Defence Forces Review 2010

Defence Forces Review 2010Recommendations and ImplicationsSome of the recommendations which arose from the research and their implications areoutlined as follows:• There is a requirement to promulgate and establish a standard, codified commanddoctrine for the DF – ideally MC. This initiative would achieve two things: firstly, itwould close off the current conceptual gap of the DF having no definitive commandphilosophy; and secondly, it would enable MC to become the command philosophyof choice for the DF at home, and therefore the default philosophy for PSOs.• Secondly, MC philosophy needs to become an integral part of existing DF leadershipdoctrine, particularly given that the research firmly indicates how central leadership isto MC philosophy. Situating MC within leadership doctrine would drive the requiredcultural change, thereby enabling the organisation to adopt MC as its commandphilosophy.• Finally, formal instruction on MC philosophy needs to be developed and imparted toall DF personnel. This could be achieved by teaching MC doctrine on all career coursesfor DF leaders at various DF educational institutions. This would be a necessary firststep in facilitating its dissemination and adoption throughout the organisation.ConclusionThis essay set out to provide the reader with an overview of MC philosophy; tracing itsorigins, offering some key definitions in respect of MC, C2 and leadership. Thereafter theessay focussed on the ongoing military academic debate in respect of MC philosophy. Thehuman-in-command was shown to be situated at the centre of this debate and is supported by anumber of pillars, namely; organisational culture, structure and morality/values. As a result ofthis intriguing study, I have concluded that the absence of any codified, promulgated commandphilosophy potentially leaves the DF conceptually disadvantaged to adapt effectively to thecontemporary PSO environment. The adoption of MC as the DF’s command philosophywould undoubtedly address this conceptual gap.8