technoLogYt

20 FEBRUARY/MARCH 2017 www.vanguardcanada.com

Putting the human Back in human Performance enhancement

by stéfanie von hlatky and h. christian Breede

The idea that technology is ad-vancing quickly is at once an understatement and cliché.However, it also happens to be true. Books, articles, lec-

tures, policies, and speeches for decades have made reference to the rapid pace of technological innovation. Concepts like accelerators, disruptors, ingenuity gaps and complexity have been used to describe how technology can impact our lives, sometimes causing a great deal of anxiety and fear. This anxiety and fear is hamper-ing meaningful policy discussion, and this is especially the case within the literature on performance enhancement for soldiers.

Rather than substantive discussion on how best to integrate technological de-velopments into what we refer to as “the soldier system,” some observers call for es-chewing such advances on ethical or legal grounds. At the other end of the spectrum is the temptation to focus exclusively on what science and technology can provide, which loses sight of how that innovation is to be integrated into existing soldier systems. The modern U.S. or Canadian soldier’s service rifle, based on a design from the 1960s, bedazzled with wires, grips, sights, lights, and other devices, is the very image of an unintegrated system. Although the added capability of the de-vice-laden rifle is real, it is uneven and un-integrated, creating more of a burden (the appetite for batteries is but one example) than an improvement. Indeed, there is a trade-off between unfettered innovation and the degree of integration needed to truly enhance the capability of soldiers.

In short, the current understanding of soldier enhancement is torn between the “gee-whiz” of the technology and the “oh hell no” of ethics. We are arguing for a middle-ground — one that sees this de-bate as part of the broader force develop-ment puzzle facing all militaries and, as a result, takes a more holistic approach to

the question of enhancement. Enhance-ment is more than just about technology – it is about how technology is integrated to enhance combat effectiveness without the soldier losing their underlying human-ity. We are putting the human back into human performance.

To date, our research on soldier en-hancement suggests that the emphasis thus far has been on easing the burden that military operations place on our sol-diers. Whether in terms of the physical burden of equipment or the mental bur-den of managing the ever-increasing flow of information, enhancement has focused on the science and technology that can ease this. Recent examples include Sprin-gloaded Technology’s UpShot Tactical Knee Brace, which is has been recently undergoing trials and evaluations with the Canadian Armed Forces, to cognitive en-hancements that have been the focus of substantial research and development in the United States.

Alongside efforts at easing the burden, the field is also focused on force protec-tion. Here, research has focused on pre-

serving life and ensuring that the soldiers are protected as they engage in close com-bat or are exposed to the myriad threats they face in the contemporary operating environment. Examples here include im-provement in clotting agents and tech-nology for improved wound packing. Additionally, we see substantial efforts to improve the design of body armour. No-table here is the acknowledgement that different body types require body armour that is different in style, not just size. One example is the body armour redesign be-ing pursued in the United States to tailor the body armour based on gender as well as size.

Despite these interesting – and at times controversial – developments, there re-mains a gap in the research. Indeed, the enhancement of soldiers needs to be seen in a broader context. Enhancement is more than just new gear or new drugs; it is also about education, focused on enhancing un-derstanding and the systems that enable it.

Recent research has focused on the issue of cultural interoperability in military op-erations, showing that the lack of cultural

technoLogY

www.vanguardcanada.com FEBRUARY/MARCH 2017 21

t

awareness can act as a barrier between in-tervening forces and local populations. We think the interaction of this literature with research on human performance enhance-ment is a necessary next step. In short, we need to move from a focus on burden, to a focus on barriers. The successful deploy-ment of cutting-edge technology must take account of specific cultural and social contexts in order to enhance performance as intended.

During the war in Afghanistan, for exam-ple, soldiers sometimes felt that their body armour, helmet and sunglasses imposed an unnecessary distance between themselves and the locals they needed to interact with. This kind of anecdotal evidence is impor-tant because we can invest millions of dol-lars into updating equipment that will then just be taken off, in certain contexts. The point is not to halt the development of innovative technologies that can improve the soldier’s capabilities or force protec-tion, but to be mindful of the efficacy of such technology in different contexts, in order to preempt any counterproductive effects. In many cases, we argue that it is

the soldier who will have to make that call. Therefore, it is not enough to hand out high-tech kit: members of the armed forces also have to be educated about the interaction of that technology with the so-cial and cultural context.

While the development of human per-formance enhancement technology has been primarily focused on easing the bur-den placed on soldiers, there are other burdens that can sometimes be less visible. One such example relates to how burdens are experienced differently by men and women. Body armour and much of mili-tary equipment has been designed with one body type in mind: the average male body. For women, the burden of using ill-fitting equipment represents an actual barrier to their effective integration into the fighting force. This underscores the point, from a different angle, that tech-nological improvements are introduced in specific social contexts and that these must be anticipated by both the organi-zation and individual service members. Indeed, the aforementioned develop-ments towards redesigning body armour to account for this is an example of what a more holistic take on performance en-hancement looks like.

What we are arguing for is to bring a holistic understanding to the research and products that are developed under the banner of human performance enhance-ment. It is a note of caution, of sorts, to make sure that proper cultural and social analyses are at the heart of these devel-opments, as a first stage, but also central to how technology is then being inte-grated into the performance of missions and tasks. Technology on its own is not a panacea, so we have to think about the cultural and social barriers concurrently with physical and psychological burdens.

In previous research, we have high-lighted the need to favour non-invasive over invasive technology in order to pre-

serve a healthy soldier-society connection. To achieve this balance, we contend that innovations in science and technology should keep pace with the cultural and social context. The argument here takes this logic a step further, by suggesting that cultural and social variables can profound-ly influence how we can use this emerging technology and that failure to account for this point could lead to major acquisition blunders. These are blunders that will not only undermine capability, but ultimately cost soldiers’ their lives, either on the bat-tlefield or once they get home.

Stéfanie von Hlatky is an assistant profes-sor in the Department of Political Studies at Queen’s University and Director of the Centre for International and Defence Pol-icy (CIDP). The CIDP is hosting the 2017 Kingston Conference on International Se-curity on the theme “Developing Super Sol-diers: Enhancing Military Performance” on 12-14 June 2017. She has published three books, including American Allies in Times of War: The Great Asymmetry, published by Oxford University Press in 2013. She obtained her PhD in political science from the Université de Montreal where she was also executive director for the Centre for International Peace and Security Studies. She can be reached at svh@queensu.ca H. Christian Breede* holds a PhD in War Studies from the Royal Military College of Canada and is an Assistant Profes-sor of Political Science at The Royal Mili-tary College of Canada and Deputy Direc-tor of the Centre for International and Defence Policy at Queen’s University, both in Kingston, Canada. He can be reached at hans.christian.breede@rmc.ca. *The opinions and analysis expressed in this article are based on his own research and in no way reflects official policy of the Govern-ment of Canada.

While the development of human performance enhancement technology has been primarily focused on easing the burden placed on soldiers, there are other burdens that can sometimes be less visible.