ADA133076-The Impact of Various Levels of Professional Military Education and Formal Education on...

8/8/2019 ADA133076-The Impact of Various Levels of Professional Military Education and Formal Education on Selected Supervisory Dimensions

1/64

LMDC-TR-83-3AUGUST 1983

THE IMPACT OF VARIOUS LEVELS OF"' PROFESSIONA MILITARY EDUCATION

AND FORMAL EDUCATION ON SELECTEDSUPERVISORY DIMENSIONS

AIC MICHAEL MANSFIELD, USAF

AUGUST 1983

Iz SEP 2 9 4,983

i A-. JAPPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED,

,KAiF HIP AND MANAGEMENT I)EVELOPIMENTr ( , ,TER-Af 'T'IRAINING (COMMANDX~Wll Air, Force Base, Alaban, a 36112 8 ,?.6 0,


2/64

Ll'%)C- r R-83-3Technical Reports prepared by the Leadership and Management DevelopiwentCenter (LMDC), Maxwell Air Fo, ce Base, Alabama, report a completed r;sear(hproject documented by literature review references, abstract dnd testn9 ( i

hypotheses, whether stated or implied. Technical Reports are intended pri-marily for use within the Air Force, but may be distributed to researchersoutside the USAF, beth military and civillin.Th e views and opinions expressed in this document represent the personalviews oi the author only, an d should not in any way be construed to reflectany endorsement or confirmation by the Department of Defense, the Departmentof the Air Force, or any other agency of the United States Government.This report has been reviewed and cleared for open publication and/orpublic release by the appropriate Office of Public Affairs (PA) in accord-ance with AF R 190-17 and %s releasable to the National Technical InformationCenter where it will be available to the general public, including foreignnations.

This Technical Report has been reviewed and is approved for publication.LAWRENCE 0. SHORT, Major, USAF LLOYD WOODMAN, JR., Lt Col, USAFChief, Research Operations Director, Research and Analysis

JOHN E. EMMONSColonel, USAFCommander

eest Available Copy


3/64

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OR THIS PAflr f n Does I__ntroi_ _._"_ _REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLUTING FORM

I REPORT NUMBER 1T2 GOVT ACCESSION NO.4 I RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMOCERLMDC-TR-83-34. TIT.E (uid S.bfitfI) 5 TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVEREDTH E IMPACT OF VARIOUS LEVELS OF PROFESSIONALMILITARY EDUCATION AN D FORMAL EDUCATION ON

SELECTED SUPERVISORY DIMENSIONS 6 PERFORMING O REPORT NUMSER7 AUTHOR(a) 8 CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(.)AIC Michael Mansfield9 PERFORMIPiG ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10 PROGRAM EL.EMENT P ROJECT, TSK"I AREA A WORK UNIT NUMBERSDirectorate of Research and AnalysisLeadership and Management Development Center(AU)Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama 36112 ,I1 CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 2 REPORI OITEDirectorate of Research and Analysis August 1983Leadership and Management Development Center(AU) ,1 NUMBEROF AGESMaxwell Air Force Base, Alabama 36112 5714 MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESSI, different (ro- Ccl ln Othci , iS SECURITY CLASS "o f 111 this rt.

Unclassified35 CL.ASSJI'CATION OGANORADINOI SCH EC-,J'E

65 DiSRIU TI


4/64

Unclassifiedd_SECUPITY CLASSOVICATION O r "NIS PAGE l4.-'F r)Da -11od)

20.meducation positively influe-nce the perceptions of subordinates on keysupervisory measures. To determine how the Ai- Force compares to industry,information was collected from four defense related corporations. Theseindustries place as much o'- more emphasis on the professional eductionof employees than the Air Force. In the area of advanced education, whatmay appear costly io the present should reap enormous benefits in thefuture.

K'c as;f

Unclassified


5/64

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page!NTRODUCTION .................................................. 1

'REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ............ ....................... 2The Need fo r Professional Education ........ ................ 2Professional Military Education .......... .................. 5

Squadron Officer School ............ ................... 9Air Command and Staff College ...... ................. .10Air Wa r College ........... ........................ 11

Graduate Degree Education ............... ..................... .. 13AFIT Resident and Non-Resident Courses ................. 13AFIT Administered Civilian Graduate Education .... ......... 14Need for Civilian Graduate Education: Pros and Cons ....... 17Other Graduate Degree Opportunities ..... .............. 17

Other Non-AFIT Specialized Education Programs ..... ........... 18Conlerisor to Industry ......... ....................... 19

McDonnell Douglas Corporation ...... ................. .19The Communications Satellite Company (COMSAT) ............ .20The BD M Corporation ............. ...................... 20The Boeing Aircraft corporation ...... ................ 21

Summary ............... .............................. 23METHOD .................. ................................. 24

Subjects .............. .............................. 27K.SULTS ................ ................................. 28DISCUSSION ................ ............................... 30CONCLUSIONS .............. ............................... 31RKFERENCES ................ ............................... 34APPENDICES ................ ...............................

Appendix A............ ............................. 36Appendix B............ ............................. 38Appendix C............ ............................. 51


6/64

LIST OF TABLESTable Page1. Officer Sample by Category ...... ... ..................... .272. Summary of Significant Main Effects on Level of ProfessionalMilitary Education ........ ....... ......................... 283. Job Motivation Index ........ ..... ........................ ..394. Task Autonomy ......... ..... ............................ 405. Management and Supervision .......... ..................... .416. Supervisory Communications Climate ........ ................. .427. Organization Communications Climate...... ................. .438. General Organizational Climate ...... ..... ................... 449. To What Extent Do You Feel Accountable to Your Supervisor In . ...Accomplishing Your 'ob? ....... ... ....................... .

10. My Supervisor Performs Well Under Pressure ...... ............. 4611. My Supervisor Explains Ho w My Job Contributes To The OverallMission....... ............ ............................... 4712. When I Need Technical Advice, I Usually Go To My Supervisor .... 4813. Job Related Satisfaction ....... ... ...................... .. 4914. Pride ...... ........... ............................... ... 50

ii

SI. . ' .


7/64


8/64

INTRODUCTION

It is essential that officers of the armed services receive advancedprofessional education in order to carry out their assigned duties In theinterests of national security. Due to the ever increasing complexity ofsociety and a constantly changing international political environment, thisneed for advanced officer education becomes more important over time.National security requirements have become more comprehensive and nationalpolicy formulation involves greater interaction among several disciplinesmilitary, political, economic and technological (Brodsky, 1970). Since the-ilitary is a key element in formulating and achieving national policyobjectives, the need for Air Force officers to be able to competently deal indreas outside their military specialty is evident. The problem centers onthe question: Ho w much of what type of education and/or training does theAir Force officer need? This paper will analyze how an officer's level ofprofessional military education and academic education interact on his/hersubomainate's perceptions of managerial and supervisory issues. A comparisonto industry will be made to determine the similarities and differences (ifthey exist) that some major corporations might have with the Air Force inmegard to the advanced education of their employees.

Th e need for advanced professional schooling will be put in betterperspective after a brief look at the overall environmental demands onofficers. Specifically, the seriousness of growing Soviet influence aroundthe world, coupled with the deterioration of the United States' advantage inadvanced technology, will be addressed. It will be shown that serviceschools and higher education in civilian institutions are essential in,)reparing Air Force officers to meet these challenges.1

- -V-


9/64

A REVIEW OF THE LITERATUREThe Need for Professional Education

To deal with aspects of national policy other than strictly militaryissues, today's Air Force officers must be able to function effectively in awide variety of academic disciplines. They must be able to "communicate withpolicy formulators, with economic analysts, with political decision makers,with systems analysts, with sociologists, psychologists, scientists, andengineers," to name a few of the requirements (Brodsky, 1970, p. 429). Theimportance of highly educated officers in the scientiflc/technological fieldcan never be overemphasized. Our superiority in these fields has been ahallmark of American society. This traditional superiority is eroding, par-tially due to inadequate technical education and research.

Even as there has been a steady erosion in U.S. activity in thebasic sciences, there has been an increase in the level of suchactivity in Western Europe and Japan. If that continues, we are indanger of losing our position of scientific leadership (Fitch, 1982,p. 56).As Walsh & Walsh (1982) note, if the Reagan Administration follows

through with it s education policy on science and technology, the nation'sschools will be on their own. Reactions to this policy from education organ-izations, most of which favor federal support, are negative. Already thereare signs that industry is answering distress signals from engineeringschools and university science faculties. The military has also acted onthis subject.

As a result of concern in the arned forces about dimming tech-nological prowess, at least on e ambitious program has been launchedjointly by the military and industry to work through Reserve OfficerTraining Corps units in high school and college to promote interestin careers in science and engineering (Walsh A Walsh, 1982, p. 39).Yet, know-how alone does not ensure success in countering Soviet expan-

siunism, a major threat to our national security. Th e nature and extent ofsoviet intentions is stated well in Nixon's book The Real War:

2

I


10/64

The Soviets have been waging World War II I since the closing days of,:orld Wa r II. It has proceeded from the Soviet seizure of EasternEurope through the communist victory in China, the wars in Korea andIndochina, and the establishment of a Soviet outpost in Cuba, to thepresent intrusions by the Soviets and their allies in Africa, theIslamic crcscent, and Central America...Anguia, Ethiopia, Afghanis-tan, South Yemen, Mozambique, Laos, Cambodia, South Vietnam [andNicaragua], all have been brought under communist domination since1974... The Soviet Union today is the most powerfully armed expan-sionist nation the world has ever known, and it's arms buildup con-tinues at a pace nearly twice that of the United States. There isno mystery about Soviet intentions. The Kremlin leaders do not wantwar, but they do want the wnrld. And they are rapidly moving intiposition to get what they want (1981, p. 3).The Soviets, therefore, do not appear reluctant to deploy combat forces

wherever and whenever their national objectives would be served. Th e factthat they seldom receive more than token criticism when they do use forcemlight speak well of their resolve to maintain ind use the forces and equip-

ment necessary to achieve their national objectives. By contrast, Bletz andTaylor (1974) suggest that after the Vietnam experience, except in instances 4where vital national security interests are directly threatened, the Unitedstates does not intend to intervene militarily on behalf of another nation.To counter Soviet expansionism, the United States will have to make it s mili-tary assistance program work to its fullest potential. Military officersemployed as advisors and contingency planners can anticipate a vastlyexpanded role. The success of our military assistance program will dependheavily on these officers. Familiarity with languages and knowledge of othercultures, in addition to the special military expertise they display, will

impact significantly on the effectiveiiess of the program. The military mustalso be politically aware.

3


11/64

Th e political - miltary environment of the 1980s will necessitatea military profession that rejects the limitations of the liberaltraditional alliance, [an alliance which believes that the militaryshould concentrate solely on the art of warfare and leave the politi-cal dimensions, which it is inextricably involved In, to *he peoplein Washingtonl. The profession must engender a true spirit ofintellectualism conditioned by political and military realities(Sarkesian, 1979, p.52).Th e struggle being waged in El Salvador between leftist guerillas and

government forces is an immediate example of the importance of the need for awell coordinated, efficient and successful effort between United Statescivilian and military personnel involved in that country. United States mil-itary planners and advisors involved in El Salvador must be aware of Americanpublic and political sentiment towards that country. They should also havean understanding of the people of that region, their customs, religions, his-tory, etc. This will help insure clear and accurate comminication andexchange of informatior and ideas between the United States and El Salvadorand among American military, civilian and government personnel. "CentralAmerica is too close and the strategic stakes are too high for us to ignorethe danger of governments seizing power there with idealogical and militaryties close to the Soviet Union" ("A Plan to Win," 1983). Based on theinformation researched for this section, it is my opinion that our n;tionalleddership will be demanding more professional military advice and expertl'eon the political, military, sociological, economic, and technical - dimen-sions of the nation's security goals.

4

X -


12/64

Professional Military EducationIn order to meet these challenges facing the military, advanced profes-

sional education is a must. The prir.dry function of formal professional edu-cition should be "to equip the student to use in subsequent learning and inprofessional work an understanding of the fundamental concepts, principles,techniques, and ways of thought of his profession in order that he mayjuvelop throughout life an analytical and creative power" (Pittman, 1980,,. 14).

The unique role and structure of the military necessitate a professionalcoiicatlicn program different from those found in civilian industry andivilian professions (Dorger, 1979). Since few civilian educationalinstitutions and in-house industry education programs teach courses thatrelate directly to trie military, it has been necessary to establish in-houseProfessional Military Education (PME). This has been made easy by the factfL at the iliii tdi'y is both a p-;fession an n an exclusive bureaucracy'Plttman).

Professional military education is defined as "those educationaiactivities which provide participating students with the broad serviceKc)wledge required to meet the greater responsibility inherent in their:.regression in rank" (used by a 1966 study of officer education by theA.ssistant Secretary of Defense, Manpower) (Pittman. 1980, p. 3).

The uniique role of the military is determinec by the needs of thesociety it serves. It doesn't have the luxury of choosing it s own role. Therole of the military is not static. It is established in the context ofrapid technological, social, and political change. The professional militaryeducation system is responsive to these changes. Thus PME is used as a pri-:,1dry source of providing officers the capability to fill this role (Dorger).

"5


13/64

The structure of the Air Force is based on the specialized division oflabor along functional lines. This serves to diffuse the possibility of theaccumulation of excessive power; it is also necessary du e to the sheer sizeand complexity of the Air Force. Specialization is necessary in order to dealwith rapid technological change and knowledge obsolescence. Also, personnelrotations have been reduced considerably in recent years and officers are morelikely to find themselves retained in limited functional areas for greaterperiods of time due to new functional management techniques such as the RatedDistribution and Training Management System. Yet while specialization servesmany useful purposes it has the potential to adversly impact the professionalidentity of military officers and destroy a sense of military corporateness, acharacteristic which has always been considered important. This could cause atrend towards an occupational, rather than professional, outlook on the AirForce. Another possible danger attributed to specialization is a lack ofcoordination and cohesion of the unit as a whole. Only through PME, and thesocial and professional exchanges associated with it, can the proper knowledgeand attitudes necessary to ensure professionil identity and teamwork at alllevels, be promioted (Dorger).

As is characteristic of most organizations, the military is ilso struc-tured along hierarchical or vertical lines. Specialization is maximized atthe lowest organizational levels. At successively higher levels, "similarfunctions are grouped together to facilitate management, prevent the duplica-tion of effort in subordinate functions, and to ensure effective team effortamong the various agencies" (Dorger, 1979, p.20). In fact:

Managerial responsibility Is inherent within each officer position.Normally, it increases ir proportion to the officer's progressionto higher and more responsible positions. In senior field gradepositions, managerial responsibilities generally outweigh therequirement for specific technical job knowledge, except in a fewof the most highly complex areas (Dorger, 1979, p.20). I


14/64

Since the military must draw upon it s own ranks for required managementskills, PME must be capable of preparing officers for these positions oforoader responsibility.

On the surface, there appears to be a conflict between the bureaucraticrequirement of top leaders to have a broad knowledge base and the trend ofspecialization. This problem is placated by the military "through adistinction between two tracks of officer development, the specialist and thefuture commander, and through formal education and training" (Pittman) 1980,p.20).

Those who perform best in positions of commano, spending much of theirtime with line units, are selected for successively higher commands. Alter-natively officers may concentrate their careers along functional lines, e.g.,personnel, operations, plans, recruiting, project management. Still othersbecome specialists along such lines as automated data processing, research &development, logistics, or information (Taylor, unddLed).

According to Pittman (1980), PME is often thought of aS "training"whereas civilian graduate school is "education". With regard to PME, theseterms are often used interchangeably. A closer look reveals that PM E is anixture of "training" and "education", the former structured to predominateat the lower levels and the latter at the higher levels of PME. The purposeof "training" is to teach a trade or skill (basic military subjects), whilethe purpose of "education" is to develop thinking and reasoning as well asknowledge. The military profession, like architecture, law, engineering, andmedicine, combines d variety of skills with an underlying body of knowleoge.It distinguishes itself from most other professions, however, bydifferentiating between "training" and "education", though there is someoverlap:

7T


15/64

At all levels, professional courses are a mixture of trainingand education, with the former tending to predominate at thelower levels. Even the higher professional schools devote someattention to developing skills and techniques and to impartingdoctrine, but the higher up the ladder, the more dominant theeducational content of the courses (Taylor, undated, p.20).

When officers enter the service they are expected to have some knowledgeof the military profession (through a precommissioning program) in additionto a field of academi.: study. Once in the service, they attend variouseducation and training programs to sharpen their knowledge and skills intheir particular area of expertise. Ye t this does not entirely fulfill theirprofessional development needs. Without a program to further develop offi-cers' leadership and management capabilities, qualities of discipline, dedi-cation, motivation, ethics, etc., the professional development of an officeris not complete. PM E serves to provide these capabilities and qualities(Dorger). Through PME, Air Force officers are able to acquire an under-standing of how the Air Force is organized and optrates. They are betterable to see how their roles fit into the overall scheiie of things. They areable to understand how, when, to ihom, and why the Air Force does some of thethings it does. Thus, Air Force officers are better able to appreciate thecomplexity of the Air Force and some of the problems encountered in it (Dent,1975).

PM E is a unique system in that it is phased in time to match the offi-cers' potential with years of service (Rogers, 1975). It does this by inter-spersing periods of formal training/education between periods of practicalexperienLe over the course of an officer's career. If all this knowledgewere presented to officers at the beginning of their careers, much of itwould be forgotten or would become obsolete once it was used. Also, moneywould be wasted on the training and education of officers who oon't intend toremain in the service (Dorger).

8


16/64

For the military, professional schooling is particularly significant becauseof the limited opportunities officers have to practice their profession--tocornmand and manage troops in combat. Other than war, school is one of theprincipal means by which officers can develop professional expertise:Pittman). PME, therefore, serves to improve officers' capabilities in theart of warfare and national security.

Also, the interaction of students and faculty serves as a review board ofaerospace experts to evaluate and recommend improved aerospace concepts,doctrine, and strategy (Rogers). For the most part, the PM E system isresigned to produce an officer who is a "generalist", as opposed to a"specialist". This is not to imply that one should be a "jack of all trades

but master of none." Rather, one should be a multi-specialist, able to managethe integration of multiple specialties in pursuit of a common objective(Bletz & Taylor).

Squadron Officer SchoolThe first level of PM E fo r officers is Squadron Officer School (SOS).

it is an intensive, 8 1/2 week program whose educational philosophy emphasizesprofessional development for officers wnose primary responsibility is force.ipoyment. The key attributes of these officers should be the ability to

lead and the ability to communicate. Four curriculum areas - officership,Sorce employment, leadership, ind communications ski 'Is directly support theOS mission, objectives and philosophy (AU Catalog, 1982-1983). PM E at this!evel:

Seeks to deepen officers competencies in their p,'imary specialties,i.e., to teach them the latest management techniques in training,maintenance, supply, fire control, etc., and to prepare them for thegreater leadership and responsibility involved (Taylor, undated, p.21).

At SOS, basics such as writing, speaking, techniques of research, etc.,are stressed. Students also become familiar with doctrine and elementarytactics (Pittman).

U


17/64

"The emphasis at this level, again, is on imparting techniques and militarydoctrine rather than generating independent thinking and analysis" (Taylor,undated, p. 21).Air Commana and Staff College

Air Command and Staff College (ACSC) is the intermediate level Air ForcePM E program. It is 40 weeks long and the AU Catalog notes its mission is "toenhance the professional knowledge, skills, and perspectives of mid-careerofficers for increased leadership roles in command and staff positions."Since ACSC is the highest level of PM E that most officers will attend, it hastraditionally focused attention "on bringing all of them to a uiiform levelof staff competence and to a common understanding of the principles of mili-tary leadership and command of forces in the field" (Taylor, undated, p. 23).Th e four curriculum areas of ACSC are Staff Communications and Research,Command Leadersnip and Resource Management, National Security Affairs, andWarfare Studies. At this level of PM E there is a shift in emphasis away from"training," towards "education".

As the officer progresses from relatively technical jobs to thoseof broader scope, his basic skills retain their importance, butrequire refinement. Writing ability is channeled into the distinc-tive formats and styles of the staff paper, the talking paper, andmilitary correspondence. An understanding of Air Force organiza-tions--their form, purposes, and procedures -- becomes necessary...Study of tactics and doctrine expands and deepens. Th e specificfocus of this type of knowledge will vary depending upon the indi-vidual's assignment--whether his duties are on a staff or in opera-tions, in the field or at a headquarters (Pittman, 1980, p.25).

National Security Affairs deals with US national security policy and ,regional studies, i.e., global perspectives. Warfare Studies covers militarytheory and history, and the types of warfare. Additionally, a sizeablenumber of officers are sent each year to attend intermediate level profes-sional military education at other institutions, i.e., the Armed Forces


18/64

Staff College, the Army Command and General Staff College, the Naval War Col-lege (Command and Staff Course), the Marine Corps Command and Staff College,th e Royal Air Force Staff College, th e Canadian Forces Staff College, and theGerman Armed Forces Staff College (Dorger).Sir War College

Senior level PME )s provided by the AMr War College. The mission of theAir W ar College is to prepare select officers for key command and staffassignments where they have responsibility fo r developing, managing, dndemploying air power as a component of national scur-ity (AU Catalog). It isassumed at the senior level PME that students already have acquired the spe-cific skills of the various professions:

Thus, military officers are thought to know tne intricacies ofdeploying, operating, and maintaining the weapons systems of theirvarious services... Through curricula thought to be professionallyunique, the colleges seek to provide them organized bodies ofknowledge and enhanced perspectives on national defense in orderto prepare them fo r high positionr of public trust and responsi-bility (Taylor. undated, p.25).

It is at the Air War College that management sKills and the ability tointegrate rultiple specialties in pursuit of d common objective, are developedto the fullest potential.

Again, a numoer of officers attcnd senior level professional militaryeducation at other institutions. Some of the-, institutionS dre the NationalWar College, the Industrial College of the Armcd Forcs, the Army War College,th e Naval War College (Naval Warfare Course), the Royal Air Force College ofAir Warfare, the NA7O Defense College, and th e Canadian Forces NationalDefense College (Dorger).

ii Ii

-----------


19/64

Despite abundant praise coming from military and civilian leaders, andthe many elaborate systems used to review, update, and modify the programs ofthe various PM E schools, the services are constantly facing major challengesto their PM E systems (from both inside and outside the military). Th e reasonfor this is the cost of providing professional military education in an era ofaustere defense budgets.

In this type of austere environment, it always becomes difficultto maintain programs which invest in long-term growth and develop-ment in the face of immediate demands, where the consequences offailing to provide must be managed by the current decision -makers rather than their successors. In the case of truly long-term development, such as that represented by education, the dif-ficulty is increased. Professional military education is such along-term program. Th e inability to quantify or categoricallyidentify the benefits derived from PM E makes it particularly hardto convincingly articulate its value, especially in the highlypragmatic atmosphere of the panels and committees of the Air StaffBoard Structure as they discharge their responsibility of "balanc-ing" the Air Force budget (Pittman, 1980, p.1).

The services can not fund all of their legitimate requirements. Theresult has been a growing emphasis in recent years on reducing the costsassociated with all officer educational programs, including professionalmilitary education (Dorger). There are some knowledgeable observers, though,who believe the serv'ces' need for professional military education isgrowing. For example, a former Assistant Secretary of Defense, Education,wrote recently:

The challenge... is clear. Manifold factors compound and intensifythe problems of continuing the thoughtful and purposeful developmentof the officer corps of the seryices. Knowledge obsolescence at anincreasing rate, rapidly changing social patterns, and an increasinglysophisticated work onvirrunlent demand that even more... attention bedevoted to th e professional development and e,;ucational preparation ofthe officer of the future... With the increasing responsibility whichall officers must assume in the increasingly ccmplex environment ofthe future, a telling argument is made for the need to expand the baseof attendance at professional military education (Dorger, 1979, p.4).

12


20/64

Th e importance which the Air Force places on PM E can be seen by the num-ber of people (Air Force Officers) involved in the program (Appendix A). Atotal of 2,498 officers graduated from residence PM E between August '81 andJune '82. This figure was derived from data supplied by the Director ofEvaluation of each PM E school. An additional 18,828 graduated throughcorrespondence and seminar courses (F Y 82), and 39,882 officers were enrolledin the PM E program at the end of FY 82. The correspondence and seminarcourse data were provided by SOS's Plans, Programs and Research Division,ACSC's Records Division, and AWC's Records, Reports, and Analysis Section.These figures do not include officers from the other branches of the serviceand civilians who attend Air Force PME.

Graduate Degree EducationAFIT Resident and NonResident Courses

In addition to the "generalized" PME common course content offeredselected officers, more specialized education and training is available tofulfill the specific educational requirements of the Air Force. The bulk ofthese programs are administered by the Air Force Institute of Technology(AFIT), a subordinate agency of the Air University.

AFIT provides education to meet Air Force requirements in scientific,technological, managerial, and other designated professional areas (AUCatalog). It is through AFIT that officers receive fully funded graduatedegree educdtion.


21/64

AFIT courses are administered in on e of two ways: resident AFIT programsand AFIT administered programs conducted on civilian camlpuses (Dorger). Stu-dents are sent to graduate school on civilian campuses for courses and areasof study which the AFIT residence prugrams don't cover. Most of these civil-ian campus programs normally last for on e or two (exceptionally three) yearsat an accredited civilian institution to cumplete a master's degree or adoctorate.

According to AFMPC there were a total of 728 fully-funded, AFIT admin-istered, officer graduate degree slots awarded in 1982. Th e areas of study,numbers of students assigned to each area, and the corresponding percentagceach area represents of the total, are as follows:

Engineering 19 7 35%International Area 149 26%7Technical Management 146 25%7Physical Sciences 64 11%Social Sciences 9 2%7Communications 8 1%Mathematics 0 0%

AFIT Administered Civilian Graduate EducationPrior to the 60's, civilian graduate education for Air Force officers was

primarily in the scientific an d engineering areas. This has been expanded tocover such areas as political science, economics, international relations,psychology, sociology, business administration, etc., (Taylor). According toBletz and Taylor, civilian graduate schooling serves three main purposes.

Analytical skills and critical judgement. First, it teaches analyticalskills and critical judgement different from traditional military practices.Th e military seems to lean toward learning through historical and inductivemethodology, as opposed to deductive reasoning and speculation towards thefuture. Th e military is said to rely on field manuals, technical manuals,current statements of policy, etc. - wisdom based on lessons of the past.

14___t.I- ---- ~-- ----


22/64

Civilian graduate schools tend to use not only inductive reasoning, but deduc-tive reasoning as wel1, the result being a mind tha i conditioned to recoy-nize the limitations of conventional doctrine applied to situations differentfrom those in which it was developed. This brings to mind our experience inVietnam where the military tended to view pessimistically threats to nationalsecurity (the worst case syndrome), to report optimistically an military capa-rilities to get the job done (the can do syndrome), and to show progresstoward achieving objectives by whatever measures their civilian masters estab-lished. These problems are a result, in part, from a less than adequateunderstanding of public policy or marginal and multivariate analysis and alack of understanding of the country (Vietnam) itself - problems with whichcivilian graduate schools deal (Bletz & Taylor).

Exposure of officers to civilian attitudes 6nd opinions. Second,on-campus education also provides one of the few opportunities for Air Forzeofficers to qet a feeling first-hand for the attitudes and opinions of civil-ians on issues of common interest. Many military officers and their familiesare physically isolated from adjacent ivilian communities. Air Force basesare designed to provide every conceivable service to it s people.

Physical isolation leads to cultural isolation: the horizons formost officers ,y end at the base bounderies ana their interestswill tend to become superparochial. For officers commissioned fromthe service academies the problem will be exacerbated by the lack ofthe leavening experience of four years of civilian undergraduateeducation... For an increasing proportion uf ufiicers, the experi-ence of full-time graduate school on a civilian campus will repre-sent the only opportunity for significant exposLre to the pulse ofthe civilian society they serve - it s problems, fears, ideals andaspirations (Bletz & Taylor, 1974, p. 258).

The converse is also true; those in academia are given a rare opportunity to.;,eet and work with members of the military establishment, an experience thatundoubtedly serves a positive cause (Bletz & Taylor).

15


23/64

Attraction and retention of better qualified officers. Third, graduatecivilian schooling serves to attract and retain better qualified people.Most officers consider graduate education a vital and expected aspect oftheir career. Retention is a key factor in the cost-benefit analysis ofofficers whose graduate education has been provided by the government. Wecan assume greater productivity from officers with graduate educationalthough this is difficult to measure (Bletz & Taylor, 1974, p. 256).

Interviews with executives of four major corporations in 1973yielded general agreement concerning the positive correlationbetween advanced aegree holders and high performance (resultingin increased return to the corporation), with emphasis on thebroadening effect of graduate education. There wa s generalagreement, too, that graduate education is associated withlower personnel turnover (Bletz & Taylor, 1974, p. 256).Data correlating fully-funded qraduate civilian schooling and retention

was srarce prior to 1973. In 1973, the Department of Defense administered arandom sample survey Questionnaire to 18,000 officers of the four serviceswho had obtained at least a master's degree (Bletz & Taylor). Officers with"profestional" degrees (i.e., chaplains, dentists, doctors, lawyers, etc.)were not included. Th e sampling plan sought a disproportionately large num-ber of respondents in the lower grades. The response was approximately 70mand useable data base consisted of 11,568 officers. Positive career intentwas relatively clear. Fifty-three percent responded that they intend toremain in the service as long as possible; 36% intend to stay for a minimalcareer and only 11% intend to leave the service before eligible to retire.It appears significant that 93% of the respondents believe their advanceddegrees are useful in making them more effective officers. Officers respond-ing to the OSD survey were motivated positively by graduate civilian school-ing. This has important implications for the recruitment and retention ofquality officers in the Volunteer Armed Forces (Bletz & Taylor).

16


24/64

Need for Civilian Graduate Education: Pros and ConsOpinions differ widely as to whether or not officers need the amount of

civilian graduate education they currently receive. Civilian critics wouldike to see the military isolated from society as much as possible. Military

critics fear that civilian education for military personnel could have a con-taminating effect, causing some to stray from the paths of duty. Cost-benetit arguments are raised, where costs are easily measured and benefitsnot so readily definable (Taylor). When on e weighs these arguments againstthe unique purposes civilian graduate schooling serves, the need for graduatecivilian education is compelling. The four primary reasons for civiliangraduate education are: First, civilian graduate school teaches analyticalskills and critical judgement different from traditional military practices;secend, it provides one o- the few opportunities for Air Force officers toget a feeling, first-hand, for the attitudes an d opinions of civilians onissues of common interest, and vice versa; third, civilian graduate educationserves to attract and retain better qualified officers; and fourth, it pro-vides specialized education to meet Air Force educational needs not availablein PME courses or resident AFIT progrars. This neec for civilian graduateeducation is especially true considering the expanded roles and ever increas-ing responsibilities of today's Air Force officer.

Other Graduate Degree OpportunitiesIn 1982, an additional 155 officers began pursuing graduate degrees

in specialized areas, i.e., legal master's program, Air Force Academysponsored degrees, the Senior Commander's Sponsored Education Programs, etc.Also, a total of 131 officers attended education in industry (IBM, etc.).

Officers may fulfill graduate degree requirements by enrolling in pro-grams cosponsored by civilian colleges and universities and some of the pro-fessional military educational institutions. In these programs, students at

17

- - "-


25/64


26/64

Comparison to IndustryIn order to get a feel for how the Air Force compares to industry on the

subject of the professional education of it s people., information from fourdefense related corporations is provided here. The four corporations thatwill be discussed are McDonnell Douglas Corporawon, Th e Communications)dtellite Company 'COMSAT), the 8DM Corporation and the Boeing AircraftCorporation. These four companies were chosen foi their prominence in the,,efense and aircraft industries.

McDonnell Douglas CorporationAccording to M r. Bill Johnson, (1983) Training Kepresentative, Personnel

Training, McDonnell Douglas will reimburse any of it s employees a portion oftoe cost of college courses. The courses must be joo related, and a grade ofC or better is necessary to receive reimbursement. Should a person decide topursue an undergraouate Uegree, each tour!e Losl i, reiiibured 60% and theemployee is allowed $20 for books. Upon completion of the degree an addi-tional 15% of the total tuition is reimbursed. The same holds true for anyonewishing to pursue a graduate degree, the only differecce being that instead ofreceiving an additional 1S% reimbursement of the totc! tuition upon completionof the degree, an emploype is awarded an additional 46%, for a total of 1(;0%.,:,ny employee wishing to pursue a doctorate will receive 100% reimbursement upfront. For anyone wishing to pursue a college degree with reimbursement, thecurriculum must first be approved.

Engineers who wish to acquire an MBA must have a masters in engineeringor five years experience as a supervisor (there are exceptions to thispol icy )

19

X


27/64

Basic adult education is another program in which McDonnell Douglas willhelp pay for costs (not a college credit program). This program consists ofremedial training, technical training and obtainment of high school diplomas.Under Basic Adult Education, the employee is reimbursed 100% of whatever costsare incurred.

In the separate category of Skill Improvement, 60 % of costs is reim-bursed for individual courses which are job related.

Between 1 July 1982 and the end of March 1983, 59 6 persons wishing toobtain a college degree received curriculum approval, and 55 employees hadsome sort of curri :ulum approved under Basic Adult Education (Johitson).The Communications Satellite Company (COMSAT)

COMSAT also reimburses employees for educational degrees. This is avail-able to everyone and is considered a benefit. An executive marked for animportant promotion is sent out to attend an advanced management programn atsuch schools as Harvard, MIT, etc. This only averages about one person per"qI year. Add'tijnally, with an individual managers approval, an employee mayattend an external seminar. In 1982, out of a total population of 2,705people, COMSAT spent $165,000 on education (an average of $61 per employee).Ten percent of COMSAT's employees availed themselves of educaticoal assist-ance, 25 % of which took tw o or more courses at on e time (Rarnsdale, 1983).The BDM Corporation

This company offers professional services In research, experiments,analyses, design and tests in such areas as defense, communications, energy,envircnment, transportation and public policy. Major General W.R. MacDonald,USAF (Ret.) Corporate Vice President of BDM, states:

To further enhance our success through the continued technical andmanagement education and training of our professional staff, wehave strongly supported the personal growth of our people througha combination of education and training programs. All permanent,full time employees are eligible to receive 100 percent reimburse-ment for the cost of tuition, books, and related fees associatedwith attending courses at college and universities. During 1982,301 BDH personnel attended 525 (_uurses le~dinq to graduate degrees(1983). 20

-- .4-


28/64

Out of an estimated 8DM population of 2300 employees, approximately 1b%-pursued graduate degrees in 1982 (employees who receive fully-funded educa-tion incur no obligations).

In addition to full-time, fully-funded education, BDM employees mayattend short courses, seminars, and symposia which will enhance their skillsor broaden their knowledge in a particular interest area.

Finally, BDM has developed a program similar, in some respects, to AirForce PME. As General MacDonald explained:

Th e BDM style of management makes many demands, especially on rela-tively new people at the middle management level. Rapid growth,plus the dynamics of our unique matrix management organizationalstructure, have demanded an effective, systematic program to impartBDM management expertise to newer managers. To meet this demand, BD Mhas developed an in-house, management development system which trainsprofessional personnel in various aspects of manigement... Addi-tionally, BDM sent seven of its personnel to special managementtraining courses at Harvard University, Psychological Associates,etc, in 1982 (1983).

The Boeing Aircraft CorporationBetween July 1, 1981 and August 31, 1982. Boevng funded a total Of

2,570 employees pursuing graduate (3,326 masters, 61 PnDs) and undergradiatedegrees (6,932), and individual courses (2,249). Tnis figure represents.,proximately 14% of a total Boeing population of 90,O00 persons (3.8% pur-sued graduate degrees). During this period, 114 individuals received grad,|-ate degrees (113 masters, 1 PhD) and 92 received underjraduate degrees, for atotal of 206 (Gayton, 1983). Also, many employeet develop their mandyeridl,kills in the Boeing Management Development System. Corporate policy statesthat:

The management development program will emphasize self-developmentby all managers, on-the-job development of all managers, personalattention of eac" manager to the development of his subordinates,and the integration of these individual actions with organizationalmanagement developm2nt under an overall system (iNiven, 1983, p.1).

21


29/64

Following are the eight key programs which comprise the overall manage-ment development system, and their respective participation levels: Pre-Management ('80-1500, '81-824), Basics of Supervision ('80-1066, '81-447),Management for excellence ('80-244, '81-185), Senior Boeing Management Semi-nar (120 participants per year), Program Management ('81-57), AerospaceIndustry Manufacturing Seminar (40 participants per year), Executive Program('80-65, '81-13, 5 military participants each year), and Sloan Fellowships(50 participants over the last 20 years). Also, Management Developmentorganizations within the major operating organizations provide for a widerange of management training operations. These programs fall in the generalareas of One-hour Management Skill Courses, Functional and Cross-FunctionalPrograms, and Outside Short Courses and Seminars. Finally, Boeing has theExpo Program, designed to identify, early in their careers, people who havehigh potential for eventual promotion to executive level responsibilities(Niven).

It appears that these four defense related industries place as muchemphasis nn the professional education of it s employees, if not more, thandoes the Air Force. A figure for the total number of Air Force officers pur-suing graduate degrees in 1982 was not readily obtainable. With 728 newgraduate degree slots started in FY 82, and graduate degree programs lastingnormally two years, not more then 2% of the entire Air Force officer corpscan be involved in pursuing a fully-funded graduate degree at any one time(.72% of the entire Air Force officer corps began pursuing graduate degreeson a full-time, fully-funded basis in FY 82).

A

221


30/64

Thus fa r we have looked at: The need for professional education fo r AirForce officers; professional military education; AF;T administered graduatedegree programs ano the various other educational programs available toofficers, and a comparison of Air Force professional educdtion to industry.It is evident that a considerable amount of money is being spent on officerprofessional education by the Air Force. This trend is also apparent inindustry. While there is considerable intuitive iustification for theseprograms, there is a scarcity of hard evidence to support these expenditures.At the Leadership and Management Development Center there are data which canbe used to explore the interactions and effects qhich PM E and graduateeducation might have on officers in the areas of supervisory and managermentskill.

"I

LI


31/64

METHODIn an attempt to determine what influence PM E and civilian graduate

school has on the supervision and management abilities of officers, ananalys's wa s conducted to measure how subordinates view their officersupervisors on such matters as Management and Supervision, SupervisoryCommunications Climate, Job Related Satisfaction, and a host of otherfactors (Appendix B). Th e data within the Organizational Assessment Package(OAP) data base, used for this study, contains survey information collectedsince January 1979 by the Air Force Leadership and Management DevelopmentCenter (LMDC). The 109 question survey was designed by the Air Force HumanResources Laboratory to aid LMJC in it s mission to: (a) provide managementconsulting services to Air Force commanders upon request, (b) to provideleadership and management training, and (c) to conduct research on Air Forcesystemic issues with information within the accumulated data base (Hendrix &Halverson, 1979).

Administration of the survey is the first step in the consultationprocess. The survey is given to a stratified random sample of the organiza-tion to which LMDC has been invited. The results of the survey are an iMpor-tant feature in the assessment of the organization. The results are handledin a confidential manner between LMDC and the client. After approximatelyfive to six weeks for analysis, feedback of data Is then provided tocommanders ard supervisors within the organization.

When specific problems are revealed, a consultant and the supervisordevelop a management action plan designed to reduce the problem at that levelof the organization. Within six months, the consulting team returns toreadminister the survey instrument as a means to help assess the Impact ofthe consulting process.

24


32/64

Th e data from each consulting effort are stored in a cumulating database for research purposes. These data are aggregated by work group codesdeveloped for this instrument. Th e data nay be reca'ied by demographics suchas personnel category, age, sex, Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC), pay grade,zime in service and educational level. Through factor analysis, th e 93 atti-tudinal items are combined into 24 measures which cover job content, jo binterferences, and various types of supervisory and organizationaldimensions.

Using the data from the LMDC data base, several notions about the impactof PME and formal education can be tested. In general, th e purpose of thisstudy is to analyze the perceptions of subordinates of officers across keysupervisory limensions to determine the impact of various levels of PME andformal education. To reduce maturational impact, tine in sevice will be usedas a covariate. Specifically, the following null hypotheses were tested bytnis study:

1. There will be no significant differences in subordinate meanresponses across the levels of PME.

2. There will be no significant differences in mean responses of sub-ordinates whose supervisors have a bachelors degree (as highest level ofeducation completed), vs those whose supervisors have acquired either amasters or docto-ate.

3. There is no significant interaction between level of PME and levelof degree.

To test the null hypotheses, an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) wasperformed (ANCOVA tests main effects and interaction effects controlling fora covariate) using a 2 (level of college deyree obtained) X 4 (level of PM Ecompleted) factorial design. Differences between/aionq the various cells areconsidered statistically significant at or below the .05 alpha level of

Z5


33/64

significance. This establishes a 95% confidence level that the null hypothe-si s will not be rejected In error. Th e effect of time in service was made acovariate, and thus factored out. Medical doctors were excluded from thestudy due to the fact that they usually identify themselves as holding adoctorate degree during survey administration.

Th e first independent variable, level of college degree obtained, con-sists of 2 levels: (a) officer supervisors who hold a bachelors degree and(b) officer supervisors who hold a graduate degree. This study compares theperceptions, as indicated by overall mean responses, of subordinates of offi-cers grouped into these two categories.

The second independent variable, level of PM E completed by officers con-sists of 4 levels: (a) no PME, (b) Squadron Officer School, (c) IntermediateService School and (d) Senior Service School. Comparisons are made of theoverall mean responses of subordinates of officers who have completed thesevarious levels of PME.

In addition to investigating these main effects by level, this researchdetermines any interaction effect on each of the OAP factors selected of thetwo independent variables (level of education and level of PME) operatingtogether, as distinguished from the main effect of each independent variable.

Twelve dimensions (factors and items) measured by the OAP were selectedfor the study. Th e selection was based on the dimension's relationship tothe purported benefits of the various types of education. Th e dimensions arefurther defined at Appendix B and depicted graphically at Appendix C.

26

*... ,T - 7'


34/64

Subjects

The selected sample fo r this study includes all officers with subordinateworkgroups within the LMDC aata base from 1 Oct 1980 through I Jan 1983.While th e selected statistical procedures from the Statistical Package forthe Social Sciences (Nie, Hull, Jenkins, Steinbrenner, Bent, 1975) usediffering treatments fo r missing cases, the subject pool by category is:resented in Table 1.

TABLE 1Officer Sample By Category

PMEEducation NONE SOS ACSC AWC OTALI

dacnelors 224 2s1 156 76 707uraduate 50 222 449 310 1031TOTAL 274 473 605 386 f73_

27

'* '

Results


35/64

A total of 12 dependent measures were used in the analysis of each nfthe hypotheses. These measures were chosen for their representativeness assupervisory and management indicators.

Null Hypothesis 1: There will be no significant differences in subordi-nate mean responses across the levels of PME which their supervisors havecompleted. Null Hypothesis 1 was rejected in 10 of the 12 factors and vari-ables.

A summary of the significant differences are provided in Table 2. Adetailed statistical presentation is provided in Appendix B, Tables 3 through12 .

TABLE 2Summary of Significant Main Effects On Level ofProfessional Military Education

________ Factors _Job MotivationTask AutonomyManagement and SupervisionSupervisory Commnnicatlois ClimateOrganizational Communications ClimateGeneral Organizational Climate

ItemsTo what extent do you feel accountable to your supervisor in accomplishingyour job?My supervisor performs well under pressure.My supervisor explains how my Job contributes to the overall mission.When I need technical advice, I usually qo to my supervisor.

28


36/64

The two variables that reflect no significant 6ifference are Job RelatedSatisfaction (Table 13 ) and Pride (Table 14). It is apparent that those withnigher levels of PME are rated more positively on supervisory dimensions by"hreir subordinates.

Null Hypothesis 2: There will be no significant differences in meanresponses of subordinates whose supervisors have a bachelors degree, (asnighest level of education completed) vs those wnose supervisors haveacquired either a masters or doctorate. The onl,, variable that revealed asignificant main effect was Job Satisfaction [F(I, 8) 7 7.85, p. < .05]. inthis case, the subordinates of those with graduate degrees shared greater JobSatisfaction (Table 13, Figure 11). However, the trend across all otherdependent variables, as portrayed by Figures 1-10, ,2, shows a slight (notsignificant) edge to those with graduate degrees.

Null Hypothesis 3: There is no siynificdnt irttrdctiun between level ofPME and level of degree. Of the 12 selected depencnt variables, only oleproduced a significant interaction. The Item, "When I Need Technical Advice,1 Usually Go To My Supervisor," was found to produce an interaction [F(3, 8)

2.93, p. < .05]. The data is presented in Table 12 and depicted in FigureI U.

The only variable that showed no significant main effects was Pride(Table 14). It is noted that the trends once again appear to favor advancededucation and PME, although not significantly (Figure 12).

Finally, As suspecteO, the variable "Time in Service" that was used as acovariate to eliminate its effect on the findings, was significant in allcases (Tables 3 - 14).

29

DISCUSSION


37/64

Overall, the data shows that officer's professional military education hasan extremely positive relationship with the perceptions of their subordinateson many key supervisory measures. PM E is significantly positive in 10 of thE12 measures chosen for this study.

Only on e measure, Job Related Satisfaction, indicates that graduate schoolhas a significantly positive effect. Apparently, subordinates whosesunervisors had obtained either a masters or doctorate degree seemed to havemore job sat'sfaction. Additionally, there is a trend across all the data infavor of graduate school, though not significant. This can be seen inFigure; 1-12.

Interactions turned out to be, for the most part, as expected. On theitem concernina technical advice, graduate degrees appear to provide officersthe knowledge necessary for them to answer technical questions across theboard. PM E does not have much of an effect, except that having no PM E and nogrdduate education leaves the supervisor unable to field technical questionswith much oroficiency. No-mally, we would have expected to see relativelyparallel lines between the two groups. This is not the case on technicaladvice.

30

I

CONCLUSIONS


38/64

From the discussions and analyses presented in this study, the authorbelieves a cas! has been made to support several conclusions. First, the AirForce exists to serve as one of several instruments of American foreignPolicy. It serves as a deterrent, hopefully at all levels, to aggressionaimed by adversaries against the United States and it s allies. Its veryexistence allows the United States an extra amount of leverage to influenceevents in a way favorable to the national security interests of the UnitedStates and its allies, and, if al l else fails, the American militaryestablishment must have a war-fighting capability, second to none, to protectvital national interests.

The key to both deterrence and war-fighting capability is unitoperational readiness. The military establishment is not justanother American institution and it s leaders are not simplymembers of another profession ... military officers carry fromth e time of commission, extraordinary responsibilhties, endureunusual hardships, receive no additional compensation for longerand harder work, and bear unlimited liability extending to therisk of l ife itself. Military units train and fight only as wellas they are led by their officers (Taylir, undated, p. 44).The volatile and constantly changing international scene, and the new

technological age in which the military must operate, presupposes a militarytnat is well educated and trained to meet the many challenges facing it. Asthe world environment increases in complexity, the 1980's will put evengreater demands on officers. Officer effectiveness will be dependent on theamount and quality of educetior and training invested in these officers."nigher education for the military professional in both civilianinstitutions and service schools is probably the best way to develop theintellectual sensitivity and analytical insights he/she will need"(Sarkesian, 1979, p. 45).

Second, industry, like the Air Force, considers the development andmaintaining of a hignly-ecucated and trained staff an essential element for aquality professional organization, as indicated by a sampling of four defen.,erelated firms. between I july I982 and the end or Marco ii93, S96 Mcuonneil

31


39/64


40/64

Kinally, the importance of professional education for Air Force officers hasneen shown. The Air Force places heavy emphasis on training andscholarship. This is seen by the number of officers actively involved 'n MEand other educational programs. PM E is the most widEly used tool for officerprofessional development, as participation levels indicate. Rapid advancesin technology and constant changes in the international political arenadissure that the need for PM E and other educational programs shall notdiminish. If anything, the need will increase, oarticularly in the area ofgraduate education. Information supplied by four defense-relatedcorporations indicate their understanding of the need to keep abreast ofcurrent knowledge and information. Takinq this into consideration, thiecurrent level of Air Force emihasis on graduate edjuation (2%) may be lo..2,thouqh cost and manpower requirements may seem prohibitive to increasinqqradLjate education expenditures, the Air Force emph.sis on PM E reveals tiedesire for a well trained and educated officer. What apoear to be mostlycosts now, in the area o* eaucation, could very well reap enormous benefitsin the future.

33

I

References


41/64

Air University Catalog. Air University: Maxwell AFB, AL , 1982-1983.Bletz, D. F., & Taylor, W. J., Jr. A case for officer graduate education.

Journal of Political and hM-itary Sociology, 1974, 2, 251-267.Bricker, R., Professional military education. Air Reservists, 1982, 34,8-9.Brodsky, N. Th e professional education of officers. Phi Delta Kappan,1967, 48, 429-432.Dent, D. R. Roles of PM E in officer development. Air University Review,1975, 26, 92-99.Dorger, J. M. USAF Officer PM E in the 1980s: A look at the Air Force needfor professional military education in the coming decade (Report Number0600-79). Air Command and Staff College, Maxwell AFB, AL: 1979.Fitch, V.L. We are in danger of losing our scientific leadership.U.S. News & World Report, June 21, 1982, 56.Gayton, Carber. Personal communication, 6 May, 1983.Hendrix, W. H., & Halverson, V. B. Organizational survey assessment packagefor Air Force organizations (AFHRL-TR-78-93). Brooks AFB TX: Air ForceHuman Resources Laboratory, 1979.Johnson, Bill. Personal communication, 18 April, 1983MacDonald, W. R., Personal communication, 24 February, 1983.Niven, J., From a corporate policy letter by T. A. Wilson, dated June 27,1977, number 8D10, in the Boeing Management Development System Manual,

dated April 1983.Niven, J., Personal communication, 18 April, 1983.

SNixon, R M. , The Real War, N.Y.: Warner Books, Inc., 1981.Pittman, W. C., Jr . W hy PME? Th e purpose of professional militaryeducation. Student Research Report. 79-80, Air War College, AirUnive:sity, Anril 1980.A )lan to win in El Salvador. Newsweek, March 21, 1983, 18-20.;iRafnsdale, J. Personal communication, 13 April, 1983.fkogers, F. M., Why professional military education? Air University Review,1975, 26, 2-9.

34


42/64

Sarkesian, S. C., Changing dimensions of military professionalism: educationand enlightened advocacy. Military Review, 1979, 59 , 44-57.

Taylor, W. J. Jr., Professional enculturation of the U.S. officer corps.Washington, D.C. T-eorgetown University Center fo r Strategic andInternational Studies, undated.

Aalsh, E., & Walsh, T. The status of science education. The EducationDigest, November, 1982, 48, 36-39.

I%

F


43/64

APPENDIX AAir Force Officer PME Participation Levels

____ 36


44/64

RESIDENCE PMESO S

Total graduated (August '81 Mav '82) i900oAC SC

Total graduated (August '81l- une '82) 434AW C

Total graduated (August '81 - May '82) 164Total residence PM E graduated 2498

NON-RESIUENCE PME FISCAL YEAR 1982SO S

CorresponJer.ceTotal graduated 2,479Total enrolled at end of FY '82 24,824

ACSCCorrespondence

Total yraduated 9242Total enrolled at end of FY '82 9377Semi na r

Total graduated 6022lctal enrolled at end of FY '62 738

A14CCorrespondence

Total graduated 336Total enrolled at end of FY '82 1927Semi nar

Total graduated 749Total enrolled at end of FY '82 301)Total non-residence PM E graduates 18823Total nrn-residence PME enrolled at end of FY '82 3982

37


45/64

APPENDIX BOA P Factors and Variables

38

_ - - _- --- I "II'

S ~~~~~~~.. . . . ...... .......... .... ... .. . ..... ... . ... . . .. .. .. .

Tdble 3


46/64

Z807 Jub Motivation IndexAndlysis of Means

Mean(Count) NONE SOS ACSC AWC

Bachelors 111.01 118.35 121.93 127.73(231) (252) (159) (75)

Graduite 119.94 119.70 121.97 136.77(54) (228) (456) (313)

Analysis of VarianceSum of Mean SignificaiceSource of Variation Squares DF Square F of F

MAIN EFFLCTS 41417.450 4 10354.363 4.434 0.001Degree 1428.598 1 1428.598 0.612 0.434PM E 37866.540 3 12622.180 5.405 0.001

Z-WAY 1NIL;ACTIONSDegree PM E 5327.863 3 177/.954 0.761 0.516CovariateTime in Service 97245.067 1 97245.067 41.643 0.000

39II39 +.

-- +.--..- ...-. .

Table 4


47/64

Z813 Task AutonomyAnalysis of Means

Mean(Count) NONE SOS ACSC AW C

Bachelors 4.19 4.28 4.45 4.70(238) (257) (160) (76)

Graduate 4.40 4.37 4.52 4.89(55) (22q) (45P) (313)I!

Analysis of VarianceSum of Mean Significance

Source of Variation Squares DF Square F of FMAIN EFFECTS 50.665 4 12.666 12.143 0.Degree 3.199 1 3.199 3.067 0.080PM E 40.851 3 13.617 13.054 0.0002-WAY INTERACTIONSDegree PM E 1.053 3 0.351 0.337 0.799CovariateTime inService 45.413 1 45.413 43.537 0.000

4U

i

Tatie 5


48/64

Z618 Management and SupervisonAnalysis of Means


Bachelors 4.70 5.18 5.21 5.37(237) (248) (158) (76)

Graduate 4.87 5.14 5.30 5.42(51) (226) (456) (311)

II

Analysis of VarianceSum of Mean SignificdnceSource of Variation Squares DF Square F of F

MAIN EFFICTS 29.440 4 7.36U 6.470 0.000Degree 0.383 1 0.383 0.337 0.562PM E 24.943 3 8.314 7.309 0.0002-WAY INTERA(lIUNS

Degree PM E 1.428 3 0.476 0.419 0.740Covari ateTime in Service 62.791 1 62.791 55.199 0.00U

41

Table 6


49/64

Z819 Supervisory Communications ClimateAnalysis of Means

Mjanjqount) NONE SOS ACSC AW C

Bachelors 4.37 4.74 4.80 4.88(237) (248) (158) (76)

Graduate 4.61 4.78 4.90 4.98(51) (226) (456) (311)

Analysis of VarianceSum of Mean SignificanceSource of Variation Squares DF Square F of F

NAIN EFFECTS 19.603 4 4.901 4.118 0.003Degree 2.329 1 2.329 1.957 0.162PM E 12.516 3 4.172 3.506 0.015a-WAY INTERACTIONS

Degree PME 0.838 3 0.279 0.235 0.872CovariateTime In Service 44.967 1 44.967 37.785 0.000

42

- - ------.-- ~.--~-


50/64

Table 7Z820 Organizational Cornmunications Climate

Analysis of Means

Medn(Count) NONE SOS ACSC AW C

bachelors 4.48 4.73 4.78 4.87(224) (251) (156) (76)

(Graduate 4.59 4.83 4.80 4.93(5U) (222) (449) (310)qi


MAIN EFFECTS 11.227 4 2.807 2.968 0.019Degree 1.104 1 1.104 1.167 0.280PME 8.260 3 2.753 2.911 0.033

2-WAY INTFRACTIONSDegree PM E 0.511 3 0.170 0.18U 0.910

CovariateTime In Service 23.404 1 23.404 24.744 O.OUO

43

Table 8


51/64

Z824 General Organizational ClimateAnalysis of Means


Bachelors 4.67 4.94 5.08 5.16(224) (251) (156) (7b)

Graduate 4.92 5.02 5.13 5.23(50) (222) (449) (310)


lAIN EFFECTS 15.264 4 3.816 4.058 0.003Degree 1.895 1 1.895 2.015 U.156PM E 9.417 3 3.139 3.338 0.0192-WAY INTERACTIONSDegree PM E 0.844 3 0.281 0.299 0.826CovariateTime In Service 39.706 1 39.706 42.225 0.000

44

- -I

Table 9


52/64

Z216 To What Extent Do You Feel Accountable To YourSupervisor In Accomplishing Your Job?

Analysis of Means


Bachelors 4.94 5.16 5.33 5.66(242) (256) (161) (76)

Graduate 5.23 5.1 5.34 5.63(54\ (231) (40) (316)


Source of Varlatlon Squares DF Square F of FMAIN EFFECTS 44.885 4 11.221 9.779 0.000Degree 0.463 1 0.463 0.4U4 0.525PM E 39.352 3 13.117 11.432 0.0002-WAY INTERACTIONS

Degree PM E 2.737 3 0.912 0.795 0.497Covarlate

Time in Service 37.794 1 37.794 32.937 O.OOU

45[ ~~---------------------A

Table 10Z416 My Supervisor Performs Well Under Pressure


53/64

Analysis of Means

Mean(Count) NONE SO S ACSC AW C

Bachelors 4.72 5.31 5.30 5.57(231) (252) (159) (75)

Graduate 5.06 5.28 5.54 5.67(54) (228) (456) (314)

I


MAIN EFFECTS 37.363 4 9.341 5.609 0.000Uegree 3.8U5 1 3.805 2.285 0.131PME 25.153 3 8.384 5.035 0.002

A-WAY INTERACTIONSUegree PME 4.821 3 1.607 0.965 0.408CovariateTime In Service 132.012 1 132.012 79.275 0.000

46

I . . . .. , .

Table 11


54/64

Z428 My Supervisor Explains Ho w My Job Contributes to theOverall Mission

Analysis of Means

Mean(Count) NONE SU S ACSC AW C

Bachelors 4.38 4.78 4.97 4.84(237) (248) (158) (76)

Graduate 4.55 4.83 5.00 5.03(51) (226) (456) (311)

Analysis of VarlanceSkim of Mean SignificanceSource of Variation Squares OF Square F of F

MAIN EFFECTS 22.436 4 5.609 3.695 O.U05Deyree 1.492 1 1.492 0.983 0.322PME 16.152 3 5.384 3.547 0.0142-WAY INTERACTIUNSDegree PME 1.4b9 3 0.486 0.320 0.811CovariateTime in Service 66,926 1 66.926 44.085 0.00O

47

Table 12


55/64

Z439 When I Need Technical Advice, I Usually Go To ?*Y SupervisorAnalysis of Means


Bachelors 3.77 4.30 4.13 4.41(237) (248) (158) (76)

Graduate 4.32 4.20 4.24 4.14(51) '226) (456) (311)

qT


Source of Variation Squares DF Square F of FMAIN EFFECTS 18.652 4 4.663 2.128 0.075Degree 0.108 1 J.108 0.049 0.825PME 17.772 3 5.924 2.703 0.0442-WAY INTERACTIONSDegree PM E 19.275 3 3.425 2.932 0.032Covariate

Time in Service 12.521 1 12.521 5.714 0.017

48

Table 13


56/64

Z822 Job Related SatisfactionAnalysis of Means


Bachelors 4.92 5.08 5.28 5.17(224) (251) (156) (76)IiIi

Graduate 5.13 5.24 5.33 5.43(50) (222) (449) (310)

Analysis of VarianceSum of Mean SignificdnceSource of Variation Squares DF Square F of F

MAIN EFFECTS 10.207 4 2.552 3.593 0.000Degree 5.572 1 5.572 7.846 0.005PM E 1.892 3 0.631 0.888 0.447

2-WAY INTERACTIONSDegree FPE 2.239 3 0.746 1.051 0.369CovariateTime In Service 51.862 1 51.862 73.026 0.000

49

i ' 'I I

Table 14


57/64

Z811 PrideAnalysis of Means


Bachelors 5.08 5.21 5.42 5.19(238) (257) (160) (76)

Graduate 5.05 5.17 5.35 5.41(55) (229) (458) (313)

Analysis of VarianceSum of Mean Significance3ource of Variation Squares UF Square F of F

hAIN EFFECTS 4.632 4 1.158 1.131 0.340Degree 0.152 1 0.152 0.149 0.700PME 4.597 3 1.532 1.497 0.214

'-WAY INTERACTIONSDegree PME 4.524 3 1.508 1.473 0.220CovariateTime In Service 32.056 1 32.056 31.317 0.000

50


58/64

APPEND:X C

51I

BACHELDRS CRADL$.1E

MFAN NEMPONSC


59/64

130

125

120

116

LvELOF PME Lc k

Fioje 1.Comiparison 04 the perceot ons of subordinates o fiesoJoh- Motivation.

4.6

4,44.2 -

LENEL OF FWE

Fiqu-e 2. Co,!pijrison of the perceptions of subordinates of officers oniask Autonomy.

52


60/64

BAO4HEUA ~OPAOE

5.8 RSPONSE5.4

5.4.8 .

4.6

14LEML OFPME

-igure 3. Comparison of the perceptions of subordinates of officers on73nagenment and Supervision.

840*1..O GRkDUATE

5.25

4,B441

-- ',re - .. ;.:;arison ,)f the ierceptions of subordinatum of officers oni.icervi sor, oi,unica tLOrs C iu, te.

53


61/64

MMRESPONtSE

&.45.25

4.4

NL~ Or PME

Friou-e 5. Comparison of the p-rceptioris of subordinateS of officers onOroanizationa1 Commnunications Climate.

B4CHEfLOS "fDLbkTE

MEAN REPONSE

.5.4

4.8S4

th . 6. reIpa ri .on of thE, purceptions of subordinates of officers on.! 1Orq;inj 7at erm 1 i::te.

54


62/64

5.4

54

4.4

LEM! OF PME

Fi cure 7. Comparison of the Derceptiors of subordinates of officers onA,ccountability To Supervisor.

Ba4tHLO.RS ORADLATE

MiEAN R!3PONSE5.A

4A

1 ue uCoopari son of tile 1r-rceit ions of suhiordi nates of officers on-,,jrervisor Pr-rforrc; qe! I inder Pressure.

55

bh4,Df OPALMJE

brmRES~PONSE


63/64

5.4

54.8 -4.64.4 -4%

LEVEL OF PME

Fioure 9. Comparison of the perceptions of subordinates of officers onMyvSwervisor Explains How Mv Job Contributes to the Overall Mission.

W54 RESPONSE4.11

4.44.2

4L3../

3.6L

Ltvm or rut

Iic 10. Col)arison of *he perceptions of subordinates of officers on, ',"ed Technical Advice, I '.sually Go To M y Supervisor.

56

4 1 - . . . -?

8k*4aboM OMiDUMiE


64/64

3.5.

&4

4.84 K

f qure 11. Comparison of the perceptions of subordinates of officers on;ob Related Satisfaction. I

5.4rJ.4.5.2-

F- -,tre 12. Comparison of the i)erceptions of SLIDordi,.Ate, of officers on

57

ADA133076-The Impact of Various Levels of Professional Military Education and Formal Education on...

Documents

Transcript of ADA133076-The Impact of Various Levels of Professional Military Education and Formal Education on...