Defence has successfully implemented a major change to the way they develop military capabilities. Creating real and enduring change for organisations of their size and complexity is no small task. This brief case study highlights how Defence managed to avoid some common errors I see occurring across many organisations wanting to create significant change. Some of these errors have been identified and published by John Kotter1 and others are my own observations.
A COMPELLING CASE FOR CHANGE
The Ministry of Defence and the New Zealand Defence Force are jointly accountable for developing and managing defence capabilities. Anyone who has worked around defence capability management will tell you it is a costly business. It is a system that sits within a series of wider systems—it is large, highly complex and in many ways, cumbersome.
By early 2015 there had been several reviews that all painted a picture of a fractured and under-performing system. At the same time, ageing military capabilities meant that new investment was becoming critical if New Zealand was to continue to have a sufficiently credible and capable Defence Force into the future. The investment required was heading towards NZ$20B over 10-15 years—the largest in a generation. The combination of these factors meant that the need for change had become urgent and critical.
And so, the Ministry of Defence and the New Zealand Defence Force, together, embarked on a five-year journey of change. Creating change across one organisation is hard enough; leading it across two organisations more than doubles that challenge. Throughout their journey they did some things very well and avoided some common mistakes. Ultimately, despite the odds, they managed to create a significant change that, so far, has stuck.
It is commonly quoted that 70% of major change initiatives fail; within a couple of years they can dissolve without trace. Which is why, in my view, this story is worth telling.
VISIONARY LEADERSHIP THAT WAS SERIOUS ABOUT CHANGE
The then Secretary of Defence, Helene Quilter, and the Vice Chief of Defence Force, Kevin Short jointly led the change programme. They were serious about achieving the change Defence2 needed. The tone they set was one of unwavering commitment and of geniune partnership. These two leaders were extraordinary in many ways.
From the outset, they were determined that Defence would have a credible, repeatable and effective Capability Management System. They created one of the best authorising environments I’ve encountered. They made it clear that the Defence Capability Change Action Programme (DCCAP) was a high priority. They sought and accepted advice. They commissioned a relatively small but impactful programme office with experienced experts to help. At times they were very brave. They were always resolute. And they were patient.
In 2015 they worked with a wide range of partner organisations (other government agencies, the defence industry and other militaries) to describe a shared vision for the Defence Capability Management System. They put a target date on that vision (2020) and then they published it, effectively holding themselves publicly accountable. This vision became a critical blueprint for the change.
They welcomed external scrutiny and advice, to help them ensure the change they were seeking was being achieved and would endure well into the future. This included having experienced, credible external experts on the programme governance board and regular independent review.
Consequently, they avoided common error #1 – senior executives failing to dedicate the required effort, resources and sustained focus to make the change real.
And also, common error #2 – lack of a clearly articulated, practical and shared vision of the desired future3.