Transformation in contact
Learning the Lessons of Modern War
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4033282 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Robert T Foley, Robert Foley (0000-0003-2574-4981, University of Liverpool), Stuart Griffin (0000-0001-8646-6132, King's College London), Helen B Mccartney (0000-0002-1888-5236, King's College London), Helen Mccartney |
| Year | 2011 |
| Volume | 87 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 253-270 |
| Publication date | 2011-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Affairs (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-5850 • E-ISSN: 1468-2346 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1468-2346.2011.00972.x |
| OpenAlex | W2044372027 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 25 |
The US and British armies have faced intelligent and adaptive enemies in Iraq and continue to do so in Afghanistan. While both armies have proved adept at fighting high-intensity conflict, their initial performance against asymmetric threats and diffuse insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan demonstrated how much each army had to learn about conducting counterinsurgency operations. This article examines one important means by which the US and British armies have transformed themselves into more flexible and responsive organizations that are able to harness innovation at the front effectively. It traces the development of the lessons-learned systems in both armies from the start of counterinsurgency operations in Iraq to today. These changes have resulted in significant development within the organization of both armies. Reform of US and British army learning capabilities offers an important insight into the drivers of military change. The reformed lessons-learned systems have been better integrated into training, experimentation, and doctrine and force development. While there are still challenges to be overcome, both armies have created robust structures that facilitate the movement of knowledge from recent experience at the front to the rest of the organization. As such, these reforms provide us with a useful case-study that enhances our understanding of the role of ‘bottom-up’ initiatives in military innovation
Doctrine · Front (military) · Political economy · Political science · Sociology · Anthropology: Ethics, History, Culture · Engineering · Law · Mechanical Engineering · Military History and Strategy
Democratic Security Policy in Colombia
Future Reserves 2020, the British Army and the politics of military innovation during the Cameron era
The military as a learning organisation
Organisational learning during the Donbas War
Sources of military change
The Baha Mousa Tragedy
Emulating underdogs
Innovating at the pace of relevance
Improvise, adapt and fail to overcome? Capacity building, culture and exogenous change in Sierra Leone
A Case Study in Horizontal Military Innovation
Learning ‘Under Fire’
What is a military innovation and why it matters
Military Innovation Studies
Coping with Knowledge
On military restoration
Evolving towards military innovation
Military Innovation and Tactical Adaptation in the Israel–Hizballah Conflict
Battlefield knowledge and barracks reality
Getting Coin’ at the Tactical Level in Afghanistan
The Limits to Learning in Military Operations
Hybrid times
The Challenge of Creating an Adaptive Bundeswehr
Enmeshed in insurgency
Why Military Organizations Are Cautious About Learning
Learning From Others? Emulation and Change in the Italian Armed Forces Since 2001
| Unique citing works | 25 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,79 |
| Citation span | 2012 - 2026 (15) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 24 |