Social Media in Command & Control: A proof-of-principle experiment
1 like467 views
The document describes a proof-of-principle experiment to test the use of social media in command and control (C2). The experiment was designed to raise the technology readiness level from the concept stage to an analytical proof of concept. It compared using traditional email (Condition A) to using Twitter and CrowdMap (Condition B) in a simulated crisis response scenario. Results found that Condition B facilitated self-synchronization across the hierarchy and completed the scenario in less time than predicted, supporting the theoretical framework. However, the experiment had limitations and further research is needed.
![Theory (7)
Level Description
TRL 1 Basic principles observed and reported
TRL 2 Technology concept and/or application formulated
TRL 3 Analytical & experimental function and/or characteristic proof-of-concept
TRL 4 Component and/or breadboard validation in laboratory environment
TRL 5 Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant environment
TRL 6 System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in relevant environment
TRL 7 System prototype demonstration in space [i.e. operational] environment
TRL 8 Actual system completed and flight-qualified through test & demonstration
TRL 9 Actual system flight-proven through successful mission operations
Baden-Baden, 15 May 13
Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment
20
Mankins, 1995 (ESA variant)](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/iscram2013grantetalslides186proofofprinciple130511final-130619114653-phpapp01/85/Social-Media-in-Command-Control-A-proof-of-principle-experiment-20-320.jpg)
Social Media in Command & Control: A proof-of-principle experiment
- 1. Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment Tim Grant, Fred Geugies, Peter Jongejan r̅
- 2. Overview • Goals: – To describe proof-of-principle experiment to test extended framework for C2 using social media (SM) • Outline: – Relevant theory – Proof-of-principle experiment: • Design • Performance • Results & analysis – Conclusions & further research Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 2
- 3. Theory (1) Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 3 Citizen1 Citizenn Building situation awareness (a) Integration, aggregation and validation of citizen generated content Early warning; Instructions (b) Citizen Communication Sender Citizen Organizations Organizations Citizen Receiver Reuter, Marx & Pipek, 2011 (c) Self Help Communities “Run uphill to escape tsunami” Organization (d) Inter- organizational Crisis Management Inter-organizational communication
- 4. Theory (2) Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 4 Receiver Organization Citizen Sender Citizen White et al (2009) Starbird & Pane (2010) Starbird & Stamberger (2010) Bajpal & Jaiswal (2010) Latonero & Shklovski (2010) Tapia et al (2011) Wiedenhöfer et al (2011) Thomson et al (2012) Starbird Muzny & Palen (2012) Denis et al (2012) Terpstra et al (2012) Zielinski & Bügel (2012) Manso & Manso (2012) Addams-Moring (2007) Vieweg et al (2008) Liu et al (2008) Sutton et al (2008) Hughes et al (2008) Hughes & Palen (2009) Kavanaugh et al (2010) Sutton (2010) Perng et al (2012) Kavanaugh et al (2012) Organization Montells et al (2006) Reuter et al (2009) Manso & Manso (2012) (intra-org only) Valtonen et al (2004) Addams-Moring et al (2005) Eysink Smeets & Sillem (2005) Wood (2005) Zimmerman (2005) Sillem & Wiersma (2006) Seddign et al (2006) Latonero & Shklovski (2010) Kelley et al (2011) Wiedenhöfer et al (2011) Denis et al (2012) Nilsson et al (2012) Sutto et al (2012) Manso & Manso (2012)
- 5. Theory (3) Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 5 Mintzberg, 1980 C-level (CEO, CFO, CIO) (i.e. policy makers) Back-office First responders / onsite / employees in the field (front-office) (Process Under Control) Controllers / commanders (line-managers) (Controlling Process)
- 6. Theory (4) Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 6 Receiver Organisations Citizens CP PUC Sender Citizens (N/A) (a) Citizen-generated content (c) Self-help Organisations PUC Observations (SITREPs) On-site / self- synchronisation (could be seen as (d) intra-organisational coordination) (b) Citizen communications CP (d) Inter- organisational coordination Instructions (Op Orders / plans) (N/A) Jongejan & Grant, 2012
- 7. Theory (5) Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 7 observations instructions outputs inputs Controlling Process Process Under Control Environment Organization Citizens Focus of our research Past research
- 8. Proof-of-principle (1) • Proof-of-principle: – “Realization of idea, concept, or theory to demonstrate feasibility or potential for use” – Characteristics: • Small prima facie experiment • Raises technology readiness level (TRL): – TRL 2: Technology concept formulated (Jongejan & Grant, 2012) – TRL 3: Analytical & experimental proof of concept – “Faster, better, cheaper” = new vs. old: • Condition A: legacy C2 technology (e-mail, paper maps) • Condition B: social media in C2 (Twitter, CrowdMap) Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 8 Wikipedia, 2013 Mankins, 1995
- 9. Proof-of-principle (2) • Experiment design: – Scenario: • Transporting food by truck from Port Sudan to Darfur – Simulated organization: • CP: NGO HQ in Europe • PUCs in Sudan: Truck convoy, fuel supplier, & NGO rep • Command Post Exercise (CPX); rest hand-simulated – Human subjects: • Officer-cadets: – Early 20’s; 3rd /4th year; digital natives; selected on availability – Trained in network-enabled (military) C2 Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 9
- 10. Proof-of-principle (3) Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 10 NGO HQ in Europe (CP) Truck convoy (PUC1) Diesel fuel supplier (PUC2) Rep in Khartoum (PUC3) Geugies, 2012 Email: up & down hierarchy (Condition A) SM: across hierarchy (“network-centric” / “self-synchronisation” / ”empowered”) (and up & down hierarchy if so addressed using @) (Condition B)
- 11. Proof-of-principle (4) Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 11 Geugies, 2012
- 12. Proof-of-principle (5) Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 12 Twitter (comms) CrowdMap (SA) Geugies, 2012
- 13. Proof-of-principle (6) Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 13 Geugies, 2012
- 14. Proof-of-principle (7) • Results (1/2) – N.B. triangulation: – (Subjective) Questionnaires: • Positive: – Benefit (3); self-synchronization (1); overview (1) • Negative: – Security (1); information overload (1); need clear jargon (1) – (Objective) Predicted vs actual (simulated) times: Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 14 Geugies, 2012 Condition A (email) Condition B (SM) Predicted time 5 days 5 hours 4 days 8 hours Actual time 5 days 5 hours 4 days 6½ hours
- 15. Proof-of-principle (8) • Results (2/2): – (Objective) Numbers of messages: Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 15 Geugies, 2012 Actor Messages sent Messages received Condition A Condition B Condition A Condition B CP (NGO HQ) 24 5 (intent 1) 27 23 PUC1 (trucks) 26 37 32 23 PUC2 (fuel) 10 11 17 18 PUC3 (rep) 4 8 8 9 Totals: 64 61 84 73
- 16. Conclusions & limitations • Conclusions: – Proof of principle supports theoretical framework – SM technology aligned to network-centric “business model”: • Facilitates self-synchronization / empowerment • Limitations: – No replication – Same subjects ran Condition A followed by Condition B: • Countered learning effect by extra event in Condition B • Anticipated learning by predicting shorter makespan, Condition B – Hence, claiming only proof of principle: • IF use SM technology AND users trained in network-enabled C2 Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 16
- 17. Further research • Contribution: – Further research into social media in C2 is justified • Possible further research: – Raising TRL: Concept Development & Experimentation (CDE) – Socio-organizational issues: • Harnessing wisdom of the crowd • Roles for volunteers • Recruiting & training digital natives – Fit with other technologies: • Bring Your Own Device • App stores (for crisis response & management) • Natural language processing (speech to text; extract geo info) – Peter and I seek collaborators! Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 17
- 18. Any questions? Tim Grant Professor emeritus Retired But Active Researcher (R-BAR) tim.grant.work@gmail.com +31 (0)638 193 749
- 19. Reserve slides
- 20. Theory (7) Level Description TRL 1 Basic principles observed and reported TRL 2 Technology concept and/or application formulated TRL 3 Analytical & experimental function and/or characteristic proof-of-concept TRL 4 Component and/or breadboard validation in laboratory environment TRL 5 Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant environment TRL 6 System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in relevant environment TRL 7 System prototype demonstration in space [i.e. operational] environment TRL 8 Actual system completed and flight-qualified through test & demonstration TRL 9 Actual system flight-proven through successful mission operations Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 20 Mankins, 1995 (ESA variant)
- 21. John Wayne 2.0 Baden-Baden, 15 May 13 Social media in C2: Proof-of-principle experiment 21 Collignon, Volkskrant, 2013