Crowd Assessment of the Military Utility of Future Technologies

Marcus Dansarie; Kent Erik Andersson; Stefan Silfverskiöld

doi:10.31374/sjms.339

Crowd Assessment of the Military Utility of Future Technologies

Scandinavian Journal of Military Studies

Volume 8 (2025): Issue 1

By: Marcus Dansarie , Kent Erik Andersson and Stefan Silfverskiöld

Open Access

|May 2025

Abstract

Effective development of military capability in peacetime requires the ability to predict the implications of future technologies. To this end, technology forecasting is greatly important. This study adopts a design science approach to explore whether crowdsourcing and the anonymous, asynchronous involvement of experts through a web-based application could enhance the validity of an already-established method for military utility assessment of future technologies (MUAFT). A dedicated application was developed, designed to facilitate the development of assessments by engaging online participants. The modified method, consisting of the application and updated procedures, is demonstrated to effectively support asynchronous assessments while preserving the anonymity of participants. The modifications are thus likely to leverage the possibilities of crowdsourcing and to increase the overall validity of the method. While the demonstrated method shows promise, several areas for improvement have been identified, particularly regarding the application’s usability. To comprehensively evaluate the method’s validity and reliability, real-world assessments of future technologies involving large and diverse groups of experts and students are recommended.

References

Andersson, K., Bang, M., Marcus, C., Persson, B., Sturesson, P., Jensen, E., & Hult, G. (2015). Military utility: A proposed concept to support decision-making. Technology in Society, 43, 23–32. 10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.07.001
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Andersson, K., Lundmark, M., & Silfverskiöld, S. (2019). The Military Utility Assessment Method for Future Technologies.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bower, J. L., & Christensen, C. M. (1995). Disruptive technologies: Catching the wave. Harvard Business Review, 73(1), 43–53.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Brabham, D. C. (2008). Crowdsourcing as a model for problem solving. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 14(1), 75–90. 10.1177/1354856507084420
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Briscoe, E. J., Appling, S., & Schlosser, J. (2015). Passive crowd sourcing for technology prediction. In N. Agarwal, K. Xu & N. Osgood (Eds.), Social computing, behavioral-cultural modeling, and prediction (pp. 264–269). Springer. 10.1007/978-3-319-16268-3_28
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Harvard Business School Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Clark, R. M. (1996). Intelligence analysis: Estimation and prediction. American Literary Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cuhls, K. E. (2024). Argumentative Delphi surveys: Lessons for sociological research. The American Sociologist, 55(2), 120–141. 10.1007/s12108-023-09596-x
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Dalkey, N., & Helmer, O. (1963). An experimental application of the DELPHI method to the use of experts. Management Science, 9(3), 458–467. 10.1287/mnsc.9.3.458
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Finkel, M. (2011). On flexibility: Recovery from technological and doctrinal surprise on the battlefield. Stanford Security Studies. 10.1515/9780804777155
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gabel, O. (2021). Photonic radar. Fraunhofer Institute for Technological Trend Analysis.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ghezzi, A., Gabelloni, D., Martini, A., & Natalicchio, A. (2018). Crowdsourcing: A review and suggestions for future research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(2), 343–363. 10.1111/ijmr.12135
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gregor, S. (2006). The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611. 10.2307/25148742
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Handel, M. I. (1987). Technological surprise in war. Intelligence and National Security, 2(1), 1–53. 10.1080/02684528708431875
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hevner, A. R. (2007). A three cycle view of design science research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 87–92. https://aisel.aisnet.org/sjis/vol19/iss2/4
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75. 10.2307/25148625
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Holmström, J., Ketokivi, M., & Hameri, A. (2009). Bridging practice and theory: A design science approach. Decision Sciences, 40(1), 65–87. 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00221.x
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Horowitz, M., Stewart, B. M., Tingley, D., Bishop, M., Resnick Samotin, L., Roberts, M., Chang, W., Mellers, B., & Tetlock, P. (2019). What makes foreign policy teams tick: Explaining variation in group performance at geopolitical forecasting. The Journal of Politics, 81(4), 1388–1404. 10.1086/704437
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Horowitz, M. C., & Pindyck, S. (2023). What is a military innovation and why it matters. Journal of Strategic Studies, 46(1), 85–114. 10.1080/01402390.2022.2038572
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hult, G., Almbladh, T., Dansarie, M., Granholm, J., Lagg, E., Silfverskiöld, S., & Thenander, D. (2022). Technology forecast 2022: Military utility of future technologies. https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:fhs:diva-11254
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hundley, R. (1999). Past revolutions, future transformations: What can the history of revolutions in military affairs tell us about transforming the U.S. military? RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1029.html
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jacobsen, M. (2023). Ukraine’s drone strikes are a window into the future of warfare. New Atlanticist. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/ukraines-drone-strikes-are-a-window-into-the-future-of-warfare/
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jaiswal, N. K. (1997). Military operations research: Quantitative decision making. Kluwer Academic Publishers. 10.1007/978-1-4615-6275-7
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Johannesson, P., & Perjons, E. (2014). An introduction to design science. Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978-3-319-10632-8
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Katsagounos, I., Thomakos, D. D., Litsiou, K., & Nikolopoulos, K. (2021). Superforecasting reality check: Evidence from a small pool of experts and expedited identification. European Journal of Operational Research, 289(1), 107–117. 10.1016/j.ejor.2020.06.042
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kott, A., & Perconti, P. (2018). Long-term forecasts of military technologies for a 20–30 year horizon: An empirical assessment of accuracy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 137, 272–279. 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.08.001
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kuosa, T. (2014). Foresight, intelligence, and policy-making. Dynamic Futures.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (2011). Delphi: A brief look backward and forward. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(9), 1712–1719. 10.1016/j.techfore.2010.09.011
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Majchrzak, A., & Malhotra, A. (2013). Towards an information systems perspective and research agenda on crowdsourcing for innovation. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 22(4), 257–268. 10.1016/j.jsis.2013.07.004
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Martin, B. R. (2010). The origins of the concept of “foresight” in science and technology: An insider’s perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(9), 1438–1447. 10.1016/j.techfore.2010.06.009
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mellers, B., Stone, E., Atanasov, P., Rohrbaugh, N., Metz, S. E., Ungar, L., Bishop, M. M., Horowitz, M., Merkle, E., & Tetlock, P. (2015). The psychology of intelligence analysis: Drivers of prediction accuracy in world politics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 21(1), 1–14. 10.1037/xap0000040
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mellers, B., Ungar, L., Baron, J., Ramos, J., Gurcay, B., Fincher, K., Scott, S. E., Moore, D., Atanasov, P., Swift, S. A., Murray, T., Stone, E., & Tetlock, P. E. (2014). Psychological strategies for winning a geopolitical forecasting tournament. Psychological Science, 25(5), 1106–1115. 10.1177/0956797614524255
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Modig, O., & Andersson, K. (2022). Military innovation as the result of mental models of technology. Scandinavian Journal of Military Studies, 5(1), 45–62. 10.31374/sjms.117
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
NATO ACT. (2021). NATO CD&E handbook. https://www.act.nato.int/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/NATO-ACT-CDE-Handbook_A_Concept_Developers_Toolbox.pdf
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Prelec, D., Seung, H. S., & McCoy, J. (2017). A solution to the single-question crowd wisdom problem. Nature, 541(7638), 532–535. 10.1038/nature21054
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Quinn, J. B. (1967). Technological forecasting. Harvard Business Review, 45(2), 89–106.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. 10.1007/BF01405730
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Silfverskiöld, S., Andersson, K., & Lundmark, M. (2021). Does the method for military utility assessment of future technologies provide utility? Technology in Society, 67, 101736. 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101736
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Steininger, D. M., & Gatzemeier, S. (2019). Digitally forecasting new music product success via active crowdsourcing. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 146, 167–180. 10.1016/j.techfore.2019.04.016
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Surowiecki, J. (2005). The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few. Abacus.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Van Creveld, M. (1991). Technology and war. The Free Press.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wang, X., Dao, F., Ji, Y., Qiu, S., Zhu, X., Dong, W., Wang, H., Zhang, W., & Zheng, X. (2024). Crowdsourcing intelligence for improving disaster forecasts. The Innovation, 5(4), 100647. 10.1016/j.xinn.2024.100647
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Weihrich, H. (1982). The TOWS matrix—A tool for situational analysis. Long Range Planning, 15(2), 54–66. 10.1016/0024-6301(82)90120-0
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31374/sjms.339 | Journal eISSN: 2596-3856

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 200 - 219

Submitted on: Sep 24, 2024

Accepted on: Apr 29, 2025

Published on: May 22, 2025

Published by: Scandinavian Military Studies

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

Keywords:

MUAFT,

capability development

© 2025 Marcus Dansarie, Kent Erik Andersson, Stefan Silfverskiöld, published by Scandinavian Military Studies
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 8 (2025): Issue 1