Paratus Papers - The Agile Commander: In the Adaptive Army

Abstract

Change within our society and primary operating environment has reached exponential levels. The requirement to create an adaptive Army was recognised early this century and Army has been working to create a cultural shift that will make it more effective in its current endeavours. The key catalyst to enable an adaptive Army is agile commanders who have the freedom of action to adapt and overcome. This article examines the methods that software engineers and project managers use to solve non linear complex endeavours that are surprisingly relevant for today’s junior commander.

In times of change the learners will inherit the earth, while the learned will find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.

 - Eric Hoffer¹

Introduction

Each year the Australian Defence Force (ADF) spends billions of dollars on capability and infrastructure. Despite this significant expenditure the single most important investment is and always will be its people. The Army is characterised by a clearly defined hierarchy and chain of command. The senior ranks are held accountable for the direction of the Army and for its actions but they are not the ranks with the power to influence cultural change. The implementers of change are the junior commanders—the corporals and lieutenants. Junior commanders can compensate for shortfalls in resources, equipment and systems. Junior commanders can provide the inspiration and innovation necessary to achieve the mission in difficult and hostile terrain, the dynamic, non-linear complex endeavour that forms Australia’s primary operating environment (POE).

In mid-2008 the Army began a detailed self-examination to study the force structure and command arrangements required to succeed in the contemporary and future operating environments. The resultant Adaptive Army is a series of inter-linked initiatives to ensure that the Australian Army remains relevant, effective and reputable.² Adaptive Army came from a study of many other defence and civilian best practice systems. The correlation between the software developers’ project management methodology of Agile Management and the resultant Adaptive Army Initiatives are clear, and as such merits a closer look at the Agile Management systems.

Aim

The underpinning tenets of Agile Management are applicable to developing the agile junior commanders that the Australian Army needs. In the foreword of the May 2009 Update on the Implementation of the Adaptive Army Initiative, Chief of Army Lieutenant General Ken Gillespie expressed why he believed Adaptive Army was important. He stated:

The success of Army in the conduct of contemporary (and future) operations, force generation and preparation will be largely determined by our capacity to learn lessons, and then adapt based on those lessons. The Army must continually review and adapt to ensure that it remains fit for the changing environment.³

Commanders at the regiment and battalion level have been entrusted with continually reviewing and adapting to ensure their units remain fit for the changing environment. They must foster a culture of innovation and adaptation, supportive of mission command within the Army. They must invest in their junior commanders to allow them the freedom to be the implementers of the Adaptive Army.

Agile Methodology

Agile methodology was developed as a tool for software developers and project managers to enable them to be more responsive to their clients’ end user require- ments²—in Army terminology ‘to be more responsive to the commander’s intent’. In a conventional construction project, objectives are completed in a linear sequential format. Groundwork is completed followed by construction of the foundation, followed by construction of the walls, construction of the roof, and so on. Software development is a non-linear complex endeavour. There are multiple inputs and outputs that create activities that occur simultaneously and that are all interlinked with an input into one activity, thereby changing the output of another. In functionality this is very similar to the POE that the ADF operates within.

A single operational unit is required to train for and carry out multiple activities on all levels of the force spectrum; in other words, multiple inputs and outputs. A single troop commander may have subordinates who are required to undertake activities ranging from supporting of local community events such as a school fete, preparing for emergency and disaster response, providing a peacekeeping force in Timor-Leste, supporting Special Operations Command in Afghanistan and training within Australia for conventional mid-level intensity warfare. It is important for a junior commander who is facing this non-linear complex endeavour to study other methodologies that operate in similar complex environments. This is true of the junior commander who plans the activities (lieutenant) and the junior commander who will carry out the activity (corporal).

It is important for a junior commander who is facing this non-linear complex endeavour to study other methodologies that operate in similar complex environments.

From the original Agile Manifesto⁴, three core values that are highly relevant to the junior commanders are:

• Individuals and interactions over processes and tools. Not rigid constrictive systems to force members into compliance, but the development of mutual trust and respect through communicating with individuals and interaction up and down the chain of command.
• Functional standard operating procedures (SOPs) over comprehensive documentation. Moving away from forty-page operations orders designed to protect the chain of command from litigation, towards functional SOPs and understanding and implementation of common doctrine.
• Responding to change over following a plan. With valued individuals and functional SOPs, a junior commander can utilise their freedom of action to achieve their commander’s intent and the mission despite a hostile, friction-laden environment subject to constant change.

Agility is defined as that ability of an organisation to effectively adapt to change. It is an enabler to command and control (C2) that fits squarely into the Chief of Army’s intent for an adaptive Army. Agile C2 recognises the requirement for current junior commanders to have a more collaborative interaction with their subordinates in the complex endeavours they are required to undertake.

Passive agility is a prescribed conditioning that prepossesses a set of characteristics that allow a unit to continue to operate effectively, despite changes in circumstances or conditions. In Australia’s POE passive agility is expressed as pragmatic doctrine and up-to-date functional SOPs. More practically it is the common base level of training that enables a unit to flow from one task to the next with minimal disruption to the unit’s operational effectiveness. A recent example would be the rerolling of engineer elements involved in training for conventional mid-level intensity warfare to Defence Aid to the Civil Community (DACC) tasking providing flood relief. The passive agility that allowed the flow from one task to another was already present in the unit due to the level of its training and its SOPs.

Active agility is the ability of a unit to effectively respond or adapt when required. This may involve taking an action, stopping an action, changing a process, changing an approach to management, governance, or C2. It may also involve changing perceptions or even the way success is defined. Active agility provides more of a practical challenge because it relies on the impetus of the unit rather than the unit’s innate ability. Active agility also requires the questioning of the assumptions behind the activity in order to allow the most appropriate response.⁵

Taking into account the size of the ADF, its accountability to the Australian Government and the bureaucracy required to maintain highly complex endeavours under intense scrutiny, the Australian Army excels in the provision and execution of passive agility. However, increasing scrutiny has led to a group think ‘safety in numbers’ mentality that stymies the creative problem-solving required for active agility in favour of a conservative ‘cover your arse’ approach to management. By instilling active agility within junior commanders and providing them freedom of action, Army can realise the Adaptive Army vision and remain fit for the changing environment.

... increasing scrutiny has led to a group think ‘safety in numbers’ mentality that stymies the creative problem-solving required for active agility ...

It is one thing to espouse a desire to be more responsive, more flexible or innovative, it is quite another to create the conditions that are necessary to enable the prerequisites for active agility. Improving agility requires that enablers be present and impediments are removed. It is therefore key for senior leadership to develop the following tenets from The Agility Imperative⁶ with their junior commanders:

• Responsiveness: to be responsive a commander must be able to recognise potentially significant changes in the operating environment, an adversary, or the unit in a timely manner and recognise then what would be an appropriate response. Being agile therefore involves the ability to create an adequate awareness and understanding of the environment and the ability to anticipate and where relevant, detect and recognise a relevant change in circumstances. Active agility also requires the ability and freedom of the commander to respond appropriately.
• Robustness: the sufficient training and equipping level of units that permits the junior commander to achieve a level of performance or effectiveness in accomplishing a new or significantly altered task or mission. A lack of robustness and multi-skilling limits a commander’s ability to succeed when the nature of the task or mission differs from what is expected or when it changes in unanticipated ways.
• Resilience: the ability of the unit to maintain its task and complete the mission despite significant loss of capability. Resilience permits the junior commander to recover the lost performance or effectiveness caused by loss, damage, misfortune or a destabilisation in the environment. This is especially relevant to the junior commander who has been detached from his sub-unit and its associated integral support. Resilience is enhanced by encouraging subordinates to be creative, innovative and flexible.⁶

Impediments to Agility

Environment

Junior commanders and their subordinates must be given the freedom to fail. Junior commanders provide the most effective means to compensate for shortcomings in organisation, processes and resources. They are also the most agile level of command and have the greatest understanding of how the unit will respond to change. Yet the current environment, where only success is encouraged, does not allow the junior commander the freedom to fail. Failure is an important teaching tool. Senior commanders must be more willing to allow failure by their subordinates, particularly in a contained environment, in order for them to learn the lessons that can only be learnt by experiencing failure. The current operating continuum gives soldiers and officers a very short time in command roles. Therefore commanders feel a great deal of pressure to succeed as this will directly reflect on their performance review and future employability.

Senior commanders must be more willing to allow failure by their subordinates, particularly in a contained environment ...

Inflexibility

The Army through its strong emphasis on discipline and clear hierarchical structure can become a breeding ground for inflexibility and stubbornness. While discipline is a core tenet of carrying out a complex activity in extremely hostile environments, the chain of command must recognise that its soldiers and junior commanders are increasingly better networked and more communications savvy than their senior commanders. Soldiers and junior commanders (most of whom are Generation Y) have grown up in a rapidly changing world, and as a result they are far better at assimilating these changes and adapting their actions to capitalise on opportunities.

Mindset

A closed and complacent mindset is an impediment to agility. Although the lower levels of an organisation often contain the most agile members, they cannot flourish if senior commanders are set in their ways. Within Army the commanding officer and officers commanding must have an agile mindset. They must always be looking for and encouraging their junior commanders to look for opportunities to do things better and smarter and to question the status quo. Providing junior commanders with the authority to act, therefore allowing them to rapidly respond to changing circumstances and respond appropriately gives them the opportunity to practice agile thought processes and actions. This freedom must be delegated down the chain of command.

In contrast to the inflexible success- oriented closed mindset that may be found in some training environments, the focus of real-time operations is much more closely aligned with the adaptive Army. On operations the junior commander is more likely to be allowed increased freedom of action to achieve the commander’s intent. The junior commander who is confronted by an issue at their level is encouraged to step forward with a solution at their level and as a result the deployed unit is far more responsive, robust and resilient. Anecdotally, the unit’s members report a much higher ownership of the mission and are far more satisfied with their performance than those subjected to only training environments and a higher level of ‘micromanagement’.

[T]he unit’s members report a much higher ownership of the mission and are far more satisfied with their performance than those subjected to only training environments and a higher level of ‘micromanagement’.

Conclusion

The desire to be more adaptive requires all members of the organisation to have a vested interest. Responsive, robust and resilient junior commanders require an environment that expects them to perform to best practice and to make changes for the benefit of the unit. Outlined in this paper are some of the salient points of agile management that are being encouraged in the Adaptive Army initiatives. Senior commanders within Army have shown that they are willing to provide an environment conducive to agility. The next step for creating an agile unit is to provide junior commanders the education, training, information and resources to further develop their skills. With these resources, in an environment that encourages trying new things in a controlled training scenario set by senior commanders, units can obtain true agility and meet the aspiration for an adaptive Army.

About the Author

Captain Matthew Jefferies joined the Army as a Combat Engineer in 2001. He was posted to the 3rd Combat Engineer Regiment were he completed the Army Year 12 Equivalency Course and was accepted at Duntroon. After graduation he transferred to the Royal Australian Electrical and Mechanical Engineers and has been posted to the Army Logistics Training Centre, 1st Command Support Regiment, Special Air Service Regiment, 1st Armoured Regiment and is currently serving at the Australian Headquarters Joint Operations Command. He deployed to Afghanistan in 2011 with Mentoring Task Force – Two.

Endnotes

1    E Hoffer, The Ordeal of Change, Hopewell Publications, 1967.

2    Australian Army, Adaptive Campaigning — Future Land Operating Concept, Department of Defence, Canberra, 2009.

3    KJ Gillespie, An Update on the Implementation of the Adaptive Army Initiative, Department of Defence, Canberra, 7 May 2009.

4    Mike Beedle et al., Manifesto for Agile Software Development, 2001, <http://agilemanifesto.org/&gt;.

5    David S Alberts, ‘Précis’, The Agility Imperative, 30 March 2010, <http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts_Agility_Imperative_Precis.pdf&gt;.

6    Ibid.