“Zeitenwende” remains just another buzzword if, in addition to weapons systems, armed forces do not adapt their learning speed. A team of authors from Subdivision G7 of the German Army Command (responsible for training, exercises, and the “Lessons Learned” process) sums up this challenge in a recent article for Defence Network: Modern battlefield is virtually transparent an, sensor-to-shooter cycles are becoming ever shorter. In addition, unmanned systems shape all levels of operations, and electronic warfare can disrupt digital command and control any time. However, all technical innovations only take effect when people make decisions, collaborate, and act differently. Therefore, doctrine, training, leadership, and operational command must change simultaneously. This is precisely why, in our view, the transformation of the Army is an organizational transformation task.
Speed over perfection also changes leadership
One of the most notable conclusions of the article is “speed over perfection.” The OODA loop (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) must be accelerated. This means that what we in the Bundeswehr have called “mission-based tactics” or “leadership by mission” will become even more important. As is well known, the principle behind this is that while leadership sets a goal, the executing unit or soldier decides independently how to achieve it.
This includes ensuring that soldiers and units do not have to seek approval through additional approval loops for their decisions. Conversely, leadership must not succumb to the temptation of micromanagement when, thanks to new sensor technology, it is able to look deeper and deeper into operational processes.
Transformation therefore also means redefining decision-making authority, clearly defining responsibilities, escalation criteria, and interfaces in advance, and training personnel accordingly.
“Lessons learned” must become “lessons applied”
The article highlights another crucial point: The Army needs agile lessons-learned management. Practical experience must circulate more quickly among troops, staff, and training institutions. From our perspective, we should take this a step further. After all, simply documenting findings in databases does not in itself lead to learning.
The actual work of transformation therefore lies between “Lesson Identified” and “Lesson Applied.” Who is responsible for ensuring that a finding is incorporated into training, doctrine, or processes? How quickly does this happen? Which other areas are affected? How do soldiers learn about it? Which existing routines must they abandon? What new skills do they need? And how does leadership recognize that the desired behavior has actually taken hold?
The speed of this cycle should become a key metric for measuring the transformation.
“Every soldier is a drone operator” is also a change initiative
The phrase is catchy: “Every soldier is a drone operator.” But if drone proficiency, data hygiene, cybersecurity, and the handling of digital situational awareness become broad core competencies in the future, this will change role models, responsibilities, and routines. Existing specialists may have to relinquish part of their monopoly on knowledge. Other soldiers will be given additional responsibility. This creates friction.
viadoo observed similar dynamics while supporting the German Armed Forces during the rollout of DEMAR. New rules and processes required more than training. For many people, established routines and responsibilities changed. In some cases, long-standing roles and status positions changed as well. Leaders were therefore sensitized to the social and emotional consequences of the transformation. Those affected were also involved systematically. Training alone does not guarantee adoption.
People must understand why a change is necessary. They must know what it means for their tasks. They also need clarity about new expectations and the skills required to meet them.
Beware of overwhelming people!
Digitalization, unmanned systems, electronic warfare, new training content, procurement changes, data architectures, AI, command procedures, and industrial interfaces evolve simultaneously. They also influence one another. We know this problem from large industrial transformation programs. Each project may make sense on its own. Yet the organization as a whole can still become overwhelmed.
The more initiatives run in parallel, the more important overarching governance, prioritization, and dependency management become. In the defense sector, we observe the same challenge among industrial companies: development, certifications, the supply chain, and ramp-up all compete for scarce skilled personnel and management’s attention. Unclear priorities and interfaces then increase friction, while the individual projects continue to run formally.
For the Army, transparency is therefore essential. Leaders need to know which changes affect which units at the same time. They also need visibility into dependencies between capabilities. The organization must identify where it risks overloading itself. A central transformation governance structure can help. It should not become another layer of bureaucracy. Instead, it should make dependencies visible, align priorities, prepare decisions, and accelerate learning.
Communication must enable action
In military organizations, communication is still occasionally viewed primarily as a means of supporting a decision that has already been made. This is not enough for transformation. After all, communication is, as is well known, a leadership tool. It must provide guidance and include systematic feedback channels.
Surveys, structured debriefs, dialogue formats with leaders, and regularly evaluated feedback loops provide transformation management with information about where acceptance issues arise, processes are failing, or new solutions are out of touch with reality.
In our view, it is precisely this combination of leadership, participation, empowerment, and communication that forms the human infrastructure of a transformation.
Adaptability remains crucial
The Defence Network article concludes with a remarkable observation: In future combat, the speed at which armed forces learn and adapt will be decisive. This statement could also define the Army’s transformation logic. What is needed is a learning military organization that quickly evaluates observations, makes decisions, implements consequences, reviews their impact, and then adapts once again.
Technology is indispensable for this. But people decide whether it translates into capability. That is why it will be crucial how quickly leadership, the organization, and the people can change their behavior when the next insight shows that this is precisely what is needed.
Featured image: © Faust / viadoo GmbH
Since 2004, viadoo has been supporting companies and organizations in the defense sector with complex transformation projects. The focus is on the human factors that can either accelerate or hinder implementation: leadership, governance, collaboration, engagement, and communication.
Author(s)
Dr. Dominik Faust verfügt über umfassende Erfahrung in der Führung komplexer, funktionsübergreifender Initiativen an der Schnittstelle von Transformation, Governance und Kommunikation (P&L-Verantwortung > 6 Mio. €). Als Gründer der viadoo GmbH unterstützt er seit vielen Jahren Führungskräfte aus KMUs und DAX-Konzernen operativ bei der Planung und erfolgreichen Steuerung anspruchsvoller Projekte. Dazu gehören M&As (Post-Merger Integration), Restrukturierungen oder Projekt-Recovery.
