One of the U.S. Navy's top thinkers on how new ideas develop in military organizations recently spent time with the senior members of the command leading the transformation of the U.S. military. USJFCOM summarizes some highlights from a recent talk by Capt. Terry Pierce.
"Jointness," or the ability of different services like the Navy, Army & Marines to all communicate together and share targeting information, communications, etc. as a networked force, is a big component of Military Transformation. U.S. Joint Forces Command, or USJFCOM, is a separate group (an approach often used in "Innovator's Dilemma" situations) aimed at helping to lead that innovation charge in certain areas. They've got an interesting release up that reviews USJFCOM's efforts over the past year, including the Transformation Academy for U.S. and NATO personnel
Interestingly, the NY Times has an article in the same vein, Pentagon Said to Offer Cuts in the Billions
"When Donald H. Rumsfeld became defense secretary in 2001, he took aim at costly weapons systems that he and his top aides said were relics of the cold war. Since then, the Army has canceled the $11 billion Crusader artillery system and the $38 billion Comanche reconnaissance helicopter program."
Not a bad article considering the source.
Now if they would just cancel the huge stratigic blunder, technical failure of a missile defense system we would be in even better shape.
The idea most missing in the discussion of innovative and disruptive innovations is the fact that what destroyed the Wehrmacht Blitzkrieg and the Japanese Imperial ambitions were neither the huge advantage in material given to the USSR or made available to the US Navy. The decisive factor was intelligence gleaned from the enemy.
For the US Navy it turned constantly on the code breakers. For the Allies on the Western front it was the same. We know this because it was the last piece of military history revealed. In the case of the USSR it was intelligence from the Red Orchestra. Classic effects on battles were the destruction of Nazi supply convoys to the North African front, the death of Admiral Yamamoto in early 42 and for the USSR the destruction of Army Group Central at Kursk. The difference is how the intelligence was OBTAINED.
For the US and England it was the code breakers. For the USSR it was human intelligence. Technology changes and new codes must be broken. Human intell goes on and on because of its constant need to be compartmentalized to protect its source. Further it is directed at a SPECIFIC TARGET further safeguarding its sources and controllers.
I suspect no matter how much money is diverted from military armament, no matter how much improvement occurs in command and control capablity for the battlefield we will constantly be behind the eightball untill our human intelligence catches up with our technological intelligence. This will require a change in thinking that I do not believe exists in OUR culture for numerous reasons.
One, it doesn't exist because at all levels of our society rewards come for those things that our most tangible and easily recognized. Look at any Fortune 500 company, their dependence on consultants and the desire to please on a quarterly earnings basis. Look at our fascination with the lastest thing and its empherality. How many people are in a chess club vs those intoxicated with the newest video game at any level in our society?
Developement of human intelligence requires developing a relationship. All good relationships are built over time and constant work/reevaluation that is not rewarded immediately. Ask any detective on a homicide squad in a major metropolitan area. How much time is put into following leads, developing of a time line of vents and eliminating extraneous information? Remember this is for situations where the chief suspect is almost always known.
Our desire for ready results leads to punative coercion. Torture which leads to substandard results because the sources goal is self-serving. It only seeks to end the pain. The result is resentment by the innocent and a desire to be the toughest by those whom know the most usable information. They know that time is their friend.
The last issue is our lack of respect for other cultures and their norms. There is an absolute belief that we are morally and culturally superior to everyone. This belief makes it hard to find personnel in large numbers that are willing to even learn a foreign language or culture. The Dan Darlings of the USA are even harder to find.
All of these issues require time and time is not on our side in the struggles we face.
Great article here, could not agree more. It is the way it has always been and perhaps may always be.