Submission of proposals
Download 1.78 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- A02-027 TITLE
- A02-028 TITLE
- A02-029 TITLE
A02-026 TITLE: Planning Exercise System to Promote Shared Mental Models TECHNOLOGY AREAS: Human Systems ACQUISITION PROGRAM: Battle Command Battle Lab OBJECTIVE: To create and evaluate an Army operations/project planning exercise system that actively develops, through a process of concept exchange and inquiry, a shared mental model of the operation by all those involved in the planning. The shared mental model will not be limited to a common understanding of the situation and the details of the operation. The system will actively develop a shared understanding of the goals, intent, desired end state, beliefs and assumptions that are the conceptual foundation of the operation and the relationship of these concepts to the plan itself. The system will have four goals: 1) To develop skills within command groups and staffs in testing the assumptions and rationale behind their own concepts and the concepts of others; 2) To develop, through case-based group training, a common understanding within a command group and staff of terms and concepts and the thought processes of each other; 3) To improve the efficiency, rationality, and creativity of the command group/staff planning process; 4) To promote ownership (i.e., ‘buy-in’) of plans within the planning group based on participation and shared mental models. The heart of the exercise system is the facilitation and systematizing of concept exchange and inquiry to promote the rational development of shared mental models within a command group and staff. It is expected that the resulting system will include digital support where appropriate. DESCRIPTION: The dispersion and possible rapid, autonomous decision making by Objective Force units will require a thorough, shared understanding of the operation among all units involved. The proposed exercise system is intended as a means to develop and promote these shared understandings. The system also will promote a transformational leadership style by encouraging individual and organizational growth in a vital mission area through intellectual stimulation. (FM 22-100, pg. 3-17) Mental models are our internal pictures of how the world works. They determine how we interpret the things we experience. Two people with different mental models can observe the same thing yet describe it quite differently based on their preconceived models. Mental models are typically based on assumptions arising from limited experience or teaching. When these assumptions are wrong, outdated, or do not apply to the event under consideration, acting upon them can produce grave results. A further problem is that most of the mental models that affect our behavior are applied without conscious reasoning; we must bring them into conscious thought before we can examine and correct them. A proven effective way of correcting these misconceptions is in a group setting using relevant case scenarios to surface and challenge ineffective mental models. Skills both in reflection into ones own thinking and inquiry into the thinking of others are enhanced as well as the development of effective shared mental models. (Senge, 1990). This procedure may be considered as a form of negotiation. Research into the dynamics of negotiation has increased considerably over the past decade and several insights useful for the design of this exercise system might be gleaned from a review of this literature (Bazerman, 2000). Among the problems the system needs to overcome are common egocentrism and advocacy of one’s own opinions that can greatly diminish the effectiveness of such an exercise (Senge, 1990; Thompson & Loewenstein, 1992) and the complexity added to the system by having more than two ‘negotiators’ involved (Kramer, 1991). Another useful line of inquiry is research into human dialogue and how types of dialogue affect argumentation and negotiation (van Eemeren & Grootendorst, 1992; Walton, 1998). PHASE I: Develop a conceptual model of the exercise system. The relationship of the principles, methods and procedures described in the model must be tied to the relevant research literature. In Phase I, the contractor will describe how they would implement the system in Phase I, the primary risks involved, and a general concept for evaluating its effectiveness. PHASE II: A prototype of the exercise system will be developed and demonstrations provided as required. A detailed evaluation plan will be developed, implemented, and the results documented. A user’s guide will be developed. PHASE III: The staff exercise system would have wide application in any organization that performs multiple projects, needs to train its managers and staffs in reflection and inquiry in project planning, and requires a shared mental model of critical aspects of projects. REFERENCES: 1) FM 22-100 (1999). Army Leadership. Washington, D.C.: Headquarters, Department of the Army, June, 1999. 2) Bazerman, Max H. (2000). Negotiation. Annual Review of Psychology. 3) Kramer, R. M. (1991). The more the merrier? Social psychological aspects of multiparty negotiations in organizations. In Bies, et. al. (eds). Research on Negotiation in Organizations, Vol. 3. Greenwich, CT: JAI. 4) Senge, Peter M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Chapter 10: Mental models. New York: Doubleday/Currency. 5) Van Eemeren, F.H. & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbram Associated, Inc. 6) Walton, D.N. (1998). The New Dialectic: Conversational Context of Argument. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. KEYWORDS: Shared Mental Models, Negotiation, Team Training, Dialogue Theory, Transformational Leadership. A02-027 TITLE: Training Rapid Decision-Making Processes Required by the Dismounted Objective Force Leader TECHNOLOGY AREAS: Human Systems ACQUISITION PROGRAM: Dismounted Battlespace Battle Lab OBJECTIVE: Develop interactive computer-based methods to train the rapid decision-making processes needed by dismounted Objective Force leaders in an information-rich, electronic environment. DESCRIPTION: The Army’s Objective Force concept exploits the enormous opportunities made possible by advances in our capacity to quickly gather, organize, and distribute battlespace information. Electronic information systems will be developed and fielded to process and display critical features of the data available from multiple sensor and database systems. If the lessons being learned about aircraft pilot cognition and decision making in the electronic cockpit are transferable to a dismounted small-unit leader in an electronic battlefield, changes will occur in the nature of the cognitive processes currently required to achieve decision-making competence in conventional environments. Evidence suggests that the nature of cognitive tasks of the small-unit leader in the future electronic battlefield will shift from that which is largely intuitive to that which is increasingly analytical. Measures of proficiency of decision-making performance will shift from those that reflect success in the leader’s ability to accurately recognize and respond to multiple probabilistic cues in the real-world environment to those that indicate an ability to maintain logical consistency in highly reliable and accurate information available through the electronic media (Mosier, 2001). These are quite different types of cognitive abilities. Consequently, proficiency in one does not ensure proficiency in the other, and training methods appropriate to achieve proficiency in one may not be appropriate to achieve proficiency in the other. Currently, the more promising strategies for training small unit leaders to make sound rapid decisions in conventional environments stress the need to “get inside the head” of experts to determine how they process information and make decisions in those environments. Methods are then developed to train the novice leader to acquire and use cognitive processes similar to those used by the expert (Phillips et al, 1998). There are no experts for making decisions in an electronic battlefield. There are, however, documents that describe the required operating capabilities of future electronic information systems and several such systems in various stages of development. What is needed is a method that will identify, for each of various dismounted military operations, the information that will be available to decision makers from the electronic information systems as well as the functional relationships among various types and sources of information contained in these systems that are associated with good decision outcomes. This method must furthermore permit comparisons between the conventional and electronic battlefield environments of implications for training decision-making proficiency of dismounted small-unit leaders. The ultimate objective of this research topic is the development and evaluation of interactive computer-based methods for training rapid decision-making proficiency of small unit leaders that takes into consideration various combinations of conventional and electronic battlefield environments. PHASE I: - Summarize information that identifies, compares, and contrasts critical decision-making requirements of both conventional and electronic military environments for a common set of dismounted infantry operations. - Develop a comprehensive description of the training implications of the critical decision-making requirements identified for the conventional and electronic military environments, highlighting, in particular, conditions in which the decision-making requirements and the decision-making training implications for these two environments are identical, complementary, conflicting, and independent. - Describe how an interactive computer-based decision-making training methodology can be developed to serve both the conventional and electronic dismounted infantry environments and how the efficacy of this methodology can be evaluated. - Document the Phase I work in a research report.
PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: The contractor shall tailor the interactive computer-based training methods to be applicable to conventional and electronic operating environments in the private and public sectors. The application of the products of this research topic are most closely linked to police, firefighting, emergency medical services, and homeland/civil defense operations. Another dual-use benefit of the product of this research will be a metric, based on the training impact of proposed electronic information and decision support systems, which can be used during the development of more effective and useful systems. OPERATING AND SUPPORT COST (OSCR) REDUCTION: Beginning now to develop strategies for training the cognitive processes required to successfully use future electronic information systems will assure that the training programs necessary to use these systems will be developed in parallel with the systems themselves. Consequently, users can be trained to use the systems as the systems are being fielded. In addition, lessons learned in developing methods for training decision-making proficiency of an electronic information system should influence the development of hardware, software, and organizational components of the system, closing the loop in what should become a successful application of spiral development. REFERENCES: 1) Alberts, D. S. (2001). C4ISR initiatives brief, Website, http://www.dodccrp.org/ 2) Bjorkman, E. (2001). Smart sensor web overview brief, Website, http://www.sainc.com/ssw 3) Dyer, J. L. (2000, October). Lessons learned from land warrior (LW). A briefing presented to the Independent Review Team – Objective Force Warrior Technology Assessment. 4) Endsley, M. R., Holder, L. D., Leibrecht, B. C., Garland, D. J., Wampler, R. L., & Mathews, M. D. (2000). Modeling and measuring situational awareness in the infantry operational environment (Research Report 1753). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. 5) Mosier, K. (2001). Cognition in the automated cockpit: A coherence perspective. Proceedings of the 45th annual meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Minneapolis/Saint Paul, MN, 68-72. 6) Phillips, J., McDermott, P. L., Thordsen, M., McCloskey, M. & Klein, G. (1998). Cognitive requirements for small unit leaders in military operations in urban terrain (Research Report 1728). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. 7) Pleban, R. J., Eakin, D. E., Salter, M. S., & Mathews, M. D. (2001). Training and assessment of decision-making skills in virtual environments (Research Report 1767). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. 8) Urzi, D., & Cameron, J. A. (2001, July). Preview of the literature-based findings regarding HS and IS collaboration. Paper prepared for a workshop, Facilitating cooperation between the human systems (HS) and information system (IS) communities: A human systems IAC workshop, Lincoln Laboratories, Boston, MA. KEYWORDS: Objective Force Warrior, Small Unit Leaders, Training, Information Unitization, Decision Making A02-028 TITLE: Defining and Developing Interpersonal Performance for Objective Force Soldiers TECHNOLOGY AREAS: Human Systems ACQUISITION PROGRAM: Special Operations Command OBJECTIVE: This research will develop an innovative model for defining skill levels and standards in the domain of interpersonal performance and provide validated methods for assessing and developing deficiencies in this area that can be used within a work setting. These research findings will provide a foundation for the development of a program that uses web-based technology to guide Objective Force leaders in administering corrective training to soldiers within their unit who demonstrate weaknesses in interpersonal performance. This program would include a leader’s handbook, innovative developmental tools and exercises, and technologically sophisticated performance assessment and tracking forms. DESCRIPTION: As the global involvement of U.S. Army forces continues to increase, both in conflicts as well as Peacekeeping and other Stability and Support Operations, soldiers confront complex cultural and political situations and are often in delicate and potentially explosive positions. Often interpersonal performance is a critical component of success in these situations. Interpersonal skills are listed as one of the seven critical skills for Objective Force soldiers (Cox, DeRoche, & Leibrecht, 2001), and interpersonal performance is extremely important for success in special operations specialties such as Special Forces (see Russell, Crafts, & Tagliarini, McCloy, & Barkley, 1996), as well as for success in leadership positions (FM 22-100; Zaccaro & Klimoski, 2001). When a soldier demonstrates weakness in an area of performance, noncommissioned officers or officers provide the soldier with counseling, which includes describing the required standard and what will happen if he or she does not meet the standard. In addition, it is critical that leaders provide guidance on how to improve through a corrective training program. This enables the soldier to work toward specific developmental goals and enables both the soldier and leader to document progress or lack of progress. Developing a corrective training program for tactical or technical skills presents a relatively unambiguous task. Required skill levels are clear and methods to improve are known and available. However, establishing a corrective training program that focuses on interpersonal performance is more ambiguous. Required skill levels are not established, no tools are readily available and it is difficult for leaders to know how to help a soldier improve. It is also difficult to document success or failure to improve. Existing research describes programs in the civilian sector to improve interpersonal skills (e.g., Bordone, 2000; Rabinowitz, Feiner, & Ribak, 1994; Bailey & Butcher, 1983). These typically use behavioral training such as role playing and modeling. Some research suggests computer-based role-playing may also be effective (Holsbrink-Engels, 1997). These programs typically do not take place within the work setting, however, and skills acquired during these programs do not necessarily transfer to the work setting (e.g., Rabinowitz et al., 1994; May & Kahnweiler, 2000). For these reasons, it is important to create an innovative approach to defining and developing interpersonal performance that can be executed from within the work setting. The foundation of this is a model that will allow us to define skill levels and standards for interpersonal performance. PHASE I: The Phase I effort will integrate existing knowledge about the development of interpersonal performance to provide a proof-of-concept for the research objective and description. Researchers will use one military occupational specialty (MOS) as a target performance domain to develop and validate a model for defining skill levels and standards in interpersonal performance. PHASE II: The Phase II effort will use this model to develop procedures for administering developmental training in interpersonal performance and evaluate the effectiveness of the program for the target MOS. Researchers will provide web-based technology for assessing and developing deficiencies in this area that can be used by leaders for soldiers within their unit. Products from Phase II would include a web-based leader guidance program that provides step-by-step instructions, innovative developmental tools and exercises, and performance assessment and tracking forms. PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Interpersonal performance is critically important to success in many civilian jobs, both for networking with other organizations as well as smooth functioning within work units and project teams in the organization (e.g., Cannon-Bowers, Tannenbaum, Salas, & Volpe, 1995). Some researchers have also suggested the growing importance of teams in organizations (Kozlowski, Gully, Nason, & Smith, 1999). Both the methodology and tools developed in this research could therefore be readily applied to organizations outside of the Army. REFERENCES: (A02-028) 1) Bailey, C. T., & Butcher, D. J. (1983). Interpersonal skills training: I. The nature of skill acquisition and its implications for training design and management. Management Education & Development, 14, 48-54. 2) Bordone, R. C. (2000). Teaching interpersonal skills for negotiation and for life. Negotiation Journal, 16, 377-385. 3) Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Tannenbaum, S. I., Salas, E. & Volpe, C. E. (1995). Defining competencies and establishing team training requirements. In R.A. Guzzo, E.Salas & Associates (Eds.), Team Effectiveness and Decision Making (pp.333-380). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. 4) Cox, J. A., DeRoche, L. M., & Leibrecht, B. C. (2001). Training Horizontal Teams in the First Interim Brigade Combat Team: Lessons Learned for the Objective Force. Draft Technical Report (Contract No. DASW01-99-0013) prepared for the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. 5) FM 22-100 (1999, August). Army Leadership: Be, Know, Do. (Field Manual No. 22-100). Washington, DC: Headquarters, Department of the Army. 6) Holsbrink-Engels, G.A. (1997). Computer-based role-playing for interpersonal skills training. Simulation & Gaming, 28, 164-180. 7) Kozlowski, S. W., Gully, S. M., Nason, E. R., & Smith, E. M. (1999). Developing adaptive teams: A theory of compilation and performance across levels and time. In Ilgen D. R., and Pulakos, E. D. (eds.), The Changing Nature of Performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. 8) May, G.L., & Kahnweiler, W.M. (2000). The effect of a mastery practice design on learning and transfer in behavior modeling training. Personnel Psychology, 53, 353-373. 9) Rabinowitz, S., Feiner, M., & Ribak, J. (1994). Teaching interpersonal skills to occupational and environmental health professionals. Psychological Reports, 74, 1299-1306. 10) Russell, T. L., Crafts, J. L., Tagliareni, F. A., McCloy, R. A., & Barkley, P. (1996). Job analysis of Special Forces jobs (ARI Research Note 96-76). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. (AD A324 584) 11) Zaccaro, S. J., & Klimoski, R. J. (Eds.). (2001). The nature of organizational leadership: Understanding the performance imperatives confronting today’s leaders. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.
1) Campbell, J. P., & Knapp, D. J. (2001). Exploring the limits in personnel selection and classification. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 2) Ford, L. A., Campbell, R. C., Campbell, J. P., Knapp, D. J., & Walker, C. B. (2000). 21st century soldiers and noncommissioned officers: Critical predictors of performance (Technical Rep. No. 1102). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. KEYWORDS: Performance; Skill Qualification Test; Selection; Training; Cost-effectiveness; Simulations; High Fidelity; Effectiveness; Measures Directory: osbp -> SBIR -> solicitations solicitations -> Army sbir 09. 1 Proposal submission instructions dod small Business Innovation (sbir) Program solicitations -> Navy sbir fy09. 1 Proposal submission instructions solicitations -> Army 16. 3 Small Business Innovation Research (sbir) Proposal Submission Instructions solicitations -> Air force 12. 1 Small Business Innovation Research (sbir) Proposal Submission Instructions solicitations -> Army 14. 1 Small Business Innovation Research (sbir) Proposal Submission Instructions solicitations -> Navy small business innovation research program submitting Proposals on Navy Topics solicitations -> Navy small business innovation research program solicitations -> Armament research, development and engineering center solicitations -> Army 17. 1 Small Business Innovation Research (sbir) Proposal Submission Instructions solicitations -> Navy 11. 3 Small Business Innovation Research (sbir) Proposal Submission Instructions Download 1.78 Mb. Share with your friends:
|