Crystal
Clear
It’s the future
Air Force according to the people who will run the future Air
Force. Private John Wellfare attended this year’s Leading
Edge Teams conference and found out what was in store.
 |
|
Photo
by PTE John Wellfare
|
WHAT
would become of the Air Force if, during the next 25 years, Australia’s
Federal Government collapsed and the country was divided into
a collection of largely autonomous city states, each with its
own feudal leadership, laws and security forces?
How would the structure of the ADF in such a world be different
to the structure needed in a globally isolated Australia that
has technologically fallen behind, with a declining population
and a shrinking economy?
And how would that compare to a future where Australia is a leader
in environmental protection in a world overflowing with information
resources?
More importantly, how would the ADF structure for any of these
worlds compare to what we have today? And what would be needed
to prepare the organisation for any, or all, of these possible
futures?
If you think it’s a matter only the senior leadership team
needs to think about, the Air Force’s key planning executives
think you’re wrong.
They’re drawing some of the most innovative concepts for
future force structure, management and values from junior leaders
– that is, the Leading Edge Team workshop, comprising a cross-section
of Air Force personnel interested in shaping the future Air Force.
Ranging in rank from leading aircraftman/woman to squadron leader,
participants in the Leading Edge Team scenario workshops are split
into four groups, each allocated a scenario outlining the Australia
of 2030 and given three days to discuss the potential future and
determine the strategic-level changes that would be needed to
prepare the Air Force and the broader Defence organisation for
such a future.
At the end of the workshop phase, they present their findings
to members of the senior leadership team and those findings are
documented for presentation at the next senior leadership team
conference.
Workshop participant Sergeant Kevin Curtis, from Health Services
Training Flight, says although each scenario was unique, each
presented a plausible potential future. His group faced the challenge
of the Bugger’s Muddle scenario, which detailed the complete
breakdown of Australia’s national political structure.
“My team’s scenario is probably the most implausible
on the surface,” he says, “but when we started talking
about it - comparing society in 2030 and looking at what’s
around now - you can actually see the building blocks for events
which could snowball and turn into the world that we’re presented
with in 2030.
“One of the big things that comes out of all the scenarios
[is that] they all point to the fact that, in the next 20 to 25
years, the whole organisation is going to have to undergo some
fairly radical changes.
“We think we’ve had some fairly radical changes over
the past 10 or 15 years, but there’s more over the horizon
if we’re going to remain at the edge technologically, but
also sociologically.”
Continued radical change is the only way for the organisation
to meet retention and recruitment targets and, particularly in
the more utopian potential futures, remain relevant to Australian
society.
Corporal Judd Leverton, from No. 38 Squadron, was part of the
group workshopping the Cultural Technocrat scenario, in which
the countries in Australia’s region had become closely unified,
but Australia was not included.
“When you talk about values, it’s not only the values
of the Defence Force, but also the values of the society of
the time,” he says.
“Instead of being a structural leadership with air, land
and sea, it would be Northern Defence, and one commander would
have assets of air, land and sea.
“You put someone in a position more because they know that
area and they know how to defend that area. Even our hierarchy
would need to be more based on skills rather than age or anything
like that. You needed to give people incentives rather than just
promote them.
“Why can’t you have a guy in there who wants to be a
life-long mechanic, but have extra pay or extra incentives? It’s
one of these things that you need to think outside the box. Why
does it have to be the traditional promotion into a job that he
hates?”
Leading Aircraftman Brendon Hawkins’ group dealt with the
Green Dawn scenario, which, despite outlining a stable potential
future, came with its own host of challenges.
“We were faced with the issue that we didn’t have a
specific threat and that makes it harder to decide exactly what
you’re going to be doing with your force,” he says.
“You’ve got a prosperous society, one that doesn’t
necessarily feel under threat. How does the ADF define itself
in that sort of environment?”
Flight Lieutenant Anne Prior, from Headquarters Training Command,
whose group workshopped the Conservative Hermit scenario in which
Australia maintained an isolated moral high ground in a world
of environmental exploitation, says there’s more to it than
just sitting down and predicting the future.
“I think the biggest challenge for the group is to be able
to think strategically,” she says. “If you’re an
operator, hands on in the workplace, that’s the world that
you’re used to, so this is a very different world and a very
different type of thinking.
“It can lead to some interesting interchanges, but at the
end of the day, there are some very good outcomes.”
Considering all the challenges for participants and the depth
of the scenarios, is three days long enough to explore the issues
and develop meaningful solutions? Flight Lieutenant Prior says
it’s all about the way you approach it.
“It just felt far too intense to take it all in and process,
get your head around and make clear outcomes out of it,”
she says. “You had to just get in there, get dirty and get
out.”
According to Leading Aircraftman Hawkins, there can be some advantages
to the brevity of the workshops.
“You don’t cull it too much; you still have the original
ideas and you leave them raw, let someone else process them.”
That processing is done by the senior leadership team. One of
the senior officers to attend the presentations at the end of
the workshop was Director General Personnel Branch-Air Force,
Air Commodore Lee Roberts.
“The people on the course and the senior officers actually
get the same thing out of it – you realise how bright everyone
else is,” he says.
“I get at least one good idea each time I go there.
“I was [also] surprised at the number of things that the
teams brought up that I believe should be done and some of it
I’ve actually got people doing some preliminary work on.
“For them to come up with the same answer is very satisfying
– it’s good that they could, but it also confirms that
we’re probably headed the right way.”
Another senior officer in attendance at the workshop presentations,
Director General Aerospace Development Air Commodore Chris Deeble,
is a strong advocate of the Leading Edge Team program – he
and the Adaptive Culture team were an integral part of its formation.
“I’m responsible for the delivery of our future capability,”
he says. “I’m in the business of determining and articulating
what that future capability needs to be.
“Part of the dilemma I often have is how do I think about
the future? I have a lot of great staff here with lots of great
ideas, but often you don’t want to leave it to an individual;
you actually want to capture some group input.
“I think it’s the gems that flow out of getting young
people thinking about the future Air Force that they want to be
part of, which can play a fundamental part in guiding the way
in which I should be thinking about capability.”
According to Air Commodore Deeble, there are four main dimensions
to planning for the future in the ADF.
“We need to be thinking about the personnel element –
the attraction and retention, the training and education …
and the innovative culture that goes with that people dimension;
allowing people to learn by doing and acceptance of mistakes.
Training in different ways is going to be important.”
Next is organisation.
“You need to think about your organisational structure. It’s
very hierarchical at the moment, but in the future it may be very
flat and indeed sometimes you might want a mixture of both –
you might want to have some hierarchy because decisions that are
being made will need those checks and balances, but then diverge
in to a flat organisation for the execution of the task at the
working end.
“Then there is the issue of doctrine. How do you get doctrine
that actually resonates with people, so rather than gathering
dust on a shelf they want to pick it up and read it, because it’s
important to them to understand how they fit into the equation.
“The last part of it is technology. I’m of the view
that we should be adapting the technology to our people, not our
people to the technology. Technology helps you think about doing
business differently, but ultimately it’s the people dimension
that translates that into something evolutionary or transformational.”
Leading Edge Team workshops are likely to continue well into the
future and continue to have an influence on the Air Force.
Even if none of the suggestions made in the group presentations
are adopted by the senior leadership, the workshops have still
had a positive impact on the organisation. Vitally, they provide
an important learning space for future leaders to practise strategic
thinking skills.
According to Air Commodore Deeble, showing members that they can
play a part and that their influence is important is one of the
most important outcomes of the workshops.
“Those people that have been on the Leading Edge Teams, the
thing I always tell them is that now they’re the virus in
the workplace. They’ve been engaged and they’ve looked
more broadly, now take the discussion to the workplace.
“That’s what it’s about. It’s about that innovative
culture, getting people thinking about the future and playing
an active role in charting the future that they want to lead in.”
The
following scenarios are condensed versions of the scenarios given
to the participants in this year’s Leading Edge Team
workshops.
Green
Dawn | Bugger's Muddle | Conservative
Hermit | Cultural Technoclast
Green
Dawn
IN
THIS world, Australians are eager to stay connected with one another
and with the other citizens of the global village in an ever-growing
web of associations, aided by inclusive public and private activities
to ensure the quality of life stays in balance with the fast-growing
population of 37 million and the economic base.
Strong
connectivity produces lots of information and results in powerful
groups with shifting allegiances, interests and objectives.
The choices in this dynamic world are numerous – decision
makers must act decisively, but only after exhaustive deliberation.
A range of intelligent systems and decisionsupport tools facilitates
this analysis, but the inclination is to over-analyse before acting.
In
order to compete for even base-level jobs, Australians need a
Bachelor degree as a minimum requirement. In this genetically
engineered world, average life spans approach one hundred years.
The
increased longevity, made possible by biotech and other health
care advances, contribute to Australia’s rapid population
growth.
In addressing security concerns, Australians are seeking the best
way to address the volatility of the world while having the least
impact on domestic elements of society, such as the environment,
other economic obligations of the government and the needs of
a growing population.
Under
stronger and faster regional power shifts, political and military
relationships are dynamic and occasionally volatile, while the
reactions of states and forces to their fellow actors quickly
become public knowledge.
Security
planners are focused on concealing intentions and capabilities
until it is time to act.
Buggers’
Muddle
IN
THIS world, Australia’s orientation in 2030 results from
a confluence of many events, starting with the worldwide Great
Depression of 2010 that stemmed from a failure to address the
Asian economic crisis.
This was compounded by the widespread failure of banking, public
utility and health care systems, as a rogue computer virus infected
computer software together
with a pandemic resulting from strain of bird flu.
The Australian Government accepted millions of environmental refugees
fleeing fallout and starvation following a disaster at a nuclear
power plant in Eastern Europe in early 2017.
Immigration
to Australia is now officially discouraged. Individual communities
have erected their own barriers, but no one much wants to come
anyway. Lack of support for the government led to discontent.
In an attempt to rally support and revive enthusiasm, the government
conducted a referendum in 2020 on declaring an Australian republic.
Only 12 per cent of eligible voters turned out at the polls. This
indifference of the electorate compelled the government to resign.
A series of weak federal caretaker governments has led the country
to the present state feudal system.
Power has not been effectively exercised at the federal level
in more than two decades. Australia is a nation of individualistic,
inward-looking, largely self-governing cities, along with even
more small towns and settlements.
The role of the federal government in 2030 is limited to defence,
foreign relations, immigration control and environmental protection.
The
acquisition cycle for major system procurements, including defence,
is 18 months in this “pay up front” world.
In
light of the fast regional power shift, the perception of turbulence
and danger is high and defence acquisition is thus one of the
few areas where decisions can be pushed through quickly in the
interest of national security.
Conservative
Hermit
IN
THIS world, much of the rest of the world, nations, corporations
and individuals care little about the environment.
From
the turn of the millennium, developing nations in Asia, Africa
and Latin America adopted increasingly bold and profitable economic
policies at the expense of the environment. Australia’s reaction
to these events was one of condemnation and distancing itself.
By
2030, Australian political and social agendas focus on environmental
protection. Business activity is modest because the Australian
economy operates in a closed loop.
Australia
is isolated, particularly due to concerns about terrorism. Australia
did not actively withdraw from its alliances, but failed to build
on them while others were becoming ever more engaged and connected.
Australia faces no imminent
threats.
Other
regional states, which pay Australia little attention, have acknowledged
the country’s orientation toward disengagement. Air power
is the most potent element of force in other militaries, with
their inventories of space strike weapons and trans atmospheric
vehicles.
Australia
has regressed from its former inclusive policies of multiculturalism.
Only native-born Australians are permitted to own property and
stay permanently.
Out-of-the-box
thinking is uncommon in this world – Australians are pleased
with the box they have and will sacrifice efficiency for tradition.
Competitive
behaviour is deemed inappropriate and disruptive.
Cultural
Technocrat
IN
THIS world, Australian economic growth rates lag behind rates
elsewhere.
Despite the weakened currency, most Australians value the stability,
at least compared to the chaotic US and European economies. In
Asia, economies are perceived to be more stable, in particular
the Chinese economy.
Academics
point to the issue of immigration and restrictive government policies
to account for the decline in population to 14 million.
Australians
have maintained their passion for technology. By the time the
commercial satellite “wars” had finished in 2015, Australians
had spread down-link devices and appliances across the continent.
Most
people overseas are uninterested in Australia. Asia remains physically
close but distant both socially and politically.
The
planet in 2030 is going through a period of unprecedented and
revolutionary technical growth.
This growth, however, has not had the positive effect that Australians
had hoped. The combination of the Wang Zhu-oriented country’s
innovation in precision farming and genetic engineering, has radically
reduced Australia’s export market for primary products.
Green
Dawn | Bugger's Muddle | Conservative
Hermit | Cultural Technoclast
