Esselaar TIM Gate 1 FINAL Presentation

November 20, [email protected]@forces.gc.ca Slide

The Defence and Security Simulation Ecosystem:Defining an Innovation Network

Erik Esselaar

Gate 1 Thesis PresentationTechnology Innovation ManagementNovember 20, 2009

1

Friday, November 20, 2009

mailto:[email protected]





Introduction

• CF/DND mandated to transform to better interoperate with allies and partner organizations– Defence and Security (DaS) stakeholders

traditionally innovate in “stovepipes”. Varying degrees of inter-organizational collaboration, dependent on problem set / focus.

– Modelling & Simulation (M&S) technologies used in varying degrees - particularly applicable in Concept Development and Experimentation (CD&E), and Training

– Proposal made to establish expanded simulation and innovation capabilities (Near 2009, McComb 2009a)

2




Objective

• This thesis will build an ecosystem map between Defence and Security Simulation partners today, will assess its health, will determine motivation and ability to expand collaboration through a future simulation capability, and assess that proposed ecosystem’s health.

• Deliverables:– Current ecosystem map of Defence and Security Simulation

stakeholders, and ecosystem health assessment– Based on Motivation and Ability, a future ecosystem map, given

that a Defence and Security Simulation for Innovation network is built, and ecosystem health assessment.

3



Who cares Why Evidence that decision makers care about the issues addressed

Canadian DND / CF • Domestic and international operations are in a Joint, Interagency, Multi-national and Public environment

• Must train and develop capabilities in sync with our partners

“The Chief of Defence Staff’s unifying vision for the CF is that of an effective integrated military force working in lock-step with allies, government departments and non-governmental organizations.”-McComb, 2009a

Government of Canada / Public Safety Canada(Includes RCMP, CSIS, CBSA)

• Responsible for safety and security of Canadians - in partnership with DND and other agencies

• Must develop, plan and train before a scheduled event

• Must be prepared for contingencies (Emergency Management - EM)

• Pressured to better use limited resources

“These shared exercises will help develop and validate capabilities arising from the cooperative efforts of various agencies and government departments from all levels.” -Government of Canada, 2009“Visualization support to modelling and simulation of all-hazards risk will communicate threats more tangibly to decision makers: to properly represent the consequences of known risks coming to fruition modelling and simulation of all-hazards risk could have more impact.” - Hales & Miller, 2008

International Defence Industry

• Involved in past, present, and future in CD&E activities

• Are simulation services users and providers

“VSIM is a separate $28-million project funded by the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the Ontario Innovation Trust, and industry partners.” - Constructing the Future - Carleton NOWhttp://www.now.carleton.ca/2005-10/934.htm

Academia • Provide critical education and research in technology and innovation, enabled by advanced modelling and simulation

“VSIM is a separate $28-million project funded by the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the Ontario Innovation Trust, and industry partners.” - Constructing the Future - Carleton NOWhttp://www.now.carleton.ca/2005-10/934.htm

US DoD and DHS • Key allies with Canada, already collaborating in many separate simulation events.

• Have invested significant funds in simulation; Have common issues with organizational stovepipes

“Overall, the US [DoD] view distributed M&S capabilities as force multipliers essential to maintaining force readiness.”-McComb, 2009a

Relevance

4






http://www.now.carleton.ca/2005-10/934.htm

http://www.now.carleton.ca/2005-10/934.htm


Stream Key highlights of the stream Key references

Military Transformation

•Definition of DiSC; DASIC; US JFCOM transformation; Requirement to collaborate with diverse organizations.•Critical for DND to partner with other organizations before it is required in actual operations.•Transformation required to meet current and future operational challenges.

Near, 2009; McComb, 2009a; McComb, 2007; Coll, 2009. DND, 2008; DND, 2006a;

Organizational / Command and Control Theory

•Network-centric / Network-enabled warfare emerging as the nature of modern operations; Disruptive innovations required in defence command and control to remain adaptive;•Meta-organizations: exist and must adapt to real-world challenges; Much research in EMS response; not CD&E;

Alberts & Hayes 2003; Alberts & Hayes 2007; Hales & Miller 2008; Rummler & Brache, 1990; Senge 1990;

Simulation / CD&E

•GUIDEx - how to conduct collaborative experimentation•Measurable cost savings are “stunning” when able to effectively manage simulation resources•Simulation as a tool, enabler;

McComb, 2001; TTCP, 2006; Wainer, 2009; Miller, 2008; DND 2005; DND 2006a, 2006b;

Innovation Theory / Business Ecosystems

•Business ecosystems theory; Planning business ecosystem strategies•Factors for evaluating ecosystem health (productivity, robustness, niche creation);

Iansiti & Levien, 2004; Iansiti & Levien, 2002; Moore, 2006; Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006. Abrahamson, 2004; den Hartigh et al, 2004-2007; Salas, 2007;

Literature review

5







Lessons learned

• Plethora of intra-organizational literature on training simulation, command and control and military transformation– Little formal, rigorous and academic research on military aspects

• Scarce resources on organizational / management of specific case of simulation services, and simulation itself as an enabler of CD&E / innovation.

• Much work on business ecosystems & health thereof - little found on application to government-centric innovative endeavours, and partnerships with government

6



Contribution

• This thesis, through formal maps of existing and potential future key simulation and innovation stakeholders in DaS will assist in determining what partnerships / linkages need to be cultivated for a successful future Defence and Security Simulation Ecosystem.

7







Theoretical framework

• Business Ecosystems• Methodology Sources

– Business Ecosystems• Iansiti & Levien, 2004; Moore, 2006;

– Business Ecosystem Mapping and Health Assessment• Iansiti & Levien, 2002; den Hartigh, 2006; Salas, 2007

– Motivation Ability Framework (for potential future ecosystem)• Christensen, Anthony & Roth, 2004

– Case Studies in DaS simulation and innovation• Eisenhardt 1989, Eisenhardt & Graebner 2007, Foddy 1993, Yin 2003.• Organizations and projects of interest - not representative

– Example: existing Carleton Center for Visualization and Simulation has many parallels to proposed DASIC

8







Research design

• Research Method: Inductive Case Study• Unit of Analysis: organizations using / providing simulation

services and/or mandated for DaS innovation• Time Period: CFEC lifespan (2000 to present)• Sample / Population: nested design

– Focus on DND and sub-organizations as a Keystone– Detailed analysis of Carleton VSIM– Target key interesting partner organizations from list of existing partner

organizations

• Sampling Method: at least one key organization in each identified partner group (see backup slides)– Minimum: 8 organizations– Maximum: 20 organizations– Depends on availability of interviewees

9



MethodStep Describe the dominant activity undertaken to produce deliverables

1 - Getting Started(Identification)

• Definition of research question to be answered• Identify key stakeholders, issues and areas for research• Literature review

2 - Selecting Cases • Specified population: DaS stakeholders (simulation or not)

3 - Crafting Instruments and Protocols

• Refine measures of health, through preliminary meetings with stakeholders• Qualitative data (interviews) and quantitative data combination (number of projects / exercises engaged in past, dollars

spent on innovation; dollars spent on simulation-based activities)• Define / plan data gathering (interviews)

4 - Entering the Field • Overlap data collection and analysis• Flexible and opportunistic data collection: allow for some additional interviews, some more focus on “interesting”

organizations (nested/embedded)

5 - Analyzing Data • Within-case analysis (nested/embedded)• Cross-case pattern search between ecosystem members• Building current ecosystem map, assessing health• Based on Motivation-Ability framework, response in interviews, build future ecosystem map, assess health

6 - Shaping Hypotheses • Iterative tabulation of evidence for each ecosystem member, and various relationships / linkages’ health• Search evidence for “why”

7 - Enfolding Literature • Comparison with conflicting and similar literature (based on previous literature review)• Data validation

8 - Reaching Closure • Refined ecosystem maps of past/present and future• Thesis report generation

(adapted from Eisenhardt, 1989)

10







Data acquisition

• Qualitative: Interviews with key Defence and Security Simulation for Innovation stakeholders and future potential stakeholders– Focused on key stakeholders - existing or potential

simulation users / providers in Defence and Security.• When: Jan-Feb 2010• How: in-person / phone interviews

• Quantitative:– number of collaborative projects / exercises / activities– dollars spent on simulation and innovation projects– number of person-years spent on projects

11



Data analysis

• Data Analysis: categorization of stakeholders’ past innovation and simulation activities, partnerships / collaboration, evaluation of stakeholders’ motivation and ability to form part of a future simulation for innovation network

• Data Reduction:– into current ecosystem map– into future ecosystem map, based on motivation/ability to use future

proposed capability– assessment of health of above ecosystem maps (individual,

linkages, aggregate) - modified measures, based on Iansiti & Levien, 2002

• Data Validation:– through feedback loop on findings with key identified stakeholders

12

(based on Miles & Huberman, 1994)







References

Abrahamson, E. 2004. Change Without Pain. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. http://www.amazon.ca/Change-Without-Pain-Eric-Abrahamson/dp/157851827X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256841778&sr=8-1 Accessed: Nov 1, 2009.

Alberts, D.S. and Hayes, R.E. 2003. Power to the Edge - Command... Control... in the Information Age. US Department of Defense Command and Control Research Program, Washington, D.C. http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts_Power.pdf Accessed Nov 1, 2009

Alberts, D.S. and Hayes, R.E. 2007. Planning: Complex Endeavors. US Department of Defense Command and Control Research Program, Washington, D.C. http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts_Planning.pdf Accessed Nov 1, 2009.

Christensen, C. M., Anthony, S. D., & Roth, E. A. 2004. Seeing What's Next: Using the Theories of Innovation to Predict Industry Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Coll, S. 2009. U.S. General Mattis Interview with New Yorker: The Future of Soldiering. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/stevecoll/2009/06/the-future-of-soldiering.html. Accessed: Nov 1, 2009.

den Hartigh, E. 2006. The Health Measurement of a Business Ecosystem. Paper Presentation for ECCON 2006.

Department of National Defence, 2005. Land Force Command Order 28-1: Land Force Simulation Policy. Internal DND Order.

Department of National Defence, 2006a. Defence S&T Strategy: Science and Technology for a Secure Canada. http://www.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/sciences/strat/strat-eng.pdf Accessed Nov 1, 2009.

13


http://www.amazon.ca/Change-Without-Pain-Eric-Abrahamson/dp/157851827X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256841778&sr=8-1






http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts_Power.pdf




http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts_Planning.pdf

http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts_Planning.pdf

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/stevecoll/2009/06/the-future-of-soldiering.html




http://www.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/sciences/strat/strat-eng.pdf

http://www.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/sciences/strat/strat-eng.pdf


References (2)

Department of National Defence, 2006b. Modelling and Simulation Management. DAOD 2010-1. http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/dao-doa/2000/2010-1-eng.asp Accessed Nov 1, 2009.

Department of National Defence, 2006c. Modelling and Simulation. DAOD 2010-0. http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/dao-doa/2000/2010-0-eng.asp Accessed Nov 1, 2009.

Department of National Defence, 2008. Canada First Defence Strategy. http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/focus/first-premier/June18_0910_CFDS_english_low-res.pdf Accessed Nov 1, 2009.

Dhanaraj, C. and Parkhe, A. 2006. Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, Vol 31, No 3. pp659-669.

Eisenhardt, K.M. 1989. Building theory from case study research. Academy of Management Journal, 14(4): 532-550.

Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E. 2007. Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1): 25-32.

Foddy, W. 1993. Constructing Questions for Interviews and Questionnaires: Theoryand Practice in Social Research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Hales, D. & Miller J. 2008. Meta-Analysis of Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned. Internal DND Report.

14


http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/dao-doa/2000/2010-1-eng.asp








http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/focus/first-premier/June18_0910_CFDS_english_low-res.pdf





References (3)

Iansiti M. and Levien, R. 2002. The New Operational Dynamics of Business Ecosystems: Implications for Policy, Operations and Technology Strategy. Working Paper.

Iansiti M. and Levien, R. 2004. The Keystone Advantage: What the New Dynamics of Business Ecosystems Mean for Strategy, Innovation, and Sustainability. Harvard Business School Press. http://books.google.ca/books?id=T_2QFhjzGPAC&lpg=PP15&ots=Uey8L9rRp9&dq=iansiti%20levien%20ecosystem&lr=&pg=PP18#v=onepage&q=&f=false

McComb, D., Lieutenant-Colonel. 2009a. Canadian Forces Warfare Centre Capability Definition Paper. Internal DND Concept Paper. Draft Version 0907.

Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. 1994. An Expanded Sourcebook: Qualitative Data Analysis (Second ed.): Sage Publications.

Miller, E. 2008. Leverage engineering simulation across the enterprise. Manufacturing Business Technology, Mar 2008, Vol 26 Issue 3, p17

Near, J.R., Major. 2009. A Canadian Defence And Security Innovation Centre: An Idea Whose Time Has Come. Canadian Military Journal, Vol 9, No 4. http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo9/no4/14-near-eng.asp. Accessed Oct 23, 2009, 1207hrs.

15


http://books.google.ca/books?id=T_2QFhjzGPAC&lpg=PP15&ots=Uey8L9rRp9&dq=iansiti%20levien%20ecosystem&lr=&pg=PP18#






http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo9/no4/14-near-eng.asp

http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo9/no4/14-near-eng.asp


References (4)

Salas, A.J. 2007. Health of Business Ecosystems, a Structural Approach. Master's Thesis. Delft, Netherlands: Delft University of Technology.

The Technical Cooperation Program, 2006. Guide for Understanding and Implementing Defense Experimentation (GUIDEx). V1.1. http://www.dtic.mil/ttcp/GUIDExBookFeb2006.pdf

Wainer, G.A. 2009. Discrete-Event Modeling and Simulation: A Practitioner’s Approach. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Yin, R. K. 2003. Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Third ed.): Sage Publications.

16


http://www.dtic.mil/ttcp/GUIDExBookFeb2006.pdf

http://www.dtic.mil/ttcp/GUIDExBookFeb2006.pdf


Questions?

17



Backup Slides

18



Thesis Planning - Schedule

19

Esselaar Thesis Project Planner : Gantt Chart : Defence And Security Simulation for Innovation Ecosystem (DASSIE)

Page 1 of 1

# Name Duration Start Finish Cost

1 Project Management 280.0 d 09-06-01 10-06-25 $ 0.00

2 Thesis Re-Alignment 22.0 d 09-06-01 09-06-30 $ 0.00

3 Milestones 258.0 d 09-07-01 10-06-25 $ 0.00

4 Gate 0 09-07-01 $ 0.00

5 Gate 1 (TBC) 09-11-20 $ 0.00

6 Gate 2 (TBC) 10-03-26 $ 0.00

7 Gate 3 - Thesis Defence (TBC) 10-06-25 $ 0.00

8 Deliverables 104.0 d 09-06-30 09-11-20 $ 0.00

9 Gate 0 Presentation 1.0 d 09-06-30 09-06-30 $ 0.00



12 List of References 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

13 Ethics Committee Application 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

14 Application Document 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

15 Letter of Information 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

16 Letter of Sponsorship / Support (CO CFEC) 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00



19 DRAFT Thesis Document 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

20 Gate 3 Thesis Defence 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

21 Thesis Presentation 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

22 Thesis Document 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

23 Budget 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

27 Phase I - Thesis Definition 123.0 d 09-05-01 09-10-20 $ 0.00

33 Phase II - Literature Review 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

77 Phase III - Research Method 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

86 Phase IV - Data Acquisition 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

87 Gate 2 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

88 Gate 3 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

89 Phase V - Data Reduction, Analysis, Validation 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

90 Phase VI - Thesis Document 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

112 Phase VII - Thesis Defence 1.0 d 09-10-20 09-10-20 $ 0.00

Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug

1st Quarter 2009 2nd Quarter 2009 3rd Quarter 2009 4th Quarter 2009 1st Quarter 2010 2nd Quarter 2010 3rd Quarter 2010

09-07-01

09-11-20

10-03-26

10-06-25

PhaseTask

DeadlineMilestone

Link







Thesis Planning - Upcoming Tasks

• Interservice / Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference (I/ITSEC) 2009: Nov 30 - Dec 3, 2009– Meetings, Research and Exhibition at Conference

• Explore benefits of collaborating with Ecosystem Mapping Software of EventuSix from Lead To Win 2009

• Refine website to enable communications with ecosystem members:– http://sce.carleton.ca/~esselaar

• Adapt Iansiti & Levien, 2002, ecosystem health measures to our specific case

• Refine list of basic / broad capabilities of a future DASIC / DiSC, in preparation for interviews in 2010

• Carleton Ethics Committee Research Application: Jan 5, 2010

20


http://sce.carleton.ca/~esselaar

http://sce.carleton.ca/~esselaar


Simulation Domains

• Operations• Training• Concept Development and Experimentation• Research and Development• Acquisition• Engineering Design• Education

• References: DND, 2005; Wainer, 2009.

21



Ecosystem Members

• Canadian Department of National Defence (DND)– Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC)

• Centre for Security Science (CSS)– Chief of Force Development

• Canadian Forces Experimentation Centre (CFEC)– Chief of Land Staff

• Director Land Synthetic Environments– Chief of Air Staff– Chief of Maritime Staff

• Public Safety Canada– Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP)– Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA)– Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS)

22



Ecosystem Members (2)

• Canadian National Research Council (NRC)– Centre for Surface Transport Technology (CSTT)

• US Department of Defence (DoD)– Joint Forces Command (JFCOM)

• Joint Training and Experimentation Network (JTEN)– Modelling and Simulation Coordination Office (MSCO)

• Academia– Carleton University– University of Ottawa– University of Alberta– University of New Brunswick– ...

23



Ecosystem Members (3)

• Provincial and Municipal Governments• International Defence Industry

– CAE– General Dynamics Canada– Thales– ...

24
