CAP Talk

Last poll for the day...I promise.   :angel:

I put tech, and man that was a tough one. My vision view is that we need the right tools for the jobs the country needs us doing, we can't get those tools cause we aren't viewed as competent capable & trusted professional officers, so we should fix our recruiting & training structure to offer a degree of interoperability which will be dramatically on the rise as we venture into NIMS. The result being better alignment with our parent by utilizing their model. Which in turn side effects into other things that eventually include uniforms. Part of this process must be to fix our governance structure & internal operating model to provide maximum accountability & merit based advancement in both grade & position...

So anyway, I'm saying tech cause that's the practical thing I can hold in my hand that we need to make a difference, but it takes a big picture fix of the organization to gain the trust that gets it. I don't know if I had to say one item that really best captures everything we need to do, it's core values.

Quote from: DNall on March 05, 2007, 05:41:51 AM
I don't know if I had to say one item that really best captures everything we need to do, it's core values.

I don't disagree and the reality is that there is no one item that can be focused on.  However, by throwing some options up and being forced to pick one, it may help identify the issues that those here feel are most important for National to work on.  We can then compare that to the issues that National actually is choosing to address.   As mentioned in one of my other polls, I'm not a professional survey writer, so the approach is not without flaws.  In addition, some additional drill down would be useful (ie. rate your top 5 issues, etc.) but we're limited by the poll type.  I hear ya though! 

No doubt, I think a lot of people would like myself like to have a catch all like that they can fit a buch of things into, and it's good you didn't provide one to water down the results. I thought it important to mention how I voted though cause I think that may suprise a lot of people that'd assume I'd say kiss the AF's butt, when actually the logic for the stuff I want to see done starts in a much more practical point & works back to the AF on the other end of things.

It's simple. Just rigorously follow the CAP core values and the USAFA honor code. Especially the part that reads "...nor tolerate those who do".  All the other items will fall in place over time, probably sooner than later.

Quote from: BlackKnight on March 05, 2007, 08:01:05 AM
It's simple. Just rigorously follow the CAP core values and the USAFA honor code. Especially the part that reads "...nor tolerate those who do".  All the other items will fall in place over time, probably sooner than later.

I don't klnow if I'm supposed to post sections of SOS (the readings not the tests obviously), but I just finished the section on core values recently, and it was a troubling read while thinking about CAP. It does cover the "nor tolerate those that do" statement w/o need of the honor code though. I really think that whole section should be added to AFIADL13, and some real time spent on the subject in Lvl I.

Don't get distracted on this subtopic. I'll go post a new thread in the morning.

I don't think any of those are mutually exclusive.  NHQ cannot (and should not) focus on just one thing. That would be an incredible waste of resources.

I voted other, I think NHQ needs to focus on the retention issue we have. That, of course, means everything on that list (except uniform and grade structure imo).

Clearly NHQ/NB shouldn't focus on one thing, but they should have a top priority, that's the question.

Well no I think uniform issues (respectability) & professional development (specifically recognition of merit in promotions) have quite a lot to do with retention, but I think if you want the most bang for the buck on that issue it would come from fixing eServices & streamlining the ES training programs to be more user friendly. That joke about you can tell how long someone has been in by their degree of frustration thing isn't funny at all.

CAP should focus on one thing - THE MISSION

Once you determine what is the mission, and I don't mean the current "Missions for America" craze (which translates as "we'll walk your dog if there's a funding scheme and a PAO opportunity attached") but figuring out what CAP can/will do for the nation/state/community.

Once you have that, everything else should flow from that.  Every decision (or proposed change) on uniforms, organization - anything, really - should have a "signing statement" that explains why this change is important to the mission.

Without this, we're adrift.  If we could recruit based on a mission we'd recruit fewer people but probably have better retention because we wouldn't get the members who drift away after finding nothing to do.  Heck, if we could come up with a mission we could recruit to a target figure and skill set - maybe even turn away people?  What a concept...

In all seriousness:

Other: Professionalism in top management. but not for why you might think I'd vote that way, but for these:

A true top level management would seek a smooth running, stress free membership to the extent possible, a well running organization with happy and interested members is a good thing.

CAP in the Search and Rescue mode would seek (with the help of many others) to push the technological area of cellular and GPS technologies (the ones working well thus far together) to help be able to find folks VERY fast. In SE Florida, if a plane goes down, we know right away, but due to population of the area. If a plane goes down in the Everglades, we need SAR, but with the population of government choppers, news choppers, fishermen and the like, we'd likely have found the thing before CAP even knew it was lost, just for the news story value of it all.

Cellular phones, the pain that they are, could be the "everyone ELT" but with precise location capability. The GPS Sneakers that are coming out (pricey now) but could be a potential idea to assist in finding folks, the ideas are limitless, but as a finding organization, CAP ought to be in the front lines of that type of research... CAP could benefit greatly from helping other corporations to test ideas and products... even at a profit to CAP in the way of dollars for assistance or at the least reimbursement for those flying these non air force missions to advance technologies... CAP could become a very much future corporation... maybe.

Lastly (well for me now anyway) CAP should be in the mix for pushing the LSA (Light Sport Aircraft) technologies and be in the forefront of that area of aviation. If CAP is going to have to search for LSA aircraft, they should be in fully on the process... CAP should also be deeply involved with seeking the AFFORDABLE flying and aviation solutions of tomorrow with, by and through the Cadet Programs... I see a very large potential in the LSA and future of aviation, but it will not be in time for me to take part of, but it COULD be for the cadets of today and tomorrow...

Done right, the cadets of today are the CAP leaders of tomorrow... current management is far too short sighted (and corrupt) to truly seek the best for the organization of the future... that is for the leaders of tomorrow to be thinking of now, before they get to the top rungs of the organization to turn it around for the better... they will, but it is going to take time and attrition... I just hope they seek to see a lot further into the future and can bring sanity, efficiency and ability back to the organization...

Professional Development: because it isn't a bandaid but rather a long term cure for a lot of what ails us. Get professional and focus on the real problems.

Regards,
Ken

Quote from: KFreeman on March 05, 2007, 04:02:24 PM
Professional Development: because it isn't a bandaid but rather a long term cure for a lot of what ails us. Get professional and focus on the real problems.

Regards,
Ken

That is my thought too.

Although, I like FlyGuy's answer as well. 

Quote from: ddelaney103 on March 05, 2007, 03:22:08 PM
Once you determine what is the mission, and I don't mean the current "Missions for America" craze (which translates as "we'll walk your dog if there's a funding scheme and a PAO opportunity attached") but figuring out what CAP can/will do for the nation/state/community.

Quote from: DNall on March 05, 2007, 05:41:51 AM
I put tech, and man that was a tough one. My vision view is that we need the right tools for the jobs the country needs us doing, we can't get those tools cause we aren't viewed as competent capable & trusted professional officers, so we should fix our recruiting & training structure to offer a degree of interoperability which will be dramatically on the rise as we venture into NIMS. The result being better alignment with our parent by utilizing their model. Which in turn side effects into other things that eventually include uniforms. Part of this process must be to fix our governance structure & internal operating model to provide maximum accountability & merit based advancement in both grade & position...

You can see a couple other threads where I've been involved in discussion on this, but specifically CBRNE detection over border/coastal/national security events (stadiums/shuttle/etc)/& trans routes (interstates/rail/cities)... the mapping kind being developed at Sandia & light UAV deployable, also useful on hazmat & simliar missions.

And secondly a FLIR on all 182s. Mostly HLS focused, but increasingly necessary on SaR/DR.

The mission roles are simple expansion of what we do now, or at least used to do. Merely updating the gear & people to better respond in a world with higher standards

The most important thing that the NB should be focusing on in improvement of the professionalism of our officers.

Whether that takes a "Rorganization" or nt is a valid point of debate, but we cannot move forward in ANY of the other areas, nor can we have credibility with the USAF or other user organizations, while our standards for officer's rank remains at 98.6 F body temperature and no serious criminal convictions.

I voted "other:.

My choice is -- Integrity.

NHQ (and CAP as a whole) should focus on honesty, truthfulness, consistency  and equity in applying regulations.

If we get our Core Values on a solid foundation, the other elements (and many are critically important, such as retention, recruiting, professional development, reducing demands on squadron staff) should begin to fall into place.

I put website.  Perhaps I was being too literal, but I was thinking of NHQ as the paid staff up there.  Those folks need to get the web site fixed.

If we're talking about the appointed leadership (MG Pineda, NB, etc.) I would say AF-relationship. 

Vision.  Direction.  Purpose.  Goals....

Quote from: CAP Safety Dude on March 06, 2007, 02:09:51 AM
Vision.  Direction.  Purpose.  Goals....

Sounds like a Strategic Plan to me. Hmm.... perhaps thats whats needed  :o

I think they need to work on making the cadet program better.  I don't think it needs to be expanded to younger ages.  i actually feel opposite.  I think 12 year olds can handle the program, but i think we should build the cadet program around a 16 year old cadet.  currently the aerospace books look like they were written for a 5th grader, with the whole bird talking to you and all.  I think a more professional looking book would be better.  I always feel that the cadet program always tries to include the younger cadets at the expense of not pushing the older ones.  That causes our older cadets to give up a lot of the time and we need those older cadets.  Not to say that all squadrons are like this (mine really does a pretty good job at a good balance) but the program as a whole needs to be designed for an older age group.

another quick issue is the lack of younger senior members.  the 20-30 age crowd.  i know the whole starting the job and family thing doesn't really allow for them to do a lot, but it is an issue that national could work on.

They are working on it now.  I have not read the whole paper, but it shows that someone at NHQ is doing thier jobs.

[url]http://www.mncap.org/cp/documents/Learning%20to%20Lead%20-%20white%20paper.pdf[/url\

I selected Professional Development after flirting with "Other" for a while.  CAP seriously needs to develop the core values, particularly among corporate officers, who somehow seem to lose their cadet training when they get into the heady evironment where they get addressed as "Colonel."  The structure allows deviation from the core values with impunity, so long as you are loyal to your appointing officer.  There have been band-aid fixes over the years, but they have been mostly ineffective because the "Independent" enforcers have remained under the big stick of the most egregious offenders.