LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
- journal86
- Jun 16
- 5 min read
Updated: Jul 2
Sir
Tackling the Challenge of Recruiting and Retaining Technical Talent
Unfortunately, I’m unable to get to the RSI Spring Seminar but noted a theme for discussion that was of great interest to me. I felt it important to offer a view.
Recruiting and retaining high-quality, technically qualified professionals has become a persistent challenge in the telecommunications sector. As technologies evolve rapidly, the demand for skilled personnel consistently outpaces supply. Employers often struggle to attract candidates with up-to-date knowledge in areas like 5G, network security, and AI-driven infrastructure. Even when recruitment succeeds, retention proves difficult due to competitive offers, lack of career development, and outdated workplace practices.
To address this, a multi-faceted approach is essential. First, organisations must invest in continuous professional development. Offering clear learning pathways, certifications, and support for further education can help employees grow while staying loyal. Second, partnerships with universities and technical colleges can help shape curricula aligned with industry needs and establish talent pipelines early.
Retention also hinges on workplace culture. Flexible working arrangements, diversity and inclusion initiatives, and transparent career progression are now baseline expectations for high-calibre professionals. Companies must also empower technical staff by involving them in strategic decisions and recognising their contributions beyond technical output.
Finally, industry bodies such as the Institution of Telecommunication Professionals (ITP) can play a pivotal role by fostering knowledge-sharing, mentoring, and standard-setting that benefits employers and employees alike.
Addressing this issue is vital—not only for individual organisations but for the resilience and competitiveness of the entire UK telecoms sector, including Defence!
Bradley York
Sir
Modernising Defence Procurement for the Digital Battlespace
It came as little surprise to me to note that the RSI Spring Seminar feature defence procurement – a hoary old chestnut. Sadly, I could not attend so offer my comments in a letter.
As a senior executive with over two decades of experience supplying IT, cyber, and telecommunications systems to the UK Armed Forces, I write to express growing concern over the persistent misalignment between defence procurement practices and the realities of modern digital warfare. Despite shared ambitions across government and industry, the current acquisition model remains unfit for the pace and complexity of emerging technologies.
Cyber and communications capabilities are no longer peripheral—they are central to mission success. Yet, by the time new systems are procured through traditional defence channels, they are often technologically outdated and operationally constrained. This results not only in inefficiencies and spiralling costs, but also in unacceptable risk to operational readiness and national security.
To address this, I propose four key reforms:
Adopt Agile Acquisition Models: Defence must move toward iterative, spiral development cycles that deliver capability quickly, with room for rapid adaptation and upgrade. Agile methodologies are proven in the private sector and essential for technologies where obsolescence is measured in months, not years.
Embed Technical and Commercial Expertise in Programme Teams: Many procurement challenges stem from insufficient in-house understanding of complex IT systems. Programme teams should include technical professionals who can engage with industry as peers, challenge assumptions, and make informed trade-offs.
Lower Barriers for SMEs and Non-Traditional Suppliers: Smaller firms with innovative solutions are often deterred by the burdens of MOD contracting processes. Simplified routes to market—such as framework agreements, challenge-led competitions, or dynamic purchasing systems—can unlock untapped capability and diversify the supplier base.
Enable Pre-Competitive Dialogue and Flexibility in Specifications: Too often, requirements are rigidly defined before industry engagement, locking in solutions that are impractical or outdated. Structured pre-tender dialogue would enable more relevant, cost-effective, and technically sound outcomes.
The adversaries we face exploit the speed and fluidity of the information environment. If we are to counter these threats effectively, our procurement practices must evolve accordingly. The Armed Forces require digital capabilities that are timely, scalable, and responsive to the mission—not bound by outdated procurement doctrine.
The urgency of this transformation cannot be overstated. It is not simply a matter of efficiency, but of national resilience.
Scott Rawson
Sir
The Critical Role of Data Exploitation in the Digitised Battlefield: Lessons from Current Defence Shortcomings
I applaud the RSI for attempting to tackle data exploitation at the Spring Seminar. Regrettably, I could not get there but here follows my thoughts.
The ability to harness data effectively is pivotal to modern warfare, yet current defence strategies often fall short in fully realising its potential. While the digitised battlefield presents enormous opportunities for operational superiority, flawed implementation, inadequate cybersecurity measures, and bureaucratic inertia threaten to undermine its effectiveness.
One of the most pressing issues is the inability to streamline data across systems and allied forces. Despite significant investment in digital transformation, interoperability remains a challenge. Defence organisations often rely on outdated or proprietary data structures that hinder seamless integration with allied forces. This fragmentation leads to delayed responses, operational blind spots, and inefficient decision-making. Defence must prioritise the adoption of open architecture systems that allow secure and real-time data sharing across units and coalition partners.
Cybersecurity vulnerabilities are another critical failing. With defence networks processing immense amounts of sensitive intelligence, adversaries have developed sophisticated methods to exploit weaknesses. The frequency of breaches and cyber-attacks highlights the necessity for more proactive cybersecurity policies. Currently, reactive measures dominate strategy—often responding to threats after damage has been inflicted. Instead, defence must shift to a more predictive model, incorporating AI-driven threat detection and continuous monitoring to identify and neutralise risks before they materialise.
Another area of concern is the mismanagement of emerging technologies. While artificial intelligence and machine learning promise revolutionary advancements in data processing, defence agencies are slow to integrate these capabilities effectively. Legacy systems and bureaucratic hesitance delay adoption, creating inefficiencies in data exploitation. A more agile approach—where defence fosters partnerships with tech innovators, ensures rapid prototyping, and adapts procurement processes—could significantly enhance operational capabilities.
Ethical and legal considerations surrounding data exploitation also require attention. Autonomous systems, data-driven targeting, and predictive analytics raise concerns about accountability and compliance with international humanitarian law. At times, defence decision-makers rely too heavily on algorithmic recommendations without sufficient human oversight, leading to potential errors and ethical dilemmas. Stricter operational frameworks are needed to ensure AI-assisted warfare remains aligned with ethical principles.
Addressing these shortcomings requires a cultural shift within defence institutions. Investing in digital literacy and training personnel to harness data responsibly is just as important as acquiring cutting-edge technologies. Furthermore, collaboration with private-sector experts and academia could bridge knowledge gaps and accelerate innovation.
Exploiting data successfully is the key to mastering the digitised battlefield. Defence must acknowledge and correct existing failings to ensure that it does not fall behind in this new era of warfare.
Harland Penney
Editor’s Response.
I am most grateful to all three contributors to this Edition’s letter section. Sorry we couldn’t chat at the RSI Spring Seminar. I will publish a more fulsome response in the Winter 2025 Edition by which time I will have collated and processed the outcome from Seminar. A consolidation of the discussions and wider comments from the day was not produced in time for publication. Much more will follow on these topics.
Director RSI
Comments