TOPIC-NURTURING

INNOVATION IN
THE NAVY

COMMODORE NOTT PRIZE ESSAY

COMPETITION 2020

COMMANDER SARATH MANARI GOPINATHAN

P.NO 42193T
 NURTURING INNOVATION IN THE NAVY

By

COMMANDER SARATH MANARI GOPINATHAN

P.NO 42193T

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Ser Topic Pages

No From To

1. Certificate of Originality 3 3

2. Introduction 4 5

3. The Nature of innovation 6 7

4. Defence – A Hotbed of innovation 8 10

5. The importance of Nurturing Innovative thinkers 11 12

6. Achieving innovation in the Navy 12 14

7. Analysis 14 17

8. Conclusion 18 18

9. Bibliography 19 20

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

 CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY

Declaration of the Candidate:

I, Commander Sarath Manari Gopinathan (P No. 42193T) hereby

declare that I am the sole author of this Essay and that neither any
part of the same nor the whole of the Essay has been submitted to
any University or Institution for obtaining any Professional or academic
award.

I further certify, that the Essay submitted by me is an outcome of my

independent and original work. I have duly acknowledged all the
sources from which the ideas and extracts have been taken.The
materials from the work of other people which has been included in
my study have been duly acknowledged. I certify that this
assignment/report is my own work, based on my personal study
and/or research and that I have acknowledged all material and
sources used in its preparation, whether they be books, articles,
reports, lecture notes, and any other kind of document, electronic or
personal communication. I also certify that this Essay has not
previously been submitted for assessment in any other Organisation.

Signature:

Name of Author : Commander Sarath Manari Gopinathan

P. No : 42193T
Date : 3rd Oct 2020
Place : Mumbai

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

 NURTURING INNOVATION IN THE NAVY

From time immemorial the people of India have had very intimate
connections with the sea. They had trade with other countries and they had also
built ships. In the bygone era Indian Shipbuilders with their skill and proficiency
, ardour and exertions etched an indelible mark in the field of shipbuilding in India.
The vessels built at Bombay at that time were superior to those built elsewhere; a
reality exploited by all, realised by many, accepted by few but
acknowledged by none....
INTRODUCTION

The history of the Indian Navy can be traced back to 1612 when Captain Best
encountered and defeated the Portuguese. Although Bombay had been ceded to the
British in 1662, they physically took possession of the island on 08 Feb 1665, only to pass
it on to the East India Company on 27 Sep 1668. By 1686, with British commerce having
shifted predominantly to Bombay, the name of this force was changed to Bombay
Marine. The Bombay Marine was involved in combat against the Marathas and the Sidis
and participated in the Burma War in 1824.

In 1830, the Bombay Marine was renamed Her Majesty's Indian Navy. Whilst the
Navy's strength continued to grow, it underwent numerous changes of nomenclature
over the next few decades. It was renamed the Bombay Marine from 1863 to 1877, after
which it became Her Majesty's Indian Marine. In recognition of services rendered
during various campaigns, its title was changed to Royal Indian Marine in 1892, by
which time it consisted of over 50 vessels. The Royal Indian Marine went into action
with a fleet of minesweepers, patrol vessels and troop carriers during the First World
War.

The first Indian to be granted a commission was Sub Lieutenant D.N Mukherji who
joined the Royal Indian Marine as an engineer officer in 1928. In 1934, the Royal Indian

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

Marine was reorganised into the Royal Indian Navy. At the outbreak of the Second
World War, the Royal Indian Navy consisted of eight warships. By the end of the war,
its strength had risen to 117 combat vessels and 30,000 personnel who had seen action
in various theatres of operations.

On India attaining Independence, the Royal Indian Navy consisted of 32 ageing vessels
suitable only for coastal patrol, along with 11,000 officers and men. The senior officers
were drawn from the Royal Navy, with R Adm ITS Hall, CIE, being the first Post-
independence Commander-in-Chief. The prefix 'Royal' was dropped on 26 Jan 1950
with India being constituted as a Republic. The first Commander-in-Chief of the Indian
Navy was Adm Sir Edward Parry, KCB, who handed over to Adm Sir Mark Pizey, KBE,
CB, DSO in 1951. Adm Pizey also became the first Chief of the Naval Staff in 1955.

It was then that Indian Navy's foray into self reliance began, over five decades ago with
the design and construction of warships in the country. Today, forty eight of its state-
of-the-art ships and submarines are under construction in Indian shipyards, both public
and private, a clear reflection of the Indian Navy's enduring support to India's
indigenous warship building endeavour. On 14 August 2020 Defence Minister Rajnath
Singh launched the Naval Innovation and Indigenisation Organisation (NIIO) through
an online webinar. The NIIO puts in place dedicated structures for the end users to
interact with academia and industry towards fostering innovation and indigenisation
for self-reliance in defence in keeping with the vision of Atmanirbhar Bharat. The NIIO
is a three-tiered organisation. Naval Technology Acceleration Council (N-TAC) will
bring together the twin aspects of innovation and indigenisation and provide apex level
directives. A working group under the N-TAC will implement the projects. A
Technology Development Acceleration Cell (TDAC) has also been created for induction
of emerging disruptive technology in an accelerated time frame.While much has been
achieved in our pursuit of ship building over the past decades, the time is now ripe for
launching into a new phase of self-reliance by manufacturing technologically advanced
equipment within India, through ‘Nurturing Innovation in the Indian Navy’.

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

 THE NATURE OF INNOVATION

Doing things differently is difficult; but the heart of innovation is about

first seeing things differently which is just as hard. Both involve making decisions under
uncertainty and ambiguity, and embracing risk. There is a natural human instinct and
inclination to want certainty about the future, but predicting a future is like “driving in
the dark” If we base our decision-making on unrealistic assumptions about uncertainty,
we are not likely to get things right.

In addition, trying to base innovation on a predictable future can lead to endless debate
because the discussions are unresolvable and will go on without end. Moreover, from
the record of the past, the consensus of experts will be unreliable. P. E. Tetlock in Expert
Political Judgment: How Good Is It? offered conclusive evidence that an expert’s power of
prediction ten years in the future was “worse than that of a dart throwing monkey,” in
other words, less reliable than a random choice. Regardless, battle-changing
innovations do happen. Here are three ways to help us cope with, perhaps even
embrace, an unpredictable future:-

Thinking about alternative futures. Thinking about alternative futures is a powerful

way of enabling decision-making under uncertainty. The reward of exploring
alternative futures is the chance to uncover and adopt a strategy, new technologies, and
new tactics suitable for all or most of them. For example, our future with China may be
collaboration, competition, confrontation, or different kinds and levels of conflict. This
has many implications, including that it may be possible to design one fleet that
imperfectly supports an adaptive maritime strategy to keep the peace and support our
East Asia allies.

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

Looking at historical trends. In addition to thinking about possible futures, looking at
our pasts and our history to identify trends can be a useful way to navigate the seas of
uncertainty. For example, the approach should be to identify trends and constants in
naval history. Because trends are likely to continue, they can guide the development of
new tactics and technologies. For example, the trend toward smaller, faster, and more
efficient computers and their growing applications is one that has a profound influence
on information warfare. “COTS” (commercial off-the-shelf) technologies have had the
biggest effect on computer technology. The same kind of influence and eventual
dominance of commercially developed control systems is now affecting the growing
power and flexibility of UAVs.

Studying successful innovations from the past. Understanding the evolutionary

processes enabling innovation can be useful indicators of what might work in the
future, and how implementing innovation has proceeded, usually along a winding
road. While it is tempting to look to business for learning how to innovate, there is
much to learn from past innovation in many military organizations’ histories,
indicating also that non-linear forward progress is the norm for effecting
innovations. For example, aircraft carriers were developed before their coming
dominance at sea was fully appreciated. Tanks had a checkered history: The British
invented them; the French built high quality ones in large numbers; but the Germans
exploited their tactical advantages with a new operational application, the Blitzkrieg.
Vertical lift aircraft were notably inferior to propeller and jet-propelled aircraft, yet they
revolutionized air and ground warfare.

Note that great achievements at the combat level usually require both new technologies
and new tactics, which are like two sides of a coin and often best enabled if guided by
new concepts and new ways of thinking. Leaders must learn how to marry the quite
different personalities of technologists and seagoing officers to accomplish big
advancements.

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

 DEFENCE – A HOTBED OF INNOVATION

If you remember the incident of 26/11 in Mumbai that took many lives, Just to
immobilize such happenings, the country needs newer technologies, which will act as
force multipliers. Building unmanned surface vehicle is equipped with AI-based
command control system can automatically detect if there is an intruder and can
interdict in first place. The unmanned vehicles can safeguarding our coastlines by
operating these vessels in Atlantic, Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea and swarming of
these vessels over the years. The future goal should be to have 100 meter vessels which
are being controlled by satellite communication and RF systems from the stations.

The ultimate goal is to introduce indigenous and modern defence solutions in our naval
corps, so that our soldiers don’t have to go out in the sea and fight. Rather than sending
human assets, the unmanned vehicles can carry security and surveillance. They have
war fighting capabilities and could bring our sailors and soldiers back home safe. With
the expanding possibilities of artificial intelligence (AI), combined with augmented and
mixed reality (MR), is becoming crucial for modern warfare. Defence systems equipped
with AI and MR improves human decision-making capability and human-to-machine
interaction immensely. Thus, modernisation of the armed forces and indigenization of
manufacturing should emerge as focus areas for the Indian defence sector.

The government is also promoting participation of the private sector in defence

manufacturing through Make in India. Initiatives like MAKE Projects, Innovations for
Defence Excellence (iDEX) or Defence India startup challenge are pushing the defence
modernisation drive – at the same time creating ample of opportunities for small
businesses. Recently, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh called for an increased
participation of the private sector in the defence manufacturing. In a Business Summit
earlier this year, he said, “In our envisaged Defence Production Policy, we have clearly

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

spelt out our goal to achieve a turnover of $26 billion in aerospace and defence goods
and services by 2025.”
“This will have huge implications for India’s endeavours to promote R&D, innovation
and its efforts to secure a place in global supply chains,” Defence Minister added, while
admitting that the necessity of becoming internationally competitive, globally
innovative and structurally efficient demands that the private sector plays a crucial role
in the defence production. With such push, many startups are collaborating and getting
into strategic partnerships with bigger enterprises. For instance, public sector
undertaking Hindustan Aeronautics is sharing its workload with many small
businesses for various productions.

According to the Research and Markets study, the government is eyeing to achieve a
turnover of Rs. 1.7 trillion in military goods and services by 2025, with strategic
partnerships and make in India programme. While at the same time, the export target
is set up for Rs. 350 billion (approximately US$ 5 billion) in defence goods and services
by 2025. Most innovations take place in organizations, or need organizations to
generate new inventions. Organizations can help and encourage, but sometimes stifle,
innovation. As organizations age and grow (and most military organizations are both
quite large and old) they first develop routines, rules, and structures to improve
efficiencies and get things done, but then the rules and bureaucratic processes often
take a life of their own and multiply, resulting in organizational calcification.

Trimming organizational deadwood can be as challenging in the business world as in

public institutions. It is a rare soul who has not been frustrated and maddened by
multiple business bureaucracies—not to mention disastrous business decisions that
cost jobs and create economic turmoil and heartache. Commercial organizations and
think tanks offer examples of innovative research and they can provide important
inputs to military organizations and innovations. We can undoubtedly learn from how
they organized and facilitated innovative research. But military organizations are not

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

think tanks, whose product is thought and writing. Military organizations must also
plan and act. Military organizations are different from commercial organizations, too.
Both have an important competitive/interactive aspect. Businesses gain and maintain
competitive advantages by making and selling competitive products. Military
organizations need to gain and maintain competitive advantages too, but they are
designed to destroy an enemy’s will to fight and his means of war. Despite the
differences, there are things we can learn from studying the organizational mechanisms
that have successfully supported innovation in different contexts, such as reducing
administrative overhead, decentralizing the decision-making, and trying to avoid
empowering middle managers with too many layers of approval.

Organizations have adapted to changes in warfare in the past, with aircraft carriers,
precision-guided weapons, and the atomic bomb. These innovations were not merely
passive responses to change: many proactively created changes in warfare. Speaking
about uncertainty and risk, someone once said, “If you can predict the future then I
can’t change it.” Interestingly, many of the most important innovations helped shape a
future by imposing change on the enemy, exploiting enemy weaknesses, and building
on our strengths.

Successful past innovations were often focused geographically with a specific enemy in
mind. For example, the development of Marine amphibious assault doctrine and the
vessels to achieve it grew out of Major Earl “Pete” Ellis’ study of the Pacific Islands and
atolls the Marines knew they would have to seize in the event of war with Japan. The
Israeli Navy swiftly developed small missile combatants armed with Gabriel missiles
after the sinking (in 1967) of the destroyer Eilat with ASCMs fired from small, Soviet-
built, Egyptian-operated, Osa and Komar missile boats. In just six years from a cold
start, the Israeli Navy obtained the ships and trained crews to defeat the Egyptian and
Syrian navies in the 1973 War. It was a great shock to the enemy and changed the nature
of naval war in coastal waters.

10

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

 THE IMPORTANCE OF NURTURING INNOVATIVE THINKERS

Not everyone in the organization should be an innovative thinker. Many must excel in
planning with existing capabilities and fighting. Most people prefer to do what they
know they do best, and they can often easily measure and see the results of their work.
Innovative thinking requires experimenting with what one does not know best and
sometimes not at all. The fruits of such work are often more distant and uncertain.
Organizations, to be adaptive, need both exploration with new ideas and ways of
thinking (leading to new capabilities in the long run) and exploitation of existing ones.
A problem arises when planners do not appreciate the necessary contribution of a few
precious disruptive and innovative thinkers. But if innovators alone dominate, then
there is no one to plan the development, implementation, and tactics to exploit an
innovation, often in ways quite different from the original intent. Leaders must know
how to recognize, nurture, and listen to innovative thinkers and suppress bureaucratic
impediments to “thinking differently.”

Recognizing and making room for disruptive talent. There is a great need to be open to
creative individuals, those with ideas that may challenge the system and managers at
times. As Colonel John Boyd noted in his testimony on military transformation: “First,
we need to understand that throughout history the difference between brilliantly
performing armies and mediocre ones has always depended on a small handful of
combat leaders. Naturally, the military that manages to nurture a tiny handful of
brilliant, innovative officers achieves great results… On the other hand, a military that
suppresses said brilliant and unconventional young officers among them, who I might
add tend to make life uncomfortable for seniors, is forced to grind out rigid, predictable
battles with much blood and mountains of material.”

Creating unusual mixing. One can help fight against the organizational bureaucratic
inertia by mixing teams of people in unconventional ways. Doing so demands creative

11

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

leadership because there are centripetal forces at work. People gravitate toward those
who are most like themselves, but we often learn more by interacting with those unlike
ourselves. In academic and military educational institutions, leaders can take proactive
roles in “mixing” people who may otherwise gravitate toward the institutional and
intellectual comfort of those with the same beliefs.

ACHIEVING INNOVATION IN THE NAVY

Innovation cannot be reduced to a check-off list, a blueprint, or a manual to guide

creativity. Military doctrine manuals provide for unified strategic planning and tactical
cooperation. That is different from innovation. Contrast Edison’s development of the
electric light bulb with the multifaceted development of submarine and missiles.
Contrast both with the strange history of the development the tank in 1917 and its
several applications to armored warfare. There is no one single process to guide success.
However, there are things naval leaders can do to foster innovative thinking and make
their organizations more prepared to adopt new tactics and technology, including:-

Guard against a no-defect mentality and fear of failure. The only way never to make
a mistake is to never make a decision, in other words to do nothing perfectly. Innovative
thinking will never be right all the time, so there has to be a system that encourages
variations in ideas in order to swiftly accept, adopt, and assimilate the good
variations. Ironically, avoiding failures can lead to loss of opportunities to learn from
failures and evolve. The advancement of naval aviation in the US Navy in the 1920s and
1930s is a case study in learning from false starts and failures while rapidly progressing
to readiness for World War II. Senior leaders must also actively protect disruptive
thinkers.

Have organizational structures in place to recognize innovative thinking that doesn’t

fit the mold of preconception. The common mistake is preparing to fight the last war.

12

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

Instead when a promising advancement is discovered, create shortcuts under a sense
of urgency to get around the bureaucratic system.

Emphasize that the most important characteristic to foster innovation is

people.Advancement comes not from processes; or disciplinary lenses, or the “how to”
manuals, or even advances in technology. The most important element in organizations
and in warfare is the human element. As former Marine Corps Commandant General
Robert Barrow noted, “In any institution or undertaking, the importance of people
transcends all else.” Marine Combat University President General Bowers also noted
(in his discussion of Wilson and Barrow), “You can get everything else wrong, but if
you get the people right, you will be all right. Whereas you can get everything else right,
but if you get the people wrong, you are going to be in trouble.” Leaders must
proactively constrain middle managers who maintain the status quo with a
“spreadsheet” mentality.

Recognize and reward the best leadership styles. In addition to realizing that the most
important element is the people chosen, we need leaders who stick their necks out for
those willing to experiment and do things differently and provide top cover for the
people who are implementing the new ideas, technologies, and tactics.
Experimentation. Experiment at sea with prototypes and first generation designs in the
full expectation that second and third generation designs must be built to correct the
early mistakes and smooth out shortcomings. Experiments can also lead to innovative
ways in how organizations think and fight.

Exploiting the creativity of youth by “getting out of the way.” Here are wise words
regarding cyberwar from a US Navy lieutenant: “The most talented graduate students
at the best U. S. computer science and engineering schools are said to be those who
leave before graduation in order to pursue venture capital or other commercial

13

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

opportunities”. Talented youth will be prominent in cyber war evolution, just as they
rose to prominence in computer technology.

Building an organizational culture to support innovation and reward risk takers. It

goes without saying there are limits and achieving a balance is one of the most
challenging skills of leadership. Nevertheless, it is a lot easier to suppress innovation
and risk-taking than to grow it. Leaders must be particular attentive to the handful of
people who are willing to take risks and protect the intelligent risk-takers from
thoughtless suppression because they are willing to dare.

Broadening peoples’ minds. Foster curiosity in the midst of good discipline. Cultivating
open minds is a key responsibility of our military educational institutions. Military
innovative thinkers are famously avid (and broad) readers. while reading doesn’t give
you all the answers, it lights up the path ahead and enables us to understand and learn
from the past.
ANALYSIS

Sneak Peek: India’s defence budget. Government has announced plethora of

measures in the Union Budget 2020 to strengthen defence infrastructure and facilities.
The measures include two new defence corridors to encourage MSMEs contribution in
the sector. The industry is also receiving much-needed push under the Make in India
initiative.The concept of import substitution is being gradually accepted by
stakeholders as they foresee huge opportunities in the sector. Of the total Rs 4,71,378
crore (US$ 66.9 billion) budget allocation, Rs. 3,23,053 crore ($45.8 billion) goes to the
Defence Services Estimates (DSE) [that includes all the three forces and the Defence
Research and Development Organisation (DRDO)].The remaining chunk is going to be
distributed between defence pensions (which is Rs. 1,33,825 crore or $19 billion and
Ministry of Defence (Civil) (Rs. 14,500 crore or $2.1 billion). 

14

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

Innovation exists, but where is the money? Indian military modernisation needs a lot
more spends on R&D, innovation and indigenisation. However, a recent report tabled
in the parliament, pointed out insufficient budgetary allocation. India considers
national security of paramount importance. The developments in the neighbourhood
over the past decade have led the country to rethink its security strategy. And,
modernisation of the country’s defence, in particular, has been the government’s
agenda for long.
The “potential” threats and strengthening the national defence has prompted the rising
demand for new procurement and innovation in this sector. This reflects in several key
initiatives taken up by the government over past few years. Stating national security as
a priority and focus on indigenization of defence, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman
earmarked a budget of Rs 4,71,378 crore (US$ 66.9 billion) for the Ministry of Defence
(MoD) for the year 2020-2021. This is an increase of 9.37 per cent in the defence budget
allocation over the previous year’s budget of Rs. 4,31,010.79 crore. However, if one look
at the budget closely – majority (almost 90 per cent of the defence allocation) is for
existing obligations, leaving a little room for new procurement and defence
modernisation. Despite that, India – already a tech innovation hub – is witnessing
several startups trying to cater to this highly critical segment.

Modernisation of armed forces – budget is a concern. To meet the wide spectrum of

security challenges, today modernisation of armed forces is a necessity. In order to
fulfill the needs, the government is procuring new equipment and upgrading existing
ones to ensure the armed forces are well equipped. As per the government data, during
the last three years and in the current year, 197 contracts have been signed for capital
procurement or upgradation of defence equipment such as missiles, aircraft, artillery
guns, assault rifles, radars, rockets, helicopters, weapons, simulators, ballistic helmets,
bullet proof jackets and electronic fuzes and ammunition.

Capital procurement of defence equipment is undertaken from various domestic as

well as foreign vendors, based on threat perception, operational challenges and

15

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

technological changes and to keep the armed forces in a state of readiness. In addition
to this, Institute for Defence Studies & Analyses (IDSA) reveals some more data on
procurement for modernisation. It states that in the first 10 months of 2019-20, the
Ministry of Defence has signed nearly 14 new contracts that include, T-90 Tanks (Rs.
20,000 crore), anti-submarine warfare shallow watercraft (Rs. 12,623 crore) and Akash
Missile System (Rs. 5,357 crore).
Taking into account the budget allocation and expenditure under Capital Budget Head
under Defence Services Estimates in the last three years vis-à-vis comparison of last
year modernisation budget versus this year’s modernisation budget clearly reveals that
this year all three services got an overall increase of 11 per cent or Rs. 9,227 crore, under
the modernisation Budget 2020-21. Despite this ‘marginal’ increase, the extent of budget
allocations is a concern. As IDSA study states it’s not enough to meet the modernisation
requirements.“Owing to severe resource crunch, timely payment for these and other
ongoing contracts has been a major issue for the MoD. In fact, in past several years, the
resource crunch has been so acute that its allocation for modernisation has been less
than even the Committee Liabilities arising from payment outgo for the past contacts,”
states Dr. Laxman Kumar Behera, a research fellow at IDSA.

Shortages of Modernisation Fund. The study also discloses that the shortages
have also led to armed forces cutting down on some of their planned procurement. For
instance, the India Navy has pruned its capital procurement of some of the necessary
apparatus owing to the budget constraints. “These included mine counter-measure
vessels, early-warning helicopters, landing platforms docks (LPDs) and maritime
reconnaissance aircraft. However, resorting to such a measure doesn’t augur well for
the modernisation and defence preparedness of the country, to say the least,” the IDSA
study states. Though there is growth in the budget, it looks like on modernisation front,
the allocation is falling short.As per the figures, the total amount allocated for Capital
Acquisition (Modernisation) is 27.87 per cent of defence services estimates. That means

16

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

an amount of Rs 90,048 crore, with an increase of Rs 9,088.92 crore over budget
estimation of 2019-20 allocations. 

 Modernisation vs manpower cost .Besides the limited grants, another factor

that’s a roadblock in the defence modernisation process is expenditure on manpower.
In last few years, there is a change in the spending patterns of the Ministry of Defence.
There is also a periodic upgradation on salaries and allowances. As per the IDSA study,
currently the MoD’s budget directly pays to nearly 5.1 million people, of which 1.4
million are uniformed personnel, 3.2 million pensioners and 3,98,433 defence civilians.
The expenditure on manpower, which includes salaries, pensions and other
allowances, has drastically surged by almost 60 per cent. The increase in the manpower
cost is primarily due to increase in number of people funded by the defence ministry.
For instance, pensions have doubled in last five years. It jumped to Rs. 1,33,825 crore
from Rs. 60,000 crore.
Lately, the defence pensioners number has also jumped up drastically from less than 10
per cent of the DSE up to late 1980s to over 40 per cent in 2020-21. In percentage terms,
defence pensioners constitute 64 per cent of total MoD-funded people. The Personnel
Below Officer Rank (PBOR), the biggest pensioner segment, accounts for 77 per cent of
the total pensioners and 49 per cent of total number of people directed funded through
the MoD’s budget. With the implementation of One Rank One Pension (OROP) scheme,
there is an annual addition of 60,000 retires to the pension club. With this exponential
growth, the pension budget will be unhindered unless drastic reform is undertaken to
contain it, the experts believe. Under the OROP scheme, the pension of retired defence
personnel is to be revised in every five years, in comparison to every 10 years for the
central government civilian employees. In other words, modernisation process is
suffering due to the sharp increase in manpower cost. The increase in manpower cost
comes at the cost of the stores and modernisation budget – two key components of the
defence services estimates (DSE) that are essential for acquiring and maintaining hard
military capability.

17

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

 CONCLUSION

The scenario ahead. The Indian economy is going through testing times and there is a
downward pressure on it. The year 2019-20 has particularly been a difficult year. In
2020-21, experts were expecting the economy to rebound with the gross domestic
product (GDP) to grow in the range of 6.0 to 6.5 per cent. With this, the growth of 9.4
per cent in MoD’s overall allocation looks reasonable, though not sufficient to meet all
the shortages it faces. However, the present sentiments have made the situation look
gloomy due to the impact of Covid-19. Also, the Ministry of Defence is unlikely to
witness a major hike in its budget in the near future – thus it will be pushed to cut down
on some of its planned expenditure and re-prioritize the rest. There will be an uphill
task ahead for Indian defence.

The metaphor of “driving in the dark” is very relevant to the road to improve
innovation amidst uncertainty, and it will not be a straight highway. Yet,
notwithstanding the difficult nature of innovation and the inhibiting organizational
processes that often suppress it, past successes suggest that we can indeed nurture
innovators and grow innovations in the Indian Navy. This will unavoidably
accompanied by bruising the status quo ways of thinking. We have not discussed every
aspect of success. Further dimensions to explore include how our educational
institutions must help build more innovative and interdisciplinary thinking, and
examining past attempts to innovate, including the failures, with an eye for their
strategic, organizational, and tactical implications.

18

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. NATIONAL COMPETENCE IN MARINE PROPULSION- THE ROAD AHEAD (By

Cdr MS Gopinathan, Cdr Manish Singh) http://ficci.in/spdocument/20728/Indian-Naval-
Officers-for-FICCI-Seminar.pdf

2. Indian Naval Indigenisation Plan (INIP), Directorate of Indigenisation IHQ, MoD(N),

New Delhi.

3. Indian Industry Trends in Defence Shipbuilding, Cmde Mukesh Bhargava (Retd) Vice

President Larsen & Toubro Limited 12 Jun 2015

4. Genesis of Indian Navy, www.indiannavy.nic.in

5. Make in India: Challenges Before Defence Manufacturing, SN Mishra,Issue Vol. 30 1 Jan-

Mar2015.

6. Reach new heights: Naval engines and marine propulsion system, www.cassindia.com.

7. Dr V Bhujanga Rao (VBR), Director General, Naval Systems and Materials, Defence
Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), Ministry of Defence, interview with India
Strategic (IS).Published: December 2013.

8. www. Wikipedia. Org.

9. Understanding 'Make in India' in the Defence Sector, Lieutenant Commander L Shivaram ,

(Retd)

10. Journal of the United Service Institution of India, Vol. CXLV, No. 601, July-September

2015.

11. Web References

(a) https://www.army.mil/article/173386/making_innovation_happen
(b) https://www.cnas.org/publications/reports/driving-in-the-dark-ten-propositions-
about-prediction-and-national-security
(c) http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/10/16/100-right-0-of-the-time/
(d) http://grc-usmcu.libguides.com/c.php?g=756767&p=5426039
(e) https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2017/07/25/mattis-get-
unnecessary-training-off-warfighters-backs/

19

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T

(f) https://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/the-man-who-invented-the-predator-
3970502/
(g) https://www.c-span.org/video/?17753-1/us-military-reform-oper-desert-storm
(h) https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-
corps/2016/03/04/commandant-looks-to-disruptive-thinkers-to-fix-corps-problems/
(i) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJZCBg_SDLY
(j) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RL4__NVYByw
(k) http://www.strifeblog.org/2013/05/07/with-rifle-and-bibliography-general-mattis-on-
professional-reading/
(l) http://cimsec.org/leading-military-innovation-past-and-present
(m) https://smefutures.com/indias-defence-set-for-modernization-innovation-exists-but-
where-is-the-money/

20

Commander M S Gopinathan – 42193T