Western military organizations are widely held to be poor innovators – processoriented, resistant to change, and slow to learn, traits they share with other largebureaucratic organizations. This article argues that a particular knowledge ideal inmilitary organizations founded on the four interrelated biases of action, relevance,conflict, and hierarchy (ARCH), hinders criticism, in turn thwarting innovation. ARCHserves to collectively discourage criticism on the individual level; on the organizationallevel, it prevents criticism serving as mechanism of self-correction. Using thematicanalysis, these biases are identified through a most-different research design,comparing the military doctrines of the United States and Sweden. ARCH reflectsand reinforces a dominant Western vision of how war is waged. Improvements in theorganizational capacity for innovation may require a revision of institutional beliefs ofmilitary efficiency and warfare.