NATO NEC C2 Maturity Model Overview

1
NATO NEC C2 Maturity Model Overview

•  

2
C2 Maturity and NEC Capability
Five levels of C2 maturity have been defined.
These five levels and their relationship to the
NEC Operational Levels are depicted below.
(Figure 1)

•  

3
Edge C2
The objective of Edge C2 is to enable the
collective to self-synchronize. The ability to
self-synchronize requires that a rich, shared
understanding exists across the contributing
elements. This, in turn, requires a robustly
networked collection of entities with widespread
and easy access to information, extensive sharing
of information, rich and continuous interactions,
and the broadest possible distribution of
decision rights. Figure 2 (below) summarizes the
attributes of each of the maturity levels, in
terms of the dimensions in the C2 approach space.

•  

Figure 2. Variables Defining Collective C2
Maturity Levels
4
C2 Maturity Levels and the C2 Approach Space
As was stated earlier, approaches to command and
control with different levels of maturity occupy
different regions of the C2 approach space, a
three dimensional space with axes that correspond
to allocation of decision rights to the
collective, interactions among the entities, and
distribution of information across entities. The
C2 maturity levels and their relationship to the
C2 approach space are discussed in Figure 3. This
figure provides a graphical representation of the
mappings involved.

•  

Figure 3. C2 Maturity Levels and C2 Approach Space
5
Patterns of Interaction
The manner in which decision rights are allocated
influences who interacts with whom and the
frequency nature of the interactions that take
place between and among endeavour participants.
These interactions take place within an entity
and between and among individuals in different
entities. Figures 4 through 8 are graphic
representations of the patterns that are expected
at the various levels of C2 maturity.
Conflicted C2
All interactions are within individual entities. Thus, a graph of the interactions for the collective of participating entities would show a number of clusters, each corresponding to an individual entity with no links between the entities in other words, a set of isolated clusters. Thus, as shown in Figure 4, the clusters represent individual entities with no (zero) degree of inter-cluster connectivity Figure 4. Conflicted C2

•  

6
De-Conflicted C2
Depicted in Figure 5, De-Conflicted C2 requires minimal, episodic interactions between/among individual clusters, each of which represents a given participating entity.
Figure 5. De-Conflicted C2 Depicted in Figure 5, De-Conflicted C2 requires minimal, episodic interactions between/among individual clusters, each of which represents a given participating entity.

•  

7
Coordinated C2
In Coordinated C2, some clusters of interactions appear that correspond to tasks that involve two or more individual entities working together. The number of links (interactions) between and among clusters is still limited and although more frequent/continuous than in the case of De-Conflicted C2, is periodic, not anywhere near continuous
Figure 6. Coordinated C2 In Coordinated C2, some clusters of interactions appear that correspond to tasks that involve two or more individual entities working together. The number of links (interactions) between and among clusters is still limited and although more frequent/continuous than in the case of De-Conflicted C2, is periodic, not anywhere near continuous

•  

8
Collaborative C2
Significant task-related clusters of entities working together form and, in fact, begin to compete with entity clusters. Thus, interactions are as much between and among entity clusters and within task-related clusters as they are within entity clusters. The degree of inter-cluster connectivity increases dramatically and can be characterized as rich and continuous (or near continuous).
Figure 7 Collaborative C2 Significant task-related clusters of entities working together form and, in fact, begin to compete with entity clusters. Thus, interactions are as much between and among entity clusters and within task-related clusters as they are within entity clusters. The degree of inter-cluster connectivity increases dramatically and can be characterized as rich and continuous (or near continuous).

•  

9
Edge C2
In the case of Edge C2, the clusters of entities related to tasks dominate. These task-organized clusters are not static as may be the case in Coordinated or Collaborative C2, but are in fact emergent, being both tailored to the evolving situation and dynamic in response to changes in the endeavour and/or the environment
Figure 8. Edge C2 In the case of Edge C2, the clusters of entities related to tasks dominate. These task-organized clusters are not static as may be the case in Coordinated or Collaborative C2, but are in fact emergent, being both tailored to the evolving situation and dynamic in response to changes in the endeavour and/or the environment

•  

10
C2 Maturity Levels Required Patterns of
Interaction

•  

Figure 9 summarizes the discussion of the
characteristics of the patterns of interaction
required to successfully operate at each of the
five levels of C2 maturity
11
C2 Effectiveness and C2 Agility

• C2 effectiveness can be measured in a number of
  ways.
• For the purpose of assessing the ability of a
  particular approach to command and control to
  support NNEC, the creation of shared awareness
  and shared understanding are of critical
  importance.
• For the purposes of coping with a complex and
  dynamic environment/adversary, the C2 agility of
  the collective is of paramount importance.

•  

Figure 10 depicts the values that are expected to
result from operating at each of five levels of
C2 maturity. Both shared awareness and shared
understanding (across participating entities) are
expected to improve with higher levels of C2
maturity. C2 agility is also expected to increase
as a result of the increasing shared awareness
and understanding. In addition, the emergent
behaviours that accompany an edge approach to
command and control further increase in agility
because edge organizations can dynamically tailor
patterns of interactions in response to changes
in the environment more quickly than less mature
approaches.
12
Expected Values of C2 Effectiveness and C2
Agility (MOCE)
Figure 10
De-Conflicted C2
13
Measure of Endeavor Effectiveness (MOFE)

•  

Figure 11 summarizes the return in terms of
endeavour effectiveness that can be expected from
operating at the various levels of collective C2
maturity
14
Action Item Develop a Campaign of
Experimentation for Agility
ELICIT

• Feedback/Comments?
• Ideas for Elicit Experiment

•  

Wrap-Up Adjournment

• Next FACT Meeting?
• FACT T-shirt