Because of an increase in focus by the media on the Danish Defence, following our participation in military operations e.g. in the Former Republic of Yugoslavia (1991), Iraq (2001) and Afghanistan (2003), military leadership has become a topic for much debate. Amongst other things, this increase in focus could be due to the fact, that the leader of today, in the Danish Defence, operates in a highly distinct as well as complex reality. This dissertation argues, that the before mentioned complexity, comes to light especially when you look at recent technologies introduced into the Danish Defence, and view them against long time existing requirements, such as semantics, certain expectations for correct conduct, specific rules, norms and the like, that for decades have been a part of the Danish Defence. Together the two, the more recent technologies as well as the already existing requirements, might entail the risk of making, what was meant as a working-tool for the leader, even more complex. This dynamic potential was discussed through an analysis, with attention specifically on a highly topical technology; FOKUS, introduced in 2006. Initially my theoretical point of view was inspired by Niklas Luhmann and Michel Foucault. I early discovered that these perspectives were not solely sufficient in order to pursue my intent, which was to observe the Danish Defence communication concerning leadership. My analytical strategy had to be constructed with terms also explaining a rather unique set of behaviour, similar to those of the early European court society. Therefore I found that Norbert Elias should also be part of my overall view in observing observations about leadership. It resulted in three partly parallel analysis concerning, 1) the semantic history of the leader, 2) figurations and etiquette, and 3) technology as conditioning factor of leadership. The analysis show, that the leader in the Danish Defence could be diagnosed as follows: He emerges from hidden behavioral, semantic and technological paradoxes, repeatedly recreating themselves as subjectivation-possibilities, e.g. governing/governed. The Danish Defence communication about leadership offers constantly oscillating tensions between the distinction individual/organization. Leadership is then a question of handling these paradoxes and tensions.
|Educations||MSocSc in Political Communication and Managment, (Graduate Programme) Final Thesis|
|Number of pages||163|