SJLT Book Final

STRENGTHENING JOINT LEADERS AND TEAMS
STRENGTHENING JOINT LEADER DEVELOPMENT AND ENHANCING JOINT TEAMS

STRENGTHENING JOINT LEADERS AND TEAMS
Recommendations and Implementation Plan
For
General David L. Goldfein
Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force
Prepared by:
Brigadier General B. Chance Saltzman
and the
Air Force Strategic Integration Group
Table of Contents
Foreword ........................................................................................................................................................... 6
Call to Arms .................................................................................................................................................... 8
Implementation Plan .................................................................................................................................... 11
Flight Plan ..................................................................................................................................................... 16
Foreword
The Air Force’s ongoing efforts to improve its warfighting capabilities can be traced to
the fall of 2016 when Chief of Staff of the Air Force (CSAF), General Goldfein, initiated three
Focus Areas aimed at joint warfighting excellence. The second of these focus areas,
“Strengthening Joint Leaders and Teams (SJLT)” was designed to improve the Air Force’s
ability to effectively develop Airmen and organizational structures for joint warfighting
excellence. The CSAF outlined five strategic objectives in a published paper, Strengthening
Joint Leaders and Teams…a Combined Arms Imperative, in an effort to better prepare the AF
for Joint Force responsibilities. In response to these objectives, an SJLT Flight Plan was
developed and presented to the CSAF with six major lines of effort, including 26 projects and 65
recommendations. From this extensive work, an SJLT Implementation Plan (I-Plan) was
presented to senior Air Force leaders.
The I-Plan was signed in July 2018 by the SECAF, CSAF, and the Chief Master Sergeant
of the Air Force (CMSAF) and includes nine tasks aligned within two interdependent and
mutually supporting lines of effort referred to as Strengthening Joint Leader Development and
Enhancing Joint Teams. Initiatives detailed in the I-Plan support the Air Force priority of
“Developing Exceptional Leaders” as articulated by the Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF).
Efforts within the SJLT further support the charge in the National Defense Strategy (NDS) to
recruit, develop, and retain a high-quality military and civilian workforce that is essential for
future joint warfighting success.
PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
CHIEF OF STAFF
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON
Strengthening Joint Leaders and Teams ... a Combined Arms Imperative
This paper is the second in a series to share my thinking behind three key CSAF
focus areas over the next four years. As stated in the first paper, "Revitalizing Squadrons
- the Heartbeat of the Air Force", these ideas are neither revolutionary nor a significant
vector change. Each align with our Air Force Future Operating Concept and Strategic
Master Plan -- our strategic vision documents. They also nest perfectly under Secretary
James' three priorities: Taking Care of Airmen; Balancing Readiness and Modernization;
and Making Every Dollar Count. Said another way, these ideas are about evolution .. . not
revolution .
Today's national security challenges come from a combination of strong states that
are challenging world order, weak states that cannot preserve order, and poorly governed
spaces that provide sanctuary to extremists who seek to destabilize world order. From
China 's actions to militarize the South China Sea .. . to Russian aggression in Eastern
Europe ... to Iran's continued malicious activity .. . to nuclear aspirations of an increasingly
unstable North Korea .. . we have returned to the era of state-on-state competition even
as we counter violent extremism in the Middle East, prevent its spread to other regions,
and disrupt attacks worldwide.
Given we will be facing the challenges listed above for the next several years, it is
essential we strengthen the development of Airmen who are not only steeped in the
business of Airpower, but also knowledgeable in how to optimize every component as
part of a Joint Task Force (JTF). Airmen, leveraging the same leadership used to blend
joint and coalition partners into a synergized air campaign, must be ready to lead and
work in JTF HQs designed to synergize all components. Airmen, embodied with the global
perspective natural to the speed and range of airpower, have much to contribute through
leadership at the highest levels of joint command .
To better prepare our officer, enlisted, and civilian force to stand up, lead , and
support a JTF, we must reinvigorate our development to purposefully and systematically
gain proficiency in joint warfare earlier in the careers of Airmen. Our Airmen should
continue to serve in joint positions, both on the staff and operationally, and capitalize on
joint experiences, education and training. Our culture must value those who serve in these
joint positions. We then must promote what we value and invest in Total Force Airmen
who are joint warfighters.
In parallel with the development of Airmen to lead joint operations, we must evolve
the composition and training of our organizations to deploy as a JTF HQ. We'll start our
training with 9 AF and the AFCENT missions co-located at Shaw AFB and certify the
commander and staff as a core JTF HQ. Under the leadership of COMACC, we 'll learn
from this effort and then look to expand it to selected Component Numbered Air Force
(C-NAF) HQs. As wings across our Air Force generally report to NAF Commanders, I'll
expect NAF Commanders to bring the language and battle rhythm of a JFC HQ into the
daily rhythm of our wings as we exercise missions in support of a Joint Commander. I'll
also expect Wing Commanders to educate Squadron Commanders on the value of joint
comp rehensive read iness. To support this, our education and training programs wi ll also
provide the right Joint training at the right time for our leaders. These changes wi ll
naturally influence how we exercise and inspect NAFs and wings to further solidify the
business of joint warfighting and JTF leadership across the Air Force. This is about
instilling joint warfighting expertise into our formations and Airmen at all levels to include
combat and combat support.
We'll also look at how we present forces to a Combatant Commander. Historically,

JTFs stand up with in days or weeks of a crisis with little fanfare or warning . While intended
to exist only for the duration of the crisis, they often become enduring. Therefore, with
little time to prepare before the formation of a JTF, it is critical that we have Airmen trained
and ready to provide the cr.ucial airpower component and JTF leadership whenever and
wherever needed.
It also means we need to reset how we deploy Airmen to a fight. Over the past
15 years, we migrated from deploying as teams to often deploying as individual Airmen.
Throughout our history, we tend to do our best wo rk by training , deploying, employing,
and re-deploying as team s. We'll never be the component that sticks rigidly to a fixed
team size for deployment (i.e. a set squadron or flight) because the Nation needs its Air
Force to be more flexible . However, over the last few years, more Airmen have deployed
into combat as individuals at the expense of Airmen and unit read iness.
With 15 years behind us in this fight ... and likely 15 more yea rs ahead ... this is
important, timely, and worthy work. Strong leadership is required to train together, deploy
together, fight together, and return together. This is especially important for our Guard
and Reserve Airmen who often return home without a main operating base or unit to share
their combat experiences.
Over the next four years, I look forward to working with our Secretary, MAJCOM
Commanders, and Air Force leadership to strengthen our joint warfighting leaders and
teams. As always, I am proud to serve with you.
Fight's on!
~
...
DAVE
THE SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE
CHIEF OF STAFF, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON DC
MEMORANDUM FOR ALL COMMANDERS AND HAF STAFF
FROM: SECAF, CSAF, AND CMSAF
SUBJECT: Strengthening Joint Leaders and Teams (SJLT) Implementation Plan
The Air Force priority Developing Exceptional Leaders demands we refine and
strengthen how we grow Airmen to lead and integrate into joint teams. Over the last year, we
conducted robust analysis to identify ways to strengthen our joint warfighting excellence while
remaining functionally proficient in Air Force core functions. These recommendations form the
basis of the more detailed report: Strengthening Joint Leaders and Teams Flight Plan which can
be found at:
(https://org2 .eis.af.mil/sites/ 10961 /SJLT/teamportal/flightplan/Shared%20Documents/FA-
2%20Flight%20Plan Approved.docx).
"The surest way to prevent war is to be prepared to win one ... The Nation must field
sufficient, capable forces to defeat enemies and achieve sustainable outcomes that protect the
American people and our vital interests. Our aim is a Joint Force that possesses decisive
advantages for any likely conflict, while remaining proficient across the entire spectrum of
conflict. "
Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis

2018 National Defense Strategy
(NDS)
We are facing an increasingly complex and volatile national security environment

defined by state and non-state adversaries challenging the world order put in place and held
together by the US and our allies for the past 70+ years. While today's Air Force is the most
lethal and ready in the world, to maintain our competitive lead we must strengthen our ability to
operate in an increasingly complex multi-domain joint environment. Our decisive advantage is
and will continue to be our ability to employ combined forces that are able to "act together
coherently and effectively to achieve military objectives" (NDS, 2018).
To better prepare ourselves to thrive in this environment, the Air Force must develop
increasingly experienced, credible Airmen who are ready to integrate into, influence, and lead in
a joint environment. Airmen must be both competent in our core specialties (Global Vigilance,
Reach, and Power) and be ready to rapidly integrate and optimize all other joint missions and
domains in a joint campaign. We must be ready to quickly assemble and lead and support a Joint
Task Force (JTF) that designs, executes, and integrates a military campaign that supports
diplomatic efforts to negotiate a better peace. These Airmen must be supported by organizations,
systems, and processes that enhance our lethality and readiness along with joint warfighting
capabilities. The challenges outlined in the NDS and the growing imperative to enhance joint
inter-operability and lethality serves as the catalyst for this effort.
This implementation plan is rooted in two interdependent and mutually supporting lines
of effort to be executed in an integrated approach:
1. Strengthening Joint Leader Development

2. Enhancing Joint Teams
Strengthening joint leaders and teams is not the work of a single MAJCOM or a few
career fields; it is an enterprise-wide imperative. Over the next year, Brig Gen Chance Saltzman
will lead the Strategic Integration Group charged with facilitating the implementation of this plan
ensuring coordination, cross-talk, measurement, and timely reporting to institutionalize a joint
mindset and enhance our warfighting lethality.
Strengthening Joint Leader Development
Intent: Historically, the timing from crisis to standup of a JTF takes approximately six weeks.
In this timeframe, a commander is chosen and a headquarters and staff are assembled to go
forward to design a campaign, integrate joint, allied, and inter-agency teammates, and execute
military operations. Every JTF Commander and staff are expected to understand how to merge
military operations into a broader political strategy. As the service that brings global capabilities
to a JTF, it is essential that we develop leaders who can command a JTF and Airmen who can
rapidly assimilate into a joint inter-agency team to begin campaign design immediately upon
arrival. Strengthening joint leader development requires focusing on targeted talent management
to ensure our airmen obtain the training, education and assignment experiences needed to lead
effectively and thrive in this environment.
Tasks:
1. SAF/MR will publish a Headquarters Mission Directive to AF/Al and HQ AETC establishing
overarching authorities to develop policies, resources, and execution of joint development.
AF/Al and HQ AETC will establish the necessary organizational structures, and define/align the
roles and responsibilities needed to synchronize and integrate Air Force joint development
efforts. As part of this task, AETC (with support from the HAF, and MAJCOMs) will conduct a
comprehensive assessment of competencies identified in existing education, training, and
experiential opportunities to assess whether there are gaps in the current state of Air Force joint
education and training. The mission directive, measures of effectiveness, and baseline
assessment plan will be presented by 1 Oct 2018.
2. SAF/MR and AF/ A 1 will develop an Air Force joint talent management strategy with support
from MAJCOM Commanders. This strategy will serve as the foundation for joint development
considerations by Development Teams, Career Field Managers, and HQ AFPC. The strategy will
include measures to incentivize and signal value of joint experience and propose equivalency
credit for service in key joint positions. The strategy will update Air Force joint experiences to
better define what is considered joint duty and enable wider tracking of joint development. To
further support the effort, AF/Al will ensure HQ AFPC effectively manages Joint Experience
Tracking and Reporting within the Joint Talent Tracking and Management System. The Joint
Talent Management Strategy will be submitted by 1 Oct 2018.
3. AETC will ensure the Air Force Continuum of Learning accounts for joint matters across a
career lifecycle ensuring we integrate the requisite knowledge, skills, and abilities as an essential
component of our Total Force development. The new Continuum of Learning will be ready for
implementation by 1 Oct 2018.
4. AFPC and Al, working with AETC and the redesigned Continuum of Learning will include
an institutional framework that balances Air Force and joint progression. Joint learning Goint
experiences, education, and training) will include purposeful follow-on and practical assignments
so that Airmen have the expertise to plan, execute, and lead joint operations.
5. AETC will deliver a validated Air Force Institutional Competency list to enhance an Airman's
ability to operate across a full spectrum of environments. This competency list will provide a
road map for the timing and learning level for elements across the continuum of learning. These
newly updated Air Force competencies will be ingrained throughout our education and training
ecosystem, ultimately codified in a comprehensive education and training catalog, and will be
used as a primary driver for deliberate force development and assessment. The competency list
will be validated by 31 Oct 2018.
6. AETC will further develop the Air Force Institutional Competency list to include joint
competencies. The additional elements will be further integrated throughout the education and
training ecosystem, enriching an Airmen's ability to operate in the joint environment. The plan
for a joint-focused refinement of the Air Force Institutional Competency list will be complete by
4 Jan 2019.
Enhancing Joint Teams
Intent: As we focus on the individual development of Airmen to thrive in the joint warfighting
arena, we must also build the doctrine and supporting formations and structures needed to lead
and/or rapidly support a Joint Task Force (JTF).
Tasks:
1. ACC will design, train, and certify a core JTF HQ at 9th Air Force at Shaw AFB, SC. The 9th
AF Commander will be certified as a JTF Commander ready to perform all tasks associated with
JTF tasking IA W joint standards and timelines. Upon certification, this core JTF HQ will be
placed in the Global Response Force (GRF) and available for tasking by SecDEF and the CJCS
to meet global contingencies. Certification by Joint Staff J7 is scheduled for December 2018.
2. AF/A3 will work with MAJCOM Commanders to determine what additional Component
Numbered Air Force Headquarters (CNAFs) should be considered to follow the 9th AF model
and certify as a core JTF HQ. AF/A3 will assess primarily against National Defense Strategy
operational challenges and tasks in addition to humanitarian disaster support. Future core JTF
HQ elements must be deployable in support of CJCS Dynamic Force Employment models.
AF/A3 recommendation will be submitted to Air Force Warfighting Integration Center (AFWIC)
for incorporation into USAF design blueprint no later than 1 Mar 2019.
3. AETC, through the LeMay Center, in conjunction with HAF, MAJCOMs, DRUs, and FOAs,
will assess Air Force Doctrine and associated annexes to ensure tight, complimentary
connections to the joint doctrine framework and the National Defense Strategy. The LeMay
Center will monitor Annex revisions to ensure service-centric content is not unnecessarily
disconnected from joint doctrine. The LeMay Center will ensure the Air Force aligns with joint
doctrine in a complimentary way. Throughout, we must re-energize doctrine to present powerful
ideas simply and drive warfighting excellence. Be prepared to brief results of doctrine
assessment and way ahead by 1 Feb 2019.
Future multi-domain operations demand an Air Force steeped in the art of applying air and space
power to global challenges. At the same time, we must understand the broader elements of joint
warfighting necessary to integrate and optimize land, maritime, cyber, and SOF capabilities into
a joint campaign. Future conflict will likely not afford us the luxury of time to train up leaders
and build formations to fight and win our Nations wars. There are few certainties in our world, as
noted by SECAF, CSAF, and CMSAF. This one is crystal clear- we have from now until the
war starts to prepare ourselves for the task ahead. We must treat every week of peace as a
blessing and possibly our last. Others before us have done so. The torch has been passed to us.
We expect leaders across the Air Force to embrace and support this implementation plan as we
work together to strengthen how we build the joint leaders and teams needed to fly, fight, and
wm.
We look forward to working with you during this important journey. Thank you for your
. leadership and passion for enhancing joint warfighting excellence.
q./-&-'rt ' 1
Heather W~lson{
1• ( s~
~
Secretary of the Air Force
Kaleth 0. Wright
Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force
For Official Use Only
Strengthening Joint Leaders and Teams

Flight Plan
For
General David L. Goldfein
Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force
Prepared by:
Major General Brian M. Killough
and the
Headquarters Air Force Core Team
January 2018

Executive Summary
The Focus Area 2 (FA-2), “Strengthening Joint Leaders and Teams,” Flight Plan guides and
informs short-term, mid-term, and far-term initiatives intended to bolster the Air Force’s joint
warfighting capability, focusing on both its structures and its Airmen. General David L.
Goldfein, Chief of Staff of the Air Force (CSAF), directed the FA-2 team to consider emerging
and future security challenges that demand greater joint integration from our force while looking
for ways to strengthen Air Force joint leaders and teams.
Today’s adversaries are increasingly sophisticated and seek to undermine the United States’
tactical and technological superiority by employing lethal and non-lethal effects simultaneously
across multiple domains and regions. Service-centric solutions are not enough to overcome these
complex operational challenges. The ability of the United States to fight as a synergistic team,
integrating and simultaneously employing the capabilities of its armed forces seamlessly with
interagency, intergovernmental, and coalition partners will continue to be our asymmetric
advantage in overcoming future threats. Airmen inherently bring unique perspectives and
capabilities to the complex challenges of joint warfighting. Our leaders and teams must be able
to quickly and effectively integrate, influence, and lead at any level of joint warfare. As a result,
the Air Force must strive for Joint Warfighting Excellence to stay ahead of its adversaries and
remain the preeminent fighting force.
Through an in-depth assessment and collaboration with stakeholders from across the Air Force,
the FA-2 team created 26 projects to better leverage the unique capabilities and expertise of our
Service in the joint fight. Each project addresses a specific area of improvement such as doctrine,
education, training, inspections, and career development to strengthen joint leaders using a
cradle-to-grave approach. In parallel, the team examined organizational structures and
approaches that employ Airmen to reinforce Joint Warfighting Excellence. Each initiative has a
section that details recommendations, next steps, and a potential timeline, with multiple projects
scheduled for implementation during 2018.
Our forces must be educated, experienced, organized, agile, expeditionary, competent, and
credible to effectively integrate, influence, and lead across the future joint warfighting landscape.
They must remain highly proficient at their core specialty while becoming increasingly more
proficient at reaching across Air Force, domain, or sister service silos to optimize their combat
effectiveness across the larger joint warfighting functions. Our Service and its Airmen must be
skilled joint partners to meet the joint warfighting needs of our Nation.

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 2
Current State: Evolving Global Challenges ............................................................................... 5
Future State: The CSAF’s Vision ................................................................................................ 5
Project Background, Purpose, and Scope................................................................................... 5
FA-2 Findings & Recommendations ........................................................................................... 5
Doctrine........................................................................................................................................... 7
Education & Training ..................................................................................................................... 7
Oversight ......................................................................................................................................... 7
Career Development ....................................................................................................................... 8
Structures ........................................................................................................................................ 8
Retain ............................................................................................................................................ 10
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 10
Appendix A – Key Concepts ...................................................................................................... 12
Appendix B – Team Organization ............................................................................................. 15
Appendix C – Project/Task Execution Plan Overview ............................................................ 18
Appendix D – Concept-to-Project Methodologies ................................................................... 26
Appendix E – Communication Plan .......................................................................................... 30
Appendix F – Doctrine................................................................................................................ 31
Air Force and Joint Doctrine ............................................................................................................... 31
Appendix G – Education and Training..................................................................................... 37
Education and Training Assessment ................................................................................................... 38
Joint Core Competencies .................................................................................................................... 44
Education and Training Catalog ......................................................................................................... 53
Joint Professional Military Education (PME) Exchanges ................................................................... 55
Joint Exercise Study ............................................................................................................................ 61
Optimizing Air Force Joint Education and Training for the 21st Century (Preparing Airmen for the
Joint Environment).............................................................................................................................. 64
Appendix H – Oversight ............................................................................................................. 70
Joint Oversight Concepts .................................................................................................................... 70
Support Air Force Personnel in Isolated Joint Duty Locations ........................................................... 74
Appendix I – Career Development ............................................................................................ 80
Joint Experiences Working Group (JEWG)........................................................................................ 81
3
Advanced Studies Group Utilization .................................................................................................. 96

Vector Air Force Personnel into Joint Duty........................................................................................ 99
Strengthen Enlisted Talent Management .......................................................................................... 100
Joint Attributes (Qualities) Working Group ..................................................................................... 105
Airmen Attributes/Qualities for Recruiting and Accessions Study .................................................. 113
Identify Key Billets for Joint Development ...................................................................................... 115
Civilian Joint Leader Development .................................................................................................. 116
Appendix J – Structures ........................................................................................................... 120
Force Presentation Model (FPM) Improvement ............................................................................... 120
Deployed Teaming ............................................................................................................................ 124
Numbered Air Force/Wing Inspection .............................................................................................. 125
Strengthen Air Force Institutional Identity ....................................................................................... 128
Joint Task Force Future Concepts ..................................................................................................... 128
Joint Task Force Next-Steps ............................................................................................................. 131
Deployment Training ........................................................................................................................ 134
Appendix K – Retain ................................................................................................................ 135
Air Force Equivalency Credit for Joint Positions ............................................................................. 136
Reward Air Force Personnel with Specialized Joint Education Training Experience ...................... 138
Appendix L – Glossary ............................................................................................................. 143
4
Current State: Evolving Global Challenges

The U.S. military is the finest fighting force the world has ever known. Yet, our adversaries are
quickly closing the gap in capability and skill. Today’s adversaries represent traditional nation-
state threats as well as asymmetric and emerging technological threats that are transregional in
nature. These threats demand multi-domain, multi-component, and multinational responses at
speeds that create multiple overlapping dilemmas keeping our adversaries at a strategic
disadvantage. The need for joint solutions is not only a future imperative, it is required today.
Future State: The CSAF’s Vision

The CSAF envisions an Air Force that “will deliberately develop Airmen and structures
organized and ready to integrate into, influence, and lead joint operations in future
environments.”1 The Air Force must be capable of leading operations that are transregional,
multi-domain, multi-component, and that leverage all instruments of national power. Airmen will
proudly, professionally, and competently stand side-by-side with our joint service, interagency,
intergovernmental, and multinational partners to ensure the security of the Homeland and
national interests. To achieve this vision, our Airmen and structures must be infused with the
knowledge, processes and tools for Joint Warfighting Excellence. By deliberately strengthening
our joint leaders and teams, we will set the conditions for our service to succeed in the joint fight.
Project Background, Purpose, and Scope

In the fall of 2016, the CSAF introduced three focus areas he intended to address during his
tenure. Each focus area aligned with the Air Force’s Future Operating Concept, Strategy, and Air
Force priorities. These “big rocks,” as they were originally known, were organized into three
interlinked focus areas, each serving as a vital cog in his overall vision for Air Force
transformation. FA-2, “Strengthening Joint Leaders and Teams,” was tasked to assess the Air
Force’s ability to effectively develop and grow both Airmen and structures to integrate,
influence, and lead in joint environments. Within FA-2, teams were formed to assess challenges
and identify deliberate joint warfighting development norms and opportunities. Key aspects of
Airmen development and associated (or relevant) Joint, Department of Defense and AF doctrine,
policies, structures and processes were targeted. Project teams, subject matter experts (SME),
and key stakeholders worked together to identify new ideas and concepts through the use of
interviews, surveys, and workshops. As a result, 26 projects were created to improve joint
leaders and teams. The findings and recommendations described below are the result of this
team’s dedicated work.
FA-2 Findings & Recommendations

The FA-2 team identified and pursued six overarching themes (Figure 1) that would strengthen
the Air Force's capability to strengthen joint leaders and teams. From this body of work, the team
initiated 26 projects aimed along those lines of effort. A macro-level overview of key findings
and recommendations is listed below. Specific findings and recommendations associated with
FA-2 projects are in Appendices F through K.
1
Focus Area 2 Mission Statement (2016).
5
Figure 1, Themes & Projects/Tasks
6
Doctrine
Air Force Doctrine reflects our values and should complement joint doctrine. Aligning Air
Force doctrine better with joint doctrine will reduce seams within Air Force specialties and
with the joint community. This will enable Airmen to operate more efficiently in a joint
environment by collaborating and communicating seamlessly with other services. See
Appendix F, Doctrine:
 Air Force and Joint Doctrine – describes opportunities where Air Force doctrine can
better align and be consistent with joint doctrine
Education & Training

The Air Force should infuse the proper amount of joint education and training at the right
time in an Airman’s career to better equip him or her with the skills necessary to integrate
into, influence, and lead joint operations. The FA-2 team determined that embracing and
leveraging Institutional Competencies would provide a clear foundational roadmap for the
timing and learning level for joint elements within education and training. In addition to
providing targeted and appropriate knowledge and skills necessary to fulfill their mission and
responsibilities, Airmen should embrace an Air Force culture that values joint capabilities. In
line with the Continuum of Learning (CoL) initiative, education and training offerings should
evolve to support deliberate and progressive development of joint-minded Airmen. Air Force
touchpoints for Professional Military Education should be reformed for officer, enlisted, and
civilian Air Force personnel. Professional Continuing Education (PCE) courses should be
expanded to gain proficiency in joint warfare. Education and training should be deliberately
and systematically sequenced with joint experiences to intentionally develop Airmen with the
right knowledge, skills, understanding, and experience to integrate into and lead joint
operations. See Appendix G, Education & Training:
 Education and Training Assessment – a framework and initial vector for the
education and training response to strengthen joint leaders
 Joint Core Competencies – leverage competency-based learning to form the
foundation of joint warfighting objectives for what Airman must “be” and be able to
“do”
 Education and Training Catalog – identifying joint education and training
opportunities for the community to help define opportunities
 Joint Professional Military Education Exchanges – a concept to deliberately reinforce
and supplement joint education and training with experience
 Joint Exercise Study – identifying and expanding joint exercises to reinforce and
supplement joint education and training with experience
 Optimizing Air Force Joint Education and Training for 21st Century (Preparing
Airmen for the Joint Environment) – identifies various ideas to evolve the Air Force’s
joint education system across the CoL
Oversight
Existing mechanisms for joint oversight are distributed, inconsistent, and inefficient, thus
diminishing the Air Forces’ ability to effectively shape, assess, and sustain Joint Warfighting
Excellence. Until joint experience is better understood and consistently valued, an
7
authority/champion is required to develop and manage joint Airmen force development and
talent management in order to develop a consistent system or process to ensure value and
sustainment for the long-term. See Appendix H, Oversight:
 Joint Oversight Concepts – identifies alternative options to sustain FA-2 initiatives
and administer the policy and strategic guidance needed for deliberate joint
development
 Support Air Force Personnel in Isolated Joint Duty Locations – identifies measures to
deliver more robust support to isolated Airmen serving in isolated joint locations
Career Development
Currently, the Air Force develops Airmen as experts within a given system or function. This
creates highly technical/tactical experts but challenges the breadth required for joint
experience. The Air Force should optimize its human capital management framework to
deliberately, consistently, and transparently prepare Airmen for the joint fight. Career
development pathways should be updated to account for functional differences in officer,
enlisted, and civilian careers. Flexible joint experience targets should be developed and
inserted into force development pyramids. Joint experiences, knowledge, skills, and
attributes/qualities should be defined and leveraged to strengthen Airmen development and
employment. Furthermore, information technology systems should be revised and developed
to comprehensively track, manage, and present the sum of joint experiences. Finally, Air
Force policy, directives, guidance, and processes should be revised to value and strengthen
joint development and experiences. See Appendix I, Career Development:
 Joint Experiences Working Group (JEWG) – delivers a comprehensive tracking and
reporting mechanism to enable purposeful joint vectoring and positioning
 Advanced Studies Working Group Utilization – outlines potential modifications to the
Air Force’s Advanced Studies Group program
 Vector Air Force Personnel into Joint Duty – identifies options to improve the Air
Force’s ability to effectively vector personnel into joint opportunities
 Strengthen Enlisted Talent Management – provides ideas to improve holistic talent
management mechanisms for enlisted personnel
 Joint Attributes (Qualities)Working Group – provides supporting concepts to improve
the Air Force’s ability to identify, vector, and assign the right Airman into key joint
opportunities
 Airmen Attributes/Qualities for Recruiting and Accessions Study – provides a project
description for a future study to potentially improve the Air Force’s ability to recruit
joint leaders of the future
 Identify Key Billets for Joint Development – provides the framework for identifying
and defining pinnacle joint positions to enable targeted joint development
 Civilian Joint Leader Development – identifies a concept for a civilian enterprise
talent management cell to oversee joint development
Structures
FA-2 identified four major areas where the Air Force can optimize its joint warfighting
structures: force presentation, deployed teaming, Joint Warfighting Headquarters, and
8
Numbered Air Forces and Wings (NAF/WG) inspections. These mutually supporting areas
should ensure the Air Force is postured and positioned to integrate into, influence, and lead
joint operations.
Force Presentation is an area that encompasses each of the listed structures; it touches
everything from employment models to organizational structures. The CSAF directed the
team to assess the existing construct to maximize warfighting effectiveness, lethality, and
readiness for all operations across the conflict continuum. While the current construct
provides flexibility to meet joint force requirements, it diminishes warfighting effectiveness
by not clearly defining an organizational structure that provides measured readiness, focused
training, integrated command and control, and specific supporting relationships.
Additionally, the current force presentation model does not communicate the diversity of Air
Force missions, domains, and capabilities for the current and emerging fight. Ultimately, it is
not easily understood by Airmen, joint partners, Congress, and the American public. Force
presentation transformation efforts seek to: maximize warfighting effectiveness, while
accepting potential decreases in efficiency; enable focused training and foster unity of
command by prioritizing unit integrity; and bolster the ability to communicate readiness and
risks to the United Sates Joint Force and Congress. This critical area is a foundation of the
FA-2 effort and course of action development will continue into the 2nd quarter of 2018.
Deployed Teaming is complementary to Force Presentation and will increase Airmen

readiness and overall Airmen support, while still meeting joint warfighting demand signals.
Over the last 16 years of war, the Air Force has migrated from deploying as teams to often
deploying as individual Airmen. While efficient, this construct limits effectiveness as the Air
Force’s best work is accomplished by training, deploying, employing, and redeploying as
teams. The FA-2 team discovered a better way of teaming its deployed Airmen in order to
strengthen overall resilience and readiness. After analyzing 700,000 Air Force deployments,
the team developed a Deployed Teaming model, which is currently being implemented.
Soon, the Air Force will no longer deploy Airmen by themselves (with some exceptions) into
the fight and will return to deploying as teams.
Joint Warfighting Headquarters is a parallel effort to rejuvenate the Air Force’s ability to
command and control a Joint Task Force (JTF). The Air Force has historically been
underrepresented in providing the core capability of a JTF Headquarters. Unlike the other
services who have organic command and control capability and organizational structures into
which a joint force can integrate, the Air Force relies on centralized control. The CSAF
tasked 9th Air Force in conjunction with FA-2 to remedy this problem and restore the Air
Force’s ability to deploy a core JTF Headquarters with a capability to command and control
joint forces across all domains, anywhere in the world. This will enable us to lead air-centric
joint operations, but will also refine and optimize the Air Force’s joint command and control
processes. It will provide further development opportunities for Airmen to operate in and
lead in joint environments. In the near term, the Air Force will have the ability to command
and control any JTF or joint operation.
9
Numbered Air Force and Wing Inspections instills Joint Warfighting Excellence by ensuring
that the Air Force continues to focus on and assess joint warfighting capabilities.
See Appendix J, Structures:
 Force Presentation Model (FPM) Improvement) – describes the methodology and
background for developing alternative force presentation options in order to optimize
warfighting effectiveness across the conflict continuum
 Deployed Teaming – illuminates the background and context underpinning the Air
Force’s new teaming construct for deploying Airmen
 Numbered Air Force and Wing Inspections – identifies opportunities to improve the
Air Force’s inspection program to measure and assess joint and warfighting readiness
 Strengthen Air Force Institutional Identity – denotes an area for future study in order
to strengthen Air Force institutional identity via culturally organizing around
functional communities
 Joint Task Force Future Concepts – indicates an area for future study to define the
design principles and requirements for a JTF-capable organization optimized for the
anticipated operational environment in 2030
 Joint Task Force Next-Steps – identifies a proposed methodology and framework for
applying the lessons learned from 9th Air Force’s JTF standup to future joint
development considerations
 Deployment Training – denotes an area for further study to define the Air Force’s
deployment training
Retain
Research indicates that functional or “tribal” development is valued over joint experiences.
To prepare and retain a stronger joint force now and in the future, the Air Force should value
joint exposure and opportunities. The Air Force should adapt processes and systems that
encourage and reward Airmen to participate in joint assignments while fostering a culture
that values joint broadening. See Appendix K, Retain:
 Air Force Equivalency Credit for Joint Positions – identifies a concept for granting
Air Force command or school credit for personnel who fill key joint roles to enable
increased joint breadth and depth for high-potential Airmen
 Reward Air Force Personnel with Specialized Joint Education Training Experience –
describes ways the Air Force can incentivize and reward Airmen who seek and
complete joint training, education, or experiences
Conclusion
FA-2’s mission is to optimize both Airmen and structures to ensure development and preparation
to succeed in joint warfighting, now and into the future. Airmen repeatedly demonstrate that they
are highly capable by offering an unparalleled strategic perspective, asymmetric solutions,
unique problem solving abilities, and multifaceted leadership skills. This flight plan depicts ways
to build on these distinct attributes/qualities to ensure our Airmen continue to excel and are ready
for the future fight. Through its 26 projects/tasks this plan serves as the roadmap to reach the
CSAF’s desired end state where Airmen and our structures are organized and ready to integrate
into, influence, and lead joint operations. From doctrine, education and training, oversight, career
10
development, structures, and retention of joint Airmen, the Air Force will evolve to sustain Joint
Warfighting Excellence.
11
Appendix A – Key Concepts

Several key concepts must be embraced to ensure the Air Force is prepared to support and meet
the intent of the CSAF when pursuing FA-2 objectives.
Airpower and what our Air Force traditionally brings to the joint team is foundational to all
current and future joint campaigns. Strengthening how the Air Force organizes, trains, and
presents forces to combatant commanders, and how we build joint leaders with the tools,
experience, and training to both support and lead joint teams is critical to success.
This deliberate evolution will be a long-term endeavor. This plan reflects the steps the Air Force
can quickly execute, as well as long-term strategies that will take years to fully implement. We
must prepare our Airmen now for their role in a complex, rapidly evolving future fight across
multiple domains. Through a deliberate evolution, we must be ready for a transforming security
environment by developing leaders and structures that consistently think, plan, fight, and lead in
a joint environment.
The mission and end state for FA-2 are aligned with the overarching themes of all three CSAF
initiatives. Joint Warfighting Excellence, Globally Integrated Operations, and Airmen organized
and ready to integrate into, influence, and lead joint operations are the central principles and
desired end state for each Focus Area. Subsequently, the FA-2 mission is to deliberately develop
Airmen and structures organized and ready to integrate into, influence, and lead joint operations
in future environments.
FA-2 establishes force design principles in both force development and force presentation. While
many of the ideas and concepts will lead to intangible changes such as modifications to
education and training curricula, some of the proposed recommendations will convey material
changes.
Joint Warfighting Excellence

Joint Warfighting Excellence is a responsibility of the Air Force to our joint, coalition, and
interagency team. Addressing the global challenges of today with increasingly unpredictable
state-sponsored activity requires a simultaneous, coordinated team response. Each service is
designed to gain control over and then exploit domains in defense of the United States and our
allies. However, joint teams work best when every service has a seat at the table and brings their
unique culture and problem solving approach. It is important that the voice of Airmen, with a
culture and perspective born from dominating Air, Space, and Cyberspace remains relevant to
military operations design dialogue.
Joint Warfighting Excellence is a function of organization, leadership development, operations,

technology, sustainment, and protection of the force, and what ties each of the Focus Areas
together. Although FA-2 is centered on the organizational and leadership development aspects of
Joint Warfighting Excellence, there is inevitable overlap and synergy achieved by synchronizing
efforts with the other focus areas.
Appendix A 12
In terms of the future conflict, Joint Warfighting Excellence will go to the leader who can control
his or her forces to create multiple dilemmas from multiple domains, achieve precision speed,
and maneuver kinetic and non-kinetic forces. This may include some key abilities: engage
globally and respond immediately, handle traditional and non-traditional threats, technological
superiority, flexibility in organization and employment of force, agility and speed in execution,
and economy of force. Success in executing this conceptual, integrated operational aspect of
Joint Warfighting Excellence is dependent on Globally Integrated Operations through multi-
domain command and control.
Globally Integrated Operations

Globally Integrated Operations is the force development and operational concept of the Joint
Force. Described in the Capstone Concept for Joint Operations (CCJO): Joint Force 20202 it
explains how the joint force should prepare for the security environment we will soon face. It
requires a globally postured joint force to quickly combine capabilities with mission partners
across domains, echelons, geographic boundaries, and organizational affiliations. These
networks of forces and partners will form, evolve, dissolve, and reform in different arrangements
in time and space with significantly greater fluidity than today’s Joint Force. The concept of
Globally Integrated Operations aims to accelerate and expand how the joint force musters
decisive force. At its heart, the concept envisions the integration of emerging capabilities with
new ways of fighting and collaborating.
Globally Integrated Operations consist of eight key elements:

 Mission command
 Seize, retain, and exploit the initiative
 Global agility
 Partnering
 Flexibility in establishing Joint Forces
 Cross-domain synergy
 Use of flexible, low-signature capabilities
 Increasingly discriminate to minimize unintended consequences
Applying these eight ideas together will leverage present and future sources of U.S. military
advantage to improve tempo and adaptation. Globally Integrated Operations will enable
commanders to cope with uncertainty, complexity, and rapid change. It will improve the
commander’s ability to tailor and scale their force as required.
Globally Integrated Operations are the result of proper employment of multi-domain command
and control. The future of battle is multi-domain. This is more than the ability to work in
multiple domains or operations in one domain supporting or complementing operations in
another domain. An advanced multi-domain Concept of Operations (CONOPS) will exploit
current and new capabilities as well as integrate joint and coalition capabilities across all military
operations. It will allow the Air Force to see more opportunities and generate more options for
2
Joint Chiefs of Staff, Capstone Concept for Joint Operations (CCJO): Joint Force 2020 (10 September 2012)
[http://dtic.mil/doctrine/concepts/ccjo_jointforce2020.pdf]
Appendix A 13
our Nation’s leaders. If the joint force air component commander or joint force commander are
leading a campaign, the Air Force will be responsible for the delivery and articulation of joint
fires. This responsibility mandates that the Air Force master multi-domain command and control
in order to strengthen joint leaders and teams.
This evolution in our command-and-control capabilities requires new thinking, new training, and
new technologies or new ways of using older technology. We will need to integrate real-time
information from a variety of sources and evaluate that information as fast as systems can
process it. If an enemy blocks actions in one domain, we will quickly adjust to attack or defend
from another. The future of operations that are multi-domain will be high velocity, agile, and
joint by their very nature. The elements to make command and control work are situational
awareness, rapid decision making, and the ability to direct forces to achieve commander’s intent.
The first essential element is situational awareness. Our ability to collect and distribute data and
transform it into intelligence is robust, but we need to better integrate non-traditional sources of
information. We also need to leverage our interagency, commercial, and foreign partners’
capabilities. To make sense of that volume of information, we need common architectures,
standardized data formatting, increased machine learning, artificial intelligence systems, and
better integration to rapidly identify, analyze, synthesize, and present timely decision-quality
intelligence to the right leader.
Situational awareness is most powerful when it enables effective and timely decision making at
the right level whether tactical, operational, or strategic. Making decisions at the needed
operational tempo presents a human as well as a technical challenge. We must continue to
develop and empower Airmen at all levels with the skills for joint planning, battle management,
and a better understanding of how to optimize joint capabilities across multiple domains. We
need both leaders and tools that can visualize multiple battlespaces and execute rapid decision
making in any type of conflict.
Advanced command and control capabilities that are multi-domain must enable commanders to
leverage this enhanced decision making capability to direct forces across domains and missions.
A continuous feedback loop includes command direction but also real-time reporting of the
changing battlespace, battle management or emerging threats and opportunities, and dynamic
status updates of forces, their supporting structures, and enabling elements.
More broadly, Globally Integrated Operations will encourage collaboration across the joint force
and with partners. It will allow stakeholders to bring different perspectives and capabilities to
bear on complex challenges. Finally, by enhancing military effectiveness even as United States
(U.S.) forces grow smaller, it will allow us to be better stewards of fiscal resources as we defend
the nation and its interests.
Appendix A 14
Appendix B – Team Organization

Major General Brian Killough was selected by the CSAF to lead FA-2 efforts. He appointed
three members to create his leadership team: Col Bryan Cannady as his Chief of Staff,
Lieutenant Colonel Eric Peterson as his lead Action Officer, and Chief Master Sergeant Ronald
Thompson as his Senior Enlisted Leader (Figure 2). An operational planning team was formed
during a 2016 FA-2 Kickoff Conference to form projects/tasks, identify key stakeholders, and
link SMEs to project/task teams. Core team members (Active Duty, Guard, Reservists, and
Civilians) were resourced from across the Air Force and designated as Project Leaders for the
entire effort. Five Lines of Effort (LOEs) were formulated and supported by custom-built
working groups consisting of cross-functional SMEs from across enterprise (Figure 2). The Core
Team led and fused efforts ensuring alignment of LOEs with unified goals, objectives, and
mutually supportive tasks. This cross-functional enterprise effort was synchronized through
periodic status updates, conferences, and common milestones.
Figure 2, Focus Area 2 Organizational Construct
Appendix B 15
During the initial mission analysis, the FA-2 team developed an operational approach wherein
the three CSAF directed objectives were dissected across five mutually supporting LOEs:
1) educate and train, 2) career development, 3) optimized teaming, 4) Joint warfighting
headquarters, and 5) change management (Figure 1 and 2). Education and Training and Career
Development specifically target objective 1 by developing credible joint warfighters. Optimized
Teaming matches objective 3 by creating a sustainable employment model to the joint force.
Joint Warfighting Headquarters (HQ) specifically addresses the objective of fielding capable
joint structures. Change Management encompasses the other four lines of effort and is ultimately
aimed at recognizing the importance of addressing organizational and cultural changes through
focused strategic messaging at all levels of the Air Force while pursuing these efforts.
The importance of Change Management cannot be overstated; it is focused on leveraging a

change management strategy to ensure FA-2 efforts are successful. Each team is chartered to
address organizational and cultural institutional change management throughout the lifecycle of
their project/task. Identifying and analyzing stakeholders, addressing barriers, promoting benefit
analysis communication strategies, and working to build a strong narrative explaining the “Why”
for each project/task will increase the chance of success. These five communication messages are
the backbone of why FA-2 efforts are critical to the future force:
 The Fight – For those who have spent time downrange and have seen the
interconnectivity of globalization realized in the age of information, the fight is no longer
linear with clear lines of phasing or along traditional nation-state borders. Whether at
the tactical, operational, or strategic level, no United States service will ever go it alone
again
 The Force – We are no longer just an “air” force, but have various forces across all
domains
 Our Voice – Since 1947, Airmen established that airpower required a unique voice in the
fight. As we stepped to the table, we offered solutions for our Nation that no other service
could provide
 Our Mission – As our force steps forward with a clear voice to answer our Nation’s call,
we must strike a balance to ensure we evolve our Airmen and structures from traditional,
regional air warfare to a force that transcends regions, extends across the globe, and can
outpace our adversary’s thinking to ensure our Air Force is postured to provide the
asymmetric force that our Nation requires
 Our Airmen – To each Airman, this is your call: To understand the joint fight, our force,
and our unique voice as a joint teammate within the DOD and the greater whole of
government effort. Each of you plays a vital role as a service force and in the joint fight
to ensure the strength that our Nation requires
FA-2 is collaborating with SAF/PA specialists to create and implement an initiative-wide

Strategic Communications plan, which outlines stakeholders, delivers general and targeted
Appendix B 16
messaging, and outlines a calendar for engaging with audiences. Each project/task is expected to
develop an open and transparent communication strategy to ensure key stakeholders, target
audiences, cross-functional teams, senior leaders, and internal/external organizations are aware
of their efforts.
The FA- 2 Champion and team members will proactively collaborate with and influence internal
and external agencies, key stakeholders, SMEs, and senior leaders as a means to signify the
importance of developing joint Airmen. Each project’s communication plan will contribute to
strengthening the importance of FA-2 efforts.
Appendix B 17
Appendix C – Project/Task Execution Plan Overview

Both Figure 3, FA-2 Project/Task Timelines and Table C.1., Projects/Tasks Overview depict
overviews of the various projects/tasks supporting FA-2 goals and objectives. Figure 3 depicts
when each project/task began within FA-2. It also depicts the projected Office of Primary
Responsibility (OPR) transition dates and projected completion dates. Table C.1. lists each
project/task. The “Project Title & Actions” column lists the title of each Project/Task and
provides a brief overview of the actions to be accomplish by FA-2 personnel. The next two
columns list OPRs and Offices of Collateral Responsibility (OCR) designated for each task.
Listed notional OPRs and OCRs, depicted with asterisk(s), will be validated once a project/task
transitions from Phase 2 to Phase 3 (Appendix D and Figure 4). “*” and “**” notations are
defined at the end of Table C.1. The last two columns list the projected FA-2 to OPR transition
and estimated project/task completion dates.
Appendix C 18
Figure 3, FA-2 Project/Task Timelines

Appendix C 19
Appendix C 20
Table C.1. – Project/Task Execution Overview

OPR Projected
Transition Completion
Project Titles & Activities OPR(S) OCR(S)
Date Date
(MMMYYYY) (MMMYYYY)
Air Force and Joint Doctrine: Analyze Air Force and Joint Doctrine for congruence
and consistency in both terminology and meaning with the goal of better aligning Air
Force doctrine with joint doctrine. Through analysis, provide recommendations for
LeMay Not
improving the congruence and consistency of Air Force and joint doctrine. In order Apr 2018 Oct 2019
Center Applicable
to meet the Focus Area’s 2 end state of transforming its leaders so that they can
consistently think, plan, and fight joint, Airmen must be able to understand and apply
Joint lexicon and doctrine.
Education and Training Assessment: Research and provide a framework and initial
vector for the education and training community to assess its capabilities and gaps **FA-2
AETC
and respond to defined requirements for the desired future Airmen. It provides a way ETT May 2018 Nov 2019
FD/CC
forward for the education and training community to support the Air Force AF/A1
imperative to strengthen joint leaders.
Joint Core Competencies: Research, assess and identify the Air Force’s current state
AF/A1 AETC/
of joint warfighting competency development and provide recommendations to
AETC AU May 2018 Nov 2019
improve the Joint Warfighting capacity and capability of Air Force officers, enlisted,
ETT USAFA
and civilian personnel.
Education and Training Catalog: Identify and catalog relevant education and AF/A1
training opportunities to help define paths to success and strengthen joint leaders. AETC AF/A9
Apr 2018 Apr 2019
ETT MAJCOM/
A3
Joint Professional Military Education Exchanges: Research and assess how the Air AETC
Force can better select, position, and outplace personnel who attend sister-service AETC/
and international Professional Military Education exchange programs. AF/A1 AU Apr 2018 Apr 2019
CFMs
EET
Appendix C 21
Joint Exercise Study: Research, assess, and provide recommendations on how the
Air Force can better utilize Joint Exercises to strengthen Joint Airmen proficiency.
Conduct a gap analysis on the tasking, selection, and placement processes of Airmen
into Joint Exercises. Provide recommendations on how the Air Force should govern
AF/A3 ACC/A3 Apr 2018 Jun 2019
its participation in Joint Exercises to maximize development of Joint experience.
Research the feasibility of implementing an Exercise Strategic Calendar. Provide
recommendations on how the Air Force can better educate its commanders and
Airmen on the value of Joint exercises across the spectrum.
Optimizing Air Force Joint Education and Training for the 21st Century (Preparing
*AF/A3* *AETC/
Airmen for the Joint Environment): Research and identify potential opportunities
AETC AU Apr 2018 Apr 2022
and options to strengthen joint education and training for a 21st Century joint
*ETT *AFRL
warfighting environment.
Joint Oversight Concepts: Research and develop an organizational construct AF/A1
authorized to provide joint strategic direction, policy oversight, and/or career AF/A3
development guidance across the Air Force enterprise. AF/A1 MAJCOM/
Apr 2018 Aug 2018
AETC A1L
CFMs
AFPC
Support Air Force Personnel in Isolated Joint Duty Locations: Research and analyze
current processes and systems used to support members fulfilling joint roles. Identify AF/A1
and address gaps in support to Air Force personnel across the spectrum of joint AETC/ AFPOA Apr 2018 Oct 2021
environments in order to better prepare and reinforce Airmen assigned to joint AU
positions, deployments, or exercises.
Joint Experiences Working Group (JEWG): Research and develop the processes and AF/A3
tools to deliberately develop Airmen (Total Force officer, enlisted, and civilian) for AFPC
AF/A1
Joint leadership across the talent management spectrum. While tracking will foster AFPOA
AETC Apr 2018 May 2019
and enable better management of joint experienced Airmen, it will also help to FAAs
AFPC
incentivize our Airmen to seek “valued” joint experiences to strengthen the overall FAMs
Air Force. CFMs
Appendix C 22
Advanced Studies Group Utilization: Research and assess whether changes are
needed to the current Advanced Studies Group (ASG) outplacement and utilization AF/
program. Air Force Advanced Studies Group graduates are typically high- A5/8 AFPC
performing officers that have considerable potential to reach senior levels of joint AF/A1 AF/A3 Apr 2018 Aug 2018
leadership. Increasing the placement of highly talented officers into the joint AETC/ ACC
environment demonstrates to the broader enterprise that the Air Force values joint AU
broadening.
Vector Air Force Personnel into Joint Duty: Research and make recommendations to
AFPC
improve the Air Force’s ability to effectively vector personnel into joint CFMs Apr 2018 Oct 2018
AF/A1
opportunities.
Strengthen Enlisted Talent Management: Research, assess, and make
recommendations to improve Air Force Enlisted methods to identify and nurture an *AF/A1 *CFMs
Apr 2018 Oct 2018
Airman’s potential and ultimately vector and position personnel to increase *AFPC *MFMs
effectiveness within joint roles.
Joint Attributes (Qualities) Working Group: Research and evaluate how the Air
Force can improve its assessment process of Airmen attributes/qualities/skills to AF/A1
AF/A1
more effectively vector and assign personnel into joint positions. Working group will AETC Apr 2018 Apr 2023
711 HPW
explore opportunities to properly develop and align Airmen in order to grow highly AFRL
proficient joint leaders.
Airmen Attributes/Qualities for Recruiting and Accessions Study: Research and
determine if current accessions/recruiting standards, favoring Science, Technology, AF/A1 AFRS
Jan 2019 Dec 2019
Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) backgrounds, is aligned with expected future AF/A9 CFMs
environment and the CSAF’s intent to strengthen Joint leaders and teams.
Identify Key Billets for Joint Development: Research and identify key joint billets *AF/A9
that the Air Force should target for deliberate joint development for officers, *AF/A1 *SAF/MR Apr 2018 Jul 2018
enlisted, and civilians. CFMs
Civilian Joint Leader Development: Research and assess how to improve deliberate SAF/AA AETC
joint development of Civilian Airmen. Apr 2018 Aug 2018
AF/A1 CFMs
Force Presentation Model (FPM): Develop a force presentation construct to
AF
maximize enduring warfighting effectiveness and readiness to defeat current and **FA-2 Oct 2018 Sep 2020
Enterprise
emerging adversaries and support national security objectives.
Appendix C 23
Deployed Teaming: Increase warfighting effectiveness and Airmen resiliency

through establishment of a minimum team size; begin the transition to a revitalized
force presentation focused more on units and capabilities in lieu of individual AF/A3
AF/A4 Oct 2017 Apr 2019
Airmen. Limit deployments through the formation of “teams” to provide mutual **FA-2
support during the entire deployment continuum of prepare-deploy-redeploy-
reintegrate.
Numbered Air Force and Wing Inspection: Research and assess how the Air Force
SAF/IGI AFIA Apr 2018 Apr 2020
needs to reform its inspection program to strengthen its joint leaders and teams.
Strengthen Air Force Institutional Identity: Research, assess, and generate
recommendations on how the Air Force can strengthen its institutional identity to **FA-2 **FA-2 Apr 2018 Apr 2019
help break the propensity to culturally organize around functional guilds.
Joint Task Force Future Concepts: Research and establish principles and
requirements for structure and organization for an Air Force led JTF in future
operating environments (2030). Identify gaps in current JTF models relative to AF/A5 9 AF Apr 2018 Apr 2019
envisioned requirements and develop a roadmap for JTF evolution. This work should
be informed by JTF Headquarters’ evolution.
Joint Task Force Next-Steps: Capture lessons learned from 9 AF/JTF effort, from AF/A5-8
both a process and a personnel education and training perspective and develop a AF/A3
ACC
plan to apply those lessons to build future AF JTF HQs capability and better develop AF/A9 Apr 2018 Apr 2020
9 AF
future joint leaders. LeMay
Center
Deployment Training: Research and assess Rear Mission Support Element’s
(RMSEs) evolution into a model that provides leadership, best practices, research,
**FA-2 **FA-2 Apr 2018 Apr 2019
support and/or just-in-time joint training and then make recommendations for
alignment and governance for this organization.
Air Force Equivalency Credit while in Joint Assignments: Research the assumed GCC
need to provide command equivalency credit for Joint/Joint Task Force positions in MAJCOM/
order to provide more time to increase depth in Joint Matters and sustain value in A1
joint experience. Conduct analysis to determine if an opportunity exists for enlisted CFMs
**FA-2 Dec 2017 Apr 2018
positions to acquire equivalency credit at higher echelons of rank. Research and SAF/PA
assess potential enterprise processes and mechanisms to grant Joint equivalency AF/A9
credit at regular intervals or through recurring Air Force refresh opportunities. J1
J7
Appendix C 24
* SAF/MR
Reward Air Force Personnel with Specialized Joint Education Training Experience:
*SAF/FM
Establish an overarching process that recognizes these joint Airmen *AF/A1 Apr 2018 Oct 2019
*AF/HO
accomplishments.
*CFMs
* Notional OPRs/OCRs will be validated once a project/task completes Phase 2 and transitions to Phase 3. Project/Task Phases are described in Appendix D.
** FA-2 depicts the projects/tasks that have not started or are evolving.
Appendix C 25
Appendix D – Concept-to-Project Methodologies

This appendix will describe the conceptual and detailed planning methodologies used for each
project. Below is a list of known challenges considered while taking these concepts, projects, and
tasks through each phase. These challenges assisted in devising the listed themes, key concepts,
and projects/tasks.
 Create a coherent and acceptable vision  Train in a joint environment

 Generate an urgency for action  Define and build the right credentials
 Overcome institutional resistance  Attract, Assess, and Recruit the right people
 Gain joint buy-in  Value and reward joint careers
 Alight the enterprise with common vision  Develop joint focused career tracks
 Certify Air Force Joint Task Force
 Manage/track joint education and training
Headquarters
 Instill Operational Art  Develop force presentation model for joint
knowledge/experience warfighting
 Inculcate joint language/understanding  Ensure interoperability with partners
 Provide the right joint experiences  Define what future command and control
(C2) looks like
Four distinct phases were used to create each concept (with one exception), conduct research,
perform analysis, and deliver viable recommendations (Figure 4). It also depicts activity
milestones associated with each development phase.
Phase 1: Frame - Problem Scoping and Gap Analysis

Phase 1 defined the design problem through problem scoping, challenge exploration, and the
establishment of goals, objectives, and tasks. The problem framing process used several guiding
principles that deliberately analyzed the situation to gain a deep understanding of the current
environment. This enabled the ability to map system interrelationships and establish system
boundaries. This allowed problems to be structured, broken down into component parts, and
developed into a problem statement with a broad visualization of a solution.
Through challenge exploration, information was gathered to develop central questions and
further refine the problem. Gap analysis identified undesirable conditions and allowed evaluation
of tendencies, trends, and tensions. Qualitative and quantitative causal analysis examined
undesirable conditions and identified key factors that differentiated problem symptoms from
causes. A Strength, Weakness, Opportunity and Threat (SWOT) analysis was applied to each
project. Initial identification of key stakeholders, SMEs, and team members occurred during this
phase.
Key factors were then prioritized at the macro level to establish goals, objectives, and tasks. This
defined well-structured problem sets that generated a clear vision, hypotheses for problem sub-
sets, and tasks for problem sub-sets.
Appendix D 26
Key Outputs:
 Defined well-structured problem-sets
 Developed clear objectives, goals, and tasks
 Formed key questions
 Synchronized work-plan across LOEs
o Established tasks and dependencies
o Linked key questions and targeted organizations to tasks
 Completed initial Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership, Personnel,
Facilities and Policy (DOTMLPF-P) research gap analysis
 Completed SWOT analysis
o Defined risks, assumptions, constraints, and resources
Phase 2: Design - Concept Development and Modeling

Concepts and model development are the main aspects for this phase. During concepts
development, a collaborative research and analysis approach was used to authenticate and
validate initial tasks to concept(s) to recommendations. During model development, concepts
were synthesized to understand linkages between design components and investigate
relationships across LOEs. Relationships across problem-sets must also be evaluated for
inconsistencies. Then, test concepts were validated for viability and feasibility by outlining
resources against risks, side effects, and long-term repercussions. Validation will refine higher-
order objectives.
Key Outputs:
 Refined objectives based on research, analysis, and modeling results
 Linked conceptual designs to every LOE problem-set and subsidiary tasks
 Tested designs for validity according to design criteria (e.g., original objectives, costs,
risks, side effects, etc.)
 Completed tasks through SWOT and DOTMLPF-P research and analysis
 Made existing or new processes/systems integration or modification determinations
 Integrate Reserve Component into all program areas
Phase 3: Build - Course of Action (COA) Development and Analysis

COA development and analysis across all LOEs occurs during this phase. After developing COA
evaluation criteria, combined models were formed into detailed COAs for each LOE. Analysis of
different model combinations by SMEs generated recommendation opportunities that were then
presented to key stakeholders and Senior Leaders for validation. COAs are analyzed and
wargamed to understand interrelationships, incongruities, and inconsistencies between LOEs.
The resulting data from each COA was compared back to the evaluation criteria. A single LOE
COA was selected based on an enterprise decision.
Key Outputs:
 Developed COA evaluation criteria
 Detailed COAs created
 Validated COA by SME
 Selected single COA
Appendix D 27
Phase 4: Document - Flight Plan Development

A Flight Plan, inclusive of contributing projects/tasks data, will be used to document the initial,
ongoing, and future aspects of FA-2 efforts. Periodic updates to the Flight Plan will occur as a
means to ensure consistency and continuity as projects/tasks evolve.
Key Output:
 Comprehensive Flight Plan
o Coherent Vision and Mission Statement
o Transparent and communally-accepted Imperative
o Understandable and overt Objectives, Tasks, and Responsibilities
o Outline of who, what, where, when, and why
o Discernible roadmap, timeline, and milestones
Appendix D 28
Figure 4, Phased Conceptual and Detailed Planning
Appendix D 29
Appendix E – Communication Plan

Communication is a key success factor for FA-2 efforts. Each project/task is expected to develop
an open and transparent communication plan to ensure key stakeholders, target audiences, cross-
functional teams, senior leaders, and internal/external organizations are aware of their efforts.
This should be done, as necessary, from development to execution. FA-2 team members will
communicate with different audiences for a variety of reasons: 1) research, 2) analysis, 3)
forming teams, 4) promoting proposals, 5) collaboration, and 6) briefings to multiple
organizations. The FA-2 Champion and team members will proactively collaborate with and
influence internal and external agencies, key stakeholders, SMEs, and senior leader leaders as a
means to signify the importance of developing Airmen that are organized and ready to integrate,
influence, and lead joint operations. Each project’s communication plan will contribute to
strengthening the importance of FA-2 efforts, enhance and maintain key relationships, and
sustain those key relationships to meet intended goals and objectives.
Appendix E 30
Appendix F – Doctrine
Strengthening Air Force doctrine is a pivotal part of the FA-2 effort. Doctrine plays a critical role in the development of our Airmen as
it represents the Air Force’s central values and beliefs on how we organize and employ our forces. Doctrine also serves as a critical
reference point for fostering shared language and comprehension across cross-functional communities. Transforming Air Force
doctrine to bring it in closer alignment with joint doctrine will not only reduce the seams within Air Force specialties, but to the wider
joint community. By reducing the gap between joint doctrine and Air Force doctrine, the Air Force can reduce confusion caused by
conflicting terminology, organization, and concepts. In parallel, more consistently incorporating joint lexicon into Air Force doctrine
will help infuse basic joint awareness.
Transforming Air Force doctrine will serve as a significant step toward FA-2’s end state of strengthening its leaders so they can
consistently think, plan, and fight joint. It lays the groundwork for building Airmen who understand and apply joint lexicon, concepts,
and doctrine.
Project Title: Air Force and Joint Doctrine

Project POCs: Project Lead: Lt Col. Edmund X. Loughran, AF/A3TS
Supporting Contract: Research and Development (RAND) Corporation assessment of Air Force and
Joint Doctrine.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Analyze Air Force and Joint Doctrine for congruence and consistency in both terminology and
Statement: meaning with the goal of better aligning Air Force doctrine with joint doctrine.
Problem Statement: Is the Air Force doctrine giving Airmen the tools to integrate into, influence, and
lead joint teams? Specifically, does Air Force doctrine use joint terms, promote joint processes and
principles, and encourage an integrated joint mindset?
Project Status: Completed.
Approach: RAND started this process by developing an analytical framework for assessing the overall alignment
between any service’s doctrine and joint doctrine.
First, RAND identified the key areas of doctrine for comparison: organization of doctrine; assumptions
about operating environment and missions; operational principles including the role of airpower in joint
operations; roles, responsibilities, and processes; as well as terminology.
Appendix F 31
Second, RAND developed criteria for assessing the substantive alignment and tone of a service’s
doctrine. The substantive alignment of documents ranges from significantly divergent to significantly
aligned with joint doctrine. Criteria for significant alignment include: service principles, processes, and
terms are consistent with joint principles; service doctrine introduces key joint topics; and linkages to
joint documents and processes are present. Tone could range from service-centric to joint. Criteria for a
joint tone include describing the joint context and the joint force commander’s role; portraying the
service as a unique, rather than superior, contributor; using collaborative language; and portraying other
services as contributors to a joint team.
Interviews with doctrine developers revealed that there are several reasons that Air Force and joint
doctrine may be divergent. Air Force doctrine developers’ preference for brevity and the Air Force’s
use of documents other than operational doctrine, such as Air Force instructions, explain some gaps
(defined as lack of discussion of key joint concepts) in Air Force doctrine. In other cases, joint doctrine
may be recently published, and Air Force doctrine may not have been updated yet to reflect any
changes.
Finally, the Air Force sometimes presents new or different concepts in its service doctrine as part of its
effort to advocate for changes in joint doctrine. Although these considerations may justify divergence,
this report describes all differences, regardless of the reasons behind them.
Parallel Groups: None.
Recommendations Broad revisions to doctrine are needed in order to strengthen Air Force joint leaders and teams. Simply
Summary: stated, this study recommends that Air Force Doctrine should: 1) Mirror the joint doctrine framework;
2) Elevate operational doctrine within the Air Force culture to expose Airmen to doctrine throughout
their career; and 3) Provide Airmen with opportunities to exercise key doctrinal concepts.
Acknowledging that organizational change is a deliberate process, this study offers eight
recommendations that can be implemented in the near-term that would aid laying a foundation for
developing future Air Force joint leaders and teams.
Supporting RAND’s formal 235-page report “Strengthening Joint Leaders and Team: Potential Contributions
Documentation: of Air Force Doctrine” is in draft format with a planned release in early 2018. The study depicts in
detail RAND’s research methodology and gap analysis of Air Force Doctrine.
Appendix F 32
Details: In order to provide the timely analysis needed for the CSAF FA-2 effort, the study limited its focus to
only the gaps between Air Force and Joint doctrine. Not included in this scope of effort is an analysis of
other service documents.
Recommendation 1: Align the internal organization of annexes with joint publications where appropriate and feasible.
OPR/OCR: OPR: LeMay Center.
Recommended More closely aligning the internal organization of Air Force doctrine documents to follow the internal
Next Steps: organization of joint doctrine where there are substantive correlations could make it easier for Airmen
to find related information.
Execution Timeline: Near-Term.
Recommendation 2: Summarize key joint concepts within Air Force doctrine annexes and provide explicit references to
joint publications.
Recommended Air Force doctrine developers currently seek to minimize repetition with joint doctrine in order to write
Next Steps: shorter documents that Airmen are more likely to read. However, some limited repetition of joint
concepts, processes, and terms is necessary to orient Airmen to a topic. While in-text hyperlinks to joint
publications are helpful for Airmen that want additional information, they are not a substitute for brief
summaries of joint constructs within the Doctrine Topic Modules (DTMs). The annex should be
explicit if an Airman needs to read an entire joint publication or section before reading a DTM. Every
annex should provide explicit, in-text references to relevant joint publications, not just hyperlinks.
Recommendation 3: Create graphics to show connections between service and joint doctrine.
Recommended Graphics can be another way to help Airmen understand the relationship between Air Force and joint
Next Steps: processes and principles. For example, Air Force targeting doctrine has a very helpful graphic that
shows how the steps of the air tasking cycle relate to the joint targeting cycle. Joint doctrine also
frequently has diagrams that show the relationship between national and operational level organizations
and processes that could serve as models.
Recommendation 4: When Air Force graphics depict identical relationships or processes to those found in joint doctrine, use
the joint diagram, rather than creating a new Air Force diagram, to reinforce the alignment.
Appendix F 33
Recommended In some cases, Air Force annexes describe relationships or processes that are consistent with joint
Next Steps: doctrine. In these cases, using the joint diagram, rather than creating a new Air Force diagram could
reinforce the alignment. For example, special operations doctrine shows the same command and control
relationships as joint doctrine, but the figures have a different visual appearance. This makes it more
difficult for the reader to see that the diagrams are consistent.

Recommendation 5: Provide connective tissue to show how Air Force doctrine topics fit together.
Recommended Air Force doctrine appears as a series of DTMs, which can make Air Force doctrine disjointed. The Air
Next Steps: Force should adopt the joint approach and write annexes as books that have a strong internal logic and
clear connections between sections. In relation, the Air Force should revise documents holistically,
rather than simply focusing on a subset of DTMs. While select DTMs may be the focus of a particular
revision, the process should include an assessment of the logic of the entire annex.
Appendix F 34
Recommendation 6: Revise historical vignettes and select senior leader quotes to show Air Force contributions as part of a
joint team.
Recommended The LeMay Center reported that experts in the field often contribute historical vignettes. While these
Next Steps: can be useful to illustrate a particular concept or challenge, they sometimes took on a service-centric
tone. Reviewing and revising these vignettes with attention to how other services and the joint force are
portrayed could improve the overall tone of Air Force annexes. A subsequent slide provides an
example.
The Air Force has some senior leader quotes that note the value of operating in a joint setting. Using
more quotes like these and removing senior leader quotes that emphasize Air Force superiority could
also help to promote a joint mindset.

Recommendation 7: Remove advocacy from Air Force doctrine documents; use another mechanism to advocate for change
to joint doctrine.
Appendix F 35
Recommended Air Force doctrine documents are sometimes intentionally divergent from joint doctrine because the Air
Next Steps: Force is trying to advocate a change in joint doctrine. In some cases these differences are noted, but
contribute to a service-centric tone. In other cases, differences are not described, potentially leading to
confusion in a joint setting. Removing advocacy from doctrine could therefore improve the tone as well
as the substantive alignment of Air Force and joint doctrine. Service experiences should still inform
joint doctrine. Service doctrine documents, which also inform Airmen operating in joint environments,
may simply not be the best mechanism for communicating new ideas to the joint community.
The LeMay Center reported that they lack credibility when advocating for changes to joint doctrine if
an idea is not already present in service doctrine. Therefore, this recommendation may create a tradeoff:
doctrine would be more aligned, but the Air Force may have somewhat less influence in some doctrinal
debates in the joint community.
Recommendation 8: Use outside Air Force reviewers to assess content and tone.
Recommended After substantial revisions to Air Force doctrine documents, a review by an outside expert could be
Next Steps: used to assess both substantive alignment and overall tone. Because doctrine development includes
input from a large number of people, a fresh set of eyes on a document is especially important to ensure
its overall internal logic is sound. This recommendation would require additional resources for the
doctrine development process.
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, OPR transition is projected for April 2018 with full implementation expected by October
2019.
Appendix F 36
Appendix G – Education and Training

The purpose of this appendix is to describe how education and training will contribute to the Air Force imperative to strengthen joint
leaders.
FA-2 has several interdependent efforts dedicated to strengthening joint leaders. Some focus on building the organizational structures
to support joint leaders and their ability to command and control. Others seek to improve the development of Airmen, especially those
who will serve in those organizational structures, and those who will lead or follow in the joint environment. Education and training
play major roles in developing capable Airmen ready for the joint fight.
Many sub-projects under FA-2’s Career Development or Education and Training work streams seek to improve the development of
Airmen into joint leaders. Some projects seek to identify desired joint competencies – what Airmen should be and what they should be
able to do (e.g., revised AF Institutional Competencies List and its subcomponent of Joint Core Competencies). Other projects define
methods to identify, track, and manage experiences and the achievement of those competencies. Still others direct how to credential
Airmen as “qualified” to assume joint leadership responsibilities.
Various DOD entities work to ensure Airmen are sufficiently educated and trained in joint matters; whether through the Joint Officer
Management Program; CJSCI 1800.01E and its required Joint Professional Military Education Learning Areas; CJSCI 1800.15A and
its enlisted Desired Leadership Competencies; or through the Air Force’s own Institutional Competencies, which are detailed in
AFMAN 36-2647. The FA-2 recommendations within this appendix comply with all of these directives.
The Air Force has a rich history of producing strong joint officers. Regardless, we need to better anticipate the future environment. We
recognize the status quo is not good enough to support the future fight and the Air Force must strive to build a better path for Airmen.
More specifically, we need our future development program to ensure that our Airmen:
 Are prepared to lead joint efforts in transregional, multi-domain, multi-component, multi-national, urban, and fast conflict
environments (CSAF at Air Force Association (AFA))
 Are properly exposed to the operational art of air, space, and cyber and integrating these with other domains (CSAF at AFA)
 Are prepared to deal with the amount of data their Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) requires (FA-2 Project Plan)
 Speak the common lexicon of the joint force (FA-2 Project Plan)
 Are comfortable with operational planning and the Op Planning Method (FA-2 Project Plan)
 Understand all aspects of the military instrument of power (FA-2 Project Plan)
 Understand all aspects of the Nation’s instruments of power (Whole of Government) (FA-2 Project Plan)
Appendix G 37
 Possess cross-service and cross-domain understanding (FA-2 Project Plan)

 Are prepared to integrate into, influence, and lead joint operations (Big Rock #2 Update, 14 Sep 2017)
FA-2 has identified six projects within Education and Training to support the imperative of strengthening joint leaders. The first
project area, Education and Training Assessment, provides a framework for the education and training community to assess its
capabilities and gaps and respond to defined requirements for the desired future Airmen. This effort is supported by five additional
education and training efforts. Joint Core Competencies is an effort to define the desired competencies of the future Airmen and is the
yardstick by which we will measure success—expectations of what the future Airmen must “be” and be able to “do.” This effort will
ideally result in positive change to the current Institutional Competencies List. Education and Training Catalog is an effort to identify
existing education and training opportunities for the community to help define paths to success for developing the desired future
Airmen. Professional Military Education Exchanges explores a concept to deliberately reinforce and supplement joint education and
training with appropriate experience after PME. In doing so, it may provide other mechanisms, along with education and training, to
develop the desired competencies we seek in our future Airmen. Likewise, Joint Exercise Study seeks to identify exercises that
reinforce and supplement joint education and training with experience, providing yet another mechanism to develop the desired
competencies we seek in our future Airmen. Finally, the last project, Optimizing Air Force Joint Education and Training for 21st
Century, identifies various ideas to evolve the Air Force’s joint education system across the CoL.
Project Title: Education and Training Assessment

Project POCs: Project Leader: Colonel Christian Watt, Air University, Air War College.
Team Members: Lieutenant Colonel Jared Gude, LeMay Center, Warfighting Education; Majors
Jeffrey Miller and David Yuers, CSAF FA-2.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and provide a framework and initial vector for the education and training
Statement: community to assess its capabilities and gaps and respond to defined requirements for the desired
future Airmen. It provides a way forward for the education and training community to support the
USAF imperative to strengthen joint leaders.
Problem Statement: The Air Force lacks certain required tools and a sufficient framework for the
education and training community to develop a coherent response to the Air Force imperative to
strengthen joint leaders.
Project Status: Phase 2 complete, primary research is complete. Education and Training Team (ETT) formation
(explained below) and creation/assessment of a list of desired competencies for current and future
Airmen (e.g., a revised Institutional Competency List) are required to continue with the framework,
identify opportunities and gaps, and develop a coherent education and training response plan.
Appendix G 38
Approach: We created a framework for education and training to help improve the development of joint leaders.
The focus here is not on what education and training did to develop Airmen in the past, but how
education and training can respond to help develop the desired Airmen of the future. How will
education and training, throughout the CoL, contribute to a strategy for success?
Before proceeding with a description of the specific tasks for education and training community to
perform, a review of key facts and assumptions is important:
 Who to educate and train. There is a resource tradeoff, be it time, money, or attention, associated
with a focus outside of one’s primary job. As such, not every Airman fits the mold to be the target
of all of this development effort
 What to educate and train. Defining Joint Competencies aligns education, training, and
experiences with a common vision of a Joint Airman. We will not purposely succeed until we
clearly define what we want in our future Airmen. The best way to do this is for Air Force leaders,
who best understand joint leadership requirements, and in consult with educators and trainers who
best understand the capabilities of their craft (extant and proposed), to develop a time-specific list
of desired competencies for future Airmen. That is, these experts should work together to clearly
identify what future joint leaders will need to “be” and what they will need to be able to “do”. The
Joint Competencies Working Group, whose efforts are described in the next project area, have
taken a positive step towards doing this in their development of Joint Core Competencies and the
resulting recommended changes to the Air Force Institutional Competencies. Together, these
experts should also identify which of these desired competencies can be developed best through
education, training, and/or experience, as well as which competencies may not be easily
developed in these ways and may simply be possessed and identified for a given Airman to
progress to higher joint responsibilities
 When to educate and train. Education, training, and experience are perishable and need to be
given at the right time in the right way to the right people. Capabilities will change. Doctrine will
change. Memories will fade
 Where to educate and train. All resident and non-resident Air Force education and training
capabilities are available for this effort. Non-Air Force education and training capabilities may not
comply with our new education and training requirements. While the Air Force sends a majority
Appendix G 39
of its enlisted troops and officers through Air Force-owned PME programs through the grades of
Technical Sergeant (NCO Academy) and Captain (Squadron Officer College), the Air Force sends
some Senior NCO Academy enlisted members (E-8) and a large portion of its in-residence
Intermediate Developmental Education (IDE) (O-4) and Senior Developmental Education (SDE)
(O-5/6) officers to non-Air Force PME programs and this mix will not substantively change
 How to educate and train. The newer generations are accustomed to learning differently than the
older generations. The use of educational technology is increasingly familiar to the newer
generations, can be leveraged for efficiency and reach, and we will have the resources and
expertise to do so
In light of these facts and assumptions, education and training experts, in conjunction with Air Force
leaders, should follow this framework to best help FA-2 be successful:
1) Form. Form a team of experts to assess and guide the education and training response to FA-2.
We refer to this team as the Education and Training Team (ETT). This team should include, as a
minimum: experts from all levels of officer, enlisted, and civilian in-residence and distance
learning PME experts from all PME levels, experts from key PCE, training, and accessions
providers (e.g., LeMay, USAFA, ROTC, OTS, and Lackland), command element Instructional
System Design experts (AETC, AETC/AU), and advocates for senior leadership equities.
Functionals should be included since they understand Air Force career path consequences and
equities.
2) Define. The ETT should first validate the desired competencies of our future Airmen—what we
want our future Airmen to “be” and be able to “do,” in coordination with and in support of Air
Force leadership. This is critical—the foundation. If we do not define what we need correctly, we
could get what we get instead of what we need. The new draft Institutional Competencies (which
would include new Joint Core Competencies) could prove sufficient as the list of desired
competencies. Regardless, they should be validated by the ETT. Does the list of competencies
account for all the key elements that a joint leader needs to be and do? Does it account for various
service and agency cultures so our future joint leaders can more effectively communicate with our
partners? Aside from knowing airpower and airpower doctrine, does the list account for joint
doctrine and the potential disconnects with other services doctrine so our future joint leaders can
Appendix G 40
anticipate and avoid coordination problems? Does it account for improved Airman competency in
the land domain—to adeptly arbitrate warfighting choices (e.g., key terrain, population control,
civil services, reestablishment of order) for this common Joint Task Force focus area of
responsibility? The list of desired competencies needs to be measurable and specific as to “when”
the attributes are desired/required as education and training (and experience) can be perishable and
should be delivered at the most effective time to develop the given Airman.
3) Analyze. The ETT should then assess how to best leverage education and training to inculcate the
desired attributes and competencies into Airmen while leveraging individual qualities that lead to
perceived attributes. Which steps of which competencies should be developed by which
mechanisms (education, training, or experience)? Does our current education and training
construct, along with experience, offer the necessary opportunities to inculcate the desired
competencies? If so, what are the paths to success? If not, what gaps in education and/or training
opportunities are there? Can this be overcome by experience or do we need to fix the education
and training opportunity gaps? If so, how? What are the risks to inculcating the desired
competencies if we cannot afford to fix the gaps? Do our current Information Technology (IT)
training solutions meet the needs of a younger generation of Airmen? Are current exercise
opportunities sufficient to provide the necessary joint experience for Airmen?
4) Decide. If analysis shows that our current construct has education or training opportunity gaps that
require resources to fix (e.g., more PCE opportunities or IT training solutions), will those fixes be
resourced? In light of that decision from Air Force leadership, or if no resourcing is required, the
ETT should develop COAs for various paths to best inculcate the desired competencies and
present these COAs to Air Force leadership for decision (e.g., at CORONA).
5) Implement. Upon approval, the ETT should then work with education and training providers to
adapt programs as necessary to accomplish the chosen paths to inculcate the desired competencies
in our Airmen.
6) Assess. The ETT should then flight follow the implementation of approved education and training
changes and define how providers can assess that these desired competencies are being met
(internal evaluation). ETT should also verify directly that these desired competencies are being
met (external evaluation). Measure future Airmen against desired competencies as described in the
proposed revision of Institutional Competencies.
Appendix G 41
7) Improve. Lessons learned should be garnered and fed back into the process to improve education
and training efficacy in inculcating the desired competencies.
Parallel Groups: Joint Core Competencies, Education and Training Catalog, Professional Military Education
Exchanges, Joint Exercise Study.
Recommendations While appropriate research and analysis should be done by a knowledgeable (not necessarily
Summary: volunteer) body of education and training experts and leaders (e.g., the ETT as proposed earlier) to
ensure we have a coherent and viable path to developing the desired future Airmen, the following
findings and recommendations seem apparent already:
Recommendation 1: Form a working body of education and training experts—the ETT—and select an
entity to lead it through the framework
Recommendation 2: Carefully define and validate desired competencies for our future Airmen
Recommendation 3: Create and make readily available an Education and Training Catalog
Additionally, while these recommendations are underway, leaders should prepare to allocate resources
if needed to remedy gaps in education and training.
Recommendation 1: Form the ETT and select an entity to lead it through the framework.
Details: The current body working the education and training contribution to the flight plan lacks certain key
players. It is important to address the education and training contributions corporately as the way
forward may affect every Airman and could be very costly in terms of wasted resources and effort if
we get it wrong.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AETC.
OCR: FA-2 Team; ETT member providers.
Recommended Form the ETT, comprised of experts from all levels of officer, civilian, and enlisted in-residence and
Next Steps: distance learning PME experts from all PME levels, experts from key PCE, training, and accessions
providers (e.g., LeMay, USAFA, ROTC, OTS, Lackland), command element Instructional System
Design experts (AETC, AETC/AU), advocates for senior leadership equities, and possibly
functionals. Select an entity to lead the ETT, perhaps from Force Development Command. Be
mindful of endurance and continuity of the program--it will be long-term and outlive many two to
four year tours.
Recommendation 2: Define/Validate the desired competencies of future Airmen using the Joint Core Competencies as
foundation (see Joint Core Competencies recommendations below).
Appendix G 42
Details: The Air Force lacks an approved, updated, well-defined, and time-specific list of desired
competencies for our future Airmen. This is required to identify the appropriate education and training
response to FA-2.
OPR/OCR: OPR: ETT.
OCR: AF/A1D.
Recommended The ETT in conjunction with Air Force Institutional Competency stakeholders should assess and
Next Steps: validate the revised Institutional Competencies for sufficiency as a yardstick of desired Airmen
competencies. If insufficient, provide a suitable modification or alternative. When ready, the list
should be staffed through USAF leadership for CSAF approval (e.g., at CORONA). This is a priority,
and a recurring requirement.
Recommendation 3: Develop an Education and Training Catalog
Details: The Air Force needs a readily available list of applicable education, training, and experience
opportunities. This will help communities define paths to successfully develop the desired
competencies in Airmen and enable targeted development when Airmen are missing various
credentials. The catalog will identify gaps that the Air Force might have in its learning ecosystem.
This recommendation is aligned with the AETC/CC’s desire to develop an enterprise-wide Education
Catalog.
OPR/OCR: OPRs: ETT and AETC/A8X.
OCR: AF/A1.
Recommended The ETT should work in conjunction with the AETC Continuum of Learning initiative in its effort to
Next Steps: build a comprehensive Education and Training catalog. This list should be made available on a readily
accessible site for all interested parties.
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, OPR transition is projected for May 2018 with full implementation expected by
November 2019.
Appendix G 43
Project Title: Joint Core Competencies

Project POCs: Project Lead: CMSgt Ronald Thompson, FA-2 Core Team.
Team Members: Col Rich King, AF/A1X; Col Charles Douglass, AU/LeMay Ctr. WE; Col Dalian
Washington, AF/A1DI; Lt Col Steven Byrum, AF/A5-8 (FA-2 Core Tm); Lt Col Ivory Carter,
AF/A5-8 (FA-2 Core Tm); Lt Col Chris Boring, JS/J-7; Lt Col Eric Peterson, AF/A5SS (FA-2 Core
Tm); Lt Col Don Thigpen, AF/A8X; Lt Col Tiffany Rivera, AF/AQS; Maj John Koyama, 93 AGOW
(FA-2 Core Tm); Capt Dennis Seay, 93 AGOW/DOK (FA-2 Core Tm); CMSgt John Bentivegna,
AF/A1 (FA-2 Core Tm); Dr. Patricia McGill, AF/A1DI; Dr. Scott Tannenbaum, Group OE; and Mr.
Danny Menashi, AF/A5SM.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research, assess, and define desired competencies for Joint Airmen.
Statement:
Problem Statement: The Air Force lacks an approved, updated, well-defined, and time-
specific list of desired competencies for our Airmen. This is required to identify the
appropriate education and training response to FA-2.
Project Status: This project is in Phase 3, validation. Phase 1 Analysis and Phase 2 Design of Institutional
Competencies, to include creation of proposed Joint Core Competencies, is complete.
Approach: The Joint Competency Working Group (JCWG) leveraged joint warfighter experience and expertise
to define the expectations and key behaviors for success in a joint warfighter position or
environment—the desired competencies of our future Airmen. This could have been done in many
ways, and the team chose to approach this by building upon the existing Air Force Institutional
Competency framework.
The initial effort was to outline the knowledge, skills, and experience requirements through the
interview and focus group process, then fuse those requirements into the Air Force Institutional
Competency framework. As noted in AFMAN 36-2647, “Air Force Institutional Competencies (ICs)
apply to Airmen across all functional communities and is the common taxonomy used to implement
the Continuum of Learning” (p. 3). This format allowed an objective, competency-based breakdown
of the uniquely joint warfighting requirements. While the team focused on warfighting competencies,
it acknowledged the interdependent nature of these warfighting competencies and the leadership,
interpersonal, and organizational competencies that underpin them. Instead of focusing solely on joint
competencies, the team developed the warfighting competencies to retain the Air Force’s primacy in
its principal domains of Air, Space, and Cyberspace. The team acknowledged that the majority of
Airmen must first hone their technical craft while then growing and being broadened to other Air
Appendix G 44
Force mission areas and then finally being cultivated in joint, coalition, and whole-of-government
environments. It was recognized early that an Airman’s credibility in the joint environment is first
defined by their knowledge in Air, Space, and Cyberspace. However, it is noteworthy that joint
competencies are not ideally just-in-time skills and must be gradually introduced and developed over
the lifespan of each career.
The Joint Core Competencies were developed as Institutional Competencies vice Occupational or
Functional Competencies. As such, they are applicable to Airmen and the Air Force will provide the
baseline education and training to reach the proficiency level commensurate with the rank and
timeline identified in the attached progression model (Reference the progression model located in the
Supporting Documentation section and assumptions as part of Recommendation 1). Individual
functional areas and career fields are responsible for defining amplified or further requirements
beyond those outlined as part of the Air Force Institutional Competency framework.
The Joint Competency Working Group organized its project across four interdependent phases:
Analysis, Design, Validate, and Implement. The key tasks of these phases and current progress are
outlined below.
Phase 1: Analysis
 COMPLETE: Identified and defined critical knowledge, skills, attributes, and developmental
experiences for the Joint Warfighter
o Performed one-on-one interviews with approximately 80 joint-experienced warfighters
(officer, enlisted, civilian) across four services, including 20 General Officers and Senior
Enlisted Leaders
o Executed 10 Focus Groups, compiling input from 85 joint-experienced officer and enlisted Air
Force personnel from five Major Commands (MAJCOMs)
o Utilized qualitative data to formulate competency requirements
o Performed extensive literature review of existing sister-service competency models and Joint
Staff competency models
o The analysis phase of the JCWG efforts identified key knowledge, skills, attributes, and
developmental experiences that were desired and/or required to be successful as a joint
warfighter.
Appendix G 45
 Knowledge
• Air Force Capabilities and Doctrine
• Sister Service Capabilities and Doctrine
• Understanding Command Relationships
• Awareness and Understanding of a Combined Arms Approach
 Skills
• Dynamic, Operational Leadership
• Joint Planning Experience and Processes
• Joint Forces Integration (Multi-Domain/Multi-Service)
• Communication Techniques and Standards
 Attributes
• Credibility
• Mission-Focused/Operator-Focused
• Teamwork (Leading Diverse Teams)
• Motivation
 Developmental Experience
• Joint Experience is Key to Success in Joint Warfighting
• Build Enduring Joint Relationships is a Critical Element of the Foundation for Success
• Increased Frequency and Duration of Joint Exposure/Experience
Phase 2 Design
 COMPLETE: Defined and Recommended new Air Force Institutional Competencies and
associated Sub-competencies while retaining existing proficiency levels of Basic, Intermediate,
Proficient, Skilled, and Advanced
o The JCWG recommended minor adjustments to the existing “Air Force Institutional
Competencies (ICs)” related to leadership and interpersonal skills based on gap analysis
performed in Phase 1
 Recommended adjustments to the following sub-competencies to reflect the required
supporting knowledge and skills to be successful joint warfighters:
• Decision Making
• Builds Coalitions and Teams
Appendix G 46
• Warrior Ethos
o The JCWG recommended replacement and enhancement of current “Employing Military
Capabilities” competency with new “Warfighting” competency to align with Joint and CSAF
language while equally balancing art and science of warfare
 Reorganized knowledge and skills for art/science of warfare for entire conflict continuum
across four sub-competencies:
• Integrates Joint, Interagency, Intergovernmental, Multinational (JIIM) Capabilities
and Processes
• Leverages Air Force Capabilities and Processes
• Employs Strategic Art
• Executes Operational Art
 Codified education and training objectives associated with each sub-competency and
proficiency levels using qualitative analysis
 Provided further specificity of warfighting competencies to enable assessment process
o Defined planning factors and time horizons for “Warfighting” competency
Phase 3: Validate
 COMPLETED: 711th Human Performance Wing and Air Force Research Laboratory evaluated
and validated JCWG’s recommended Institutional Competency approach and framework and
provided minor adjustments to language/content
 PAUSED: Air Force Institutional Competencies revalidation process began in May 2017 with
revised competencies as developed by JCWG, submitted to AF/A1 and socialized with
stakeholders. AF/A1 hosted the first working group virtually in June 2017
o IC revalidation was paused due to pending AETC Force Development Commander
transition and formation of the ETT
o ETT should revalidate the ICs as suitable list of desired competencies as part of their FA-2
response framework
Note: Graphic located in the Supporting Documentation section depicts proposed/desired milestones
and content.
Appendix G 47
Parallel Groups: Education and Training Assessment, Education and Training Catalog, Professional Military Education
Exchanges, Joint Exercise Study.
Recommendations Recommendation 1: Validate and incorporate Joint Core Competencies (warfighting and supporting)
Summary: into Air Force Institutional Competencies (AFMAN 36-2647) to drive joint force development.
Recommendation 2: Perform an education and training assessment with revised Air Force
Institutional Competencies inclusive of joint core competencies and develop options for
incorporation.
Recommendation 1: Validate and incorporate Joint Core Competencies (warfighting and supporting) into Air Force
Institutional Competencies (AFMAN 36-2647) to drive joint force development.
Details: The JCWG recommended changes to the Air Force Institutional Competencies are attached below.
See IC Revalidation Worksheet for new “Warfighting” main competency (inclusive of both Air Force
and JIIM warfighting competencies) and minor changes to other existing ICs.
The following specific assumptions and comments define the JCWG’s proposed progression model
for joint proficiency used to develop the Warfighting Competencies:
BASIC: Airmen have acquired an exposure to Joint Matters and Warfighting Competencies through
accessions training and are focused on the role of Airpower application.
 Generally, the CoL would culminate for an Airman at this joint proficiency level with completion
of a commissioning pipeline (USAFA, ROTC, and OTS) or completion of Airman Leadership
School
 The Foundational knowledge base is not rank or AFSC specific. Although some Airmen will
have occupational requirements to know more/perform at a higher level of competency, none will
progress slower than the IC mandated progression
INTERMEDIATE: Airmen have expanded their knowledge base in Joint Matters and Warfighting
Competencies through experience, training, and exercises and are professionally focused on Airpower
integration.
 Airmen categorized as “Basic” pursue a second period of four to six years in a CoL further
developing their core competencies and specifically orienting on applying Airpower across the
Range of Military Operations and organization of the Force while continuing to grow their joint
knowledge. This learning period culminates for Airmen at the “Intermediate” joint proficiency
Appendix G 48
level with completion of (Officer) Developmental Education (Squadron Officer School) or NCO
Academy
 The Intermediate knowledge base is also not rank or AFSC series specific. Although some
Airmen will necessarily have occupational requirements to know more/perform at a higher level
within the sub-competencies none will progress slower than the IC mandated progression.
Achieving the “Intermediate” level remains achievable for the dominant population of the Air
Force when considering historical promotion rates to Captain or Technical Sergeant, although
retention of the Force at this stage becomes a consideration for Force Development
 Many Air Force Specialties (AFS)/Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) series and Functional Areas
will have little joint touch points and may struggle to value the minimum knowledge and
experience expected of Airmen as they continue to develop along their career paths. Functional
Area Managers (FAMs) and Career Field Managers (CFMs) (along with MAJCOM A1 and
Developmental Teams) must actively engage the individual Airman and effectively apply talent
management and talent retention schema in order to best posture those with high potential for
continued growth and greater responsibility for developmental opportunities at this stage
PROFICIENT: Airmen have developed a broad range of experience, education, and training to
confidently advocate for Airpower in the context of Joint Matters and Warfighting Competencies and
can credibly integrate, influence and lead as appropriate in a joint warfighting environment.
 Airmen categorized as “Intermediate” pursue a third period of four to six years in a CoL further
developing their core competencies while growing command and control and employment of
Airpower capabilities across the Range of Military Operations and organization of the Joint Force.
This learning period culminates for Airmen at the “Proficient” joint proficiency level with
completion of (Officer) Developmental Education (Air Command and Staff College or equivalent)
with Joint PME I accreditation, Senior NCO Academy, or an Air Force accredited commensurate
joint PME experience
 The Proficient knowledge base is also not rank or AFSC series specific. Although many Airmen at
this level will have occupational requirements to know more/perform at a higher level within the
sub-competencies none will progress slower than the IC mandated progression. Achieving the
Proficient level remains achievable for a declining proportion of the total Air Force population
when considering historical promotion rates to Major or Senior Master Sergeant. Although
Appendix G 49
continued individual development and growth of core competencies will continue at this stage in
cadence with continued career progression, it will be the functional (AFS/AFSC) limit for
institutional force development. Beyond this stage the individual selection rates for promotion and
PME opportunities become highly competitive and talent management becomes a more crucial to
continued progression for those members moving towards the Skilled proficiency level
 Most enlisted AFSC series and Functional Areas will have few or no requirements to develop the
enlisted force for joint proficiency past this point, as well as several specialized officer career
fields. FAMs and CFMs (along with MAJCOM/A1 and Developmental Teams) must actively
engage the individual Airmen and effectively apply talent management and talent retention
schema in order to best posture those with high potential for continued growth and greater
responsibility for strategic developmental opportunities at this stage
SKILLED: Airmen have a record of leadership and are joint qualified (officers) with credible
experience, education, and training in the context of Leadership, Joint Matters, and Warfighting
Competencies and are individually selected for positions of responsibility to integrate, influence and
lead in Air Force or joint environments at the wing through NAF level.
 Airmen categorized as “Proficient” pursue a fourth period of four to six years in a CoL further
developing their core competencies while oriented on integrating the joint force to achieve
National, Strategic objectives across the Range of Military Operations providing leadership from
an Airman’s perspective. This learning period culminates for select Airmen at the “Skilled” joint
proficiency level with completion of (Officer) Senior Developmental Education (Air War College
or equivalent) with Joint PME 2 accreditation for officers and Senior Enlisted Joint PME II or the
Joint Special Operations Forces Senior Enlisted Academy and the Command Chief Orientation
Course for enlisted
 The Skilled knowledge base is exclusive to the majority of the junior Total Force and will be
considered as a pre-condition to senior leadership roles. By design, few Airmen will reach this
degree of joint proficiency due to the very selective and nominative nature of the associated ranks,
positions, and PME requirements at this level. To reach the “Skilled” competency level, Officers
should also be qualified Joint Specialty Officers by Office of the Secretary of Defense
(OSD)/Joint Staff, and CMSgts selected as Command Chief candidates with the Command Chief
Orientation Course complete
Appendix G 50
 Generally, management of “Skilled” Officers and enlisted transitions from AFPC and the
Developmental Team at this point (previously transitioned at CMSgt for enlisted) to AF/A1/DPO
consistent with rank/projected rank and job requirements. The majority of practical improvement
of joint proficiency at this level occurs more with experience, and less formal education and
training; crediting joint duty tours are a requirement at this level for officers
ADVANCED: Airmen have a record of senior leadership, are joint qualified with credible experience,
education, and training in the context of Leadership, Joint Matters and Joint Competencies and are
individually nominated and selected for positions of authority to integrate, influence, and lead in Air
Force or joint environments at the HAF 2-letter, MAJCOM, and Combatant Command (CCMD) level
or higher.
 Airmen categorized as “Skilled” in joint proficiency pursue a fifth period of an extraordinarily
selective CoL oriented on advanced senior leader exposures and experiences. Advanced level flag
officers and their senior enlisted leaders are provided supplemental opportunities for growth to fill
senior command positions across the Service and joint force. The PME gateway opportunities at
this level are CAPSTONE (flag officers) and KEYSTONE (CMSgts), although some unique
continuing PME and PCE opportunities exist beyond this PME gateway
 Management of “Advanced” Officers and Command Chiefs is nominative, highly selective, and
encompasses the smallest minority of the Total Force without regard for AFS/AFSC series
Assumptions:
The following assumptions were used to develop this graduated set of joint proficiency level
definitions and associated tasks/performance levels:
 PME is the anchoring mechanism for Force Development, and generally occurs at four to six year
intervals across officer and enlisted career pattern growth. Thus, by ensuring that the key PME
opportunity includes a “gateway” proficiency check, the Total Force can reasonably be assured
that completion of PME for grade also will include appropriate experience and training that
complete the CoL that gets an Airman to the next higher level of joint proficiency without
AFS/AFSC bias.
Appendix G 51
 The period between PME opportunities is the CoL spectrum for each Airman, though it will differ
by rank, AFS/AFSC, and career field needs. As an example, while many of the “Foundational”
knowledge tasks for joint proficiency are presented in Basic Military Training, the first term
Airman has between three and five years to develop and learn those joint proficiency tasks to the
required level through Technical Training School, Professional Continuing Education, and On-
the-Job Training along with academic learning through the CDCs, promotion testing, and
operational experience. Airman Leadership School should be the final event in this CoL with a
commensurate testing mechanism to validate the tasks are understood at the correct proficiency
level.
 The goal of Force Development is to get as many Airmen to the “Proficient” level as possible in
order to provide the broadest and most qualified pool with which to select Air Force and joint
leaders at the SNCO/Senior Officer levels (Skilled and Advanced joint proficiency). Promotion
and terminal PME opportunities are highly selective processes that exclude the overwhelming
majority of the force; therefore, it is unrealistic and unnecessary to construct a joint proficiency
model that guides Airmen to the Advanced level.
 While time and associated promotion (rank) is a natural interpretation of joint proficiency, it is not
the underpinning concept. Using PME as a gateway to higher joint proficiencies is a “no later
than” model. Many career fields have joint proficiency requirements for employment far earlier in
an Airman’s career. However, upon analysis, these “faster developing joint proficiency Airmen”
typically do not get education or training on all aspects of Joint Matters as defined above. Thus,
baselining across all joint proficiency tasks no later than PME for grade is the functional gateway.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A1 and ETT.
OCR: AETC and USAFA.
Recommended ETT review and validate proposed revision of Institutional Competencies (with Joint Core
Next Steps: Competencies) as a suitable conception of the desired competencies for future Airmen.
Officially, integrate Joint Core Competencies into Air Force Institutional Competencies.
Recommendation 2: Perform an education and training assessment with revised Air Force Institutional Competencies
inclusive of joint core competencies and develop options for incorporation.
Details: This recommendation is accounted for in the Education and Training Assessment project area above,
which provides a framework to validate the proposed competencies and identify/adjust education and
Appendix G 52
training opportunities accordingly. The ETT is the body conceptualized to lead this effort. If the ETT
is not approved, a different body will need to validate these competencies and sort out how to best
incorporate them.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AETC and ETT.
OCR: Air University and USAFA.
Recommended Form AETC ETT; ETT validate the proposed competencies.
Next Steps:
Supporting
Documentation:
AFRL FA 2 - LOE 2 IC Revalidation JCWG Warfighting
Summary.docx Worksheets_FA 2 Edits_CAO
Progression
20JUNE.xlsx
Model.pptx
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, OPR transition is projected for May 2018 with full implementation expected by
November 2019.
Project Title: Education and Training Catalog

Project POCs: Project Lead: Colonel Christian Watt, Air University, Air War College.
Team Members: Lt Col Jared Gude AU/LeMay Center; Lt Col Brad Hickey AF/A1D; Maj David
Yuers FA-2; and Col Christian Watt AU/AWC.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Identify and catalog relevant education and training opportunities to help define paths to
Statement: success and strengthen joint leaders.
Problem Statement: The Air Force lacks a consolidated education and training catalog designed to
easily identify and understand education and training opportunities to help strengthen joint leaders.
Project Status: Phase 1, in-progress.
Approach: The Air Force needs a readily available list of applicable education, training, and experience
opportunities to compare what we need for future Airmen with what we currently have to develop the
desired future Airmen. This will help communities define paths to successfully develop the desired
competencies in Airmen.
FA-2 initiated an effort to identify and catalog pertinent PME and PCE opportunities. The approach
for finding a list, or multiple lists of PCE courses, has led to AETC’s Education and Training Course
Announcements (ETCA) website, Joint Knowledge Online (JKO), and Advanced Distributed
Appendix G 53
Learning Service (ADLS). This effort is not yet complete and needs to be expanded to include a wider
range of education and training opportunities.
Parallel Groups: Education and Training Assessment, Joint Core Competencies, Professional Military Education
Exchanges and Joint Exercise Study.
Recommendations The sole recommendation of this project area is to complete creation of the catalog and make it
Summary: available on a readily accessible site for interested parties.
Recommendation 1: Complete creation of a consolidated education and training catalog.
Details: Per the previous project area on Education and Training Assessment, the ETT is the proposed body to
champion the creation of such a catalog and work to make it available on the Air Force Portal for all
interested parties. If formation of the ETT is not approved, a different entity will need to be selected
to perform this task.
These are key considerations to help define the path to success:

1) Air Force, Sister Service, and Joint PME are the primary educational milestones, and
foundation for an Airman’s development.
2) PCE provides focused training opportunities, and augments, but does not replace PME. The
courses teach specific skills, and vary significantly in content and structure. The PCE offerings
must be distilled into a workable and pertinent course list that focuses on joint and interservice
lexicon, planning processes, and operations.
3) JKO and ADLS courses provide supplemental training opportunities. The vast course catalogs
must be reviewed, and a pertinent course list derived that focuses on joint and interservice
lexicon, planning processes, and operations.
These facts and assumptions were considered in the creation of the catalog to date:
 Due to the Officer Professional Military Education Policy and Enlisted Professional Military
Education Policy requirements from Joint Staff, SNCO, IDE, and SDE PME programs are similar
enough with respect to joint core competencies that only the Air Force variant needs to be
cataloged to understand the nature of the rest (e.g., Air War College and Army War College are
similar enough in those respects that they don’t both need to be cataloged)
 Fellowships/Internships are problematic due to their unique nature
 There is no “master” list of PCE courseware for joint development opportunities
Appendix G 54
 Many MAJCOM PCE and formal training courses are intended as a focused or functional
education opportunity and not intended to provide a foundational base of joint knowledge
OPR/OCR: OPR: AETC and ETT.

OCR: Education and Training community, AF/A1, AF/A9, and MAJCOM/A3.
Recommended Form the ETT and charge the ETT to champion the completion of the catalog as described in the
Next Steps: Education and Training Assessment project area that is described above.
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, OPR transition is projected for April 2018 with full implementation expected by April
2019.
Project Title: Joint Professional Military Education (PME) Exchanges

Project POCs: Project Leader: Major David Yuers, CSAF FA-2.
Team Members: Senior Master Sergeant Travon Dennis, 908th Force Support Squadron; Master
Sergeant Malcolm Curtis, 707th Communications Squadron; Lorna Fermanis, AF/A1; Senior Master
Sergeant Jennifer M. Johnson SAF/IA; Lieutenant Colonel Brad Hickey, AF/A1DLE; Second
Lieutenant Astin Moore 71st APS; Captain Dennis Seay, 93rd Air Ground Operations Wing; Chief
Master Sergeant Ian Eishen, 9th Intelligence Squadron; Master Sergeant James Clarey, CSAF FA-2;
Colonel Gary Arnaud, French Air Force; and Colonel Johnnie Barnes, Director, National Capital
Region Liaison Office.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and assess how the Air Force can better position and outplace personnel who
Statement: attend sister-service and international Professional Military Education exchange programs.
Problem Statement: The Air Force does not factor in previous joint experience in selection nor
deliberately outplace personnel following sister-service/international PME attendance before the
Senior Developmental Education (SDE) level for officers or at any level for enlisted or civilian
Airmen.
Project Status: Phase 3 completed, pursuing OPR/OCR transition.
Approach: Following research and analysis of current Joint PME Exchange process, a three-phase model of
Frame, Design and Build was utilized for development of recommendations for the deliberate
selection and outplacement of Air Force members to Sister-service and/or international professional
military education. These phases consisted of the following tasks:
Appendix G 55
Phase 1, Frame efforts: Determine the need and extent of current Joint PME Exchanges for high
performing civilian, enlisted, and officer Airmen across functional communities and then identify
recommendations for positioning and outplacement. Identify key stakeholders and SMEs (ongoing),
review A1 and Air Education and Training Command (AETC) methodologies and processes
(ongoing), review management processes, review Joint Staff J7 approved exercises (ongoing) and
education and finally determine need for expanding Air Force Joint PME to every Airmen.
PME Exchange research and gap analysis led to a review of DOD and Air Force Joint PME guidance
and policies to determine mandates – if any – for follow-on assignments post Joint PME. Analysis of
the alternatives for Airmen as well as the various schools Airmen have the option to attend
determined that the follow-on portion for most schools below the SDE level are rarely taken into
consideration. Historically, the Air Force does not follow through in assigning candidates to joint
operations (with some exceptions, e.g. SDE or the Joint Advanced Warfighting School).
Phase 2, Design efforts: Initiate contact with SMEs and CFMs (accomplished) for research and
analysis, refine for better granularity, create concepts to Identify, Measure, Assess, and Track
(IMA&T), develop models for PME IMA&T and request recommendations.
Phase 3, Build efforts: Develop system and/or policy to identify, measure, assess, and modify
tracking for transparency, and follow-on.
Parallel Groups: Joint Experience Working Group, Joint Air Force Equivalency Credit, Joint Oversight.
Recommendations The goal of this project is to develop and implement Air Force processes using previously established
Summary: architecture to input and outplace members for Joint PME Exchange attendance. Having a defined
goal, the team conducted research and analysis of processes and systems that were vetted by SMEs
from functional, organizational and enterprise levels, to provide the below recommendations as the
way forward.
Below is a scalable menu of recommendations depending on how aggressive the Air Force desires to
be in managing assignments and allocations. Recommendations one through three are based upon
individual course of action models. The short, mid, and long-term recommendations are designed to
guide personnel into a model that is beneficial to the member and their respective career field.
Appendix G 56
Recommendation four is a hybrid-model that provides flexible options to the career field managers to
ensure limitations are not placed upon rank/grade, career tracking, and talent management.
Recommendation 1: Near-Term; A deliberate Joint PME follow-on program, designed using short
immersive experiences to complement to the recently completed education.
Recommendation 2: Mid-Term; Joint PME continuation program employing fellowship, internship or
exchange participation.
Recommendation 3: Long-Term; Utilization of an educational plan consisting of Joint PME
outplacement to a predetermined assignment.
Recommendation 4: Tailored; Flexible and deliberate Joint PME outplacement program with
optimum adaptability.
The recommendations above closely link with AETC’s Developmental Special Experiences (DSE)
concept being introduced as part of the CoL initiative.
These recommendations are a culmination of research through both primary and secondary sources,
examined historical background, comparisons of cross-functional Air Force Specialty Codes
(AFSCs), and civilian, enlisted, and officer functions. Once the information was gathered the team
identified SWOT in each area. Additionally, the team examined respective DOTMLPF-P domains to
identify any barriers and to develop a direction for implementation.
Below are necessary next steps independent of the chosen recommendation, in no particular order:
 Coordinate with civilian, enlisted, and officer CFMs for the creation of Joint Professional Military
Education (JPME) outplacement contract commitment mechanisms (Accomplished, 12/15/2017)
 Collaborate with PA to develop message to the enterprise on the intent to maximize sister service
and international partners near-term opportunities with JIIM partners
 Draft and implement governing policy and directives
 Research and analyze current sister service and international partner opportunity eligibility
requirements
 CFMs – Identify opportunities for and develop functional requirements for Joint PME follow-on
Recommendation 1: Near-Term: A deliberate Joint PME follow-on program, designed using short exposure/immersive
experiences to reinforce and supplement recently completed education.
Appendix G 57
Details: This option may furnish broad experience via a quick exposure/immersion program and is intended to
provide a quick exposure to the joint dynamic rather than the experience gained from a long-term
assignment. Following completion of a Joint PME Exchange, the graduated candidate may have the
option of participating in a joint exercise and/or deployment, which reinforces and supplements the
Joint PME completed. For example, if the candidate attends South Korean PME, participates in
ULCHI FREEDOM GUARDIAN, and does a 179-day tour at Yongsan Garrison, this would suffice
as a validation process after completing South Korean PME. Another example is if the candidate were
to attend United States Navy PME at the Naval War College and then do a deployment to the naval
base at Camp Lemonier, Djibouti, and being assigned to the Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of
Africa staff followed by participating in a J7 approved exercise under current law as a functional joint
opportunity, then the candidate’s joint requirement would be certified as complete. A third example
would be the candidate attending Canadian PME and following graduation participating in Exercise
MAPLE RESOLVE and/or going on Temporary Duty (TDY) to Headquarters North American
Aerospace Defense Command (Establish a Global Exercise Scheduling (GES) at AF/A3T in order to
ensure enterprise-wide governance and considerations), Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado, which is a
combined United States/Canadian command.
OPR/OCR: OPR: Air Force Manpower/Force Development (AF/A1D).
OCR: CFMs, AETC, AETC/AU, and ETT.
Recommended  Research viability for developing various short term assignments with sister-service and
Next Steps: international partners
 Collaborate with appropriate authority to ensure proper nesting of Joint PME policy changes
 MAJCOM – Identify joint exercises and TDYs that corroborate joint experience
 Continue collaboration with AF/A1D, CFMs, AETC, and AETC/AU for research and analysis
Recommendation 2: Mid-Term: Joint PME continuation program employing fellowship, internship or exchange
participation.
Details: Review of current fellowships, internships, and exchange programs highlights an opportunity to
increase and expand paths to not only include joint development and education, but to also extend
opportunities to a larger number of personnel across the Air Force. Ultimately, this serves to prepare
Air Force personnel to anticipate and successfully meet challenges across a range of joint military
operations. Furthermore, a Mid-Term opportunity increases networking opportunities and affords a
higher potential for developing relationships. The Career Field Manager (CFM) who selects the Mid-
Term alternative for their candidates are furnishing a selection, which is longer in duration and thus
Appendix G 58
increases joint participation competencies. For example, if the candidate were to graduate from the
Navy Senior Enlisted Academy (SEA) and then follow up with a one year program of 60 days at Rim
of the Pacific (RIMPAC), 90 days working on the Fleet Reserve Plan, 90 days aboard a naval ship
supporting the Maritime Expeditionary Security Forces (MESF) and 90 days supporting a Maritime
Security Forces Unit, while participating in exercises throughout these back-to-back tours,
confirmation of the candidate’s joint competencies and their credibility in the joint arena is advanced.
There are many year-long sister-service, international, and interagency fellowships, which CFMs may
also explore as a Mid-Term solution. CFMs should also closely study their outplacement
assignment/utilization plans as valid positions on the Unit Manpower Document (UMD), position
description (grade and occupational series), and carefully consider mobility requirements.
Assumptions:
 CFMs, utilizing the definition produced by the Joint Experiences Working Group (JEWG), will
define the joint positions and Mid-Term joint opportunities that will be available. Fellowship
programs and their execution by CFMs for joint candidates will serve as the benchmark for Mid-
Term options. The selected Joint Oversight organization is recommended as the Point of Contact
(POC) for candidates and their CFMs. There will also be a need for a Fellowship Development
Team (FDT) to be assembled specifically for fellowships, which can define the requirements for
candidates.
Constraints/Restraints:
 It is time and resource intensive to develop and fund fellowships and internships programs, CFMs
may opt to go for either the short-term or long-term options instead. Some Airmen in certain
functional communities may be removed from their primary mission to attend a fellowship and
consequently may have their career opportunities limited due to perishable core knowledge skills.
However, this may be offset by the “air-mindedness” they bring with them to the joint table.
o For civilian Airmen Joint PME opportunities are more constrained and limited to sister-service
schools, the Defense Executive Leader Development Program, Defense Senior Leader
Development Program, the Dwight D. Eisenhower School, and the Education with Industry
and Excellence in Government interagency development program
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A1D.
OCR: CFMs and ETT.
Appendix G 59
Recommended 
Collaborate with CFMs and SMEs to research/determine available fellowships, internships, and
Next Steps: exchange programs
 CFMs recommend the following:
o Joint Development Teams for civilian, enlisted, and officer Airmen
o CCs build plans for candidates but still coordinate with CFMs
o CCs should ensure the nominative process for Joint PME involves CFMs
o See Supporting Documentation for further details regarding CFM recommendations
 Coordinate with sister services, international partners, intergovernmental partners, and
multiagency teams to develop exchange, internship, or liaison positions within JIIM parameters
Recommendation 3: Long-Term: Utilize an educational plan consisting of Joint PME outplacement to a predetermined
assignment.
Details: A predetermined outplacement and fixed assignment and/or utilization plan for interagency PME,
sister service PME, and international PME graduates with a length from two to three years is the ideal
method for deliberate joint development post-Joint PME. Civilian Airmen CFMs should closely study
outplacement assignment/utilization plans as valid positions on the UMD, coordinate with
Development Teams, review position description (grade and occupational series), and carefully
consider mobility requirements.
OCR: CFMs and ETT.
Recommended  Coordinate with CFMs to ID positions meeting long-term requirements
Next Steps:  Update appropriate systems
Recommendation 4: Tailored; flexible and deliberate Joint PME outplacement program with optimum flexibility.
Details: CC’s, CFMs, and DTs should be given the choice to be able to create a more flexible option for
deliberate outplacement following a candidate’s completion of sister service/international PME. A
combination of two short-term obligations or a short-term tasking combined with a mid-term
objective, such as a fellowship, would equate to a long-term assignment and equally accredit the
candidate’s joint participation. A tailored Contingency Placement plan allows maneuverability for
CC’s, CFMs, and DTs to utilize the immersion, exposure, experience, and/or joint assignment
programs to meet Functional Requirements.
OCR: CFMs and ETT.
Recommended  Consolidate all information from near-term, mid-term, and far-term solutions
Appendix G 60
Next Steps:  CFMs determine sister services, multiagency, and international partners opportunities that may be
consolidated into a post JPME Contingency package
2019.
Recommended  AF/A1 approve

Next Steps:  Career Field Development Team approve
 Establish Civilian Enterprise Talent Management Cell
 Strategic Messaging and Communication Effort--ensure civilian workforce is prepared to accept
change and maximize potential
Supporting
Documentation:
Joint CFM PME Joint CFM PME Joint CFM PME
Conference CIVILIAN.pptxConference ENLISTED.pptx
Conference OFFICER.pptx
2019.
Project Title: Joint Exercise Study

Project POCs: Project Lead: Lt Col Scott West/A5RI.
Team Members: Maj Patrick Leary A8XP; Maj Karson Kuhlman AF/DPO; CMSgt Stephanie
Moncalieri AF/REPX; Lt Col Mehtap Kuykendall AFMC; Lt Col Jennifer Bratz, USAF DIR SPT EL
AF/EBDP; and SMSgt Micah Small AFMC AFIMSC/XZR.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research, assess, and provide recommendations on how the Air Force can better utilize Joint
Statement: Exercises to strengthen Joint Airmen proficiency. Conduct a gap analysis on the tasking, selection,
and placement processes of Airmen into Joint Exercises. Provide recommendations on how the Air
Force should govern AF participation in Joint Exercises. Research the feasibility of implementing an
Exercise Strategic Calendar. Provide recommendations on how the Air Force can better educate its
commanders and Airmen on the value and availability of Joint exercises across the spectrum.
Appendix G 61
Problem Statement: The Air Force lacks strategic level processes and methodologies to identify, track,
and evaluate joint exercise opportunities and experiences.
Expected Outcome
 Deliberately develops Joint proficiency in Airmen using exercises
 Strategically deepens Air Force Joint bench
 Leverages existing force development structures
 Zero additional cost or manpower
 Minimal workload increase to existing force development structures
 Short notice taskings may constrain deliberate matching effort
 Opportunities may be limited due to Geographic Combatant Commanders (GCCs) filling
positions internally first
Project Status: Completed: Identify how individuals are selected for Joint exercises.
Initiated: Influence process stakeholders to revise selection methodology to support a deliberate
development path.
 Influence Air Force Instruction 10-204, Participation in Joint and National Exercises, currently in
rewrite at 3-letter level
o Completed: Socialized with Action Officers the FA-2 intent and provided notional injects
o Pending: Awaiting Task Management Tool task for formal coordination
Approach: The Department of the Air Force is the Nation’s principal Air and Space force, and is responsible for
the preparation of forces for two primary objectives; the effective prosecution of war, and support to
civil authorities in the United States and abroad. This requires close coordination with other Military
Services, Combatant Commands, National Guard, United States Government (USG) Departments and
Agencies, and international partners.
To assess the Service’s ability to meet these objectives, the Air Force conducts training for Joint
operations, participates in designated Joint exercises, and conducts exercises and training events with
other USG Departments and Agencies, and international partners. These events afford the opportunity
to develop Air Force organizations and individuals ensuring the ability of the Service to meet and
effectively integrate with other organizations.
Appendix G 62
The Air Force currently does not have a system for the deliberate development of Airmen through
exercises. Participation of individuals in exercises occurs through unit participation or an ad hoc
manner of availability as tasked out by the Air Expeditionary Force (AEF) Center.
Research was conducted on how current Air Force exercise process works as designed and in
execution. Consultations occurred with SMEs from AEF Center, career development personnel, and
AF/A1 personnel from across the Air Force.
Parallel Groups: Education and Training Assessment, Joint Core Competencies, Education and Training Catalog, and
Professional Military Education Exchanges.
Recommendations There is a prime opportunity to influence the Air Force Exercise process as it is already in revision in
Summary: standard Air Force processes. Work will commence to ensure inclusion in AFI 10-204 and supporting
information technology (IT) solution(s) and enable joint experience development for individuals.
Recommendation 1: Incorporate FA-2 injects into new AFI 10-204 to strengthen Joint Airmen
proficiency.
Recommendation 2: Ensure AF/A3’s Air Force Exercise IT solution incorporates ability to identify
key positions to enable better personnel matching to exercise opportunities.
Recommendation 3: Establish a Global Exercise Scheduling (GES) at AF/A3T in order to ensure
enterprise-wide governance and considerations.
Details: Exercise AFI is in rewrite, providing an opportunity to add language for deliberate development of
personnel. An IT solution is in early stages of requirements identification for development managed
by AF/A3TI.
Recommendation 1: Incorporate FA-2 injects into new AFI 10-204 to strengthen Joint Airmen proficiency.
Details: Provide FA-2 focused injects to AFI 10-204 AF Exercises Rewrite Comment Resolution Matrix
(CRM). A3TI team has been contacted and provided a list of preliminary revisions focused on how
Air Force Exercises nest within or prepare Air Force for joint fight, need to capture opportunities, and
deliberately develop joint experience of individuals.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A3T, Lt Col Scott West.
OCR: ACC/A3.
Recommended Waiting for the generation of a AF/A3 coordination/staff tasking for inclusion of FA-2 equities.
Next Steps:
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, OPR transition is projected for April 2018 with full implementation expected by June
2019.
Appendix G 63
Recommendation 2: Follow development of requirements identification Air Force Exercise IT solution. Ensure AF/A3 Air
Force Exercise IT solution incorporates ability to identify key positions in advance allowing for
matching.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A3T, Lt Col Scott West.
Recommended Monitor and influence development of central scheduling IT solution.
Next Steps:
2019.
Recommendation 3: Establish a Global Exercise Scheduling (GES) at AF/A3T in order to ensure enterprise-wide
governance and considerations.
Details: Shifting Global Exercise Scheduling from ACC/A3O to the HAF level will require a reallocation of
resources from ACC to the HAF.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A3.
OCR: AF/A3T, ACC/A3O
Recommended AF/A3-Conduct a feasibility study in changing the roles and responsibilities of both ACC/A3O and
Next Steps: AF/A3 to reallocate global exercise management to the HAF level.
2019.
Project Title: Optimizing Air Force Joint Education and Training for the 21st Century (Preparing
Airmen for the Joint Environment)
Project POCs: Project Leader: CMSgt Ronald Thompson, FA-2 Core Team.
Team Members: CMSgt Ian Eishen, 9th Intelligence Squadron; SMSgt Amy Mendonca/692d
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Group; MSgt James Clarey, Defense Intelligence
Agency; MSgt Craig Gehron, 315th Cyberspace Operations Squadron; and MSgt Malcolm Curtis,
707th Communication Squadron.
Problem Statement/ Purpose: Research and identify potential opportunities and options to strengthen joint education and
Purpose: training for a 21st Century joint warfighting environment.
Problem Statement: Certain Air Force educational institutions may not fully utilize the gamut of
training solutions available to develop the leadership and joint competency of our new technology
Appendix G 64
savvy Airmen. The Air Force's Education and Training mechanisms may require improvement in
technology utilization to build the joint leaders we expect for the future. The Air Force could
strengthen its learning ecosystem by employing 21st century tools and practices.
Project Status: Phase 2, Initial Analysis and Brainstorming complete.
Approach: After conducting initial research to understand current education and training methods, the team
utilized a brainstorming approach in its pursuit for ways that the Air Force could augment these extant
mechanisms to better prepare Airmen for the joint environment.
This effort provides ideas for the ETT, defined in the Education and Training Assessment, to consider
in their assessment of how to best leverage education and training to develop the desired future
Airmen. These initial recommendations outlined below require further analysis and development with
the assistance of designated OPR/OCRs below in coordination with the ETT team.
Parallel Groups: Education and Training Assessment, Joint Exercise Study, Joint Competency Working Group,
Education and Training Catalog, and Joint Professional Military Education Exchanges.
Recommendations Recommendation 1: ETT conduct a gap analysis of current wargame and exercise offerings. If a
Summary: capabilities gap exists, consider these ideas to incorporate into our current education and training
structure that can apply real-life military skills to a variable set of scenarios, rules of engagement, and
objectives within a joint, integrated environment.
Recommendation 2: Evaluate current virtualized in-classroom exercises and build robust virtualized
in-classroom exercises where gaps exist.
Recommendation 3: Determine feasibility and requirement for an online application-based game (or
physical board game) that can apply real-life military skills to a variable set of scenarios, rules of
engagement, and objectives within a joint, integrated environment and support joint learning
objectives.
Recommendation 1: ETT conduct a gap analysis of current wargame and exercise offerings. If a capabilities gap exists,
consider these ideas to incorporate into our current education and training structure that can apply
real-life military skills to a variable set of scenarios, rules of engagement, and objectives within a
joint, integrated environment.
OCR/OPR: OPR: ETT.
OCR: AETC/AU.
Details: Air Force PME and PCE offers wargames and exercises opportunities during PME and PCE schools.
The quality and/or availability of wargames and exercises is not consistent between Officer
Professional Military Education (OPME) and Enlisted Professional Military Education (EPME). The
Appendix G 65
complexity of developing or modifying wargame or exercise offerings dictates that a body with
educational experience and expertise review wargames and exercises currently available and
determine if any gaps exist. The ETT is such a body.
Assumptions:
 Joint wargames or exercises are already offered at some PME institutions
 Wargame or exercise offerings are more robust at OPME than at EPME schools
Constraints:
 Development of any exercises or wargames must be based on sound educational objectives
Recommended Next ETT will:
Steps:  Analyze current wargame and exercise offerings from OPME, EPME, and PCE schools and
complete gap analysis
2019.
Recommendation 2: Evaluate current virtualized in-classroom exercises offered at PME institutions and build robust
virtualized in-classroom exercises where current gaps exist.
Details: Prior to an assignment or deployment within a JIIM environment, some Airmen lack the opportunity
to learn and/or apply joint training concepts into practical application. Airmen may be assigned to
these joint assignments or deployments without prior experiences that set them up for success.
Airmen can learn the needed skills in these assignments or deployments but may suffer degraded
capability until they have learned the joint lexicon and processes that are used by the joint community.
Additionally, Airmen who have learned these processes or lexicon may suffer from skill atrophy or
lack theory and understanding of changed joint processes or concepts because they lack the
opportunity to practice and apply what they have learned. This gap degrades measurable performance
of these learned skills and inhibits an Airman’s ability to build immediate capability, credibility, and
confidence within JIIM environments.
Officers who attend Squadron Officer School, Air Command and Staff College, and Air War College
are exposed to joint education and some limited skills application opportunities. At Intermediate, or
Senior Officer PME programs, officers are exposed to joint education and have skills application
exercises to strengthen these skills. However, enlisted do not get these skills application opportunities.
Appendix G 66
There are no joint skills application opportunities within Airman Leadership School, Non-
commissioned Officer Academy, or Senior Non-commissioned Officer Academy, nor are there even
opportunities within joint education courses such as Senior Enlisted Joint Professional Military
Education (SEJPME) level one or two.
In order to provide enlisted Airmen better access to these joint experiences, and to improve
opportunities for officers to practice applying joint processes and concepts, the Air Force must
consider investing in areas that reinforce these skills. Providing these skills application opportunities
is imperative to strengthening Air Force joint leaders who are proficient in joint skills and can
effectively lead or manage joint warriors. The creation of an exercise series in EPME within a virtual
environment, aimed at the tactical and operational levels of war and integrated with joint partners, can
help close these gaps in enlisted education. An evaluation of officer application exercises could yield
improvements to the current exercise.
Assumptions:
 Exercise development is manpower and resource intensive, especially up front
 An IT solution to run this wouldn’t have to be developed and existing systems could be used; end-
user stations can be quickly configured for the requirements of this concept
 Developing a new exercise series will incur significant resources and costs; however, some of this
may be defrayed by reviewing the diverse portfolio of exercises the Air Force participates in and
determine value of each. The Air Force currently struggles to fill many open billets across this
vast set of exercises and this proposal may provide a good opportunity to evaluate current exercise
resource investment
 This concept has value across all services; if developed and executed successfully, the model
could be passed to the Joint Staff for adoption and central execution, potentially alleviating the Air
Force of financial costs to run and upkeep
 Exercises must be developed in accordance with valid educational objectives
OPR/OCR: OPR: (Notional) ETT, AETC and AF/A3T.
OCR: (Notional) Air University.
Appendix G 67
Recommended Next  AETC

Steps: o Research the availability of IT tools robust enough to support audio, visual, functional area,
and mapping tools for virtualization and how they support current exercise offerings.
o Assess ideal class size and functional representation to determine needed participants, as well
as feeder sources
o Build and advertise annual class schedule and means to nominate personnel for the series, if
needed achieve get proper joint integration
2022.
Supporting
Documentation:
Approved Joint Certification_Criteria_
Exercises.pdf Rubric_v2.docx
Recommendation 3: Determine feasibility and requirement for an online application-based game (or physical board game)
that can apply real-life military skills to a variable set of scenarios, rules of engagement, and
objectives within a joint, integrated environment and support joint learning objectives.
Details: Today’s Airmen have lived much or all of their life in a highly technological world. Gaming model
that allows Airmen to work together to solve a scenario will help them develop their joint skills. This
concept opens the aperture to any service member to learn and apply joint concepts. Additionally, the
game could reinforce these concepts in a highly transparent means to the Airmen playing it. Multiple
other communities are pursuing game development as a means to build and exercise learning concepts
and encourage discussion amongst members. For example, one pocket of the cyberspace community
is on the final legal agreement stage with a Five Eyes partner to bring a board gaming concept back to
teach and reinforce cyberspace operations within the United States Air Force. Simultaneously, the
intelligence community is approaching a similar concept to critical thinking and hypothesis testing.
Assumptions:
 IT training solutions may already exist in our education and training system, but current state must
be analyzed for shortfalls
 Airmen would be engaged in a concept that speaks to their interests
 The joint landscape doesn’t change fast enough to make developed concepts obsolete
Appendix G 68
 It is possible to build a variety of scenarios, end states, and objectives, all with changing rules of
engagement that provide an engaging, interactive experience with replay-ability to enhance
understanding of joint concepts
 This concept will not sufficiently prepare an Airman for a joint assignment or deployment but
serves as an introduction to this arena
 Must focus on joint education and concepts for the purposes of strengthening joint leaders
 This concept could require significant time to develop
 Any online-based wargame or exercise must be properly tied to an educational institution and
developed with sound learning objectives
OPR/OCR: OPR: (Notional) ETT.
OCR: (Notional) Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL).
Recommended  ETT in conjunction with AFRL:
Next Steps: o Assess the breadth of concepts existing and desired for incorporation into a game
o Conduct surveys across the Air Force to determine interest in gaming concept
o Work with industry or other partners to determine viability, agreements, and contracts for an
online game or board game
2022.
Appendix G 69
Appendix H – Oversight
This appendix describes two broad oversight change efforts undertaken by the FA-2 Team in order to achieve the Air Force’s goal of
strengthening joint leaders and teams. In the first oversight change effort, Joint Oversight Concepts, an Air Force-wide team
researched, developed, and provided recommendations for an organizational construct to provide joint strategic direction, policy
oversight, and/or career development guidance across the Air Force enterprise. The second effort, Support Air Force Personnel in
Isolated Joint Duty Locations, provides recommendations to bolster current Air Force processes and systems to support members
fulling joint roles.
Project Title: Joint Oversight Concepts

Project POCs: Project Lead: Lt Col Eric Peterson, AF/A5S.
Team Members: Lt Astin Moore, 71st APS; Mr. Danny Menashi, AF/A5SM; MSgt Craig Gehron, FA-
2/E-QRF; CMSgt Ian Eishen, FA-2/E-QRF; SMSgt Amy Mendonca, FA-2/E-QRF; and Mr. Dave
Gladden, Booz Allen Hamilton.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and develop an organizational construct authorized to provide joint strategic
Statement: direction, policy oversight, and/or career development guidance across the Air Force enterprise.
Problem Statement: The Air Force lacks an organization to provide joint strategic direction, policy
oversight, and/or career development guidance across the Air Force enterprise.
Project Status: Phase 3, Stakeholder Engagement.
Approach: Phase 1, Research/Analysis Effort: Researched current Air Force functions responsible for joint and
career development policy oversight; determined options for evolution joint oversight and management
across the Air Force.
Phase 2, Design/Build Effort: Developed four possible COAs to oversee the development and
implementation of joint and career development policy.
Phase 3, Stakeholder Engagement: Coordinated with SMEs in AF/A1 to gauge strengths,

weaknesses, and concerns with COAs; also accepted feedback on alternate options.
Parallel Groups: Joint Experiences Working Group.
Recommendations Recommendation options for Air Force Joint Oversight Concepts were assessed and vetted by team
Summary: members, SMEs, key stakeholders, and AF/A5/8 leadership.
Appendix H 70
The recommendations below represent five different alternatives for achieving the purpose of joint
oversight. Recommendations 1-4 are logically exclusive, while recommendation 5 represents a hybrid
solution.
Recommendation 1: Utilize current Air Force functions and organizations to absorb JIIM development
and oversight responsibilities respective to their roles and responsibilities.
Recommendation 2: Establish a division within A1 to serve as centralized team for joint development
policy oversight and to advise external players on integration into respective functions.
Recommendation 3: Establish a new A1 Directorate to lead overall joint policy, development and
integration efforts.
Recommendation 4: Establish Special Staff to lead overall joint policy, development and integration
efforts.
Recommendation 5: Employ a “crawl, walk, run” hybrid model; begin by implementing
Recommendation 1, then gather and analyze data for a three-year period, then implement
Recommendations 2, 3, or 4 if deemed necessary based upon data analysis.
Recommendation 1: Utilize current Air Force functions and organizations to absorb JIIM development and oversight
responsibilities respective to their roles and responsibilities.
Details: This recommendation option requires no changes to the Air Force Organization structure or manpower
and requires A1D to incorporate JIIM policy and guidance into all aspects of force development. In
turn, CFMs, AF/DPG, AF/DPO, AF/DPE, and other effected HAF Staff organizations must incorporate
this JIIM policy and guidance into force development and management actions.
Limitations:
 Because numerous Air Force organizations currently coordinate the various elements of joint
development, collaboration and integration will be key to effective and standardized employment
of JIIM concepts across the Air Force.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A1D and AETC.
OCR: AF/A1P, AFPC, CFMs, AF/A3T, AF/A3O, AF/DPG, AF/DPS, AF/DPO, and AF/DPE.
Recommendation 2: Establish a division within AF/A1D to serve as centralized team for joint development policy oversight
and to advise external players on integration into respective functions.
Details: This recommendation option requires the creation of a “Joint Division” within AF/A1, potentially
AF/A1D. The new AF/A1[D]J division would execute joint guidance and direction from Air Force
leadership and continuously assess policy to ensure that objectives align with Air Force strategic goals
Appendix H 71
and joint force developmental strategies. In addition, AF/A1[D]J would advise and guide stakeholders
(AF/A1[D] divisions, PME, CFMs, AFPC, etc.) to integrate and support joint development efforts.
Limitations:
 The Air Force standup of the Force Development Commander (FD/CC) could shift this Division to
AETC. Additionally, AF/A1D has expressed reluctance to create a new division and has shared
concerns about the directorate enforcing policy rather than providing guidance for CFMs to
implement and enforce.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A1 and AETC.
OCR: AF/A1P, AFPC, CFMs, AF/A3T, AF/A3O, AF/DPG, AF/DPS, AF/DPO, and AF/DPE.
Recommendation 3: Establish new AF/A1 Directorate to lead overall joint policy, development and integration efforts.
Details: This recommendation option requires the creation of a “Joint Directorate” within AF/A1. The new
AF/A1J division would execute joint guidance and direction from Air Force leadership and
continuously assess policy to ensure that objectives align with Air Force strategic goals and joint force
developmental strategies. AF/A1J would also advise and guide stakeholders (AF/A1D divisions, PME,
CFMs, AFPC, etc.) to integrate and support joint development efforts. Further, AF/A1J would develop,
track, and validate JIIM experience equivalency, training, and joint assignment qualifying billets. The
directorate would prioritize Air Force JIIM training, exercises, deployments, and assignments across
the DoD for integration into personnel career development planning. Finally, AF/A1J would manage
the “Bench” for senior officer and enlisted joint leadership positions.
Limitations:
 AF/A1 personnel have expressed that this work would likely be considered outside of A1’s scope.
Therefore, this option may receive significant pushback.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A1M.
OCR: AF/A1D, AETC, AF/A1P, AFPC, CFMs, AF/A3T, AF/A3O, AF/DPG, AF/DPS, AF/DPO, and
AF/DPE.
Execution Timeline: Near-Term [or Mid-Term].
Recommendation 4: Establish new organization directly under the Chief of Staff to lead overall joint policy, development
and integration efforts.
Details: In essence, this recommendation option requires the creation of a new Deputy Chief of Staff for Air
Force Joint Integration (e.g., AF/A12) or an equivalent organization. The new organization would
Appendix H 72
execute joint guidance and direction from Air Force leadership and continuously assess policy to
ensure that objectives align with Air Force strategic goals and joint force developmental strategies.
Although resource-heavy, this option would create a true “Joint Champion” to steer Airmen joint
development.
Limitations:
 The development of AF/A12 or an equivalent organization would take a significant amount of
resources (finances, time, and manpower).
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A1M.
OCR: AF/A1D, AETC, AF/A1P, AFPC, CFMs, AF/A3T, AF/A3O, AF/DPG, AF/DPS, AF/DPO, and
AF/DPE.
Execution Timeline: Mid-Term or Long-Term.
Recommendation 5: Employ a “crawl, walk, run” hybrid model; implement Recommendation 1 immediately, then gather
and analyze data for a two year period to assess and make refined recommendation on the utility and
value of Recommendations 2, 3, or 4 based on persistent gaps in joint development.
Details: This recommendation would entail implementation of Recommendation 1 (see above) and then a
period of collecting and analyzing data from both Commands and individual Airmen. AF/A9 would be
tasked to analyze two years of data to determine whether recommendation 1 was successful in
substantially strengthening joint development. If continued gaps exists, AF/A9 in coordination with
other stakeholders identified in this flight plan, will refine and make updated recommendations on the
needs for increased joint oversight and policy guidance.
OPR/OCR: OPR: See Recommendation 1.
OCR: See Recommendation 1.
Recommended Finalize COAs, COA Comparison at Air Force Executive Level, COA approval, Formalize
Next Steps: organization form, staff/resource organization, and assess outcome.
Supporting
Documentation:
Charter.docx
Execution Timeline: COAs 1-4: Near-Term, OPR transition is projected for April 2018 with full implementation expected
by August 2018.
COA 5: Mid-Term. OPR transition is projected for April 2018 with full implementation expected by
October 2022.
Appendix H 73
Project Title: Support Air Force Personnel in Isolated Joint Duty Locations
707th Communication Squadron
Problem Statement/ Purpose: Research and analyze current processes and systems used to support members filling joint
Purpose: roles. Identify and address gaps in support to Air Force personnel across the spectrum of joint
environments in order to better prepare, support, empower, and reinforce Airmen assigned to joint
positions, deployments, or exercises.
Problem Statement: Air Force members assigned to joint positions often experience a lack of, or
reduced access to, Air Force support functions that can have detrimental impacts to mission
effectiveness, career progression, morale, family support, and retention. This can further undermine
the value of joint duty.
Project Status: Phase 2, Initial Analysis and Design Complete.
Approach: Research included interviews with CFMs, SMEs in the field, and reviews of published sources from
across the Air Force. Once initial analysis was completed, the team identified both internal factors
(strengths and weaknesses) and external factors (opportunities and threats) to strengthen Air Force
support for isolated Airmen in the joint environment. Lastly, the team identified potential roadblocks
to the proposed implementation plan considering the DOTMLPF-P spectrum.
The team identified the following gaps in supporting isolated joint Airmen:
 Geographic separation from traditional Air Force bases and support programs isolates some of
those serving in joint roles (Interagency, Sister-service positions, etc.)
 Difficulty in tracking and identifying Airmen who are serving across the wide range of non-
traditional joint opportunities
 There are large variances in the IT systems that are employed across the spectrum of joint
environments
Appendix H 74
 Airmen fulfilling joint supervisory or managerial roles may not have the sufficient training, tools,
or support mechanisms to provide highly competent leadership/advocacy for sister service or
civilian personnel in advance of or during assignments
Note: The initial recommendations outlined below require further analysis and development with the
assistance of designated OPR/OCRs below.
Parallel Groups: Joint Task Force-Headquarters (9th Air Force).
Recommendations Recommendation 1: Create automated alerts to notify members in a timely manner and across
Summary: multiple communication domains of important career actions.
Recommendation 2: Establish a mandatory joint mentorship lesson within enlisted PME courses,
mandate default profiles for MyVector, and strengthen existing mentoring tools/policy to include joint
duty issues and support.
Recommendation 1: Create automated timely alerts across multiple communication mediums, i.e. personal and work
emails and text message, to notify members across the Air Force of personnel career impacting
actions.
Details: The Air Force currently sends various types of messages or “alerts” to members via Air Force Portal,
My Personnel System (MyPers), and Aeromedical Services Information Management System
(ASIMS). Air Force Portal and MyPers alerts are focused on providing members of the force with
general updates to Air Force policy or programs, while ASIMS sends alerts notifying members of due
or overdue individual required actions pertaining to medical readiness. This recommended career
action alert system would notify members to impending personnel actions that have impact on one’s
career. Examples include, but are not limited to, upcoming reenlistment or retainability requirements,
promotion, or PME requirements, to name a few. Members would establish which communication
mediums they wished the alerts to be sent to, such as personal and work emails, and text messaging.
Assumptions:
 Military Personnel Data System (MILPDS) will feed alert system
 Relatively low cost solution with significant impact to Airmen
 Minimal manpower burden
 Minimizes reliance on human processing, and increases timeliness of member notifications, which
are currently reliant upon contact from Force Support Squadron (FSS) or FSS joint location point
of contact
Appendix H 75
 Will decrease overall readiness overdue rates

 Solution could be developed and implemented in a relatively short time-frame
 Cost for IT solution development
 Communication is limited for members in certain overseas locations
 Current acquisition processes may hinder timely development and implementation
 Must protect Personally Identifiable Information; alerts cannot contain this type of information
OPR/OCR: OPR: (Notional) AF/A1X.
OCR: (Notional) AFPOA.
Recommended  AF/A1X
Next Steps: o Assess the full range of personnel actions desired to be on alert
o Assess the systems that house the derived list of actions and ensure all can interface with
MilPDS to send out alerts or can send alerts directly to the member
o Survey the force to determine desired methods of alerting Airmen and assess ability to support
those communication mediums
Recommendation 2: Establish a mandatory joint mentorship lesson within enlisted PME courses to introduce Airmen to
the importance of mentorship, provide tools to help mentor others, and build confidence in adoption
of a mentor role. Mandate default profiles for all Active Duty enlisted Airmen within MyVector, with
a continued emphasis for Airmen to strengthen these default profiles and to seek out mentors and
mentees. Expand available mentorship tools and plans to include joint duty and support issues,
accessible in Air Force Publications, MyVector, and other Air Force sponsored mentor IT systems.
Details: Mentoring is an essential ingredient in developing well-rounded, professional, and competent future
leaders. To support this, the Air Force has established initiatives to develop and enhance mentorship
opportunities and tools. Mentoring can be informal or deliberate and is often built on a foundation of
experience and leadership. Supervisory and leadership skills are taught starting at Airman Leadership
School and throughout the CoL and these skills form a strong foundation from which mentoring can
begin and be applied. However, mentorship lessons are not directly provided in any Air Force
professional military education curriculum, nor are an explanation and guidance of existing mentoring
tools provided. By the time Airmen have reached the SNCO tier, they are expected to be proficient in
this skill. Simultaneously, it is critical that Airmen have mentors of their own in order to continually
guide their careers. Building mature mentoring relationships is difficult within some environments
Appendix H 76
due to the lack of available or ideal fit Air Force senior leaders for a given person, due to limited
access to Air Force-provided tools and systems for mentoring, or even due to a lack of understanding
in the importance of mentoring.
Some of the Air Force’s highly capable Airmen reside in these joint environments, and a lack of
mentoring may stunt their ability to operate at full potential. Without appropriate coaching, highly
capable Airmen assigned to these environments may lack the needed knowledge and support to
quickly adapt to this joint environment. Alternatively, Airmen who spend the majority of their career
in these highly joint environments may lose cognizance of Air Force culture and career-impacting Air
Force policy changes. This sight picture loss may degrade their potential to lead other Airmen and
inhibit awareness of Air Force expectations such as enlisted professional military education or Air
Force opportunities to shape their career field.
To combat these trends, the Air Force must increase emphasis and awareness of mentorship within
enlisted PME courses, particularly at the NCO and SNCO levels. Therefore, evaluating existing
mandatory enlisted course curriculum and deliberately developing mentorship lessons is imperative.
Additionally, modifying required course content in Career Assistance Advisor led courses, such as the
NCO Professional Enhancement Course or the SNCO Professional Enhancement Course as described
in AFI 36-2624, will help reinforce these lessons.
Changing the courseware is not sufficient in itself; the Air Force must continue to strengthen policy
and tools available for mentors and mentees to use. One of these existing tools is MyVector; this tool
was advertised at various times over the past two years. This IT capability is well suited for various
types of mentoring, and allows an influential leader to remain involved in an Airman’s career despite
the obstacle of distance. However, during research, it was discovered that some Airmen had still never
heard of this mentoring capability. Another limitation to MyVector is that it is voluntary and relies on
Airmen creating an account and taking the time to populate their profile with experiences and
interests. Failure to do so limits the information a mentor can use to help guide the mentee or for the
individual to be selected as a mentor for others. To expand the aperture of eligible mentors, it is
recommended that every Airmen have a baseline profile to include name, rank, AFSC, and duty
title/unit assignment history, pulled from authoritative sources, in the system. Airmen should then be
encouraged to further update their profile by opting-in to more detailed data pulls to further round out
their profile. Encouraging Airmen to manually fill out fields such as job interests, family, future role
Appendix H 77
interest, and other factors can further build robust mentoring relationships. It is important to let an
Airman know that is program would be on a voluntary basis and they can choose to leave the program
at any time.
Finally, it is recommended that the Air Force adopt a stronger stance on the need for and
responsibilities of mentors by adding and strengthening existing verbiage in AFI 36-2624 and
AFMAN 36-2643 to reflect the above recommended changes. AFMAN 36-2643 currently contains a
mentoring plan for use; however, it is not sufficient to identify the multitude of areas that Airmen may
need support in isolated joint duty settings. Evaluation of plans that increase focus areas for
mentorship, such as the attached, are suggested.
Assumptions:
 Support for Airmen assigned to isolated joint duty is the focus of these efforts
 PME curriculum content has enough flexibility to support the inclusion of mentorship lessons
 MyVector continues to be the Air Force solution for mentorship
 MyVector can hold the depth of records required to provide all active duty Airmen with an
account
 Airmen should not feel compelled to be a mentor or mentee
 Not all personnel are equipped or suited to be a mentor
 A mentorship relationship is very personal, and any formalization or imposition of formal
agreements and guidance may hinder mentorship
OPR/OCR: OPR: (Notional) Air University, AF/A1D, and AF/A1X.
OCR: AF/A1P, and SAF/MR.
Recommended  Air University
Next o Assess the ability to add a mentoring lesson into Noncommissioned Officer Academy (NCOA)
Steps: and Senior Noncommissioned Officer Academy (SNCOA) curriculum
 AF/A1X
o Work with BamTech to assess the ability to scrub and add all Active Duty Air Force members
into MyVector and determine whether MyVector can hold that volume of records. Develop an
Appendix H 78
Operational Planning Team (OPT)-in/OPT-out system for MyVector to further augment

records with existing data from authoritative sources
 AF/A1D
o Assess the existing tools and language in AFI 36-2640 and AFMAN 36-2643 for updating and
strengthening.
o Assess AFI 36-2624 to build mandated mentoring lessons within NCO Professional
Enhancement and SNCO Professional Enhancement Courses.
o Update AFI 36-2624 with additional mentoring policy and tools
Supporting
Documentation:
Mentoring_Plan_Wor
ksheet.docx
Execution Timeline: Mid-Term, OPR transition is projected for April 2018 with full implementation expected by October
2021.
Appendix H 79
Appendix I – Career Development

This appendix broadly describes how career development will contribute to the Air Force’s goal to strengthen joint leaders. Using a
Talent Management construct, the FA-2 team looked for key areas to improve processes and tools for more deliberate joint
development.
The projects outlined below, in concurrence with FA-2’s other efforts, will bolster the Air Force’s ability to deliberately develop
officers, enlisted, and civilian Airmen who can integrate into, influence, and then lead in the joint environment. The overarching
effort, Deliberate Joint Airmen Development, serves as the foundation for all the other projects by building a framework for joint
leader talent management. Ultimately, it provides the Air Force’s diverse set of human capital stakeholders—supervisors,
commanders, development teams, career field managers, and boards/panels—the capability to identify, assess, and then ultimately
vector or position Airmen based on their joint experience, exposure, or potential. From education and training, deployments, exercises,
and assignments, many Airmen are already getting joint exposure and knowledge that cannot be honed or capitalized on because there
is currently no single system that captures these joint experiences and/or it is never reported. This limitation inhibits the Air Force’s
ability to deliberately groom its personnel for joint leadership progression. While the “Joint Officer Management Program” exists to
track limited officer experiences in the joint environment, there is a need to track civilian, enlisted, and other officer experiences that
cannot be tracked in the current system.
The first project within this effort, Joint Experiences Working Group, provides recommendations to enhance the Air Force’s
fundamental processes and supporting information technology to manage, track, display, and assess joint capabilities. The second
project, ASG utilization, outlines an opportune area in which a small group of high-performing officers can be selectively developed to
expand their competence and credibility in the joint environment. The third project, Vector Air Force Personnel into Joint Duty,
illuminates additional tools the Air Force could employ to improve its ability to vector the right Airmen into the joint environment.
The fourth project, Strengthen Enlisted Talent Management, provides ideas to improve holistic talent management mechanisms for
enlisted personnel. The fifth project, Joint Attributes (Qualities) Working Group, offers an avenue for the Air Force to improve its
ability to define critical individual leader qualities, assess those qualities, and provide meaningful feedback intended to strengthen
leaders and teams. This effort aids the AF in developing, vectoring, and assigning the right Airman into key joint and complex AF
opportunities by including more components of the whole person into its overall assessment and talent management framework.
Furthermore, the sixth project, Airmen Attributes/Qualities for Recruiting and Accessions, is identified as a key area for future study to
potentially improve its ability to recruit the joint leaders of the future. Moreover, the seventh project, Identify Key Billets for Joint
Development, lays out the Air Force need to clearly define the positions it wants to target for joint development. Finally, the project,
Civilian Joint Leader Development, provides a framework for improving the joint capabilities of the civilian workforce by instilling an
enterprise talent management cell to oversee joint development
Appendix I 80
While a joint development lens underpinned the projects below, many of ideas can be applied to other talent management
improvement projects.
Project Title: Joint Experiences Working Group (JEWG)

Project POCs: Project Lead: Lt Col Eric Peterson, AF/A5SS.
Team Members: Lt Astin Moore, 71st APS; Mr. Danny Menashi, AF/A5SM; MSgt Craig Gehron,
FA-2/E-QRF; Mr. Dave Gladden, Booz Allen Hamilton; Lt Col Dalian Washington, AF/A1; CMSgt
John Bentivegna, AF/A1; Anthony Delgado AFPOA; and Jeffrey Gatcomb, AFPC/DP3AM; and
Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA) performance of project USAF Joint Experience Assessment
(HQ0034-14-D-0001).
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and develop the processes and tools to deliberately develop Airmen (Total Force
Statement: officer, enlisted, and civilian) for Joint leadership across the talent management spectrum. While
tracking will foster and enable better management of joint experienced Airmen, it will also help to
incentivize our Airmen to seek “valued” joint experiences to strengthen the overall Air Force.
Problem Statement: The Air Force lacks the processes and tools to identify, measure, assess and track
joint experiences for deliberate joint development. The current Joint Qualification System (JQS) is
Officer centric and does not sufficiently capture joint experiences due to the restrictive and strategic
nature of its criterion. This limits the Air Force’s ability to identify and access the established pool of
joint-experienced personnel, as well as the ability to track unique knowledge and skills garnered from
joint experiences, both traditional and non-traditional.
Project Status: Phase 3, Build.
Approach: The capability as an enterprise to identify, assess, and then place the right person into a position or
developmental opportunity is underpinned by Air Force human resource systems and processes that
track personnel knowledge and experiences. The major gap in the Air Force’s current ability to
identify and then utilize joint Airmen, is the fact that multitudes of joint experiences are simply not
captured. From exercises, education, deployments, and non-standard training, many Airmen are
already getting joint exposure that is never tracked in any Air Force system. The team’s mission was
to ensure that the Air Force did a better job of capturing joint exposure and knowledge so that
supervisors, hiring authorities, development teams, and boards could utilize this data to make more
informed personnel management decisions for both development and utilization. While a few
functional communities have developed their own tracking mechanisms for joint development, this
information is often stovepiped and not cross-shared throughout Air Force human resource systems.
Appendix I 81
The JEWG took a broad approach to determine the best tracking mechanism to utilize at the
enterprise level. Capturing relevant and meaningful joint experiences for officers, enlisted, and
civilians across the functional areas required the JEWG to better understand the potentially
independent tracking requirements within this spectrum. Each functional area values different
experiences and learning opportunities based on their own developmental needs and independent
culture. Additionally, some career fields have little joint opportunity in the current environment while
others spend a significant amount of their time in the joint environment. In order to account for this
diversity, the group conducted workshops, conferences, interviews, and research in conjunction with
the Institute of Defense Analyses (IDA) to determine the most appropriate enterprise method to
identify, assess, and then capture joint experiences. This process involved representatives from 19
career fields and some of the major stakeholders involved in policy or implementation. During this
process, the group evaluated and collected feedback on current tracking mechanisms such as Special
Experience Identifiers (SEI), other manual-input options, and more automated ways to capture joint
data.
After clearly defining the foundational concepts, the team developed various models for joint
experience tracking. Eventually, the team down-selected the various options into three discrete Joint
Experience models that varied in joint specificity (joint aperture), the amount of granularity they
reported (joint depth), and the methods they employed to determine joint value (art/science). The
three methodologies were then vetted through several groups of SMEs to determine the
strengths/weaknesses, feasibility, costs (time and resources), and overall value in relation to career
development. The team’s recommendations below are informed by this robust analysis.
The following list describes some of the major tasks that were accomplished during the team’s three
phases of the project (Analysis, Design, and Build):
Phase 1, Analysis Effort: Initiated contract with IDA for research and analysis; Determined the need
and extent of current joint experience tracking (Officer, Enlisted, Civilian); Identified an OPR for
current joint experience identification and tracking; Identified team members, key stakeholders and
SMEs; Identified connections to FA-2 project teams; Reviewed J-1/JOM (Joint Officer Management)
methodologies and management processes; Reviewed JOM approved exercises, education, and
training; Determined need for an Air Force and service joint qualification system.
Appendix I 82
Phase 2, Design Effort: Developed list of non-traditional joint experiences; Built team to research
current IT systems; Developed definition of AF/Service joint experiences; Created concepts to
identify, measure, assess, and track; Developed models for Joint experience tracking; War-gamed
potential models; Socialized appropriate validation authority; Coordinated with parallel organizations
for nesting/combination of system application
Phase 3, Build Effort: Coordinated with system managers on requirements to build or modify
necessary IT systems; Continued research with IDA for necessary indicators for use in rubric;
Requested cost analysis from A1X/A1M for systematic change request; Team members began
writing initial process and system business rules
Parallel Groups: Joint Exercise Study, NAF/Wing Inspections, Air Force Equivalency Credit for Joint Positions, PME
Exchanges, Vector Air Force Personnel into Joint Duty, Joint Attributes, Airmen Attributes for
Recruiting/Accessions, ASG Utilization, Strengthen Enlisted Talent Management, Identify Key
Billets for Joint Development, Civilian Joint Leader Development, and Joint Oversight
Recommendations The following recommendations are sequential steps designed to achieve an overall end state of
Summary: properly identifying and tracking an Airman's joint experience as a means to better developing our
joint Airmen as part of the Air Force's overall Talent Management enterprise.
Recommendation 1: Develop and implement a Hybrid IT system, enabling members to receive credit
for both “Coded” and “Self-nominated” JIIM experiences that meet the JIIM experiences definition
outlined in Recommendation 2.
Recommendation 2: Define and apply Air Force-specific JIIM Experiences definition as criterion for
tracking relevant and meaningful joint experiences.
Recommendation 3: Add Joint Experience History block to the Single Unit Retrieval Format (SURF)
that reports those JIIM experiences identified which meet the Air Force JIIM experiences definition.
Additionally, Joint Experiences information shall be reported in AETC's Airmen Learning Record (in
development).
Recommendation 4: Modify current IT systems to support identifying, tracking and reporting of JIIM
experiences into Joint Experience History block of SURF and the Airmen’s Learning Record (in
design by AETC) while developing long-term requirements for more comprehensive talent
management querying and reporting.
Appendix I 83
Recommendation 5: Standardize the employment of SEIs to track specific joint capabilities and skills
required for joint development within Air Force functional areas.
Recommendations 1-4 are mutually supporting and are required in order to establish the definition
(rubric), processes, and supporting information technology changes to accomplish the stated goals of
the Joint Experiences Working Group. Recommendation 1 provides the data capture methodology
based on the definition in recommendation 2. Recommendation 3 suggests the reporting tool while
recommendation 4 modifies and builds the requisite IT architecture. Recommendation 5 provides a
complementary tracking mechanism for more granular level tracking needed by functional areas.
Supporting
Documentation:
JEWG Attachment JEWG Attachment
1_2.docx 3_IT Model.pptx
Recommendation 1: Develop and implement a Hybrid IT system, enabling members to receive credit for both “Coded”
and “Self-nominated” JIIM experiences that meet the JIIM experiences definition outlined in
Recommendation 2.
Details: The analysis and feedback approach outlined above led the team to recommend an automated hybrid
solution similar in concept to the JQS. This hybrid-solution was the best option to capture both
traditional and non-traditional joint experiences. A solely self-nominative was too manpower
intensive by itself, while just coding (“tagging”) experiences in current systems could not capture the
totality of experiences that Airmen get in various learning environments. For example, Airmen are
often asked to participate in non-standard training in the joint environment that current systems do
not identify.
The hybrid-solution concept being recommended is not a singular solution for capturing joint
experience. Much like the JQS, it requires the coding of billets to tag them as joint, while also
tracking relevant and meaningful data for these positions that can be stored in personnel records for
reporting purposes. However, the team also envisions that this coding should also be applied to
recurring deployments, exercises, and education. The other half of the solution is to enable members
to self-identify other joint experiences through an IT interface. This will enable members to receive
credit for experiences that simply cannot be coded due to system limitations. Both the coding process
and the IT interface for self-reporting will use the JIIM experience definition to determine which
experiences are credited. See Attachment 3 for graphical depiction of this overall design.
Appendix I 84
OPR/OCR: OPRs: AF/A1 and AETC.

OCRs: Functional Area Authorities and Managers, Career Field Managers, SAF/PA, and SAF/MR.
Recommended  Coordinate with HAF functions to incorporate policy updates/changes/recommendations
Next Steps:  PA develop communications plan and draft references to be published enterprise wide
Execution Timeline: Reference timeline found in Recommendation 4.
Recommendation 2: Define and apply Air Force specific JIIM Experiences definition as criterion for tracking relevant and
meaningful joint experiences
Details: In concert with the Joint Core Competencies, the JIIM Experiences definition serves as a driver for
force development and assessment. It serves as the determinant for what the Air Force considers a
relevant and meaningful joint (JIIM) experience and what is tracked.
The recommendation to utilize a specific Air Force definition for tracking joint experiences was
informed by key findings during the JEWG problem framing. First, the focus area team was given
directive to open the aperture of what is considered “joint.” In order to accomplish this, it was
recognized that the Air Force needed to value and account for the diverse spectrum of both traditional
and non-traditional joint experiences across the various career fields. Second, the current “Joint
Matters” definition utilized as the rubric in the JQS was found to be too narrow and strategic for
capturing more Air Force experiences. Third, making changes to the Joint Matters definition was
outside the scope of Air Force authority as it is defined by Congress in United States Code.
Moreover, this definition and the JQS is designed for Officer joint development. Due to these
limitations and inputs received from both CFM focus groups and Airmen interviews, the JIIM
Experiences definition was developed.
JIIM Experience definition: An assignment or experience that develops or demonstrates the

appropriate level of mastery of knowledge, skills, and abilities in joint, interagency,
intergovernmental, or multinational (JIIM) topics or activities.
This definition is worded broadly to capture experiences not limited by the JQS – not only billets and
operational assignments, but also education, exercises, and other experiences. In addition, the breadth
of the definition supports application to officers, enlisted, and civilian career management. It is
adapted from the Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction (CJCSI) 1330.05A for experience-
based joint duty assignments (E-JDA). Ultimately, the recommended JIIM Experiences definition
Appendix I 85
aligns with joint policy and expands the range of experiences included while eliminating the officer
centric focus.
The above definition and preliminary indicators below will be used for feasibility testing to
determine which variables capture JIIM experiences most effectively and efficiently. The goal of this
feasibility testing will be to refine and possibly reduce to a similar set of indicators that meet the
following criteria: availability of the information, the value they provide in achieving the goals of this
initiative, the unique information they provide, their ease of use for pre-coding or self-nomination
purposes, and their practical utility for personnel decisions.
Preliminary indicators include:

 Experience duration
 Proportion of duties (or time) that involve other service or JIIM matters
 Interaction with non-own-service personnel
 Organizational level
 Level of war
 Role
 JIIM topics or activities
 Joint function(s) (as defined in Joint Publication 3-0)
Note: Reference Supporting Documentation for indicator definitions.
Feedback from CFMs indicated that the roles or levels of involvement are valuable in determining
whether an experience qualifies as a JIIM experience. As with the recommended JIIM definition, the
roles include not only joint experiences, but are more broadly defined in terms of JIIM to include a
range of different experiences, grades, and career fields. The addition of “Learn” accommodates
educational and other experiences that may not be captured in the other roles. The roles refer to the
level of a member’s involvement in JIIM activities. The roles progressively increase in the degree
and complexity of JIIM involvement.
 Learn – Develops or demonstrates understanding of JIIM lexicon, organizations, and doctrine
and/or knowledge of non-own-service organizations (other services, agencies, and nations)
Appendix I 86
 Integrate – Participates in a JIIM environment; demonstrates understanding of JIIM lexicon,

organizations, or doctrine; applies knowledge of JIIM activities and operations
 Influence – Builds upon “integrate;” applies knowledge and use of Air Force functions,
capabilities, and operational specifics within a JIIM environment to provide credible impact on
operations; applies combined arms/unified action, operational and strategic art, or the integration
of airpower
 Lead – Coordinates, aligns, or directs efforts of a JIIM team to accomplish tactical, operational,
or strategic objectives
These roles characterize the member’s actions with regard to JIIM matters or activities rather than the
member’s capabilities or proficiencies. Although valuable, assessing capabilities and proficiencies
raises challenges that would likely require more time and resources than assessing experiences.
Limitations:
 Enterprise level process/systems do not exist
OPR/OCR: OPR: Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA), USAF Joint Experience Assessment project (HQ0034-
14-D-0001) in conjunction with Joint Experiences Working Group.
OCRs: AF/A1M, MAJCOM/A1s, CFMs, AF/A1P, AF/A3T, AF/A3OD, AETC/A2/3/10, and
SAF/MR.
Recommended  Complete Feasibility Testing
Next Steps:  Refine and Finalize the JIIM Experiences definition
 Publish JIIM definition into Air Force doctrine and policy
 Assess billets, education sources, deployments, and exercises according to finalized JIIM
experiences definition
 Coordinate with proper authorities to code selected JIIM experiences
 Assessed the JIIM definition, on a four-year cycle, to ensure it continues to reflect Air Force
needs and meet overall intent.
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, FY18-19.
 Feasibility Testing with IDA contract support from October 2017 through February 2018
 Refine and finalize AF JIIM definition, February 2018 through April 2018
 Publish JIIM definition and indicators to AF Doctrine/Policy, May 2018 through June 2018
 Survey and code Joint Experiences, June 2018 through May 2019
Appendix I 87
Recommendation 3: Add Joint Experience History block to the SURF that reports those JIIM experiences identified which
meet the Air Force JIIM experiences definition. Additionally, Joint Experiences information shall be
reported in AETC's Airmen Learning Record (in development).
Details: During its analysis phase, the JEWG set out to answer a foundational question; how would this
system create value for the Air Force enterprise, program and personnel managers, and members.
With the goal of strengthening joint development, the group needed to collect inputs from the
different functional areas to better define the end state, the output or actual reporting mechanism of
an Airman’s joint experience. The JEWG developed and solicited feedback on four concepts to
identify and adjudicate the various needs for joint tracking across Air Force career fields: Joint
Tiering (levels), Joint Experience Score, Joint Experience Identifiers (SEIs), and Joint Experience
History. These concepts were presented as options to career field functional managers for potential
application, valuation, feedback, and recommendation.
During the analysis phase, the JEWG also sought feedback on the potential application of joint
experience data across the spectrum: general awareness, professional development, vectoring,
selection and assignment, and finally promotion. Nearly every career field viewed better tracking of
joint experiences as beneficial and that joint knowledge was needed earlier in a career path.
However, there was significant divergence in the utility of tracking versus crediting joint experience
to make vectoring, assignment, and promotion decisions. Many career fields were concerned that
utilizing joint experience explicitly to make advancement decisions could disadvantage some
communities. For selection and assignment purposes, respondents were receptive to the analogy of
foreign language skills – measure, track, incentivize, use in making assignments but has no explicit
impact on advancement. Career field feedback and inputs from senior leaders all pointed to the
importance of utilizing joint experience as one element in a larger whole-person assessment. The end
product needed to balance the art and science of human capital management.
The JEWG determined that the Joint Experiences History was the best balance of
strengths/weaknesses, costs and time to implement, and utility. This solution will ultimately
report/display a person’s list of JIIM experiences, either coded or reported through the self-
identification IT solution, that meet the criterion for the JIIM experiences definition (“rubric”). This
concept provides the personnel manager insight while giving way to the subjectivity needed for
proper outplacement of an Airman.
Appendix I 88
Joint Experience Data will also be available as part of AETC’s Airmen Learning Record, which will
enable Total Force Officers, Enlisted, and Civilians access to their entire learning record to include
joint data.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A1X.
OCR: AFPC and AFPOA.
Recommended  Receive approval for the selected indicators to be displayed
Next Steps:  Determine the format for display
 Provide both system business requirements to the selected IT portfolio manager
Execution Timeline: Reference Recommendation 4.
Recommendation 4: Modify current IT systems to support tracking and reporting of JIIM experiences into Joint
Experience History block of SURF and the Airmen’s Learning Record (in design by AETC) while
developing long-term requirements for more comprehensive “joint experience” querying and
reporting.
Details: With the need for an efficient way to track the joint experiences of Airmen, the Joint Experience
Working Group coordinated with representatives from A1XI, A1D, A1P, A1H, SAF/AQ, A9,
AETC/A5S, CoL effort, and BamTech to solicit recommendations for both short and long-term IT
solutions to support its design requirements. Research and analysis proved that the process to create,
design, build, test, restructure and implement a brand-new system would face challenges including
priority, cost and time. With time being a significant factor, in order to meet the CSAF deadline, our
SMEs recommended modification of current Air Force IT systems as a preliminary solution while a
new system could by designed, utilizing a spiral development approach. This approach allows the
program manager to introduce the ideas and requirements, while evaluating the need for potential
enhancements or a standalone system.
In order to accommodate both the short and long-term requirements of the JEWG, multiple Human
Resource Information Systems will have to undergo modification in order to track JIIM experiences.
The Air Force utilizes different systems to manage the various experiences that the JEWG hopes to
“code” as meeting the joint experiences definition. Each of these IT systems, such as Manpower
Programming and Execution System (MPES) for Unit Manpower Document, which interfaces with
the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) for assignments, Deliberate and Crisis Action
Planning and Execution System (DCAPES) for deployments, and Defense Transaction Interface
Module System (DTIMS) for exercises will need modifications to support coding. The extent of
Appendix I 89
these changes will be informed by the joint experience definition feasibility study, which will outline
the key data elements for inclusion into existing IT architecture. Additionally, MilPDS (military) and
DCPDS (civilian) will both need the ability to store this personnel data and will require
modifications. Finally, current Human Resource Information systems (HRIS) do not support the
functionality to allow members to self-identify joint experiences and then authenticate/validate this
information as the appropriate level. This capability will need to be nested within current or emergent
IT architecture or be developed as a new system.
While the short-term requirements are informed by a crawl-walk-run approach, the JEWG’s long-
term vision is to provide further capability for deliberate joint development. One of the key areas for
improvement identified by nearly all career fields was the ability to query and compare personnel
records for joint experience and capability. While current IT architecture cannot support these
requirements, this capability will significantly augment the capability to effectively identify, assess,
and deliberately develop joint experienced Airmen. Precursory to this long-term vision, is the need to
identify those key elements or joint experience identifiers that should be tracked in human resource
systems. Tracking of these data elements will need to occur in initial rollouts in order to phase in the
query ability later.
These data elements are a key aspect of feasibility testing. Another potential addition in future
rollouts, is the ability apply an algorithm to assess, weight, and then potentially score joint
experiences. While many career fields saw the value in this capability because a score could be
utilized on both the supply and demand side of career development. On the demand side, a joint
experience score could define the requirements for a position or another joint experience. This would
also enable faster screening for joint experience. However, this concept could also further constrain
career field managers in the art of talent management and create a system of have/have nots. Due to
these reasons and the relative immaturity of tracking joint experiences, this concept could be further
explored for future implementation in later cycles.
Finding: As there are parallel projects being performed in other organizations, the JEWG may be able
to nest its requirements within another system.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A1X.
OCR: AF/A1XI, AFPOA, AFPC, AF/A1M, AF/A3T, SAF/MR, and AF/A3OD.
Recommended Provide both process and system business requirements to selected IT portfolio managers.
Appendix I 90
Next Steps:
Execution Timeline: Near-Term:
 Coordinate/Staff business requirements, March 2018 through May 2018
 MilPDS change request by November 2018
 IT modifications to “coding” systems by February 2019
 Self-Nomination Interface system in place by March 2019
 Joint History Block added to SURF by April 2019
 Fully enable Joint Tracking system by May 2019+
Recommendation 5: Standardize the employment of SEIs to track specific joint capabilities and skills required for joint
development within Air Force functional areas.
Details: Complementary to the goal of doing better enterprise-wide tracking of Joint Experiences based on a
common rubric, is the vision of creating a common and standardized construct to capture joint skills
and capabilities needed for functional requirements. Due to the diversity of the specific joint
knowledge and skills needed across the different career fields, utilizing SEIs commonly across the
Air Force enables a better balancing of institutional requirements versus functional requirements.
This balance of institutional tracking via coding and self-identification of joint experiences married
to standardized use of SEIs for use by functional areas, enables more cohesive identification of
individuals joint capabilities. SEIs enable more granular identification of specific skills or knowledge
showing potential joint depth, while the enterprise system will show more joint breadth. The
combination is synergistic—the ability to identify and position the right person for the right
experience at the right time.
Recommend stakeholders create SEIs to identify Airmen with various joint capabilities and skills and
incorporate the “joint” SEIs into both Air Force Enlisted Classification Directory (AFECD) and Air
Force Officer Classification Directory (AFOCD) in order to better identify Airmen with these
capabilities.
Considerations:
 Enlisted SEIs are composed of three alphanumeric characters; however, individual characters in
the SEI have no significant meaning
o Enlisted currently utilize 1,003 SEIs as of April 2017
Appendix I 91
 Officer SEIs are also composed of three alphanumeric characters; however, this system is
comprised of an activity code (first character) and experience set (last two characters)
o Over 46,000 separate SEI codes are possible in the officer SEI program when combining the
Activity Code and Experience Set; however, many of them are being used currently
o “G, K, N, Q, V, Y, Z” Officer Activity Codes are not being utilized
o Many of the Experience Set codes are being utilized
 MilPDS does not impose a restraint on the number of SEIs that can be recorded
Limitations:
 Research has identified difficulties in implementing common joint SEIs for both officers and
enlisted due to the differing SEI constructs of both, which severely limits the number of
combinations available for different types of common SEIs
o Functionally, the officer SEI system imposes limitations on the number of different
experiences that could be tracked
 As an example, a “Y” activity code could denote Joint for an officer but a large number of
the two character experience set codes are already used, thereby limiting the number of
available combinations to capture different joint experiences
o Contrasting the officer SEI system, an enlisted SEI has no notion of activity and experience
set code combination. Therefore, no combination of “Y” and two accompanying characters
are used currently and open up a much wider range of available ways to capture different joint
experiences
 Some joint experiences SEIs already existing for enlisted personnel such as Joint Special
Operations Task Force (JSOTF) or Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) experience
 AFECD policy imposes a limit on the number of SEIs that can be attached to an enlisted member
o This policy limitation is partially based on the capacity and use of systems that display SEIs
attached to a member. Therefore, SEIs may be assigned but not be visible for an Airman
o SEIs that may be concurrently recorded in an Airman’s record are currently set to five with
the primary AFSC, five with the 2AFSC, four with the 3AFSC, three with the 4AFSC, and
one in the general SEI area
 There is no date attached to an SEI; therefore, there is no way of determining when it was applied
in the current system
o This could be remedied by changing the procedures on how SEIs are applied. For example,
adopting the SEI removal procedures for SEI application by using the Case Management
Appendix I 92
System in MyPers would provide an ability to track the date it was applied but limit flexibility
on application of the SEI
o Alternatively, the MilPDS or associated system capabilities could be expanded to track the
date at which an SEI was applied to an individual
Implementation Options:
 There are three ways to implement a joint SEI:
o Keep the officer and enlisted systems separate
 Officer SEIs would be limited as compared to enlisted SEIs
 Similar experiences may have different SEIs within the officer and enlisted corps
o Adopt the officer system to capture joint experiences for both officers and enlisted
 Limits both officer and enlisted SEIs but keeps those experiences uniform and easily
recognized
o Modify the officer SEI system
 This could be a complete overhaul, requiring an update for existing SEIs
• Could mirror the enlisted system and open up more combinations to capture these
experiences
 Alternatively, a “Y” activity code SEI for officers could work differently from how other
officer SEIs work and ignore the concept of an experience set
• Could ignore currently used experienced sets and mirror the enlisted system, opening
up more combinations to capture these experiences
• Would be confusing for officers as two different applications of SEIs would exist
 If it is determined that it is feasible to standardize the employment of officer and enlisted SEIs,
the Joint Experiences Working Group recommends using the Joint Functions and/or the
standardized joint staff structure as a framework for tracking specific joint experiences,
capabilities, and skills
o Example: J2T
 Could be used for tracking a defined capability in joint intelligence targeting
o Example: J3P
 Could be used to identify Airmen who have skills in joint operational planning
o Existing SEIs that describe joint experience would need to be recoded in order to align with
the framework described above
Appendix I 93
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A1PT, HQ AFPC/DP3DW, and HQ AFPC/DPSIC.

OCR: Functional Managers, CFMs, and SAF/MR.
Recommended AF/A1PT: Modify AFI 36-2101 with adjusted SEI policy.
Next Steps: HQ AFPC/DP3DW: Work with FAMs and CFMs to develop the list of newly needed joint SEIs and
update AFOCD/AFECD as appropriate.
HQ AFPC/DPSIC: Establish and oversee policies for classifying personnel, which includes
developing, reviewing, interpreting, and changing classification policy and procedures for classifying
military personnel.
Recommend working with CFMs and HQ AFPC/DPSIC to establish and revise SEIs for both officers
and enlisted.
Execution Timeline: Near-Term: must conduct workgroup and feedback session on the need, value and feasibility of
developing and using Joint Experience SEIs. OPR transition is projected for April 2018 with full
implementation expected by May 2019.
Other The following decisions areas and recommendations should be considered during implementation of
Considerations: recommendations 1 through 4.
 Requirement(s). The requirement for JIIM experiences should be clearly identified to drive
identification of expected outcomes for personnel, careers paths, or mission. Clearly identifying
the requirement (“demand signal”) is necessary to determine and then evaluate the success of
joint tracking
 Purpose and intended use of JIIM experiences reporting. This decision impacts the IT
requirements, the granularity needed for tracking, and the communications required to encourage
both self-nomination and the validation of self-nominations
o Recommend joint experience information be utilized for professional development, vectoring,
and selection and assignment. For early implementation, it is not recommended that joint
experience data be visible and used in promotion boards. This data could be unmasked after
an initial grace period and after early progress is assessed
o Proponency. Identifying or establishing OPR is a critical step prior to implementation
o Final decision TBD. The working group recommends the OPR be the Air Force organization
charged with Force Development. Because the definitive roles and responsibilities of the
Force Development Commander have not been decided, this could either be in AETC’s lane
or remain with AF/A1D
Appendix I 94
 Grades/ranks. Determining to what grade/rank level to extend JIIM experience tracking is a

critical implementation decision that will impact the way ahead and the resources required
o Recommend that this process should be applied to all grades/ranks. This could be downscaled
later due to the additional resources required to track experiences for Airmen of any rank
 Minimum time. The minimum time required in a JIIM experience will need to be identified for
tracking purposes. Each self-nomination must be validated and adjudicated, and a decision will
be needed on the minimum experience that is worth the resources for validation and adjudication
o TBD. No minimum time limitations should be set for feasibility testing. If it is identified that
superfluous experience submissions will likely generate problems in execution, the IDA
should provide a recommendation for minimum time
 Retroactive JIIM credit. A decision will be needed regarding whether, and how retroactively, to
“grandfather” past experiences. For self-nomination, the validation process would likely differ for
less recent experiences, as past supervisors or commanders who can validate the experience may
have moved on to other assignments. For pre-coded positions, a decision is needed on whether to
apply credit for a past assignment in that position, or whether to apply credit only to the current
and any future incumbents in the position
o It is recommended that Airmen should be able to apply for retroactive credit through the self-
identification system to a historical date TBD. Current commanders could serve as the
validation authority for grandfathering. No credit should be granted for newly coded positions
 Coding priorities. Coding of positions, exercises, training, and education is resource intensive,
and decisions will be needed on prioritization of coding. Coding will have to occur in phases, and
leadership input is needed on which career fields, MAJCOMs, ranks/grades, and/or components
should be coded first
 Validation. The appropriate level and organization for authenticating and then validating self-
nomination submissions will need to be determined
o Recommend delegating authentication to first-line supervisors and validation to commanders.
If the Air Force determines that joint experience information will be used for promotion, it
recommends the standup of a joint experiences panel to validate in a manner similar to the
JQS. This enterprise-wide validation will ensure consistency across the different communities
Appendix I 95
Project Title: Advanced Studies Group Utilization

Project POCs: Project Leader: Lt Col Peterson, AF/A5SS.
Team Members: Lt Col Cory Hollon, AF/A5SC.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and assess whether changes are needed to the current Advanced Studies Group
Statement: (ASG) outplacement and utilization program. Air Force Advanced Studies Group graduates are
typically high-performing officers that have considerable potential to reach senior levels of joint
leadership. Increasing the placement of highly talented officers into the joint environment
demonstrates to the broader enterprise that the Air Force values joint broadening.
Problem Statement: The Air Force could more effectively position Advanced Studies Group graduates
into joint and warfighting billets to build competence, establish credibility, and foster joint
relationships.
Project Status: Phase 3; Analysis and Design complete, ready for implementation.
Details: Current Process: Request for ASG graduates are sent to AFPC and validated every year in November.
After the validation, a Council of Colonels in A5/8 prioritize the requested billets using a tier system
(Tier 1= Critical, Tier 2 = Essential, Tier 3 = Other). Within each of these tiers, the A 5/8 council
further prioritizes the billets to give a rank ordered list of the requested ASG staff billets. After the
validation and ranking process, the School of Advanced Air and Space Studies (SAASS)/CC, in
conjunction with AFPC begin to match faces to spaces. During this process, the type of ASG graduate
(SAASS, SAMS, SAW, etc.) is considered in addition to issues like timing, job type, and other
considerations. Further, “warfighting” JTF billets are not considered permanent and therefore, a key
opportunity to develop joint relationships is missed.
Findings: This last year, there were 87 validated requests and 35 Tier 1 billets. Of those 35 Tier 1
billets, only nine were Joint or Combatant Command (CCMD) staff positions. Exchanges with the
Army or United States Marine Corps for division level planners is already being done. ASG graduates
fill those positions regularly, but they are not considered pure “staff billets,” and they will not go
through the process and list identified above.
Parallel Groups: Joint Experience Working Group, PME Exchange.
Recommendations Recommendation 1: Elevate priority of ASG permanent staff positions in Joint/ Combatant Command
Summary: (CCMD) environments.
Appendix I 96
Recommendation 2: Develop mandatory six-month fellowship for ASG graduates into warfighting
positions (JTFs) within their first year of graduation.
Recommendation 3: Increase SAASS capacity and output in order to meet increased demand signal in
joint environments based on recommendations one and two above.
Recommendation 1: Elevate priority of ASG permanent staff positions in Joint/CCMD environments.
Details: This recommendation requires the Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force or AF/A5-8 to provide specific
direction to the A5/8 Council of Colonels to prioritize joint billets for ASG graduates. This guidance
will increase the number joint billets falling in the Tier 1 range and enable the SAASS/CC to assign
more graduates to those positions.
This recommendation will increase the number of positions that the Air Force fills in joint
environment with high-performing officers.
Limitations:
 Increasing the fill rate of officers to joint positions will reduce the number of available graduates
for Air Force institutional billets.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A5/8.
OCR: AFPC.
Recommended HAF A5/8 provide direction to prioritize joint ASG billets.
Next Steps:
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, recommend immediate execution.
Recommendation 2: Develop mandatory six-month fellowship for ASG graduates into warfighting positions (JTFs) within
their first year of graduation.
Details: This recommendation is an area for further study in order to more effectively utilize and develop ASG
graduates strategy and operational planning skills. At the same time, a mandatory fellowship would
enhance operational credibility of ASG graduates with their joint peers and supervisors.
Fellowship placement would be tailored for each graduate based on previous experience, specific
school curriculum, and specific developmental needs.
Waiver recommendations for the mandatory fellowship would be submitted by SAASS/CC for
approval by AF/A5-8.
Appendix I 97
A potential option to increase the amount of joint opportunities in warfighting positions would be to
place ASG graduates into sister-services billets for those graduates from School of Advanced Military
Studies (SAMS), School of Advanced Warfighting (SAWS), and Maritime Advanced Warfighting
School (MAWS). Army, Marine Corps, and Navy graduates of SAASS could reciprocate and serve in
Air Force designated positions. This would require an extensive partnership and coordination with the
other services to effectively manage and implement.
Limitations:
 Requires effective coordination between ACC, AF/A30D, AFPC and SAASS/CC to match
potential deployment fellowships.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A5/8.
OCR: AFPC, AF/A3OD and ACC.
Recommended AF/A5-8 explore feasibility of fellowship in conjunction with key stakeholders involved in matching
Next Steps: Airmen to fellowship opportunities.
Recommendation 3: Increase SAASS capacity and output in order to meet increased demand signal in joint environments
based on recommendations one and two above.
Details: In order to meet the increased demand signal for ASG graduates in joint positions by implementing
recommendations 1 and 2, the Air Force should increase the capacity and output at the advanced
warfighting schools that it owns and operates, SAASS. This recommendation helps alleviate the
major concern that implementing the recommendations above reduce the number of available ASG
graduates to meet AF institutional requirements for airpower strategists. By increasing the supply of
SAASS graduates, the Air Force can still meet its institutional requirements for strategists while still
increasing the numbers in the joint environment at the same time.
Air University, in conjunction with the staff of SAASS, will need to determine the feasibility and
costs of increasing its capacity and output. Even increasing the number of SAASS students by 5 (a 10-
percent increase from 45 to approximately 50), would enable the Air Force to better reconcile its own
requirements while still increasing the number of graduates in joint positions.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AETC/AU.
OCR: AF/A5/8.
Recommended Air University conduct a feasibility study and costs determination of increasing capacity and output
Next Steps: by 10-percent (5 students) and 20-percent (10 students).
Appendix I 98
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, OPR transition is projected for April 2018 with full implementation expected by August
2018.
Project Title: Vector Air Force Personnel into Joint Duty

Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and make recommendations to improve the Air Force’s ability to effectively
Statement: vector personnel into joint opportunities.
Problem Statement: The current process to vector Airmen into assignments is inconsistent across the
Air Force, nontransparent, and does not deliberately develop joint Airmen across a total career.
Project Status: Phase 3; Analysis and Design phases completed.
Approach: The research strategy began with qualitative research consisting of semi-structured and structured
interviews with CFMs, SMEs and analysis of published sources from across the Air Force. The data
collection strategy consisted primarily of quantitative research through both primary and secondary
sources, examining historical background, comparing of cross-functional AFSCs, and enlisted,
officer, and civilian models. Once data was gathered, the team identified internal factors (strengths
and weaknesses) and external factors (opportunities and threats) in a particular area. Examined
respective DOTMLPF-P domains to identify any roadblocks and to develop a roadmap for
implementation.
Recommendations Recommendation 1: Include “narrative block” on enlisted and officer performance reports
Summary: (EPR/OPR) for member to provide desired joint vector comments.
Recommendation 2: Use current Developmental Special Duty (DSD) process to vector Airmen for
Joint billets.
Recommendation 1: Add “narrative block” to EPR/OPR for member to provide desired joint vector comments.
Appendix I 99
Details: The Narrative Block in the EPR/OPR would enable an Airman to identify their interest in a future
role/position and enable a commander’s assessment of whether that person is ready, not ready, or not
eligible. This recommendation would provide leadership a better awareness of member’s career
development aspirations, enabling members and supervisors to discuss future goals and develop a
roadmap. Additionally, it would increase the member’s input to self-identifying interest in future
roles (joint experience, roles, education, DSD), amplifying the member’s sense of ownership over
his/her career.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A1D
OCR: AFPC/DP3SP and SAF/MR.
Recommended Propose to stakeholders for feedback and endorsement. Submit request to change forms and AFI to
Next Steps: AFPC/DP3SP.
Recommendation 2: Use current Developmental Special Duty (DSD) process to vector Airmen for Joint billets.
Details: The Air Force uses the DSD program to vector personnel into special duty assignments and positions
that have been selected due to their unique leadership roles and the member’s responsibility to mentor
and mold future leaders. This recommendation suggests that the DSD process include selective joint
duties or roles that CFMs find significant enough to the Air Force and the joint mission to require
nominations and selective placement. CFMs would be required to identify these positions, and
incorporate them in the DSD process during the existing DSD cycles.
OPR/OCR OPR: AF/A1P.
OCR: CFMs, MAJCOM and NAF WG/CCs, MAJCOM CCM/A1, and SAF/MR.
Recommended Propose to stakeholders for feedback and endorsement. CFMs identify selective joint positions within
Next Steps: their functional communities to incorporate into the DSD process. Propose and submit changes
through AFPC/DP20SS. Update guidance and provide to the force.
2018.
Project Title: Strengthen Enlisted Talent Management

Project POCs: Project Lead: CMSgt Ronald Thompson, FA-2 Core Team.
Appendix I 100
Agency, MSgt Craig Gehron; 315th Cyberspace Operations Squadron; and MSgt Malcolm Curtis,
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research, assess, and make recommendations to improve Air Force Enlisted methods to
Statement: identify and nurture an Airman’s potential and ultimately vector and position personnel to increase
effectiveness within joint roles.
Problem Statement: The Air Force lacks the talent management mechanisms to effectively identify
and vector Enlisted Airmen suited for joint education and assignment opportunities.
Project Status: Phase 1, Initial Research completed.
Approach: Research strategy began with qualitative research consisting of semi-structured and structured
interviews with CFMs, SMEs in the field, and analysis of published sources from across the Air Force.
The data collection strategy consisted primarily of quantitative research through both primary and
secondary sources, examining historical background, and comparisons of cross-functional AFSCs,
enlisted, officer, and civilian models. Once data was gathered, the team identified internal factors
(strengths and weaknesses) and external factors (opportunities and threats) in a particular area.
Examined respective DOTMLPF-P domains to identify any roadblocks and to develop a roadmap for
implementation.
Recommendations Recommendation 1: Incorporate Enlisted Development Team (EDT) policy into AFI 36-2640,
Summary: Executing Total Force Development.
Recommendation 2: Utilize enlisted development teams to identify Airmen placement into joint
positions at the E-7 through E-9 level in order to deliberately develop SNCOs capable of effectively
fulfilling senior joint leadership assignments.
Recommendation 3: Utilize “Future Roles” blocks in EPR to vector Enlisted Airmen for joint roles or
assignments.
Recommendation 1: Incorporate EDT policy into AFI 36-2640, Executing Total Force Development.
Details: Development teams have existed in the Air Force for some time, particularly within the officer
community. These teams exist to help perform a level of talent management and to vector identified
personnel for the right jobs. However, EDT have not existed until fairly recently. This delay has
stunted the deliberate placement of enlisted talent and potentially their growth. Without providing the
right growth opportunities, the Air Force has relied on a right time, right place methodology for
enlisted members. This cannot continue, particularly as senior level echelon Command positions
Appendix I 101
require both an officer, vectored with the right set of experiences, and an enlisted member, who the
Air Force has relied on receiving the right set of experiences by luck of the draw.
The 17th Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, CMSgt James Cody, mandated that all enlisted
AFSCs implement EDTs no later than 1 January 2017, or obtain a waiver if appropriate. According to
AF/A1DI, by March 2017, 76 percent of enlisted career fields (105 of 139) had commenced with
EDTs of some level. To date, all remaining enlisted career fields either have commenced EDTs or
have action plans pending. However, a unified policy across the Air Force does not currently exist; at
least eight different AFIs or policies exist across multiple career fields, which outline EDT processes
uniquely. Furthermore, the lack of policy, oversight, and enforcement does not drive CFMs to utilize a
standardized process or to even implement an EDT at all.
As an example of how EDTs have been implemented within career fields, the weather specialty,
1W0X1, defines development team processes through their Career Field Education and Training Plan
(CFETP), in which the “1W Deliberate Development Board (DDB) will balance career growth
opportunities, Air Force needs, and individual preferences while focusing on developing MSgts and
SMSgts for increased (or higher) leadership positions in the Weather Career Fields. It is aimed at
improving the identification of the right Airman, for the right job, at the right time” (1W0X1 CFETP,
8.2). Furthermore, the 1W0X1 Career Field Education and Training Plan states “SNCOs serving in a
DDB position will be identified with a specific duty title and fill a D-prefix position as defined on the
UMD.”
Alternatively, the Air Mobility Command supplement, AFI 10-207, provides Command Post career
field (1C3) policy for EDTs to “update and execute a prioritization plan for MSgts, SMSgts, and
CMSgts” (AFI 10-207, 13.3.5.4) and annotates eight different development positions. Meanwhile the
Aircrew Flight Equipment Career Field defines processes in AFI 11-301, Volume 5 to include policy
that states, “Ensure Key Development Positions (KDP) and Key Leadership Positons (KLPs) are
coded with a ‘D’ prefix in the personnel management system. (T-2) The ‘D’ prefix identifies positions
on manning documents and personnel serving in, or qualified to serve in, positions requiring
functional area expertise and knowledge.” (AFI 11-301 Volume 5, 2.2.3.3).
In order to standardize disparate efforts across the force and to provide more structured guidance for
career fields, the team recommends stakeholders incorporate the enlisted development team construct
Appendix I 102
into AFI 36-2640, Executing Total Force Development, to ensure the enlisted development team
processes are conducted consistently and deliberately across the force. Current developmental team
functions outlined in AFI 36-2640 allow for consistent, transparent, and deliberate vectoring of
officers and civilians. The team recommends submitting changes to 1.1.4, 1, 1.2.8.4, 3.1, 3.1.1. to
include the words enlisted as well as 3.5.15 and Table 3.1 to deliberately vector enlisted force.
The above policy recommendations must be made with attention paid to CFM needs. To avoid
constraining CFMs on how they must execute their EDTs, the policy should allow for waiver
authority and should provide the flexibility that each CFM needs to accomplish the intent of the EDTs
in a manner that best fits the career field needs, but meets Air Force intent and still maintains integrity
of consistent application across the enlisted corps.
OPR/OCR: OPR: (Notional) AF/A1DI.
OCR: (Notional): SAF/MR
Recommended Review current policy and propose AFI changes in AFI 36-2640.
Next Steps:
Recommendation 2: Utilize enlisted development teams to identify Airmen placement into joint positions at the E-7
through E-9 level in order to deliberately develop SNCOs capable of effectively fulfilling senior joint
leadership assignments.
Details: This recommendation builds upon the first recommendation, which includes holistic EDT policy
within AFI 36-2640. The team recommends key stakeholders utilize EDTs to identify Airmen for
placement into joint positions at the E-7 through E-9 level to deliberately develop future SNCOs to be
positioned into senior joint leadership assignments. Current development team functions exist within
certain enlisted career fields; some of the EDTs are looking only at E-9s, some at E-8s and E-9s, while
some may be looking at all tiers of SNCOs. This recommendation is to drive all functional area EDTs
to look across all tiers of SNCOs. Many E-7s have the opportunity to fill what could be considered a
key development position. Not deliberately looking at E-7s for these positions also narrows the pool
of candidates for the key development and leadership positions at E-8 and E-9. Looking only at E-8s
and E-9s is too late in an Airman’s career and only applies to approximately three percent of the
enlisted force. E-7 is an appropriate grade to look at as these individuals have already been vetted by a
board to even make rank and have already been evaluated for rising above their peers. Finally, some
but not all of these EDTs may consider joint leadership roles for key leadership positions and key
development positions.
Appendix I 103
The team recommends that CFMs and MAJCOM functional managers utilize enlisted development
teams to consider, identify, and code key joint leadership positions and key joint development
positions on unit manning documents and in CFETPs career paths to deliberately vector MSgts,
SMSgts, and CMSgts into these positions. This change strengthens the ability to vector Airmen
towards appropriate joint leadership positions and grow a bench of capable and effective leaders ready
to lead in a joint environment.
OPR/OCR: OPR: (Notional) AF/A1DI.
OCRs: (Notional) All Enlisted CFMs, MAJCOM Functional Managers (MFMs), and SAF/MR.
Recommended AF/A1DI socialize the need to consider joint positions for KLP and KDP designation to CFMs. CFMs
Next Steps: identify these positions within functional community CFETPs. MFMs evaluate the desired mechanism
to capture a KLP or KDP on a unit manning document and code positions as appropriate.
Recommendation 3: Utilize “Future Roles’ blocks in EPR to vector Enlisted Airmen for joint roles or assignments.
Details: The EPR form currently has a future roles section to be used by the commander to recommend roles
or assignments for a member that best serve the Air Force and continues an Airman’s development.
However, this section is not used to feed into any current system or process to vector or place
personnel into those recommended positions. In order to utilize the future roles block deliberately and
effectively, the data would need to be integrated into an IT system, so the right personnel/system can
extract it for use. The data can then be used to identify personnel for selection to joint positions who
have been identified by their leaders as being a qualified and optimal candidate. The CFMs would be
required to provide a standardized list of eligible joint positions and roles available for each AFSC and
rank.
Assumptions:
 CFMs provide a standardized list of eligible positions for each AFSC and rank
 Process will provide EDTs with a “bench” for eligible positions
 Connects force development with performance review
OPR/OCR: OPR: (Notional).AF/A1DI.
OCR: (Notional) AFPC/DP3S , CFMs, MAJCOM and NAF WG/CCs, and SAF/MR.
Appendix I 104
Recommended  Propose to stakeholders for feedback and endorsement

Next Steps:  Submit request to change forms and AFI to AFPC/DP3SP
 CFMs review and identify the list of eligible joint duty positions and roles
 Message changes and provide guidance to the force
2018.
Project Title: Joint Attributes (Qualities) Working Group

Project POCs: Project Leader: CMSgt Ron Thompson, FA-2 Core Team.
Team Members: Dr. Wayne Chappelle, 711th Human Performance Wing; CMSgt Ian Eishen, 9th
Intelligence Squadron; SMSgt Amy Mendonca/692d Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance
Group; MSgt James Clarey, Defense Intelligence Agency; MSgt Craig Gehron, 315th Cyberspace
Operations Squadron; and MSgt Malcolm Curtis, 707th Communication Squadron.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and evaluate how the Air Force can improve its assessment process of Airmen
Statement: attributes/qualities to more effectively develop individual leaders, strengthen leadership teams, and
aid in vectoring and assigning personnel into joint or complex positions.
Problem Statement: The Air Force does not effectively assess joint experience and Airmen
attributes/skills in order to enable more comprehensive talent management decisions across the force.
Project Status: Phase 2, Design. Initial analysis and design completed.
Approach: Defining desired senior leader individual qualities. This was a challenging task fraught with widely
varying opinions and concerns over stereotypes such as Minority Report. In coordinating with PhDs
from AFRL, the 711 HPW, and Air University, we discovered that definition of terms could vary for
individual qualities ranging from qualities to attributes to characteristics, to traits. We found that each
of those terms has a specific meaning that is, from time to time, misused in the context of defining
what qualities an individual possess that can indicate potential behavioral outcomes. For the purpose
Appendix I 105
of this approach, our team has shifted from the word “attribute” to “quality” at the recommendation of
Dr. Stafford from AU.
Rather than create an entirely new list of Air Force desired senior leader qualities, this team took an
approach of combining existing definitions and integrating key leadership attributes. The team
reviewed in depth the current Air Force and sister service Core Values and their sub-set values/traits,
the Air Force’s Institutional Competencies, CJCSI 1800 and 1805, AF 1-1 and AF 1-2, AFI 36-2618,
and a variety of leadership books. It was discovered that ~85% of the Air Force Core Values are also
listed within sister service core values documents which provides a solid foundation for joint
interoperability and credibility. Additionally, many of the key qualities, traits, characteristics,
attributes and leadership behavioral expectations from within these many documents are mutually
supportive, although somewhat disconnected or inconsistent in their use.
From that review, a core group of desired individual qualities was drafted. The broad areas can be
captured within conscientiousness (work ethic, order, self-discipline, decision making…),
extraversion (interpersonal propensities, assertiveness, positivity…), openness (creativity, openness to
change and diversity, intellectual curiosity…), agreeableness (trust, candor, self-control, care for
others…), and neuroticism (emotional reactions, resilience, anger threshold, contentment, impulsivity,
positivity…). We were able to link these psychological qualities/attributes to the Air Force Core
Values with ~80% efficacy. Additionally, these qualities are easily tied to many other key attributes
outlined within the other guiding documents, such as agility, innovation, critical thinking,
anticipation, diversity inclusion, and resilience. A formal and marketable list of Air Force desired
senior leader qualities still needs to be created and approved.
From that foundational work, the working group collaborated with the 711th Human Performance
Wing and leveraged current AF processes and stakeholders in this area. The team’s research strategy
began with qualitative research consisting of interviews with Senior Enlist Leaders serving at the 3 &
4-Star level, CFMs, SMEs in the field, and analysis of published sources from across the Air Force,
including both primary and secondary sources. Early on, this team focused on better understanding of
the opportunities, challenges, and realities of diversity across AFSCs and enlisted, officer, and civilian
processes and development models. This focus led to an approach simplifying those complexities by
taking a BETA test approach that initially targeted senior enlisted leaders at the NAF and above (with
a few select developmental leaders as well). Once data was gathered, the team identified internal
Appendix I 106
factors (strengths and weaknesses) and external factors (opportunities and threats) to determine the
best ways in which the Air Force could improvement its utilization of attributes for making force
development decisions. The team examined this issue through a DOTMLPF-P lens to identify any
roadblocks and to develop a roadmap for implementation.
These initial recommendations outlined below are based on early findings and the ongoing efforts of
the working group team are creating a more mature concept each day that will need to be reconciled
with this early concept as it moves into the initial execution phase in 2018.
NOTE: This approach requires continued work to formally define individual qualities important to
leadership and mission effectiveness and identify/select a scientifically validated assessment
instrument. There is a continued need to explore opportunities and define ways to provide easy access
to meaningful feedback that aids in targeted individual development and strengthening of leadership
teams and aid in vectoring leaders to the best job(s) that fit their unique whole person skills.
Parallel Groups: Joint Experiences Working Group, Airmen Attributes for Recruiting/Accessions.
Recommendations Recommendation 1:
Summary: Approve the implementation of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness Personality Inventory-Revised
(NEO PI-R) assessments for all senior leaders working at the NAF level or above to include
equivalent positions in 2018.
Recommendation 2: Create an Air Force High Potential Airmen model in which to assess ‘High-
Potential’ officers and enlisted for appropriate career development and investment using a “whole
person approach”.
Recommendation 1: Employ the NEO PI-R immediately for target audience senior leaders.
Phase I: (Strengthen individual enlisted senior leaders)

 -Employ the NEO PI-R to assess all enlisted senior leaders at NAF (equivalent) and above.
 -Use NEO PI-R results for senior enlisted leader introspection and targeted development.
 -Employ the Subject Matter Experts at the 711 HPW (Dr. Chappelle) as the lead for assessment
interpretation, feedback, and developmental mentorship for 2018.
 -Utilize the AF Core Values as the initial list of individual qualities yardstick.
 -Continue to develop, validate, and approve a more holistic list of desired leader qualities in CY
2018.
Appendix I 107
 -Hire a permanent Operational & Clinical Psychologist (with a background in AF leadership) to

facilitate long-term interpretation, feedback, mentorship, and program development/management.
 -Develop a standardized feedback mechanism that provides meaningful data and is easily
accessible to the individual while protecting PII/HIPA data. (format along with IT solution)
Phase II: (Strengthen individual officer senior leaders)

 -Employ NEO PI-R assessments for NAF and above Commanders.
 -Provide individualized meaningful feedback and mentorship from the results.
 -Encourage/support targeted development based on individual strengths and areas for
improvement.
Phase III: (Strengthen senior leadership teams)

 -Utilize the NEO PI-R Subject Matter Expert to facilitate leadership team feedback for
commanders and CCMs based on the individual personality factors to strengthen the leadership
team.
Phase IV: (Talent Management)

 -Inclusion of individual qualities for targeted talent management / fill critical and/or uniquely
demanding positions.
Continue to develop and refine this approach throughout BETA testing in calendar year 2018.
Implementation can be phased or inclusive of all 4 phases simultaneously in 2018 based on senior
leader priorities and available resources. Expand and formalize this program in 2019 and into the out-
years. Estimate initial operational capability will be achieved in summer of 2018 and full operational
capability for an expanded audience including all GOs and CCMs at all levels could be in place as
early as 2020.
Details: The importance of understanding individual qualities, (also intermingled with and occasionally
referred to as attributes in this document) related to our strengths and weaknesses (opportunities and
risks) in our effort to strengthen our joint leaders cannot be understated. Individual attributes are
defined in the CJCS Approved Enlisted Desired Leader Attributes, our Air Force Core Values, our Air
Force Institutional Leadership Competencies, and various other sources. Individual qualities can be
defined in a number of sources, but those utilized in the NEO PI-R provide a solid introspective
Appendix I 108
assessment for personal and professional development as well as aligning very tightly with the Air
Force’s desired senior leader attributes. In broad terms, qualities are rarely objectively measured and
just as infrequently do individuals get any insight to their personal attributes or qualities as they apply
to their Air Force duty. Fortunately there are proven instruments in use today within the Air Force
(NEO PI-R) that can help us better understand just what attributes should be valued, how they can be
effectively measured, and how the resulting data can benefit individual development and talent
management supporting FA-2. To leverage these tools along with existing research, FA-2 has
collaborated with the 711th Human Performance Wing to assess the viability of utilizing individual
attributes in the context of Strengthening Joint Leaders and Teams.
The Air Force currently employs the NEO-PI personality assessment tool in the assessment and
selection of Airmen for hard to fill AFSCs. This program is somewhat tailored to the target audience
and has demonstrated promising results. Findings indicate that the data gained through this assessment
tool can help better understand how individual attributes can provide meaningful insight into
individual propensities. This provides an opportunity to target individual development and possibly
amplify talent management.
The FA-2 working group on individual attributes / qualities conducted targeted interviews and limited
research, which identified shortfalls in senior leader development and human capital management.
The team found that a whole person approach that included considerations of knowledge, skills, and
attributes would provide a better developmental roadmap and clearer picture of individual
competencies. It was found that many of our Air Force leaders focus personal development based on
feedback provided through annual evaluations, feedback systems, and documented educational
development paths and completion. For the most part, this captures both knowledge and witnessed /
documented performance, or knowledge and skills. It was found to be extremely infrequent that
leaders are given meaningful and actionable information or feedback on their individual attributes.
Employing an attributes assessment instrument and combining it with meaningful, scientific, and
accessible feedback that complements existing feedback systems will provide individuals very
specific areas to focus on for growth and increased performance. Additionally, it is possible that this
data can be used to help identify and / or prepare individuals for particularly demanding joint duty.
Finally, this can be complemented by assessing both officer and enlisted members of the leadership
team providing pivotal insights to leadership team dynamics and performance.
Appendix I 109
FA-2 research includes using this instrument to assess ~40 senior level Command Chiefs (to include a
few sister service senior enlisted leaders). This data was compiled into a median finding for that group
and translated into a viable feedback format. Initial one-on-one feedback has yielded very positive
comments from participants. Since then one MAJCOM commander has taken the assessment and
another is being scheduled for November. Early concept findings are promising that individual
attributes can positively help focus senior leader development, align personnel attributes to job
demands, and strengthen leadership teams.
This concept is intended to be information and developmental. It is assessed that it should not be used
as a go / no-go qualifier for any reason. However, it is speculated that it could become a viable
probability tool to help vector the right person to the right job at the right time with Talent
Management.
We recommend the AF approve, fund, and employ a scientifically sound individual qualities
assessment instrument designed to strengthen Air Force joint senior leaders through the discovery and
understanding of their personal qualities (strengths, areas for improvement, risks…balanced against
the joint senior leader attributes and service institutional competencies), understanding how their
qualities/attributes will impact a specific joint duty, and how to mesh their qualities / attributes with
their counterparts on the leadership team. Employ the NEO PI-R as the assessment of choice for
attaining individual qualities. Currently this assessment can be purchased via an existing contract
vehicle within the 711 HPW for ~$8-$10 per assessment. Develop a feedback IT solution. Possible
near term solutions include SLCMS, MyVector, or a commercial of the shelf option.
Initial target audience would ideally be NAF and above CCMs (as well as those CCMs specifically
named by the Chief’s Group or the CMSAF) at a minimum, but should include commanders to
maximize benefit. The NEO PI-R is already in use within the AF (JSOC, AETC, 711 HPW), it is
easily accessible (internet based), and is relatively inexpensive. There will be a need to continue
concept / approach fine-tuning during the first 1-2 years of the program to optimize its effectiveness.
NOTE: This program will require an expert to oversee the program and provide valid interpretation,
individualized feedback, and utilization / modification recommendations for the program.
Appendix I 110
The following documents contain additional information related to this recommendation and are
located in the “Supporting Documentation” section:
 PPT: Senior Leader Qualities Output Notional Reports – provides quick look at how individual
qualities can be displayed and provide meaningful feedback
 PPT: Senior Leader Qualities_28 Nov 17 – provides overview of work on “whole person”
approach to individual qualities and the building block for desired senior leader attributes creation
 Spreadsheet: AF Core Values_NEO PI-R Correlation – provides a line by line look at how the
assessment relates to current AF guidance and individual values, traits, characteristics, qualities
 NEO letter - individual attributes continuity document, letter sent to CCMs for participation in the
Senior Enlisted Attributes data collection / study US Army Human Dimension Strategy -
individual attributes supporting document, shows Army work on individual attributes and talent
management
 2015 CG Signed Future Special Operator Concept - individual attributes supporting document,
shows Special Operations Command (SOCOM) work on individual attributes and talent
management
 09 Fragale Air Force Managing Human Capital Handout - individual attributes supporting
document, shows value to understanding oneself CSEL Duties and Responsibilities - individual
attributes supporting document, shows importance of individual attributes and linkage to high
level duty positions / responsibilities
 CJCS Enlisted Joint Leader Development Program - individual attributes supporting document,
shows joint enlisted leader development linkage to individual attributes
OPR/OCR: OPR: FA-2, 711 HPW, and AF/A1.
OCR: 711 HPW.
Recommended  Hand-off this effort to the new FA-2 team as / when appropriate. Estimate Initial Operating
Next Steps: Concepts in early-mid 2018
 Continue the joint leader attributes research and program development started within FA-2
o Employ assessment for all Command Chief Master Sergeants (CCMs) at NAF and above
(include CCMs named by Chief’s Group)
o Assess new CCM candidates on a voluntary basis as able for long term data collection
o Complete data consolidation and interpretation for senior leader CCMs and GOs already
assessed
 Partner with Col Grogan’s senior officer attributes team at Air University to leverage synergies.
Combine efforts if viable
Appendix I 111

Beta test concept in a phased approach
o Phase I: (partially complete) assess CCMs, gather data and provide meaningful individual
feedback to include all NAF and MAJCOM CCMs for personal insight and development
o Phase II: expand assessment to include commanders at the NAF and MAJCOM level.
o Phase III: Leverage leadership data by providing individualized feedback for the leadership
team to increase cohesion and performance optimization
o Phase IV: employ data for talent management at the NAF and above level
o Beyond Phase IV: Expand the audience below the NAF as resources, logistics, and interest
allow
Recommendation 2: Create an Air Force High Potential Airmen model in which to assess ‘High-Potential’ officers,
enlisted, and civilian for appropriate career development and investment using a “whole person
approach.”
Details: Note: This recommendation has been identified as an area for further future development.
The Center for Creative Leadership has identified the formal designation of “high potential leaders” as
a key factor in the retention, morale, and productivity of a majority of senior leaders. The AF should
leverage this conclusion and integrate the concept into its talent management design.
There is a distinction between individuals who are high performing and those that can be identified as
demonstrating high potential to serve in more challenging roles, often outside of their AFS/AFSC.
High potential personnel are those that are seen to have the ability to rise and succeed as senior
leaders within our Air Force. Although those members may also be high performers within their
specialty, not all high performers are high potentials in this context. High performers may do well in
their current position, but may not demonstrate the skills required to be successful at the next level or
more specifically to grow into senior leadership roles. Air Force supervisors and leaders have
mechanisms in place to assess high performers through the observance of behaviors and duty
performance. However, identifying high potential individuals is more challenging because it relies on
the identification and observance of behaviors and duty performance. However, identifying high
potential individuals is more challenging because it relies on the observance of personal attributes
and/or less obvious behaviors. It is important for the Air Force as an organization to codify the
attributes / qualities and competencies they value for high potentials to allow leaders to more
accurately identify personnel, deliberately develop and mentor them for future roles, and assist the Air
Appendix I 112
Force retaining and employing them. Include the individual AF desired leader qualities list and the
NEO PI-R to assist in better understanding, identifying, and developing high potential leaders.
The document titled, “High Potential Talent” located in the “Supporting Documentation” section
describes shows research finding on the importance of formally defining a high potential program and
openly letting employees know if they are high potential or not.
OPR/OCR: OPR: 711 HPW, AF/A1, and AETC.
OCR: FA-2.
Recommended  711 HPW, in cooperation with key talent management stakeholders, conduct appropriate research
Next Steps: and data gathering to identify attributes and competencies the Air Force values in high potential
Airmen
 Develop Air Force High Potential models for officers, enlisted, and civilians
 Create informational material for the force. Provide information and guidance to leaders for
application
Supporting
Documentation:
09_Fragale Air 2015 CG Signed CJCS Enlisted Joint CSEL Duties and NEO letter.docx US Army Human
Force Managing Human
Future
Capital
Special
Handout.pdf
Operator
Leader
Concept.pdf
DevelopmentResponsibilities.pdf
Program.docx Dimension Strategy 2015.pdf
Senior Leader AF Core Senior Leader High Potential Senior Leader

Qualities_Notional Reports_Short_05
Values_NEO PI-R Correlation.xlsx
Dec
Qualities_28
17.pptx Nov 17.pptx Talent.pdf Qualities Outputs and Example Report Products.pptx
Execution Timeline: Mid-Term, OPR transition is projected for April 2018 with full implementation expected by April
2023.
Project Title: Airmen Attributes/Qualities for Recruiting and Accessions Study

Project POCs: Project Lead: [Area identified for further study by FA-2 team].
Team Members: Air Force Recruiting Service (AFRS)
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and determine if current marketing/assessments/accessions/recruiting standards,
Statement: favoring Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) attributes for officers or other
factors for enlisted, is aligned with expected future environment/requirements and the CSAF’s intent
to strengthen joint leaders and teams.
Appendix I 113
Problem Statement: Is the Air Force overvaluing STEM as part of its identity and recruiting strategy?
What other attributes should the Air Force be looking for in new recruits to be better prepared for the
joint fight and future operational environments? How do we best attract, assess, and recruit these
candidates?
Project Status: Not started. Area identified for future analysis. This project warrants a future study by an external
organization.
Approach: To be determined.
Parallel Groups: Joint Attributes Working Group.
Recommendations Fund a RAND Project Air Force Study to determine whether the Air Force’s prioritization of STEM
Summary: attributes in its recruiting strategy is aligned with the anticipated future fight. If not STEM, then what
attributes and backgrounds should the Air Force be looking for in its new recruits?
Recommendation 1: Fund a RAND Project Air Force Study to determine whether the Air Force’s prioritization of STEM
attributes in its recruiting strategy is aligned with anticipated future fights.
Details: Due to its advanced weapon systems and technology, the Air Force is often identified as the service
that attracts talent with STEM backgrounds. Additionally, the Air Force prioritizes STEM in its CoL
and even in its accession sources. For example, every graduate from the Air Force Academy receives
a Bachelor of Science. Students must take a considerable core of engineering, math, and science
classes in order to graduate. However, a fundamental question is whether this prioritization of STEM
is aligned with the anticipated future fight?
While it is the important to retain the ability to train and operate increasingly sophisticated and
complex weapon systems, there is also a requirement for Airmen to move away from being specialists
and tacticians as they develop. Air Force senior leaders must be generalists and adept at dealing with
the human domain. There is a potential that having a more balanced force of Airmen recruits who
have more general or liberal arts backgrounds could potentially make us better warfighters. It could
potentially encourage more diversity of thought and bring in a larger variety of backgrounds. Finally,
is this weighting of STEM attributes closing the door to talent because potential recruits feel like they
are not the right fit for the Air Force?
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A1.
OCRs: Air Force Recruiting Service and CFMs.
Appendix I 114
Recommended  Submit project description for study of Airmen Attributes as part of Project Air Force (PAF)
Next Steps: submittal process.
 Recommend study be included in next round of funded PAF projects.
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, OPR transition is projected for January 2019 with full implementation expected by
December 2019.
Project Title: Identify Key Billets for Joint Development

Team Members: To be determined.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and identify key joint billets that the Air Force should target for deliberate joint
Statement: development for officers, enlisted, and civilians.
Problem Statement: The Air Force lacks a definitive list in which to provide its human capital
stakeholders as key targets for deliberate joint development.
Project Status: Not Started, project/task recently identified for future analysis.
Approach: To be determined.
Recommendations Identify and list key billets for officers, enlisted, and civilian joint development.
Summary:
Recommendation 1: Identify and list key billets for officers, enlisted, and civilian joint development.
Details: For officer joint development, there has already been analysis performed identifying top-level joint
positions that the Air Force should target for its development. In fact, a recent RAND report, Rare
Birds: Understanding and Addressing Air Force Underrepresentation in Senior Joint Positions in the
Post-Goldwater-Nichols Era, illuminated that the most beneficial positions are linked to strategy-
making and warfighting. At higher echelons of rank, RAND suggested that the Air Force should
target the following positions: “Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; Vice Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff; combatant commands (particularly U.S. Central Command, U.S. Pacific Command,
and U.S. European Command); joint task force commands; director of the Joint Staff; and the Joint
Staff directors of the following three directorates: Operations (J3), Strategic Plans and Policy (J5), and
Appendix I 115
Force Structure, Resources, and Assessment (J8).”3 As part of this analysis, RAND highlighted that
the Air Force has historically been underrepresented in these key joint positions.
This level of analysis needs to be replicated for civilians and enlisted. While it would make sense that
the enlisted model would closely resemble officers, the FA-2 team assumed that key civilian positions
would be more closely aligned with policy rather than warfighting.
Human capital stakeholders could utilize this information to target their high-performing Airmen into
subordinate positions in the identified organizations (directorates, combatant commands, Joint Task
Forces, and Combat Support Areas). This would provide earlier exposure to key areas for joint
development.
OPR/OCR: OPR: (Notional) AF/A1D.
OCR: (Notional) AF/A9, CFMs, and SAF/MR.
Recommended Develop list of positions that are considered JIIM significant—allowing civilian, officer, enlisted
Next Steps: credit, development, and management.
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, OPR transition is projected for April 2018 with full implementation expected by July
2018.
Project Title: Civilian Joint Leader Development

Project POCs: Project Lead: Ms. Ellen Greenwood, AF/DPS.
Team Members: Ms. Lorna Fermanis; Mr. Danny Menashi, AF/A5SM; and Lt Col Dalian
Washington, AF/A1D.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and assess how to improve deliberate joint development of Civilian Airmen.
Statement:
Problem Statement: The Air Force lacks the civilian force development mechanisms to foster
deliberate broadening outside of functional communities.
Project Status: Phase 3; Analysis and Design are complete. Build and Implementation are still required.
3
Caitlin Lee et al., Rare Birds: Understanding and Addressing Air Force Underrepresentation in Senior Joint Positions in the Post-Goldwater-Nichols Era (Santa
Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2017), iii.
Appendix I 116
Approach: This specific group spawned from the larger career development efforts due to many of the unique
development differences of Air Force civilians. Fundamentally, it must be recognized that Air Force
civilians are part of a larger federal and DOD workforce. As such, they have a robust developmental
framework already in place. This includes mandatory progression models and OPM, DOD, and Air
Force competencies. Additionally, civilian structure allows entry and exit at various points along the
career path or on the pyramid. Unlike the military, this makes the civilian workforce an “open
system.” Furthermore, a significant challenge is that New Employee Orientation (NEO) is the only
mandatory training, provided at initial entry into the Air Force civilian workforce. Much like their
military counterparts, key human capital bodies ensure the health of their functional area, including
education, training, and development. For civilians this includes the Civilian Functional Manager
(FM), Development Team (DT), and CFM.
Team Findings: Current development processes are functionally aligned, and underserve those
civilians who venture out of their functional lanes. Career broadening positions are aligned to
functional areas – broadening a civilian within a functional area, but not across functions.
Additionally, the Air Force lacks a central oversight process for those who have become more hybrid
in nature – particularly those who have broadened into non-traditional offices such as legislative
support, engine rooms, and other resource mgmt. offices. As individuals become more broadly
developed at the enterprise level, they may be competitive across several functional communities.
This would require an “enterprise broker” to assist in moving employees across numerous boundaries
– both internal and external to the Air Force.
It was identified early on that the civilian workforce lacks an enterprise-wide body to identify, track,
and develop civilian Airmen for joint duty.
Recommendations Establish Enterprise Talent Management Cell.
Summary:
Recommendation 1: Establish Enterprise Talent Management Cell to Oversee Civilian Joint Development.
Appendix I 117
Details: Create an Enterprise Talent Management system that will develop and sustain civilian leaders who:
 Have enterprise perspectives developed through diverse experiences
 Are prepared for a broader range of leadership in the joint and interagency environment
 Can influence and support complex issues relating to National Security
 Can work as a part of collaborative teams and networks across the AF, DoD, and Interagency
The following Form and Function factors are recommended by the team:
Form:
 This Enterprise Talent Management Cell could nest under AF/A1D or AF/DPS
 The exact size of this body is TBD and requires further study, however proposed recommendation
is two to three central salary account civilians
Functions:
 The key function of the Enterprise Talent Management Cell is to increase “joint capability” of
civilian force by bolstering deliberate rotations in the JIIM environment
 Establish Enterprise Talent Management Program for JIIM-wide Rotations and Outplacement
o Deliberate Development and Management of GS-14/15 and expand to GS 12/13 later
o Utilize/Increase Capacity of civilian developmental programs:
 Civilian Strategic Leadership Program (CSLP), Key Career Positions (KCPs), Career
Broadening Opportunities
 Obtain 25-30 positions from CSA as enterprise rotational
o Use and expand Joint Education at enterprise and functional level
 Defense Senior Leader Development Program (DSLDP), National War College (NWC),
Eisenhower
 Ensure AF and DoD Competency Frameworks aligned
 Develop internal/external roster of developmental positions (OSD Policy; CAPE; Joint; State)
 Enable brokering of high potential civilians through annual process that “advertises” their resumes
to all DTs/CFMs
Resources Required:
Appendix I 118
 Carve out 25-30 positions from functional career broadeners – coordinated with CFMs and
approved by Civilian Force Development Panel (CFDP)
o Align associated PCS and developmental funds
 Align resources to specific training courses that deliberately develop “compensating
competencies”
Constraints:
 Hiring process - civilians outside Air Force positions are no longer Air Force
 OPM hiring rules and competitive hiring processes
 Civilians will enter and exit civilian workforce at any point in career
 Ultimate decision is hiring official for non-CSA Air Force positions
Limitations:
 Getting civilian bodies to support new organization from Central Salary Account
 CCMD / Joint buy-in that JIIM is valued and needed
 Balance of entire workforce awareness with identification/development of “bench”
OPR/OCR: OPR: SAF/AA and AF/A1.
OCR: AETC, CFMs, and SAF/MR.
Recommended  Socialize with CFMs

Next Steps:  AF/A1 approve
 CFDP approve
 Establish Civilian Enterprise Talent Management Cell
 Strategic Messaging and Communication Effort--ensure civilian workforce is prepared to accept
change and maximize potential
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, OPR transition is projected for April 2018 with full implementation expected by August
2018.
Appendix I 119
Appendix J – Structures
This appendix broadly describes seven complementary structural change efforts undertaken by the FA-2 Team in order to achieve the
Air Force’s goal of strengthening joint leaders and teams.
The first structural change effort, Force Presentation Model (FPM) Improvement, was undertaken to develop an enhanced Total Force
presentation construct that will allow the Air Force to maximize its enduring warfighting effectiveness and readiness, as well as to
assist the joint team in defeating current and emerging adversaries and support national security objectives. The second structural
change effort, Deployed Teaming Implementation, was undertaken to increase warfighting effectiveness and Airmen resiliency
through establishment of a minimum deployable team size; begin the transition to a revitalized force presentation focused more on
units and capabilities in lieu of individual Airmen. This policy will limit those deployments through the formation of “teams” to
provide mutual support during the entire deployment continuum of prepare-deploy-redeploy-reintegrate. The third structural change
effort, Numbered Air Force/Wing Inspection Research, will allow further assessment about how the Air Force needs to reform its
current NAF/Wing inspection programs to strengthen joint leaders and teams. The fourth structural change effort, Strengthen Air
Force Institutional Identity, brings together an AF-wide team to research, assess, and generate recommendations on how the Air Force
can strengthen its institutional identity and break the paradigm regarding organizations based on functional guilds. The fifth structural
change effort, Joint Task Force Future Concepts (JTF-Future Concepts), brings together an Air Force-wide team to research and
establish principles and requirements for structure and organization for an Air Force led JTF in future operating environments (2030).
This group will identify gaps in current JTF models relative to envisioned requirements and develop a roadmap for JTF evolution. The
sixth structural change effort, Joint Task Force Next Steps (JTF-Next Steps), will capture lessons learned from the 9 AF/JTF effort,
from both a process and a personnel education and training perspective, and develop a plan to apply those lessons to build future AF
JTF HQs capability and better develop future joint leaders. The final structural change effort, Deployed Training, will research and
assess Rear Mission Support Element’s evolution as a model that provides leadership, best practices, research, support and/or just-in-
time joint training and then make recommendations for organizational alignment and governance.
Project Title: Force Presentation Model (FPM) Improvement

Project POCs: Project Lead: Colonel Bryan Cannady, AF/A5-8.
Team Members: Divided into three major COA teams led by Major Kenyatta Ruffin AF/A5-8.
COA Development Leads:
COA 1: Col. Sean McLay (A8X) and Lt Col. Erin Cluff (AFIMSC).
COA 2: Col. Val Hasberry (A4C) and Lt Col. Jim Mach (A3K).
COA 3: Col. Brian Greenroad (AFSFC) and Lt Col. Abe Jackson (A2O).
Appendix J 120
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Develop a force presentation construct to maximize enduring warfighting effectiveness and
Statement: readiness to defeat current and emerging adversaries and support national security objectives.
Problem Statement: The current Air Force force presentation construct (AEF/AETF) is designed for
functional efficiency over warfighting effectiveness, hindering readiness for operations outside of a
permissive environment.
Project Status: Phase 3, COA development and pursuing further guidance and direction from the CSAF.
Approach: The FPM Improvement project began with overarching Conceptual Planning and will culminate with
Detailed Planning and a recommended FPM that presents effective, ready, and enduring USAF
warfighting forces. The project planning design includes five distinct phases each with measurable
objectives and a desired end state:
Phase 1: Problem Framing: develop a common and unified understanding among working groups
and Senior Leaders based on the CSAF intent and desired outcomes.
Phase 2: Idea Consolidation: merge numerous and diverse ideas into three to six FPM COAs.
Phase 3: COA Development: examine and refine concepts that capture the views of others.
Phase 4: COA “Down Select”: create senior leader decision brief to identify COAs for further
development and define the way forward.
Phase 5: COA Formal Review and Actions: conduct a formal cost/budget analysis and required legal
process coordination; develop strategic communications plan.
COA development throughout the five phases must account for global and regional forces (employ-in-
place vs. deploy-to-employ), factor basing requirements for both home station and forward-deployed
operations, ensure command and control enables integrated, multi-domain operations, and design a
macro model that is understandable and easy to communicate to the force.
Parallel Groups: Deployed Teaming.
Recommendations Develop a force presentation construct maximizing warfighting effectiveness in order to defeat
Summary: current and emerging adversaries and meet national security objectives to present during CORONA
Fall.
Appendix J 121
Recommendation: Develop a force presentation construct maximizing warfighting effectiveness in order to defeat
current and emerging adversaries and meet national security objectives to present during CORONA
Fall.
 Restructure this project by formally chartering this singular effort with more authority to integrate
other force design initiatives across the USAF and establish the requirement to provide various
FPM options within 60 days of commencement.
Details: The effort to develop an alternative to the current Force Presentation Model (FPM) will account for
both global and regional forces and factor basing requirements for both home-station and forward-
deployed operations. A new FPM construct will further ensure C2 architecture enables integrated air,
space, and cyber capabilities in a regional fight. From a communications perspective, the new model
or construct must be understandable and easy to communicate to numerous stakeholders.
Any proposed FPM design will align with three main principles: centers on optimizing warfighting
effectiveness, enables unity of command and effort, and sustains mission readiness. These principles
will result in a construct that presents ready and effective Air Force warfighting forces.
Developed COAs will be evaluated around the four key factors of warfighting effectiveness, readiness
and sustainability, unity of command/effort, and ease of communication:
Warfighting Effectiveness is the ability for Air Force forces to conduct actions in a combat
environment, which produces or enables lethal effects, contributing to the achievement of joint force
objectives.
Readiness and Sustainability enables quantifiable combat capacity and capability, addressing current
and potential threats; maintains an active fighting force, while alleviating continuous pressures from
high deployment operations tempo.
Unity of Command/Effort is the operation of all forces under a single responsible commander who
has the requisite authority to direct and employ those forces in pursuit of a common purpose [JP 3-0].
Ease of Communication properly communicates objectives and relaying Commanders’ intent with all
necessary stakeholders, ensuring a unified mission focus.
Appendix J 122
Note: Cost and risk/timeline estimates will not be incorporated formally as part of the evaluation
process but will be estimated to the extent possible to help lead to an informed decision.
Cost is analysis of resources required to achieve the desired end state and objectives.
Risk/Timeline is the potential for the COA to fail to meet the desired end state or stated objectives.
The assumptions, constraints, and restraints to FPM improvement efforts are listed below.
Assumptions:
 This FPM Improvement effort is not focused on incremental AEF improvements
 COAs can/will impact force generation and presentation
 At a minimum, the Air Force will continue to execute its five core missions
 The demand signal and importance of Agile Combat Support (ACS) and security cooperation will
not diminish
 A standardized “unit of force” model reduces non-standard sourcing solutions
 Standard model may increase warfighting effectiveness, yet decrease efficiency
 Future FPM must utilize Joint language when possible and nest under Joint Functions
 Force Presentation is inextricably linked to command and control
 Future FPM should enable integration of Air Force core functions before combat ops
 Resource constraints should inform, but not limit FPM development
Constraints:
 New Defense Planning Guidance (e.g., NDS) is foundational to FPM transformation
 No degradation to Air Force execution of on-going missions and taskings
 FPM must function across spectrum of conflict
 FPM must enable readiness and sustainability
 SECDEF Deploy and Mob to Dwell guidance remains the same (i.e., 1:2 and 1:5)
 Defense Readiness Reporting System and other Joint processes remains the same
 Future FPM should account for attrition
Restraints:
Appendix J 123
 Requires Congressional approval for base realignment or closure

 Requires Congressional approval to move permanent forces
 Significant portion of force remain assigned to CCMDs
 Availability of limited key assets/capabilities will not increase
OPR/OCR: OPR: FA-2.
OCR: AF Enterprise.
Recommended Refine CSAF guidance and direction.
Next Steps:
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, OPR transition is targeted for October 2018 with projected completion by September
2020.
Project Title: Deployed Teaming

Project POCs: Project Leads: Major David Cochran, FA-2/AF/A5/8 and Kenyatta Ruffin, FA-2/AF/A5/8
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Increase warfighting effectiveness and Airmen resiliency through establishment of a
Statement: minimum team size; begin the transition to a revitalized force presentation focused more on units and
capabilities in lieu of individual Airmen. This policy will limit those deployments through the
formation of “teams” to provide mutual support during the entire deployment continuum of prepare-
deploy-redeploy-reintegrate.
Problem Statement: The Air Force often deploys Airmen in one or two person UTCs; while efficient,
this construct limits effectiveness and creates concerns on unit integrity, home-station manning,
readiness, and sustainability.
Project Status: Completed, this project has been implemented.
Approach: Initial research and efforts were aimed at optimizing teaming through the discussion of attributes,
characteristics, and functionality of highly effective teams. Based upon SecAF and CSAF direction, the
“Deployed Teaming” policy was developed with representatives from across the Total Force. Staffing
and coordination revealed significant feedback and led to the final recommendation submitted to the
CSAF for a phased implementation over three successive six-month periods.
Parallel Groups: None.
Details: A SecAF and CSAF endorsed directive was released and distributed on November 30, 2017. been
released during the 1st Quarter of FY18 instructing Deployed Teaming implementation. Air Force
Appendix J 124
Public Affairs Guidance was released and distributed on November 30, 2017. A copy of these
documents are located in the “Supporting Documentation” section.
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A3OD.
OCR: AF/A4.
Recommended Execute in accordance with roles and responsibilities as outlined in the policy letter.
Next Steps:
Supporting
Documentation:
Directive to Deployed Teaming
Implement Deployed Teams
PAG (FINAL).pdf
and Squadrons Concept20171130.pdf
Execution Timeline: Near-Term. SecAF and CSAF directed an 18-month phased-implementation approach beginning in
FY18. OPR transition occurred October 2017 with full implementation expected by April 2019.
Project Title: Numbered Air Force/Wing Inspection

Project POCs: Project Lead: Nathan Herro, AF/A5SC.
Team Members: Lt Col Cory Hollon, AF/A5SC; Ms. Rachael Curran, Booz-Allen Hamilton; CMSgt
Suzanne Ramirez, AFMISC; and Ms. Sharon Gunselman, SAF/A1CP.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and assess how the Air Force needs to reform its inspection program to strengthen
Statement: joint leaders and teams.
Problem Statement: The Air Force inspection system does not measure and assess readiness of
organizations and Airmen for joint operations.
Project Status: Phase 3 completed; pending OPR transition.
Approach: A phased DOTMLPF-P research and gap analysis approach was used to develop and present data-
driven recommendation opportunities for this project. The third FA-2 Conference, 18-20 July 2017,
was used to kick-off this project. Listed team members generated and refined a task based project
management plan, located in the Supporting Documentation section. Over 25 DoD and Air Force
policies were reviewed to baseline readiness and inspection requirements. Facts, assumptions,
constraints, and risks were identified. Research and analysis was accomplished by reviewing current
doctrine, policy, and guidance. SMEs were consulted to gather facts, identify additional research and
analysis opportunities, list primary and sub-tasks, create key questions, generate requests for
information, and devise and validate recommendation opportunities. DoD Inspector General and Joint
Appendix J 125
Readiness office points of contact were used to research and assess inspection and readiness reporting
processes. Secretary of the Air Force Inspector General and Headquarters Air Force Operation’s
Readiness points of contact were used to research and assess inspection and readiness reporting
processes. Recommended solutions were created and eliminated based on findings and observations.
A review of select NAF, Wing and Squadron Management Inspection and Unit Effectiveness
Inspection reports was accomplished. A qualitative review, of 24 inspection reports, focused on
identifying the following references in each report: 1) Joint; 2) Readiness References; 3) Defense
Readiness Reporting System (DRRS)/Air Expeditionary Force Unit Type Code Reporting Tool
(ART)/Status of Resources and Training System (SORTS)/Ready Aircrew Program (RAP); and 4)
whether joint references were addressed in Major Graded Areas 1, 2, and 4 of each report. This
review determined that joint and readiness references were inconsistently reported. A list of viable
recommendation opportunities were validated with key stakeholders (DOD/IG, SAF/IGI, AFIA and
AF/A3) before being presented to AF/A5/8 for a project decision.
Parallel Groups: Air Force and Joint Doctrine, Joint Competency Working Group, Joint Experience Working Group,
UTC Library Consolidation, Informal Training Reform, Deployment Center of Excellence Evolution,
and Air Force Guidance Reform.
Recommendations Four recommendation opportunities were assessed by team members and SMEs and proposed to key
Summary: stakeholders and AF/A5/8 leadership (Supporting Documentation). Recommendation 1 was
determined to be viable:
Recommendation 1: Modify existing and add questions to the Management and Unit Effectiveness
Inspection Master Question Files that strengthens the way the Air Force measures joint and AEF
readiness at the wing and below levels.
Recommendation 2: Rewrite the entire Management and Unit Effectiveness Inspection Master
Question File to strengthen the way the Air Force measures joint and AEF readiness at the wing and
below levels.
Recommendation 3: CSAF Memo instructing MAJCOM/CCs to assess and report how organizations
are effective in joint functions (training, talent management, exercises, deployments, mission
readiness, etc.) through wing level and below Commander’s Inspection Programs (CCIPs).
Recommendation 4: Status Quo – No inspection modifications required or recommendations offered.
Recommendation 1: 1a. Modify existing and add questions to the Unit Effectiveness Inspection Master Question File that
strengthens the way the Air Force measures joint and AEF readiness at the wing and below levels.
Appendix J 126
1b. Modify existing and add questions to the Management Inspection Master Question File that
strengthens the way the Air Force measures joint and AEF readiness at the Joint Task Force level.
Details: A review of DOD and Air Force inspection and readiness reporting guidance and policy to determine
mandates. Analysis of Squadron, Wing, and Numbered Air Force readiness reporting and
Management and Unit Effectiveness inspections determined that the readiness reporting is not
considered joint readiness reporting and the Air Force Inspection System has limited capability in
measuring readiness in support of joint operations. Modifications to Air Force readiness reporting
would require changes to reporting criteria per Joint Publication 3-33, Title 10 and Chairman of the
Joint Chief of Staff Instruction 3401.02B. The Air Force Inspection System is an evolving system that
does not have an enterprise level assessment system in place; it does allow sub-organizations to assess
themselves in isolation. Strengthening Management Inspection and Unit Effectiveness Inspection
Master Question File questions to assess joint may only impact a handful of squadrons or wings. A
review of the Master Questions Files for Management Inspections and Unit Effectiveness Inspections
are not designed to measure a Joint Task Force Headquarters. A Joint Task Force Headquarters, when
aligned to a Combatant Command or when aligned to a Major Command, would be inspected by the
command’s Inspection General.
Limitations:
 Enterprise level analysis process/systems do not exist and Management Inspections use Malcom
Baldrige strategic level assessment criteria.
OPR/OCR: OPR: SAF/IGI.
OCR: Air Force Inspection Agency and MAJCOM/IG.
Recommended  Present SAF/IGI with revisions to both the Management Inspection and Unit Effectiveness
Next Steps: Inspection Master Question Files.
o Have SAF/IGI sponsor revision to the Master Question File (MQF) Working Group during
their FY18 meeting.
2020.
Appendix J 127
Project Title: Strengthen Air Force Institutional Identity

Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research, assess, and generate recommendations on how the Air Force can strengthen its
Statement: institutional identity to help break the propensity to culturally organize around functional guilds.
Problem Statement: To be determined.

Project Status: Not Started.
OPR/OCR: OPR: FA-2.
OCRs: FA-2.
2019.
Project Title: Joint Task Force Future Concepts

Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and establish principles and requirements for structure and organization for an Air
Statement: Force led JTF in future operating environments (2030). Identify gaps in current JTF models relative to
envisioned requirements and develop a roadmap for JTF evolution. This work should be informed by
JTF Headquarters’ evolution.
Problem Statement: The Air Force has not clearly defined the Joint Task Force operating concepts and
principles needed for a fight in 2030.
Project Status: Phase 2, Initial Analysis Completed.
Parallel Groups: Joint Task Force Next Steps.
Recommendations Recommend continued analysis based on the key conclusions identified below.
Summary:
Details: A variety of SMEs and stakeholders met to define the purpose, functions, characteristics, strategic
value, and key principles underlying TF-Future’s organizational construct and capabilities, and then
examine potential Air Force approaches to meet the demands of TF-Future.
Appendix J 128
The foundational principles included: 1) play to the Air Force voice / strategic value; 2) Fill a gap
(need or want) to solve a problem; and 3) put the Air Force in a position of strength (supported versus
supporting).
The working group determined that the probable characteristics of future campaigns, which ultimately
play to the strengths of the Air Force include trans-regional, asymmetric, and the contested/
competition spectrum of conflict. Future campaigns will likely demand low or no-footprint solutions
that lower political risk and engage all instruments of power with coalition partners. The Air Force’s
long-standing characteristics of speed, range, and flexibility, coupled with its ability to rapidly mass
force, then equally rapidly disperse, while providing a tailorable application of force, make the Air
Force ideally suited to lead future military campaigns.
The working group concluded the basic organizational structure should center on the primary
functions of 1) Strategy/Design; 2) Planning/Tasking; 3) Execution; and 4) Assessment. Continually
supporting these functions are the capability to integrate and coordinate across the joint force as well
as maintain battlespace awareness. While implementing these functions, the TF-future must be
capable of focusing on solutions rather than just effects, integrating the full-spectrum of effects across
the range of capability to achieve the desired solutions.
The working group predicted that TF-Future would have numerous characteristics that help it adapt to
the 2030 timeframe. The identified characteristic include (not in priority order): 1) Scalable; 2)
Tailorable; 3) Responsive; 4) Ready; 5) Adaptable; 6) Interoperable; 7) Disaggregated, and 8)
Deployable.
The group also determined the TF-Future headquarters must be able to 1) seamlessly transition across
the range of military operations; 2) provide for continuous operations; 3) be capable of dynamically
adapting to complex and changing situations; and 4) involve a “whole-of-government” approach to
solving the problem. The characteristics the group envisioned for TF-Future mirrored those
capabilities we expect the Air Force to be able bring to potential conflict both now and in the future.
The USAF is currently not optimized to support JTF C2 within the current C2 structures. USAF’s
current approach to meeting the demands of TF-Future relies primarily on the capability and capacity
of our current component headquarters. Under our current component construct, using the United
Appendix J 129
States Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) as an example (figure 1), if Commander, United States
European Command (CDRUSEUCOM) tasked USAFE to establish a JTF headquarters, USAFE
would combine elements of their current A2, A3, A4, A5 and A6 staffs, as well as their 603rd Air
Operations Center (AOC), to form the core of the JTF headquarters staff and its Joint Operations
Center (JOC). The primary challenges to this approach are: 1) The Air Force Forces Staff and the
603rd AOC would be doing double-duty supporting the Commander, Air Force Forces/Joint Force Air
Component Commander (COMAFFOR/JFACC) and the JTF/CC. Further, AFFOR staff and AOC
personnel are not currently fully trained in JTF headquarters procedures. The functions and
organization of an AOC are significantly different from those of a JTF JOC. Under this scenario, both
the JTF HQs and the COMAFFOR/JFACC HQs would require both joint/combined augmentation as
well as Reserve Component augmentation to succeed.
Recommendation 1: While initial analysis was completed, FA-2 recommends the following steps in order to continue and
refine this concept and then begin to develop a roadmap to meet this vision/concept.
1. Baseline current doctrine on execution of joint operations functions in a JTF HQ, leveraging
insights from active JTFs, 9th Air Force effort, and others.
2. Develop a vision and supporting concepts for the future JTF based on existing guidance on the
future security environment. Currently, Air Force and joint strategy documents and environmental
assessments all echo similar future challenges. As part of this concept development, determine the Air
Force’s value proposition (unique value added and likely conditions for use) in leading a JTF in this
operational context.
3. Characterize gaps in the Air Force’s ability to organize, train, equip, and employ a JTF HQ that can
execute this vision/concept. A critical question is how an Air Force JTF in this environment would
execute the Joint Functions? How should the Air Force posture itself in the future to meet and fulfill
these evolving functions? Joint Publication 3-33 must serve as the foundation for evaluating future
organizational principles and the structure needed for a future fight. This will ensure participants
utilize common terminology and attach the same meaning to doctrinal concepts and principles.
4. Develop a roadmap for the Air Force to meet this vision, through DOTMLPF-P instruments such as
force development, training and exercises, and materiel solution development.
Appendix J 130
OPR/OCR: OPR: AF/A5SC.

OCRs: AF/A5SS, 9 AF.
Recommended AF/A5SC in conjunction with AF/A5SS and 9 AF, take lead in study to explore and then define the
Next Steps: Joint Task Force operating concepts and principles needed for a fight in 2030.
2019.
Project Title: Joint Task Force Next-Steps

Team Members: To be determined.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Capture lessons learned from 9 AF/JTF effort, from both a process and a personnel
Statement: education and training perspective and develop a plan to apply those lessons to build future AF JTF
HQs capability and better develop future joint leaders.
Problem Statement: The Air Force currently has limited experience leading JTF headquarters and
needs to capture lessons learned from 9 Air Force/JTF’s ongoing effort to develop JTF headquarters
capability and develop future joint leaders.
Project Status: Not Started. Area identified for future study.
Approach: The Study approach will be to examine 9 AF/JTF over the next two years and identify applicable
lessons that can then be applied across the Air Force.
9 AF Background Information
The Air Force must continue to evolve to more deliberately integrate into, influence, and lead the
joint force in preparing to solve future security problem sets. A pivotal step in that evolution is the
establishment of 9 AF as a JTF capable headquarters. At CORONA South (Mar 2017), Air Force
leadership approved a course of action that added 33 active duty manpower authorizations to the HQ
9 AF staff, along with a Digital Joint Command and Control (DJC2) and associated 6 active
component manpower authorizations over the course of the Five-Year Defense Plan, and an Air
Reserve Component complement. This decision will effectively transition 9 AF into a Global
Appendix J 131
Response Force (GRF) aligned, service-retained, JTF capable unit and provide the capability to
deploy a 110-personnel core JTF staff.
Current target dates and critical assumptions for this transformation include:
9 AF/JTF IOC Target: 1 Dec 18
Declaration follows 9 AF/CC led certifying event in Fall 2018 conducted by all assigned 9th Air
Force HQ personnel and ARC identified JTF manpower. IOC capabilities are limited to Air Force
augmentation and/or other component-led JTF HQs.
9 AF/JTF Full Operational Capability Target: 1 Dec 20.

This is based on the timeline driven by FY19 Program Objective Memorandum inputs for manpower
and equipment as well as ARC planning for JTF dedicated resourcing in the FY20 Program
Objective Memorandum. Assumption: Joint Staff recommends 80 percent of required manpower and
communications suite (DJC2) must be in place for tasking. Capabilities include leadership of any
JTF HQ. Expect alignment to GRF in FY 21.
Parallel Groups: Joint Task Force Future Concepts.
Recommendations Recommendation: As a pilot case for JTF development, the Air Force should clearly define, measure,
Summary: and report 9 AF’s metrics (measures of performance/effectiveness) in relation to JTF capability and
joint leader development.
Recommendation: Clearly define, measure, and report 9 AF’s metrics (measures of performance/effectiveness) in
relation to JTF capability and joint leader development.
Details: This recommendation is an area that FA-2 has identified for future study.
In order to effectively apply the lessons learned from the 9th Air Force transformation into a JTF-
capable headquarter for future decisions, 9 AF in conjunction with Headquarters Air Force should
define, evaluate, and report metrics related to JTF capability and joint leader development. This
criterion will be critical in making future recommendations for joint development and transforming
additional organizations into JTF-capable headquarters.
Some key areas to consider as 9th Air Force develops its evaluation criteria are outlined below:
 JTF capability (structures):
Appendix J 132
1) functions and missions; 2) tailorability to mission 3) design and organizational needs for
longer term operations; 4) training plan and capacity including exercise schedule and alignment;
5) manning and HQ size; 6) utilization rate as JTF; 7) joint and interagency
augmentation/integration
 Joint leader development (people):
1) Attrition rates for personnel matched to HQ 9 AF during assignment process; 2) integration
with the rated source allocation plan; 3) fill rates with high-performing officers/enlisted
Headquarters 9 AF will be a good indicator in whether the Air Force is making progress in valuing
joint assignments and exposure. Evaluating the outcome of whether the 9 AF’s incentive plan was
successful in addressing its force development issues will be a key learning area.
Upon the completion of 9th Air Force standup as a JTF capable headquarters (IOC), the Air Force
should use the final criteria it accepts in a formal evaluation period. This information will serve as
the foundation to determine the effectiveness of 9 AF and in making future change recommendations.
This evaluation period and process will require consistent coordination with 9th Air Force leadership.
The formal lessons learned from 9th Air Force’s pilot case can be used to continue the Air Force’s
progress to strengthen joint development.
Note: Collaboration and integration will be key to effective and standardized employment of JIIM
concepts across the Air Force.
OPR/OCR: OPR: 9 AF, ACC.
OCR: AF/A9, AF/A5-8, AF/A3, Lessons Learned Directorate (LeMay Center).
Recommended  9 AF in conjunction with ACC develop evaluation metrics
Next Steps:  AF/A9 publish evaluation metrics and perform annual assessment of 9th Air Force’s progress
 Assessment should be provided to AF/A5-8 and AF/A3 for Headquarters Air Force review and to
coordinate Air Force actions
Supporting Headquarters United States Air Force, Program Action Directive 17-XX, Implementation of The
Documentation: Chief of Staff of the Air Force Direction to Transform Headquarters 9th Air Force into Joint Task
Force-Capable Unit (9 AF JTF Program Action Directive 17-XX).
2020.
Appendix J 133
Project Title: Deployment Training

Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research and assess 9th Air Forces’ Rear Mission Support Element’s evolution into a
Statement: model that provides leadership, best practices, research, support and/or just-in-time joint training and
then make recommendations for alignment and governance for this organization.
Problem Statement: To be determined.

Project Status: Not started.
OPR/OCR: OPR: FA-2.
OCR: FA-2.
2019.
Appendix J 134
Appendix K – Retain
This appendix broadly describes how the Air Force can better retain joint developed Airmen through a combination of tangible
rewards and intangible incentives, both proving that the Air Force values joint Airmen.
In order to incentivize joint development and retain Airmen in the joint environment, the Air Force must clearly signal that it values
these experiences. The current environment has Airmen predominantly developed and managed within their own functional
communities. This functional development continues to grow tactical and technical specialists who are unmatched in capability.
However, joint development inherently requires broadening into other career specialties and domains that are not within an Airman's
core specialty. Interviews and focus groups reveal that joint broadening is often not valued in the current environment. Too much time
away from the core specialty is perceived as detrimental to career progression. One facet of the problem is the nature of the Air Force's
advanced capabilities. These capabilities drive a significant amount of technical training and other developmental requirements for
many career fields. This dilemma is especially pertinent to rated career fields because of the additional time restrictions imposed by an
extended initial training pipeline, monthly training requirements, aircraft crew progression, and the requirement to accrue flying gate
month minimums. Challenges continue based on the need for an Airmen to accumulate and step through key developmental and
leadership milestones that serve as discriminators for continued career progression. Traditional Air Force institutional requirements for
promotion leave little time for joint officer development, while currently no requirements exist for the joint development of
noncommissioned officers and civilians.
The Air Force needs to clearly message its change in values, showing that joint assignments are valued, while building in more
operational joint time to increase depth and breadth. This led to the discovery that the Air Force needed to evaluate the possibility of
providing Air Force equivalency credit, even command credit, for key joint assignments. Simply put, an Airman would potentially no
longer need to choose between perceived tax on a career and career mobility when taking a joint assignment. This same equivalency
idea to build in more joint time has the potential to be utilized to provide IDE and SDE credit for key JTF or joint billets.
The Air Force must convey that it values joint experience, and there is no better way than by rewarding individuals who seek joint
exposure and are groomed for joint leadership. While the FA-2 team identified some opportunities in which it can reward its joint
experienced Airmen, promotion and career progression serves a key lever for changing Air Force culture and organizational values.
Appendix K 135
Project Title: Air Force Equivalency Credit for Joint Positions

Project POCs: Project Leader: Maj Jeffery Miller AF/A5SS
Team Members: Mr. Danny Menashi AF/A5SM; Maj Rob Husmann ACC/A3C; Mr. Jeff Gatcomb
AFPC; Col Bruce Munger 9 AF; Dr. Iara Infosino AF/A9; Lt Col Sonja Tritsch AF/A9; Lt Col Jayson
McDonald AF/A9; Mr. Jay Sanchez AF/A9; Mr. John Georgiou AF/A9; Lt Col Brad Hickey
AF/A1D; Lt Col David Heinitz 2 ASOS; Lt Col Eric Peterson AF/A5SS; and Mr. Nathan Herro,
AF/A5SC.
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Research assumed the need to provide command equivalency credit for Joint/Joint Task
Statement: Force positions in order to provide more time to increase depth in Joint Matters and sustain value in
joint experience. Conduct analysis to determine if an opportunity exists for enlisted positions to
acquire equivalency credit at higher echelons of rank. Research and assess potential enterprise
processes and mechanisms to grant Joint equivalency credit at regular intervals or through recurring
Air Force refresh opportunities.
Problem Statement: Current Air Force-centric command and developmental requirements, especially
for rated officers, does not sufficiently allow the requisite quality and quantity of joint experience
needed to progress to senior joint positions. The two interdependent elements of the problem are Air
Force enterprise values and time. The Air Force must be willing to tradeoff time in the Air Force blue
side for Airmen to gain more exposure and build relationships in the joint environment. This means
that these members might need current Air Force milestones waived, credited, or removed in order to
progress. While the Air Force has successfully groomed key joint leaders in today’s environment,
their development paths are difficult to replicate.
Project Status: Phase 2, Joint Duty Assignment List (JDAL) Analysis Phase completed. An AF/CV re-vector tasking
to Combatant Command senior AF leaders is complete. Pursuing approval for an AF/DPO tasking to
analyze submitted billets, and develop a CSAF decision brief.
Approach: Air Force equivalency began with understanding what makes a commander through evaluating:
duties, authorities, responsibilities, scope, scale, and Air Force institutional competencies. Research
began searching the JDAL for potential positions that could be equivalent to command. Due to the
size of the JDAL, project was scoped to focus on O-6 rated (11x, 12x, 13x) billets that could produce
Gp/CC equivalency. Due to the lack of resources and information on the JDAL, AF/A9 was pulled in
for further analysis. A9’s objective was to identify O-6 command equivalencies, and create a
repeatable framework for recurrent (and defendable) analysis for expanded analysis. AF/A9 took a
similar, but more thorough and analytical approach: (a) research, including a literature search and
Appendix K 136
interviews with relevant departments, (b) defining elements of Air Force command and joint duty
assignments, and (c) identifying a framework for JDAL analysis. In their report, AF/A9 concluded
that, “the key components of a joint duty assignment do not directly compare to the key elements of
an Air Force command assignment.” While there are shared elements between Air Force command
and JDAL billets, they have a different level of impact, therefore making them non-equivalent.
Parallel Groups: Joint Experience Working Group, Joint Competencies Working Group.
Recommendations AF/DPO analyze billets submitted by Geographic Combatant Commanders (GCCs), and prepare a
Summary: Group Command equivalency decision brief for CSAF.
Recommendation 1: AF/CV initiate task to AF/DPO to analyze billets submitted by GCCs, and prepare a CSAF decision
brief regarding billet inclusion on the next command screening board (CSB).
 AF/DPO evaluate billets submitted by GCCs that conduct Joint Matters and that can be considered
equivalent to Group command.
Details: AF/A9 has analyzed rated (11x, 12x, 13x) O-6 billets on the JDAL in search of identifying billets that
could be equivalent to an O-6 Group command. No billets were identified. Due to this, FA-2
leadership decided this recommendation was the appropriate avenue to take. The institution is still
bound to look through traditional lenses.
During their analysis, AF/A9 identified common characteristics and key elements of command, as
well as predominate factors in the determination of organizational type. These will be used as a
benchmark for analysis of this task. The provided characteristics and elements are not all inclusive,
nor restrictive. Command is not equal across the board because it is subjective. Leaders use their
intuition, informed by experience and research to make educated decisions. These positions do not
need to be bound by G-Series orders or budgetary authorities. These positions should also be
congruent with Air Force Institutional Competencies (AFMAN 36-2647). Joint Matters, as defined by
Section 668, Title 10 U.S.C., is less subjective yet still open to interpretation. This leaves Air Force
senior leadership latitude to determine which billets/positions are best suited and qualify for command
equivalency. Additionally, while the definition of Joint Matters is governed by Section 668 of Title 10
U.S.C., its recent modification leaves it open to interpretation.
Assumptions:
 There are billets that are close enough to be deemed worthy of command equivalence
 CSAF is willing to grant exception to policies for command equivalencies
 SecAF has indicated concurrence with equivalency concepts
Appendix K 137
 It is time and resource intensive to analyze billets for equivalency
 Command Screening Board will require guidance from SecAF
 Will require CFM buy-in and increased talent management
 Opportunities may be limited across certain functional communities
OPR/OCR: OPR: FA-2.
OCR: GCC AF GOs; GCC/J1; MAJCOM/A1; CFMs; AF/A9; J1; J7; and SAF/PA.
Recommended  Identify equivalent billets in organizations – 08 Dec 2017
Next Steps:  Adjudicate billets at HAF – 15 Jan 2018
 Recommend identified positions for Central Selection Board (CSB) credit on next CSB, or
convene special CSB for this matter – 1Q2018
 Issue CSB guidance
 Change billet AFSC to “C” prefix
 Issue Air Force-wide messaging, highlighting the value of these positions being granted CSB
 CFMs
o Identify opportunities for and develop functional internships
Execution Timeline: Near-Term, OPR transition is projected for December 2017 with full implementation expected by
April 2018.
Project Title: Reward Air Force Personnel with Specialized Joint Education Training Experience
Purpose/Problem Purpose: Establish an overarching process that recognizes these joint Airmen accomplishments.
Statement:
Problem Statement: The Air Force does not have specific and deliberate methods to reward joint
experience within the Air Force, and incentivize Airmen to strive towards joint experiences, training,
and assignments. By rewarding and incentivizing joint experiences, it solidifies the perception that the
Appendix K 138
Air Force values a culture that understands the importance of joint force integration and joint-minded
Airmen, which in turn increases the value of joint experience to an Air Force member.
Project Status: Phase 1, Initial Research completed.
Approach: Research strategy began with qualitative research consisting of semi-structured and structured
interviews with CFMs, SMEs in the field, and analysis of published sources from across the Air
Force. The data collection strategy consisted primarily of quantitative research through both primary
and secondary sources, examined historical background, comparisons of cross-functional AFSCs, and
enlisted, officer, and civilian models. Once data was gathered, the team identified internal factors
(strengths and weaknesses) and external factors (opportunities and threats) in a particular area. Lastly,
the team examined respective DOTMLPF-P domains to identify any roadblocks and to develop a
roadmap for implementation.
Parallel Groups: Joint Experience Working Group (JEWG), and Joint Equivalency Credit
Recommendations Recommendation 1: Expand joint education, training, internship, and fellowship opportunities for
Summary: high performing Airmen across functional communities.
Recommendation 2: Develop a Joint duty badge or Qualification badge for wear on uniform that
identifies a member as having served in or is currently serving in a JIIM assignment, or a member
who has reached a defined Joint qualification experience level.
Recommendation 3: Allow Airmen in hard-to-fill JIIM assignments to receive Special Duty
Assignment Pay.
Recommendation 1: Expand joint education, training, internship, and fellowship opportunities for high performing Airmen
across the Air Force and within functional communities.
 Create additional enlisted fellowship/internship opportunities. There is an opportunity to align or
mirror officer fellowships. For example, Enlisted Strategic Policy Internship or Air Force Special
Operations and Low Intensity Conflict (SOLIC) Fellowship
 Create internships for enlisted/officer on Combatant Command (CCMD) J-staffs
o Internships can be tailored to specific functional areas i.e. intelligence AFS in J2; or can be
function or AFS agnostic i.e. any AFS in J1 or J3
o Length of internship can be anywhere between four to twelve months
o Low cost option: make available only to member assigned to or in the vicinity of a CCMD
 Create functional internships
o Created and managed by CFMs
o 20 DOD agencies where internships can be created
Appendix K 139
 For example, Geospatial-Intelligence Career Advancement Program (CGAP) is a three-

year geospatial intelligence internship for 1N1X1A at National Geospatial Agency (NGA)
 Opportunity for Wings, Groups, and Squadrons to create internships, exchanges, or liaison
positions with JIIM mission partners in their respective locations and areas of responsibility
Details: The Air Force has a selective number of fellowship, internships, and exchange programs for officers
and enlisted which serve to increase understanding of the role of air, space, and cyberspace power in
times of peace and war. Review of current programs highlights an opportunity to increase these
developmental paths to not only include joint development and education, but to also extend
opportunities to a larger number of personnel across the Air Force. Ultimately, this serves to prepare
Air Force personnel to anticipate and successfully meet challenges across the range of military
operations, as well as positively impacts both recruitment and retention efforts.
Assumptions:
 Additional opportunities and focused experiences reflect an increase in how the Air Force values
joint knowledge and experience
 Creating internships, exchanges, and liaison positions strengthens JIIM partnerships and cohesion
 It is time and resource intensive to develop and fund fellowship and internship programs
 Airmen removed from primary mission to attend exchanges, internships, or fellowships
 Opportunities may be limited across certain functional communities
OPR/OCR: OPR: (Notional) AF/A1D.
OCR: (Notional) Career Field Managers and MAJCOM/NAF/WG Commanders.
Recommended  AF/1D
Next Steps: o Research viability and details for developing additional enlisted fellowship opportunities
o Coordinate and collaborate with J7 to develop internships on CCMD J staffs
o Coordinate and provide guidance to CFMs for the creation of functional internships
o Develop messages to the enterprise on the intent for Wgs/Gps/Sqs to take advantage of local
partnerships and develop exchanges, internships, or liaison positions with local mission
partners
 CFMs
o Identify opportunities for and develop functional internships
Appendix K 140
Recommendation 2: Develop a Joint duty badge and/or Qualification badge for wear on uniform that identifies a member
as having served in or currently serving in a JIIM assignment, and/or a member who has reached a
defined Joint qualification experience level.
Details:  The Joint duty badge would identify a member who has served or is currently serving in a
formally identified JIIM position. It would be a generic “Joint badge” and is in addition to the
JIIM badges already identified in AFI 36-2903 para 10.3 (such as North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO), Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD),
United Nations (UN), etc.). Qualifying positions would be those formally identified by the Air
Force as ‘Joint billets’ (Enlisted has approximately 4K+/Officer has approximately 3K+)
 The Joint qualification badge would be awarded to those members who have reached an Air Force
defined level of joint experience or proficiency. At some point there could/should be a tier or time
fulfilled quantitative summary to reward Airmen for Joint experience
 To propose the creation of a new badge, the functional community must contact the Institute of
Heraldry for design development and/or approval. Once that is accomplished, the functional
community staffs the package across other functional communities that will be authorized to wear
the badge. The package is then coordinated through AF/A1S, AF/A1, Chief Master Sergeant of
the Air Force, and SAF/MR and finally approved by the CSAF (Ref AFI 36-2903, par 10.8.3)
OPR/OCR: OPR: (Notional) AF/A1.
OCR: (Notional) SAF/MR and AF/HO.
Recommended  AF/A1
Next Steps: o Conduct research into joint duty and qualification badge; design badge and determine/update
policy for badge wear
o Coordinate with CFMs to identify joint billets/assignments that qualify for joint duty badge
o Determine joint qualification badge criteria
 CFMs
o Identify assignments within functional communities that qualify for joint badge
 AF/A1
o Coordinates and ensures system updates as required to track and award badge to members
Recommendation 3: Allow Airmen in hard-to-fill JIIM assignments to receive Assignment Incentive Pay or Special Duty
Assignment Pay.
Details:  Assignment Incentive Pay (AIP) is a temporary compensation to provide monetary incentive to
encourage Airmen to volunteer for select hard-to-fill or assignments in less desirable locations or
Appendix K 141
units. There are currently five Air Force AIP programs listed in DOD 7000.14, Volume 7A,
Chapter 15: Korea AIP; 724th Special Tactics Group Incentive Pay; HQ AFSOC; Intercontinental
Ballistic Missile Field Operations Program; Kingsley Field, Kamath Falls Oregon. An influencing
factor for AIP is accessions and reenlistment
 Special Duty Assignment Pay is awarded to an Airman performing duties in an authorized
specialty and/or assignment and is based on extremely demanding personal effort to ensure
successful mission accomplishment; and a greater than normal degree of responsibility or
difficulty than is expected in a regular military assignment for a member’s grade and experience
 AFI 36-3017, Assignment Incentive and Special Duty Assignment Pay, establishes USAF award
criteria. The SecAF approves AIP policies and procedures, and AF/A1P is responsible for
ensuring AIP payments are consistent and comply with Title 37 USC 307a. The AF Career Field
Manager (AFCFM), MAJCOM, Field Operating Agency (FOA), or DRU can request that a duty
be part of the Special Duty Assignment Pay (SDAP) program
OPR/OCR: OPR: (Notional) AF/A1P, CFMs, MAJCOMs, FOA, DRUs.
OCR: (Notional) SAF/FM.
Recommended  SAF
Next Steps: o Receive approval from SecAF
 AF/A1
o Determine specific criteria to qualify for joint AIP or SDAP
 CFMs
o Identify positions that would meet AIP or SDAP requirements
o Draft and implement governing policy and directives
o Update appropriate systems
2019.
Appendix K 142
Appendix L – Glossary
References:
Air Force Future Operating Concepts, September 2015
Air Force Strategic Master Plan, May 2015
Air Force Doctrine Annex 1-1, Force Development, April 2017
AFI 10-204, Participation in Joint and National Exercises, March 2015
AFI 10-207, Command Post, June 2014
AFI 10-601, Operational Capability Requirement Development, November 2013
AFI 11-301, Aircrew Flight Equipment (AFE) Program, May 2017
AFI 36-2101, Classifying Military Personnel (Officer and Enlisted), June 2013
AFI 36-2624, The Career Assistance Advisor, First Term Airmen Center and Enlisted
Professional Enhancement Programs, October 2009
AFI 36-2640, Executing Total Force Development, December 2008
AFI 36-2903, Dress and Personal Appearance of Air Force Personnel, February 2017
AFI 36-3017, Assignment Incentive and Special Duty Assignment Pay, January 2016
AFMAN 36-2643, Air Force Mentoring Program, May 2017
AFMAN 36-2647, Institutional Competency Development and Management, March 2014
CJCSI 1330.05A, Joint Officer Management Program Procedures, December 2015
CJCSI 1800.01E, Officer Professional Military Education Policy, May 2015
DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, August 2017
Joint Publication 1, Doctrine for the Armed Forces of the United States, 25 March 2013
Joint Publication 3-0, Joint Operations, January 2017
Joint Publication 3-33, Joint Task Force Headquarters, July 2012
Joint Publication 5-0, Joint Operation Planning, August 2011
Title 10, United States Code, Armed Forces, January 2011
Title 37, United States Code, Pay and Allowances of the Uniformed Services, 2011
Terms:
Attributes – Those characteristics (often behaviors) assigned to an individual by an outside
observer that indicate specific states of psychological functioning.
Career Development – The force development model that seeks to incentivize personnel and
intentionally develop quality Airmen through talent management in order to meet the USAF’s
continuous need for effective leaders at all levels
Combatant Command – A unified or specified command with a broad continuing mission

under a single commander established and so designated by the President, through the Secretary
of Defense and with the advice and assistance of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (JP 1)
Continuum of Learning (CoL) – A career-long process of individual development where

challenging experiences are combined with education and training through a common taxonomy
to produce Airmen who possess the tactical expertise, operational competence, and strategic
vision to lead and execute the full spectrum of Air Force missions (AF Annex 1-1).
Appendix L 143
Competencies – Observable, measurable pattern of knowledge, skills, abilities, behaviors, and

other characteristics needed to perform institutional or occupational functions successfully
(AFMAN 36-2647).
Course of Action (COA) – A scheme developed to accomplish a mission (JP 5-0).
Development Planning – Engineering analysis and technical planning activities that provide the
foundation for informed investment decisions on the fundamental path with a materiel
development to follow to effectively and affordably meet operational needs (AFI 10-601).
Far-Term – described as four fiscal years beginning in 2025 and correlating to the twenty-third
CSAF’s tenure.
Five Eyes – often abbreviated as FVEY, is an intelligence alliance comprising Australia,

Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States. These countries are bound by
a multilateral United Kingdom United States of America Agreement, a treaty for joint
cooperation in signals intelligence.
Force Development (FD) – A deliberate process of preparing Airmen through the Continuum of
Learning with the required competencies to meet the challenges of current and future operating
environments. Institutional development generally results in leadership, management, and
warrior ethos proficiency. Occupational development generally results in flying and technical
skill proficiency.
Influence – Building upon the “integrate” level, recurring experience in joint environments
results in credible impact on joint operations, including the application of combined arms/unified
action, operational and strategic art, and the integration of airpower in the joint operational
environment. (Reference FA-2 March Conference Briefing).
Institutional Competencies – Common taxonomy used to implement the Continuum of

Learning. These leadership competencies are expected of every Airmen, throughout their careers,
and will be the competencies needed to operate successfully in the constantly changing
environment in which they function. The three categories of these competencies (Organizational,
People/Team, and Personal) are mapped to the Air Force leadership levels (reference AFMAN
36-2647). Specific, measurable personal abilities that have been identified as desirable to prepare
Airmen for future performance.
Integrate – Knowledgeable of Air Force functions, capabilities, and operational specifics;

understand and apply common lexicon, organizations, and doctrine of the joint force;
knowledgeable of sister service cultures and capabilities, as well as interagency,
intergovernmental, and multinational organizations and processes.
Integrate, Influence, and Lead – A framework for viewing an Airman’s contribution to the
joint force expressed across spectrum of impact.
Appendix L 144
Joint Airmen – Solution-minded, trained, and educated Airmen organized and ready to
integrate, influence, and lead planning, operations, and campaigns across all services, agencies,
coalitions, and domains.
Joint Duty Assignment – An assignment in which an officer gains significant experience in

joint matters. This excludes assignments for joint training and joint education, except as an
instructor responsible for preparing and presenting courses for Joint Primary Military Education I
and II.
Joint Force – A general term applied to a force composed of significant elements, assigned or
attached, of two or more Military Departments operating under a single joint force commander.
(JP 3-0).
Joint Functions – Related capabilities and activities placed into six basic groups of command
and control, intelligence, fires, movement and maneuver, protection, and sustainment to help
joint force commanders synchronize, integrate, and direct joint operations.
JIIM – Joint, Interagency, Intergovernmental, and Multinational.
JIIM Experience – An assignment or experience that develops or demonstrates mastery of

knowledge, skills, and abilities in joint, interagency, intergovernmental, or multinational (JIIM)
topics or activities.
Joint Matters – Command and Control (authorities and forces), Fires and Effects, Targeting and
Intelligence, and Agile Combat Support.
Joint Operations – Military actions conducted by joint forces and those Service forces
employed in specified command relationships with each other, which of themselves, do not
establish joint forces. (JP 3-0)
Lead – Experienced and thoroughly knowledgeable of joint, interagency, intergovernmental, and

multinational operations; able to coordinate, align, and direct efforts of a joint team to
accomplish strategic and operational objectives.
Military Decision Making Process (MDMP) – is a United States Army seven-step process for
military decision making in both tactical and garrison environments. It is indelibly linked to
Troop Leading Procedures and Operations orders.
Mid-Term – described as four fiscal years beginning in 2021 and correlating to the next CSAF’s
tenure.
Multi-Domain – emerging term representing a domain-equal environment where all domains

contribute and operate seamlessly across Services, functions, and domains.
Near-Term – described as the next four fiscal years correlating to the current CSAF’s tenure.
Appendix L 145
Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO PI-R) – the

standard questionnaire measure of the Five Factor Model (FFM), provides a systematic
assessment of emotional, interpersonal, experiential, attitudinal, and motivational styles--a
detailed personality description that can be a valuable resource for a variety of professionals.
Optimized Teaming – A method of ensuring Airmen deploy with a team-based support

structure appropriate to their designated task and location; accounts for individual risk factors.
Proficiency Levels – Measurable levels that describe the full range of work performed within
competency development-from gaining understanding through expert application.
Qualities – Qualities, when used for an individual, are “those traits and characteristics inherent
to that person that represent specific states and levels of psychological functioning.” These
qualities shape decisions, behaviors, and social interactions. Note: This term is often used
synonymously with the term “attributes.”
Talent – The collective set of knowledge, skills, abilities, experience, and potential individuals
or groups can provide to meet organizational goals or objectives (AF/A1).
Talent Management – An integrated set of human capital management processes designed to

ensure mission objectives are met by optimizing the productivity, value, and potential of an
organization’s greatest asset –its people (AF/A1).
Teaming – The intentional grouping of individuals in order to achieve a common goal and/or
mutual support.
Team Cohesion – The closeness of a team or the level to which one identifies with a team;
influenced by task interdependence, leadership, shared experiences, proximity, and
environmental conditions; higher cohesion provides a higher level of emotional and social
support to team members.
Skills – Abilities obtained through training, practice, and repetition.
Unified Action – The synchronization, coordination, and/or integration of the activities of

governmental and nongovernmental entities with military operations to achieve unity of effort.
(JP 1)
Appendix L 146
EPR – Enlisted Performance Report

Acronyms: FA-2 – Focus Area 2
ADLS – Advanced Distributed Learning Service FAM – Functional Area Manager
AEF – Air Expeditionary Force FD – Force Development
AFIS – Air Force Inspection Agency FD/CC – Force Development Commander
AFMAN – Air Force Manual FPM – Force Presentation Model
AFS – Air Force Specialty FSS – Force Support Squadron
AFSC – Air Force Specialty Code FY – Fiscal Year
AIP – Assignment Incentive Pay GCC – Geographic Combatant Command
ASIMS – Aeromedical Services Information Management GES – Global Exercise Scheduling
System GO – General Officer
CCMD – Combatant Command GP or Gp – Group
CFM – Career Field Manager HAF – Headquarters Air Force
CJCS – Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff HQ – Headquarters
CJCSI – Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction IC – Institutional Competencies
COA – Course(s) of Action IDA – Institute for Defense Analyses
CoL – Continuum of Learning IDE – Intermediate Developmental Education
CSAF – Chief of Staff of the Air Force IMA&T – Identify, Measure, Assess, and Track
CSB – Central Selection Board IT – Information Technology
CTETP – Career Field Education and Training Plan JCS – Joint Chiefs of Staff
DDB – Deliberate Development Board JCWG – Joint Competencies Working Group
DOD – Department of Defense JEWG – Joint Experience Working Group
DOTMLPF-P – Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, JDAL – Joint Duty Assignment List
Leadership, Personnel, Facilities & Policy Facilities - Policy JIIM – Joint, Interagency, Intergovernmental, and
DRU – Direct Reporting Unit Multinational
DSD – Developmental Special Duty JKO – Joint Knowledge Online
DTM – Doctrine Topic Module JPME – Joint Professional Military Education
EDT – Enlisted Development Teams JOM – Joint Officer Management
ETT – Education and Training Team JQS – Joint Qualification System
Appendix L 147
JTF – Joint Task Force SDAP – Special Duty Assignment Pay

JP – Joint Publication SDE – Senior Developmental Education
KDP – Key Developmental Positions SME – Subject Matter Expert
KLP – Key Leadership Positions SQ or Sq – Squadron
LOE – Line(s) of Effort STEM – Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
MAJCOM – Major Command SURF – Single Unit Retrieval Format
MDMP – Military Decision Making Process SWOT – Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats
MFM – MAJCOM Functional Manager TBD – To Be Determined
MyPers – My Personnel System TDY – Temporary Duty
NAF – Numbered Air Force UMD – Unit Manning Document
NCOA – Noncommissioned Officer Academy USAF – United States Air Force
NEO PI-R – Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness Personality USAFA – United States Air Force Academy
Inventory-Revised USG – United States Government
OCR – Office of Collateral Responsibility WG or Wg – Wing
OPR – Office of Primary Responsibility
OPT – Operational Planning Team
OTS – Officer Training School
OSD – Office of the Secretary of Defense
PCE – Professional Continuing Education
PME – Professional Military Education
POC – Point of Contact
PAF – Project Air Force
RAND – Research and Development
ROTC – Reserve Officer Training Corp
SAASS – School of Advanced Air and Space Studies
SAMS – School of Advanced Military Studies (Army)
SAW – School of Advanced Warfighting
SecAF – Secretary of the Air Force
SEI – Special Experience Indicators
Appendix L 148

SJLT Book Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SJLT Book Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

STRENGTHENING JOINT LEADERS AND TEAMS

STRENGTHENING JOINT LEADER DEVELOPMENT AND ENHANCING JOINT TEAMS

Strengthening Joint Leaders and Teams ... a Combined Arms Imperative

We'll also look at how we present forces to a Combatant Commander. Historically,

MEMORANDUM FOR ALL COMMANDERS AND HAF STAFF

FROM: SECAF, CSAF, AND CMSAF

SUBJECT: Strengthening Joint Leaders and Teams (SJLT) Implementation Plan

Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis

We are facing an increasingly complex and volatile national security environment

1. Strengthening Joint Leader Development

Strengthening Joint Leader Development

Enhancing Joint Teams

Strengthening Joint Leaders and Teams

For Official Use Only

For Official Use Only

Advanced Studies Group Utilization .................................................................................................. 96

Current State: Evolving Global Challenges

Future State: The CSAF’s Vision

Project Background, Purpose, and Scope

FA-2 Findings & Recommendations

Figure 1, Themes & Projects/Tasks

Education & Training

Deployed Teaming is complementary to Force Presentation and will increase Airmen

Appendix A – Key Concepts

Joint Warfighting Excellence

Joint Warfighting Excellence is a function of organization, leadership development, operations,

Globally Integrated Operations

Globally Integrated Operations consist of eight key elements:

Appendix B – Team Organization

Figure 2, Focus Area 2 Organizational Construct

The importance of Change Management cannot be overstated; it is focused on leveraging a

FA-2 is collaborating with SAF/PA specialists to create and implement an initiative-wide

Appendix C – Project/Task Execution Plan Overview

Figure 3, FA-2 Project/Task Timelines

Table C.1. – Project/Task Execution Overview

Deployed Teaming: Increase warfighting effectiveness and Airmen resiliency

Appendix D – Concept-to-Project Methodologies

 Create a coherent and acceptable vision  Train in a joint environment

Phase 1: Frame - Problem Scoping and Gap Analysis

Phase 2: Design - Concept Development and Modeling

Phase 3: Build - Course of Action (COA) Development and Analysis

Phase 4: Document - Flight Plan Development

Figure 4, Phased Conceptual and Detailed Planning

Appendix E – Communication Plan

Project Title: Air Force and Joint Doctrine

Execution Timeline: Near-Term.

Execution Timeline: Near-Term.

Appendix G – Education and Training

 Possess cross-service and cross-domain understanding (FA-2 Project Plan)

Project Title: Education and Training Assessment

Project Title: Joint Core Competencies

Project Title: Education and Training Catalog

These are key considerations to help define the path to success:

OPR/OCR: OPR: AETC and ETT.

Project Title: Joint Professional Military Education (PME) Exchanges

Recommended  AF/A1 approve

Project Title: Joint Exercise Study

Recommended Next  AETC

Project Title: Joint Oversight Concepts

Phase 3, Stakeholder Engagement: Coordinated with SMEs in AF/A1 to gauge strengths,

 Will decrease overall readiness overdue rates

Operational Planning Team (OPT)-in/OPT-out system for MyVector to further augment

Appendix I – Career Development

Project Title: Joint Experiences Working Group (JEWG)