I.1. Objectives of the book

Launched in March 2018 by the French Ministry of Defence, the creation of the Agence de l’innovation de défense (Defence Innovation Agency) highlights the importance of innovation and research into the development of defence industrial and technological capabilities. The Direction Générale de l’Armement, DGA (French Procurement Agency) has launched several programs to support the Ministry of Defence’s innovation policy by mobilizing large corporations, research laboratories, start-ups, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and small and medium industries (SMIs). The objective is to promote industrial and technological skills in the fields of complex data processing (e.g. data fusion, analysis and dissemination, task automation), human–system collaboration (e.g. cooperation in teams composed of human and artificial agents) and virtual or augmented reality, at the service of military capability development (e.g. planning, command and control of operations, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, logistics, education and training).

Besides this French example, innovation defines a global strategy of capacity adaptation and change management for defence stakeholders whose primary purpose is to enable the armed forces to have effective organizations, equipment and materials at their disposal with regard to military affairs. While the military model of innovation management remains deeply rooted in the experimental approach due to its collaboration between academic, industrial and military operators, the defence community is currently facing several challenges. Located at the forefront of several major transformations affecting its business models and skills, artificial intelligence (AI) perfectly embodies these challenges. Hence, it is a central topic for analysts and practitioners, and leads to policy and strategy discussions all over the world, particularly in Europe, the United States and China [KAN 18]. While it is not the only knowledge domain that can transform military organizations and capabilities in the long term¹, AI raises a number of fundamental issues that question the participation of defence stakeholders in the innovation process and their ability to benefit from it in operational, political and economic terms.

Advances in the disciplines of computer science and artificial sciences (e.g. robotics, virtual or augmented realities, big data analysis) are changing the knowledge structures from which military technological trajectories develop in a sustainable way. Because it develops outside the traditional defence industrial and technological base framework (DITB), AI perfectly illustrates the disruptive potential of a knowledge application field developed on the periphery of this “ecosystem” and widely affecting its various layers (e.g. system integrators, suppliers and subcontractors, research laboratories, training organizations, government agencies, civil and military operators). Embodying a dual technological and organizational disruption for defence actors, AI profoundly redefines the way in which the processes of knowledge generation, application and exploitation are organized [BAR 16]. It also justifies taking a fresh look at the uses and methods of developing users’ skills [BAR 18]. Finally, it leads to the rethinking of military operations in the light of the changes brought about by the interaction between two forms of intelligence, human and artificial, which is carefully incorporated into the capabilities, practices and artifacts used to plan, command and control operations (e.g. intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, communication, decision support [BAR 17a]).

The objective of this book is to address the hot topic of renewing the cognitive and organizational foundations of innovation within the defence sector. It aims to discuss the implications for its stakeholders, in particular the companies responsible for creating innovations and those in charge of implementing them. Two complementary dimensions of the transformation induced by innovation for defence are highlighted: industrial and intraorganizational. On an industrial scale, there is indeed an impact on the ecology of knowledge underlying the industrial and technological military ecosystem. Knowledge bases are changing and new methods are emerging, the boundaries of science and technology are shifting, opening up opportunities for value creation on the periphery of the traditional DITB ecosystem. How are organizations adapting to these changes? How does this change their core competencies and knowledge bases? At the intraorganizational level, it is the stakeholders’ habits that change and, in turn, their skills and the processes by which they are acquired and transferred. In this context, the sources of innovation value and its legitimacy are being transformed, requiring in return sometimes radical adaptations to the role models, organizational structures and strategies of established stakeholders (companies, military, researchers, government agencies [BAR 17b]).

We have also chosen to highlight the effects of AI on stakeholder skills (organizations and individuals) insofar as it refers to a cross-disciplinary field of knowledge that is recognized as penetrating most technological innovations that may affect current and future military capabilities [GON 18]. More specifically, AI modifies two fundamental capabilities: the implementation of weapon systems and the command and control (C²) of operations. The concepts of autonomy and collective intelligence applied to weapon systems and C² systems, respectively, embody two major innovations for defence organizations that build on the progress made in the field of AI.

While they are at the heart of strategic thinking within the defence community, these concepts remain poorly defined and their implications poorly perceived. Can a remotely piloted aircraft system (RPAS) be described as autonomous? What is the meaning of an “intelligent” C2 system? What are the forces driving the development of innovative ecosystems, such as remotely piloted aircraft systems? More broadly, what types of knowledge support innovations are found within the defence sector? What implications do digitization and AI have for operators’ skills and even for their professional identities? These questions are not clear-cut and this observation justifies further assessment of the meaning given to innovations driven by advances in the field of AI, in particular so-called “autonomous” systems and “intelligent” digital decision-making artifacts. These two socio-technical objects remain largely “unthought of” and several chapters of this book are devoted to them.

This book is organized into two parts and nine chapters.

The first part is dedicated to the transformation of the innovation organization model in the defence sector, through the study of knowledge bases distributed within this ecosystem (inter-organizational scale). It is composed of five chapters.

In Chapter 1, Jean Belin and Marianne Guille analyze the dynamics that have affected research and development (R&D) and innovation in the defence sector since the 1980s in order to understand the changes in the behavior of the various stakeholders (public or private companies, universities and government agencies). The French innovation system has undergone profound changes to which the various stakeholders have had to adapt, particularly in the defence sector.

In Chapter 2, Cécile Fauconnet explores the evolution of the innovation model in the aerospace and defence (A&D) sector between 1945 and 2015. In this chapter, the author examines the evolution of the innovation model of the A&D sector and argues that it is marked by the intensive use of scientific knowledge.

In Chapter 3, François-Xavier Meunier develops the research field introduced in Chapter 1 and proposes a method for empirically identifying the knowledge systems that structure the “technological landscape” within defence industries. The author thus identifies technological knowledge systems (TKS) from which he highlights the knowledge bricks (component knowledge) as well as the knowledge architectures (architectural knowledge) which, for each system, structure the dynamics of innovation in the defence sector.

In Chapter 4, Cécile Fauconnet, Didier Lebert, Célia Zyla and Sylvain Moura study the organization of R&D in A&D companies as well as their innovations through a “patent” approach. The authors propose a typology of these companies according to their ability to generate technological synergies in their innovation activity and according to the trade-offs they make between exploration innovations and exploitation innovations.

In Chapter 5, Pierre Barbaroux shows, through the case of remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS), how the development of innovations in the defence sectors is conditioned by their legitimacy, which depends on the coherence of political and technological choices made by public and private organizations (communication, innovation, regulation).

The second part of this book explores the transformation of skills and uses induced by innovations, with an emphasis on those related to the application of advances in digitization, AI and autonomous systems. It is composed of four chapters.

In Chapter 6, Vincent Ferrari questions the notion of artificial intelligence through the study of the concept of collaboration between a human agent and an artificial decision support system. Starting from a critique of the paradigm of “specialized” expert systems (i.e. a paradigm based on the application of learning algorithms to big data), the author shows that human decisions are characterized above all by the implementation of procedures that involve the application of a general principle, a rule of common sense or approximations that very often prove to be judicious: heuristics. In doing so, the author questions the foundations of “intelligent” collaboration between human and artificial agents, a collaboration that underlies disruptive innovations in the fields of command and control of military operations in a digital environment.

In Chapter 7, Nicolas Hué, Walter Arnaud and Christophe Grandemange analyze how technological innovation (e.g. AI, big data, augmented virtual reality, 3D printing, remote maintenance) is changing the practices of defence stakeholders responsible for maintaining equipment and materials in operational condition (MCO) as part of weapons programs.

In Chapter 8, Cyril Camachon and Pierre Barbaroux discuss the implications of digital innovations for military operators through the study of the changes brought about by the introduction of new generation aircraft in the training of French Air Force pilots. These new aircrafts (Cirrus SR20 and Pilatus PC-21), equipped with innovative capabilities (glass cockpits and on-board simulation), represent a technological breakthrough that could affect the nature and diversity of pilots’ skills, as well as the training process governing their acquisition.

In Chapter 9, Bertrand Kirsch and Olivier Montagnier study the technological innovation represented by the high-altitude solar drone with almost unlimited endurance through the persistent technological obstacles that today limit its development and its civil and military applications. The low propulsive power extracted from the solar source imposes a very particular system architecture, with, in particular, a very long and flexible wing, particularly vulnerable to destructive interactions. The authors then show how a transdisciplinary approach, established in experimental research, offers innovative solutions to overcome the technological obstacles that hinder the development of a dual innovation.

The book’s Conclusion recalls the innovation challenges faced by the defence sector. If, today, the potential productivity gains brought by AI and its applications have prompted significant investments by defence stakeholders to adapt military capabilities through the integration of new technological bricks into existing networks and platforms, the latter will eventually be replaced by combat networks, composed of intelligent, collaborative and autonomous vectors, effectors and sensors that connect human and artificial agents. In the absence of a deliberate strategy to anticipate the effects of future changes and develop capacities for innovation and immersion, the conclusion states that traditional defence stakeholders may be affected by change rather than leading it.