Cadets in Assistant Duty Assignments

[Eclipse]

Being a squadron ITO is about more than programming a website, and that's the rub.

[Ed Bos]

Blank stares, and a "now what?"

One last question, and I would appreciate an answer: How can you mentor someone in something you have no idea how to do?
If I can't tie my shoe, I can't mentor someone on how to tie their shoe.

To the first part I quoted above, that's a shame, I hope you just caught them off guard.

To the latter, I'll PM you so we don't drag this out further.

[lordmonar]

Leadership isn't really the main topic of what we are discussing. We are talking about mentoring (which does have a bit of leadership).

You can't mentor someone if you don't know how to do the task!

Absolutley WRONG.....

I can't waltz in and correct someone doing physics, if I don't know how. Even if I am their tutor, mentor, or whatever. Knowledge of the tasks are the key to mentoring someone.

No...but you can certainly manage and lead those physists.

I'd be willing to guess the average CC/DCC doesn't know enough about some things to provide a viable mentor.

Again...you are confusing the idea of a mentor and a trainer. 

Supervisor and mentor are two different animals. One means you are the boss of someone. You have hire/fire powers. The other you are teaching, if you don't like what they are doing, you correct it.  Supervisors don't need to know the technical details of stuff. A mentor does, a mentor is there to teach you a better way of doing things.

Nope...you understand neither role of supervisor or the role of a mentor.  Supervisors...do just what they say.  They monitor your work, make sure you are meeting your task goals and dead lines....they are the primary point of contact to the rest of the organisation to get help with road blocks.  Mentors are there to help you develope as a leader.  They don't teach.  The provide support, the provide guidance...but they don't teach you technical stuff.

NOW.....often...the roles of trainer, mentor and supervisor are often combined into the same person....the USAF uses this model for the most part...but not always.  When I was a MSgt I had a Major who was my supervisor, but my trainer was a SSgt and my mentor was a CMSgt.....but when I was an SrA my mentor, trainer and supervisor were all the same SSgt.

In the buisness world...you are often supervised by someone other then your mentor, and both of them may not a thing about how to do your job (right now neither my mentor nor my supervisor are qualified to do my job as a Ground Control Segment technican).

Officers in the USAF almost always have zero clue on how to do your job.....but they are still your supervisor.

Layman terms are great. They are useful for communicating with someone that isn't proficient in whatever. You shouldn't need to use layman terms with your supervisor. He should teach you the technical mumbo-jumbo.

And yet you will be required, no matter where you end up working, have to deal with the fact that your mentor and/or supervisor may not know what the heck you are talking about.

On a different note, the regs mention "cadet X officer" not "Assistant X officer."
So is the cadet's title C/X officer or Assistant X officer?

With in the structure of the CADET program you can have any title you want.  Cadet Admin Officer takes care of all the admin functions for the cadet corps......he may also hold the assitant admin officer for the whole squadron.....but he can't be the squadron admin officer.

[tsrup]

Extreme,

If you want to be the squadron ITO, then why don't you just become a senior member?

You're obviously tired of the restrictions of responsibility placed on cadets,  why don't you come play the game for real, and have your name put on stuff.  So when things are screwed up, Wing crawls down your throat.

THAT, is really why there are no squadron cadet positions.  Because at the end of the day someone has to be responsible for what happens, and cadets aren't able to accept that responsibility.

[lordmonar]

One last question, and I would appreciate an answer: How can you mentor someone in something you have no idea how to do?
If I can't tie my shoe, I can't mentor someone on how to tie their shoe.

Mentoring is not the same as training.

I train you to do something.  Mentoring is about is about providing support, and guidance.  It only requires experince, a knowledge of the workings of the company and an understanding of the buisness environment.  It does not require an expert knowledge of the task at hand.

Now...it certainly helps if your supervisor and/or mentor are just as versed in the mechanics of the task as you are....but it is not necessary.
A Cadet Programs officer does not need to know how to drill and ceremonies in order to effective supervise his cadets and mentor his cadet officers.  Same is true for just about any other discipline.....especaially the Air Force.  Wing Commanders are 99% most likely to be pilots...fighter pilots at that.  Most of them have never had to supervise any more people then 2-3 other pilots until they are Lt Cols when they get a whole squadron and now they have to deal with enlisted guys!  The wing commander knows zero about satellite communications....and yet he is ultimaly my supervisor...He has to supervise Support Group Commander who has to supervise the Cops, Civil Engineering, Supply, Services, Communications et al.  He may be a pilot himself, or he may have come up through services, CE, Suppy or SF or Comm.....but just as likely to have come over from operations.  The Comm Squadron commander may be a network guy, or an ex air crew guy or an intell weenie....or maybe an ex comm maintenance officer....then there is me a MSgt who by regulations does not have to be qualifed on the systems he is responsible for maintaining.  As a Satellite, Wideband And Telemetry Systems specialist...I could have spent my entire career working on large fixed satellite facilities, or on mobile tropo equipment, or man portable satt comm, or working the R&D area doing testing that had nothing to do with radios.......and yet all of these people are responsible for supervising and mentoring their subordinates....even if they don't talk the talk.

So...bottom line, is that you need to break this ideal that mentoring and supervision is the same as training.   Having the BTDT knowledge certainly helps....but it is no 100% necessary.

The other side of that coin is the attitude I have encountered a few times where people think that technical knowledge is the only criteria for selecting supervisors.  I can't tell you how many times I have encountered people who say things like "I don't know how he can be in charge, he does not know a thing about XXXX (insert technical knowledge here)!"

Don't fall into that trap either.

[Extremepredjudice]

Mentor is defined as "a wise and trusted counselor or teacher" Teacher is "a person who teaches  or instructs, especially as a profession; instructor." training is defined as "the education, instruction, or discipline of a person or thing that is being trained"

Supervise is defined as "to oversee (a process, work, workers, etc.) during execution or performance; superintend; have the oversight and direction of."

Therefore, if mentor is defined as a teacher, and a teacher is an instructor, and instruction is part of the definition of training, than you guys are operating on a logical fallacy. Sorry, but with all due respect, if you can come up with an argument that isn't based on a fallacy than I would enjoy debating this further.


Supervising and mentoring are different animals, just as I said. You can be both. I never said you couldn't. Training is mentoring. As I proved above.

Blank stares, and a "now what?"

One last question, and I would appreciate an answer: How can you mentor someone in something you have no idea how to do?
If I can't tie my shoe, I can't mentor someone on how to tie their shoe.

To the first part I quoted above, that's a shame, I hope you just caught them off guard.

Nah.

Extreme,

If you want to be the squadron ITO, then why don't you just become a senior member?

You're obviously tired of the restrictions of responsibility placed on cadets,  why don't you come play the game for real, and have your name put on stuff.  So when things are screwed up, Wing crawls down your throat.

THAT, is really why there are no squadron cadet positions.  Because at the end of the day someone has to be responsible for what happens, and cadets aren't able to accept that responsibility.

Well first there is a problem of age. Second, I don't really want to be the squadron ITO. (I was planning on building a site, and donating it, but that is just boredom.) Third, I believe we have an ITO.

I am using ITO as an example because I have the best knowledge of it. I can talk about it the most, and I have experience with related items.

But sure, if you can figure out a way to make me a Senior Member, I will take you up on your challenge.

Being a squadron ITO is about more than programming a website, and that's the rub.

When did I say it was only about designing a website? Yes, I have been using that as an example. But never have I said something like that.

[tsrup]

Extreme,

If you want to be the squadron ITO, then why don't you just become a senior member?

You're obviously tired of the restrictions of responsibility placed on cadets,  why don't you come play the game for real, and have your name put on stuff.  So when things are screwed up, Wing crawls down your throat.

THAT, is really why there are no squadron cadet positions.  Because at the end of the day someone has to be responsible for what happens, and cadets aren't able to accept that responsibility.

Well first there is a problem of age. Second, I don't really want to be the squadron ITO. (I was planning on building a site, and donating it, but that is just boredom.) Third, I believe we have an ITO.

I am using ITO as an example because I have the best knowledge of it. I can talk about it the most, and I have experience with related items.

But sure, if you can figure out a way to make me a Senior Member, I will take you up on your challenge.

I was under the (obviously false) impression that you were over the age of 18 from some of your earlier posts in other threads.

If you're not old enough, you're not old enough. 


My point still stands.  Cadets cant head up these squadron positions because most of the time they aren't old enough to legally accept the responsibility.

A supervisor can delegate the authority to do a project, but what separates the supervisor from you, is if things go south, he/she still is ultimately responsible for what happens.

[NCRblues]

"hello, I am Dwight Schrute, assistant regional manager" ~ Dwight

"no, he is the assistant TO THE regional manager...big difference Dwight" ~ Michael Scott

[lordmonar]

Granted a mentor is a teacher.....but not in necessarily in a technical field.

He certainly can be....but more often then not he is an experrenced hand in the general area that one is seeking mentorship in.

And a supervisor certainly oversees the work of a subordinate....but again that does not necessarilly mean that he is a technical expert in that work.  Again it is a definate benifit...but not necessary.

A squadron commander in CAP is not an expert in all the areas that a squadron must do.  It is just impossible.  He hires individuals to be the SME's in each area and supervises them as they do the work.

If anything you have the roles reversed.  A mentor with no technical knowledge is less of a problem then a supervisor with no technical knowledge.....and neither of them are always tasked with providing technical knowledge.  I know that my current supervisor could not train me and I know that those I go for mentorship absolutly have no technical know how in my current work.

I can still learn from them...but I learn leadership, management and other skills that make me a better asset to the company....but not a better technican.

And finally as tsrup said....cadets cannot by regulation, role, and maturity be the primary for any area with a CAP squadron.  This is not to say they are not useful....it is just the way things are.

[EMT-83]

... and in the real world, life doesn't always mirror a textbook.

[Eclipse]

A squadron commander in CAP is not an expert in all the areas that a squadron must do.  It is just impossible.  He hires individuals to be the SME's in each area and supervises them as they do the work.

If anything you have the roles reversed.  A mentor with no technical knowledge is less of a problem then a supervisor with no technical knowledge.....and neither of them are always tasked with providing technical knowledge.  I know that my current supervisor could not train me and I know that those I go for mentorship absolutly have no technical know how in my current work.

I can still learn from them...but I learn leadership, management and other skills that make me a better asset to the company....but not a better technican.

Put the bold part on the front of a t-shirt, and the rest on the back.

[jimmydeanno]

Even in the IT field, I would not consider my "mentor" to be the person that I go to for troubleshooting issues.  Anyone can do that.  Your mentor is someone you should pick to help you with your personal development.  Perhaps they provide insight and guidance to you as you pursue a job they have, give suggestions, help you navigate through difficult choices, identify skill sets you should develop, and can point you in the right direction when you hit hard times.

There was an AF Wing Commander that I heard speak once, who related that his mentor was his grandmother.  He'd call her to ask her what she thought about personnel issues, leadership stuff, things related to his family, among other things.  Do you think she knew how to be a Wing Commander?  Probably not, but she'd been around the block a few times when it came to dealing with people, she'd had her share of hard times, and fallout, and could provide him with just enough insight so he could view the problem from the direction that he was missing.  That person, who had no first-hand experience in leading an AF wing somehow was able to provide guidance and relevant information.

A mentor certainly does not have to be an expert in the field.  They are just someone who you trust with your goals, interests, and even problems.  You can even have more than one if you want - just in case you need a mentor to teach you about web design.

That idea that the mentor is a teacher, doesn't necessarily mean that they are technical gurus that instruct C#, or a graphic design, but that they are someone you can learn something from.  As long as there is an information exchange, they have met the "teacher" "requirement."

[Eclipse]

^ This is a difficult thing to understand, especially for young people new to the universe and people who haven't had experience in management.

In most cases a manager manages process and people, he does not turn the wrenches.  Payroll, performance reviews, production plans, etc.
It's the indirect leadership styles taught in the later phases of the CP.  I've seen it far too many times - a hot poop wrench turner reaches
the point in his career that it's time to "move up", and some just have no tolerance for things that don't respond immediately to their input.

And that's fine, not all good techs can be managers, and certainly not all managers can be techs.  Neither can exist without the other.  CAP fails
in the assumption by many that these skills are interchangeable and exist in equal quantities in everyone.

[JeffDG]

^ This is a difficult thing to understand, especially for young people new to the universe and people who haven't had experience in management.

In most cases a manager manages process and people, he does not turn the wrenches.  Payroll, performance reviews, production plans, etc.
It's the indirect leadership styles taught in the later phases of the CP.  I've seen it far too many times - a hot poop wrench turner reaches
the point in his career that it's time to "move up", and some just have no tolerance for things that don't respond immediately to their input.

And that's fine, not all good techs can be managers, and certainly not all managers can be techs.  Neither can exist without the other.  CAP fails
in the assumption by many that these skills are interchangeable and exist in equal quantities in everyone.

+1

And just to make a point that grates on me about "IT Officer does the website".  Honestly, I don't care a whit if an ITO can create a website.  It's about "information", period.  Getting the information people need to the places they need it when they need it.  If you have to contract out building a website for that, great.  But you need to understand information first and foremost as an ITO.  The technology, as implied by the name, is secondary.

[Eclipse]

The technology, as implied by the name, is secondary.

Wow and a half, exactly.

The information needed to convey to the viewer should inform the tech, not the other way around.  I can't count the number of CAP (and other) websites and projects overly complicated and wrapped around the axle because of someone's personal tie to a particular technology.

By far the majority of CAP units, and nearly every echelon could do more than well with template-based sites like Blogger or Sites, and concentrate on the content.

[Spaceman3750]

In my squadron the responsibility for the website is supposed to be split. The ITO is responsible for the mechanics of the website and the PAO is responsible for the content. This was originally accomplished through a "web team" that I created consisting of three people with the PAO as the head. My intention was that they would collaborate independently and return a finished product on a two-month timeline.

[Extremepredjudice]

^ This is a difficult thing to understand, especially for young people new to the universe and people who haven't had experience in management.

Dear sir, do you know what I do all day? That question goes for everyone on this forum.
I'm afraid to say you don't. Therefore, I can't accept your statement because it is built on the assumption I know nothing about management, and have no experience with it. Even if the statement is true, it is an assumption.

In most cases a manager manages process and people, he does not turn the wrenches.  Payroll, performance reviews, production plans, etc.

Yes, I agree. That is the roll of a supervisor, IMHO.

I've seen it far too many times - a hot poop wrench turner reaches
the point in his career that it's time to "move up", and some just have no tolerance for things that don't respond immediately to their input.

I assume you are talking about me. I have extremely high levels of tolerance. The only things I don't have tolerance for is fallacies and lying.

After months of logic-based, well reasoned, and well articulated arguments, my suggestions have been rejected on the premise of, in essence, not changing the status quo, I do tend to get a little frustrated. It is my experience that this is normal. (If it isn't than a lot of stuff I've learned is wrong.) I stand by what I have done and said. If you want to discuss this, or inquire about this, I ask we do it in a private setting.

And that's fine, not all good techs can be managers, and certainly not all managers can be techs.  Neither can exist without the other.  CAP fails
in the assumption by many that these skills are interchangeable and exist in equal quantities in everyone.

True, but some managers can be techs. Some techs can be managers. It isn't black or white; either or.

By far the majority of CAP units, and nearly every echelon could do more than well with template-based sites like Blogger or Sites, and concentrate on the content.

It conveys a level of... how do I say this? laziness, we can't build our own site. Unprofessional, professionals would be able to build their own site. That isn't really what I want to say, but for some reason I can't come up with the correct words. It just annoys me that they are to lazy to pay the 1000$(average price for a good site) to build their own. They just go use some POS product some corporation built. They use a cookie-cutter product rather than come up with something on their own. I can understand some things, like calenders, forums, etc.

Besides, if I want to take your statement literal, most designers build their sites via templates.

In my squadron the responsibility for the website is supposed to be split. The ITO is responsible for the mechanics of the website and the PAO is responsible for the content. This was originally accomplished through a "web team" that I created consisting of three people with the PAO as the head. My intention was that they would collaborate independently and return a finished product on a two-month timeline.

Great idea, and I hope it works out for your squadron. The ITO shouldn't really be responsible for content. Neither is updating the site.

Since the website is your online public face, kudos for putting the PAO on it.

[Eclipse]

Extreme,

You've indicated here that you are a cadet too young to go senior, so regardless of "what you do all day", it's not going to be very relevant in
terms of experience. 

As to the custom vs. template argument, sorry, the needs and capabilities of the customer come far before the desire to do things "custom".
In CAP's case, the need is for clear, simple, conveyance of information, hosted at a member-agnostic facility, provided in a way which costs
little to nothing, and which can be updated and edited by anyone with no special skills.

Anything else is wasted effort, overkill, and dies the minute the "custom guy" gets a new CAP job, decides he's "tired of it", or leaves CAP.

A $1000 to devel a custom site?  Seriously?  That's twice the operating budget of most units, not to mention borderline an FW&A.  You don't
pay for things you can do just as well, or better, for free, just to make it kewl.

CAP is not a code shop, and no one joins to discuss PHP or CSS.  I know it's frustrating - Comm guys want the world to be all about the radios,
IT people the websites, pilots...heh, they like their airplanes, but it's not about any of those "things" - they are just tools to accomplish the mission,
which isn't actually about "radios", "websites", or even ((*gasp*)) airplanes.

[Extremepredjudice]

You've indicated here that you are a cadet too young to go senior, so regardless of "what you do all day", it's not going to be very relevant in
terms of experience. 

uh-huh. Sir, I manage 20-200 people. I have done so for 4 years. For a total of over 7000 hours. If you think that gives weight let me know. That is just one thing I do all day.

As to the custom vs. template argument, sorry, the needs and capabilities of the customer come far before the desire to do things "custom".

I agree. I am talking about things like tumblr. That vs something someone made. Tumblr would lose, always.

In CAP's case, the need is for clear, simple, conveyance of information, hosted at a member-agnostic facility, provided in a way which costs
little to nothing, and which can be updated and edited by anyone with no special skills.

all of my sites are able to be updated by the admins. The admins can add/remove anyone. The only things the admin needs is their web browser and a keyboard.
I keep an account, and I keep a test admin account, in case of a problem.The reason WordPress is so widely used is it provides a tool for designers to do the same thing, but easier.

Anything else is wasted effort, overkill, and dies the minute the "custom guy" gets a new CAP job, decides he's "tired of it", or leaves CAP.

agreed, see above item for my codicil.

A $1000 to devel a custom site?  Seriously?  That's twice the operating budget of most units, not to mention borderline an FW&A. 

I was ranting about sites in general. Not really CAP. FYI 1k is cheap for a good site, really good designers are usually 1000-5000. Over 5000 it starts to become cheaper to hire them on as part of your company.

You don't
pay for things you can do just as well, or better, for free, just to make it kewl.

I guess individuality is out the window.

I think you think I am some teenager that cares more about "cool factor" than functionality. I am the total opposite. Functionality is my main goal. It is my first thought when I sit down with customers. Coolness only affects my work when I am coding against friends.

CAP is not a code shop, and no one joins to discuss PHP or CSS.  I know it's frustrating - Comm guys want the world to be all about the radios,
IT people the websites, pilots...heh, they like their airplanes, but it's not about any of those "things" - they are just tools to accomplish the mission,
which isn't actually about "radios", "websites", or even ((*gasp*)) airplanes.

we all have our likes and dislikes. We also have what we are good at. I am good at IT. you may be good at eating doughtnuts.  I have no idea. If what I am good at will help my squadron I will do it.  This thing grew out of my claim that cadets can run a directorate, such as IT, without SM mentors. Supervisor, manager, or boss, yes they need that. Not necessarily a mentor though. Remember, mentor = teacher. 

I still believe this. We are definitly off topic, now... At least we aren't discussing uniforms.

[tsrup]

You've indicated here that you are a cadet too young to go senior, so regardless of "what you do all day", it's not going to be very relevant in
terms of experience. 

uh-huh. Sir, I manage 20-200 people. I have done so for 4 years. For a total of over 7000 hours. If you think that gives weight let me know. That is just one thing I do all day.

you've been managing 20-400 people since you were 13 (at the oldest)...