Posted on Jul 31, 2018
Commentary: The Air Force is not designed to produce good leaders
5.71K
114
31
11
11
0
AN: Airman
Officers
Leadership Development
Leadership
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 19
12
12
0
LTC Jeff Shearer
Charlie no I was not Air Force, however, over my many years I completely disagree with that thought. The Air Force troops I had contact with were petty damn good leaders. My opinion and am right most of the time, just saying
(3)
(0)
Lt Col Charlie Brown
The AF is different so our process is different. I did lots of leadership training. In chage of flights from 35 people to 80 people. Did command in 2 units, different AFSCs for a total of 6 years
(3)
(0)
PO1 John Johnson
I can't go with this either. It's a crap shoot as to whether the "O" (and this goes for the "E's" as well) will turn out to a great, average or not worth the oxygen they're breathing type of leader. Way to many factors involved to just say it is solely the fault of a design of the individual Services.
(2)
(0)
11
11
0
Couple quick observations
- Senior Staff College is not to build leaders. It’s to prepare Colonels to function in a national security entity. It just so happens most go to an O6 Command afterward
- if you are focused on teaching leadership at the O6 level....too darn late
- tragic truth: toxic leaders get results. They leave debris and mayhem but in a two year command they can get stuff done. It’s incumbent on the senior rater and his senior staff (O6 level Chief of Staff) to check that.
- command prior to O5 in the Airforce is an anomaly. Army and Marines it’s the norm to command a company as an O3/O4. There is value to this.
- Senior Staff College is not to build leaders. It’s to prepare Colonels to function in a national security entity. It just so happens most go to an O6 Command afterward
- if you are focused on teaching leadership at the O6 level....too darn late
- tragic truth: toxic leaders get results. They leave debris and mayhem but in a two year command they can get stuff done. It’s incumbent on the senior rater and his senior staff (O6 level Chief of Staff) to check that.
- command prior to O5 in the Airforce is an anomaly. Army and Marines it’s the norm to command a company as an O3/O4. There is value to this.
(11)
(0)
Col Joseph Lenertz
Absolutely. Spot on with respect to senior PME being too late to teach leadership. I also agree with your last observation, though I don't have an easy way to fix this for rated AF officers.
(4)
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
Col Joseph Lenertz - just an observation, as I said. The Navy has a similar issue. There are few Commands below O5 level because the ship is from the hull inward and there is one Captain. Handful of smaller craft among SWOs for O4 and O3 or isolated to two communities, Special Warfare and Seabees.
If the Air Force Squadron is the primary level of command authority, then your options are limited. From what I remember there is no level of organization analogous to an Army Company. Flights are roughly analogous to an Army Platoon (30ish people lead by a LT in 3-5 squads led by E5/E6) in size but it's led by a Captain and Senior NCO, correct? That's your opportunity I think. My first Platoon as a Second Lieutenant had 85 people in it. Our Troop had over 300 and was bigger (people wise) than an Armor Battalion.
elements, Flights, squadrons, groups, and wings, right?
If the Air Force Squadron is the primary level of command authority, then your options are limited. From what I remember there is no level of organization analogous to an Army Company. Flights are roughly analogous to an Army Platoon (30ish people lead by a LT in 3-5 squads led by E5/E6) in size but it's led by a Captain and Senior NCO, correct? That's your opportunity I think. My first Platoon as a Second Lieutenant had 85 people in it. Our Troop had over 300 and was bigger (people wise) than an Armor Battalion.
elements, Flights, squadrons, groups, and wings, right?
(4)
(0)
8
8
0
I do not concur. I do believe flyers feel ops centric is the only thing that matters. But that is not about leadership.
(8)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google