Leaderboard

When Gen Creech took over what was TACC at the time, he directed his staff to scrap at least half of the AFIs. He believed the AFIs were stifling innovation and creative problem-solving. Whenever one of his staff would protest, Gen Creech would tell them that he had faith in the judgement of his subordinate commanders. See, I did learn something useful from the online ACSC.

Why's that? This type of thing literally makes up the bulk of the miserable lives these people lead... might as well capitalize on the knowledge.

For some institutional change, perhaps start with AFIs. Cut/chop/eliminate. Some have plenty of useful guidelines like an MEL, some are used as ammo against one another. For example, the uniform AFI can change to, "Wear a uniform. Here are the ones we have." Take away the shoe ammo. Lower the waiver level of all AFIs after they've been chopped of the stupidness. Why the fuck a multi-star general is listed as the waiver level of so much stupid shit is well beyond me. Again, removing shoe ammo. That's all for now. Out

I've been thinking hard about this one. Every way I look at it, I don't see how having civilians cross in at the O6 or higher-level is going to translate to meaningful change for Cyber. I've got Cyber O6's that I know now agitating for meaningful changes: real mission assurance, real network advancements, etc. They can't get it done and they've been in the system the whole time! What's some civilian with no history, contacts and context going to bring? Dear Lord.. if he/she starts on staff without ever having supported an operational mission... the hate we get now will only be magnified because the leader only isn't in touch... they've NEVER been in touch. We aren't like civilian companies where we can dump one vendor for another. We're beholden to DISA for services. We're beholden to our MAJCOM/NAF for mission requirements. We're beholden to AFSPC/24AF for "cyber mission requirements." Finally we're beholden to the IMSC for... something. Couple the serious mission challenges to the promotion and "up-or-out" and you're going to demoralize the cyber force. We've already got enough problems with not having a career cyber person in cyber leadership. Now you're going to shift some of these few O6 slots to civilians coming in? How exactly am I supposed to believe there's any credibility at all with AF Cyber Leadership if this happens? It's already difficult enough as it is and I've been told very good things about the folks in charge. Finally I don't know many "cyber leadership" civilians who could do well on our PT systems. Hire civilians as non-line tech advisers, increase the industry internship opportunities, allow more sabbaticals, develop/promote Technical MS programs (AFIT doesn't count), provide mid-level (vs high-level) cyber leadership/operations training (less demanding CNODP/Cyber WIC) and get some damn career cyber leadership visible to the force. I will note none of these even start to address the problem with current GS-civilians who are retired O's and SNCO's who refuse to do anything meaningful to move Cyber into the current decade. For them the AF hasn't changed since the day it retired, and by God it'll be the same when they retire again in 10/20/30 years.

Yeah that was my point, even the A/A/A we see is done by SOF, but yet big Army is calling the shots. Also they are pretty bad about failing to listen to what the Iraqis value as important objectives and continually trying to force our way or doing things on them instead of enabling them towards their goals. Sure it's a little slower, but if it defeats ISIS in the end and keeps the GoI credible who cares?

Maybe a Texit will be next...

Or this: