Technology Strategy Integration
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Calhoun, Institutional Archive of the Naval Postgraduate School Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis Collection 2012-06 Technology Strategy Integration Carter, Keith L. Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School http://hdl.handle.net/10945/7317 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA THESIS TECHNOLOGY STRATEGY INTEGRATION by Keith L. Carter June 2012 Thesis Advisor: John Arquilla Second Reader: Doowan Lee Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704–0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202–4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704–0188) Washington DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED June 2012 Master’s Thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Technology Strategy Integration 5. FUNDING NUMBERS 6. AUTHOR(S) Keith L. Carter 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION Naval Postgraduate School REPORT NUMBER Monterey, CA 93943–5000 9. SPONSORING /MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING N/A AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government. IRB Protocol number ______N/A__________. 12a. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited A 13. ABSTRACT (maximum 200 words) Techno-strategic integration is the process through which militaries integrate technological advances into a strategy that maximizes their advantages. While sheer military might is a function of a variety of factors, technology has taken center stage in the past two centuries. The industrial revolution changed the way war was fought; and the changes had wide ranging effects. The calamity of the First World War was in some ways a failure to techno- strategically integrate industrial age technology. The history of military technology and strategy illustrates many obstacles to the integration of the two. This thesis shows that successful techno-strategic integration is often highly correlated with effective execution of war and improvement of national security. On the other hand, enduring organizational preferences, inter-service rivalry, and commercial self-interest have often undermined new techno- strategic possibilities. However, with the growth and increasing capability of information age technology, this research shows growing indications that the techno-strategic paradigm of the industrial age is shifting. The United States is positioned to capitalize on its lead in informational innovations, and integrating technologies into new concepts of operations. If managed successfully, the United States might emerge with a leaner, more agile force that can keep its strategic competitors at bay. 14. SUBJECT TERMS Military Technology, Military Doctrine, Innovation, Integration, Diffusion 15. NUMBER OF PAGES 241 16. PRICE CODE 17. SECURITY 18. SECURITY 19. SECURITY 20. LIMITATION OF CLASSIFICATION OF CLASSIFICATION OF THIS CLASSIFICATION OF ABSTRACT REPORT PAGE ABSTRACT Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified UU NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18 i THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ii Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited TECHNOLOGY STRATEGY INTEGRATION Keith L. Carter Major, United States Army B.A., University of Montana, 2000 Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN DEFENSE ANALYSIS from the NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL June 2012 Author: Keith L. Carter Approved by: John Arquilla Thesis Advisor Doowan Lee Second Reader John Arquilla Chair, Department of Defense Analysis iii THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK iv ABSTRACT Techno-strategic integration is the process through which militaries integrate technological advances into a strategy that maximizes their advantages. While sheer military might is a function of a variety of factors, technology has taken center stage in the past two centuries. The industrial revolution changed the way war was fought; and the changes had wide ranging effects. The calamity of the First World War was in some ways a failure to techno-strategically integrate industrial age technology. The history of military technology and strategy illustrates many obstacles to the integration of the two. This thesis shows that successful techno-strategic integration is often highly correlated with effective execution of war and improvement of national security. On the other hand, enduring organizational preferences, inter-service rivalry, and commercial self-interest have often undermined new techno-strategic possibilities. However, with the growth and increasing capability of information age technology, this research shows growing indications that the techno-strategic paradigm of the industrial age is shifting. The United States is positioned to capitalize on its lead in informational innovations, and integrating technologies into new concepts of operations. If managed successfully, the United States might emerge with a leaner, more agile force that can keep its strategic competitors at bay. v THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK vi TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 A. THE RESEARCH QUESTION......................................................................2 1. Technological Archetypes ...................................................................7 a. Evolutionary............................................................................10 b. Revolutionary ..........................................................................10 c. Imitative...................................................................................11 2. Modeling Relationships .....................................................................11 3. Hypotheses..........................................................................................15 a. Hypothesis 1: Political-military Interactions, Which are Characterized by an Informed and Involved Political Process Positively Affects the Integration of Revolutionary Technology......................................................15 b. Hypothesis 2: Technology Produced Predominantly by a Highly Specialized Weapons Industry, Characterized by Specific and Narrow Product Lines with a Large Investment Overhead, is more Likely to Result in Evolutionary Technology........................................................16 c. Hypothesis 3: Periods of Adversity and Intense Strategic Competition will Increase Pressure to Integrate Revolutionary Technology, Whereas Periods of Stability will Promote the Continuation of Evolutionary Integrated, and Potentially Evolutionary and Disintegrated Technology.......................................................17 d. Hypothesis 4: Complexity and Exposure to Others’ Advances Affect Technological Imitability ............................17 e. Scope........................................................................................18 4. Methodology .......................................................................................18 II. CASE STUDY: 1840 TO WWI.................................................................................21 A. 1840–1914: THE GROWING INDUSTRIALIZATION OF WARFARE.....................................................................................................21 1. Armies .................................................................................................22 a. Small Arms Development into the American Civil War........22 b. Small Arm Techno-strategic Disintegration in the American Civil War ................................................................25 c. Small Arms Development on the Continent...........................28 d. Artillery Development and Integration ..................................32 2. Industrial Infrastructure...................................................................36 a. Land Doctrine .........................................................................37 b. Transport and Info-Systems ...................................................38 3. Navies ..................................................................................................40 a. The Rise of Battleships ...........................................................41 b. Naval Doctrine: Mahan and the Jeune École .......................49 vii c. Different Strategy, Different Ships.........................................50 4. Summary.............................................................................................54 III. WWI............................................................................................................................55