Abstract
Net
Assessment (NA) provides decision makers with a deep insight into national
security management and is a tool for relative analysis of military balances
between competing nations or even potential competitors.2 These assessments range from weapon
comparisons to those at the regional or world level. The end state of any net
assessment is to evolve long-term military strategic efforts to achieve the
desired military edge. The key aspect of the procedure is the environmental
scan which is carried out by a range of tools and techniques. Scenario building
is an essential ingredient of any net assessment which is a methodology to test
the current strategy and check if it would work in the diverse types of futures
expected to arise. The benefits of net assessment are invaluable, and India
needs to take it up for future strategic initiatives.
Introduction
Post-World War II, a significant
weakness in strategic planning was acknowledged, and it emerged
that adequate attention was not being given to long-term evaluation of the
emerging competitions. The entire strategic picture was never put together and,
hence, the need was for real diagnosis and not just threat assessments to
justify military strategies.
Net Assessment (NA), as an instrument
for military strategic analysis, has now become an important strategic tool in
national security management systems and is being undertaken in a number of
countries. In the USA, the Net Assessment group as part of the National
Security Council was formed in 1972 under a Presidential Decree. It was
converted to the Office of Net Assessment (ONA) and transferred to the DoD in
1973. The director ONA is responsible for providing the Secretary of Defence,
and other senior leaders, with independent comparative assessments of the
prospects of the military capabilities of the United States relative to other
actors, as well as the political, economic and regional implications of those
assessments.3 The US Congress made NA of military
competition a required function under the law when it directed the Joint Chiefs
of Staff with responsibility for conducting such assessments.
The term ‘Net Assessment’ is a
combination of two distinct words Net and Assessment, where Net
implies the consideration of all aspects and perspectives significant to the
problem at hand and Assessment means the systematic process of analysis,
appraisal, and review to determine the salient information to develop
knowledge. As per Paul Bracken, a professor of political science and business
at Yale University, the best way to define NA is to understand that it is a
practice and not an art (like military judgment), or a science (like chemistry).
A properly conducted NA will provide the policymaker with adequate information
to allow the building of successful objectives, goals, and strategies for a
nation. But unfortunately, it remains something of a mystery to many.4
In India, the Directorate of Net
Assessment (DNA) was created as part of HQ Integrated Defence Staff in 2002,
based on the recommendations of the Group of Ministers. It was envisaged that
the creation of DNA will facilitate undertaking long and as well as medium
terms assessments, outside the perspective planning directorates of the Service
Headquarters, comprising the totality of national capabilities (political,
military, and economic). However, in comparison with the American ONA, the
directorate was not adequately staffed, and neither did it have the requisite
mix of civilians and combatants. No permanency was accorded to the
organisation, and neither was the intelligence setup integrated. Keeping in
view the geo-strategic template of India, the need to have such an organisation
is obvious and we need to further empower the organisation.
NA differs from threat assessment.
Threat analysis focuses on the strength and weaknesses of the adversary based
on a broad judgment of combat capabilities. NA, on the other hand, centres on a
greater analysis of strengths and weaknesses by considering factors like state
of the economy and its impact on defence spending, national technical base,
state of militarily critical technologies, the character of national
leadership, national myths, and their impact on decision making, etc. The
process deals with issues well beyond current military capabilities.5 NA
can be of various types as under:
n Overall
Security Environment in the form of global, regional, or national NA.
n Military
balances as strategic & operational NA.
n Weapons
and force compassion as an operational NA.
n Lessons
learned and historical evaluation.
n Special
assessments on a case-to-case basis.
Process of NA
The broad methodology
commences with identification and articulation of the national vision, followed
by identification and articulation of the desired region of nation’s security
influence and formulation and implementation of strategies to achieve
aspirations and defeat competition.
Steps of Net
Assessment
The five steps of the
process are explained below:
n Step-1.
This involves generation of the need as felt by the decision maker and is the
commencement of the Net Assessment Project. The issue that is worrying the
decision maker often becomes the subject matter of analysis. An example could
be - To evaluate the war-waging potential of Pakistan in the next 15 to 20
years.
n Step-2.
This involves theme mapping and is a detailed investigation of the subject.
This allows a range of factors to be arranged in a logical sequence and the
establishment of interdependency and causal relationships among them. It
enables spelling out the contours of a research project and provides a
framework for the study. To this end, conduct of seminars/workshops/panel
discussions and interaction with experts is necessary. The essential steps of
theme mapping are to establish ‘Conceptual Necessity’ and frame the ‘Research
Design’ comprising identification of the type of assessment and competing
players, the hypothesis, research questions that need to be answered, and the
research methodology.
n Step-3.
It involves a diagnostic style of comparative analysis using various tools and
techniques to scan the environment. The basic steps involved are to work out
the present balance analysis, extrapolate the trend analysis, define the key
drivers of change, carry out a competitive analysis by comparing concepts and strategies
and, finally, identify asymmetries and competitive edges.
n Step-4.
Scenarios, which are visualisation of future/alternate futures, are then
formulated based on iterative analysis of scenario defining drivers of change.
n Step-5.
Because of the net assessment exercise and through simulation and gaming,
strategic asymmetries are diagnosed between competitors to identify
environmental opportunities to support senior policymakers in the formulation
of effective strategies.
Tools and Techniques
Steps 1 and 2 are theoretic and need no
elaboration. The most crucial step is Step 3 and there are various tools
and techniques available to carry out an environmental scan. Some relevant tools / techniques used in the
Net Assessment process are discussed in the succeeding paragraphs.
BMC Analysis. The main drivers of a nation
state’s security can be grouped under Base-what is accorded to it by
nature, and which may, if at all change very slowly and imperceptibly, e.g.,
geospatial base, geo-material base, geo-demographic base. Next is Means-
man-made competencies which can be utilized to pursue national objectives and
aspirations viz military, economic, and political; and finally, the Capacity
for collective action which could be politico-social and psychological.
SWOT Analysis. This enables the researcher to
identify the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats of competitors.
The steps for carrying out such an analysis are:
n Opportunities
and Threats, which are always external, are brainstormed and then prioritised
by giving out a probability of occurrence/success rating. Those with a high
probability of occurrence and high attractiveness are the major opportunities
and should be the focus of formulation of strategy while those having a low
probability of occurrence and high attractiveness/seriousness should be
monitored for change. On the other hand, all those with a high probability of
occurrence and high seriousness emerge as major threats. Subsequently, the
Strengths and Weaknesses, which are always internal, are evaluated and
prioritised. A summary of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and threats is
finally rank ordered.
n Once
the SWOT review is complete, the future strategy may be readily apparent, or a
series of strategy options or combinations will suggest themselves. The SWOT
analysis identifies possible strategies, which emerge as S-O, S-T, W-O, and
W-T combinations, with the aim being to build on strengths, resolve
weaknesses, exploit opportunities, and avoid threats. One S-O strategy could be
S1-O1 articulated as, ‘Utilise Strength 1 to Exploit Opportunity 1’ and
so on.
n All
plausible S-O, S-T, W-O, and W-T options thus developed must be tested
for their Environment-Value-Resources congruence. Those found to be
congruent may only be considered for final articulation and the making of
strategy choices. It must be kept in mind that Environment imposes
constraints on the implementation of strategy, Values may not allow a
particular strategy option, and Resources required to implement the
strategy option may not be available.
Trend Exploitation. This tool uses historical data to
gain insight into future developments, i.e., extrapolate to infer the future
from the past. Net Assessment looks at long-term trends and ascertains asymmetries
and competitive edges between nations, intending to provide decision-makers a
sense of future direction in terms of capability development and contours of
future competition.
Delphi Technique. Based on the belief that group
judgments are more valid than individual judgments, this is a process to survey
and collect the opinions of experts on a particular subject. The technique
takes place by the controlled elicitation of group opinion by iterative use of
questionnaires with selective feedback of earlier responses as an informational
input for later reference by group members. It involves a researcher pooling
expert opinion about factual questions, particularly in the context of
forecasting the future, and is a highly effective tool for decision making.6
De Bono’s Six Hats. The Six Thinking Hats approach
was created by Edward de Bono, a Maltese physician, psychologist, and
philosopher. The Six Thinking Hats technique gets one to look at a problem in
six separate ways. These six perspectives are7,8
n Blue
Hat: ‘The Conductor’s Hat’. When you or your team are in blue hat mode,
you focus on controlling your thinking and managing the decision-making
process. There is an agenda, summaries, and conclusions are reached.
n Green
Hat: ‘The Creative Hat’. The green hat represents
creative thinking. While donning this hat, one explores a range of ideas and
possible ways forward.
n Red
Hat: ‘The Hat for the Heart’. This hat represents
feelings and instincts. With this hat, one can express feelings without having to
justify them logically. It looks at problems using gut intuition, reaction, and
emotion.
n Yellow
Hat: ‘The Optimist’s Hat’. With yellow hat thinking, you
look at issues in the most optimistic light possible. You accentuate the
benefits and the added value that could come from your ideas.
n Black
Hat: ‘The Judge’s Hat’. This hat plays the Devil’s Advocate and is
about being cautious and assessing risks. One employs critical judgment and
brings exactly the reasons for the concerns.
n White
Hat: ‘The Factual Hat’. The white hat represents data
& information gathering and an analytical view. It reflects being neutral
and objective and is concerned with data and taking an analytical view. The aim
is to look at data and extrapolate a past trend from historical data.
Cross-Impact
Analysis. Cross-impact
analysis is widely employed to inform management and policy decisions based on
the formulation of scenarios, defined as combinations of outcomes of relevant
uncertainty factors.9 It is the general name given to a family of
techniques designed to evaluate changes in the probability of the occurrence of
a given set of events consequent on the actual occurrence of one of them.10 It can help the analyst and forecaster explore
how certain factors are likely to interact with each other.11
All the techniques discussed above need
not be utilised together. Some or a combination could be attempted depending on
the nature of problem at hand.
Scenario Building
Moving to Step 5,
a scenario is defined as a context-dependent description of a probable future
(fictitious) situation extrapolated from the present (start state), a
hypothetical chain of events (the scenario dynamics) leading to a final
situation (end state). A scenario must be plausible, internally consistent, based
on rigorous analysis engaging, and compelling. Scenarios are stories (or
narratives) set in the future, which describe how the world might look in, say,
2025 or 2050. They explore how the world would change if certain trends
were to strengthen or diminish, or if various events were to occur. Normally a
set of scenarios are developed (between two and five) representing different
possible futures, associated with different trends and events. These scenarios
are then used to review or test a range of plans and policy options or be used
to stimulate the development of new policies, or as the basis for a strategic
vision. They are also a useful means of identifying ‘early warning’
indicators that signal a shift towards a certain kind of future.12,13,14,15
Stages. The eight stages to developing
scenarios are:
n Stage
1-Initiating a Scenario. This is the first initiating step that
defines the purpose of the scenario-building exercise or the focal
question. This could be a result of brainstorming. It also lays down the time
dimension for the exercise including a period for the development of scenarios
and time steps for the development of scenario dynamics (viz, annual time
steps, five-yearly time steps, etc). Certain purposes could be16:
o What will the future of Country X /
Region Y look like in 10 years? (country / region analysis focus).
o What risks do we face in Country Y over
the next 5 years? What contingency plans should we put in place? (Risk
management focus).
n Stage
2-Identification of Key Decision Factors. In the next stage, the key
decision factors (KDFs) are identified which are critical to the decision.
This could also be a result of brainstorming and will help the team to focus on
what is important for planning If Stage 1 has identified Management of National
Security up to the year 2030, as the purpose, the KDFs could then be seeking
military competitive advantage, economic security and status, self-sufficiency
in energy and adequacy of mineral and raw materials for growth, internal
socio-economic stability, technology edge to drive key national endeavours,
etc.
n Stage
3-Driving Forces. Once the
key factors have been listed, the third step involves listing driving forces
in the macro-environment that will shape the future of these factors. They
could be social, technological, economic, environmental, and political.
n Stage
4-Rank Ordering. Next comes the ranking of key factors and
driving forces based on two criteria: first, the degree of importance
for the success of the focal issue or decision identified in Stage 1, and
second, the degree of uncertainty surrounding those factors and trends.
The point is to identify the two or three factors or trends that are most
important and most uncertain.
n Stage
5-Scenario Logic. The logic or structure of a given scenario
will be characterised by its location in the matrix of forces or divers and
involves defining the following:
o Scenario ‘Parameters or Constants’.
These are ‘High Impact-Low Uncertainty’ factors identified earlier.
o Scenario ‘Variables or Drivers’.
The task team focuses on grouping the ‘High Impact-High uncertainty’
factors – identified as drivers, which revolve around two or more critical axes
of uncertainty. Each of these axes presents mutually exclusive different trends
referred to as scenario logics. Based on each different logic, separate
scenarios need to be developed leading to separate future end states.
o ‘How Many Scenario Logics?’.
Each Scenario Logic will dictate as many plausible scenarios as
possible. The effort should be to identify those combinations of the behaviour
of the drivers which are logical and plausible.
n Stage
6-Scenaro Writing. Having decided on the number of scenarios to be written,
a team of experts is constituted to write each scenario. Before
commencing on writing the scenario, each team must describe the time dimension
(period & time steps), the scenario logic, and the target end state.
n Stage
7-Scenario Analysis. This is where the scenario-building team interprets
the scenarios linking them back to the strategic decision(s) identified in
Stage 1. Each scenario team must present respective scenarios to the nominated
teams and in presence of other teams. A detailed critique must be held, and the
presenting team should be able to convince ‘plausibility’ of each development
which is part of its ‘scenario dynamics.’
If needed, the scenario team is allowed to go back, rework scenario
dynamics, and refine and present the same again.
n Stage
8-Selection of Leading Indicators and Signposts. It is important to know as
soon as possible which of several scenarios is closest to the course of history
as it unfolds. Once the different scenarios have been fleshed out and their
implications for the focal issue determined, then it is worth spending time and
imagination on identifying a few indicators to monitor in an ongoing way.
Each scenario will be analysed for its impact on the organisation and derive ‘Decision
Needs’ to exploit opportunities and avert threats.
Formulation of
Strategy
The decisive step in
the process of Net Assessment is to formulate effective strategies to face the
probable future and not get surprised by it. It also entails taking mid-course
strategy corrections as projected scenarios pan out on the time horizon.
Conclusion
Depth and width of
inquiry and analysis is the basic requirement of the Net Assessment process.
The concept of jointness is thus epitomised by this process and a Net
Assessment practitioner is by necessity a practitioner of jointness as well. It
is impossible to carry out a worthwhile Net Assessment by confining the inquiry
and analysis to just one or a few aspects. Even if the Net Assessment project
is confined to a specific functional aspect like a maritime balance between two
competitors it will still require examination of many other factors that will
impact the specific balance.
Net Assessment is like the stock market.
Everyone on Dalal Street has the same information available to them about stock
prices and company performance. Balance sheets and operating statements of
companies are public information and are readily obtainable. But some players
do better than others. Having data is important. But it is not enough. Time
after time some players use information that is available to all to make a lot
more money than other players. The Net Assessment uses data that is widely
available and creates Strategic Insights that lead to Decisive Advantage.
As per Peter Schwarz, using Scenarios is
like rehearsing the future.17 You run through the simulated events as if you
were already living them. You train yourself to recognise which drama is
unfolding. It helps you avoid unpleasant surprises and know how to act in your
interest.
Endnotes
1 Summary The Art of the Long View – SlideShare https://www.slideshare.
net/ramadd1951/summary-the-art-of-the-long-view
2 https://ids.nic.in/
3 James H. Baker > U.S. Department of Defense
> Biography
4 Net Assessment: A Practical Guide Paul
Bracken, https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=460780
5 Op cit https://ids.nic.in/
6 Research guidelines for the Delphi survey
technique
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/12233148_Research_guidelines_for_
the_Delphi_Survey_Technique/link/5c6c136f299bf1e3a5b3d408/download
7 Six Thinking Hats®, Looking at a Decision in
Different Ways https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTED_07.htm
8 What are the six thinking hats
https://faun.pub/what-are-the-six-thinking-hats-7cbdd2ac48b6
9 Using cross-impact analysis for probabilistic
risk assessment, Ahti Salo,Edoardo Tosoni,Juho Roponen,Derek .W. Bunn, Online
Library, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ffo2.103
10 Crosss Impact Analysis,
http://foresight-platform.eu/community/forlearn/how-to-do-foresight/methods/analysis/cross-impact-analysis/
11 Cross-impact analysis Alan Porter and Huaidong
Xu, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02688867.1990.9726770
12 The Use of Scenarios in Long Term Defence
Planning
https://plausiblefutures.wordpress.com/2007/04/10/the-use-of-scenarios-in-long-term-defence-planning/
13 Scenario Planning and Analysis
https://saylordotorg.github.io/ text_international-business/s12-05-scenario-planning-and-analysis.html
14 On Scenario Planning
https://mycourses.aalto.fi/ pluginfile.php/1172197/mod_folder/content/0/On%20Scenario%20Planning%20.pdf?
forcedownload=1
15 Scenario Planning - Global Interagency
Security Forum https://gisf.ngo/resource/scenario-planning
16 Scenario Planning
https://gisf.ngo/wp-content/uploads /2020/02/0350-Rhyddarch-2009-Foresight-Horizon-Scanning-Centre-Scenario-Planning.pdf
17 Rehearsing The Future – Making Better
Strategic Decisions
https://www.b2binternational.com/publications/strategic-decisions-planning/
@Major General Sanjeev Chowdhry (Retd) is a graduate of
the DSSC Wellington, and College of Defence Management. He commanded a new raising Composite
Artillery Brigade and a Subarea. He served as DDG (Artillery) looking after
modernisation and as Director (Net Assessment). His instructional tenures
include one at Special Frontier Force Academy and at Defence Services Staff
College.
Journal of the United
Service Institution of India, Vol. CLII, No.
629, July-September 2022.