Promotion and PRF Information

[Pooter]

On 12/31/2022 at 8:08 AM, Chuck17 said:

I think this is a bit of an oversimplification of the issue. Operations of any large bureaucracy - particularly those that don’t  work for profit - are remarkably similar in their shifting-wind policies and tolerance of ridiculousness, inefficiency, etc.

But again, this shift is no surprise to anyone who’s watched things change over the last 20 years. If you’re caught in the middle, it sucks. Maybe this change is the last change. Maybe the long safe play is to just get one. I dunno. 

I copy on voting with your feet/not taking the bonus/not staying/etc. The USAF hasn’t demonstrated it’s serious about retaining pilots yet IMHO. Having seen the impacts of things like this at both the squadron and the staff levels, I’ll tell you each camp is convinced they’re in the right (that there’s a crisis/that there’s no crisis in retention)… Which contributes to fluctuating policies such as masters degrees… 

I was part of the “gotta have a masters or you won’t get promoted” cohort in the early 2000s. Got the first one via sacrifice of weekends to AMU in 2011. Enjoyed it for the most part but it was a time suck, even for a book nerd like me.

Got sent to IDE and got another (had the opportunity to write about something of high interest, ended up publishing…)

Got picked up for ASG and got another.

Got picked up for SDE and got another. 

…. But what’s one do with four masters degrees? Retire and write? TBD.

I appreciate the opportunity, but can’t argue in good faith that it’s an experience everyone should have. 

Chuck

I get that from a 30,000 foot view at the end of a solid career it's easy to say "take it easy, these things go back and forth, what do you expect from a big organization." 
 

And I understand this was probably easy to predict for a 20+ year old hat. But there are people up for their majors board this year who have been under the masked policy since they were a butterbar and probably didn't even know the significance of the policy the last time it was changed in 2015. Now they have 3 days notice. 
 

Legitimate question here. The vast majority of O-5s and up, including you, have at least one masters if not more from various IDE/SDE programs. So it's clear the Air Force has ample opportunities built in for continuing education of people on the command track.

So why the emphasis on getting a check the box degree beforehand? Does basket weaving from AMU improve the member or the Air Force in any way? The masters time suck pulls valuable time from CGOs who should be reaching their peak tactical proficiency level in their careers.  So if the Air Force will get them a masters later anyway, what's the point?

*this question assumes tactical proficiency is something to be valued.

 

[Danger41]

My $0.02 on this one. I think if you’re an engineer and get a masters in engineering, you should get a boost on your PRF as a result. If you’re an engineer and get a MBA, it shouldn’t matter. If you’re a rated aircrew, a masters degree shouldn’t matter until O-6. I know tons of bros that got one (myself excluded) that have never used the degree directly.
 

HOWEVER, the ability of an officer to be able to write effectively, think critically, and examine complex problems is absolutely vital as one increases rank and responsibility. I understand the idea that a Masters degree would be an indication of those skills, but we’ve demonstrated that most certainly isn’t the case with the degree mills.

The real root cause here (IMO) is the Air Force’s confusion that education = leadership. I liken it to a dude that gets a masters in exercise science and nutrition getting put in charge of a bodybuilding academy but has never lifted weights. It’s honestly sad to see those types get put back in charge of a squadron and flail because now their cohort is a bunch of John Q Pilots that just want to fly jets and kill the enemy and DGAF about all the stuff that their new commander just went through to become 1/690*.
 

I’m not against education at all and personally think it’s very important. But the type of education needed to truly lead an effective fighting force doesn’t show up cleanly on a SURF. 

*This is discussed beautifully in a book called “The Captain Class”. TLDR version is the author looks at dynasty teams from every sport out there and finds the one thing they all had in common is a Captain that led by doing the dirty, challenging, and selfless work instead of getting the glory. 

[mp5g]

I honestly don’t see what the problem is. I mean, the three dudes grilled on Capital Hill about the Afghanistan pull-out/debacle/abortion have a very impressive graduate education resume, and I think they showcased that higher level critical thinking during the withdrawal operation. It’s common knowledge more degrees make a better leader. /s

SECDEF 

He holds a Master of Arts degree in counselor education from Auburn University, and a Master of Business Management from Webster University. 

https://www.defense.gov/About/Biographies/Biography/Article/2522687/lloyd-j-austin-iii/

Chairman of the JCS

In addition to his bachelor’s degree in political science from Princeton University, General Milley has a master’s degree in international relations from Columbia University and one from the U.S. Naval War College in national security and strategic studies. He is also a graduate of the MIT Seminar XXI National Security Studies Program.

https://www.defense.gov/About/Biographies/Biography/Article/614392/general-mark-a-milley/

 

CENTCOM Commander at the time

Gen McKenzie is an honors graduate of the Armor Officer Advanced Course, Marine Corps Command and Staff College, and the School of Advanced Warfighting. He was selected as a CMC Fellow in 1999, and served as a Senior Military Fellow within the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University. He has a Masters in Teaching with a concentration in History.

https://www.centcom.mil/ABOUT-US/LEADERSHIP/Bio-Article-View/Article/1798987/commander-general-kenneth-f-mckenzie-jr/

[tac airlifter]

That’s exactly right.  There’s no connection between our system’s desired pedigree for career success and actually winning wars.  And until our nation holds accountable for failure “leaders” like Miley and Austin, this practice will continue.

[SurelySerious]

*This is discussed beautifully in a book called “The Captain Class”. TLDR version is the author looks at dynasty teams from every sport out there and finds the one thing they all had in common is a Captain that led by doing the dirty, challenging, and selfless work instead of getting the glory. 

Good read. Also agree with many of these assessments, but it would be difficult for the AF to quantify actual leadership quantities so here we are again rewarding surface qualities.

[brabus]

28 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

it would be difficult for the AF to quantify actual leadership quantities

Well yeah, since it’s impossible for anyone to quantify leadership capability using any metric on paper. Leadership is only truly assessable in person, by watching and listening. And of course, it’s subjective mostly (though positive leadership traits are generally agreed upon). Seen a lot of great leaders who are enlisted without a bachelors, meanwhile the absolute worst leadership failures have resumes like Milley. AADs are retarded and serve almost no purpose in developing true leaders. There are far better avenues to develop one’s leadership than masters degrees. 

[FLEA]

4 minutes ago, brabus said:

Well yeah, since it’s impossible for anyone to quantify leadership capability using any metric on paper. Leadership is only truly assessable in person, by watching and listening. And of course, it’s subjective mostly (though positive leadership traits are generally agreed upon). Seen a lot of great leaders who are enlisted without a bachelors, meanwhile the absolute worst leadership failures have resumes like Milley. AADs are retarded and serve almost no purpose in developing true leaders. There are far better avenues to develop one’s leadership than masters degrees. 

So hot take but the AF does not promote people for being good leaders and does not necessarily want good leaders at the top. Rather, they promote pedigrees. What upgrades have you accomplished? Been a flight commander? Been a squadron commander? Had staff experience? Have an AAD? They want people at the top that they think have the appropriate pedigree to make big picture decisions. 

Some of these people just happen to be awesome leaders. A lot, and I mean A LOT, don't. The AF doesn't need them to be good leaders though because they have the power of the UCMJ behind them. They can always order people to do things. However, things go smoother when they are good leaders and they don't have to micromanage their forces with written orders. So they "hedge" themselves by creating an environment that allows these senior officers to develop into good leaders by providing education experiences, guidance, etc... but there is nothing that's going to "force" that officer to become a good leader. 

And you can definitely see this because some of the best leaders in the AF never get promoted. Their leadership was never valued. Their pedigree was and they didn't have the pedigree. Rather than focus on getting good leaders pedigree, they take good pedigree and try to make them into leaders, which doesn't work. 

[ItnStln]

Is the Welsh era Masters requirement for Colonel still a thing? If so, to the IDE and SDE degrees count?

[Bigred]

1 hour ago, ItnStln said:

Is the Welsh era Masters requirement for Colonel still a thing? If so, to the IDE and SDE degrees count?

AFPC still shows it as required on their site. 

[ItnStln]

42 minutes ago, Bigred said:

AFPC still shows it as required on their site. 

Do the IDE and SDE Masters count towards this requirement or not?

[Bigred]

2 hours ago, ItnStln said:

Do the IDE and SDE Masters count towards this requirement or not?

Beats me, I just found something that said AAD are required for O-6.

[FLEA]

4 minutes ago, Bigred said:

Beats me, I just found something that said AAD are required for O-6.

I would presume so. They are accredited degrees, I don't know why they wouldn't. It would be a bad look on the AF if they didn't even accept their own degrees for promotion. If I recall when that guidance came out, the way it was worded was "if the AF wants you to have a masters degree, we will guide you to a program to get you to one."

[DirkDiggler]

3 hours ago, ItnStln said:

Do the IDE and SDE Masters count towards this requirement or not?

Yes those count.

[Biff_T]

I didn't get my masters (didn't get promoted either lol).  I think it's more important to leadership than knowing how to fly. Except, in the civilian world. 

Nobody cared about a masters for my multi-engine, ATP or type rating.  In my limited time at the regionals, not a single Capt asked me about what degree I was pursing or if i did my SOS via correspondence or in residence.  They were talking about how the airlines work, how to do the IRONMAN TWO into LAX and how to get into the Majors. For the most part, nobody cared about what I did as an officer, other than my aviation experience and hours.  I got treated the same as the 22 year old CFII in my class.  If I sucked, they let me know.   My sim partner, a civillian who I thought was a good pilot, failed his ATP checkride in the morning SIM with the same Evaluator I was scheduled with in the afternoon.  I didn't find out about it until the next morning when the Chief Pilot met with us to welcome us to Compass.  He wasn't at the table with us and the Chief Pilot.  2 out of the 5 guys in my class failed their ATP/Type Rating.  Once again, the civilian world doesn't care what you did before as an officer.  They care about how to "fly" (manage the FMS and AP lol) not about how you were the General's aide with a Masters in butt licking.  

Edited January 2, 2023 by Biff_T

[tac airlifter]

6 hours ago, ItnStln said:

Do the IDE and SDE Masters count towards this requirement or not?

Yes.  Just ensure your IDE/SDE program of choice includes an accredited MA.  Not all do.

[FLEA]

2 hours ago, Biff_T said:

I didn't get my masters (didn't get promoted either lol).  I think it's more important to leadership than knowing how to fly. Except, in the civilian world. 

Nobody cared about a masters for my multi-engine, ATP or type rating.  In my limited time at the regionals, not a single Capt asked me about what degree I was pursing or if i did my SOS via correspondence or in residence.  They were talking about how the airlines work, how to do the IRONMAN TWO into LAX and how to get into the Majors. For the most part, nobody cared about what I did as an officer, other than my aviation experience and hours.  I got treated the same as the 22 year old CFII in my class.  If I sucked, they let me know.   My sim partner, a civillian who I thought was a good pilot, failed his ATP checkride in the morning SIM with the same Evaluator I was scheduled with in the afternoon.  I didn't find out about it until the next morning when the Chief Pilot met with us to welcome us to Compass.  He wasn't at the table with us and the Chief Pilot.  2 out of the 5 guys in my class failed their ATP/Type Rating.  Once again, the civilian world doesn't care what you did before as an officer.  They care about how to "fly" (manage the FMS and AP lol) not about how you were the General's aide with a Masters in butt licking.  

Fair statements but in the airlines you are never going to be asked to review or contribute to policy memos with wide ranging effects on the joint force, negotiate with foreign partners, issue UCMJ actions, or embed with a SOF unit conducting culturally sensitive missions in austere parts of the world the US isn't officially involved with. I think the desire to see masters degrees in officers was originally penned on those task, which are task any officer can be asked to undertake, rather the primary duty which is flying an aircraft. 

I'm not saying a BS masters at AMU makes you better at that stuff--but the DoD somewhat has its hands tied where it is incapable of distinguishing a degree from for example, Northwestern University Chicago, from Trident Online. So long as both are regionally accredited, and they are, the DOE recognizes them as peer institutions, even though in the private sector a Kellogg MBA will get you into McKinsey or BCG, where as a Trident MBA is going to land you a cashier position at Navy Federal. 

[Biff_T]

I agree with you FLEA.  But......lol

Isn't PME supposed to take care of the education? 

Edit: I'm only a tactical level dude but shouldn't new Lts focus on flying?   Not a a BS degree that means nothing.. it only takes up more time away from their aircraft and personal time.  Why get a useless degree as an aviator unless you are in the plan?   The AF has PME to educate future leaders.  They should use it. Making your officers get an additional degree kind of says PME isn't as good as an online masters from Dip N Dots.   

  

Edited January 3, 2023 by Biff_T

[Biff_T]

3 hours ago, FLEA said:

Fair statements but in the airlines you are never going to be asked to review or contribute to policy memos 

But you may be asked to pull someone's finger in the cockpit....lol

[FLEA]

1 hour ago, Biff_T said:

I agree with you FLEA.  But......lol

Isn't PME supposed to take care of the education? 

Edit: I'm only a tactical level dude but shouldn't new Lts focus on flying?   Not a a BS degree that means nothing.. it only takes up more time away from their aircraft and personal time.  Why get a useless degree as an aviator unless you are in the plan?   The AF has PME to educate future leaders.  They should use it. Making your officers get an additional degree kind of says PME isn't as good as an online masters from Dip N Dots.   

  

My 2c is the AF has always had an identity crises balancing between the technical proficiency of it's flyers and the officership, a casualty when we deposed of warrants and enlisted flyers. We want our front line fighters to be policy experts, strategist, leaders, and technical experts. You can't simply ask people to be everything. When I'm doing my own travel vouchers and personnel actions as well why even have other careers? Why not just make everyone pilots? 😂

[MCO]

We promote peacetime managers who make organizations numbers look good, for the most part. Sometimes we get lucky and those managers are also good leaders.

 

This isn’t new. There is a reason we fire a bunch of our senior leaders every time we have a major war. Luckily we haven’t had a major war in a long time. That also means we forgot what we want in a wartime leader.

[Pooter]

I don't dispute legit masters degrees are important once you get to a certain level and are working on strategy/policy/doctrine type things. 
 

But we already have an IDE/SDE pipeline specifically designed to get people masters degrees and prep them for high level policy making so why the fuck do we need people to have a miscellaneous masters beforehand??  

A degree mill masters doesn't do anything for anyone.  It doesn't make you a better leader, tactician, or strategist. And it robs time from your primary duty and family life. 

But it does give the Air Force one invaluable data point. It helps big AF identify the individuals willing to jump through their ass for a better chance of promotion. And that's their favorite kind of person because they're more likely to stick around no matter how bad the treatment. 

[Blue]

10 hours ago, Pooter said:

It helps big AF identify the individuals willing to jump through their ass for a better chance of promotion. And that's their favorite kind of person because they're more likely to stick around no matter how bad the treatment. 

Loyalty.

They want to see who's loyal to the organization, and who isn't.

Loyal people don't question the absurdities and the nonsense.  They just salute smartly and do whatever the boss says.

[jrizzell]

Having served my country faithfully and retired, it’s comical watching the pendulum swing back and forth between the AAD. I did my due diligence and checked the box because they were unmasked during my IPZ. This “new” policy will again change in 3-5 years, then change again after that. Do I think the degree is important, not really. But all that matters is what the current regime thinks. If there’s 4 people in the same grey zone, it will be a discriminator. I hate it, however, it is what it is, regardless of what the policy states. 

[FLEA]

13 hours ago, Pooter said:

I don't dispute legit masters degrees are important once you get to a certain level and are working on strategy/policy/doctrine type things. 
 

But we already have an IDE/SDE pipeline specifically designed to get people masters degrees and prep them for high level policy making so why the fuck do we need people to have a miscellaneous masters beforehand??  

A degree mill masters doesn't do anything for anyone.  It doesn't make you a better leader, tactician, or strategist. And it robs time from your primary duty and family life. 

But it does give the Air Force one invaluable data point. It helps big AF identify the individuals willing to jump through their ass for a better chance of promotion. And that's their favorite kind of person because they're more likely to stick around no matter how bad the treatment. 

So I agree and disagree with you. 

I agree in the sense you are 100% right. I got established in the higher ed space after separating and learned a few hard lessons along the way, such as 1.) Degree matters and 2.) School matters. 

I disagree in the sense that there is a very active and very strong DEI initiative to overturn that, especially in the veteran space, because veterans by nature are non-traditional students. There are some problematic issues with the current hierarchy of schools and degrees, specifically to how veterans can utilize VA benefits on education following separation, etc... So its in our interest to attempt to upend those status quos. 

What I have found in my recent relationship with an elite university (and I don't refer to it that way self-gratifyingly, rather that's how the top 20 schools or so refer to themselves) is that my BS degrees did distinguish me from other candidates in-so-much as they saw it as preparatory for my current program. So while the private sector didn't particularly value those degrees, the higher education sector did. 

I also agree that the Air Force needs to do this better by actually curating education experiences for talent by 1.) identifying individuals interested in a "warrior scholar" pathway, 2.) providing more opportunities to pursue those programs and 3.) actually providing values to individuals that pursue that path. 

In regards to #3, IDE/SDE are not the only opportunities to earn AAD in the Air Force. There is also AFIT, several fellowship programs, etc... the problem is, often those people fall out of their career field for 2-3 years and they get totally railroaded on stratifications and career development. If the current guidance is meant to address this very problematic facet of the current system, I would support that. 

Edited January 4, 2023 by FLEA

[StoleIt]

Interestingly, a buddy of mine ended up getting selected for the program to get a Master's right out of ROTC. He regrets doing the program because all it did was put him 2 years behind his peers. I guess if he wanted to go to TPS it would help immensely but, otherwise someone would really have to dig into his records to see he got selected for that program in the first place, unlike Phoenix. It didn't help him at all professionally.

So, even when the Air Force claims to value advanced degrees...they really don't.