Editorial: Transforming transformation

The theory of transformation has recently taken some body blows. Earlier this year, the Defense Department decided to close the innovative Office of Force Transformation, which retired Vice Adm. Arthur Cebrowski created. Then, earlier this month, President Bush announced that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will leave his post after six years.

Rumsfeld came to the Pentagon promising to change the way the military has traditionally done business. The question is whether Rumsfeld infused his transformation theory into the military’s way of life during his most recent tenure — he briefly worked as Defense secretary under President Ford.

In recent weeks, most reviews of the Rumsfeld era have been critical. An article on Slate.com, “A catalog of failure,” suggested that transformation hasn’t accomplished much. But that assessment is premature and unfair.

Although the Rumsfeldian theory of transformation has not yet been proven, the cantankerous Defense secretary made some significant strides. He managed to get the military to confront the reality that combat has evolved.

Most military leaders now speak about transformation. The concept is powerful. Rumsfeld’s transformation initiative seeks to introduce technologies that improve efficiency in many areas of an organization and apply those efficiencies to warfighting. Transformation enables the military to fight better and faster with a leaner yet more lethal force.

Rumsfeld also focused on transforming the Pentagon’s abysmal business systems.More work remains, but by most accounts, DOD has made great strides.

Warfare has changed, and the armed forces most likely will continue to evolve. Many experts suggest that transformation, in one form or another, has found a home at DOD.

It will be fascinating to see how the theory of transformation evolves in the post-Rumsfeld era.