'Why We Write' Series - The Angry 'Young' Man

Trav Hallen

I write because I am angry. That is probably not what The Forge editors were looking for when they asked me to contribute to this series, but hear me out; there is a nuance in that statement.

Writing is the transfer of the confusion of thoughts chaotically circulating your mind on to a screen or notepad. The writing process forces you to make sense of this confusion and come to terms with your thoughts and beliefs. As British novelist E.M. Forster put it: ‘How do I know what I think until I see what I say?’

When writing for an audience, you engage in a one-sided, one-shot argument. To have any hope of winning that argument, you need to articulate your ideas clearly, succinctly, and persuasively. Though difficult, at times excruciatingly so, this process forces you to think more deeply about the issues in question than if you were debating the same issue verbally.

I would hazard a guess that many of the writers contributing to this series will hold a similar view on the role of writing in developing and expressing their thoughts. Writing to think is a common motivator. Where writers differ is the why and what they want to think about, which brings me back to the nuance of my opening statement.

I am a pragmatic optimist. I am optimistic that the Australian Defence Force (ADF) is making the necessary adjustments to its course to prepare for the challenges of future operations. However, I am pragmatic enough to understand that organisational inertia will hinder the turn. The inertia frustrates me. Frustration leads to anger when I believe that the hindrances are illogical and ill-founded. I say believe because often I am wrong. I write to help me think through my frustrations and to figure out what is justified and what I should rail against.

Not surprisingly, this approach means that I have many half-finished drafts sitting in the cloud. Some await more research to enable me to overcome a logical or evidentiary impasse in my thinking. Others I stopped writing when I realised that I was wrong. Although many of these drafts will never see the light of the day, the effort put into them was not wasted. My thinking has advanced on the issues they cover and, in most cases, I am a lot less angry.

I believe that writing as a form of anger therapy is sufficient justification in and of itself, but not for publication. Written tirades are best limited to the 280 characters of Twitter posts. I write for publication to persuade and influence people. I cannot remove the barriers that impede necessary progress; however, I can identify and recommend to those with such power new paths that the ADF could potentially take. In an organisation that has legitimate concerns over critical public comment from its members, such critical writing can be fraught.

When we started The Central Blue in September 2016, we drew inspiration from Grounded Curiosity and The Dead Prussian. These two ground-breaking efforts demonstrated that there is scope, interest, and, most importantly, support for military writing and debate in Australia. Assuring senior officer and organisational support for, or at least indulgence of, the blog was our biggest concern. Fortunately, we began publishing at a turning point in senior officer attitudes towards public debate. As then-Chief of Air Force, Air Marshal Davies stated in a 2017 interview with The Central Blue:

Air power is not a static concept; rather, it must be studied, reflected upon, debated, and challenged. As airminded members of the profession of arms, Air Force personnel have a responsibility to participate in this contest of ideas. It is far, far better that we should respectfully engage in that contest than to hide our thoughts, only to find them wanting when it matters most.

The military writing ecosystem has grown significantly since 2016. Clare O’Neill’s Guide to the Profession of Arms Network illustrates the scale of the military blogosphere, both in Australia and abroad. The editors of most of these outlets, particularly those run by the services, such as The Forge and The Land Power Forum, and those run by current or former serving members, such as The Central Blue, Logistics in War and Chesterfield Strategy, assist in finding the balancing point between constructive and productive criticism, and adherence to defence policy.

A discussion of finding balance in military writing was a diversion, but a necessary one. Concern over falling foul of Defence policy on public comment is a barrier for many potential military writers considering jumping into the dignified melee of the ADF’s contest of ideas. It is no longer a barrier for me. I have confidence in both senior leadership support for appropriate debate over ideas, and the ability of the Australian blogosphere’s editors to assess appropriateness.

Another barrier is the want of ideas. When doing staff work—the principal or only form of non-email writing most military members do—the topic and subject is generally defined for you. That is not usually the case when writing for publication. Developing topics to write about can be particularly challenging when your day job requires you to work with classified information. Fear of spillover is a strong deterrent to writing. The solution that I have found is: Don’t write about your day job.

Instead, I read broadly and draw insights from other areas into the military context. Some of the military writing that I have found most enjoyable to read is that which brings unique perspectives, gained from unlikely sources, into our profession. Olivia Garard’s use of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland to discuss the Clausewitzian concept of genius remains one of my favourite articles. More recently, the Strategy Strikes Back collection of essays that uses Star Wars to help explain concepts of strategy and war made reading on strategy actually enjoyable. Indeed, fiction has become a useful source of topics as well as a genre of choice for military writers.

Fiction is an area where I am trying my hand, though I have much work to do before I have anything worthy of public consumption. For now, I am sticking to pieces inspired by readings in non-military areas. I have two articles currently sitting at various stages of drafting. One discusses the role of breadth and specialisation in developing future airmen; it is based on David Epstein’s findings in Range: Why generalists triumph in a specialist world. The other is a perspective on developing multi-domain commanders that draws on Peak: Secrets from the new science of expertise and The MVP Machine: How baseball’s new nonconformists are using data to build better players. Whether these pieces get published is anyone’s guess, but that is not the point. Through writing, I am better able to understand and appreciate how concepts from outside the military domain aid in addressing some of the issues the ADF is facing.

Which leads me to make a heretical statement: do not guide your reading based on lists produced by anonymous staffers and endorsed by the Chief. I do not base my reading on lists that have not been personally developed by an individual who has read the books recommended. A good friend and fellow traveller gave me that advice earlier this year; it is something I wish I had thought about sooner. Ask people you respect what they are reading and why, and look at the reviews of books on blogs and in magazines to see what grabs your attention and interest. As author Ryan Holiday puts it:

Every time I would meet a successful or important person I admired, I would ask them: “What’s a book that changed your life?” And then I would read that book … If a book changed someone’s life — whatever the topic or style — it was probably worth the investment.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I need solitude. By solitude I don’t mean a cabin in the woods, though that would be nice, rather I mean a ‘state of mind, in which the mind, isolated from input from other minds, works through a problem on its own’. How else is it possible to make sense of the torrent of information that we continually ingest into our minds? For me, pursuing this solitude led to my disconnection from social media. This has not only given me cognitive solitude it has also freed up time to read more deeply and broadly. Finding and protecting solitude has been the key to translating my anger and frustration into serenity and positive contributions to helping the ADF get where it needs to be.

We all write for our own reasons. I’d like to thank The Forge for giving me the opportunity to think and write about what my reasons are. It has made me a little less frustrated.

Wing Commander Trav Hallen is a serving Australian Defence Force officer and founding editor of The Central Blue. The views expressed are his alone and do not reflect the opinion of the Royal Australian Air Force or the Department of Defence.

Cite Article

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.