RSAF's Organisational Transformation (ST 20070208)

By Adrian W. J. Kuah
for the Straits Times
Author is an associate research fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University

The public face of defence transformation is typically framed in technology terms: the acquisition and deployment of cutting-edge weapons systems and information technologies in order to wage network-centric warfare.
In the same vein, the transformation of the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) is seen primarily as a technological transformation. The SAF's acquistion of advanced military hardware - such as the Primus self-propelled howitzer, F-15SG Eagles and Seahawk naval helicopters - has grabbed the headlines.
But there is another equally important dimension to military evolution, and that is the revamp of the command structure of the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) announced last month.
The RSAF will now be organised according to functions rather than geography. Under the air force headquarters will be five new commands: Air Defence and Operations, Air Combat, Air Power Generation, Participation, and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. This replaces the old geographically-based system of formations comprising the air bases and air defence systems division.
Whereas in the past the planning and control of operations were dictated to the formations by headquarters, the five new commands will have greater autonomy on operational matters.
The new structure is flatter and more organic; there is less formalisation, more decentralisation of decision-making and more lateral communication.
The move to an organic structure reflects the more complex operating environment and the more varied tasks the air force has to perform today. These can range from traditional war fighting to disaster relief and peacekeeping operations.
It also reflects the application of what has been called RMA ("revolution in military affairs") technologies.
These are disruptive in that they generate radical rather than incremental changes in capabilities. They disrupt and destabilise the existing structures and processes of the organisations that adopt them. They are not merely "plug-and-play" systems that can be grafted onto existing organisational structures and processes; to fully exploit these technologies, it is essential for the organisations themselves to transform.
The change to a more organic structure mirrors developments in the broader socio-economic milieu. The emergence of the information economy has led to the transformation of the firm from a top-down, hierarchical, bureaucratic corporate behemoth into a flatter, dynamic network orgnaisation that is better able to cope with changing business practices such as flexible manufacturing, just-in-time inventories and knowledge-intensive products and services.
To be sure, there are limits to how far the armed forces can, or even should, emulate the changes taking place in commercial organisations.
Indeed, the adoption of organic structures and processes by the RSAF does not mean that hierachry,formalisation and so forth have been supplanted. The changes should be read as the gradual introduction of organic organisational practices into what remains a dominant mechanistic organisational form. Features such as verticality and formal hierarchy remain integral to the functioning of the armed forces: The mechanistic organisational technology still works more often than not.
Rather, the transformations that have taken place in th RSAF reflect an attempt to pre-empt situations where the mechanistic organisational form thwarts rather than serves.
Nevertheless, these organisational transformations emphsise the importance of organisational developments along side the acquisition of technological capabilities. The interesting question is whether organisational changes can keep pace with technology.