Leaderboard

You've gone full retard.

Ha, Chang, you have no clue. You think from my posts I'm bitter? I'm just pointing out some well known problems that leaders like yourself are either too stupid or out of touch to acknowledge. I'm truly trying to help the AF that I love. "Hide" my brand of leadership? Hell no, someone has to stand up to the madness. One of the reasons I have been highly successful with both officer and enlisted subordinates is I don't "hide" things...I don't play AF games, people see that and LOVE it. I see a stupid rule...I try to change it. I see a worthless ppt presentation....I cut it. I see a jackass fast burner being a jerk to subordinates, I call him out. I've proudly not played the game, and it's cost me a few career points but the satisfaction I get from having a steady stream of officers, civilians and enlisted tell me the USAF needs more people like me....it keeps me going. You think guys like me are causing bitter attitudes?? Get real. The guys causing the problems are the guys like you, who can't understand the core basic issues with things like morale, micromanagement, wasted time/resources, lack of mission focus, etc. Your welcome Chang...I'm constantly working to fix f-ups caused by people like you. No sweat. I'll keep doing it. You just stay oblivious.

Oh GODDAMMIT... Do you actually listen to the shit that comes out of your mouth?!? Happy green squares on a staff meeting .ppt do not an effective A1 make. Christ, it's like playing cards with my brothers kids...

Chang's view as he peers over his koolaid cup does not allow him to see the problem. Good people do get promoted for the most part and bad ones don't. Unfortunately, good people also do not get promoted in the process and, in this day and age of high speed data exchange, the word gets out which leads to angst and confusion. Words from "on high" attempt to attenuate that angst but promotion board actions continue generating examples of bad leaders moving up and good people moving out with the added benefit of those that survived wondering what it will take to make it to the next round of Air Force Survivor Island. To sum it up: Life isn't fair and there is no justice. So, guys are self eliminating from the game and seeking their future elsewhere.

FIFY and THAT, is the epitome of the problem that A1 guys never see. That clueless "leader" got a bird right as her ship ran into the rocks at the base of the lighthouse. Maybe we'll get lucky & she'll go to A1, eh Chang? Then we'll have several levels of sunshine and rainbows issuing forth from the deck quartet of the Titanic. Here's the issue that you seem to have trouble grasping GC: We are not the loud, disgruntled minority. We are not poison in the ears of the youth. WE are the masses that YOU have been charged to lead, and this is our water cooler. If you can't effectively relate to us here... You see where I'm going with this? Regardless of whether or not you believe our version of the AF story or yours, even you must realize the massive disconnect between you (the staff & the leadership) and us (the rank & file). Surely something in your years of PME told you that such a thing is bad. You keep telling us to "get on board" without really seeing why we don't want to.

. Because throwing money at people always solves your problems...

The C-17 FTU lost about 18+ IP's during this past round of VSP's, including a lot of their lead airdroppers. Those guys/girls were 2-3 assignment folks who were definitely not in the bottom 10%.

Sounds familiar..."it would be unrealistic to expect perfection"....where have we heard that recently?

The funniest thing about Chang's posts on here is that, at least at AF IDE (a program Chang talks up), the senior leader guest speakers specifically reject the kind of officer he presents himself as. Most of the 2-4 stars that come here to talk are very candid about the long list of problems and challenges the AF currently faces. Last week a senior leader asked the audience if they thought there was a serious lack of trust between senior leadership and the rest of force, to which almost the entire audience raised their hands affirmative. This 2 star thought that a lack of trust in the AF was one of the biggest leadership problems in the AF today. This week a 3 star briefed that many of the AF promotion and personnel practices were inefficient and out of date. He also mentioned that "yes men" were a serious problem in the force. Multiple four stars here have noted that, with the really tough fiscal times ahead, the AF needs no shit leadership; "yes men" and guys unable use brutal, honest assessments of the state of their units aren't going to cut it. The military studies courses here give numerous examples of how in combat (an experience that I suspect Chang knows very little about), guys like him get their people killed. Officers like him also contribute to an institutional rot (LtCol Tater Tots and the missile fields article comes to mind, followed by a blood bath of firings of leadership despite same leadership saying everything great, nothing to see here) that is dangerous for a lot of reasons. His contributions here aren't helpful and fly in the face of most of the guidance being put out by the leaders he holds in such high regard.

This statement makes me very angry. We did not cut the bottom 2%. For example, in the B-1, one of the guys that got RIFed was an instructor/evaluator WSO with a Masters Degree, ACSC complete, and about 5 deployments. He was also the Chief WSO in OGV and had normal progression throughout his career. He is known as one of the sharpest guys in the community. Please explain how that is considered "the bottom 2%"! Nobody is going to "have pride" in A1 leadership. To say that you made "remarkable strides" is spin and an absolute joke. What strides? Please tell us!

When compared to other broken bureaucracies, ours is the least dysfunctional!

You really think the bottom 10% were the ones who took VSP? Good God you're an idiot...

I see the point that a guy who is going to lead at Wing and above level needs broad based experiences to be an effective leader at that level, but do you really think changing happy to glad or getting a bullet all the way to the end of the block on an OPR is a consequential development in the process of an effective AF senior officer? I get that there is an administrative, day to day aspect to the role of a leader but there is a point that once a person is so involved in that world they loose sight of the fact that we are actually supposed to fly airplanes, man missile stations, patrol flight lines, fix airplanes, etc.... it becomes background noise while they are responding to another pointless email with the subject "Hot Tasker!" You know I am right.

Nuke your city - see if your house gets crispy or just well done. https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

“Tiger, one day you will come to a fork in the road,” he said. “And you’re going to have to make a decision about which direction you want to go.” He raised his hand and pointed. “If you go that way you can be somebody. You will have to make compromises and you will have to turn your back on your friends. But you will be a member of the club and you will get promoted and you will get good assignments.” Then Boyd raised his other hand and pointed another direction. “Or you can go that way and you can do something – something for your country and for your Air Force and for yourself. If you decide you want to do something, you may not get promoted and you may not get the good assignments and you certainly will not be a favorite of your superiors. But you won’t have to compromise yourself. You will be true to your friends and to yourself. And your work might make a difference.” He paused and stared into the officer’s eyes and heart. “To be somebody or to do something. In life there is often a roll call. That’s when you will have to make a decision. To be or to do. Which way will you go?

Good points Danny - I understand what you're saying. Maybe the best way is to just accept that those who want the 20 years of flying, more control, etc. are just going to go guard/reserve/out completely regardless of what AD does. But, it still wouldn't hurt to at least loosen the death grip the AF has on the idea that everyone should want to be a WG/CC+ until they are deemed unfit and sent another direction (deservedly or not). For the most part, it is still a potentially very dumb move to show any cards leading to other than "I want to be a WG/CC!" while still on AD, at least until you're at the point you have to show them to move in the direction you want. I think that's a foul, why can't AD just accept someone's desire to do that and let them serve out their full commitment without fear of retribution. If anything it would do a great deal for morale and in turn get better productivity out of people until the very end.

I'm a staff wiener. As Danny alluded to the "staff shit" is important. Having ding dongs here has negative repercussions in the Ops squadrons. You guys want the new hotness? Well if you send a dumb asses to staff, that shit gets fucked up. The Generals who actually make the decisions are informed by Majors and LtCols. I'm actually astonished by how much push me and my Major pears have with respect to requirements and future plans. It's always one fucked up briefing away from tanking a community for years, the way the POM process works, you're looking at affecting an MDS for the next 3-5 years, and it's extremely difficult and expensive to change thing once the ships have sailed.

Seriously??? Guys, keep your head down, do your absolute best where you're planted, and multiple exec jobs will seek you out. Keep doing well, and you'll continue on to higher-level exec and aide jobs over multiple years. And yes, schools and promotions will follow. The AF only sends their best to these jobs; hence, the rewards at the end of the rainbow.

On the contrary, while I acknowledge we are always a work-in-progress, I offer the voice of optimism to the young officers who read the daily sadness that BODN has become. The opportunity to serve in the Blue is a fantastic honor and responsibility...I want our young guys to take pride in that, not become disillusioned and bitter. We are a long, long, LONG way from the problems of the mid-to-late 1990's, and most of the bloggers here weren't around then to even understand how good things are now.

No system is going to nail the perfect solution, and despite the botched information flow from A1 in 2014...I'd say we hit a homerun on the non-voluntary reductions.

'Sigh'. We can debate the resources aspect, but non-stop ops? Really? The numbers simply do not back that up, my friend. Dwell times continue to get better and better. I'm rooting for you to get a Pentagon job out of ACSC this summer, hopefully here in A1. It will really open you aperture.

Curious...compared to our brothers and sisters in other services, our personnel system is a bright light. We have cut our requisite bottom 10% performers (which became only the bottom 2% or so, thanks to voluntary separations) and are not facing involuntary separations in 2015. If sequestration hits again, thanks to last year's VSP, we can get rid of a few more underperformers without extreme stress on the system, but we're anticipating that will not be required. We revamped the EPR. Our list of stressed career fields is remarkably low, and we have a plan to retain our critical RPA officers by offering more money. Trust me, we are the envy of the other three services. Have some pride in your AF leadership, particularly in A1, because we've made remarkable strides shaping the force for the 2020s.