Tawazun - Indicators | Civilian Competences

The Index measures the relative efficiency of civil-military relations. Efficiency is defined as the ability of civilian and military actors to negotiate, formulate, and coordinate policies in the sphere of national defense, in ways that further effective governance of the defense sector, reinforce state core competences, and enhance nation building.

The Index includes five domains, each comprising a set of main questions and indicators. Rationales for each domain and main question clarify their relevance in measuring the efficiency of civil-military relations. The index is designed in question format, allowing respondents to answer each indicator on a scale.

Civilian Competences

Efficient civil-military relations depend on the military’s openness to involvement by competent non-uniformed civilian professionals in defense-related functions such as planning, procurement, and development within different branches of government, and to open discussion of defense affairs by civilians both inside and outside government. Female participation in the armed forces additionally correlates with increases in human resources and professionalism, and so measures to increase it are also integral to the development of a capable and modern military. The ability to collect, process, and utilize data is crucial in an information-intensive age and a necessary competence for the military to possess, making extensive and routinized interaction between it and civilians essential.

Q1. Do civilian professionals contribute effectively to policymaking, oversight and management, and support of the defense sector?

In mature states, defense is treated as a function of government like any other. It therefore involves civilians with appropriate competence and professional training, and requires the policies governing it and its performance to be subject to civilian scrutiny and public debate.

Do civilian ministers, civil servants, and government planners and advisers or other experts play formal policy-setting and decision-making roles in the defense sector, and do they have a good grasp of the military’s capabilities?

These civilians play little or no formal role in policy-setting, and generally lack the requisite grasp of the military’s capabilities.
These civilians have limited or inconsistent roles in policy-setting and poor grasp of the military’s capabilities.
These civilians have a formal policy-setting role, but limited or inconsistent grasp of the military’s capabilities.
These civilians have a formal policy-setting role, and a good grasp of the military’s capabilities.

Does the military accept the authority of civilian policy-setters and decision-makers?

No, across the board.
The military accepts civilian authority only in specific, narrow competences.
The military accepts civilian authority at the level of head of state and/or council of ministers, but less so or not of civil servants or government planners and advisers.
Yes, across the board.

Do civilians in official positions (ministers, advisers, civil servants, members of parliament and their staff, judges) have the expertise to debate and decide on defense affairs within their areas of competence?

Civilians consistently lack the necessary expertise within their areas of competence.
Only a few civilians have the necessary expertise within their areas of competence.
Many civilians have the necessary expertise within their areas of competence.
Civilians consistently have the necessary expertise within their areas of competence.

Does the military encourage and utilize civilian expertise in defense affairs?

The military actively discourages civilian expertise and does not utilize it.
The military does not actively discourage civilian expertise, and occasionally utilizes it.
The military occasionally encourages civilian expertise, and utilizes it somewhat routinely.
The military actively encourages civilian expertise, and utilizes it routinely.

Is there a gap in the military’s ability to respond to various needs or to connect between defense policy and programs for developing military capabilities, that civilians could or should help fill?

Yes, there is a considerable gap that civilians could or should help fill, but this is impeded by lack of civilian competence or military opposition to civilian involvement.
There is a considerable gap, which is only partially filled, whether due to limited civilian competence or military reluctance to accept civilian involvement.
There is a gap, which is partially filled by competent civilians, with little military resistance to civilian involvement.
Any gap is filled by competent civilians, with full military acceptance of civilian involvement.

How open is the military to employing civilians with professional competence and training in key defense areas such as planning, inspection, procurement and financial management, or in technical, legal, and intelligence activities?

Not at all: The defense sector regards all these as an exclusive military preserve.
To a limited extent: Civilians are employed in a few non-key areas and in limited numbers.
To some extent: Civilians are employed in a few key areas, but in varying numbers and not consistently across the board.
Considerably: Civilians are employed across the board.

Does the defense sector or government have effective and well-resourced programs or other means to recruit and develop civilian defense professionals in any relevant field of competence (such as planning, budgeting, or technical fields such as cyber warfare)?

No.
To a limited extent (limited options or resources, poor design and management).
To some extent (some options and resources, moderate design and management).
Considerably.

How open is the defense sector to foreign providers of military assistance supporting systemic functions (such as planning, oversight, pension design)?

Not at all.
To a limited extent.
To some extent.
To a high extent.

Q2. Is the military effective in expanding the pool of human resources, skills, and specializations it can draw on by integrating women into the armed forces and expanding the scope of tasks they undertake?

Significant changes in military operations and functions brought about by technological advances, United Nations calls for gender equality, and the need for increasingly diverse skills and specializations has brought more women into the armed forces and introduced them into domains previously reserved for men. Some countries have institutionalized strategies to induct greater numbers of women into the military.

Are women formally enabled to join the armed forces or formally excluded from doing so?

Women are formally excluded.
Women are not formally excluded, but a de facto policy prevents them from joining the armed forces.
Women are able to join the armed forces, but there are some barriers and the military does not have a policy of actively expanding their participation.
There are no formal barriers to women joining the armed forces, and the military actively seeks to expand their participation.

Does the military employ women outside of clerical/administrative and medical roles?

No, as a matter of policy.
There is no clear policy, and it generally does not.
There is no clear policy, but sometimes it does.
Yes, as a matter of policy.

Has the military adjusted and adapted its rules and regulations, training programs, and facilities to integrate women (both including and outside of clerical/administrative and medical roles)?

Not at all.
To a limited extent.
To some extent.
To a high extent.

Are terms of engagement (pay, benefits and leave, and pensions) and conditions of service (training, equipment, facilities) equal or equivalent with suitable adjustments for men and women in the armed forces?

No, as a matter of policy.
There is no clear policy, and generally they are not.
There is no clear policy, but sometimes they are.
Yes, as a matter of policy.

Does the military have a code of conduct prohibiting gender discrimination and sexual harassment, and if yes, does it have both the means and the will for enforcing the code?

There is no code of conduct, and gender discrimination and sexual harassment are seldom, if ever, punished.
There is no code of conduct, but gender discrimination and sexual harassment are sometimes punished.
There is a code of conduct on gender discrimination and sexual harassment, but the means and will to enforce it are inconsistent.
Yes, there is a code of conduct on gender discrimination and sexual harassment, and the military has the means and will to enforce it.

Does the military have a formal commitment to recruiting and integrating women in its ranks, and does it have an action plan to ensure this happens?

There is no commitment or action plan.
There is only an informal commitment, without an action plan.
There is a formal commitment, but without an action plan.
There is a formal commitment and an action plan.

Is there a national gender policy (to fulfill government obligations to the UN Women, Peace and Security Resolutions), and, if so, does it enhance recruitment and integration of women into the military?

There is no national gender policy, nor does the military seek to recruit and integrate women into the military.
There is no national gender policy, but some guidelines are in place that enhance recruitment and integration of women.
There is a national gender policy, but it does little to enhance recruitment and integration of women.
There is a national gender policy, and it enhances recruitment and integration of women.

To what extent do foreign providers of military assistance influence gender mainstreaming in the armed forces?

Not at all.
To a limited extent.
To some extent.
To a high extent.

Q3. Does the military possess the orientation and means to make effective use of civilian competence in the collection, processing, and utilization of data in an information-intensive era?

A modern military must have both the intention and the capability to continuously acquire, analyze, and utilize (share) information about itself (social and gender composition, skills, performance) and its interactions with its own society in order to enable ongoing modifications and upgrades in its operational capabilities, doctrine, equipment, delivery of core missions, and strategic planning. The ability to collect, process, and utilize data is especially critical given the advent of cyber and fifth generation warfare, which requires extensive and routinized interaction between the military and civilians.

Does data-based research and analysis feed directly into the military’s strategic, policy, and operational planning?

No, the military does not conduct anything beyond the most basic data-based research and analysis.
The military generally does not conduct routine data-based research and analysis, but data-based insights occasionally make their way into planning.
The military conducts data-based research and analysis, but the quality is inconsistent or in need of improvement and it feeds somewhat inconsistently into planning.
Yes, data-based research and analysis is of good quality and feeds routinely into military planning.

Does the military have dedicated units or staff with the necessary competence to undertake design and implementation of quantitative and qualitative data collection, and to analyze output?

No (highly inadequate competence and utilization).
To a limited extent (poor or inconsistent competence and utilization).
To some extent (reasonable but somewhat inconsistent competence and utilization).
To a high extent (high competence and utilization).

Does the military routinely collect and assess the data on its own social, educational, and gender profile, with the aim of ensuring that it is representative of its society and effective in recruiting the human resources and skills sets it needs?

Not at all or very rarely.
To a limited extent.
To some extent.
To a high extent.

Does the military undertake or commission polling to assess public perceptions of it?

Not at all or very rarely.
To a limited extent.
To some extent.
To a high extent.

How open is the military to releasing data to the public?

Not at all.
To a limited extent.
To some extent.
To a high extent.

Does the military have formal or informal agreements with research organizations (including universities) to design and undertake or provide training in data collection and analysis?

Not at all.
To a limited extent.
To some extent.
To a high extent.

Is the military open to the participation of its personnel in research seminars or in conducting and publishing their own peer-reviewed research findings in public forums?

Not at all.
To a limited extent.
To some extent.
To a high extent.