![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
The post-Cold War era has witnessed the rapid expansion of organisational learning initiatives within NATO militaries, especially formal “lessons-learned” processes. The effectiveness of national lessons-learned processes in recalibrating military activity to the demands of ongoing operations has been highly-differentiated. However, the academic literature on military change and practitioner guidance has been slow to investigate the key features of best-practice in military learning. This article breaks new ground by drawing upon the literature on dynamic organisational capabilities to explore the fundamental organisational processes and activities which are necessary to implement successful lessons-learned. It examines, in particular, the organisational features which facilitate “knowledge transformation”: the effective combination of new knowledge gained from intra- and inter-organisational learning with existing organisational knowledge. The article concludes by highlighting several potential future empirical and theoretical research agendas in military learning and the importance of engagement between lessons-learned practitioners and organisational learning scholars.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. Militaries can be conceived of as consisting of two main organisational components: the “institutional military”, which refers to the military organisations involved in training, equipping and ensuring the readiness of the military and the “operational military”, which consists of the organisations and personnel prepared for deployment.
2. AJP-3 (B), Allied Joint Doctrine for the Conduct of Operations, NATO, March 2011, 0454.
3. Marcus (Citation2017, pp. 5–9) provides an interesting, but brief examination of the core features of “organisational learning capacity” which relies heavily on the existing literature on military learning.
4. See, for example, Downie (Citation1998), Davidson (Citation2011), Fitzgerald (Citation2013), Nagl (Citation2002), Russell (Citation2010) and Serena (Citation2011).
5. For an exploration of best-practice in knowledge acquisition, management and dissemination, as well as further detail about the organisational activities and processes which underpin knowledge transformation in a military context, please see Dyson (Citationforthcoming).
6. The principle of mission command involves the delegation of a significant level of responsibility for tactical-level decision-making to lower-levels of command, particularly to platoon and company commanders in order to enhance flexibility in realising their commander’s intent.
7. Interview partner, DACOS Warfighting, British Army Land Warfare Development Centre, Warminster, 11 July 2017.
8. Three interviews, Centre for Historical Analysis and Conflict Research, Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst, 12 July 2017.
9. Interview, Division J357, Department for Lessons Learned, Potsdam, Bundeswehr Operations Command, 13 April 2016; Interview, Joint Warfare, Operational Analysis and Learning, Joint Forces Command, Northwood, United Kingdom, 28 February 2017.
10. Interview, former Head of British Army Mission Support Group and Afghanistan Counterinsurgency Centre, London, 27 February 2017.
11. Interview, former Head of British Army Lessons Exploitation Centre and former Army Chief Safety Officer, Warminster, 28 February 2017.
12. For a comparative account of British and German Army and Joint-level lessons-learned, see Dyson (Citationforthcoming).
13. Interview, Lessons Team, Land Warfare Development Centre, Warminster, 15 December 2016.
14. Interview, Lessons Team, Land Warfare Development Centre, Warminster, 15 December 2016.
15. Interview, Lessons Team, Land Warfare Development Centre, Warminster, 10 July 2017.
16. For a preliminary exploration of knowledge management and lessons-learned within international organisations, see Ringel-Bickelmaier and Ringel (Citation2010).
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Tom Dyson
Tom Dyson is a Senior Lecturer in International Relations at the Department of Politics and International Relations, Royal Holloway College, University of London. His research interests include British and German defence policy, the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy and NATO. Dr Dyson is the author of four books: The Politics of German Defence and Security; Neoclassical Realism and Defence Reform in post-Cold War Europe; European Defence Cooperation in EU Law and IR Theory (co-authored with Theodore Konstadinides) and Organisational Learning and the Modern Army (forthcoming). He has published articles in the British Journal of Politics and International Relations, Contemporary British History, Contemporary Security Policy, Defence Studies, European Law Review, European Security, German Politics and Security Studies. Dr Dyson recently undertook a two-year Gerda-Henkel Foundation project on military learning (2016-18).