Retired General McChrystal has written an excellent article that exposes one way in which the military has adapted to a non-traditional enemy without a straightforward vertical hierchy, one which relies instead on networks.
I won't comment on the overall effectiveness of the unit to which he refers (because I know less than nothing about it) but instead wanted to address his article as it could apply to a "DOD FAO network". Those last three words are in quotation because I believe a "DOD FAO network" to be a hypotheticaldream idea at the moment. In fact, I don't necessarily believe there is even a traditional vertical hierarchy organizing the DOD FAO community (at least not one easily found or ever referred to within the community at large). And there is certainly no mechanism or network in place to connect FAOs (in a strategic or working vision sense) across the services, across the stove-piped AORs, and across active duty and retired.
Following you will see a selection of quotes from McChrystal's article that I found to be applicable in some respect to creating a DOD FAO network.
"our enemy was a constellation of fighters organized not by rank but on the basis of relationships and acquaintances, reputation and fame" This idea resonates with me (and I would guess with a fair number of junior officers today). For a FAO, relationships and acquaintances, as well as reputation are paramount in building from a baseline of intelligence and knowledge.
"The enemy does not convene promotion boards; the network is self-forming...We would watch a young Iraqi set up in a neighborhood and rise swiftly in importance: After achieving some tactical success, he would market himself, make connections, gain followers, and suddenly a new node of the network would be created and absorbed. The network's energy grew." This speaks to the power of a network. A DOD FAO network would create its own nodes. I envision these nodes as ones which initially build from within AORs but then later spread and pulse outwards, overlapping traditional AOR boundaries. East African nodes pulsing outward and overlapping within Indian nodes. Brazilian nodes meshing threads with those in Angola and Portugal. An immediate reaction from some is 'what does all this mumbo-jumbo mean practically!' How does it manifest itself physically? I don't know the answer right now. But I do know that it will be through encouraging and rewarding innovators and risk-takers in the DOD FAO community. And while the DOD FAO community will never be able to buck or break the military's bureaucratic promotion system, it must allow successful (as acknowledged by those in their networks) FAOs the opportunity for promotion of other sorts (positionally for instance).
"And we had to process that new information in real time -- so we could act on it." How do FAOs even process information? On language, on billets, on their experience in those billets and in-country? How do FAOs process intel? Does the information travel vertically, or are there avenues that allow it to travel out and be shared horizontally and diagonally?
"What was hazy then soon became our mantra: It takes a network to defeat a network." For the DOD FAO community, in which the enemy can best be stated as our own unique triangles or hourglasses ('stovepipes' in defense-speak) this mantra can be shortened to simply: "It takes a network."
"an effective network involves much more than relaying data. A true network starts with robust communications connectivity, but also leverages physical and cultural proximity, shared purpose, established decision-making processes, personal relationships, and trust." There is limited opportunity for FAOs to establish these 'personal relationships' and ensuing 'trust'. Every opportunity must be seized to take advantage of physical proximity and build 'the network.' The dreaded conference must be transformed and shifted from a series of lengthy speeches (and limited discussion) to natural-formed networks (working groups) that focus on processes and information sharing.
"Ultimately, a network is defined by how well it allows its members to see, decide, and effectively act. But transforming a traditional military structure into a truly flexible, empowered network is a difficult process." Word. How well do DOD FAOs see, decide and effectively act? How transparent are decisions made within each service FAO community made?
""blinks" -- time delays and missed junctures where information was lost or slowed when filtered down the line." Within the FAO community we often don't have blinks, we have full on naps (I acknowledge this parallel is tenuous at best since these blinks are addressed within the context of battlefield decision-making, but c'mon just go with me). An entire generation of some of the oldest FAOs (within the Army) are retiring and taking with them an irreplaceable amount of knowledge and experience. We cannot afford to be passive in retaining this knowledge. Measures must be put in place to capture it. If these FAOs are in a robust DOD FAO network, their retirement doesn't mean they are pulled out of it. Their own node or pulse may not be as bright, but their connections-their threads can remain and overlap and connect to new nodes and pulses. Another example of this is when DOD FAOs return from country teams (whether within an OSC or as an attaché) their experiences, their passdown, their after action reports, their debriefings are lost within the ether-within their service "triangle". In a DOD FAO network all of this information would not be confined by services or organization but would instead flow throughout and be pulled to where it was needed.
"Decisions were decentralized and cut laterally across the organization. Traditional institutional boundaries fell away and diverse cultures meshed." These traditional institutional boundaries exist within our Embassy structure but also within DOD (duh).
"It [the network] valued competency above all else -- including rank." While there is much 'looking down the nose' at the aviation community (my old community) for its joviality and apparent lack of professionalism at times, there was one key maxim that transcended this and was part of every good pre-flight brief: "there is no rank in the cockpit." This did more than encourage all members of the crew (officers and enlisted) to speak up on issues of flight safety and decision-making--it mandated it. In essence, in the cockpit 'it valued competency above all else.' This same type of mentality must be instilled within the DOD FAO network (probably most applicable within the academic environment).
When determining what a DOD FAO network would look like, it is of ultimate importance to note that ABOVE ALL ELSE a network requires its users to believe (whether you are talking about jihad or facebook)...and not just lackadaisically...but fervently and passionately believe...therefore for the FAO network to establish itself and thrive...it needs motivated believers who BELIEVE and are allowed the opportunity and leeway to create a network, to build that groundswell.
I know there's not much concrete in this posting, but this is a (mostly) abstract idea that has been percolating within me (and at least a few other junior FAOs) but which I'd never been able to fully articulate until reading McChrystal's article today. There are plenty of FAOs far smarter and more experienced than me that I am sure have the 'concrete' we need to build and leverage that DOD FAO network. I look forward to building those nodes, pulses and threads with you.
I won't comment on the overall effectiveness of the unit to which he refers (because I know less than nothing about it) but instead wanted to address his article as it could apply to a "DOD FAO network". Those last three words are in quotation because I believe a "DOD FAO network" to be a hypothetical
Following you will see a selection of quotes from McChrystal's article that I found to be applicable in some respect to creating a DOD FAO network.
"our enemy was a constellation of fighters organized not by rank but on the basis of relationships and acquaintances, reputation and fame" This idea resonates with me (and I would guess with a fair number of junior officers today). For a FAO, relationships and acquaintances, as well as reputation are paramount in building from a baseline of intelligence and knowledge.
"The enemy does not convene promotion boards; the network is self-forming...We would watch a young Iraqi set up in a neighborhood and rise swiftly in importance: After achieving some tactical success, he would market himself, make connections, gain followers, and suddenly a new node of the network would be created and absorbed. The network's energy grew." This speaks to the power of a network. A DOD FAO network would create its own nodes. I envision these nodes as ones which initially build from within AORs but then later spread and pulse outwards, overlapping traditional AOR boundaries. East African nodes pulsing outward and overlapping within Indian nodes. Brazilian nodes meshing threads with those in Angola and Portugal. An immediate reaction from some is 'what does all this mumbo-jumbo mean practically!' How does it manifest itself physically? I don't know the answer right now. But I do know that it will be through encouraging and rewarding innovators and risk-takers in the DOD FAO community. And while the DOD FAO community will never be able to buck or break the military's bureaucratic promotion system, it must allow successful (as acknowledged by those in their networks) FAOs the opportunity for promotion of other sorts (positionally for instance).
"And we had to process that new information in real time -- so we could act on it." How do FAOs even process information? On language, on billets, on their experience in those billets and in-country? How do FAOs process intel? Does the information travel vertically, or are there avenues that allow it to travel out and be shared horizontally and diagonally?
"What was hazy then soon became our mantra: It takes a network to defeat a network." For the DOD FAO community, in which the enemy can best be stated as our own unique triangles or hourglasses ('stovepipes' in defense-speak) this mantra can be shortened to simply: "It takes a network."
"an effective network involves much more than relaying data. A true network starts with robust communications connectivity, but also leverages physical and cultural proximity, shared purpose, established decision-making processes, personal relationships, and trust." There is limited opportunity for FAOs to establish these 'personal relationships' and ensuing 'trust'. Every opportunity must be seized to take advantage of physical proximity and build 'the network.' The dreaded conference must be transformed and shifted from a series of lengthy speeches (and limited discussion) to natural-formed networks (working groups) that focus on processes and information sharing.
"Ultimately, a network is defined by how well it allows its members to see, decide, and effectively act. But transforming a traditional military structure into a truly flexible, empowered network is a difficult process." Word. How well do DOD FAOs see, decide and effectively act? How transparent are decisions made within each service FAO community made?
""blinks" -- time delays and missed junctures where information was lost or slowed when filtered down the line." Within the FAO community we often don't have blinks, we have full on naps (I acknowledge this parallel is tenuous at best since these blinks are addressed within the context of battlefield decision-making, but c'mon just go with me). An entire generation of some of the oldest FAOs (within the Army) are retiring and taking with them an irreplaceable amount of knowledge and experience. We cannot afford to be passive in retaining this knowledge. Measures must be put in place to capture it. If these FAOs are in a robust DOD FAO network, their retirement doesn't mean they are pulled out of it. Their own node or pulse may not be as bright, but their connections-their threads can remain and overlap and connect to new nodes and pulses. Another example of this is when DOD FAOs return from country teams (whether within an OSC or as an attaché) their experiences, their passdown, their after action reports, their debriefings are lost within the ether-within their service "triangle". In a DOD FAO network all of this information would not be confined by services or organization but would instead flow throughout and be pulled to where it was needed.
"Decisions were decentralized and cut laterally across the organization. Traditional institutional boundaries fell away and diverse cultures meshed." These traditional institutional boundaries exist within our Embassy structure but also within DOD (duh).
"It [the network] valued competency above all else -- including rank." While there is much 'looking down the nose' at the aviation community (my old community) for its joviality and apparent lack of professionalism at times, there was one key maxim that transcended this and was part of every good pre-flight brief: "there is no rank in the cockpit." This did more than encourage all members of the crew (officers and enlisted) to speak up on issues of flight safety and decision-making--it mandated it. In essence, in the cockpit 'it valued competency above all else.' This same type of mentality must be instilled within the DOD FAO network (probably most applicable within the academic environment).
When determining what a DOD FAO network would look like, it is of ultimate importance to note that ABOVE ALL ELSE a network requires its users to believe (whether you are talking about jihad or facebook)...and not just lackadaisically...but fervently and passionately believe...therefore for the FAO network to establish itself and thrive...it needs motivated believers who BELIEVE and are allowed the opportunity and leeway to create a network, to build that groundswell.
I know there's not much concrete in this posting, but this is a (mostly) abstract idea that has been percolating within me (and at least a few other junior FAOs) but which I'd never been able to fully articulate until reading McChrystal's article today. There are plenty of FAOs far smarter and more experienced than me that I am sure have the 'concrete' we need to build and leverage that DOD FAO network. I look forward to building those nodes, pulses and threads with you.
This has many ideas that I like. I'm glad some thinking is developing that seeks to exploit the national/DOD expenditure on FAOs across the uniformed services over the past decades. The DOD FAO system has come a very long way since my father was Army Attache in Korea (1953-4)and Chief of Military Mission/MAAG to Nicaragua in the late 1950s.
ReplyDeleteI am a retired Army South Asia FAO, language 1975-6, incountry 1976-7, and spent four years as the South Asia Specialist-Strategist on the Faculty of the USA Command and General Staff College. 1977-81. Then, spent 10 years since in Defense Contracting: 1983-93.
Been doing other things since, but have maintained a decided interest in things South Asian, especially Indian.
There are many political, economic, military, and ideological changes in the region since the mid -70s. We have noted the rise of India as a major economic (software and call centers) player, especially as the "back office" of many multi-national corporations. The Indian military, nuclear equipped, is the most potent force in that part of the globe, in my judgment. I long ago wrote that India's navy, if interested in doing so, could be a "scalpel on the jugular of an oil dependent world"(plugging Hormuz, and might as well add Malacca), and also could impose a "Pax Hindustan" from Cape Good Hope to Cape Leeuwin, which would include interdicting China's ocean-supported push into eastern Africa.
While Pakistan attempts to strut and keep up militarily, even at the mutual Wagha crossing, it is a small player, even if similarly nuclear equipped.
Religion's dead hand hampers "realpolitik" with respect to terrorists operating in the oldnamed Northwest Frontier Province. Yet, one notes that little effort seems to be taken in accomodating Pushtan nationalism: that Damned Durand Line of the British creates the havoc; the Indus should be the eastern boundary of Pushtunistan.
The fact that India is leapfrogging Pakistan into Afghanistan certainly impinges on US Afpak policy and strategy. Keep in mind that India notes China's push into central Asia; keep your eye on the copper in Afghanistan that China is now exploiting. Watch out for the Chinese railroad extension out of Tibet towards the Wakhon Corridor and the copper mines.
These are some of the perspectives I've formed and held since the 1970s. I am not privy to immediate specifics, and lack of daily intel briefings causes diminished knowledge of current Who's Who.
Nevertheless, the rise of change, and perhaps hope, across the entire region of North Africa and Central South Asia compounds the local autocrats' grip on populations, frustrates the dead hand of religion, and provides possibilities for the emergence of women as a potent force, which effect has yet to be realized.
Mr Raymond,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comments and your insight! It's just this type of corporate knowledge that the DOD FAO community needs to retain. Are you involved in FAOWeb? It's run by NPS and retired FAOs can get accounts there. It's still in its infancy and has room for improvement but its a good resource for connecting people. Also, if you reside in the DC Metro Area the FAO Association has monthly luncheons with interesting speakers and ample opportunity to network.
https://myfao.nps.edu/web/fao/
FUUO;
ReplyDeleteOne problem, IMHO, is that FAOs are failing to utilize the resources which already exist (such as the FAOWeb you just mentioned and the FAOA's member network). One question worth asking is why? Although I don't know "the" answer, I think that two possibilities are a combination of unfamiliarity with the concept of social networks within the older generation, and a lack of understanding of the importance of networking within the junior FAO community. Anyone out there in the ether have any other ideas/comments on how to build or adapt from the resources which are already there?
~Capt Abi Dorhosti, USAF
sub-Saharan Africa RAS-in-training
Abi, I think you make two great points. Most of us (on the Navy-side at least) come from communities where the networking aspect is either an institutionalized given or irrelevant. From the pure aspect of flying helicopters in the Navy, networking with other Navy helicopter pilots doesn't buy me a whole lot. So when these same people come into the FAO community they don't have an innate networking ability
ReplyDelete