The Impact of Technology Insertion on Organisations

HFIDTC/2/12.2.1/1
Version 3 / 21 November 2007
11.2 Identifying and Training the <strong>Technology</strong> <strong>Insertion</strong>
Practitioners
<strong>The</strong> literature, case studies and SME evidence suggest that technology insertion risks
occur at various stages <strong>of</strong> any technology insertion programme. Engineers selecting
components to upgrade military platforms may be familiar with selecting equipment
based on capability and cost, but must also consider the implications that changes may
have on overall platform performance. How important is component performance when
compared with its ruggedness, international restrictions, reliability or number <strong>of</strong>
suppliers?
At a higher level <strong>of</strong> decision maker, there are risks in selecting the wrong technologies
and platforms to develop. Are major platforms relevant for asymmetrical warfare? Will a
new IT system be compatible with existing systems or coalition systems?
<strong>Technology</strong> insertion decisions can have implications for the number and type <strong>of</strong>
personnel needed in the organisation as well as for recruitment and retention policies.
This scoping study suggests that in terms <strong>of</strong> the military, TI practitioners include:
• Customers;
• MoD Integrated Project Teams (IPT);
• MoD DECs (Director <strong>of</strong> Equipment Capability);
• Contractors;
• Training Organisations.
Given the number <strong>of</strong> people responsible for TI and the uncertainty and risks surrounding
TI decisions, it is clear that TI practitioners need either training, guidance in selecting
effective techniques or support in decision making. Weaknesses in the acquisition process
have been identified in this report, but it is beyond the scope <strong>of</strong> this study to recommend
changes to this aspect <strong>of</strong> military organisations.
11.3 Are there any common lessons?
Given the challenges in managing technology insertion programmes, it seems likely that
practitioners need to be well trained in identifying and managing project risks.
Practitioners may need to be trained to take a systems view <strong>of</strong> technology projects, so
they are able to not only identify technology capabilities, but also assess overall system
impact, and identify organisational risks, before they commit to insertion decisions.
It is also apparent that the tools available to support practitioners are lacking in efficacy.
If risk assessment tools are failing to help practitioners identify the key risks, then it
seems reasonable to suggest that more effective or task-appropriate tools are required. So,
to summarise:
• Practitioners may not always have experience <strong>of</strong> the likely risks <strong>of</strong> technology
insertion or the impacts <strong>of</strong> these new technologies upon the user and
organisation. This issue is especially likely where the impacts occur beyond
the practitioners’ area <strong>of</strong> expertise, e.g. impacts on productivity, morale,
63