ISSUE 176 : Jul/Aug - 2008 - Australian Defence Force Journal

about by posting cycles can impede the development and maintenance of headquarters
knowledge, where there is insufficient time available for comprehensive handovers.
Conclusion
The above-raised issues represent interview program participants’ experiences working
with the Coalition. Their emphasis on the factors affecting the degree to which this working
relationship was an effective one highlights human rather than technological issues. These
include the critical role played by embedded, liaison, and exchange staff, and the impact of
classified information. Trust proved to be a positive and defining element in these respects,
facilitating the role of liaison officers and the sharing of classified information. Cultural
differences such as those in command philosophy, specialisations, and doctrinal frameworks
were also found to have an impact on ADF–Coalition interoperability.
Findings from this research indicate that issues of communication protocols, trust, relationship
building and awareness of coalition cultural differences are important components of effective
C2 and mission outcomes in the battlespace. There are a number of lessons that can be drawn
from this data:
• improved connectivity does not in itself guarantee the free flow of information;
• robust human networks, often informal, are important for information flows in the
battlespace; and
• cultural awareness programs should extend to coalition partners.
The outcomes from this research confirm that the human dimension is a significant
interoperability enabler. The importance of robust formal and informal human networks is the
predominant theme that has emerged from all of the interviews conducted for this research.
The robustness of these networks enable personnel to build situation awareness, and to
share information. These networks also provide an alternative to obstructed or protracted
processes; additionally, they facilitate timely access to classified information, and they alleviate
problems caused by incompatible technologies. The interviewees’ emphasis on human
networks demonstrates the integral role of effectively facilitating interpersonal relationships
in areas of operation. The importance of relationship management can be further seen in the
interviewees’ emphasis on trust, on the important role of embedded, liaison and exchange
staff, and on other issues associated with working with members of other national forces. It
is hoped that by highlighting these issues, improvements to interoperability can be made by
facilitating a shift in perceptions during pre-deployment training so that personnel ‘on the
ground’ will be better prepared for engagements. At the very least, it is hoped this article will
promote discussion and further exploration of these factors.
Future operations are likely to be in a joint coalition environment. The differences in command
philosophy, doctrine and the way the NCW concepts are translated into a battlespace will
probably continue to differ amongst coalition partners. Interoperability requires more than
merely overcoming technological hurdles of compatibility; there is also a need to utilise and
understand the human domain where differences between coalition partners’ cultures, personal
120