Listing 1 - 7 of 7 |
Sort by
|
Choose an application
For a variety of reasons, including deployments, many Air Force organizations have been finding significant differences between the number of personnel they were authorized to have and the number of people actually available. RAND Project AIR FORCE undertook a detailed study of the related issues and policy implications. The researchers collected historical data and available manpower determinants; interviewed a variety of personnel; and analyzed the personnel strength histories of selected wings, functional areas, and specialties, eventually broadening the focus to the cumulative affect of the Air Force human resource system on wing-level manpower, skill levels, and personnel tempo. Among the resulting recommendations were ways the Air force can improve its manpower bookkeeping and how it determines requirements, including greater use of dynamic simulation models, as well as implementing metrics comparing planned and actual burdens on personnel, especially when on-the-job training is involved.
Choose an application
Today's active-duty military has become progressively more joint. But in recent years, U.S. joint military activities have also seen higher participation rates by reserve component general and flag officers, senior civilians, and senior noncommissioned officers. This report examines the preparation of reserve component general and flag officers, senior civilians, and senior noncommissioned officers for participation in joint military activities. The authors interviewed a select group of senior people who had served at the highest executive levels of DoD and a number of senior members who had been identified as being exemplars with respect to participating in joint activities. They then used this information to develop their recommendations and worked with the appropriate OSD staffs to link them to possible initiatives.
Unified operations (Military science) --- United States. --- United States. --- Officials and employees. --- Personnel management. --- United States --- United States --- Armed Forces --- Officers. --- Armed Forces --- Personnel management.
Choose an application
Since 2000, spending on military personnel (MILPERS) has grown at an average annual rate of 3.3 percent to approximately
Choose an application
Many colonel jobs need officers with a substantial background in more than one area (say, intelligence officers with expertise in political-military affairs or bomber pilots with experience in system acquisition), many can accept officers with different occupational backgrounds, many need officers with prior experience as colonels, and some are important for developing or testing officers with especially good prospects of becoming generals. Prior research targeted mixes of promotions that could help the Air Force sustain and assign inventories of generals consistent with requirements at each general-officer grade. Here, the authors develop and apply a flow model that recommends sizes for numerous skill pairings' pyramids of colonels, consistent with colonel jobs' needs and with targets for new general officers. The model also recommends annual numbers of new colonels with each occupational pairing and illustrates alignments between positions and each pyramid's colonels. Among other objectives, it aims to ensure that enough officers with the right occupational backgrounds will be available when job vacancies arise, that no more new colonels than necessary bring paired skills, and that the mix of colonels be as similar as possible to a reference (e.g., prior) mix. The method estimates the percentages of new colonels needed with each primary skill and paired skill, reflecting both preferred and less-demanding, or marginal, parameters.
Core competencies --- Military art and science --- United States. --- Officers --- Training of. --- Personnel management.
Choose an application
"Air Force specialty codes, similar to Army and Marine Corps military occupational specialties and Navy officer designators and enlisted ratings, establish personnel-classification boundaries according to the work performed and the required skills, education, and training. The specialties combine duties and tasks into cohesive job clusters that may be matched to people possessing the essential aptitudes, attributes, and qualifications. Given the Air Force's evolving missions, changing nature of work, and changing workforce, several senior Air Force leaders have asked whether the existing specialty codes still provide the appropriate clustering of specialties. This technical report examines the current officer-classification structure while seeking to determine whether more fundamental changes are needed. It provides a brief primer on the specialty-classification system, encapsulates major changes that are in progress and planned, and offers additional changes based on interviews and comparative analyses. Although the research focused primarily on the officer structure, many of the observations have correlates in the enlisted-specialty structure. Specialty-classification components need continuous maintenance and periodic upgrades. One recommendation is that the continuous process improvement initiatives, such as Air Force Smart Operations 21, be expanded to include reducing the overall cycle time for specialty-classification changes."--Publisher's website
United States. --- Officers. --- Occupational specialties. --- Job descriptions. --- Personnel management.
Choose an application
The Department of the Air Force is revamping the way it manages officer development and promotion. As part of this overhaul, the Line of the Air Force (LAF)—a single developmental category (DevCat) accounting for more than 80 percent of officers and 40 career fields—is being split into six separate DevCats. New personnel management flexibilities, introduced by the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, are also being introduced. The purpose of these changes is to enable the identification, development, and rewarding of talent at all stages of an officer's career. The motivations behind these personnel policy changes are clear. However, given the complexity of officer development and promotion management, it is difficult to fully anticipate the effects of these changes. To help decisionmakers evaluate the utility and implications of new personnel policies, the authors built a strategic tool called the Air Force Personnel Policy Simulation Tool (PPST) to simulate the effects of new personnel policies on career field health and demographic diversity. This tool can help ensure that Air Force policy changes will further stated goals; identify potentially adverse consequences of personnel policy changes on career fields and demographic groups; and if needed, develop mitigating courses of action.
United States. --- Personnel management. --- Officers --- Promotions.
Choose an application
The Department of the Air Force (DAF) promulgates directives, memorandums of instructions, and other guidance embracing the importance of diversity. Indeed, DAF Senior Leadership is on record stating that diversity is a mission imperative. Yet, demographic data have been masked for most boards making decisions about career development and promotions. The DAF wanted to assess the efficacy of making demographic data visible to board members. The 2021 Central Professional Military Education Program (CPME) Boards provided an opportunity to test the effects of unmasking the data to board members. In addition, the DAF implemented two other diversity and inclusion–related changes for the 2021 CPME board: (1) board members underwent unconscious bias training, and (2) instructions to board members concerning consideration of race, ethnicity, and gender were modified. In this report, the authors present the results of analyses comparing the 2020 outcomes (before the changes in guidance) with the 2021 outcomes (after the changes). In conducting this research, the project team used a mixed-methods approach. Specifically, the team analyzed board inputs and selection outcomes for the 2020 CPME board (before the changes) and 2021 CPME board (after the changes) to assess the effects on the selection likelihood for minority versus nonminority members; conducted semistructured interviews with 2020 and 2021 board members to learn about their experiences and how they interpreted and applied the new instructions to illuminate the quantitative patterns in the data; and reviewed relevant literature to identify trends that might assist the DAF in implementing the proposed changes.
Listing 1 - 7 of 7 |
Sort by
|