I’ve been privileged in my career to work with some outstanding soldiers and officers whose contributions to the Australian Defence Force (ADF) have significantly improved capability, processes and inter-operability. Some of these members have been appropriately recognised through the current Honours and Awards (H&A) system, but many, despite nominations, have not – often due to H&A quotas. This article intends to spark conversation about whether the current system is able to support the ADF’s dynamic workforce and its outputs or whether a new approach should be considered.

It is my belief that the system of quotas requires review as this approach does not appropriately factor in the reality that human performance fluctuates and is often a result of opportunity. In units across the ADF, there will be years where exceptional performances worthy of formal recognition may be observed by a higher number of members than in previous years. The current system has a propensity to discount the impact of these achievements by only recognising a select number of contributors. What I would encourage is a review that does not allocate numbers of awards but provides a clear guideline on what behaviour/outcomes warrant formal recognition, and enable Commanders the discretion to decide how many awards have been earnt in any given year.

The counter-argument to this is that by increasing the allocation or removing the quota we inadvertently de-value the prestige of the award to the recipients. I would dispute this response as flawed logic. What this viewpoint says is that the Defence Service Medal and Defence Long Service Medals which are widely available to all members who complete the appropriate amount of time in service (and are therefore not restricted), should not be valued. This is not true. Each of these medals represent a significant commitment to service and are not devalued by somebody else also having the same medal. I believe the same is true of other forms of H&A which cannot be devalued by others receiving similar recognition for their contributions.

Retention is an issue frequently raised by senior leaders at a time when we are trying to grow in order to support future force and new capability requirements. Of all the members I have seen separate from service I am yet to hear that it is because of remuneration. People in my experience leave when they feel de-valued, exhausted (often following long periods of high intensity work away from family and friends), can no longer align their behaviours with evolving expectations, or require geographic stability in an area of their preference. One mechanism we have to assist in making people feel valued is through the H&A system. I am confident that if more servicemen and servicewomen who are deserving of recognition received it, the pride these individuals and their teams feel would contribute to validating their work and perhaps influence a positive retention rate.

I shall finish with a quote I heard from a now retired senior leader who said to me, 'There is no quota on discipline, there should be no quota on recognition of excellence'. I could not agree more.