Australia and Allied Strategy 1939–1945 which was marketed as being "the book which Prime Minister John Curtin directed the official historian not to write".

Long required that the authors have "some or all of three positive qualifications: experience of the events, proved ability to write lucidly and engagingly, [and] training as a historian".

A replacement author for Chester Wilmot's volume on the Siege of Tobruk and Battle of El Alamein also had to be found in 1954 after he was killed in a plane crash.

[11] The official historians were supported by salaried research assistants who were members of the Australian Public Service and the project was administered by the Department of the Interior.

[12] Although the series was funded by the Australian Government, the authors were free to write on all topics other than technical secrets that were classified at the time, and were not otherwise censored.

[13] In line with a request by the US and British governments, the official historians in Australia, Britain, Canada, New Zealand and the US were not given access to Ultra intelligence gained from decrypting German codes.

[13] The series also had a nationalistic motivation, which was in line with Long's goal of it ensuring that Australia's role was not overshadowed by that of Britain and the United States.

[20] The publishing company Collins began a project to print the series with new introductions by modern scholars in the 1980s after the University of Queensland Press reprinted the Official History of Australia in the War of 1914–1918.

He was more successful than most of the other authors in placing his subject in the global context in which it operated, though on occasions he exaggerated the RAN's importance in Australia's war effort.

[23] Gill's account of the battle between HMAS Sydney and the German auxiliary cruiser Kormoran in November 1941 has been criticised by some authors who view it as being part of an official cover-up, but Gill reached his conclusions independently and without censorship and his account of the battle is generally considered to have been as accurate as possible given that little evidence was available on the events that led to Sydney being sunk with the loss of her entire crew.

[24] Naval historian and Anglican Bishop to the Australian Defence Force Tom Frame has argued that although Gill "was a man of integrity" and not influenced by the Navy, his account of the battle is "bad history" as it is contradictory and "went beyond the reliable and corroborated evidence which was available to him".

Hasluck's ability to provide an unbiased account when he was a Liberal politician did not escape critical comment, but historians tend to judge his work as "fair and accurate".

[32] The other volume of the series, David Mellor's The Role of Science and Industry, was the most unusual volume of all, and still stands unique in Australian official war histories in its subject, although Mellor was criticised for hewing too closely to the views of his sources, particularly Major General John O'Brien, the Deputy Master General of the Ordnance.

[33] Allan S. Walker was a pathology specialist who served with Australian Army medical units in both world wars and taught at the University of Sydney.

[34] The five chapters on the experiences of women in the Army Medical Services in Volume IV are significant as they cover the first time large numbers of female members of the Australian military had been posted overseas.

Bean's, both series are generally seen as having created an important tradition for Australian official histories which includes high standards of accuracy, comprehensiveness and literary skill.

For instance, in a generally positive review of Royal Australian Air Force, 1939–1942 James C. Olson stated that "Although the author had access to official documents and obviously made extensive use of them, he seldom cites documentary sources- a serious shortcoming, particularly in the absence of a bibliography".

[41] Similarly, USAAF official historian Robert F. Futrell noted in his review of Air War Against Japan 1943–1945 that "While the author acknowledges the official collection of the RAAF War History Section as his principal source, the volume contains no bibliography, or essay on sources, and footnote citations are unusually sparse.

[42] The next official military history series commissioned by the Australian Government, Australia in the Korean War 1950–53 (published between 1981 and 1985), included footnotes to primary sources.

British official historian Stephen Roskill regarded Royal Australian Navy, 1942–1945 as being "well written, excellently illustrated and produced, and provided with a good index", but stated that it was "perhaps too detailed for the general reader".

[44] In his unfavourable review of The Final Campaigns Louis Morton, who wrote a volume in the official history of the US Army in World War II, judged that "even the student of military affairs and of World War II will find this meticulous account of operations that had little bearing on the final outcome far too detailed".