The U.S. Army’s Chief Data and Analytics Officer (CDAO), David Markowitz, is zeroing in on mission command data as part of the Army’s broader effort to refine data stewardship practices and establish clear lines of responsibility across the service.
In April, Army Chief Information Officer Leonel Garciga issued the “Army Data Stewardship Roles and Responsibilities” memo to formalize data management duties across the service, ensuring there’s no ambiguity about who is responsible.
But for some areas across the service assigning data stewardship has not been straightforward. For example, mission command data is fragmented and involves multiple stakeholders, which means that “[it] has no clear leader,” Markowitz said.
During an AFCEA-NOVA event on Nov. 15, Markowitz explained that entities involved in mission command data management range from units on the ground that generate and use command and control (C2) data, to program executive offices that are responsible for developing the systems that handle mission command data.
According to Markowitz, getting clarity on mission command data responsibility ensures speed in decision making.
“Speed is what we want to get answers very quickly within that decision cycle and get someone who has the authority to actually make a decision that the rest of the Army will listen to is kind of the key aspect of data stewardship,” Markowitz said.
Under this effort, Markowitz said he is focused on “C2 Next and try to link it better. Who’s doing the design, who’s doing the implementation, who’s going to run it?”
For C2 Next – the Army’s name for its next-generation capabilities – the Army is working on developing an integrated data layer to connect all the systems for functions such as intelligence, fires, and C2, so it can be composed in a single place. However, this is an additional challenge because currently, many of these siloed functions are not connected to each other.
“That’s the challenge,” Markowitz said. “In a mission command setting, like a battle space, it’s about understanding how control is being exercised and how data is being managed in that dynamic environment.”
