Throughout history, territorial and commercial tensions have been cause for battles. Looking further back in history, much of that conflict was armed – such as during the Punic Wars (264 B.C. to 146 B.C.), when the Roman Republic waged war with Carthage because of trade inferiority. Modern history sees a less violent, but no less dangerous, form of conflict.

The following recommendations were designed to provide DHS S&T with clear steps to increase reach, impact, innovation, and resilience. Our hope is that you will also be able to use the basis of our study as a starting point to understand the implications these changes mean to you and how to prepare and plan for the future.

Click on the infographic below to view the interactive version.

Change is hard. We all know this. Leading through change is even harder. Read Simon Sinek, Kotter, or Toffler, and you’ll see that people spend years seeking to understand and prepare for change and lead others through it to a successful outcome. 

Being a bit of a technology geek, I always look forward to Mary Meeker’s annual update on Internet Trends. Since 1995, Ms. Meeker has been maturing a compendium of valuable insights into the growth and expansion of our global information infrastructure. It has become an almanac of sorts for the technology industry, helping to guide investments and develop strategies for competing in the Digital Age.

In his best-selling study of post-Cold War international relations, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Samuel Huntington studies geopolitical conflicts, looking particularly at their causes. His intentional spotlighting of the word ‘clash’ reveals the heart of the story – the points at which individuals and groups come up against belief systems antithetical to their own become forces working against one another for dominance, rather than compromise.

To ensure a successful transformation to a Market Intelligence 3.0 capability, it is important to establish a governance organization to create a business case, develop a roadmap, design associated communication and coaching programs to manage the change across the enterprise, and position a capability that serves as a source of information and insight for leaders across the organization.

A complex and vulnerable infrastructure ecosystem can be constrained by regulatory, financial, and human factors that impede innovation, economic growth, and social prosperity. Adversaries can exploit the vulnerabilities these constraints create, presenting an existential risk to the infrastructure itself, your organization, and even your country.

In September, following the response to Hurricane Harvey, we considered the questions of what and how to protect necessary infrastructure – whether people, pipes, or petabytes. In that context, we noted that “More people and vulnerable infrastructure exposed to more frequent and intense hazards equals even greater risk for us in the future.” We proposed that any infrastructure threat protection program must be Consistent, Insistent, and Persistent.

 On a wall in the Brighton Ski Lodge located outside of Salt Lake City, there is a tiny plaque that simply states "BE." For years, I would go skiing at Brighton and wonder what "BE" meant. It seemed like an odd statement. What was its importance? What was I missing? What am I supposed to "BE"?

Purpose as the reason for action or existence has remained consistent over centuries. It’s where and how people and societies locate their purpose that has evolved over time. As we consider the state of our government and the present and future state of work, we see that the impetus to pursue purpose has not changed, but how and where we find it has.

I have been doing a lot of thinking about risk lately. As I engage with leaders at various commercial and government organizations, I hear them talk about threats and vulnerabilities; about what they need to protect and from whom. What struck me recently, however, is that, despite all this discussion of risk, most organizations still have a Chief Security Officer, a Security Department, or something similar. Are organizations limiting their thinking when they simply refer to security?