IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v10y2020i3p2158244020963066.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Critical Success Factors for Neutralization of Airborne Threats

Author

Listed:
  • Afshan Naseem
  • Yasir Ahmad

Abstract

Decisions regarding neutralizing airborne threats in the combat environment require comprehensive knowledge of resources at hand and enemy intentions. The complexity of the situation has resulted in the emergence of various models encompassing important factors of threat neutralization. Various characteristics of airborne threats considered important for their assessment have already been identified in previous literature, which include speed, distance, approach angle, maneuverability, and so on. Due to the possible extent of loss to critical assets, literature has emphasized on identifying as many useful characteristics of threats as possible. This study is also a step in this direction to improve the weapon assignment for threat neutralization. Weapon assignment based on a well-calculated threat index is a key to success in military conflicts. The purpose of this article is to identify new factors through the involvement of experts. In this study, a set of factors has been identified through a survey of relevant literature and semi-structured interviews followed by its refinement through a three-round Delphi study. The results suggest that airborne threats are considered different from other threats due to their lethality and consequences. The top-level decision-makers require a comprehensive understanding of the criticality of the situation and the effects of poor decisions. Besides other factors, weapon stock, supply chain information, and analysis of vulnerable assets/points in threat neutralization are critical to accomplish higher efficiency. The shortlisted factors yield a foundation of a comprehensive framework for decision making in a highly dynamic environment of air defense.

Suggested Citation

  • Afshan Naseem & Yasir Ahmad, 2020. "Critical Success Factors for Neutralization of Airborne Threats," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:10:y:2020:i:3:p:2158244020963066
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244020963066
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244020963066
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244020963066?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Albert Chan & Esther Yung & Patrick Lam & C. M. Tam & S. O. Cheung, 2001. "Application of Delphi method in selection of procurement systems for construction projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(7), pages 699-718.
    2. Paulson, Elisabeth C. & Linkov, Igor & Keisler, Jeffrey M., 2016. "A game theoretic model for resource allocation among countermeasures with multiple attributes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 252(2), pages 610-622.
    3. Bell, John E. & Griffis, Stanley E. & Cunningham III, William A. & Eberlan, Jon A., 2011. "Location optimization of strategic alert sites for homeland defense," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 151-158, April.
    4. K Hausken & J Zhuang, 2012. "The timing and deterrence of terrorist attacks due to exogenous dynamics," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 63(6), pages 726-735, June.
    5. Phillips-Wren, G. & Mora, M. & Forgionne, G.A. & Gupta, J.N.D., 2009. "An integrative evaluation framework for intelligent decision support systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 195(3), pages 642-652, June.
    6. Afshan Naseem & Shoab Ahmed Khan & Asad Waqar Malik, 2017. "A real-time man-in-loop threat evaluation and resource assignment in defense," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(6), pages 725-738, June.
    7. Govindan, Kannan & Soleimani, Hamed & Kannan, Devika, 2015. "Reverse logistics and closed-loop supply chain: A comprehensive review to explore the future," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(3), pages 603-626.
    8. von der Gracht, Heiko A., 2012. "Consensus measurement in Delphi studies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(8), pages 1525-1536.
    9. Shan, Xiaojun & Zhuang, Jun, 2013. "Hybrid defensive resource allocations in the face of partially strategic attackers in a sequential defender–attacker game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(1), pages 262-272.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Afshan Naseem & Shoab Ahmed Khan & Asad Waqar Malik, 2017. "A real-time man-in-loop threat evaluation and resource assignment in defense," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(6), pages 725-738, June.
    2. Hunt, Kyle & Zhuang, Jun, 2024. "A review of attacker-defender games: Current state and paths forward," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(2), pages 401-417.
    3. Sushil Gupta & Martin K. Starr & Reza Zanjirani Farahani & Mahsa Mahboob Ghodsi, 2020. "Prevention of Terrorism–An Assessment of Prior POM Work and Future Potentials," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(7), pages 1789-1815, July.
    4. Alyami, Saleh. H. & Rezgui, Yacine & Kwan, Alan, 2013. "Developing sustainable building assessment scheme for Saudi Arabia: Delphi consultation approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 43-54.
    5. Peiqiu Guan & Jun Zhuang, 2016. "Modeling Resources Allocation in Attacker‐Defender Games with “Warm Up” CSF," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 776-791, April.
    6. Qingqing Zhai & Rui Peng & Jun Zhuang, 2020. "Defender–Attacker Games with Asymmetric Player Utilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(2), pages 408-420, February.
    7. Aldossary, Naief A. & Rezgui, Yacine & Kwan, Alan, 2015. "Consensus-based low carbon domestic design framework for sustainable homes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 417-432.
    8. Hunt, Kyle & Agarwal, Puneet & Zhuang, Jun, 2022. "On the adoption of new technology to enhance counterterrorism measures: An attacker–defender game with risk preferences," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 218(PB).
    9. Hausken, Kjell, 2024. "Fifty Years of Operations Research in Defense," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 318(2), pages 355-368.
    10. Zhang, Jing & Wang, Yan & Zhuang, Jun, 2021. "Modeling multi-target defender-attacker games with quantal response attack strategies," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    11. Ye, Zhi-Sheng & Peng, Rui & Wang, Wenbin, 2017. "Defense and attack of performance-sharing common bus systemsAuthor-Name: Zhai, Qingqing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(3), pages 962-975.
    12. Zhang, Xiaoxiong & Ye, Yanqing & Tan, Yuejin, 2020. "How to protect a genuine target against an attacker trying to detect false targets," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 553(C).
    13. Zhang, Xiaoxiong & Ding, Song & Ge, Bingfeng & Xia, Boyuan & Pedrycz, Witold, 2021. "Resource allocation among multiple targets for a defender-attacker game with false targets consideration," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    14. Lv, Haitao & Yin, Chao & Cui, Zongmin & Zhan, Qin & Zhou, Hongbo, 2015. "Risk assessment of security systems based on entropy theory and the Neyman–Pearson criterion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 68-77.
    15. Bokrantz, Jon & Skoogh, Anders & Berlin, Cecilia & Stahre, Johan, 2017. "Maintenance in digitalised manufacturing: Delphi-based scenarios for 2030," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 154-169.
    16. Prianto Budi Saptono & Gustofan Mahmud & Intan Pratiwi & Dwi Purwanto & Ismail Khozen & Muhamad Akbar Aditama & Siti Khodijah & Maria Eurelia Wayan & Rina Yuliastuty Asmara & Ferry Jie, 2023. "Development of Climate-Related Disclosure Indicators for Application in Indonesia: A Delphi Method Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-25, July.
    17. Che khairil Izam Che Ibrahim & Seosamh B. Costello & Suzanne Wilkinson, 2013. "Development of a conceptual team integration performance index for alliance projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(11), pages 1128-1143, November.
    18. Zhiguo Wang & Lufei Huang & Cici Xiao He, 2021. "A multi-objective and multi-period optimization model for urban healthcare waste’s reverse logistics network design," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 785-812, November.
    19. Salehi-Amiri, Amirhossein & Zahedi, Ali & Akbapour, Navid & Hajiaghaei-Keshteli, Mostafa, 2021. "Designing a sustainable closed-loop supply chain network for walnut industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    20. Patricia van Loon & Luk N. Van Wassenhove & Ales Mihelic, 2022. "Designing a circular business strategy: 7 years of evolution at a large washing machine manufacturer," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 1030-1041, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:10:y:2020:i:3:p:2158244020963066. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.