Unlocking Leadership Excellence with 360-Degree Feedback - Part 2

Cultural change in Defence isn’t just a vision—it requires action. Part 2 of this series reveals how multi-source assessment and feedback can be the catalyst for real, lasting transformation in the Australian Defence Organisation.

21/02/2025

> 30 min

Part 2 - This second portion of the article (Part 1 is also available on the Forge) outlines the Defence Culture Blueprint framework, highlights the program’s objectives and structure, and briefly summarises the current use of multi-source assessment and feedback across Defence. Following detailed proposals for implementation, considerations and challenges of these implementation strategies are emphasised. The article then concludes with a summary of how multi-source assessment and feedback could contribute to achieving sustainable organisational cultural change within the Defence Culture Blueprint. A reminder of the research question being answered:

Multi-source assessment and feedback has been widely implemented throughout military and civilian contexts for leadership development and evaluation tools. However, can Defence leverage this methodology for broader culture change objectives sought by the Defence Culture Blueprint implementation?

The Defence Culture Blueprint consists of four main parts; ‘The Effects’, ‘The Spine’, ‘People Capability’, and ‘Architectures and Systems’, brought together in the framework in Figure 1.^[1]

Defence Cultural Blueprint complex diagram — Figure 1: The Defence Culture Blueprint Framework

The Defence Culture Blueprint seeks to achieve two essential Effects:^[2]

Enterprise Performance. The Defence Culture Blueprint seeks to enhance organisational performance by embracing the advantages of ‘culture as a capability’. Where Defence leaders create an evolved culture that drives and sustains performance.
Experience at Work. A positive workplace experience manifests as effective and efficient teams. The Defence Culture Blueprint seeks to enhance workforce engagement and commitment brought about by a positive workplace culture delivered through empowering leadership.
The Spine of the framework centres around Defence Values and Behaviours supported by Leadership and Identity:^[3] Defence Values embodied in workforce behaviours lead to the generation and delivery of Defence Enterprise capabilities. Leaders role modelling appropriate behaviour is critical to creating a positive team culture to deliver Defence’s mission. The Defence Culture Blueprint seeks to enhance enterprise-wide identity whilst maintaining individual characteristics of who we are, including Service and APS identities.
People Capability incorporates the workforce (People and Teams) and its continual improvement (Development) through professionalism and teamwork.
Architecture and Systems integrates governance, management, technology, and processes (Systems), binding the enterprise together (Connection) to be more than the sum of its parts.^[4]

Current Defence use of multi-source assessment and feedback

Current use of multi-source assessment and feedback within Defence is very constrained, with only two easily identifiable implementations within official leadership development programs. Outside of these programs, interested individuals from across Defence can gain ad hoc access to resources in supporting self-development.

Next Generation Navy enhances member social mastery development by focussing on lenses of thinking and behaviours. Multi-source assessment and feedback contributes to this development by providing awareness of the role of individuals, teams and organisation in creation and evolution of cultural change.^[5]

The Senior Leadership Performance Framework seeks ‘achieving an accountable, capable and unified workforce with a strong performance culture at its core where leadership, professionalism and corporate behaviours are valued and rewarded’.^[6] Senior Executive Service Band and Star rank members within this program formally undertake multi-source assessment and feedback, supporting ongoing leadership development and performance accountability.

Multi-source assessment and feedback contribution to the Defence Culture Blueprint

Given culture is considered a capability and performance enabler for Defence, the contribution of multi-source assessment and feedback should be built from the foundation of Defence’s workforce management systems and processes.^[7] The following description outlines how multi-source assessment and feedback can, if implemented appropriately, permeate the broader organisation and support almost all aspects of the Defence Culture Blueprint.

People Capability.

Critical to delivering Defence’s mission, people capability encompasses people and teams and their development through continuous investment, aligning skills, knowledge, and experience enhancement with desired outcomes.^[8] As established above, multi-source assessment and feedback supports individual and team development through Leadership Development and Learning and Development mechanisms.

Mentoring and personalised learning is an enabler for future workforce enhancement.^[9] When leadership is committed to development, an organisational learning culture is easily created and maintained.^[10] Engagement in employee evaluation and growth further supports a learning culture.^[11] Identifying and managing high performers through talent management informs succession planning, ensuring continuity in critical employment areas. Succession planning also identifies progress and promotion paths for staff. Incorporation of multi-source assessment and feedback into performance evaluation, talent management and education programs focus workforce development on what is important for organisational improvement. This focus also ensures the skills, competencies, knowledge, and experience requiring enhancement meet individual, team, and broader organisational objectives.^[12]

Architecture and Systems.

As established earlier in this paper, culture is centred around people, their principles, convictions, and interactions; the espoused organisational values and behaviours; and organisational structures and processes.^[13] Defence seeks to improve organisational culture by enhancing the connection between people, teams, and broader organisational relationships and their connection to purpose and mission.^[14]

When individuals understand their roles and how completing tasks and activities contributes to overall organisational success and strategic goals, they feel a sense of purpose.^[15] Consideration of team members’ opinions and inputs through a multi-source assessment and feedback mechanism also contributes to this sense of purpose.^[16]

The Spine.

Encompassing values and behaviours, leadership and identity, the spine represents the core of the Defence Culture Blueprint. The Defence Culture Blueprint aspires to enable positive culture change by encouraging values-based leadership and fostering productive team cultures while accommodating individual and group identities.^[17]

Multi-source assessment and feedback has, at its core, the methodology for insight into an individual’s values and behaviour from a holistic perspective. Applicable across personal and leadership development programs, performance appraisal and feedback: multi-source assessment and feedback collectively represent the social psychological concepts of person perception, impression formation, individuals’ conception of self, impression management, and behavioural change.^[18] Holistically integrating multi-source assessment and feedback within Leadership Development, Talent Management and Succession Planning, and Learning and Development Programs sets the foundation for Defence to launch cultural improvement. When also incorporated within Performance Appraisals and Selection and Promotion Processes, Defence can proactively forge a future organisational culture of diversity and inclusion whilst delivering its mission.

The establishment of leadership legitimacy is crucial for successful cultural change. Once a leader establishes preferred organisational standards, a shared identity within the organisation (group) assists with integrating desired values and behaviours.^[19] Leaders selected using programs supported by multi-source assessment and feedback enjoy greater trust within the team due to perceptions of deservedness and fairness in their selection.^[20] Leaders strengthen trust and legitimacy with a solid organisational-versus-individual view.^[21]

The Effects.

Defence seeks to establish ‘culture as a capability’; however, it concedes cultures require constant investment and focus by leaders at all levels to create the conditions for establishing and maintaining the culture Defence desires.^[22] Positive workplace culture drives and sustains high-performing teams, delivering efficient and effective performance outcomes for Defence. Prioritising people capability and improving organisational architectures and systems through positive identity and robust leadership ensures the Defence Culture Blueprint provides a positive work experience across Defence.^[23]

Implementation Considerations and Challenges

This paper highlights extensive research demonstrating multi-source assessment and feedback contribution to leadership development, organisational improvement, and cultural evolution. However, an implementing organisation must address applicable considerations and challenges for success.^[24] The following section outlines various considerations and challenges relevant to the Defence Culture Blueprint framework.^[25] These include: that cultural change is challenging; must be targeted in implementation; and should be taken with a longitudinal perspective. Importantly, accountability of senior leadership to incorporate all relevant tools, including multi-source assessment and feedback, is essential to assure the highest probability for success in cultural change.

Leadership ownership.

Perhaps the most critical challenge of successful multi-source assessment and feedback programs is the lack of leadership accountability in implementation. Leadership accountability of these programs not only enhances but ultimately determines the success of implementation.^[26] Recent advances in the United States Army’s implementation of multi-source assessment and feedback demonstrate senior leadership commitment’s importance in delivering successful programs.^[27]

Contextual and specific.

Multi-source assessment and feedback is not an organisational or behavioural change silver bullet. Rather, implemented within a suite of tools, multi-source assessment and feedback provides a unique set of data points with utility across various program outcomes. For a cultural change program to succeed, the implementation should outline the desired end-state and a definition of success must be identified. Hence, if program outcomes are unique and organisation-specific, so should the design of multi-source assessment and feedback data acquisition tools. Additionally, this tool must support two primary criteria: collection of data that enables reliable measurement and supports long-term sustainable behavioural change. Bracken and Rose collate a range of considerations and related approaches for developing outcome-specific multi-source assessment and feedback systems.^[28]

Psychologically supported.

Psychological safety is essential for implementing any program incorporating multi-source assessment and feedback. Establishing a psychologically safe environment must occur before a program begins, especially if participants receive multi-source assessment and feedback for the first time. This environment must also account for individual perception and acceptance of feedback.^[29]

Organisations seeking to implement multi-source assessment and feedback can establish a safe environment through training, education, and support arrangements. Provision of generic training, supported by the running of a pilot program, in the utility, use, and what is involved in 360-degree feedback-orientated programs for all staff and managers participating in the program must precede commencement.^[30] The provision of counselling and coaching services should be a high priority for implementing a multi-source assessment and feedback system.

Perhaps the most critical element is establishing a positive organisational feedback culture. Specialised coaching and mentoring mechanisms support a positive organisational feedback culture and are vital to alleviate concerns over the reception of negative feedback.^[31] Catering for and lessening these concerns is especially so when members receiving feedback hold a negative perception towards receiving feedback.

Development, then performance.

Implementing multi-source assessment and feedback programs should start with development in mind. Establishing understanding and trust in multi-source assessment and feedback through initial development programs is critical.^[32] Running pilots throughout the organisation’s management (leadership) levels is advisable, demonstrating leadership commitment and authenticity in implementation.

Development focus on lower-level leadership within the organisation will realise long-term organisational benefits as these leaders progress through the organisation. Early development highlights leadership weaknesses and misalignment of values and behaviours with those desired within the organisation. This development focus also helps identify areas for improvement before leadership behaviours become more difficult to modify.^[33]

Once multi-source assessment and feedback processes and associated trust have matured within an organisation, the natural progression is from development to performance evaluation purposes.^[34] Whilst these systems are complementary, they should operate separately but in parallel.^[35]

Sustainable long-term implementation.

Effective and focussed multi-source assessment and feedback implementation is an investment in people with long-term organisational benefits.^[36] Ongoing individual and leadership development supports overall organisational culture improvement.^[37] Longitudinal performance evaluation ensures the progress of desirable leaders through the organisation whilst identifying those not yet ready to progress to higher leadership roles. This approach has demonstrated promise, as seen in the United States Army implementation of multi-source assessment and feedback within the Battalion and Colonel Command and Sergeant Major Assessment Programs.^[38] Initial observations suggest there have already been positive leadership and culture improvements throughout the organisation.

Objective participant selection and data credibility.

The selection of participants to provide feedback varies in importance, depending on the outcomes sought. Feedback contributors should know the recipient for 1-3 years for best results.^[39] A representative sample of contributors should be broad across supervisors, peers, direct reports, and customers and suppliers, if seeking external input.^[40] The recipient should not determine the selection of feedback participants, hence minimising the opportunity for ‘gaming’ of feedback received.^[41] However, the inclusion of a self-assessment assists with identifying any difference in perception between the others and the recipient.^[42]

Establishing and maintaining data credibility and integrity once feedback is collected is critical. Data integrity includes empowering recipients to obtain original and interpreted data for development scenarios whilst restricting access to only those requiring it for the supporting delivery of program outcomes.^[43] Equally, keeping contributors’ input confidential increases the accuracy of the feedback given.^[44]

Conclusion

Defence’s culture change journey has achieved modest success over the previous decade. Moving forward from 2023, Defence sets out to build on the achievements of the Pathway to Change through evolution to the Defence Culture Blueprint to deliver an ‘Adaptive and Resilient Defence Culture’.^[45] Defence plans to deliver this culture by combining the outcomes from the enabling elements of the Defence Culture Blueprint Framework. The Spine of the Defence Culture Blueprint is a set of desired values and behaviours supported through effectual leadership and shared identity. This spine buttresses the broader organisation to empower People Capability, leveraging and improving organisational Architectures and Systems to deliver the primary Effects of enhanced Experience at Work and increased Enterprise Performance.^[46]

Achievement of objectives tied to individual elements of the Defence Culture Blueprint could be underpinned and enriched through multi-source assessment and feedback. Multi-source assessment and feedback has been incorporated within strategy, policies, and processes across various civilian and military organisations for over 30 years. Of particular interest for Defence is the widespread and growing implementation of multi-source assessment and feedback throughout the United States Department of Defense.

At its core, multi-source assessment and feedback seeks to provide constructive feedback from a 360-degree perspective. Confirming strengths for continued practice, whilst highlighting weaknesses and blind spots for development, multi-source assessment and feedback offers additional information to underpin a range of opportunities that benefit individuals, teams, and organisations. When aligned with organisational objectives, these development opportunities increase leadership effectiveness while encouraging a widespread learning culture. Assessed misalignment of individual values, behaviours or performance with organisational goals enables development programs to improve individuals’ and teams’ skills, knowledge, and actions towards meeting and sustaining objectives.

The combination of performance evaluation, talent management and succession planning, all informed with holistic perspectives within the workforce, ensures high-performing staff progress. Consideration of team member perspectives further enhances culture when included in important decisions that impact the team and the broader organisation. Similarly, when selection for prominent roles and promotion includes elements of holistic input, trust in those progressing into these key leadership roles is improved, building legitimacy throughout the organisation.

Multi-source assessment and feedback has successfully supported workforce management functions in civilian and military scenarios; however, implementation has not been without challenges. Despite its detractors, research over the past three decades has proved the strengths, improved the shortcomings, and highlighted areas for focused consideration in multi-source assessment and feedback implementation.

Holistically integrating multi-source assessment and feedback within underpinning elements of workforce management systems sets the foundation for Defence to launch cultural improvement. When also incorporated within Performance Appraisals, Talent Management and Succession Planning, and Selection and Promotion Processes, Defence can proactively forge a future organisational culture of diversity and inclusion whilst delivering its mission.

Footnotes

¹ Research Summary Report - Defence Culture Blueprint, 10.

² Defence Culture Strategy, 6.

³ Defence Culture Strategy, 7.

⁴ Defence Culture Strategy, 7.

⁵ Next Generation Navy.

⁶ Senior Leadership Performance Frameworks.

⁷ Defence Culture Strategy, 2.

⁸ Defence Culture Strategy, 7.

⁹ Research Summary Report - Defence Culture Blueprint, 37–41.

¹⁰ Islam et al., “Organizational Learning Culture and Leader‐member Exchange Quality,” 334; Jackson and Meyer, “Leadership, Commitment, and Culture,” 97; Vera and Crossan, “Strategic Leadership and organizational Learning,” 236.

¹¹ Van Velsor, McCauley, and Ruderman, The Center for Creative Leadership Handbook of Leadership Development, 279.

¹² Day and Halpin, “Leadership Development,” 10–12.

¹³ Schein and Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership, 17–25; “Defence Culture Strategy,” 7.

¹⁴ Research Summary Report - Defence Culture Blueprint, 24–27.

¹⁵ Fiscus, “360 Degree Feedback Best Practices and the Army’s MSAF Program,” 13; Lesperance, “Developing Leaders for Army 2020,” 5.

¹⁶ Beiring, “Getting Serious About Leadership,” 6–7.

¹⁷ Defence Culture Strategy, 7.

¹⁸ Dunnette, “My Hammer or Your Hammer?,” 374.

¹⁹ Hogg, “A Social Identity Theory of Leadership,” 189–90.

²⁰ Beiring, “Getting Serious About Leadership,” 8–15.

²¹ Keyes, Hysom, and Lupo, “The Positive Organization,” 148–50.

²² Defence Culture Strategy, 6.

²³ Beba and Church, “Changing the Game for Women Leaders at PepsiCo,” 289–90; Athota and Malik, “360-Degree Feedback at the Workplace,” 323; Jones, Improving Accountability for Effective Command Climate, 25–26.

²⁴ Smither, London, and Reilly, “Does Performance Improve Following Multisource Feedback?,” 60.

²⁵ Bracken and Rose, “When Does 360-Degree Feedback Create Behavior Change?,” 185.

²⁶ Rolnick, “Harnessing the Transformative Tsunami: Fleet-wide 360-Degree Feedback Revisited,” 44; Jones, Improving Accountability for Effective Command Climate, 25.

²⁷ Spain, “Reinventing the Leader Selection Process”; US Army Talent Management Task Force, “New Tool Gathers Subordinate Input to Help Inform Commander Selection.”

²⁸ Bracken and Rose, “When Does 360-Degree Feedback Create Behavior Change?,” 185–87; Nowack and Mashihi, “Evidence-Based Answers to 15 Questions about Leveraging 360-Degree Feedback.”; Wimer and Nowack, “13 Common Mistakes Using 360-Degree Feedback.”

²⁹ Fleenor and Prince, Using 360-Degree Feedback in Organizations, 60; Hazucha, Hezlett, and Schneider, “The Impact of 360‐degree Feedback on Management Skills Development,” 329; Day and Halpin, “Leadership Development,” 12; London and Smither, “Feedback Orientation, Feedback Culture, and the Longitudinal Performance Management Process,” 91.

³⁰ Athota and Malik, “360-Degree Feedback at the Workplace,” 324; Nowack and Mashihi, “Evidence-Based Answers to 15 Questions about Leveraging 360-Degree Feedback.,” 165; Bracken and Rose, “When Does 360-Degree Feedback Create Behavior Change?,” 186.

³¹ Atwater and Brett, “Antecedents and Consequences of Reactions to Developmental 360° Feedback,” 542.

³² Church et al., “Enhancing 360-Degree Feedback for Individual Assessment and Organization Development,” 67.

³³ Bassett, “Growing Better Leaders for the Future,” 9–13.

³⁴ Bracken and Church, “The ‘New’ Performance Management Paradigm: Capitalizing on the Unrealized Potential of 360 Degree Feedback,” 36; Bracken, Rose, and Church, “The Evolution and Devolution of 360° Feedback,” 771–72; Mamatoglu, “Effects on Organizational Context (Culture and Climate) from Implementing a 360-Degree Feedback System,” 444.

³⁵ Fiscus, “360 Degree Feedback Best Practices and the Army’s MSAF Program,” 6–7; Bracken and Church, “The ‘New’ Performance Management Paradigm: Capitalizing on the Unrealized Potential of 360 Degree Feedback,” 35–36.

³⁶ Williams, “The Surface Warfare Community’s 360-Degree Feedback Pilot Program: A Preliminary Analysis and Evaluation Plan,” 11–13; Mamatoglu, “Effects on Organizational Context (Culture and Climate) from Implementing a 360-Degree Feedback System,” 441–45.

³⁷ Jhun, Bae, and Rhee, “Performance Change of Managers in Two Different Uses of Upward Feedback,” 4257–58.

³⁸ Spain, “Reinventing the Leader Selection Process”; US Army Talent Management Task Force, “New Tool Gathers Subordinate Input to Help Inform Commander Selection”; Britzky, “How Being Passed over for Command Taught This Army Officer to Lead”; Koester, “JMC Officers Discuss Lessons Learned from Selection to Battalion Command.”

³⁹ Carson, “Saying It like It Isn’t,” 399.

⁴⁰ Testa, “A Model for Organization‐based 360 Degree Leadership Assessment,” 264.

⁴¹ Bracken and Church, “The ‘New’ Performance Management Paradigm: Capitalizing on the Unrealized Potential of 360 Degree Feedback,” 38–39.

⁴² Church, “Managerial Self-Awareness in High-Performing Individuals in Organizations,” 287–90.

⁴³ Wimer and Nowack, “13 Common Mistakes Using 360-Degree Feedback.”

⁴⁴ Bracken, Rose, and Church, “The Evolution and Devolution of 360° Feedback,” 782; Carson, “Saying It like It Isn’t,” 402; Wimer and Nowack, “13 Common Mistakes Using 360-Degree Feedback.”

⁴⁵ Defence Culture Strategy, 3.

⁴⁶ Defence Culture Strategy, 6–7.

Cite Article

Harvard

APA

Footnote

RIS

(Keir, 2025)

Keir, J. 2025. 'Unlocking Leadership Excellence with 360-Degree Feedback - Part 2'. Available at: https://theforge.defence.gov.au/article/unlocking-leadership-excellence-360-degree-feedback-part-2 (Accessed: 27 February 2025).

(Keir, 2025)

Jason Keir, "Unlocking Leadership Excellence with 360-Degree Feedback - Part 2", The Forge, Published: February 21, 2025, https://theforge.defence.gov.au/article/unlocking-leadership-excellence-360-degree-feedback-part-2. (accessed February 27, 2025).

Download a RIS file to use in your citation management tools.

Comments

Within this area, Defence’s newest members will be exposed to the conflict spectrum and theories associated with its employment. While additional emphasis will be afforded to one’s own Service, consideration will be given to joint operations and planning processes. The topic will also include an exploration of current ADF operations and emerging technological impacts on future preparedness.

The ADF’s contribution to Australian National Power through shape, deter and respond activities will be understood in general terms. Tied with this awareness will be ADO roles and responsibilities, including civil-military relations. The importance of Defence’s contribution in this regard will be linked to a general sense of Australia’s strategic environment. Resource management fundamentals will help underpin responsible expenditure of Commonwealth funds.

All members of Defence will also need to be competent in military administration, ADF roles and structures, and undertake all initial mandatory training. This foundation will continue to develop in subsequent JPME levels and increasingly expand opportunites for Joint Stream (out-of-category) postings and roles. APS does not require core military skills.

Following on from their respective recruit or commissioning course, ADF personnel will commence their Initial Employment Training (IET). This period can include workplace experience and periods of on-the-job training.

Graduation from IET marks the formal transition from Level 1 to Level 2. It is at this point when they are considered effective in the workplace.

Defence members at this level will have a sound understanding of their own Service or domain warfare systems and capability. As they progress through Level 2, they will display a stronger understanding about the ADF’s holistic contribution to Joint Force warfighting domains. This will extend to the nature and theory of war, which has developed through an academic study of historical case studies and contemporary military issues. Importantly, such awareness will help inform their understanding of the impact of technology on current and future warfare. Awareness of gender perspectives on operations will contribute to their well-rounded application of the Profession of Arms.

By recognising the difference between complicated and complex problems, personnel at this level will ensure their problem-solving strategies and decision making are optimised. In the earlier stages, personnel will employ more transactional, linear thinking, decision support tools (such as the Joint Military Appreciation Process or variations) but they will increasingly apply alternate thinking strategies to seek more sophisticated options. Greater availability of human-machine teaming systems will progressively reduce our reliance on lower order cognitive activity and thus facilitate more nuanced considerations to complex problems.

Australia’s approach to the formulation of military strategy and its strategic environment (including international and geopolitical) will strengthen as members advance in this Level. Through both courses and experience, they will also acquire a stronger understanding of interagency strategies, policies and decision making processes.

As they progress through Level 2, Defence personnel will progressively develop awareness and then expertise beyond their initial employment category.

These broader systems and processes will expand to include one or more of the five key Joint Streams: Military Support, Operations, Capability Development and Delivery, Strategy Policy and Engagement, and Intelligence.

Within JPME Level 2, Defence personnel will become increasingly proficient in their initial employment category. Through both their formal courses (initial employment training and subsequent intermediate courses) and workplace experience, they will display competency in their contribution to military power. As they develop greater technical expertise, senior personnel at this level will become suitable for growing the next generation, by seeking instructional roles.

Those operating at this level will understand both internal Joint Force command relationships and international engagement with coalition partners. Their employment of operational art will consider instruments of national power and campaign design, while the relationship challenges between strategic, operational and tactical levels of war will be clearly understood. Continual professional development will keep Level 3 practitioners abreast of emerging trends and future warfare techniques. Expertise will be apparent in the planning requirements for force generation and the factors that shape the execution of joint operations. National and military strategic planning considerations for Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, Ambiguous and Novel (VUCAN) environments will mature. Personnel will be increasingly aware of the influence technology has on current and future warfare as well as whole-of-government response options.

Those operating at this level will be increasingly comfortable with systems thinking to perceive and influence complex adaptive systems. Various alternative thinking strategies, such as Design Thinking and Multi-Criteria Decision Making, will allow them to thrive in the challenging multi-domain environment.

Importantly, they will be able to translate complex strategic issues into tangible ideas for their subordinates.

This level is noted for its integration of civil-military functions and instruments of national power. This includes strategy and public policy development as well as contemporary operating environments and implications for military and security forces. Awareness of both Joint and multinational logistics will complement resource management systems of the Joint Force.

Expertise in one or more of the Joint Streams specific processes will continue to develop with staff and/or leadership responsibilities aligning with roles held.

Examples of the advanced knowledge base likely to be demonstrated include: One Defence Capability System (or its successor) and FIC management, Joint Force staff roles, advanced Human Resources systems and processes, Whole of Government and international engagement approaches, as well as legislative requirements associated with the relevant Joint Stream.

Through more senior category appointments and opportunities, those at Level 3 will display expertise within their specialist category employment. Completion of charge courses, deployments, exercises and pre-command courses, personnel will increasingly expand their specialist expertise to support joint effects.

Increasing leadership expectations will develop within their category’s specialist vocation.

This level is recognised for its future Joint Force planning, development and sustainment challenges. Those operating in these positions will resolve military resource challenges and understand limitations of contracted support to operations. Operational artists will be adept at integrating strategic objectives to planning through the exploitation of emerging and non-traditional concepts for joint and multinational warfare. These skills will manifest in their ability to design and lead theatre strategies, campaigns and major operations. They will also be seeking opportunities to exploit technology’s influence on current and future warfare as well as its role in whole-of-government response options.

Cognitive performance will be enhanced through active seeking of diversity and a tolerance for ambiguity. Dealing with Defence-related wicked systems will be normal.

Problem-solving will increasingly accept increased risk to reflect the greater depth of wisdom and confidence in one’s judgments. This level is also noted for strategic thinking, visioning and championing a learning culture.

Level 4 leaders will be strong advocates of divergent thinking in their subordinates (when appropriate), to ensure Defence continues to improve systems and processes.

Those operating at this level have a very clear understanding of the impacts on national Defence policy and strategy. They will positively influence military capability development to enhance relevant instruments of national power. A strong awareness of contemporary global affairs and trends, combined with a deep understanding of international relations theories, will enhance their management of national military resources to support national security and foreign policy. Gender, peace and security impacts will continue to guide their strategic policy development.

Those operating at this level will be considered Generalists who possess a wide range of skills and expertise in multiple Joint Stream areas. With the exception of a select few specialists, these personnel will have actively sought out opportunities to broaden their versatility beyond their specialisation. Typical areas will include: strategic planning, civil-military relationships, campaign planning, strategic governance, business and financial acumen, One Defence Capability System leadership, strategic direction setting of emerging capabilities, policy leadership for future capability needs, and industry engagement for sustainment and growth.

At the enlisted level, Tier B and C warrant officers provide a vital link across the ADF, not only championing 75% of the ADF at the strategic table but also helping translate the top-down messaging. To do this, they must excel in understanding both worlds. Strategic level warrant officers also play a pivotal role in the command team relationship not only as advisors to decision-makers, but also in the strategic leadership of organisational culture, ongoing professional development, and the ideological underpinnings of the Profession of Arms throughout the ADF’s workforce

For those still in key roles within their primary category, there will be strong leadership expectations to ensure the delivery of capability, strategic advice on capabilities, limitations and future needs, as well as shaping the professional development system to grow future generations within the field.

Senior officers and their equivalents will be comfortable in crisis leadership situations across all aspects of Defence. They will be highly effective when commanding Joint Task Forces or conducting influence operations. This performance will come from a deep understanding of Joint Force attributes, structures, capability requirements, emerging concepts and risks affecting military strategies and campaign development. Their strategic leadership abilities will extend to synthesising operational lessons learned across all Force elements including deployment, employment and sustainment. All of these areas will be enhanced by their astute awareness of political and resource implications in joint warfare strategy and planning.

Multi-agency, political and global wicked systems are an expected reality of Level 5 roles. Those operating at this level will have the cognitive agility to respond comfortably with these challenges by exploiting paradigm shifting approaches (such as nudge theory) to improve systems to a more advantageous state.

Senior leaders at this level will be expert in strategic communication and information impacts. They will comfortably implement grand strategy through future-focused policy formulation and employment of armed forces. Their expertise in national intelligence community and architecture will help them influence national security and foreign policy. The implications of contemporary challenges on national security strategies will be understood. This depth of understanding will be drawn from a strong awareness of national powers’ characteristics, capabilities and limitations combined with the civil-military relations necessary to deliver national power instruments.

Senior officers and SES band public servants at the highest echelons will be skilled in decision cycles and information/knowledge management systems. They will understand Government processes for capability acquisition and how to exploit technology enablers within enterprise systems.

As leaders of Force Element Groups (FEGs) or Joint Task Forces (JTFs), senior military officers will integrate emerging capabilities and technology to both maintain force-in-being deterrence and deliver operations to meet Government response options. In policy and advisory roles, they will exploit emerging capabilities and technologies when shaping military strategy, policy development and implementation. Industry engagement will enhance support of sovereign capability and Australia’s economic prosperity

A Service Warrant Officer is a unique appointment within each Service, one of influence and advice rather than Command. E10 Warrant Officers have strategic leadership responsibilities as Command advisors to Senior Leadership of their Service to provide critical insight to key decisions through an alternative lived experience and with support from Senior Enlisted Personnel to give a balanced, informed and analysed perspective from the workforce.

They also play a pivotal role in the organisation’s leadership, able to utilise their professional knowledge and experience to provide context and make the complex simple and the simple compelling. The unique appointment ensures the Service WO stays connected to contemporise issues for the workforce and represent those gaps and opportunities at the appropriate delegated level.

Service Warrant Officers deliberately steward, communicate and are genuinely dedicated to their Service; while always supporting strategic organisation culture and setting the conditions for long-term success.

Service Warrant Officers have a concurrent liability to foster relationships supporting Australia’s national power through networking and encouraging active engagement with counterparts to promote a commonality of purpose: – Friendship, Partnership and Leadership.

Social Mastery

Ethical Philosophies social-ethics-level2

Moral Leadership social-ethics-level3

Lead organisation through ethical concerns social-ethics-level4

Stewarding the Profession social-ethics-level5

Biography

Jason Keir

Executive Officer for the J8 – Modernisation, Assessment and Assurance Branch within Headquarters Joint Operations Command.

Wing Commander

Wing Commander Jason Keir joined the Royal Australian Air Force in 1991 as a Technologist Apprentice, later commissioning as an officer in 2001. With degrees in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, he has held key roles in avionics maintenance, operational capability development, logistics policy, and strategic capability governance. His career includes deployments to Afghanistan and leadership in major capital acquisition projects, as well as contributions to international defense research collaborations.