Sessions & Jones
Most of the people quoted here place no price tag on planned changes, acquisitions, etc., which perhaps reflects the sensitive and classified nature of such information. They treat information as a free good in the sense that just saying that "total interoperability" is a justifiable goal makes it so. But this approach is not realistic. What is needed is "enough" information, similar to inventory management models where the costs of ordering inventory are balanced against storage costs and estimated demand and prescribed service levels are the other dimensions. For instance, virtual certainty about information that shapes battle-management decisions will cost a commander more than will 85 percent certainty.
Additionally, the future outlook for interoperability places the process in a "pull" mode wherein a commander seeks the information he needs to make a decision. This contrasts with a "push" mode where a commander is provided with the information someone else thinks he needs. The assumption underlying the pull mode is that commanders know better than anyone else what kind of information they need and when they need it--a classical entrepreneurial or decentralized approach.
A major argument for the pull model is to avoid information overload, being at the bottom of a funnel brimming with information from many sources. This argument also assumes that an individual can avoid information overload at will. But exactly what are ideal information levels? How are they derived? How is the value of information determined?
| Return to Top | Return to Contents | Next Chapter | Previous Chapter |