Defense chief Eirik Kristofferen (th) can be clearer in two important areas, writes Berit Svendsen (tv). She chaired the Svendsen Committee, which, among other things, believes that the Norwegian armed forces need more leadership and diversity.
The armed forces will need stronger leadership.
Defense Chief Eirik Kristoffersen recently presented their professional military advice. There’s a lot of good here, but in two important areas it should be clearer:
- Management reorganization.
- The use of personnel otherwise in the armed forces.
The Svendsen Committee was set up by the government in 2019. Together with representatives of companies, public companies and the armed forces, I had to assess how the armed forces can improve their ability to recruit, retain and develop expertise, including by helping to develop a necessary diversity of expertise in the armed forces.
To a large extent, the chief of defense followed the advice of the committee. But Kristoffersen gives too little importance to the measures that are necessary for the changes that the Norwegian Armed Forces will need in the future.
Here, strengthening management and better personnel management are key points for improvement.
Frequent turnover of managers
It is the defense leadership that must take the initiative when major change projects are initiated and implemented. And to grow the business in the future, the armed forces will need more management and stronger management.
Major changes require patient leadership. It’s the results that count, and that’s precisely why the armed forces need leaders who stand still longer than they do today. By remaining in office for several years, the manager will be much more empowered and it will be easier to measure what has been achieved.
Frequent job changes come at the expense of necessary and critical business development capability
Among senior officers in the Armed Forces, rotation to senior position seems to have become a goal in itself. Such frequent job changes come at the expense of necessary and critical business development capability, we believed. in our framework.
When this happens in critical areas such as information technology, communications, cyber and investments, it is no wonder that the Norwegian Armed Forces face major challenges.
And that doesn’t help the situation when you know that the positions are reserved for the military. The National Audit Office used the “very serious” level of criticism in his opinion armed forces information systems for operations. Here, it should also have been considered whether competence, experience and frequent turnover could indeed be among the reasons.
Staff management
After The Defense Committee and the chief of defense gave his opinion, the need for more people in the armed forces is now on everyone’s lips. Here I would like to caution against one-sided debate and one-sided focus on increasing the volume only.
The debate must be broadened to the question of how the armed forces can make the best use of personnel, whether military or civilian. It must also be about how the armed forces can more quickly acquire relevant experience and the right competence to meet the challenges of the future.
The Chief of Defense indeed writes a few sentences indicating that civilian experience must be valued more and that it must be open to the employment of personnel with relevant civilian expertise in certain military positions. That’s all well and good, but he writes mostly about conscription and education, and that’s nothing new. Such instruments were used by the Norwegian armed forces – and are still used – to “build” skills from scratch.
Defense Chief Eirik Kristoffersen presented his expert military advice to the government and Defense Minister Bjørn Arild Gram (Ap) on June 7.
A major weakness of this system is that it does not solve the challenges faced by the armed forces in the short term. Here, a new reflection must be carried out with regard to the use of human resources. One of the main means of action will be to bring in personnel with the right skills.
Civilian skill should be used where the military is not the answer. Consequently, the Svendsen committee proposed that several positions – including several at the top – be made civilian. It didn’t go well. The recommendation was made because the committee did not understand the military profession and the function of military power.
Civilian skill must be used where the military is not the answer
However, the Defense Commission writes well about trends and developments over the next 10-20 years. This should give the chief of defense enough crisis understanding to question the culture and tradition of the region. Leadership in the armed forces will be strengthened if personnel with experience of technological change in business and other public enterprises are recruited.
Enough words – more action
The Defense Committee points out that the recommendations of the Svendsen Committee have not been followed to any particular extent. The commission itself also refers to several of these recommendations in its report.
It took three years from when the Svendsen committee made the recommendations to when they were read by the professional military council. To improve defense ability, more words and advice are not needed, but actions. And much of that can be resolved within the chief of defense’s policy space.
I conclude as the Svendsen committee did in 2020: “The rest of the story begins with the presence of the right leaders around the boss’s table.” You’re having a bad time, Kristoffersen!
