1 of 19

Connections 2016�Working Group 2

​

Growing Tomorrow’s Wargame Innovators

​

Matthey B. Caffrey

2 of 19

Growing Tomorrow’s Wargame Innovators

  • What’s The Issue: No formal mechanism exists to:
    • Quantify the need for various levels of wargaming expertise
    • Identify the relatively small number of expert wargamers who create and execute DoD tactical, operational, strategic and programmatic decision support games so that:
      • We know how large the training/education/experience gap is – by type of expertise
      • We ensure proficient wargamers are assigned there they will do the most good
    • Train/educate/develop individuals with the types of expertise needed in the numbers to eliminate the current deficiency and then meet normal attrition.

​

3 of 19

Growing Tomorrow’s Wargame Innovators

  • Why Do I Care: We need a 3rd offset to denture or prevail in conflict
    • As during the Cold War, we cannot match our potential adversaries weapon for weapon.
    • We are in an increasingly cost constrained environment
    • As conflicts appear likely to be prolonged, we need options that allow us to prevail today and sustain healthy economic growth over the long run
    • Per DEPSECDEF guidance, the interest in wargaming for innovation at all levels calls for an increase in wargame knowledge and expertise at all level of leadership within the Department.

​

4 of 19

Growing Tomorrow’s Wargame Innovators

  • What should I do:
    • Survey OSD, the Joint Staff, COCOMs and Services to identify which leadership and staff positions (including those for NCOs) that need to consider adversary reactions in their decision making
    • Establish a type of wargaming expertise and fill rate (100 % to 50%) for all identified positions
    • Identifying individuals with current wargaming expertise by type and provide each with an identifier
    • Instruct manning specialists to make assignments partially on meeting wargame ability fill targets (100 % to 50%)
    • Establish education and training programs with sufficient capacity to close the current deficiency and meet normal attrition

5 of 19

Back Up Slides

6 of 19

Environment

  • Need to innovate
  • Larger demand for wargaming
  • Too few people to design, develop and execute wargames
  • Issue from DWAG
    • Aging workforce
    • Demographics
    • Place in analytic workflow
    • Small community

​

​

7 of 19

Topics

  • Audience
  • What they need to know
  • Delivery mechanism

8 of 19

Audiences

  • General population (as a military technique)
  • Executive (what)
    • Sponsor/Funder
    • Decision maker
  • Wargame practitioners (how and why)
    • Entry level: Execution (controller, adjudicators, facilitators)
    • Expert level: Designer, Analysts

​

​

9 of 19

What do they need to know

  • General population should understand
    • value and need for wargaming
    • types of wargames
    • spectrum of wargame applications
    • what a wargame can and cannot do
  • Executive should also understand wargame:
    • costs (scope, time and resources)
    • capabilities and limitations
    • effective tasking and confidence levels
  • Practitioners should also understand:
    • how to design and execute
    • analysis requirements and outputs

​

​

10 of 19

Delivery Mechanism

  • General audience
    • Initially, commissioning and NCO academy
      • On-line (grandfathered)
    • All subsequent PME as appropriate levels
  • Executive
    • Resident course
  • Practitioner
    • Resident course and apprenticeship

11 of 19

Now what?

  • Establish method of identifying individuals with wargaming training and experience
  • Establish requirements within DoD and each service

​

12 of 19

Question

  • Who and what in the Department need to know about wargaming—smart consumers?
    • Who, all leaders and their staffs that need to consider potential adversary actions in their decision making
    • What, capabilities and limitations, costs, effective tasking, expectation management (confidence levels)

​

  • How do you insure adequate supply of wargamers in the future?
    • OSD/CAPE (Basic, Intermediate, Executive Levels)
    • UK (Awareness, Practitioner, Expert, Master Levels)

​

13 of 19

Focus Items

  • Identify wargaming experts
  • Align wargaming positions with expertise

14 of 19

Identify Wargaming Experts

  • Establish criteria for levels/types of expertise
  • Evaluate individuals against criteria

15 of 19

Align Wargaming Positions to Experts

  • Make meeting fill rates one criteria for assignments

16 of 19

Ideas

  • Make wargaming a fitrep issue
  • Insert department wide education/training requirements
    • OSD/CAPE (Basic, Intermediate, Executive Levels)
    • UK (Awareness, Practitioner, Expert, Master Levels)
  • Use JROTC & commissioning sources to initiate of wargaming (wargame clubs)

​

17 of 19

    • how to establish problem definition
    • wargame tools and methods
    • types of tools appropriate to situations
    • minimize pathologies and artifacts

​

18 of 19

Insurgent Views

  • Gather like practices from:
    • Commercial gaming
    • Academic gaming
    • Hobbyist gaming
    • International gaming
  • Innovations sometimes
    • Come from completely different fields
    • Come from scarce resources
    • Rarely comes from a “flash of brilliance”

19 of 19

Insurgent View (2)

  • How do you find replacements
    • Recruit better (currently happenstance and mentoring)
    • Wargaming positions need to be fenced
    • Wise leaders who know value of wargaming
      • Leverage wargaming in the analytic process
      • People (awards, decorations, promotion)
    • Recognition

​