The Composite Squadron- Rubbing one's stomach and patting one's head at once?

[Major Carrales]

The Composite Squadron- Rubbing one's stomach and patting one's head at once?

I recently became the commander of a Composite Squadron in Texas.  We have discussed CADET, SENIOR and COMPOSITE squadrons before; however it was mostly in the vein of speculation or an attemp to better/change how these units are organized.

I shoudl very much like to, instead of getting flights of fancy off the ground, have a motivating discussion about how to make a Composite Squadron work.

Background:

The Corpus Christi Comp Squadron was very strong in the past, but grew weak in the late 1990s and millennial decade (get a load of that semantics).  By 2004-2005 the unit was reduced to a small corps of overworked (en re CAP standards) and burning out officers.  The unit had long ago lost access to an aircraft and was caught in the "we don't have piltos for lack or an aircraft and we don't have an aircraft for lack of pilots" catch-22.

The in late 2005 we newed the effort to build the unit.  2006 was spent making relative strides and rebuilding/retooling the unit.  As of 2007 were are strong enough to approach unit autonomy from sister squadrons.

Observations:
1) A Composite Squadron is basically a "WHOLE CAP" unit:  All three elements of CAP are the focus of the unit.  It is basically two units, with cadets and seniors.  The challenge seems to be to "keep the plates spinning" and insure that one element of the program does not rob from the other.


2) ES can be the glue that holds the unit together:  Emergency Services can hold a composite unit together.  The cadets can be "deployable" and take on real life SAR responsibilities (an element of CAP that takes off where AFROTC ends, in toher words the two should complement each other).

3) Cadets are the lifeblood of Aviation during slumps A viable source of Aircraft hours are the O-Flights.  Many times SENIOR flying units run into slumps were one has a hard time making hours quotas.  These O-Flights ass a buffer zone during these slumps.  Plus, an O-Flight Program is not a bad professional development move for pilots.  It also bolsters AE.

4) A Staff is CRITICAL!!!: Although it should not occur, it seems that a SENIOR and a CADET squadron can get away with a small staff.  PURE CADET non-ES units don't need alot of the positions.  SENIOR SQUADRONS can, in theory, be basically "ALPHA AIRCREW,"  "BETA AIRCREW" et al held together by an OPS officer.  Each MISSION PILOT of each of these AIRCREWS can take an aviation position (maintenance, safety, FRO, STAN EVAL and the like)

However, in a composite squadron, a lack of a staff can kill a unit.  The Deputy Commander for Cadets should really have a Squadron Leadership Officer and Moral Leadership Officer to help out (the three seniors of a cadet program) especially if there is no CADET NCO or OFFICER structure yet in place.

The ES, AE and Professional Development officers are key.  Its hard to have a minimal staff.  The Commander needs people who can run with their Staff Possition or else that Commander will burn out.  There are lession from ICS we can cross apply here. Plus, the fellowship aspect is key.  You have to be having fun with it.  When it starts to be a burden, you knwo the burnout begineth.

5) PAO and RECRUITING are as IMPORTANT as the FLYING!  If no one knows what you are doing or if you are keeping things small to horde flying time...your unit is alread dead.  I have found that CAP works best when when there are more of you there and when there is a large pool.

Also, the community needs to know what you do.  Make CAP a household name and your house will soon be in order.  One cannot tell me if there is an article, regular articles, in local papers about a growing CAP unit that is prospering that some prior service NCO or retired Officer or high-speed low drag Volunteer isn't going to be at least curious.  May they might even try to seek it out.

If you sow nothing, that will be your harvest.

Comments, suggestions?  Please advise...

[ZigZag911]

You've made a lot of good points.

I think the best squadron commanders are good delegaters....trust their DCS and DCC to handle the two main components of the unit.

The squadron commander is the vision person, the motivator, and grand-listener-in-chief (in a generic sense, taking interest in entire membership, not letting people bypass the deputies).

The command element needs to work as a team, and share a philosophy about where the squadron is going, and how to get there.

You need to set goals for long and short term as a unit...yeah, this isn't a democracy...but 'brainstorming' is not the same thing as voting, is it? And sometimes the newest senior or youngest cadet has a great idea!

You need to help individuals set personal CAP goals, and help them map out a path to accomplishing them.

You need hands on activities and training.

Most of all, it needs to be FUN!

Trudging through a muddy field on a cold rainy night may not actually be enjoyable....but if you like, respect, and enjoy the company of your team, then in spite of the hardships, it will indeed be fun!

Strange, but true...

[Al Sayre]

Your observations right on the mark, I frequently compare commanding a Composite Squadron to herding cats or juggling jello...

[mikeylikey]

Sounds like your unit is working! 

[MIKE]

Jack of all trades, master of none...  From my experience the Composite Squadrons around here fall into three categories:  Those that should be Cadet Squadrons, Those that should be Senior Squadrons and those those that be Flights.

[Major Carrales]

Jack of all trades, master of none...  From my experience the Composite Squadrons around here fall into three categories:  Those that should be Cadet Squadrons, Those that should be Senior Squadrons and those those that be Flights.

MIKE,

I cannot fully subscribe to that, although I will say that if a Composite Squadron has 30 seniors and 40 Cadets it should divide into two units.

Why can I not fully subscribe to it?

Experience proves, in my case at least, that many times there are not enough experienced CAP personnel to make exclusive SENIOR  or CADET  Squadrons the first time around.  The potential new unit tanks as a result of neglect. That does not preclude the notion of such a unit starting and making it...but it is harder to form a CADET SQUADRON when the nearest experienced CAP unit is hundreds of miles away.   Isolation promotes "The LOCAL Circumvent" and lack of guidance.  It is not likely that members of a unit more than 50 miles away will take the time to "mentor" new units. ( I got this first hand in 2005)

Flights lack the central authority of a commander...thus, a unit has logistical issues if the nearest unit, the one to which the flight is attached (Especially if that unit is a WING HQ) is hundreds of miles away.

Lastly, the whole CAP is actually a COMPOSITE UNIT.

Thus, I will say that the COMPOSITE SQUADRON has its place and, when it grows to a certain level it should undergo mitosis.

[carnold1836]

I don't see why you would need to split a composite squadron into individual units (1 Senior 1 Cadet). If you have 40 active cadets and 30 active seniors that is awesome and has great potential to really create a positive force in your community. Now I define "active" by a member attending 75%+ of regularly scheduled meetings, 50%+ special activities sponsored by their squadron and advancing in a timely manner, both seniors in the professional tracks and cadets through their achievements.

Imagine having each senior officer only having to be responsible for one area. Imagine the luxury of being able to crass-train as you see fit and not because if you don't the place falls flat. Imagine building a cadet officer corps of about 10 cadet officers and being able to field two 15 person flights.

This is what I see in the future of my squadron. This is what I strive for and am recruiting toward. Maybe I am going after the pie in the sky but that's my goal. I remember the Air Force's recruiting slogan from the late 80s "AIM HIGH". Well My squadron commander and I are "AIMING HIGH" and we wouldn't have it any other way.

[davedove]

You need to set goals for long and short term as a unit...yeah, this isn't a democracy...but 'brainstorming' is not the same thing as voting, is it? And sometimes the newest senior or youngest cadet has a great idea!

A good commander will always listen to the ideas of his subordinates.  Despite what some of them may think, they can't know everything.  Of course, once the decision is made, the subordinates are obligated to follow that decision.

[DNall]

Jack of all trades, master of none...  From my experience the Composite Squadrons around here fall into three categories:  Those that should be Cadet Squadrons, Those that should be Senior Squadrons and those those that be Flights.

yep

I don't see why you would need to split a composite squadron into individual units (1 Senior 1 Cadet). If you have 40 active cadets and 30 active seniors that is awesome and has great potential to really create a positive force in your community.

Actually man all the positions necessary to do what's required of you... that's min 20 adults just to do the staff load & before you've done anything for AE, CP, or ES. or really stood out on anything. Once you get enough people together, especially on teh cadet side where they are more cohesive, you gain a synergy that leads toa great unit. That 50 (20adult/30 cadets) to 80 range is just about perfect for a local unit, and you could still legitimately operate that as a flight if you wanted to.

[Dragoon]

Sadly, you have to man ALL the positions. 

According to CAP 20-1

Each unit commander should develop and post an organizational chart at headquarters, depicting the name and grade of the incumbent of each position and the specific duties of each so unit personnel know their responsibilities and their chain of command. In smaller units, it may be necessary that more than one position be filled by the same member; however, someone should be responsible for each task outlined in the position description so the entire unit is aware of who is responsible for which duties. 

In other words, if you don't have someone performing unit historian,  legal officer,  communications (even if you don't have a radio) duties, you are in violation of CAP regs.

Do you think it would kill them to put "optional" in there somewhere?

[arajca]

The idea of making some positions optional at the squadron level was shot down by the USAF. Appearently, the USAF feels that all staff positions need to be filled at every level fora unit to function. There are no 'unimportant' positions.

[davedove]

The idea of making some positions optional at the squadron level was shot down by the USAF. Appearently, the USAF feels that all staff positions need to be filled at every level fora unit to function. There are no 'unimportant' positions.

That's the way I fell about it.  All the positions are important and need to be represented in each squadron.  I do recognize that in some squadrons a particular position may not have much action.  In that case, someone should take it as a secondary (or tertiary) job.  That way someone will have at least a little familiarity with the job in case something happens where it is needed.

I'm wearing three hats (Personnel, PDO, Alt Testing), and nearly everyone has at least two in my squadron.  Some jobs don't get a lot of attention, but someone fills the slot.

[MIKE]

The idea of making some positions optional at the squadron level was shot down by the USAF. Appearently, the USAF feels that all staff positions need to be filled at every level fora unit to function. There are no 'unimportant' positions.

So then, units need to function at a level which there personnel can reasonably accomplish. i.e. Not be a Composite Squadron if you can't fill all the jobs, and instead pick a unit type with fewer required jobs.

[Major Carrales]

The idea of making some positions optional at the squadron level was shot down by the USAF. Appearently, the USAF feels that all staff positions need to be filled at every level fora unit to function. There are no 'unimportant' positions.

There are some that see Public Affairs as an "unimportant" position when the matter is in fact that PA is quite important.

Public Affairs is what drives recruiting and extends the good works we do to the PUBLIC.  Without that, there will be no one to champion us in the Community, State, Nation and the CONGRESS thereof.

So, yes, every position from the FRO to the Historian has a role.  Again, a good staff is key to the functioning of a unit.

[Major Carrales]

The idea of making some positions optional at the squadron level was shot down by the USAF. Appearently, the USAF feels that all staff positions need to be filled at every level fora unit to function. There are no 'unimportant' positions.

So then, units need to function at a level which there personnel can reasonably accomplish. i.e. Not be a Composite Squadron if you can't fill all the jobs, and instead pick a unit type with fewer required jobs.

Not so, what if there are a small number of cadets and a few seniors, say the 15 people needed for a unit.  One would have to address both.  To be a Senior Squadron would isolate the cadets...to be a Cadet Squadron would alienate the Seniors.

In places of isolation and rural economy where units are not found in handfuls...the composite Squadron is the only solution to have a unit at all.

[Monty]

Meh....in my personal experience, cadet-only or senior-only squadrons are nothing more than organizational segregation.  Such segregation does little more than to perpetuate the dislike for the other's program.

If it were up to me, I'd do away with both and make all units composite...which in essence would essentially get rid of the adjective.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with an emphasis, but I've seen too many examples of a unit poking fun at "fat ES seniors" or "GI Joe Wannabe Kids" to stomach.

A composite squadron without a plane or an active ES unit with a bunch of seniors is nothing more than a cadet squadron anyway.  A composite squadron with no kids but an active group of old fellers is nothing more than a senior squadron. Sure; it happens just by sheer numbers but the difference is....if a unit evolves, then it evolves.  I don't see any reason, however, to invite in the possibility of making a squadron a potential breeding ground for resentment.

Kill "Cadet, Composite, or Senior" and just be a squadron.  No muss, no fuss.

If I were king for a day, that is..... 

[MIKE]

Question:  CAPR 20-1 depicts some positions in the org charts enclosed in broken line boxes.  Is this what indicates an optional position?

[capchiro]

Sadly, you have to man ALL the positions. 

According to CAP 20-1

Each unit commander should develop and post an organizational chart at headquarters, depicting the name and grade of the incumbent of each position and the specific duties of each so unit personnel know their responsibilities and their chain of command. In smaller units, it may be necessary that more than one position be filled by the same member; however, someone should be responsible for each task outlined in the position description so the entire unit is aware of who is responsible for which duties. 

In other words, if you don't have someone performing unit historian,  legal officer,  communications (even if you don't have a radio) duties, you are in violation of CAP regs.

Do you think it would kill them to put "optional" in there somewhere?

I believe the operative word here is "should"  and that makes it much more optional than the word "shall".  For this reason, many squadrons don't; fulfill all positions and assign a priority to the ones needed to run the program on a daily basis.  If I have nobody that wants to be the unit historian and I appoint someone, I doubt that they will do a good job for me.  I try to fit jobs to the interests of the people to the best of my ability.  Having a communications officer without commo equipment could be very frustrating for that person.  As usual, JMHO.

[Major Carrales]

Sadly, you have to man ALL the positions. 

According to CAP 20-1

Each unit commander should develop and post an organizational chart at headquarters, depicting the name and grade of the incumbent of each position and the specific duties of each so unit personnel know their responsibilities and their chain of command. In smaller units, it may be necessary that more than one position be filled by the same member; however, someone should be responsible for each task outlined in the position description so the entire unit is aware of who is responsible for which duties. 

In other words, if you don't have someone performing unit historian,  legal officer,  communications (even if you don't have a radio) duties, you are in violation of CAP regs.

Do you think it would kill them to put "optional" in there somewhere?

I believe the operative word here is "should"  and that makes it much more optional than the word "shall".  For this reason, many squadrons don't; fulfill all positions and assign a priority to the ones needed to run the program on a daily basis.  If I have nobody that wants to be the unit historian and I appoint someone, I doubt that they will do a good job for me.  I try to fit jobs to the interests of the people to the best of my ability.  Having a communications officer without commo equipment could be very frustrating for that person.  As usual, JMHO.

Make your PAO, the historian since they (we) are the writers of future history.  Many units have lost their history and the documentation of unit activities via a newsletter or other media is a good way to begin to record history.