By the Seat of Their Pants: Military Technological Adaptation in War DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Nina A. Kollars Graduate Program in Political Science B.A., M.A. The Ohio State University 2012 Dissertation Committee: Professor Randall Schweller, Chair Professor S. M. Amadae, Advisor Professor Theodore Hopf, Advisor Copyrighted by Nina A. Kollars 2012 Abstract Fighting the war we are in is about bridging the gap between theory and practice. It is about adaptation. Adaptation is a particular kind of innovation, though we tend not to think of it that way. The literature on military innovation is focused nearly entirely on top-down processes. It posits a uni-directional model of innovation that begins above and terminates below. While this represents one potential pattern of innovation it is a decidedly lop-sided one. Innovation has two dimensions a vertical and a horizontal one. In a period of war the major route of innovation is the horizon—the battlefield. The primary innovator is the user of technology and tactics—the boots on the ground. This project traces the path of field level technological adaptations through two theaters of war and onto the modern battlefield. It demonstrates that major military innovation is possible from the field level upward but also that adaptation processes are an innovations all on their own that do not necessarily need support from above. The project suggests that there are three primary causal dimensions in field-level adaptation (horizontal and vertical linkages and machine design). These dimensions interact to produce outcomes that affect the creation and diffusion of new technologies. The causal dimensions were derived from a process of moving back and forth between data and theory—between insights generated by a random selection of soldiers and theories of user-innovation and open source/open design. This project explores these dimensions and their interactions through several cases studies that exhibit variation in terms of horizontal and vertical linkages. The final empirical chapter takes machine design as its central point of investigation and argues that the U.S. military is formally adopting user- centered technologies as a potential third path of technological development. ii Acknowledgments “A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way.” And I have carried this one for a while now. Throughout the writing of this project— each iteration of tortured thought and mangled writing—I had the support of a brilliant committee; a clan of stalwart colleagues; and a dedicated historian. I owe a debt of gratitude to Dr.’s Randall Schweller, S.M. Amadae, and Ted Hopf. They nurtured this project every step of the way. They allowed me to lead it, and find my own words—true masters of mentorship. My colleagues, Caleb Gallemore, Jason Keiber, Fernando Nunez, and Dave Traven provided countless hours of reading, and support of my ideas. I laughed through the pain of this process with them. Army Transportation historian Richard Killblane provided me with far more resource and guidance than I can ever repay at no reward to himself—a humble and dedicated man. And finally, my editor, to whom this project is ultimately dedicated to—words can never convey the journey we travelled to get here. These were the people who stood not behind, or over me, but next to me. I extend a sincere thanks to every single one of the brilliant men and women in uniform who took time to talk to me and share their stories. Without them, there would have been no way to document any of this. I have been and will always be deeply humbled by everyone’s confidence in me—most importantly in those times when I had none left in myself. Whatever becomes of this work, no one can ever say that I let my schooling get in the way of my education. iii Vita 1992 ................................................................William Kelley High School 1996 ................................................................B.A. St. Benedict/St. John’s University 2003 ................................................................M.A. International Relations, George Washington University 2006 to present ..............................................GTA Department of Political Science, The Ohio State University Publications “Pass Em’ Right: Innovation, Adaptation, and the Threat of WMD Terrorism from the American Radical Right” Perspectives on Terrorism, Summer 2011. “Teaching Through Simulation Design: The Organic and the Synthetic” Journal of Political Science Education, Spring 2011 “2011 Teaching and Learning Conference Track Summary” Political Science Quarterly “China and Tobacco: A Source List.” World Bank 2004 “Transnational Activities of Chinese Crime Organizations.” Trends in Organized Crime 2003. “A Global Overview of Narcotics Funded Terrorist and Other Extremist Groups.” Library of Congress FRD 2002 “Nations Hospitable to Organized Crime and Terrorism: South East Asia.” Library of Congress, FRD. 2003 “Abu Sayyaf. Threats to National Security.” Library of Congress, FRD. 2002 Fields of Study Major Field: Political Science iv Table of Contents Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................ii Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... iii Vita................................................................................................................................................. iv List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ viii List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. ix CHAPTER 1: Why Military Technological Innovation and From Where? ........................................ 1 What We Tend to Mean by Military Innovation ........................................................................ 6 What Innovation Isn’t .............................................................................................................. 15 A Focus on Field Adaptation: Restoring Balance in the Field ................................................... 20 Scope and Methodology .......................................................................................................... 25 Potential Implications of the Study .......................................................................................... 33 Chapter Layout ........................................................................................................................ 35 CHAPTER 2: Parsing Innovation—Grand Design, Adaptation, and Improvisation ........................ 38 Innovation’s Sub-concepts ....................................................................................................... 38 A Stretched Concept ................................................................................................................ 40 Grand Design: Visionary Paradigm Shifts ................................................................................. 47 Adaptation: Repurposing the Received ................................................................................... 51 Improvisation: The Art of MacGyvering ................................................................................... 55 The Three Processes and Major Change/Innovation ............................................................... 58 v Implications and Conclusion .................................................................................................... 60 CHAPTER 3: Taking Design Seriously—Technological Adaptation as an Open Logic .................... 62 Two Logics of Innovation ......................................................................................................... 62 Standard Economic Model ....................................................................................................... 63 Open Logics: A Direct Mechanism ........................................................................................... 66 Machine Design and the User: The First Causal Dimension ..................................................... 74 Two Types of Linkages: The Horizontal and the Vertical ...................................................... 80 The Horizontal Linkages ........................................................................................................... 80 Vertical Linkages ...................................................................................................................... 82 Interactions Among the Causal Dimensions ............................................................................ 83 Summary.................................................................................................................................. 87 Chapter 4: From Failure to Adaptation—Vietnam Gun Trucks .................................................... 89 What is Transportation? .......................................................................................................... 90 Vietnam and the 8th Transportation Group ............................................................................. 92 Field Level Technological Adaptation .....................................................................................