Missile technology was embraced by fighter pilots and the USAF because it aligned well within the culture of air-to-air combat. While it was revolutionary technology, the pilots saw it as an offensive weapon that enabled pilots to gain a tactical advantage over the adversary. Although the missile greatly altered tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs), logistics, and even support organizations, it did not seek to alter the fighter pilot culture and was therefore readily embraced by the pilots and the USAF.
Unmanned aircraft provide a striking example of the opposite effect. As discussed above, the character of aerial combat had changed dramatically since its inception, but because culture remained constant, pilots across the time …show more content…
As an organization, militaries are designed to respond to threats, which occur both on the battlefield and on the political front. Additionally, military leaders are political and seek to preserve their own status making them susceptible to the threat of being fired or removed from a position. Therefore, an innovative strategist can exploit this relationship and the fact that militaries are heavily influenced by domestic politics by garnering support for innovation from civilian leadership. In some cases the strategic innovator may have to become the “maverick” as described by Posen and drive change …show more content…
As technologies continue to rapidly evolve strategic innovators must counter organizational resistance to ensure that the military remains capable or responding to myriad threats. The future will demand that the strategist adapt not only to the challenges of the fog and friction of war, but also to the cultural, political, and social framework within which he or she operates. Therefore, the strategist must understand the cultures and sub-cultures of the organizations in which they operate and select the appropriate method for implementing change. If the innovation supports a currently established culture, the strategist must maneuver the innovation to operate within that organization where it can gain support. If the innovation is counter the organizational culture the strategist must create new organizations to foster change, pursue top-down direction from civilian leaders, or a combination of the
Unmanned aircraft provide a striking example of the opposite effect. As discussed above, the character of aerial combat had changed dramatically since its inception, but because culture remained constant, pilots across the time …show more content…
As an organization, militaries are designed to respond to threats, which occur both on the battlefield and on the political front. Additionally, military leaders are political and seek to preserve their own status making them susceptible to the threat of being fired or removed from a position. Therefore, an innovative strategist can exploit this relationship and the fact that militaries are heavily influenced by domestic politics by garnering support for innovation from civilian leadership. In some cases the strategic innovator may have to become the “maverick” as described by Posen and drive change …show more content…
As technologies continue to rapidly evolve strategic innovators must counter organizational resistance to ensure that the military remains capable or responding to myriad threats. The future will demand that the strategist adapt not only to the challenges of the fog and friction of war, but also to the cultural, political, and social framework within which he or she operates. Therefore, the strategist must understand the cultures and sub-cultures of the organizations in which they operate and select the appropriate method for implementing change. If the innovation supports a currently established culture, the strategist must maneuver the innovation to operate within that organization where it can gain support. If the innovation is counter the organizational culture the strategist must create new organizations to foster change, pursue top-down direction from civilian leaders, or a combination of the