Completed
This consensus study examined the issues surrounding capability surprise, both operational and technical, facing the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard. The study selected a few surprises from across a continuum of surprises, from disruptive technologies, to intelligence-inferred capability developments, to operational deployments, and assessed what the Naval Forces are doing (and could do) about them while being mindful of future budgetary declines. The study examined which processes are in place or could be in place in the Navy, the Marine Corps, and the Coast Guard to address such surprises, with targeted recommendations for consideration.
Featured publication
Interim
·2013
A letter dated December 21, 2011, to National Academy of Sciences President Dr. Ralph Cicerone from the Chief of Naval Operations, ADM Jonathan W. Greenert, U.S. Navy, requested that the National Research Council's (NRC's) Naval Studies Board (NSB) conduct a study to examine the issues surrounding c...
View details
Description
At the request of the Chief of Naval Operations, the Naval Studies Board of the National Research Council will conduct a study to examine capability surprise--operationally and technically related--facing U.S. Naval Forces, i.e., the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard. Specifically, the study will:
(1) Select a few potential capability surprises across the continuum from disruptive technologies, to intelligence-inferred capability developments, through operational deployments and assess what U.S. Naval Forces are doing (and could do) about these surprises while mindful of future budgetary declines;
(2) Review and assess the adequacy of current U.S. Naval Forces’ policies, strategies, and operational and technical approaches for addressing these and other surprises; and
(3) Recommend any changes, including budgetary and organizational changes, as well as identify any barriers and/or leadership issues that must be addressed for responding to or anticipating such surprises including developing some of our own surprises to mitigate against unanticipated surprises.
This 15-month study will produce two reports: (1) a letter report following the third full committee meeting that provides initial observations and insights to each of the three tasks above; and (2) a comprehensive (final) report that addresses the tasks in greater depth.
Contributors
Committee
Co-Chair
Co-Chair
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Committee Membership Roster Comments
Robert S. Muller, declined to serve, February 15, 2012
Michael C. Perkinson, declined to serve, February 27, 2012
Sponsors
Department of Defense
Staff
Douglas Friedman
Lead
Charles Draper
Lead
Major units and sub-units
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
Lead
Naval Studies Board
Lead