Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Introducing Executive-Management Decisions Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2018 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

9. Verifying Efficacy: Navy Force Structure

verfasst von : Victor Tang, Kevin Otto, Warren Seering

Erschienen in: Executive Decision Synthesis

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This chapter is a challenging case study that deals with national security. The strategic decision is about the size and structure of the US Navy for the year 2037. This case itself is a grand gedanken experiment done with experts. This case is demanding because it is very multidimensional. We had to consider geopolitical issues, economics, recent and not so recent history, international law, national cultures, NATO, and so on. The solution space under the uncertainty conditions specified consisted of 1,374,389,534,720 candidate decision alternatives. We constructed robust decisions using our decision-synthesis methodology without constraining the ability to explore any region of the solution space under any uncertainty. No data or information—in physical, electronic or verbal—in this chapter originate from any classified sources. The analyses and inferences do not represent positions of the US Navy.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Verifying Efficacy: Yokozuna Project
Nächstes Kapitel Summary: Executive Decision Synthesis Paradigm
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
2
Morell, J. B. (1992). The Law of the Sea: An Historical Analysis of the 1982 Treaty and Its Rejection by the United States. McFarland.
 
8
“Since …1978, China has … and has lifted more than 800 million people out of poverty.” (http://​www.​worldbank.​org/​en/​country/​china/​overview. Sep 14, 2016).
 
9
Disorder Under Heaven. 2017. The Economist, April 22.
 
16
https://​www.​youtube.​com/​watch?​v=​qnPWUz5hpEg (interestingly this link was closed on January 29 2017.
 
17
The immortal first line from Cicero's speech to the Roman Senate (Beard 2015).
 
Literatur
Duterte’s Pivot. (2016). The Economist. January 2017.
Unveiling China’s major military weaknesses. (2016). 揭秘中国军工真正实力:技术与美军仍有差距. Broadcast on Dec 30. Downloaded January 2, 2016, from Phoenix News. Unusual broadcast from national Chinese television on China’s military, https://​www.​youtube.​com/​watch?​v=​woYu36KERpQ
US DOD. (2017). Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2017 (FY2017) President’s Budget submission, Navy Justification Book, Vol. 1 of 1, Shipbuilding and Conversion, US Navy. February 2016.
US Navy. (2016). Alternative Future Fleet Platform Architecture Study. Navy Project Team, US Department of Defense. October.
Allen, K., & Clemens, M. (2014). The recruitment, education, and training of PLA Navy Personnel (China Maritime Study, Number 12). Naval War College Newport RI. China Maritime Studies Institute.
Beckman, R. (2010, March 11–22). UNCLOS and the Maritime Security of China. In Conference on China and East Asia strategic dynamics. Organized by Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University.
Clark, B., Haynes, P., McGrath, B., Hooper, C., Sloman, J., & Walton, T. A. (2017). Restoring American seapower: A new fleet architecture for the United States Navy. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
Cliff, R., Burles, M., Chase, M. S., Eaton, D., & Pollpeter, K. L. (2007). Entering the dragon’s lair: Chinese antiaccess strategies and their implications for The United States. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Cronin, P. M., Dutton, P. A., Fravel, M. T., Holmes, J. R., Kaplan, R. D., Rogers, W., & Storey, I. (2012). Cooperation from strength: The United States, China and the South China Sea. Washington, DC: Center For A New American Security.CrossRef
Engert, S. (2014). Confessing the Holocaust: The evolution of German guilt. In M. Mihai & M. Thaler (Eds.), On the uses and abuses of political apologies (pp. 96–115). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Erikson, A., & Goldstein, L. (2009, Spring). Gunboats for China’s New “Grand Canals”?. Naval War College Review, 62(2), 43–76.
Fravel, M. T. (2005). Regime insecurity and international cooperation: Explaining China’s compromises in territorial disputes. International Security, 30(2), 46–83.
Fravel, M. T. (2008). Power shifts and escalation: Explaining China’s use of force in territorial disputes. International Security, 32(3), 44–83
Fravel, M. T. (2010a). International relations theory and China’s rise: Assessing China’s potential for territorial expansion. International Studies Review, 12(4), 505–532.
Fravel, M. T. (2010b). Explaining stability in the Senkaku (Diaoyu) Islands dispute. In G. Curtis, R. Kokubun, & W. Jisi (eds) Getting the triangle straight: Managing China–Japan–US relations (p. 159). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
Fravel, M. T. (2011). China’s strategy in the South China Sea. Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs, 33(3), 292–319.
Geertz, C. (2008). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In The cultural geography reader (pp. 41–51). Abingdon: Routledge.
Gompert, D. C., Cevallos, A. S., & Garafola, C. L. (2016). War with China: Thinking through the unthinkable. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.CrossRef
Handel, M. I. (2003). Intelligence and the problem of strategic surprise (Chapter 1). In R. K. Betts and T. G. Mahnken (Eds.), Paradoxes of strategic intelligence: Essays in honor of Michael I. Handel. London: Routledge.
Handel, M. I. (2007). Masters of war. London and New York: Routledge.
Herbert, A. L. (1996). Cooperation in International relations: A comparison of Keohane, Haas and Franck. Berkeley Journal of International Law, 14, 222.
Kristof, N. (1993, November/December). The rise of China. Foreign Affairs, 72(5), 59–74; Ikenberry, J. (2008, January/February). The rise of China and the future of the west: Can the liberal system survive? Foreign Affairs, 87(1):23–37.
Levy, J. S., & Thompson, W. R. (2010, Summer). Balancing on land at sea: Do states Ally against the leading global power? International Security, 35(1), 7–43.CrossRef
Lewellyn, M., Wright, C., Yerger, R., & Bui, D. N. (2016). Future fleet project: What can we afford? Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory.
Mahan, A. T. (2015a). The influence of sea power upon history (Classic Reprints). London: Forgotten Books.
Mahan, A. T. (2015b). London (Classic Reprints). London: Forgotten Books.
McCain, J. (2017). Restoring American power. Recommendations for the DY2018-FY2022 Defense Budget. US Senate Armed Services Committee.
Mearsheimere, J. J. (2010). The gathering storm: China’s challenge to US Power in Asia. The Journal of International Poetics, 3, 381–396.
MITRE. (2016). Navy future fleet platform architecture study. Doc.# MITR 160165. MITRE Corp.
Mitzen, J. (2006, September). Ontological security in World politics: State identity and the security dilemma. European Journal of International Relations, 12(3), 341–370.CrossRef
Murphy, T. (2009). The financial crisis and the tectonic shifts in the US-Japan Relationship. Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, 32(2).
Murray, M. (2010). Identity, insecurity, and great power politics: The tragedy of German Naval ambition before the first world war. Security Studies, 19, 656–688.CrossRef
O’Rourke, R. (2017). Navy Force structure and shipbuilding plans: Background and issues for Congress. Congressional Research Service. RL 32665.
Shenhav, S. R. (2005). Thin and thick narrative analysis: On the question of defining and analyzing political narratives. Narrative Inquiry, 15(1), 75–99.CrossRef
Smith, P. (2013). The Senkaku/Diaoyu Island Controversy: A crisis postponed. Naval War College Review.
Villa-Vicencio, C. (1999). Living in the wake of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission: A retroactive reflection. Law Democracy and Development, 3, 195.
Williams, M. C. (2004, Fall). Why ideas matter in International relations: Hans Morgenthau, classical realism and the moral construction of power politics. International Organization, 58(4), 633–665.CrossRef
AIAG. (2002). Measurement systems analysis (MSA). Reference Manual (3rd ed.). Troy: The Automotive Industries Action Group.
Ariely, D. (2008). Predictably irrational: The hidden forces that shape our decisions. New York: HarperCollins.
Arkes, H. R. (2001). Overconfidence in judgmental forecasting. In J. S. Armstrong (Ed.), Principles of forecasting: A handbook for researchers and practitioners. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
Aron, R. (1986). Clausewitz, philosopher of war. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Ashton, A. H. (1985). Does consensus imply accuracy in accounting studies of decision making? The Accounting Review, 60(2), 173–185.
Banks, A. P., & Millward, L. J. (2000). Running shared mental models as a distributed cognitive process. British Journal of Psychology, 91(4), 513–531.CrossRef
Baron, J. (2000). Thinking and deciding (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Benzin, N. K. (2006). Sociological methods: A sourcebook. New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Transaction.
Beard, M. (2015). SPQR. New York: Liveright Publishing.
Boje, D. M., & Mirninghan, K. (1982). Group confidence pressures in iterative decisions. Management Science, 28(10), 1187–1196.CrossRef
Camerer, C. F. (1981). The validity and utility of expert judgment (Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, Graduate School of Business).
Creveling, C. M., Slutsky, J., & Antis, D. (2002). Design for Six Sigma in technology and product development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Professional.
Dawes, R. M. (1979). The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making. American Psychologist, 34(7), 571–582.CrossRef
Eisenführ, F., Langer, T., Weber, M., Langer, T., & Weber, M. (2010). Rational decision making. New York: Springer.CrossRef
Esser, J. K. (1998). Alive and well after 25 years: A review of groupthink research. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73(2), 116–141.CrossRef
Fischhoff, B. (1999). Debiasing (Chapter 31). In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristic and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fischoff, B., & Johnson, S. (1997). The possibility of distributed decision making (Chapter 10). In A. Shapira (Ed.), Organizational decision making. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gigerenzer, G., & Selten, R. (2001). Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox. MIT Press. Edited by W. Edwards. Kluwer Academic.
Handel, M. I. (2007). Masters of war: Classical strategic thoughts. London: Routledge.
Hanson, R. B. (1998). Consensus by identifying extremists. Theory and Decision, 44, 293–301.CrossRef
Hastie, R. (1986). Experimental evidence on group accuracy. Review essay in information pooling and group decision making. In Proceedings of the Second University of California, Irvine, Conference on Political Economy, JAI Press.
Hastie, R., & Kameda, T. (2005, April). The robust beauty of majority rules in group decisions. Psychology Review, 112(2), 494–508.CrossRef
Hsu, C. C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of conclusions. Assessment and Evalutation, 12(10), 1–8.
Janis, I. L. (1983). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes (2nd ed., p. 349). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Kahneman, D. (2002). Maps of bounded rationality: A perspective on intuitive judgment and choice. Nobel Prize Lecture, 8, 351–401.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2000). Choices, values, and frames. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Keeney, R. L. (1996). Value-focused thinking: Identifying decision opportunities and creating alternatives. European Journal of Operational Research, 92, 537–549.CrossRef
Koriat, A., Lichtenstein, S., & Fishoff, B. (1980). Reasons for confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 107–118.
Kray, L. J., & Galinsky, A. D. (2003). The debiasing effect of counterfactual mind-sets: Increasing the search for disconfirmatory information in group decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 91, 69–81.CrossRef
Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (2003). Bridging individual, interpersonal, and institutional approaches to judgment and decision making: The impact of accountability on cognitive bias (Chapter 13). In S. L. Schneider & J. Shanteau (Eds.), Emerging perspectives on judgment and decision research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mest, D. P., Plummer, D. (2003). Analysts’ rationality and forecast bias: Evidence from sales forecasts. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 21: 103-122.
Mohammed, S., & Dumville, B. C. (2001). Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 89–106.CrossRef
Mohammed, S., Ferzandi, L., & Hamilton, K. (2010). Metaphor no more: A 15-year review of the team mental model construct. Journal of Management, 4(36), 876–910.CrossRef
Montgomery, D. C. (2008). Design and analysis of experiments. New York: Wiley.
Nonaka, I. (1988). Toward middle-up-down management: Accelerating information creation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 29(3), 9.
Northhouse, P. (2010). Leadership. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
O’Reilly, C. A., 3rd, & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review, 82(4), 74–81.
Otto, K., & Wood, K. (2001). Product design: Techniques in reverse engineering and new product development (pp. 500–512). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Phadke, M. S. (1989). Quality engineering using robust design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Phillips, L. D. (2007). Decision conferencing (Chapter 19). In W. Edwards, R. F. Miles, & D. von Winterfeldt (Eds.), Advances in decision analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rowe, G., & Wright, G. (2001). Expert opinions in forecasting: The role of the Delphi technique. In Principles of forecasting (pp. 125–144). Springer.
Rowe, G., Wright, G., & McColl, A. (2005). Judgment change during Delphi-like procedures: The role of majority influence, expertise, and confidence. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 72(4), 377–399.CrossRef
Russo, J. E., & Schoemaker, P. J. (1992, Winter). Managing overconfidence. Sloan Management Review.
Simon, H. A. (2001). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Sniezek, J. A. (1992). Groups under uncertainty: An examination of confidence in group decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52(1), 124–155.CrossRef
Sniezek, J. A., & Henry, R. A. (1989). Accuracy and confidence in group judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43(1), 1–28.CrossRef
Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. New York: Irwin McGraw-Hill.
SunTzu. (2012). The art of war (Trans. J. Trapp). London: Amber Books.
Taguchi, G., Chowdury, S., & Taguchi, S. (2000). Robust engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Thurmond, V. A. (2001). The point of triangulation. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 3(3), 253–258.CrossRef
Tushman, M. L., & Nadler, D. A. (1978). Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 613–624.
Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly III, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8–30.CrossRef
Winquist, J. R., & Larson, J. R., Jr. (1998). Information pooling: When it impacts group decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(2), 371–377.CrossRef
World Bank. (2016b). Employment in services (% of total employment).
Wu, Y., & Wu, A. (2000). Robust design. New York: ASME Press.
Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Yousoff, M. I. (2007). Using experts’ opinions through Delphi technique. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(4), pp.1–8.
Metadaten
Titel
Verifying Efficacy: Navy Force Structure
verfasst von
Victor Tang
Kevin Otto
Warren Seering
Copyright-Jahr
2018
Buch
Executive Decision Synthesis

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-63024-3

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-63026-7

Copyright-Jahr: 2018

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63026-7_9