Squadron/Group command as a pre-requisite for Wing command?

[RiverAux]

What do you guys think about the idea of requiring Wing Commanders to have held a command position at the squadron or group level prior to being selected as Wing Commander?  I suspect that most Wing Commanders have had this experience, but I know of situations where there have been some Wing CCs without this background. 

[Smithsonia]

River;
That seems only right to me as in the Air Force the only Commander to not have previous required experience is The Commander and Chief. Everybody else has to go through the system and up the ranks.

[FW]

So, what happens when every squadron commander is too smart to want the job?

[ZigZag911]

I like the idea...there have been some notable examples of individuals lacking any CAP command experience vaulting to wing command based more on connections than any  tangible experience.

[dwb]

This is one of those things that sounds like a good idea, but that inevitably ends up excluding someone who would make a great Wing Commander.

I used to think that we should have hard-and-fast experience, professional development level, or years in CAP rules for our corporate officers.

I've softened on that a bit; I think all of those things should count, but really, I want someone who understands how to run a Wing, and how to work as part of a governing body.  Squadron command does not teach those things.

The danger here is that by choosing corporate officers that have never served in a squadron, they'll make decisions without considering the squadron perspective.  Sounds good in theory, but there are plenty of Wing CCs that came from squadrons and still are in their own little world.  And there are Wing CCs that recognize where their experience gaps lie, and round out their team with a CV and Chief of Staff to compensate for those gaps.

I think we should be casting as wide of a net as possible when looking for good candidates for senior leadership.  The fewer concrete checklist items we have, the better.

(Note that I'm not suggesting we recruit some random person off the street and make them a Colonel in a month.  If you interpreted that from my post, then you read it wrong.)

[SDF_Specialist]

Having some command experience prior to holding Wing command is a great idea. One thing I would suggest is that it should be taught for those commanders to not focus on only one or two units or groups, but the best interest in the entire Wing. Command is position of privilage. Those who use it to their advantage should be removed. But that's just my opinion

[jimmydeanno]

For as many previous commander's that did poorly that could have been vetted by having them in a command position previously, there are just as many who did fine.  Our Wing Commander right now started as our Wing's Legislative Liaison. 

I don't know that he'd do all that well as a squadron commander, but he does well at the more strategic management - being the former Mayor of our 2nd largest city and all...

[RiverAux]

This is one of those things that sounds like a good idea, but that inevitably ends up excluding someone who would make a great Wing Commander.

If they would make a great wing commander then they probably would also make a great squadron commander. 

[FW]

For as many previous commander's that did poorly that could have been vetted by having them in a command position previously, there are just as many who did fine.  Our Wing Commander right now started as our Wing's Legislative Liaison. 

I don't know that he'd do all that well as a squadron commander, but he does well at the more strategic management - being the former Mayor of our 2nd largest city and all...

Your present wing commander had a lot of CAP experience in the wing, is a high time pilot and, had military command experience.  I think he would be considered the exception to the rule. 

Seriously,  I think it would be ideal for a wing commander to have previous experience as a squadron or group commander.  I just don't think it can be a realistic prerequisite, especially in smaller wings.

[lordmonar]

This is one of those things that sounds like a good idea, but that inevitably ends up excluding someone who would make a great Wing Commander.

If they would make a great wing commander then they probably would also make a great squadron commander.

Let's say you have a guy who has been Wing DO for a long time...but never held the commander hot seat at the lower level.   He may be the perfect guy for the job but he has not jumped the simple adminstrative hoop of being a unit squadron commander.  You end up shooting yourself in the foot and having to settle for second (or third or fourth) best choice for the job.

I agree in a perfect world our best and brightest will all hold unit and group CC positions....but in reality you limit your pool of available candidates by requiring CC experince.

You have to remember no all wings are like Florida, Texas and Califonia with hundreds of units and groups.   In nevada there are maybe only about 20-30 people who have held CC positons.  Half of them are not suited for wing command (me for instance), some of them can't/won't volunteer for the position....so you quickly reduce that number to only a handful....while you may have lots of people who bring outside experince in handeling large organisations, and years of CAP experince as wing/group staffers who simply can't apply for the job.

On the other side of this equation.....being the unit commander of a 20-30 person squadron with no airplanes and only one van does not necessarily make you more prepared for the wing king job....while being the DO for the wing does infact make you prepared for the job.

One of the goals of the Organisational Excellance Specialty Track is to give formal training to people who may be a prime candidate who may not have ever actually held a lower unit command position.

[Ned]

Staff time at the wing level is more important than squadron command.  That's where a significant amount of learning the nuts and bolts of CAP occurs.

If you had a choice between an officer that had commanded a smaller cadet squadron for a couple of years versus the wing chief of staff, all things being equal, the chief of staff is more likely to have a successful wing command tour.

I guess my point is that the selection authority should look at the applicant's "whole picture" in terms of CAP and other applicable experience, and not engage in "check the box" kinds of screening.

"Sorry, I can see you have been in CAP for 25 years and have had responsible staff positions at the wing and region levels, and in your civlilian job you are the CEO of a $200 million dollar company, but because you were never a squadron commander, we can't even accept your application for wing commander.

On the other hand, our best remaining candidate has been in CAP for 6 years - two of which were commanding a squadron of 15 members - and never held a position above the squadron level.  She is obviously the best qualified candidate."



Another solution searching for a problem.

[lordmonar]

I agree......I would however go along with a requirment that you have got to have at least a Senior Rating in the OE Specialty Track to be a wing CC.....and a masters to be Regional.

At least that way we have a real chance to vett our potential candidates.

[BGNightfall]

While I am not as savvy on the politics and methods for choosing Wing Commanders as I would like, it seems strange to me that nobody is vetting applicants for the position as things are now. 

As for adding prerequisites for the position, I really must ask... does CAP have a waiver process?  Or, barring that, aren't the people screening these applicants applying the whole-person concept of command?

Perhaps the prerequisites should instead be placed on the body that chooses wing commanders?

[flyguy06]

What do you guys think about the idea of requiring Wing Commanders to have held a command position at the squadron or group level prior to being selected as Wing Commander?  I suspect that most Wing Commanders have had this experience, but I know of situations where there have been some Wing CCs without this background.

I thought it was a requirement.

[O-Rex]

I say absolutely: there is NO substitute for command-as a wing CC you will not be able to understand your subordinates until you've walked a mile in their shoes.

I say that as a former squadron and current group commander....

[lordmonar]

I say absolutely: there is NO substitute for command-as a wing CC you will not be able to understand your subordinates until you've walked a mile in their shoes.

I say that as a former squadron and current group commander....

How many Active Duty Fighter Wing Commanders know how to fix and repair 20" satellite Antennas?

That old by-word does work at a certain level....but don't carry it too far.

Being the squadron commander for the 20 member Back 40 Composite Squadron is NOT going to prepare you to be the CAWG CC.

And that is what this sort of "requirements for requirements sake" sort of thinking will do to us.  Lt Col commander of the Back 40 squadron become more qualified for the wing CC position then the Wing Chief of Staff.

That simply does not make any sense.

As Ned said.....we should be looking at the whole person.  Yes having squadron and group CC time is HIGHLY DESIRABLE....not required.

[Cecil DP]

The Best Wing Commander I ever served under was the late Colonel Ed Raymond of Massachusetts, and he never spent a day in command of a Squadron or Group.

Ditto COL Julie Goldman who wasn't even a menber of CAP, when he was asked to take over MAWG and later NER

[RiverAux]

Being the squadron commander for the 20 member Back 40 Composite Squadron is NOT going to prepare you to be the CAWG CC.

Did anyone propose that this be the ONLY qualification for Wing Commander?  Nope. 

You know, this is actually one of the few situations where I would probably consider outside experience relevant.  I would consider experience leading a volunteer service organization at a local level in another organization good enough to fulfill this requirement. 

The main problem I see with Wing Commanders without such background is that they just don't understand the issues involved with translating national or state policy into on-the-ground actions with a group of volunteers.  That is a very unique experience and no amount of real-world experience in the business or military world (especially the military world) is going to really translate.  Volunteer leaders have to be the BEST leaders because if they aren't, their members are 100% free to walk without a moment's hesitation. 

[Eclipse]

What do you guys think about the idea of requiring Wing Commanders to have held a command position at the squadron or group level prior to being selected as Wing Commander?  I suspect that most Wing Commanders have had this experience, but I know of situations where there have been some Wing CCs without this background.

I thought it was a requirement.

There are currently no regulatory requirments for the position of Wing or Region CC, only recommendations.

As to the OP - full and current knowledge of CAP operations is critical, but service as a commander at a group or unit would be a nice-to-have, but not a requirement.

Outside the "mission and purpose" issues of strong leadership, Wing CC is first and foremost an upper-level management position that requires attention to detail and the ability to delegate critical tasks to people you've appropriately appointed.

Although I am a vocal advocate of the need for more top-down leadership, most members would just as soon have a Wing CC who made sure the lights were kept on, the airplanes kept fueled, and the 120's signed.

[ZigZag911]

Group/wing staff service ought also to be a requirement, as well as squadron/group command.

Prior military experience of a similar nature (e.g., a company commander or 1st Sgt would probably make a good sqdn CC...could see that as 'equivalent experience') could substitute...however, I think former military who don't have some CAP experience ought to learn CAP "from the ground up:...that is, serve a couple of years at unit level before taking on a higher level command.

Anyone else --start at the beginning, work your way up...I don't care if you ran a Fortune 500 corporation or governed a state...just the way I see things.

[lordmonar]

Anyone else --start at the beginning, work your way up...I don't care if you ran a Fortune 500 corporation or governed a state...just the way I see things.

Why?

Why let all that good talent go to waste just because they have "put in their time" with CAP?

If you are going to allow ex-military members get a fast track why not civilain CEOs?  If anything managing 200 civilains is a lot hard harder then managing 200 military members IMHO.

I recently switched from military managment to civilan managment.  I can tell you it is a differnt animal altogther and a lot closer to managmeing a CAP unit.

[SDF_Specialist]

Staff time at the wing level is more important than squadron command.  That's where a significant amount of learning the nuts and bolts of CAP occurs.

That depends though. If you think about it, not all Wing deputy directors or general staff get the chance to fully interact or interact at all with Wing command. I held a Wing staff position, and almost never had to talk to the Wing Commander for anything related to CAP. Of course there are those Wing staffers who are up the Wing CC's butt every staff meeting, sending emails, calling, etc.

[ZigZag911]

Anyone else --start at the beginning, work your way up...I don't care if you ran a Fortune 500 corporation or governed a state...just the way I see things.

Why?

Why let all that good talent go to waste just because they have "put in their time" with CAP?

If you are going to allow ex-military members get a fast track why not civilain CEOs?  If anything managing 200 civilains is a lot hard harder then managing 200 military members IMHO.

I recently switched from military managment to civilan managment.  I can tell you it is a differnt animal altogther and a lot closer to managmeing a CAP unit.

Because I have had the unpleasant experience, on numerous occasions, of serving under individuals who lacked significant experience in CAP. They had to learn the program on the job, did not understand the regulations, were unaware of the institutional history or culture (locally, nationally, or at the wing) and basically thought that having an MBA and managing 3 or 4 people for some large corporation, being an "entrepreneur" flying solo with NO staff, qualified them to run a state wide organization of over 25 squadrons, 4 groups, and more than 1200 members.

[Hawk200]

Prior command of a squadron to be wing CC? Don't know. At face value, it  seems to be a good idea. Just don't know the downsides at the moment. I would think a group command would have gained more applicable experience by virtue of the fact that they would deal with multiple units. The experience would be fitting, but it would be hard for a good number of people to accomplish this.

As a few have pointed out, command of 20 or 30 people doesn't prepare one to command four or five hundred.

A good wing DC or chief of staff may have the necessary qualifications, and can learn by observing the Wing CC, as well as executing his or her directives.

I think a minimum amount of time in CAP should be considered as well as a reasonable percentage of it be current. There should also be some legitimate disqualifiers.

In the first few years I was in, I was told that an additional requirement to make colonel (aside from Wing CC appointment) was to have Level 5 completed. I've since found that is not necessarily true. I think it should be a case of have it completed, or be close (it should go without saying, but I'll say it anyway, Level 4 should be done).

Maybe we should consider Commander courses for each level. We already have a Unit CC course, why not Group, Wing and Region? Since the higher ones would obviously be more time intensive, make them a combination of correspondence and in residence.

[jimmydeanno]

Group, Wing and Region? Since the higher ones would obviously be more time intensive, make them a combination of correspondence and in residence.

There is a Wing Commanders' Course.  They like to call it "Charm School."  It's at Maxwell each year.

[ZigZag911]

As a few have pointed out, command of 20 or 30 people doesn't prepare one to command four or five hundred.

A good wing DC or chief of staff may have the necessary qualifications, and can learn by observing the Wing CC, as well as executing his or her directives.

I think a minimum amount of time in CAP should be considered as well as a reasonable percentage of it be current. There should also be some legitimate disqualifiers.

The military seems to prefer experience in a subordinate command before attempting a larger one; seems to work OK for them!

Most wing CV/CS have some orior commander and.or deputy commander experience.

I agree on the minimum time in CAP, and further feel completion of Level 4 should be a requirement, not simply a suggestion.

[jimmydeanno]

The military seems to prefer experience in a subordinate command before attempting a larger one; seems to work OK for them!

Of course it does.  That's because in the military, the lower levels of command are where the upper level commanders gain all their experience.  It is their primary career, and where their experience comes from.

In our situation, people have other careers where they develop their experience and we hope to take advantage of that.  It is unrealistic for CAP to expect our PD program to develop all the experience and leadership skills needed of upper level commanders. 

[lordmonar]

The military seems to prefer experience in a subordinate command before attempting a larger one; seems to work OK for them!

Of course it does.  That's because in the military, the lower levels of command are where the upper level commanders gain all their experience.  It is their primary career, and where their experience comes from.

In our situation, people have other careers where they develop their experience and we hope to take advantage of that.  It is unrealistic for CAP to expect our PD program to develop all the experience and leadership skills needed of upper level commanders.

The military also has the option of moving the commanders to the open command slot.  CAP does not have that ability.

[Hawk200]

The military seems to prefer experience in a subordinate command before attempting a larger one; seems to work OK for them!

That they do, but to move someone from a platoon directly to a battalion command doesn't happen. (I'm simply using those levels as the numbers are about equivalent. A squadron is equvialent to a company in the chain, but CAP squadrons tend to be about the same size as a platoon is in the Army.)

Some Army officers may not have commanded a company, but may move up to the battalion through assignments that lead up to deputy positions. A deputy should be learning how to command, as they're the ones who take over when the commander isn't there. Some officers move up that way because the commander slot won't be available in a manner that matches up with the timing of their career progression.