SOLICITATION NOTICE
B -- BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT FOR RESEARCH IN BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE, PART 1
- Notice Date
- 2/8/2002
- Notice Type
- Solicitation Notice
- Contracting Office
- Defense Contracting Command-Washington(DCC-W), ATTN: Policy and Compliance, 5200 Army Pentagon, Room 1D245, Washington, DC 20310-5200
- ZIP Code
- 20310-5200
- Solicitation Number
- DASW01-02-K
- Response Due
- 5/1/2002
- Archive Date
- 5/31/2002
- Point of Contact
- Carolyn Baltimore, 703-614-6823
- E-Mail Address
-
Email your questions to Defense Contracting Command-Washington(DCC-W)
(baltice@hqda.army.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- NA I. The Research and Advanced Concepts Office (RACO) of the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) solicits new proposals for its fiscal year 2002 contract program of fundamental research in behavioral science. This Broad Agency Announcement is issued per FAR 35.016. The purpose of the research is to add new, fundamental knowledge to behavioral science sub-disciplines and discover generalizable principles. Novel and state-of-the-art approaches to difficult problems are especially welcome, as are integrated programmatic efforts to develop and test theory. A portion of available funding may be made available for meritorious proposals from minority institutions and historically Black colleges and universities, and these entities are encouraged to participate. Investigations that focus on purely physiological mechanisms or psychopathology cannot be considered by this agency; however, neuroscience approaches to memory, cognition, and personality are not excluded. Similarly, no consideration can be given to purely applied research projects (e.g., human factors studies or applied training programs). However, support for basic science does depend on the judgment that its research findings will have the potential to stimulate new, applied behavioral technologies with potential for improving the effectiveness of Army personnel and their units. The decision to fund a new basic research program consists of two stages. In the first stage, each proposal is peer reviewed for responsiveness and technical merit by at least two behavioral scientists. Those proposals that are judge responsive and receive high technical ratings go to the second stage. In that stage, ARI research unit chiefs are asked whether the research generated by a given proposal, if successful, would be transitioned to their applied research programs. Proposals that are highly rated and are identified as useful for one or more ARI applied research programs will be given priority for funding. Proposals that are responsive and receive high technical rating s may also be funded but will generally be given a lower priority. II. Scientific Problems for Basic Research. To meet the transformation objectives of the U.S. Army over the next two decades, the Army must improve its ability to: (1) Select, train, and/or develop leaders and soldiers that are flexible and adaptable in novel missions and operational situations. ( 2) Select, train, and/or develop leaders? and soldiers? to function effectively in digital, information rich, and semi-autonomous environments. (3) Select, train, and/or develop teams that can function effectively when quickly formed and/or operating in di stributed, high stress environments. (4) Accelerate leader development of those skills that usually develop over time only through direct experience. (5) Select, train, and/or develop leader and soldier interpersonal/intercultural skills/attributes that make leaders and soldiers effective in joint-service and multi-national operations. These needed improvements form the broad perspective of ARI?s research objectives. In keeping with this broad perspective, the areas listed below are of special interest to ARI. It is particularly important that proposed basic research describe clearly how it can lead to applied research that would be meaningful to the Army. Some of the specific areas we are interested are: A. Basic Research?Training and Learning. 1. Training in Complex Situations, including factors that enhance transfer of training of the sort of complex tasks performed by Army personnel; the amount of training and feedback required to established sustainable improvements in complex task performanc e; the most effective mixes and sequences of training modes (classroom, live exercises, and simulations) in which complex tasks should be taught; reducing the effects of information overload through training; determining how individuals assign meaning and relevance to la rge amounts of ambiguous data being rapidly received, and determine how to improve this ability through training; improving adaptability through training. 2. Interpersonal and Team Training, including the incorporation of mentoring and team learning obtained from institutional small group instruction into web-based or distance learning instruction; investigating the most effective method of developing interp ersonal skills such as communication, negotiation, mediation, emotional intelligence; determining how necessary assessment and feedback in training interpersonal skills is; best approaches to mentoring/coaching and how can one teach unit commanders such ap proaches. 3. Training and Technology, including assessing and addressing unique training requirements in digital systems, semi-automated systems, and robotic systems; assessing the effectiveness of significant component training technologies such as virtual whiteboa rds, desktop videoconferencing, and multi-user simulation environments in distributed training; determining the best practices for utilizing the internet as (1) a channel to provide just-in-time booster training for commanders, (2) an engaging leader self- development tool, and (3) a feedback mechanism for institutions to maintain relevant leadership doctrine. B. Basic Research?Leadership 1. Methods for accelerating leader development to include assessment and training methods and devices. 2. Methods for assessing and developing/training flexibility and adaptability when faced with novel situations. 3. Self-development, including identifying the types of learning or knowledge that are best handled through self-development; the specific training needs the Army has that are best handled through self-development; the strategies or interventions can the A rmy use to support these and other individual self-development efforts; best approach (es) for self-development (e.g., reflection, web-based training, self-awareness toolkits) including the question of whether it is possible and practical for leaders to se lf-develop the interpersonal skills through distance learning; determining whether self-development has to occur in isolation or also as a social process ? as part of a team. 4. Generational Differences in Leaders. Recent research has explored generational differences along various dimensions, e.g., values, communication, self-directed activities, organizational commitment, technology, and interpersonal relations. More specifi cally, military studies have addressed the issue of junior officer attrition and have identified and discussed the disparity between senior and junior officers in terms of generational differences. We are interested in a more valid understanding of how the se generations differ and how these specific differences impact processes and outcomes important to the Objective Force (e.g., team-building, self-development, leader teams). 5. Leadership Selection, including determining the interpersonal skills that are essential for Objective Force leaders and how one selects for them; the limits of self-management skill and self-directed learning for Objective Force leaders, how they relate to Objective Force skill requirements, how one differentiates them from traditional constructs and what new assessment measures can measure them; the predictors for strong self-awareness and successful self-development, how best to evaluate the impact of self-awareness and self-development efforts for Objective Force leadership. 6. Stratified Systems Theory, including a better understanding of the relationship between the SST view of leadership (a stage theory that assumes a limited, sequential development pattern) and other assumptions about the practical limits to individual gro wth. SST is consistent with an accepted notion of adult learning. However, most research that has addressed adult learning has focused on young college students who are, at best, immature adults. Additional research is needed to expl ore the applicability of these principles to mature adults in their 30s and 40s. 7. C. Basic Research ? Human Resource Practices 1. General Selection, including identifying the aptitude and skill requirements that are specific to the Objective Force soldier; assessing how persistence and dependability develop and contribute to effective performance and job tenure, how they relate to job factors, and how individual differences in such processes can be measured; the extent to which practical intelligence is a function of an aptitude that cuts across domains and how to develop a method for measuring this aptitude; how to anticipate chan ge and develop performance measures for Objective Force soldiers for tasks that are not currently known. 2. Recruitment and Attrition, including the factors that affect enlistment decision making and the factors influencing it including ethnicity; retention decision making and the factors influencing it leading to a longitudinal model of occupational choice. This research should include the changing nature of the Army. Motivation should be included as one of the mediators considered. D. Basic Research? Social Structures The Army does not exist in a vacuum. It is a component of the overall societal system and is affected by changes in that system. We wish to support research leading to a more valid understanding of: 1. Military Environment, including studying how major societal conditions and trends, changing Army missions, and Army culture influence recruitment, personnel retention, morale, cohesion, discipline, and military performance; how to achieve organizational change without severe adverse personnel effects as applied to the process of the Army transformation. This research should result in models that consider the role of personal involvement by members at all organizational levels in successfully implementing change. E. Basic Research? Cognition Cognitive Functioning, including a better understanding of the growth of expertise in performance of complex tasks; the individual processes that characterize more effective team performance; Collective skill development; Barriers to team formation and fac tors that contribute to a sense of trust, explore principles of developing shared mental models including the effects of such models on understanding the commander?s intent and team performance; the effects of a technologically rich, digital environment on a leader?s ability to make decisions, convey intent, adapt quickly, build teams, and resist stress. PART 2 of the Broad Agency Announcement For Research In Behavioral Science will continue under separate FEDBIZOPS Announcement
- Web Link
-
Army Single Face to Industry
(http://acquisition.army.mil)
- Record
- SN00024624-W 20020210/020208213311 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |