Criticism and Knowledge Ideals in Military Organizations

Western military organizations are widely held to be poor innovators – process-oriented, resistant to change, and slow to learn, traits they share with other large bureaucratic organizations. This article argues that a particular knowledge ideal in military organizations founded on the four interrelated biases of action, relevance, conflict, and hierarchy (ARCH), hinders criticism, in turn thwarting innovation. ARCH serves to collectively discourage criticism on the individual level; on the organizational level, it prevents criticism serving as mechanism of self-correction. Using thematic analysis, these biases are identified through a most-different research design, comparing the military doctrines of the United States and Sweden. ARCH reflects and reinforces a dominant Western vision of how war is waged. Improvements in the organizational capacity for innovation may require a revision of institutional beliefs of military efficiency and warfare.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Scandinavian Journal of Military Studies
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31374/sjms.378
Citations
1
Primary Topic
International Relations and Foreign Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.52
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Criticism and Knowledge Ideals in Military Organizations

Jan Ångström
1 citations
Scandinavian Journal of Military Studies
International Relations and Foreign Policy
8.52
article

Criticism and Knowledge Ideals in Military Organizations

Jan Ångström
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Western military organizations are widely held to be poor innovators – process-oriented, resistant to change, and slow to learn, traits they share with other large bureaucratic organizations. This article argues that a particular knowledge ideal in military organizations founded on the four interrelated biases of action, relevance, conflict, and hierarchy (ARCH), hinders criticism, in turn thwarting innovation. ARCH serves to collectively discourage criticism on the individual level; on the organizational level, it prevents criticism serving as mechanism of self-correction. Using thematic analysis, these biases are identified through a most-different research design, comparing the military doctrines of the United States and Sweden. ARCH reflects and reinforces a dominant Western vision of how war is waged. Improvements in the organizational capacity for innovation may require a revision of institutional beliefs of military efficiency and warfare.

Scandinavian Journal of Military StudiesVol. 8(1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
International Relations and Foreign Policy
8.52
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Criticism and Knowledge Ideals in Military Organizations — Jan Ångström · Scandinavian Journal of Military Studies (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS