Sensemaking
Capability
Development
A FRAME FOR DEVELOPING SENSEMAKING CAPABILITIES
&
ACHIEVING THE COGNITIVE EDGE
Sensemaking Capbilities
People, processes and systems to exploit
information - under conditions of complexity,
uncertainty, and time pressure - for awareness,
understanding, planning and to make faster
and better decisions against an
adaptive adversary
Why Develop Sensemaking
Capabilities?
From “Sensemaking: A Cognitive Edge And A Sustainable Advantage For The SAF”
• Systematically create a widespread and
persistent Cognitive Edge for the SAF
• Create Sustainable Advantage
– Not easily replicated
– No COTS option
– Leveraged on our HR advantage
•
Use Cognitive
Asymmetry as a strategy
– Relative superiority in decision making
Sensemaking Faster and Better Decisions
Not just ……..
• Better weak pattern recognition
• More Hubbing
• More Collaboration
• More Decentralization
• More Self-synchronization
• More information online
• Better and faster common
operating picture
• ………………. Etc.
What’s the
problem?
Everything
is
relevant!
All this and more!!
Better and faster decisions?
The Quality of Decisions is a function of
• Quality of collected information
• Quality of knowledge base
• Quality of Sensemaking
• Time needed for Sensemaking
• Adversary’s actions
Information collected = f(No. & QofSensors)
QoD = f (Ic, K
Knowledge Base = f
(Experience, Exposure)
QoS
, ts
,
1
)
Aa
Sensemaking capability
development?
QoD = f (I , K ,
c
QoS
ts
QoS
ts
1
Aa
, )
Developments that :
• Dramatically improve the quality
of Sensemaking and/or
• Reduce the time needed for
Sensemaking
Sensemaking Breakdown?
Important Correlation QoD = f (I , K ,
c
Tipping Point
QoS
ts
1
Aa
, )
Information
Overload
Quality of
Sensemaking
QoS
Waddington’s Survey on Info
Overload (96):
Loss of job satisfaction
Tension with colleagues
Poor health due to stress  43%
increase in snr management
63% admit personal relationships suffer
Volume of Quality Information Collected
Ic
IKC2 becomes ineffective if we do not Sensemake well!
Developing Sensemaking Capabilities
Valid areas to define Problems and validate Solutions
• Organization
• Processes
• C2 Systems and technology
• Training
• Personnel/team Selection
• ……. Etc.
Doctrine
Demonstrators
Experiments
The Last Nanometer…
Thinking and
Concept
Formation
Cognitive Domain
Attention
Representation of Knowledge
Memory
Mind Activities
Pattern Recognition
Language
Cognitive Psychology
Attempt to explain
Imagery
Perception
Consciousness
Cognitive neuroscience
Behaviours
Attempt to explain
Linguistics /
Communication
Theory/ Social
Psychology
Other Users
relate
Social Domain
How C2 Systems, Organization, Processes could amplify Sensemaking?
Outcome…..
Sensemaking capability
would translate into
superior C2 systems
Cognitive
Edge
Data
Sensemaking
Capabilities
Understanding/
Knowledge
Optioning/
Planning
C2/
Action
Command & Control
Edge
Achieving the
Sensemaking Capability
FRAMING SENSEMAKING
DEVELOPMENT
Objectives
- Guide the development of a suite of
Sensemaking capability
• Aid the analysis of Sensemaking
problems
• Aid the synthesis of Sensemaking
solutions
THE SENSEMAKING
FRAME
Divided into three
parts:
- Sensemaking
Problem Space
- Desired Outcomes
- Concepts for
experimentation
and application
SENSEMAKING Problem Space
Individual
Key Sensemaking Problems
Environment
Uncertainty
Adaptive Adversary
Time Pressure
1. Cognitive Limitation
Complexity
Organisation
a.
Perception Threshold Limitation
b.
Attention Limitation
c.
Memory Limitation
2. Physical Limitation
a.
Physiological States
Structured for
Known/Knowable World
Insensitivity to Weak Signals
Compartmentalised
Knowledge
Team
Skewed Decision Making
Team process losses
Individual
b.
Human emotion
3. Naturalistic Biases
a.
Confirmation Bias
b.
Halo, Primacy and Recency effects
Biases
Cognitive Limitations
- Perception, attention, memory
Physical and affective
influence
- Hunger, fatigue, fear, etc
Problem Space
Key Sensemaking Problems
Team
Environment
Uncertainty
Adaptive Adversary
Time Pressure
Complexity
1. Skewed decision making
in teams
a. Groupthink
b. Group Risk Taking
Organisation
Structured for
Known/Knowable World
Insensitivity to Weak Signals
Compartmentalised
Knowledge
Team
2. Team Process Losses
Skewed Decision Making
Team process losses
a. Communication losses
Individual
Biases
b. Team memory
Cognitive Limitations
- Perception, attention, memory
Physical and affective
influence
- Hunger, fatigue, fear, etc
Problem Space
Key Sensemaking Problems
Environment
Uncertainty
Organization
Adaptive Adversary
Time Pressure
Complexity
1. Structured for
known/knowable world
Organisation
Structured for
Known/Knowable World
Insensitivity to Weak Signals
Compartmentalised
Knowledge
2. Insensitivity to weak
signals
Team
Skewed Decision Making
Team process losses
Individual
Biases
3. Compartmentalization of
knowledge
Cognitive Limitations
- Perception, attention, memory
Physical and affective
influence
- Hunger, fatigue, fear, etc
Problem Space
Key Sensemaking Problems
Environment
Uncertainty
ENVIRONMENT
Adaptive Adversary
Time Pressure
Complexity
1. Uncertainty
• Operations on-the-fly
• Lack of information
2. Adaptive Adversary
• T3
• Military adversaries always asymmetric
3. Time pressure
• Faster Tempo
• Greater Mobility
4. Complexity
• More players (NGO, other ministries,
etc)
Organisation
Structured for
Known/Knowable World
Insensitivity to Weak Signals
Compartmentalised
Knowledge
Team
Skewed Decision Making
Team process losses
Individual
Biases
Cognitive Limitations
- Perception, attention, memory
Physical and affective
influence
- Hunger, fatigue, fear, etc
Problem Space
6 Desired
Outcomes
15 Solution
Spaces