Thinking Change
in the
Armed Forces
Harinder Singh*
Backdrop
Militaries in recent decades have seen a quantum change in the way they equip,
train, plan and organise for war. The prime drivers for change have been the
emerging nature of conflict, and the development and fielding of cutting edge
technologies for war fighting. It is a well known fact that introduction of new
ideas and technologies usher in their own dynamics and constraints, thus
necessitating complementary changes in military structures, policies,
procedures and practices. On other hand, militaries are also known to promote
standardisation and rigidity in thought and action, and rightly to hedge against
uncertainties of war and deleterious consequences of uncoordinated military
action. Incidentally, the very nature of change militates against the manner in
which armies are organised or structured for war. Shedding of old ideas and
practices is often inhibited by those very organisational elements within the
military that are presumed to be the prime drivers for change. The issue gets
even more complex when the change is defined in context of existing ways for
waging war and, this predicament is best explained by two eminent scholars,
Adam N. Stulberg and Michael D. Salomone in their work titled, `Managing
Defense Transformation: Agency, Culture and Service Change'. This
commentary draws heavily on their views to examine some theoretical
constructs that identify some broad yet plausible approaches for thinking
change in the Indian armed forces.
* Colonel Harinder Singh is a serving infantry officer. Currently, he is a Research Fellow at the Institute of Defence
Studies and Analyses, New Delhi.
Perspectives
History is replete with examples of radical, modest and even failed
transformations, thus revealing the fact that the armed forces are
intrinsically not flexible enough to accept transformational changes. The
prime drivers for change have been the emerging nature of conflict, and the
development of cutting edge technologies for war fighting. It is a well known
fact that introduction of new ideas and technologies usher in new dynamics
and constraints, thus necessitating complementary changes in structures,
policies, procedures and practices. New ideas can be intrinsically nebulous
and unproven - implying undertaking organisational change - without
knowing where it is headed. This necessitates an open ended
transformational model for absorption of new ideas and technologies, while
in the interim organisations continue to exploit old and proven methods.
Commentary
Journal of Defence Studies
144
