CTNSP Defense and Technology Papers

May 6, 2015

DTP 107: Shifting Human Environment: How Trends in Human Geography Will Shape Future Military Operations

In January 2014 the Center for Technology and National Security Policy was asked to examine some major trends within the domain of human geography, developments that will have important influence on the type of environments future military forces will be operating in.

Sept. 12, 2014

DTP 106: Policy Challenges of Accelerating Technological Change: Security Policy and Strategy Implications of Parallel Scientific Revolutions

This paper examines policy, legal, ethical, and strategy implications for national security of the accelerating science, technology, and engineering (ST&E) revolutions underway in five broad areas: biology, robotics, information, nanotechnology, and energy (BRINE), with a particular emphasis on how they are interacting. The paper considers the timeframe between now and 2030 but emphasizes policy and related choices that need to be made in the next few years to shape the future competitive space favorably, and focuses on those decisions that are within U.S. Department of Defense’s (DOD) purview. The pace and complexity of technological change mean that linear predictions of current needs cannot be the basis for effective guidance or management for the future. These are issues for policymakers and commanders, not just technical specialists.

Aug. 22, 2014

DTP 105: A Strategic Vision and a New Management Approach for the Department of the Navy’s Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) Portfolio

This paper considers the Department of the Navy Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) program holistically. The underlying premise, that will be expanded on here, is that the Department is not doing a good enough job of strategically managing its RDT&E portfolio and that, at least partly as a result, the Department is spending too much and taking too long in getting new technology-driven capabilities into the hands of our warfighters. The goal of this paper is to identify a workable RDT&E process that better enables the Department of the Navy to identify, develop, and maintain the capabilities of our warfighters as notably the most advanced in the world.

Sept. 1, 2013

DTP-103: Critical Technology Events (CTEs) that Support the Rationale for Army Laboratories Based on Science and Technology Functions Performed

This report, part of the “Project Hindsight Revisited” series of DTP publications, provides a retrospective look at 58 Critical Technology Events (CTEs) in DoD R&D investment, logically divided across 10 separate categories. The authors demonstrate the continuing relevance of Army laboratories in the development of critical weapons systems. Using specific examples, the study articulates the importance of maintaining quality staff and managers, ensuring the relevance of S&T program investments, and integrating servicemen and women with the larger scientific community to forecast technology trends.

Sept. 1, 2013

DTP-104: External Collaboration in Army Science and Technology: The Army’s Research Alliances

In this study, the authors examine the decision for Army Research Laboratories to engage in external, formal collaborations such as collaborative alliances. They go on to assess ARL Collaborative Technology Alliances (CTAs), Collaborative Research Alliances (CRAs), and Information Technology Alliance (ITAs). The report concludes by examining the effectiveness of the examples given above, and a recommendation for formulating a set of assessment questions for Army managers considering collaboration in the future.

Aug. 30, 2013

DTP-102: “Chance favors only the prepared mind:” The Proper Role for U.S. Department of Defense Science and Engineering Workforce

This publication provides critical recommendations for managing the DoD’s 130,000 person Science and Technology workforce through a period of growing fiscal and geopolitical ambiguity. The report outlines a strategy that: prioritizes lessons learned through hands-on experience; cultivates practices that identify and support the most promising trends in technology and research; promotes advocacy for worthy programs, and; develops a process for ensuring competent “third parties” determine a fair price for acquisition and development. It concludes by urging the DoD return to a prudently managed, conservative S&T strategy that emphasizes workforce recruitment and training, adequate funding for research and development, and increased engagement with colleges and universities.

June 1, 2013

DTP-101: Organizational Analysis of the TIDES Project and the STAR-TIDES Network using the 7-S Framework

DTP 101 gives an in-depth organizational analysis of STAR-TIDES, a special project of CTNSP. STAR-TIDES is an open-network, global organization, a form that is increasingly common in the digital age. This report identifies the core “7-S” factors in STAR-TIDES (Strategy, Structure, Systems, Staffing, Skills, Style, and Shared values), with recommendations for improved performance. Results provide a template for how to conduct a 7-S organizational analysis.

Feb. 1, 2013

DTP-100: Some Recent Sensor – Related Army Critical Technology Events

Some Recent Sensor-Related Army Critical Technology Events, James A. Ratches, Richard Chait, and John W. Lyons examined current Critical Technology Events (CTEs) that are new or ongoing in US Army Science and Technology (S&T) community.

Jan. 1, 2013

DTP-099: Suggestions for Evaluating the Quality of the Army’s Science and Technology Program: The Portfolio and Its Execution

This paper presents a methodology discussing the goal of establishing the strongest possible technology program appropriately aligned to the needs of its customers and the expectations of its stakeholders. The first chapter presents the essential elements of the Army S&T portfolio followed by discussions of the Army S&T portfolio and the evaluation of it.

Sept. 1, 2012

DTP-098: Taking the Battle Upstream: Towards a Benchmarking Role for NATO

The main intuition underlying this paper is that the current (geo) political, technological, and especially financial realities may require NATO to take the battle for capabilities upstream.