Publications

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

The Advanced Concepts Group of Sandia National Laboratories hosted a workshop, ''FOILFest: Community Enabled Security'', on July 18-21, 2005, in Albuquerque, NM. This was a far-reaching look into the future of physical protection consisting of a series of structured brainstorming sessions focused on preventing and foiling attacks on public places and soft targets such as airports, shopping malls, hotels, and public events. These facilities are difficult to protect using traditional security devices since they could easily be pushed out of business through the addition of arduous and expensive security measures. The idea behind this Fest was to explore how the public, which is vital to the function of these institutions, can be leveraged as part of a physical protection system. The workshop considered procedures, space design, and approaches for building community through technology. The workshop explored ways to make the ''good guys'' in public places feel safe and be vigilant while making potential perpetrators of harm feel exposed and convinced that they will not succeed. Participants in the Fest included operators of public places, social scientists, technology experts, representatives of government agencies including DHS and the intelligence community, writers and media experts. Many innovative ideas were explored during the fest with most of the time spent on airports, including consideration of the local airport, the Albuquerque Sunport. Some provocative ideas included: (1) sniffers installed in passage areas like revolving door, escalators, (2) a ''jumbotron'' showing current camera shots in the public space, (3) transparent portal screeners allowing viewing of the screening, (4) a layered open/funnel/open/funnel design where open spaces are used to encourage a sense of ''communitas'' and take advantage of citizen ''sensing'' and funnels are technological tunnels of sensors (the tunnels of truth), (5) curved benches with blast proof walls or backs, (6) making it easy for the public to report, even if not sure/''non-event'' (e.g. ''I'm uncomfortable'') and processing those reports in aggregate not individually, (7) transforming the resident working population into a part-time undercover security/sensor force through more innovative training and (8) adding ambassadors/security that engage in unexpected conversation with the public. The group recommended that we take actions to pursue the following ideas next: (a) A concept for a mobile sensor transport (JMP); (b) Conduct a follow-on workshop; (c) Conduct social experiments/activities to see how people would react to the concepts related to community and security; (d) Explore further aesthetically pleasing, blast-resistance seating areas; and (e) The Art of Freedom (an educational, multi-media campaign).

Disruptive technologies are scientific discoveries that break through the usual product technology capabilities and provide a basis for a new competitive paradigm as described by Anderson and Tushman [1990], Tushman and Rosenkopf [1992], and Bower and Christensen [1995]. Discontinuous innovations are products/processes/services that provide exponential improvements in the value received by the customer much in the same vein as Walsh [1996], Lynn, Morone and Paulson [1996], and Veryzer [1998]. For more on definitions of disruptive technologies and discontinuous innovations, see Walsh and Linton [1999] who provide a number of definitions for disruptive technologies and discontinuous innovations. Disruptive technologies and discontinuous innovations present a unique challenge and opportunity for R and D organizations seeking to build their commercialization efforts and to reinvent the corporation. These technologies do not have a proven path from scientific discovery to mass production and therefore require novel approaches. These critically important technologies are the wellspring of wealth creation and new competency generation but are not readily accepted by the corporate community. They are alternatively embraced and eschewed by the commercial community. They are finally accepted when the technology has already affected the industry or when the technological horse has already flown out of the hanger. Many firms, especially larger firms, seem reluctant to familiarize themselves with these technologies quickly. The trend seems to be that these firms prefer to react to a proven disruptive technology that has changed the product market paradigm. If true, then there is cause for concern. This paper will review the literature on disruptive technologies presenting a model of the progression from scientific idea to mass production for disruptive technologies contrasted to the more copious incremental technologies. The paper will then describe Sandia National Laboratories' involvement in one of the disruptive technology areas, namely micro-electromechanical systems (sometimes referred to as Microsystems or MEMS) and will survey a number of companies that have investigated Sandia's technological discoveries for potential use in an industrial capacity. The survey will focus on the movement of the research findings from the laboratory into the marketplace and all of the problem areas that disruptive technologies face in this arena. The paper will then state several hypotheses that will be tested. The data will be described with results and conclusions reported.