Military and Change

Military and Change

Having served in defense sector for almost 20 years, I observed the ever-changing facets of change that the ministry ever trying to embrace and embed. Long term-vision and periodical objectives intermingle which ponder as prerequisite of modernization agenda of change.  Ironically, at the height of certain level of change, there was still slogan ‘back to basic’ for the organization to revert and this realize how important for the organization to stay rooted of its core belief. I always have stern stand that there should be no compromise over basic requirements of defense operational. Even defense has lately considered as most highly reduce budget compare to other sectors, but cost reduction over deployment and operational capabilities impede the whole organization credibility and consider undermining type of change. We always believe that change is catalyst for any organization survivability but consistency of performing foundation roles of defense cannot be put at peril.  Business organization have their products values for financial outcome, but military service agendas offer product of sovereignty with no pecuniary values to compare.

‘Organic’ aspects of  military organizations  

In general, and common understanding, military organizations uphold mechanistic form of organizations. Its complex, formal and specialized with tightly controlled roles. Procedural and rules are imminent in executing conventional operations and this inevitable when man and machines are integrated to accomplished objective and mission. In what aspect that this vast, regimental organization can be informal and focus to ‘rejection of the one best way approach’ (contingencies theory)?

When man and machine are modus operandi of securing organizational objections and missions, socio technical system (STS) play important roles to ensure how effective objectives can be achieved. This had respond to more organic form of approach in military, and how significant innovation and responsiveness to today revolutionized threats. At strategic level, military organizations need to be flexible to overcome unpredictable threat and roles of military personnel no longer revolve around ‘bread and butter’ but has expand to more global environment demand.

The implementation of National Blue Ocean Strategy (NBOS) is one novel initiatives towards innovation, creativity and responsiveness of armed forces. The participative evolution combined with charismatic transformations illuminates the critical need for each governmental sector combined as teams to prosper national progress and development . Even in term procedural and execution still concrete mechanistic form, but the whole effort strategically promotes to more organic form of military organizations.

Failure of change?

Do we still stand for larger and conscript defense force? Or we have tremendously downsized our organization for better manage of change? Why now the security guard of restricted military camp shifted to privatized company to play the roles? What are underlying rationale behind this change, intended, unintended or partially intended? This questions remains in black box our change agents in defense sector. Are the organizations respond to newly accepted trending of change or its consequences of failure to change in military realm?

On Change

Human as civilized beings are constantly change, and this natural process marked how we are progressing through ages. There are three types of people denoted their life conditions, passive reactive and proactive. In facing modern world challenges, and to, we require to plan and manage our change in such way that leads us to betterment in life. Like saying, in order to predict our future is best by design it ourselves…

Modern Long - Term Organizational Success

Today increasingly for organization to stand successful, is largely based on their capability to manage change, nurture creativity and to promote innovation. Creativity, innovation and change are intertwined catalyst to give organization competitive advantage to stay ahead in changing world of business.

Taylor ( 1856-1917)  vs Mayo (1880 -1949)

Taylor was first initiated modern scientific management in British Industrial Revolutions (1730-1850) and spelled the mechanism of efficiency in modern industry by replicate ‘human machines’. His studies provided big leap in productivity but has led to discontent among industrial workers on the way human are treated. He further assumed on his approach: money motivates people and people have tendency to idleness (I think it stills relevant nowadays where most workers need to be monitored on their job by timely performance appraisal, punch card and overtime pay)

Later Elton Mayo came in to scene to improve above concept with his Human Relations Theory. He against Taylor remarks and expand ideas on productivities by his infamous Hawthorne Study for Western Electric Company. He delved on how the physical conditions of work effects productivity and came out with findings that Human factors rather than physical working conditions determine worker satisfaction and performance. (It can be observed how ergonomics now being emphasized in factories from the chair, lighting and tables they used in industry).

Change in Nut Shell

It is vividly shown here how important change has become and inevitable in our daily life. Change is not just about new ideas but also useful and for betterment, this meant positive change. In order to achieve this, change has to be plan and manage meticulously so that the impacts are sound and beneficial to society at large. In nutshell ,change is the movement over time from current ways of doing things to new ways of workings.