New SOS in-correspondence

[Bender]

The biggest challenge is telling the top 20-50% crowd they aren't as talented as they think they are.

I agree that much of the complaints that fly around this board are born of bitterness and self-inflation. That said...it doesn't mean the system is grand, and I can assure you the bureaucracy does not need your defense.

Your quote above isn't a challenge at all; the system is all the notification they need.

The challenge is getting the 21st percentile to internalize the difference between themselves and the 20th percentile before the system notifies them of such 8-9 (10 recently) years down the road (sounds like you have a system in place to do that, the majority do not). The real challenge is getting young CGOs to internalize what being in the top 20 percent of the world's greatest Air Force should actually mean (there is more than enough GO shenanigans to know that we need to course correct to some extent).

I assure you that it is certainly a difficult pill to swallow as the 21st through 25th percentile press through the next years into O-5, as the top 20 percent stovepipe into year long academics (to precious to muster in any fashion for the 21st percentile), then a staff tour (where they gain some worldly view of military operations unknowable to 21st plus percentile) only to roll back in on top of the 21st percentile as directors and commanders inspite of their performance in any those roles while "away". Grand indeed...

There is plenty of room for bitterness (as well as ego, to some extent) that is both legit and understandable within the current construct, it's just not always expressed in the most productive fashions...and certainly not with all of the facts. I, personally, revel in the successes of all of my peers I know whom were school selects. I knew who they were before I ever saw the list, although there were a few surprising ommissions. I can find satisfaction in their success, and I can continue to contribute in the roles I am lucky enough to find...I do not doubt that I will ultimately influence the next generation of AF Officers more than some of them ever will. I will also hand hold that new CC as he takes his new job and promptly goes head under water to ensure he succeeds.

The system is not grand, rather than defend it as "right more often than its wrong", lets just make it better. AFSO21, right?

Bendy

[Liquid]

...The great dudes aren't getting out because it's hard. They are getting out because they are capable of recognizing the zugzwang. The great dudes that I've known see right through the box checking bullshit and call it for what it is: a system doomed for failure. I know a guy that somehow came out as a select without a single credit hour of Master's work done. Subsequently, he was told he had to do IDE correspondence and get a box checking Masters or he'd miss out on IDE "opportunities" and end up at ACSC on the 3rd look...You can't hope to get into a position to change it without getting burnt along the way. None of the great ones are afraid of hard work, but most are smart enough to recognize a losing hand and fold before betting the house.

I didn't say those who separate are reluctant to work hard. It is hard staying in and leading despite the challenges, bureaucracy, politics, deployments, toxic leaders, physical threats, frequent moves, lost income opportunities, etc. It is hard making a difference when the system encourages and demands conformity and compliance. The system isn't doomed for failure, but it definitely needs to be improved. Your guy should have just gone to ACSC on his 3rd look and not worried the irrational advice. I got an AAD from Embry Riddle. It was almost free and it was easy and I studied aviation. You can get into a position of change without selling out or getting burned. I did not do IDE or SDE in correspondence because I was a select for both and I thought it was stupid to do it before I did it. I also attended joint PME, so I have never been officially educated on the history or wonders of airpower. My commanders were pissed I didn't do correspondence and later said it cost me BPZ. I didn't care. Point is, I doubt your friend, or many other examples get out because someone told them they need to double tap IDE or get an AAD to be more competitive. There were probably many other personal and professional reasons.

[RTB]

Many here on this forum have a false sense of the quality of officers we promote in the top 20% ... The exec only, careerist officer is easily spotted and appropriately dinged. Strats are not the most important discriminator.

Probably true in the macro sense AF-wide. However, too often in the last 5 years, I have personally seen too many dudes placed into a command plan from afar despite no credibility in the jet (sometimes zero time) but a stellar SAASS record and GO push. Guys everyone respected suddenly found themselves without a chair when the music stopped. Results on morale have been...bad.

We should promote by AFSC.

Absolutely!

[AnimalMother]

FEFs part of promotion packages.

Personally, I'd be happy to see this but it will certainly put the AFSOC folks at a disadvantage with all the Q3s they like to throw around. Well, some of them at any rate.

[Azimuth]

Personally, I'd be happy to see this but it will certainly put the AFSOC folks at a disadvantage with all the Q3s they like to throw around. Well, some of them at any rate.

Tons of senior leaders in AMC have Q-3's. Those are the folks who would be pissy if this actually became a rule.

[Tnkr]

Great dudes need to gut it out, stay in in spite of the bullshit, and make a difference with contrarian and effective leadership. Lead the way you should lead, regardless of the consequences. We are ######ed if they all get out because it is hard.

Wait a minute. In your earlier post you lumped non-conformists with mediocre and crybabies. Now your saying that the contrarian leaders are the ones we need to wade thru this river of bull$hit so they can make a difference. In my vocab, contrarian and non-conformist are pretty synonymous. Can't have it both ways.

And let's be honest. How many sq/CCs really want the contrarian view? I've had 10 sq/cc in 13 years and NONE of them wanted the contrarian view. They wanted the view that would make them look good to the guy that wrote their OPR, or the view that reinforced their initial idea.

And BTW, no one is getting out because it's "hard". How insulting. We're getting out because the service that demands excellence in all we do, doesn't seem to expect excellence in all it does. At least that's why I'm looking for the door.

[Tnkr]

FEFs part of promotion packages.

Karl- my one worry about this is that evaluators will/might feel pressure about giving Q3s to guys they know are up and comers or tight with the boss. This could lead to seriously degraded crews. I'd agree that flight performance should always be highlighted and weighted over community service and other queep, but I'd not want any outside influence in check rides.

[busdriver]

How many sq/CCs really want the contrarian view?

I would say all of them, at least the good ones. What they don't want is you preaching your contrarian views once they've given marching orders. Bitching goes up the chain not down.

[Liquid]

What about the top 20% who are fleeing at their first opportunity? Are they "non-conformists" as well? I hope that's not really what you meant... having senior managers who value conformity is a troubling thought.

As for promoting by AFSC... been saying that for years. At a minimum, rated and non-rated promotions should be separate through the O-5 level. FEFs part of promotion packages. AADs not just masked, but eliminated from tracking by any AF system until you pin on O-5. Officers ineligible for TA. Simple fixes that would get a lot of fence sitters to re-think their plans.

This sounds a lot like the "have you thought about service before self?" line people get on their way out the door. Even the most promising CSAF in a generation hasn't been able to fix a lot of this service's problems... but sure, stay in and play the game and maybe you can change things in 10-15 years.

It is a damn tragedy they are fleeing. They may be non-conformists if they don't buy into being willing to and learning how to operate in a large bureaucracy in order to make a difference. Every organization has rules, traditions, norms, expectations and politics. Ours need some work and CSAF is making some long overdue changes, but we are far from doomed.

BTW, your manager tirade is stale. Yes, we have managers in the staffs, but we also have leaders in command. I get it, you are not impressed by your commanders, but we have some excellent leaders in the AF. Welsh, Carlisle, Gorenc, Rand, Fiel, Selva, Hostage, Goldfein, Lengyel, Fedder, Clarke, PJ Johnson, Gersten, Dirk Smith, Stough, Hesterman, and Bash may be decent managers in their current manager jobs, but they are (or were) great commanders and leaders. Sure, there are shitty ones, just like in the CGO and FGO ranks and civilian world, but there are senior leaders in the AF.

I don't give a service before self speech going out the door, but I do ask people why they continue to serve. The answer I like the best sounds like "because I'm good at it and somebody who is good at it needs to serve."

[MSCguy]

Reminds me of a MSgt I had working for me. She had a master's degree completed before entering the military, yet was still required to complete her CCAF to obtain senior rater endorsement.

When I was an enlisted reservist with a bachelors that had been completed before joining the military I got the same line every time I had a feedback session: "Get your commission, college graduates are supposed to be officers." I don't know why the AF puts such an emphasis on degrees for enlisted. In the civilian world we had a word for college graduates doing jobs that required a high school diploma: Underemployed.

[Liquid]

Wait a minute. In your earlier post you lumped non-conformists with mediocre and crybabies. Now your saying that the contrarian leaders are the ones we need to wade thru this river of bull$hit so they can make a difference. In my vocab, contrarian and non-conformist are pretty synonymous. Can't have it both ways.

And let's be honest. How many sq/CCs really want the contrarian view? I've had 10 sq/cc in 13 years and NONE of them wanted the contrarian view. They wanted the view that would make them look good to the guy that wrote their OPR, or the view that reinforced their initial idea.

And BTW, no one is getting out because it's "hard". How insulting. We're getting out because the service that demands excellence in all we do, doesn't seem to expect excellence in all it does. At least that's why I'm looking for the door.

In my vocab they are not. A mediocre, crybaby non-conformist is the guy who refuses to get PME done because he doesn't want to, then bitches that it is held against him, when the norms and standards clearly show PME is a requisite for promotion. Same for AAD, but hopefully that will change. The non-conformists clings to the STS and 69 bullshit when they have been told to knock it off. The contrarian leader approaches problems and leadership differently. Check out Steven Sample at https://vialogue.wordpress.com/2005/05/08/the-contrarians-guide-to-leadership-notes-review/ There is a difference between insubordination and unconventional thinking. Any good commander wants a contrarian point of view, then disciplined execution when a decision is made and guidance is given.

I've never been a fan of the Excellence in All We Do value. I prefer competence in your primary job. Every Airman has a role in the mission and they should be the absolute best at that job. We dilute the value of that contribution and the value of the high level of competence required for that job when we tell people to be excellent at everything they do. Ancillary training, compliance inspections, community service, additional duties, and personal//professional development should not come close to competing with competence in your primary job. How we describe our values with "Excellence in All We Do" doesn't advance that.

[Liquid]

The system is not grand, rather than defend it as "right more often than its wrong", lets just make it better. AFSO21, right?

Bendy,

The system is far from grand. AFSO21 doesn't work, but common sense action does. I agree, lets make it better rather than quit or encourage others to quit because there is shit on our green grass and we are becoming a sad footnote of failure.

[Bender]

...because there is shit on our green grass...

Ha...I like that line.

Since school and staff seem to be so important (overlooking the possibility that this prioritization may be part of the underlying issue), what could make "the system" better? One wants the O-5 promotion board to have the ability to select better quality individuals, but "eliminates" 80% due to these experiences...we need to have more people checking these boxes. It will still be difficult for all to get staff billets, but the numbers could be increased beyond 20% (if all school selects in fact get those billets as it is):

Is the length of Squadron Officer School the only reason 100% attendance is possible? We could save a small chunk of change on TDY costs by admitting SOS is really just a networking booze fest. This sort of thing can be done on any number of bases, Maxwell AFB is not some magical conduit of learning. It appeared to have no special super powers when I was there last.

When was the last time the curriculum of either ACSC or AWC was adjusted in an attempt to reduce their durations (or even add more benefit)? What on earth takes an entire year in residence really? If it even comes close to rivaling the correspondence material, I may change my opinions more towards shit-canning the whole thing in lieu of the 100% online option too, but I'll reserve that opinion since I haven't been in-residence and it may still yet be some miraculous leader factory. These are your top performers, can't we move this "process" along any quicker? How long are the days, we getting weekends off in between trying to stay awake for 50 separate semi-random speeches? To-to-today, Junior...either we need to know it or not. Listening to a speech online is NO DIFFERENT than listening to it on the internet (minus the ability to ask a question afterwards, which I seriously question the value of).

With a shrinking number of staff billets across the force, why not "meld" the first year of a staff billet into ACSC attendance (if it's deemed attendance is worth keeping), effectively turning a 4 year staff tour into a 3 year staff tour (or even a 2 year staff tour for that matter)? It will take more individuals to fill the same number of staff billets, allowing more to do both school and staff…increasing the pool of eligible airmen without the ability for a board to skate using a couple of "checked boxes" on the front page.

Certainly “continuity” wouldn’t be the issue with people being in a staff job for only a couple years (it could actually be a good thing), and most would probably be relieved being able to return to operational assignment more quickly.

I can see it increasing costs in some areas (PCS), but they could be hedged in other areas. Anything that costs money is most likely initially filed in the “nice to have, not need to have” and/or “don’t fix it if it isn’t broken” categories. Perhaps the "dog shitting on our lawn" is elsewhere.

There are still ALOT of people that think AFSO21 does work and drags people into HORRIBLE meetings to enact it. I think I have my "black belt" by osmosis.

Bendy

Edit: It's true, mind blowing will ensue! I won't even edit that out...I got a really good laugh out of it myself, twice. Thanks for the catch 56&2.

Edited February 28, 2014 by Bender

[busdriver]

Fundamentally, I think we need to re-address what we want to teach to officers and at what level. SOS was at least back in 08 heavily focused on leadership theory, in my opinion this is way too late. Basic theory needs to be in the commissioning source or an ASBC type course for LTs. I think a course for Captains needs to be a broadening course outside your comfort bubble. As a flyer I would have loved to learn about Maintenance or Intel, this could be locally taught.

[Fifty-six & Two]

Listening to a speech online is NO DIFFERENT than listening to it on the internet

[Bender]

Out loud: I learned that in SOS. In my head: Damn it.

Bendy

[pcola]

Out loud: I learned that in SOS. In my head: Damn it.

Bendy

Hey, look on the bright side - At least somebody actually read that giant wall of gibberish you posted! I gave up after the first paragraph.

[GreasySideUp]

Anyone currently in SOS? Quick question for you. PM works.

Edited October 14, 2014 by GreasySideUp

[Herk Driver]

They graduated last Friday, but I am sure one of the recent grads will be happy to answer any questions you might have.

Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

Edited October 14, 2014 by Herk Driver

[StoleIt]

Recent grad here, but they are completely changing the course from 8 weeks to 5, so if it's anything specific about the course it is probably already out of date.

[JBueno]

For those who have completed the new course in correspondence, how long is it taking?

[F16Rooster]

I finished mine a little over a year ago and I'm assuming it's the same course. The course was new then and didn't have any gouge/ponies/etc to help so it was earned honestly unfortunately. I took a test about every 1.5 weeks (I'm on a guard base so the testing opportunity is limited) and the guided discussion portion took 3 weeks if I remember correctly. With some gouge you could easily do 1 test a week but probably not too much more than that unless it's really accurate gouge. There was also a 3 week delay between taking the last test and starting the guided discussion portion. All told, I think it took me about 2.5 months.

[ThreeHoler]

For those who have completed the new course in correspondence, how long is it taking?

You can only take it if you're ineligible for residence. Does it matter how long it takes?

[Tx_Aggie99]

First post on the board, but I'd really appreciate anyone's advice.  I'm also enrolled in the "new" correspondence SOS course.  The website says it should take approx 12 months.  I really need to finish it in 4-5 months max, due to upcoming promotion board.  Can I really take a test every week or two?  What's the best way to skim the hundreds of pages of material to prep for the test?  I see there are review quizzes to help prepare for the tests, just wondering how good these are?  Thanks in advance for any advice!

[11F]

First post on the board, but I'd really appreciate anyone's advice.  I'm also enrolled in the "new" correspondence SOS course.  The website says it should take approx 12 months.  I really need to finish it in 4-5 months max, due to upcoming promotion board.  Can I really take a test every week or two?  What's the best way to skim the hundreds of pages of material to prep for the test?  I see there are review quizzes to help prepare for the tests, just wondering how good these are?  Thanks in advance for any advice!

Dude, if you're in a time crunch, I'd go VFR direct to the registrar at Maxwell. Tell them your situation; you won't be the first. Good luck!