“RECAPTURING OUR CREATIVE DNA”
By RADM Terry B. Kraft, USN, U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings (April 2013): 46–51.
The current strategic and economic climate demands that the nation’s armed forces look for innovative ways of preparing to fight wars. The Navy and Marine Corps are no exceptions.
Mankind is in the midst of explosive leaps in the formulation of new ideas and opportunities. The speed and reach of information systems have radically transformed the temporal and spatial dimensions of war. Intertwined by the Internet and social networks, previously unconnected ideas are being fused and transformed into reality at an astonishing rate. Despite this dynamic environment, much of the Navy remains shackled to cumbersome processes and outdated thinking. To exploit the era’s rich atmosphere of ideas, and prepare for challenges that come with it, we must energize and capitalize on the enterprising nature and resourcefulness of our maritime professionals. The transition will involve creating a channel for new ideas while encouraging a participatory system of idea-generating, collaborative professionals.
As we look over the horizon, we must ensure that our naval fighting capabilities are agile enough to respond to rapid changes in the future operating environment. Here, we examine the role of innovation as the Navy and Marine Corps enter a new era of information-intensive warfare. What role does innovation play in shaping future capabilities? What conditions are important to generate and exploit innovative ideas? How do we instill a culture that promotes bold, creative thinking? To position our naval forces for success in the future we must find solutions that address these questions.
What Is Innovation?
The first question to be answered is “what’s in it for us?” Innovation is defined as creativity applied to a purpose to realize value. Innovation expert John Kao goes a little deeper in his “Innovation Manifesto.”
Innovation enables people to adapt to the waves of disruptive change . . . and the rate is increasing. Changes are brought about by new demographic and geopolitical shifts [and] by new and emerging technologies. The complexity of change is beyond most strategic planning.1
Innovation as applied to military science encourages creativity and original thought to realize value. Technological advances are occurring in abundance in the private sector. The challenge before us—better yet, the opportunity—is to closely follow and rapidly incorporate applicable new technologies. How well the Navy is able to do this may well determine its ability to move forward in the information age.
Kao goes on to state: “Creating what is both new and valuable—is not a narrowly defined, technical area of competence . . . rather, innovation emerges when different bodies of knowledge, perspectives and disciplines are brought together.”2 Our challenge is to develop a cooperative structure to enhance innovation while not crushing it with bureaucracy.
In his book The Medici Effect, Frans Johansson discusses the power of combining two seemingly unrelated fields to produce new ways of tackling old problems. The result is called an “intersectional idea.” His view is that, to truly move in a new direction, it is important to “live at the intersection.”3 One community decided to give it a try. Commander, Submarine Forces sponsored the TANG Forum in November 2011. The effort brought together a diverse set of attendees, none above the rank of lieutenant, to generate a multitude of ideas centering on implementing new technologies for the submarine force. Regarding the outputs of the conference, then-Vice Admiral John Richardson commented:
This was a landmark event for us. For the first time, we really harnessed the creativity and innovative spirit of our young operators, who are perfectly positioned in the intellectual “sweet spot”—they know our problem set in detail, and they are familiar with the intuitive interfaces from their gaming, smart phones, and tablets. The conference was so rich, some of the ideas were so mature, we’ll be incorporating them into our next version of software updates in the next two years. Some were so powerful and sweeping, they will require bigger design changes in future blocks of Virginia SSNs [nuclear-powered attack submarines] and the new SSBN [nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine] class. We’re also looking to expand this approach to other submarine problems.
Innovation in Naval History
History offers a priceless cache of previously purchased lessons to those who will mine it and apply it forward. The Navy of the interwar years and early Cold War periods faced mesmerizing opportunities and challenges similar to those we face today. We must heed their lessons and adopt their innovative zeal to gain advantages in future operating environments.
The period of 1919–39, known as the interwar years, provides a fascinating glimpse at how innovation emerges in challenging environments. The primary constraint of that time was the Washington Naval Treaty that among other things limited the production of battleships and undercut forward-basing options. To overcome those challenges war planners began to think creatively. In building “War Plan Orange,” Navy planners unleashed a torrent of new ideas, such as options for aircraft carrier use, long-range logistics at sea and floating drydocks.
To keep pace with the surge in new ways to prepare for conflict at sea, Navy leadership created the General Board which, as author John T. Kuehn notes, “was the locus where treaty preparation, building policy, and war planning all intersected. The board addressed strategy, the recommendations of the bureaus, policy-making, NWC [Naval War College] wargaming results and studies.”4 The board helped cut through the complexities and uncertainties of the day. It focused innovation by defining the problems, and its largely untethered efforts resulted in the advance of amphibious warfare, carrier aviation, and the formation of a complex campaign of “island hopping,” as leaders considered how they would seize and hold new bases across the vast distances of the Pacific. Their efforts culminated in a clearly defined experimentation and wargaming process that yielded significant results. Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz was to later remark: “The wargames with Japan had been enacted in the game rooms at the War College by so many people . . . that nothing that happened during the war was a surprise—absolutely nothing except the kamikaze tactics towards the end of the war.”5
Embracing Change
Before zeroing in on the future, it is important to look at how we currently innovate. Today, the U.S. military is just a small slice of the global industrial complex and as such is no longer in a position to keep pace with the creation of cutting-edge technology. What’s more, attempts to “in-source” new ideas and concepts face the bureaucracy of the acquisition process, the influence of Congress, and the size and focus of Navy staffs. These things tend to stifle the generation and development of new ideas and concepts. The current configuration of the military was largely shaped by the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986. That legislation shifted power to the combatant commanders, all of whom have a very real need to meet the demands of their theaters on a daily basis. Much of this contributes to what many have called a “lethargy of the mind” when thinking about innovation in the Navy.6
Like the interwar years, we need a clear understanding of the issues we face. Theoretical physicist Albert Einstein said, “If I had an hour to save the world, I would spend 55 minutes defining the problem and five minutes finding solutions.” John Kao describes this as an “Innovation Audit”—understanding what we have and what we need.7 The first part is easy, the second more difficult. In defining “needs,” the pattern today is to default to things—weapon systems and other material items that can fill a perceived capability gap. Now, more than ever, it is essential to recognize that innovation is much more than technical—it involves broadly questioning how we will organize and execute warfare in future environments. For the Navy, it means thinking, again, about being challenged at sea.
In 2011, senior military leaders, academic experts, and industry representatives converged in Norfolk, Virginia, to spend two days discussing the state of innovation as it relates to our maritime forces. The audience included leaders from all sea services and the joint world. The large local audience was nearly doubled by participants on Defense Connect Online. The purpose of the conference was to begin a larger campaign to reinvigorate the conditions for