The strategic level is a bit of an enigma in the Defence environment. The strategic terminologies are used frequently and there is much discussion around strategic subjects and many presentations made. But .....there is rarely a sort of "rubber on the road" approach where the end result of all those discussions and papers and presentations is placed into a database to evolve as the Defence Force evolves. I capture some of these issues below.

REQUIREMENT

The requirement would be encapsulated in numerous documents about the global and near region strategic situation, the general priorities in those situations and the Defence business plan. These form a real multi-dimensional and multi-level set of data/information in their own right.

SOLUTIONS

The solution set at the strategic level are "Capabilities". Now Capabilities are an interesting concept. I can't say that there is a real consistent view of what a Capability is. Nor is there really a "list" of capabilities so that everyone can actually work with them. I have encouraged them in the past to create a list of capabilities and define them, because without understanding them, analysing them is difficult. There are lots of presentations and papers around that discuss various "capabilities" - undersea warfare, land logistics/transport, and so on. But there is little that defines and identifies them.

I have further encouraged that any definition list of capabilities needs to use a consistent terminology. For example sometimes they are named in sort of functional terms and in other cases in terms of their physical characteristics and on still other occasions on the outcomes they might achieve. On some occasions these three ways are mixed into the one capabilities set!!

To illustrate the problem of doing this (mixing ways of defining capabilities) I use the bulldozer example. If I was to explain a bulldozer in its technical terms it would obviously be a bulldozer or a high powered tracked vehicle with a heavy blade at the front. If I explained it in functional terms - an earth mover or road maker. Finally, in outcome terms - the completed hole or a graded track upon which vehicles can drive/move.

Capabilities provide the means to achieve the strategic intent and requirements.

VEHICLES OR PROCESSES

This is an interesting one at the strategic level in Defence. I have never seen a sort of list of "strategic initiatives" apart from the Defence Capability Plan. But this is a list of Major Projects as I will discuss later for the Operational level. I have seen attempts at sort of wrapping these projects into groupings. Indeed within the Defence Capability Development Group (CDG) there are programs of sorts - the Maritime, Land, Aerospace and Integration programs. In the Defence Material Organisation (DMO) there are also Programs of sorts where they have "Domains" and "Major Programs". But these aren't necessarily broad initiatives but more groupings of projects.

THE STRATEGIC FLOW

So... the strategic level flow goes something like this:

• Going from the left to the right we get "these strategic requirements are going to be satisfied by these capabilities which are being changed or created by these strategic initiatives".
• From right to left we have "these strategic initiatives will transform or create these capabilities to satisfy or meet this strategic guidance". Explained in a slightly different way we get "these strategic initiatives are the vehicles to transition the capabilities to the state they are required to be in to achieve the strategic intent and requirements".

Next ... the operational level.