Decision Making Model

Running head: DECISION- MAKING MODEL

Decision-Making Model

Amber J. Jones

University of Phoenix

Decision-Making Model

Introduction

The Department of Defense is responsible for maintaining situational awareness on the battlefield, as well as homeland security and defense strategies for the United States. As a defense contractor, I have been exposed to the decision-making model in many ways. One example is the research, development and procurement of tactical systems for the Marine Corps. This paper will discuss how the decision-making model pertains to some of the processes we do in the Department of Defense.

Identifying the problem

Commanders in the military have voiced their concerns regarding the timeliness and effectiveness of situational awareness. Historically, situational awareness was maintained by individual units communicating to higher headquarters via radio transmissions. Once the transmission was received, the unit's position was plotted onto a paper map maintained in a command center. This approach to situational awareness does not provide the ability to easily share or disseminate unit locations. In times of war, knowing friendly force locations is imperative for ensuring the safety of our service members. One location incorrectly plotted, or one coordinate incorrectly communicated to headquarters could result in casualties. Another problem with this approach is that commanders cannot effectively assist units who are heavily engaged by the enemy. The ability for a unit to request assistance via fighter jets, artillery or friendly reinforcements is essential for successful missions.

Generate Alternative Solutions

With the evolution of telecommunications and computer technology, the Armed Forces in the United States can capitalize on the ability to effectively implement a digital battlefield. The National Geospacial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) provides support to the military community by "Using mapping, charting, and imagery analysis and intelligence [...]" (2006, ¶ 2). NGA's products, coupled with computer technology, will enable the commander to display and disseminate information efficiently as it pertains to the battlefield.

The first step in creating a core system was developing the application which could use the products from NGA, forming the digital battlefield. A team was developed at Marine Corps Systems Command, located in Quantico, Virginia. The team was comprised of military members and computer programmers who formed a list of requirements, priorities and specifications needed for the development of the software.

The team then determined the requirements for the computer platforms needed at the using unit levels within the Marine Corps. During this process, the team approached several vendors, to include Dell, IBM, Sun Microsystems, Panasonic, and Hewlett Packard. Vendors were asked to provide a system (minimum memory and processor speeds were specified) that could potentially withstand particular environmental conditions. For example, during the testing phase, the computers were placed in a controlled environment where the temperature was raised to 120oF. In addition, the computers were placed onto a special table which vibrated, and shook, simulating tactical transportation encountered by the operating forces. Sand, water and other elements were also introduced as the computers performed database queries during timed testing.

Evaluating Alternatives

Once the software was developed, and the computer platforms were tested, we needed to evaluate our alternatives. Topics considered included cost per computer, capabilities in relation to the cost (more bang for the buck), required support, replacements, and training.

Making the Choice

Determining which computer would meet the requirements, and which survived the durability and environmental testing, was our next step. Thomas Bateman and Scott Snell discuss how optimizing can provide a balance between multiple goals. In the eBook, Management: the New Competitive Landscape, they mention "Perhaps, in purchasing equipment, you are interested in quality and durability as well as price" (Bateman & Snell, 2004, p. 13). During our decision-making process, optimization played a key role. Budgeting only allowed for a specific amount of funding; however, we needed a computer platform that could meet our requirements