Military Maladaptation: Counterinsurgency and the Politics of Failure

Bibliography

• Allison, Graham T., Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis, 2nd ed. (New York: Longman 1999).
   Google Scholar
• Amos, James F. and David H. Petraeus, Counterinsurgency Field Manual FM 3-24 (Univ. of Chicago Press 2007).
   Google Scholar
• Atangana, Martin, The End of French Rule in Cameroon (Lanham, MD: UP of America 2010).
   Google Scholar
• Avant, Deborah D. Political Institutions and Military Change: Lessons from Peripheral Wars (Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP 1994).
   Google Scholar
• Bantel, Karen A. and Susan E. Jackson, ‘Top Management and Innovations in Banking: Does the Composition of the Top Team Make a Difference?’, Strategic Management Journal 14/7 (Oct. 1993), 485–504.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, Huw, Fighting the Mau Mau: The British Army and Counter-Insurgency in the Kenya Emergency (Cambridge: CUP 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Carver, Michael, Britain’s Army in the Twentieth Century (London: Macmillan in association with the Imperial War Museum 1998).
   Google Scholar
• Catignani, Sergio, ‘“Getting COIN” at the Tactical Level in Afghanistan: Reassessing Counter-Insurgency Adaptation in the British Army’, Journal of Strategic Studies 35/4 (Aug. 2012), 513–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clausewitz, Carl von, On War, edited and translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret (New York: Everyman’s Library 1976).
   Google Scholar
• Crossan, Mary and Marina Apaydin, ‘A Multi‐Dimensional Framework of Organizational Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Literature’, Journal of Management Studies 47/6 (Sep. 2010), 1154–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crossan, Mary, Henry Lane and Roderick White, ‘An Organizational Learning Framework: From Intuition to Institution’, Academy of Management Review 24/3 (July 1999), 522–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damanpour, Fariborz, ‘Organizational Innovation: A Meta-Analysis of Effects of Determinants and Moderators’, The Academy of Management Journal 34/3 (Sept. 1991), 555–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downie, Richard, ‘Military Doctrine and the Learning Institution: Case Studies in Low-Intensity Conflict’, PhD dissertation, Univ. of Southern California, 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Eckstein, Harry, ‘Case Study and Theory in Political Science’, in Fred I. Greenstein and Nelson W. Polsby (eds), Handbook of Political Science (vol. 1): Political Science: Scope and Theory (Reading, MA: AddisonWesley 1975).
   Google Scholar
• Ettlie, John E., William P. Bridges, and Robert D. O’Keefe, ‘Organization Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical versus Incremental Innovation’, Management Science 30/6 (June 1984), 682–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farrell, Theo, ‘Improving in War: Military Adaptation and the British in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, 2006–2009’, Journal of Strategic Studies 33/4 (Aug. 2010), 567–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• French, David, The British Way in Counterinsurgency, 1945–1967 (Oxford: OUP 2011).
   Google Scholar
• Gardner, Scott, Strategic Assessment in War (Newhaven, CT: Yale UP 1997).
   Google Scholar
• George, Alexander L. and Andrew Bennett, Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press 2005).
   Google Scholar
• Goldman, Emily, ‘Western Military Models in Ottoman Turkey and Meiji Japan’, in Theo Farrell and Terry Terriff (eds), The Sources of Military Change (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner 2002).
   Google Scholar
• Grissom, Adam, ‘The Future of Military Innovation Studies’, Journal of Strategic Studies 29/5 (Oct. 2006), 905–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harbom, Lotta, Erik Melander, and Peter Wallensteen, ‘Dyadic Dimensions of Armed Conflict, 1946–2007’, Journal of Peace Research 45/5 (2008), 697–710.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen, Benjamin, ‘Military Innovation in the US Army; Anarchy, Bureaucracy, and the Forging of Doctrine, 1975–1995’, PhD dissertation, The American University, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Joes, Anthony James, Resisting Rebellion: The History and Politics of Counterinsurgency (Lexington: UP of Kentucky 2004).
   Google Scholar
• Kalyvas, Stathis N., The Logic of Violence in Civil War (Cambridge: CUP 2006).
   Google Scholar
• Kier, Elizabeth, Imagining War: French and British Military Doctrine between the Wars (Princeton UP 1997).
   Google Scholar
• King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane and Sidney Verba, Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research ( Princeton UP 1994).
   Google Scholar
• Kiszely, John, ‘The British Army and Approaches to Warfare since 1945’, Journal of Strategic Studies 19/4 (Dec. 1996), 179–206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kline, Stephen and Nathan Rosenberg, ‘An Overview of Innovation’, in Ralph Landau and Nathan Rosenberg (eds), The Positive Sum Strategy: Harnessing Technology for Economic Growth (Washington, DC: National Academies Press 1986).
   Google Scholar
• Krepinevich, Andrew, The Army and Vietnam (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins UP 1986).
   Google Scholar
• Long, Austin, Doctrine of Eternal Recurrence – The US Military and Counterinsurgency Doctrine, 1960–1970 and 2003–2006 (Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation 2008).
   Google Scholar
• Lundvall, Bengt-Ake, ‘National Business Systems and National Systems of Innovation’, International Studies of Management and Organization 29/2 (July 1999), 60–77.
   Google Scholar
• MacGregor Knox and Williamson Murray, The Dynamics of Military Revolution, 1300–2050 (Cambridge: CUP 2001).
   Google Scholar
• March, James G., ‘Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning’, Organization Science 2/1 (Feb. 1991), 71–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McInnes, Colin, Hot War, Cold War: The British Army’s Way in Warfare, 1945–95 (London: Brassey’s 1996).
   Google Scholar
• Mumford, Michael D. and Brian Licuanan, ‘Leading for Innovation: Conclusions, Issues, and Directions’, The Leadership Quarterly 15/1 (Feb. 2004), 163–171.
   Google Scholar
• Murray, Williamson, Military Adaptation in War: With Fear of Change (Cambridge: CUP 2011).
   Google Scholar
• Murray, Williamson and Allan Millet (eds), Military Innovation in the Interwar Period (Cambridge: CUP 1996).
   Google Scholar
• Nagl, John A., Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife: Counterinsurgency Lessons from Malaya to Vietnam (Univ. of Chicago Press 2002).
   Google Scholar
• Patterson, Rebecca Damm, ‘The US Army and Nation-Building: Explaining Divergence in Effective Military Innovation’, PhD thesis, George Washington University, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Posen, Barry R., The Sources of Military Doctrine: France, Britain, and Germany between the World Wars (Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP 1984).
   Google Scholar
• Rosen, Stephen Peter, Winning the Next War (Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP 1994).
   Google Scholar
• Rowe, Lloyd and William B. Boise, ‘Organizational Innovation: Current Research and Evolving Concepts’, Public Administration Review 34/3 (May/June 1974), 284–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strachan, Hew, Wellington’s Legacy: The Reform of the British Army, 1830–54 ( Manchester UP 1984).
   Google Scholar
• Strawson, John, Gentlemen in Khaki and Camouflage: The British Army, 1890–2008 (Barnsley, UK: Pen & Sword Military 2009).
   Google Scholar
• Vetock, Dennis, Lessons Learned: A History of US Army Lesson Learning (US Army Military History Institute 1988).
   Google Scholar
• Wiersema, Margarethe F. and Karen A. Bantel, ‘Top Management Team Turnover as an Adaptation Mechanism: The Role of the Environment’, Strategic Management Journal 14/7 (Oct. 1993), 485–504.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zisk, Kimberly Marten, Engaging the Enemy: Organization Theory and Soviet Military Innovation, 1955–1991 ( Princeton UP 1993).
   Google Scholar