Andrew joined the British Army in 1996, serving in several campaigns where he provided logistic and equipment support for the Paras, Royal Marines, US Marines, EU Naval Force, and Australian Defence Force. After retiring in 2018, he transitioned to a successful consulting career with EY, focusing on defence capability and acquisition in both the UK and Australia. Currently, Andrew heads up the Lumivero Defence and National Security account, delivering risk management solutions to defence customers. His extensive experience in both the British and Australian militaries, combined with his consulting expertise, makes him a valuable asset in the field of defence project management.
Sponsored by: LUMIVERO
As a former British Army officer who served in Helmand Province, I saw how our campaign missed fundamental risk management principles. Political pressures to minimise casualties led us to rely heavily on well-protected vehicles. While these vehicles provided immediate safety, they severely limited our mobility and ability to engage with the local population, a core aspect of counterinsurgency (COIN) operations. The internal British capability cycle misunderstood the operational risks and delivered equipment unsuitable for COIN. The focus on reducing casualties conflicted with our long-term goal of winning hearts and minds. A balanced approach, combining protected vehicles with lighter, agile units, could have mitigated these risks while maintaining COIN effectiveness. Unfortunately, we often overlooked the need for regular assessments and feedback loops, failing to adapt our tactics based on real-time intelligence. This oversight made it difficult to balance immediate operational needs with long-term strategic goals, ultimately compromising the effectiveness of our mission.
As a former British Army officer who served in Helmand Province, I saw how our campaign missed fundamental risk management principles. Political pressures to minimise casualties led us to rely heavily on well-protected vehicles. While these vehicles provided immediate safety, they severely limited our mobility and ability to engage with the local population, a core aspect of counterinsurgency (COIN) operations. The internal British capability cycle misunderstood the operational risks and delivered equipment unsuitable for COIN. The focus on reducing casualties conflicted with our long-term goal of winning hearts and minds. A balanced approach, combining protected vehicles with lighter, agile units, could have mitigated these risks while maintaining COIN effectiveness. Unfortunately, we often overlooked the need for regular assessments and feedback loops, failing to adapt our tactics based on real-time intelligence. This oversight made it difficult to balance immediate operational needs with long-term strategic goals, ultimately compromising the effectiveness of our mission.
