Speed of decision, not lack of innovation, is key to defence expert argues

By Lee Kormany, Executive Vice President, Defence Systems Australia, EOS

Australia does not have a shortage of defence innovation. We have a speed-of-decision problem.

The question is whether we can turn Australian innovation into fielded capability quickly enough, and keep adapting that capability as the threat evolves.

Technology can move at the speed of innovation. Capability can only move at the speed of the decisions that enable it.

Traditional capability development assumes there is time to define requirements, develop a solution, test it, certify it and eventually field it. That approach has delivered some of Australia's most important military capabilities.

But it was designed for an environment in which capability development could be measured in years. Today, operational lessons can change requirements in months.

The evolution of EOS' R400 remote weapon system provides one practical example. As drones changed the operational environment, we did not begin again. We adapted an existing, proven system to respond to a different threat, while retaining commonality for the operator.

The individual changes were not revolutionary technology. That is precisely the point. The advantage came from understanding what had changed operationally, deciding what mattered and taking action.

For adaptation to happen at speed, four things must be clear: how operational feedback reaches the people who can act on it; who holds the engineering authority to make the change; what level of assurance is proportionate to that change; and who is accountable for deciding when the capability is ready to field.

If ownership is fragmented, approvals are sequential and no one has clear authority to accept risk, Australia can have the technology to respond, and still respond too late.

This is not an argument for lowering standards. Capability must be safe, reliable and operationally effective. But risk exists on both sides. There is risk in moving too quickly, and risk in waiting for the perfect solution while the threat continues to evolve. Assurance must be rigorous, but also proportionate to the change and operational urgency.

Industry must accept our share of responsibility. We need to invest ahead of demand, design adaptable systems, expose capability to realistic testing to provide Defence with the evidence and engineering confidence to make decisions faster.

This should also shape how Australia thinks about sovereignty.

Sovereignty is not simply where something is manufactured. At its most fundamental, sovereignty is the freedom to act. It means having the people, engineering authority, software, knowledge, supply chains and manufacturing capacity required to modify, sustain and scale capability as circumstances change.

This does not mean Australia needs to do everything ourselves. International partnerships remain critical. But Australia must understand where it needs the freedom to act without being entirely dependant on another nation’s priories or technology roadmap.

This will require a different relationship between Defence and industry including earlier access to operational problems, greater visibility of what Australian industry can deliver and a willingness to co-develop, test and continually improve capability.

The next capability advantage will not necessarily belong to whoever develops the best technology first. It will belong to whoever can turn an operational lesson into a decision and fielded capability fastest.

Australia has the innovation. The challenge is building a system that can decide, adapt and act.

This article by Lee Kormany first appeared on The Australian