workshop
participants at the last session of the workshop.
To focus the discussion in each of the working groups, the working group
chairs may elect to ask a select group of people to prepare and present papers. The workshop attendees will be organized into four working
groups plus a synthesis group. The
working group structure is detailed below.
WG
1: Combat Analyst Development,
Education and Tools (CADET)
Analysts
from all branches of service are deployed around the world supporting all major
combat operations. We are
developing them on the ground as our education system did not always account for
the roles we find analysts currently filling.
Many of these analysts deployed with only a rucksack and their
experience. We must learn the
lessons from these previous deployments to empower our analysts and improve our
capabilities.
Some
potential discussion points include:
|
How
do we change/augment our ORSA educational experience for combat
analysis/assessment? |
|
What
special skills does an ORSA need in a combat environment or to support a
COCOM/CJTF? |
|
What
lessons have we learned from each service on sending analysts to support a
COCOM/CJTF? Have they been
"learned" or "observed?" |
WG 2:
Analysis in Support of Current Operations
These operations include Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), but also extend beyond that part of the world to include all COCOMs, including USFK.
Objectives
for this working group will be to identify:
|
The
support that analysts are providing, |
|
Support
analysts can and should be providing beyond their current analysis, |
|
Potential
solutions to the problems that can be addressed in the current working group
(through procedures or techniques), and |
|
Problems which will require more detailed analysis beyond the time or capabilities of the working group and how those problems should be addressed. |
Additionally,
this working group will identify the areas of commonality and the differences
between the regions and the analytical requirements.
Some potential discussion points include:
|
New
analytic techniques discovered in support of operations' logistics,
development of force packages, prioritizing reconstruction projects,
supporting democratization, etc. |
|
Working
in a crisis action environment and severely time constrained environment. |
|
Abilities
and necessities of performing reachback. |
|
Current
service capabilities for employing operations research skills to support the
Combatant Commander's operational objectives. |
|
How
combat assessments can be improved. |
WG
3: Developing Metrics of Success
Since
September 11, 2001, the U.S. has been actively working to develop metrics of
success in the GWOT and to measure progress in combating terrorism.
Though several MORS workshops have touched on this topic since that date,
this is an opportunity to consolidate and share our insights as we continue to
bring our analytic capabilities to the fight.
Some
potential discussion points include:
|
How
do we measure success in combating terrorism? |
|
How
do we forecast national and regional stability before, during, and after
military intervention by the U.S. and our allies? |
|
How
do we develop real time measures of effectiveness? |
|
How
do we measure
progress toward the attainment of operational objectives? |
|
How
can the services better integrate their roles developing metrics to better
serve the Joint commands? |
WG 4:
Best Practices for Developing Lessons Learned
Each
military service has been developing lessons learned for many years.
Arguably, there have been no conflicts where the services' capabilities
and potential for joint lessons learned have been so prevalent.
To this point, Joint Forces Command (JFCOM) has become increasingly
engaged in the development of lessons learned throughout the world.
Again, we have reached a point where the services and the Joint staff
should come together to share insights as to the best practices for developing
lessons learned for all services. Some
potential discussion points include:
|
Best
methods for data collection. |
|
Challenges
to collecting data, including time. |
|
Challenges
in turning data collection into usable information. |
|
Best
means and challenges to disseminating the lessons to reduce failures in the
near future. |
Synthesis Group
The
synthesis group will bring together the work of the four working groups and
develop overall assessment and recommendations for the analyst community.
5.
Agenda (TBD)
6.
Attendees
a.
Attendance will be by invitation only. Attendees
will include invited experts from OSD, all Services, the Joint Staff, University
Affiliated Research Centers, Federally Funded Research and Development Centers,
operational commanders, DoD contractors, Department of Homeland Security, US
Northern Command, and others, including representatives from our Allied /
Coalition Analytical Communities. Workshop
chairs will control membership of their sessions in conjunction with the
Organizing Committee. Attendance
will be limited to 200 people.
b.
Working Groups (WGs) will be led by a Chair and one to three Co-Chairs.
These leadership groups will be comprised of all MORSians or a
combination of MORSians and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs).
The responsibilities of each team include:
(1) Chair
