In the past few months, I have built and refined an approach to analysis I have dubbed reciprocal net assessment (RNA). It is based on principles inherent in hypergame analysis and is designed to encourage analysts and decision makers to avoid decision breakdowns and create and exploit decision opportunities. Although I am still refining the approach, I now believe it is ready for testing. I am currently offering pro bono analysis of two cases: one military- or security-related and the other business-related. If you might be interested in submitting a case for consideration, read on.
The need for RNA is rooted in the following conditions:
- Competition and conflict involve a continuous, dynamic interaction, sometimes described as the reciprocal nature of conflict.
- Within this domain, a participant will seek to achieve a differential advantage over his or her opponents.
- Rarely do all participants in a conflict or competition perceive precisely the same situation.
- All perceptions are open to manipulation.
Given these conditions, a participant may pursue an almost unlimited number of strategies. Many of these strategies will be highly contextual, but patterns do exist. Successful participants, for example, will be likely to
- understand and respect the potentially complex interplay of opposing strategies and perceptions;
- manipulate the opponent’s perceptions and biases;
- exploit seams and opportunities;
- exploit the elasticity of risk; and
- resist their opponent’s efforts to do the same in reverse.
Presuming a static opponent is the main decision making flaw that drives the need for red teaming, yet the red team itself may also presume it faces a static opponent. To complete the loop, the analyst or decision maker should “red team” the red team or, in other words, account for the actual and perceptual interplay between the attacker and defender (roles which may themselves may be dynamic). Traditional forms of red teaming, I believe, do not address this issue adequately. A more complete form of analysis would emphasize (1) what each participant could or might do to the other and (2) how awareness of this interplay offers advantages to the participant who possesses this awareness. I view RNA as one possible form of this more complete analysis.
RNA is based on five basic concepts, each of which is either stated or implied within the game theoretic structure of hypergame analysis:
- Any player may perceive or misperceive the other players’ options, preferences, and intent.
- What each player perceives or misperceives influences each player’s intent.
- Perceptions are based on information and awareness.
- Perceptions can be manipulated.
- A player who perceives an opponent’s misperception secures an advantage.
These five concepts are captured in two complementary diagrams. The first diagram—the wheel (figure 1)—portrays the reciprocal nature of decision opportunities. The second diagram—the ladder—portrays the advantage a player gains by perceiving another player’s misperception. If applied properly, the RNA diagrams should encourage red teamers, analysts, and decision makers to consider the perceptual aspects of conflict much more explicitly and systematically than they might otherwise. By varying the aspects of perception and misperception using these diagrams, it is possible to generate critical scenarios that intuition may overlook. These scenarios may in turn help decision makers avoid decision pitfalls and recognize decision opportunities.
Figure 1: “The wheel”–one of the two main RNA diagrams.
If this approach sounds like it might be of use to you, consider submitting a case. Again, of the cases submitted, I will choose two to analyze: one from the military or security domain and another from the business domain. A good case will embody a strong potential for misperception, deception, and surprise. Cases must be unclassified, and you must be willing to allow me to publish the results of the analysis here or elsewhere. I am, of course, willing to genericize the case as necessary for publication. To submit a case for consideration, draft a one-page description and send it directly to me at editor at redteamjournal dot com. The deadline for submissions is 1 August 2009.
