Sunday, August 28, 2016

A633.3.3.RB_ComplexAdaptiveSystems_LouBeldotti

A633.3.3.RB
Complex Adaptive Systems


Find a company which reflects Morning Star and St Luke’s image of a Complex Adaptive System (CAS) and reflect in your blog what the implications are for you and your present organization (or any organization you are familiar with). Identify what you believe are appropriate actions to move your organization forward.

            Wow!  I performed a Google search and found plenty of blogs from past classes at ERAU about Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS).

            After spending 27 years in the US Army, limited experience in the public sector, and almost six years in public education, I have very limited exposure to CAS.  In the military, CAS is an acronym for Close Air Support.  Not the same thing.

            However, there has been studies of Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) with regards to the military.  One particular study by Keith L. Green in 2011 evokes Tolstoy:

“From the battlefield adjutants he had sent out, and orderlies from his marshals, kept galloping up to Napoleon with reports of the progress of the action, but all these reports were false, both because it was impossible in the heat of battle to say what was happening at any given moment and because many of the adjutants did not go to the actual place of conflict but reported what they had heard from others; and also because while an adjutant was riding more than a mile to Napoleon circumstances changed and the news he brought was already becoming false. Thus an adjutant galloped up from Murat with tidings that Borodino had been occupied and the bridge over the Kolocha was in the hands of the French. The adjutant asked whether Napoleon wished the troops to cross it?  Napoleon gave orders that the troops should form up on the farther side and wait. But before that order was given—almost as soon in fact as the adjutant had left Borodino—the bridge had been retaken by the Russians and burned...” (Tolstoy, 1869)
            War and Peace is of course a narrative fictional account, but having served in the Russian Army, Tolstoy was conveying in this passage not just hypothetical knowledge gained through his study of history, but to some extent his personal experience in the Crimean. One wonders what Tolstoy might have written had he witnessed the use of technology by the First-World militaries of today. There exists that data allows commanders to know within tolerable error where their units are in near or near-real time; radios permit them to make inquiries of field units and communicate orders in seconds; Unmanned Aerial Systems provide real-time reconnaissance of an area many miles from their headquarters. And yet soldiers still die, and battles may still be won while campaigns are lost. Confusion reigns. Sometimes military analysts cannot answer except with anecdotal evidence or gut feeling what seems a simple question: Are we winning or losing? Moreover, military analysts often cannot answer credibly and convincingly whether a particular action has helped or harmed the cause. War differs from the subjects that traditional technical analysis is well-suited to address; however, in attempting to address the complex problems of war, analysts often attempt to apply traditional techniques by making simplifying assumptions invalid in the real world. In effect, the analysts ignore the complexities of war altogether. War displays archetypical features of complex adaptive systems—systems comprising agents that make decisions based on local, sometimes erroneous or dated information in which interactions produce patterns that could not have been calculated or derived beforehand.

            The mission space for the US military has been dominated in recent years by tasks that were not the focus of the military during much of the twentieth century, when major combat operations against other major powers was the primary concern. These new tasks cut across what has been described as the range of military operations and the problems associated with these tasks cannot be adequately addressed by traditional, fixed responses. Such problems require generalized adaptive strategies and capabilities. Today’s military prevents genocide, delivers humanitarian assistance, counters insurgents, trains foreign militaries, assists reconstruction, and supports civil authorities in a range of missions, from disaster relief to combating drug trafficking. Mission outcomes can be strongly influenced by factors that have nothing directly to do with logistics or kinetic operations. Local economic, political, and social factors exacerbate inherent complexity—as can the economic, political and social factors in the United States and around the world. A US Marine Corps manual states explicitly, War is a complex phenomenon. (Green, 2011)

            War is the same as Tolstoy depicts in his novel, even 147 years later.  The only thing that has changed is technology.  War hasn’t changed but those fighting it have adapted.  Adaptation to technology.  The strategy is the same…the only thing that has changed is how wars are fought.

            As a 27-year veteran of the US Military, it has been adaptation to change and technology that has kept the military relevant.   This is what is necessary to move the military forward. 

References

Tolstoy, L. (1869). War and Peace Project Gutenberg, Book 10, Chapter XXXIII, accessed on 24 Aug 2010 on http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2600?msg=welcome_stranger


Green, L. (2011, May). Complex Adaptive Systems in Military Analysis. Retrieved on August 27, 2016 from https://www.ida.org/~/media/Corporate/Files/Publications/IDA_Documents/JAWD/ida-document-d-4313.pdf

No comments:

Post a Comment