Projects have to handle a dynamic context with a lot of unexpected events. The more experienced project members are, the more likely it is that they can make the right decisions within critical situations. They can draw on experiences collected within similar situations in the past. By considering knowledge about the customers, divisions and technologies, the transfer of project results to the internal customers can be ensured. In this paper, we introduce an approach where we collect knowledge from project managers and transfer that knowledge into a Case-Based Reasoning system. Thus, experiences describing exceptional situations are stored within a case base. After an experimental evaluation the experiences are structured by three main characteristics: the context of the project, the specific problem and the developed solution. For the latter two characteristics we have chosen an actor-driven approach. In addition, we introduce a framework to integrate the case base into the organizational process.

Abstract not found

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Leavenworth Field Unit. Thanks to Dr. Sharon Riedel for her help throughout this project. Should the Army be interested in critical thinking? Is critical thinking important? And if so, why? A small set of themes appear over and over in the prefaces and introductions of the dozens of critical thinking textbooks that are in print. Claims fall into three groups: A. Problem difficulty, including (i) increasing complexity of problems, (ii) changing nature of problems, and (iii) information overload. B. Decentralized social and organizational structure, including (i) increasing responsibility and need for initiative, (ii) increasing participation in teams with diverse membership, and (iii) increasing need for independent thinking. C. High stakes, including (i) important public policy issues and (ii) personal decisions in an increasingly competitive career environment. Do conditions for the use of critical thinking apply in the Army? The answer certainly appears to be yes. There is a growing interest in critical thinking among Army instructors and researchers, which seems warranted by (A) the complexity and changing character of military planning and operations; (B) decentralization of the organizational structure (e.g., the demands of leadership, coordination, and initiative within every echelon); and (C) high stakes personally, organizationally, and for the nation as a whole. In addition, the direction of change in the Army promises to make critical thinking even more