A recent YouTube video discussed what NATO could learn from Sweden's use of the Saab Gripen fighter. The aircraft was specifically designed for austere and dispersed operations, reflecting Sweden's country-specific military doctrine of highly decentralized defensive operations. However, due to this inherent association with Sweden's doctrine, it is unlikely that the Gripen could be easily adapted for NATO operations. This is an example of an organization developing a character and repertoire that is a synthesis of its individual members, tools, and protocols.
A commenter pointed out that American units strongly adhere to the concept of operating from fixed facilities. While there have been some experiments with operating from highways and unprepared airstrips, the commenter observed a lack of effort in fostering a culture of decentralized operation.
I thought of Conway’s Law, which states that organizations design systems that mirror their own communication structure (h/t John Helm). These situations are circular: the systems reflect the org structure, which has itself been shaped by previous versions of the system. As a result, doctrine becomes deeply ingrained in both protocols and artifacts, thereby limiting potential changes to the doctrine itself. This is ogregore as organism.
There is a connection to Bud Light's Ogregore Antagonists. Political movements typically possess fewer protocols and artifacts compared to more formal organizations. This diminishes their functioning as ogregores.
No comments:
Post a Comment