The future of military innovation studies

Grissom, Adam R.

doi:10.1080/01402390600901067

Cited by 117 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As shown below, the rich and diverse portrait of the shifting patterns in European defence that emerges from this study contributes to the literature on military transformation (Adamsky and Bjerga, 2012;Edmunds and Malešič, 2005;Farrell and Rynning, 2010;Farrell, Rynning, and Terriff, 2013;Forster, 2006: Ch. 2;Futter and Collins, 2015;Grissom, 2006;King, 2011;Loo, 2009;Sloan, 2008: Ch. 4-5;Terriff, Osinga, and Farrell, 2010) though with a broader focus.…”

Section: The Evolution Of National Defence Policies In Europe: Commonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Upside down: Reframing European Defence Studies

Meijer¹,

Wyss²

2018

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the end of the Cold War, the study of European defence has been dominated by a 'CSDP-centric' approach, while largely neglecting the comparative analysis of national defence policies. This article makes the case for turning the dominant research prism of European defence studies upside down by returning the analytical precedence to the national level. This approach privileges the comparative analysis of national defence policies and armed forces, before focusing on the trans-/supra-national level. The case for this conceptual turn is made in three steps. First, it addresses the different historical stages in European defence integration and the transformation of national armed forces in Europe. Second, it questions the predominance of CSDP in the scholarly literature on European defence. Finally, it seeks to demonstrate the fruitfulness of such a demarche by empirically substantiating common patterns and intra-European divergences in the evolution of national defence policies and armed forces since the end of the Cold War. In conclusion, the article suggests avenues for research focused on European national defence policies and armed forces.

show abstract

Section: The Evolution Of National Defence Policies In Europe: Commonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Upside down: Reframing European Defence Studies

Meijer¹,

Wyss²

2018

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It also is a strong example of the difficulties that strategic defense adaptation needs to overcome. Future research can use this case to explore the validity of military innovation models (Grissom, 2006) The civil-military military innovation model argues that peacetime military innovation occurs if civilians intervene in military service doctrinal development, preferably with the assistance of maverick officers from within the service (Posen, 1984). Both the civilian top-down intervention (Peretz) and the military champion of change (Gold) were driving forces in Iron Dome.…”

Section: One Of the Most Serious Impediments To Effective Adaptation mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sticking to their Guns: The Missing RMA for Cybersecurity

Tabansky¹

2018

MCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Instead, they resulted in the RCDM generating the expertise to drive change in military medicine from the middle out. 21 In terms of clinical governance, the need to use the RCDM to institutionalise change was brought to a head in 2003. During a class action brought by nearly 2,000 former British military personnel suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, the High Court judge, Justice Owen, questioned whether the DMS had been negligent in keeping abreast of the developing state of knowledge in psychiatric care.…”

Section: Defence Medical Services: Longterm Innovation Enables Shorttmentioning

confidence: 99%