How much leadership training do our seniors really need?

[RiverAux]

It is pretty apparent that in the past the primary focus of CAP senior training  was on technical skills related to performing a particular staff job or performing a specific ES job and that we had little leadership training other than that which is found in the ancient photocopies that make up the CAP Senior Officer Correspondence Course (ECI-13). 

However, that does seem to have changed quite a bit.  Both SLS and CLC are now more focused on developing leaders and team players rather than telling people about the different staff jobs.  The Unit Commanders Course and both the Region and National Staff colleges are also more leadership-focused. 

While all of these courses do cover all the topics, anyone that has gone through all of them, including ECI 13, will have spent quite a bit of time on leadership training (about 16 days total training time). 

Now, we all recognize that this isn't comparable to any hard core leadership training that the military might do, but the question is -- is it enough for our purposes? 

After all, when it comes right down to it most national volunteer organizations get along pretty well without spending tons of time on leadership training for their members.

I think part of the problem is that too few of our members take advantage of what we do have available and as discussed in other threads, we don't have a lot of tools in the box to get them to do it.   

[davedove]

I think part of the problem is that too few of our members take advantage of what we do have available and as discussed in other threads, we don't have a lot of tools in the box to get them to do it.   

There's some truth to that.  The best leadership training in the world won't do any good if no one takes it.

[lordmonar]

I don't know what "hard core leadership" training in the military you are talking about.

From an AD USAF point of view....the only thing I learned from my PME is to put lables on concepts and techniques I was taught by being a leader and my mentors.

Even if we sent everyone to real PME courses (officer or enlisted) they will not really learn much of anything if they don't use that information.

Bottom line is that most CAP officers don't "need" leadership training as they do very little leading.  Most are in one deep positions or they may be luck and have one subordinate.

Of course unit commander and DCC and DCS are an automatic exception to this.

[RiverAux]

Perhaps our leadership training needs to be broken down into smaller chunks that would be appropriate for use in senior meetings?  After all, our cadet program is pretty focused on leadership and almost all of it is done at the squadron level. 

This would get the material out to those folks (for whatever reason) don't attend other CAP training classes. 

[O-Rex]

It is pretty apparent that in the past the primary focus of CAP senior training  was on technical skills related to performing a particular staff job or performing a specific ES job and that we had little leadership training other than that which is found in the ancient photocopies that make up the CAP Senior Officer Correspondence Course (ECI-13). 

However, that does seem to have changed quite a bit.  Both SLS and CLC are now more focused on developing leaders and team players rather than telling people about the different staff jobs.  The Unit Commanders Course and both the Region and National Staff colleges are also more leadership-focused. 

While all of these courses do cover all the topics, anyone that has gone through all of them, including ECI 13, will have spent quite a bit of time on leadership training (about 16 days total training time). 

Now, we all recognize that this isn't comparable to any hard core leadership training that the military might do, but the question is -- is it enough for our purposes? 

After all, when it comes right down to it most national volunteer organizations get along pretty well without spending tons of time on leadership training for their members.

I think part of the problem is that too few of our members take advantage of what we do have available and as discussed in other threads, we don't have a lot of tools in the box to get them to do it.   

The problem is teaching old dogs new tricks, as well as motivating folks to step up to military PME's.

Your average forty-to-fifty-something CAP Senior is not going to be as impressionable, malleable and dogmatic as your cadet or 21 year old SM.

Personally, I'd rather take SOS and ACSC than take a week off and spend a few hundred dollars in airfare, lodging, etc. and I have fellow members whod rather do just that than have to actually study for exams, and did just that (remember that RSC/NSC's don't really have exams.)

I know someone who took the mil PME's and went to RSC just for something to do, and they said that the only thing they got out of it was networking with other members....

As for "hardcore" leadership training, and I assume that means something like NCO Academy, OCS, PLC, WOC, or other charm schools, there just isn't a place for that in a volunteer organization (I'm assuming that hardcore means in-your-face type stuff.)  I didn't like it as a 21 year old, when they were paying me, and I certainly ain't gonna put up with that at age 43, for free.  And even so, back then when I wasn't brasso-ing shower drains or folding my undies a perfect 4X4, I was learning the same management concepts, i.e., Maslow and Johari, that I took in college. 

So how much leadership training (within the context of our organization) do Seniors really need?

As much as they can get, which is unfortunately much more than your average senior actually seeks.

[Eagle400]

The problem is teaching old dogs new tricks, as well as motivating folks to step up to military PME's.

Or changing CAP professional development to be more like military PME, so members can differentiate between "corporate civilian" and "regulated military" and act accordingly.

How's that for a concept, National Headquarters?

[RiverAux]

By hardcore I meant the traditional military training schools such as O-Rex mentioned and other similar courses, not necessarily hard core in terms of shouting, push-ups, etc. 

[lordmonar]

The problem is teaching old dogs new tricks, as well as motivating folks to step up to military PME's.

Or changing CAP professional development to be more like military PME, so members can differentiate between "corporate civilian" and "regulated military" and act accordingly.

How's that for a concept, National Headquarters?

Making CAP PD course more like military PME is not the answer.  First off it is a different leadership dynamic.  Second, military PME is backed with the assumption that the students will be getting immediat practical application of the academic knowledge.  Capt Joe Blow, Homer J. Simpson Squadron Admin officer is not going to get any application because he has nothing and no one to lead but himself and maybe one assistant.

Unless someone steps up and take on greater leadership responsibilites where they exercise their leadership muscles....all the exercise vidoes ever made will not help a bit.

[O-Rex]

By hardcore I meant the traditional military training schools such as O-Rex mentioned and other similar courses, not necessarily hard core in terms of shouting, push-ups, etc. 

It involves blocks of free time that alot of Seniors don't have.  

Kind of like what they were doing in Iowa, we kicked around the idea of a CAP OTS/Officer Basic Course over something like three weekends.  We "wargamed" the concept (i.e., played devil's advocate and threw monkey wrenches into the scenarios, just to see what would happen) and found that getting seniors to get three consecutive weekends off would be tough, so you'd have to stagger, schedule, do make-ups, etc. that it was just hard to keep up with administratively.

[Dragoon]

The vast majority of seniors need little to no leadership training, because they do little to no leading.

I think part of the problem of the "everyone's an officer" mentality of CAP is that we aren't focusing on the folks actually filling leadership jobs.  I could care less if a squadron AE officer gets his Level V.  I care a LOT if a Group Commander or Wing Director of Cadet Programs gets his.

CAP might be very different if we focused our resources on training the folks who do the jobs that need it, rather than training everyone who just wants to wear oak leaves.

[O-Rex]

The vast majority of seniors need little to no leadership training, because they do little to no leading.

Leadership isn't just about command: it's about having the maturity and wherewithall to be an influential go-to person who can maintain a clear head, solve problems and handle personalities before things get out of hand.

We are WAY SHORT in that department....

[RiverAux]

The vast majority of seniors need little to no leadership training, because they do little to no leading.

Oh, I don't think I would agree with that.  Its just that for most CAP members, we're talking about leading a small group of people.  A Mission Pilot is a leader.  A Ground Team Leader is obviously a leader (insert other ES leadership positions here).  Most of the seniors involved in cadet programs are basically leaders even if only indirectly. 

[Stonewall]

In the Air Guard and I think the Reserves, you can get away with doing things like Airman Leadership School, a 6 week course (or is it 4) by correspondence.  My wife did it recently and spent all of about 5 hours studying the week before she took the test and passed.  She got promoted to SSgt.

Like lordmonar said, the Air Force doesn't do a whole bunch of hardcore leadership training.  As I've learned from having served both in the Army and Air Force; the Army leads, the Air Force manages.  Still trying to figure out what the Navy does (even after watching Carrier last night.

[lordmonar]

The vast majority of seniors need little to no leadership training, because they do little to no leading.

Leadership isn't just about command: it's about having the maturity and wherewithall to be an influential go-to person who can maintain a clear head, solve problems and handle personalities before things get out of hand.

We are WAY SHORT in that department....

An no amount of PD classes or military PME will be able to tech that.  It is about DOING leadership...not book learning.

[O-Rex]

The vast majority of seniors need little to no leadership training, because they do little to no leading.

Leadership isn't just about command: it's about having the maturity and wherewithall to be an influential go-to person who can maintain a clear head, solve problems and handle personalities before things get out of hand.

We are WAY SHORT in that department....

An no amount of PD classes or military PME will be able to tech that.  It is about DOING leadership...not book learning.

Agreed.  That's why certain military PME courses (and in theory, CAP courses) are only available at certain points of an Officer/NCO's career: there needs to be an experiential base to build upon.

Book-learning is not meant to be an end unto itself: it needs practical exercise, to be understood and internalized and later applied appropriately to a situation.

[SamFranklin]

The vast majority of seniors need little to no leadership training, because they do little to no leading.

I think part of the problem of the "everyone's an officer" mentality of CAP is that we aren't focusing on the folks actually filling leadership jobs.  I could care less if a squadron AE officer gets his Level V.  I care a LOT if a Group Commander or Wing Director of Cadet Programs gets his.

CAP might be very different if we focused our resources on training the folks who do the jobs that need it, rather than training everyone who just wants to wear oak leaves.

I respectfully disagree. Leadership is basically influencing people and working together toward a common objective. There's a huge need for people with those skills at every level of our organization. I think you're equating leadership with "command" or positional authority, as well as using "training" and "education" interchangeably. Precisely because we are a volunteer organization, the job of leading is more challenging because the leader has fewer donuts in his or her bag. 

Here's what the AF doctrine teaches:

===========================================
"Leadership does not equal command, but all commanders should be leaders. Any Air Force member can be a leader and can positively influence those around him or her to accomplish the mission. This is the Air Force concept of leadership, and all aspects of Air Force leadership should support it."  AFDD 1-1, p8
============================================

I say let's encourage more people to participate in the professional development program.

[Short Field]

CAP leadership training is conducted every meeting and every event by the leadership (formal and informal) in the squadron.  That is how civilian organziations train and that is how the military trains.

Scary isn't it.  If anyone in the organziation is looking to move up and take more responsibility, they look at how the people with the responsibility now are conducting themselves and emulate them.  Because it is obvious that the way the "leaders" conduct themselves is what it takes to get ahead in the organization.  This is something every leader needs to be aware of.  Because organizations with good leaders generate more good leaders and organziations with toxic leaders generate more toxic leaders.

Bottom line:  Leadership classes help define and put labels on the different ways we see people lead.  The actual process of learning to be a leader requires a mentor or guide who helps a person develop their leadership toolkit as they conduct their day to day job.   A good leader constantly pushes his people just beyond their capabilites and helps them improve their capabilities while keeping them from failing.

[DNall]

Bottom line is that most CAP officers don't "need" leadership training as they do very little leading.  Most are in one deep positions or they may be luck and have one subordinate.

This is very true. The issue that I see is that we compromise our PD standards to a common denominator so EVERYONE can do it. We don't have a seperate track for true leaders/managers versus the masses. Which means the people thrust into those positions don't have the skills to do them, even if they know the technical aspects.

UCC, as an example, is technical aspects. You can be a subject matter expert on how to be a great Sq CC & still not be able to actually do it yourself. There's a big difference in knowing how to operate eServices, where reports go, how to staff projects, etc and in actually leading/managing personnel & liaising with higher.

I was taught by being a leader and my mentors.

That's very true as well. Which is why mentoring is supposed to be the primary element of both PD & specialty track progression. By the way, there's PME which is the individual courses, and then there's the overall PD program of which courses are just one element. Specialty track progression (theoretically under mentor) and command/staff duty performance (under mentor) are part of that process.

(about 16 days total training time).... Now, we all recognize that this isn't comparable to any hard core leadership training that the military might do, but the question is -- is it enough for our purposes?

I would argue it needs to be about 45 training days. That's 75% of the academic load for the quickest line officer programs out there. It can be accomplished over a year of standard CAP time commitment & with a variety of delivery methods, as well as strong mentoring aspects. I don't say that because we need to be more like the military, I say it cause we need our leaders from entry level on up to function at that level within a multi-agency command enviro. We've had this conversation, no need to repeat the details. Of course that's not the same training all workers need.

[RiverAux]

45 days in one year?  I know you're not insane, but you're stepping awfully close to the border.   You do realize that this is almost 1 day a week or two weekends a month and that such a class would have to be done at group or wing level in order to have enough students to make it worthwhile, so very likely would involve significant travel?

I think its more likely that all my favorate pet peeves will be addressed by the National Board than see something like that. 

Lets be just a little more realistic.  I don't know a single CAP member who would be willing to put in that sort of time, and I know some people who go way beyond the average committment. 

Heck, I don't know anyone that would be willing to be a course director or would be willing to instruct that much. 

[Hawk200]

True leadership is about the only thing we have. As has been pointed out before, there are only a few legitimate command positions in CAP.

The true leadership we need is to be able to influence people to do what is needed, without being heavy handed. In a military setting, you order someone. We know that is difficult with volunteers.

In the military, an officer can say: "Go clean the bathrooms." The response should be "Yes, sir (or maam)"

In CAP? "Go clean the bathrooms." The response: "Screw you, I'm a volunteer!"

Do we like to admit it? No. Which is why we need to be teaching people how to lead, not command.