The challenge of Institutionalizing Adaption - the question SASC did not ask SECDEF

[Surferbeetle]

Rob,

I have a few more points on this topic that I would like to share this morning. Innovation and Organizational Charts are two concepts that I do not normally combine in one sentence. Is it an apocryphal story that FM 3-24 was written outside of the ‘normal’ FM writing process? I would be surprised if it wasn't written outside this process, because it’s an FM in a style not normally seen and it seems appropriate that traditional organizational charts were not sufficient for the innovative thinking needed to produce it.

The ability to innovate is a skill that can both be trained and encouraged in our military personnel. The Adult Learning Model has been extensively studied, is often thought of as non-traditional learning, and both helps our nation and improves the lives of our citizens. My last trip to graduate school exposed me to podcasts, interactive websites (WebCT and Blackboard), and simulations as vehicles to disseminate and examine the validity of concepts.

A fair proportion of America listens to NPR and/or Rush Limbaugh. In Iraq I noted the extensive presence and use of audio tapes, CD’s DVD’s, and Satellite Dishes. When I consider how many hours are spent in commute time I wonder why the US Military has not tapped into this part of the Adult Learning model and made interesting Podcasts available on FM’s and other topics?

Interactive Websites such as AKO, BCKS, and Jihadi Websites are a defining feature of GWOT which help to drive innovation. They allow for a wider spread of hard-won knowledge among practitioners and students and allow for the benefits of Darwinic Selection and Economies of Scale in the selection and dissemination of the knowledge of war.

When I speak of video games I think about how many of our soldiers spend hours and hours on the game Halo. How much money and time would be needed for US Military to capitalize upon existing private sector skills to develop a similar ‘killer ap’ for our use? Would training the force using this method have more utility or be more cost effective than the Crusader or Comanche programs in fostering innovation in the COIN fight?

MIT is an admirable and innovative brick and mortar institution, which is continually pushing the educational envelope and which looks to be able to cross the digital divide. Similar to the AKO training link, I can download MIT OpenCourseWare engineering courses to study at my own pace and as time permits. At MIT proper, an ‘interactive learning’ model which includes small class sizes, real time assessment of understanding and simulations is challenging traditional methods of teaching concepts.

To finish off, my thesis is that in order to foster innovation the US Military needs to commit to the wider spread of hard-won knowledge among practitioners and students and allow for the benefits of Darwinic Selection and Economies of Scale in the selection and dissemination of the knowledge of war. Video games, podcasts, interactive websites, and simulations are vehicles to disseminate and examine the validity of concepts and will continue to grow in importance and common use as we chase innovation and adaptation. The structure of Organizational Charts should follow rather than lead in this process.

Regards,

Steve