Leadership and the Royal Australian Armoured Corps

Is there a solution to the position that the RAAC finds itself in, i.e. the senior unit of the Corps (1st Armoured Regiment) has been made a non-combatant and no longer has an RAAC role; while the next senior unit (2nd Cavalry Regiment) has been given incompatible dual-roles?

How does a leader respond to such a challenge?

Some people don’t want to be leaders; others have leadership thrust upon them.  Let’s assume that the RAAC has a keen leader who welcomes the challenge confronting him (or her).  

Although everyone has their own leadership style, it is generally agreed that leaders are those who possess intelligence, trustworthiness, humaneness, courage, and discipline. 

Assuming that our leader possesses these attributes … what does he do?  How does he resolve the conundrum facing the RAAC?

As is to be expected, there’s a lot of background involved.  Appeals have been made by the former Head of Corps and both the Representative Honorary Colonel and his predecessor.  The 1 Armd Regt Hon Col has also asked the Chief of Army to reconsider.

Letters have been written to the Chief of the Defence Force, the Chief of Army, and the Minister. The responses were all the same … no change is to be considered!

A Parliamentary Petition was forwarded to the Minister for Defence.  He chose to ignore it, rather than have to explain himself.  How gutless is this!  

There was every hope that due parliamentary process would have been followed, in accord with the highest protocols of the Nation.  Yet not a whimper was heard in response!

So, what does our leader do?  Does he seize the initiative?

It’s easier said than done (i.e. seizing the initiative in such circumstances)!

How about a meeting?  As far as we know, there have been all sorts of letters written, but no meeting has been held. 

Meeting with the CA (if it’s agreed to) has the advantage of allowing the case to be made regarding 1 Armd Regt’s lost heritage, as well as that of 3 Brigade’s loss of combat power.

A meeting with the RAAC’s Representative Honorary Colonel also allows the CA to be briefed beforehand, to fully understand the issues involved, and for her to explain the reasons behind her thinking.  

As incredible as it is, this hasn’t been done as yet.  Letters have resulted in platitudes being exchanged, such as “1 Armd Regt has an important new role … directly shaping how the Army fights”.  What in heaven’s name does this mean?  

Cogent reasons for what’s been done to 1 Armd Regt have not as yet been explained.

The Rep Hon Col has been asked if he will seek a meeting with the CA, but has declined to respond.  Maybe he will … more likely, he won’t.  

So back to the drawing board … how to find a way forward?

What if the 1 Armd Regt Hon Col was to seek a meeting with the CA?  This would be a new gambit … but maybe the moment (and opportunity) has passed? 

Lieutenant Colonel Bruce Cameron, MC, RAAC (Ret’d)

.

.

ChatGPT image

.

.


.


.