VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

CATALOG OF DOCTRINE TOPICS

Chapter 1: The Airman

The Airman’s Perspective
The Total Force
The Air Force Core Values
Warfighting and the Profession of Arms
The Airman’s Creed

Chapter 2: Leading Airmen

Foundations of Air Force Leadership
Levels of Air Force Leadership
Leadership Components

Conclusion

APPENDIX A. The Oaths of Office and Enlistment

APPENDIX B. Code of Conduct for Members of the Armed Forces of the

United States

APPENDIX C. Education and Training

APPENDIX D. Leadership Study: Tactical Expertise

APPENDIX E. Leadership Study: Operational Competence

APPENDIX F. Leadership Study: Strategic Vision

 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

CHAPTER 1: THE AIRMAN

Last Updated: 8 August 2015

All Airmen, military and civilian, support and defend the Constitution of the
United States and live by the Air Force core values. Airmen are the foundation of
the Air Force organizations and units that enable the Department of Defense to support
the National Security Strategy. The term Airman has historically been associated with
uniformed members of the US Air Force (officer or enlisted; regular, Reserve, or Guard)
regardless of rank, component, or specialty. 1 Today, Department of the Air Force (DAF)
civilians and members of the Civil Air Patrol, when conducting missions for the Air Force
as the official Air Force Auxiliary, are incorporated within the broader meaning of the
term when there is a need to communicate to a larger audience within the Service,
either for force development purposes or for clarity and inclusiveness by senior leaders
when addressing a larger body of personnel.

Airmen recognize and value airpower in its The Airman’s perspective may
application, which is fundamentally different and be shared by members of
more flexible than other forms of military power other Services and other
2 nations who apply airpower.
and instruments of national power. This
inherent flexibility allows our force to be applied To differentiate US Air Force
independently or in concert with other forms of Airmen from other like-minded
military power. The application and integration individuals, the term Airman is
of airpower produce effects across multiple reserved for US Air Force
domains and theaters. Air Force forces are personnel while airman is
employed at different speeds and closure rates used as a general term for
and over greater distances and should be those from various Services
applied by those who appreciate the breadth, and nations.
scope, and uniqueness of that power across the
range of military operations. Due to the distinctive
nature of the capabilities brought to the fight, Airmen see their Service as unique. 3

1
This broader meaning does not, however, mean or imply that anyone other than uniformed members of
the US Air Force are members of the Armed Services in other contexts. For example, in the context of
punitive Air Force instructions or the law of armed conflict regulations, care must be taken to ensure the
rights and obligations imposed under those regulations are not uniformly applied to both Service
members and civilians.
2
See Volume 1, Basic Doctrine.
3
Maj Gen Charles Dunlap, Jr., Understanding Airmen: A Primer for Soldiers, Military Review,
September-October 2007, 126.
The study of airpower and the strengths of its capabilities lead to a particular expertise
and a distinctive point of view General Henry H. “Hap” Arnold termed “airmindedness.” 4
The Airman’s perspective is forged from horizonless operations from, in, and through
the air, space, and cyberspace domains. 5 Whereas land and maritime domains each
comprise a portion of the earth’s surface, air, space and cyberspace—the Air Force’s
operating domains—surround 100 percent of our world.

4
Gen Henry H. (“Hap”) Arnold, Third Report of the Commanding General of the Army Air Forces to the
Secretary of War, Baltimore, Md: Schneidereith, 12 November 1945, 70.
5
Air Force Manual 1-1 (1992), Essay U: Airmindedness: An Example.
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

THE AIRMAN’S PERSPECTIVE

Last Updated: 8 August 2015

The US Air Force flies, fights, and wins in air, space, and cyberspace. The Air
Force provides organized, trained, and equipped forces to support combatant
commanders who are responsible for deterring attacks against the United States, its
territories, possessions, and bases, and employing appropriate force should deterrence
fail. 1 Air, space, and cyberspace are flexible and dynamic domains that present
opportunities and vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities, when not mitigated, may be
used by America’s adversaries to their advantage. The Air Force is the premier
American military force capable of overcoming those vulnerabilities in defense of the
United States.

Airmen are essential to the successful execution of the Air Force’s responsibilities in
support of the combatant commanders; therefore, they should understand and actively
advocate the Airman’s perspective on the use of airpower to achieve national
objectives. Understanding the Airman’s perspective gives Airmen a distinct advantage
when performing the responsibilities of the Air Force. They approach mission
accomplishment in a manner unique to those educated, trained, and experienced in
bringing airmindedness to all actions they perform. Airmen bring a perspective to
performing the Air Force’s mission that compounds their effectiveness in a manner best
suited to support the Air Force, joint, and multinational fight.

Airmen normally think of airpower and the application of force from a functional rather
than geographical perspective. Airmen do not divide up the battlefield into operating
areas. 2 Airmen typically approach battle in terms of creating effects to meet joint force
commander objectives, rather than on the nature and location of specific targets. 3 This
approach normally leads to more inclusive and comprehensive perspectives that favor
holistic solutions over tactical ones.

When Air Force forces are employed in various operational environments, they offer
basic characteristics that, when exploited, are fundamental to the successful conduct of
war and peace. These characteristics, when molded into viable force capabilities and
executed by knowledgeable Airmen, enhance the overall ability of the joint force to
achieve success when called upon. Therefore, each Airman should understand and be

1
Unified Command Plan, paragraph 10.a.
2
Col Dennis M. Drew, Joint Operations: The World Looks Different from 10,000 Feet, Airpower Journal,
Fall 1988.
3
Volume 1, Basic Doctrine; Annex 3-60, Targeting.
able to articulate the full potential and application of Air Force capabilities required to
support the joint force and meet the nation’s security requirements.
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

THE TOTAL FORCE

Last Updated: 8 August 2015

The total force consists of the people who make up the Air Force. It is defined as “the
US Air Force organizations, units, and individuals that provide the capabilities to support
the Department of Defense in implementing the national security strategy. Total force
includes regular Air Force, Air National Guard of the United States, Air Force Reserve
military personnel, US Air Force military retired members, US Air Force civilian
personnel (including foreign national direct and indirect-hire, as well as non-
appropriated fund employees), contractor staff, and host-nation support personnel.” 1 In
addition, the total force includes the Civil Air Patrol, as the official Air Force Auxiliary. 2

The regular Air Force is defined as the component of the Air Force that consists of
persons whose continuous service on active duty in both peace and war is
contemplated by law, and of retired members of the regular Air Force. 3 The Air National
Guard is an organized state militia and a reserve component of the Air Force. The Air
National Guard of the United States is a federal organization that is also a reserve
component of the US Air Force. Air National Guard Airmen serve in both organizations,
and can move between them as duty requires. 4 The Air Force Reserve is a component
of the United States Air Force as prescribed by law. 5 They are represented by a mix of
Traditional Reservists, Individual Mobilization Augmentees, participating Individual
Ready Reservists, Air Reserve Technicians, Title 32 Excepted Civil Service Technicians
(Guard Technicians), and Active Guard/Reserve, both Drill Status Guardsmen and full-
time forces.

DAF civilians are members of the total force, but are not members of the above
elements of the Air Force. Regular Air Force, Guard, Reserve, and DAF civilians fall
under the use of the term Airman when force development issues are discussed or
general inclusiveness by senior leaders is required for clarity in communication. In
addition, Civil Air Patrol members, when executing Air Force-assigned missions, are
civilian volunteers (with a small paid staff) of the official Air Force Auxiliary. Air Force
Auxiliary members fall under the use of the term Airman in the same manner as DAF

1
AFI 90-1001, Responsibilities for Total Force Integration, 29 May 07 (IC 1, 25 Apr 08).
2
10 U.S.C. §9442.
3
Title 10, United States Code (U.S.C.) §8075.
4
10 U.S.C. §101(c)(4) and (5); Perpich v. Department of Defense, 496 U.S. 334, 110 S. Ct. 2418, 110
L.Ed.2d 312 (1990).
5
10 U.S.C. §10101. In addition, non-participating and inactive members who are part of the Individual
Ready Reserve, the Standby Reserve, and the Retired Reserve are subject to recall as authorized by
law. See 10 U.S.C. §§ 10144, 10151, and 10154.
civilians, when general inclusiveness by senior leaders is required for clarity in
communication.

Air Force contractors are also members of the total force, but their connection to the
Service does not rise to the same level as that of regular Air Force, Guard, Reserve, or
DAF civilians, who are required to swear an oath of allegiance. Contractors support the
missions of Airmen. Managing contractors requires a different leadership approach
because they are not part of the military chain of command. Contractor personnel
should be managed through the terms and conditions set forth in their contract. They
do not normally fall under Uniform Code of Military Justice authority. Therefore, it is
imperative Air Force leaders ensure a strong contractor management system is in place
in both peacetime and during contingency operations.

Upon entering the Service, Air Force officers, enlisted members, and DAF civilians take
an oath, 6 signifying their personal commitment to support and defend the Constitution of
the United States and a commitment and willingness to serve their country for the
duration of their Air Force careers. The oath is a solemn promise to do one's duty and
meet one's responsibilities. The oath of office for officers and civilians and the oath of
enlistment for enlisted personnel are in Appendix A.

Officers

A military officer 7 has responsibilities as a warfighter, a servant of the Nation, a member

of the profession of arms, and a leader of
character. Frequently, these roles are carried
You were chosen to be an
out simultaneously. While officers often
officer because you have the
shoulder our Air Force’s leadership
potential qualities of a leader,
responsibilities, that leadership role must be
just as an athlete is “signed”
earned through demonstrated adherence to our
by a big league team and the
core values and proven followership abilities.
aviation cadet is selected for
One must be a good follower in order to be a
flying training because they
good leader. Preparation to fulfill the role of an
have certain innate abilities.
Air Force officer is a continual developmental
process. Air Force officers are raised with an
—Air Force Manual (AFM)
Airman’s perspective and grown in the culture of
35-15, Air Force Leadership
the Service. This perspective is developed
(1948)
through education in how the Air Force operates
and honed through operational experience.
Leadership opportunities grow throughout this
developmental process as does an officer’s ability
to articulate the capabilities the Air Force brings to the joint fight.

6
5 U.S.C. §3331, 10 U.S.C. §502.
7
For a thorough analysis of officership in the United States military, see The Armed Forces Officer,
National Defense University Press, 2007.
Within the Air Force, only an officer can command Air Force forces. 8 Command is
defined as “[t]he authority that a commander in the armed forces lawfully exercises over
subordinates by virtue of rank or assignment. Command includes the authority and
responsibility for effectively using available resources and for planning the employment
of, organizing, directing, coordinating, and controlling military forces for the
accomplishment of assigned missions. It also includes responsibility for health, welfare,
morale, and discipline of assigned personnel.” 9 To command, an officer is educated in
the Airman’s perspective and trained in Air Force capabilities. This training and
perspective, combined with years of experience, produce an individual able to accept
the responsibility of sending Airmen into harm’s way, the sole purview of a commander.

Federal law states commanders in the Air Force

The function of command are required to be good examples of virtue,
requires continuous alertness honor, patriotism, and subordination; to be
and willingness to accept vigilant in “inspecting the conduct of all persons
changed conditions. Our who are placed under their command”; to guard
commanders must exert against “dissolute and immoral practices” and
superior leadership; they are correct those guilty of them; and to promote
expected to know and and safeguard the morale, well-being, and
influence their soldiers. Exert general welfare of the officers and enlisted
your leadership—see that your personnel under their command. 10 Such tasks
soldiers ‘think straight.’ You are sufficiently daunting that it behooves a
won’t have all the answers, but commander to take advantage of the expertise
you can at least tell your available to him or her in an organization,
soldiers that. informally known as a command team. The
command team can consist of formal and
—General H.H. “Hap” informal members critical to maintaining the
Arnold, from Army Air Force good order and discipline of an Air Force unit.
Letter 35-280, The members of the command team should
19 September 1945 possess the experience, functional prowess,
and maturity required to make decisions of
great impact to the organization, the individuals
in the organization, and the Air Force. Operating together, a commander with his or her
command team leads Air Force organizations in the execution of Air Force duties.

Enlisted Members

The Air Force’s enlisted members provide the Service with the highest degree of
technical expertise within their respective functional areas. Inherent in the oath of
enlistment (see Appendix A), enlisted members are bound to the ideal of followership.
Although not commissioned and thereby not entitled to be in command positions,
enlisted members perform leadership roles across all Air Force organizational levels
and are highly respected members of the Air Force leadership team. Education,
training, and an Airman’s perspective, combined with a wealth of technical expertise,

8
The ultimate source for command authority is the U.S. Constitution, Article II, §2, making the President
the Commander-in-Chief of the US military. For military discipline purposes, 10 U.S.C. §801 states, “The
term ‘commanding officer’ includes only commissioned officers.”
9
Joint Publication (JP) 1-02.
10
10 U.S.C. §8583.
sustain enlisted members in the leadership of other enlisted forces who support their
unit, the unit’s mission, and the Air Force at large. 11

The Air Force enlisted members are true to a professional calling that encompasses a
high degree of specialized training, Service orientation, and a distinct subculture.
Enlisted members demonstrate dedication to this calling through hard work, loyalty, and
mission accomplishment regardless of hardship or adversity. Often referred to as the
“backbone” of the Air Force, enlisted members are grounded in the Air Force core
values and are bound to the idea of followership. Enlisted members are also brought up
with an Airman’s perspective and receive professional military education and training
tailored to appropriate levels of leadership and responsibility in accordance with AFI 36-
2618, The Enlisted Force Structure; this document provides guidance and direction for
all enlisted ranks. Enlisted members are Airmen first and specialists second. Lastly,
they carry a strong belief in setting aside their own wants and needs in seeking the
greatest good for their subordinates, peers, and leaders in defense of the Constitution of
the United States and the officers appointed over them.

Commanders depend upon noncommissioned officers (NCOs) to lead Airmen to

accomplish the mission.

—Air Force Pamphlet (AFPAM) 36-2241, Professional Development Guide

Civilians

DAF civilians are indispensable to the management and operation of the Service. As
civilians, they cannot exercise command authority over military members 12 but do
perform in leadership roles throughout the Service and across all organizational levels.
The US Air Force employs civilians in a full range of occupations providing stability and
continuity in an organization for long durations with the ability to support multiple
commanders over years of service. They fill positions in staff and base sustainment
operations that would otherwise be filled by military personnel. Their leadership skills
are enhanced through an education and training regimen suited for their growth in the
functional areas in which they provide expertise. 13 Their experiences, often honed
through many years in a given functional area, give them a level of knowledge
developed to an extensive degree. As stated in the oath of office, civilians are to
understand and value the essential role of followership in mission accomplishment.

11
See AFPAM 36-2241, Professional Development Guide, Chapter 10, for a discussion on leadership
and followership for the enlisted force.
12
There are two exceptions to civilians being prohibited from commanding military forces: The President,
as Commander-in-Chief under Article II, §2 of the US Constitution. In addition, 10 U.S.C. §113 and 50
U.S.C. §401 place the military departments under the direction, authority, and control of the Secretary of
Defense.
13
Air Force Policy Directive (AFPD) 36-26, Total Force Development, addresses how to create a total
force, including DAF civilians, “successfully prepared to accomplish the Air Force mission and to lead in a
rapidly evolving global environment with a vast range of missions, balancing individual needs – personal
and professional – to the greatest extent possible consistent with mission accomplishment.”
DAF civilians respond to the needs of the Air Force across the range of military
operations. As an example, the Civilian Expeditionary Workforce initiative is designed
to enhance the number of civilians augmenting operational requirements in contingency
operations.

President George H. W. Bush proclaimed December 4, 1991 as “Federal Civilian

Employees Remembrance Day.” This recognition was bestowed upon Federal
civilian employees because of the manner in which they responded to rescue and
reconstruction missions with distinction and valor during the bombing of Pearl
Harbor. Department of Defense civilian employees made vital contributions to the
Allied war effort by performing critical administrative and technical duties in
support of military operations.

—Information derived from Proclamation 6387;

Federal Civilian Employees Remembrance Day, 1991

Followership

Followership is as vital to the Air Force as is the status of an individual as an Airman. It

is implicit in the duties of all officers and DAF civilians, and explicit for the enlisted force.
The oath of enlistment’s language makes followership a necessity of service: “…and
that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the
officers appointed over me according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military
Justice.” 14 All Airmen are followers as well as leaders. The followership qualities
outlined below distinguish an effective from an ineffective follower: 15

 Self-management
 Commitment
 Competence
 Courage

Effective followers are “…intent on high performance and recognize they share the
responsibility for the quality of the relationship they have with their leaders… they know
they cannot be fully effective unless they work in partnerships that require both a
commitment to high performance and a commitment to develop effective relationships
with partners (including their boss) whose collaboration is essential to success in their
own work.” 16

Research reveals specific follower attributes that produce the most effective personnel.
A follower should exhibit loyalty that incorporates a high organizational commitment, a

14
10 U.S.C. §502.
15
Kelley, Robert E. “In Praise of Followers.” In Military Leadership: In Pursuit of Excellence, 3rd Ed.
Edited by Robert L. Taylor and William E. Rosenbach, Boulder: Westview Press, 1996, 136.
16
Potter, Earl H., William E. Rosenbach, Thane S. Pittman, “Leading the New Professional.” In Taylor and
Rosenbach, 148.
loyalty to the senior person’s vision and priorities, a willingness to disagree in an
appropriate and polite manner, and an ability to align personal goals with organizational
ones. A follower should function well in a change-oriented environment where the
person can be an agent for change and be agile in moving between the roles of leader
and follower. A follower should function well on teams, collaborating with others,
sharing credit, and acting responsibly toward others. A follower should exercise
independent critical thinking, be willing to express honest dissent, take the initiative in
tasks, and self-manage rather than wait for guidance. A follower should ensure the core
value of integrity is paramount, being trustworthy and truthful, setting and maintaining
the highest performance standards, and admitting to mistakes where appropriate. 17

Follower development is a leadership responsibility, and willingness to move out of

one’s comfort zone is fully expected of tomorrow’s leader. 18 As loyalty is an essential
quality of followership, the return loyalty of the leader is a necessary leadership quality.

Core values make the military what it is; without them,

we cannot succeed. They are the values that instill
confidence, earn lasting respect and create willing
followers. They are the values that anchor resolve in
the most difficult situations. They are the values that
buttress mental and physical courage when we enter
combat. In essence, they are the three pillars of
professionalism that provide the foundation for military
leadership at every level.

—Dr. Sheila Widnall, SECAF, 1993-1997

17
Latour, Lt Col Sharon, USAF, and Lt Col Vicki Rast, USAF, “Dynamic Followership: The Prerequisite for
Effective Leadership,” Air & Space Power Journal, Winter, 2004.
18
Ibid.
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

THE AIR FORCE CORE VALUES

Last Updated: 8 August 2015

Core Values help those who join us to understand right from the outset
what’s expected of them. Equally important, they provide all of us, from [the
rank of] Airman to four-star general, with a touchstone—a guide in our own
conscience—to remind us of what we expect from ourselves. We have
wonderful people in the Air Force. But we aren’t perfect. Frequent reflection
on the core values helps each of us refocus on the person we want to be
and the example we want to set.

—General Michael E. Ryan, Chief of Staff, United States Air Force

(CSAF), 1997-2001

The core values are a statement of those institutional values and principles of
conduct that provide the moral framework for military activities. The professional
Air Force ethic consists of three fundamental and enduring values of integrity
first, service before self, and excellence in all we do. 1 This ethic is the set of values
that guides the way Airmen live and perform. Success hinges on the incorporation of
these values into the character of every Airman. In today’s time-compressed, dynamic,
and dangerous operational environment, an Airman does not have the luxury of
examining each issue at leisure. He or she must fully internalize these values in order
to be better prepared in all situations—to maintain integrity, to serve others before self,
to perform with excellence and to encourage others to do the same. The Air Force core
values—integrity first, service before self, and excellence in all we do—are a
commitment each Airman makes when joining the Air Force. These values provide a
foundation for leadership, decision-making, and success, no matter the level of an
Airman’s assignment, the difficulty of the task at hand, or the dangers presented by the
mission.

There are four reasons the Service recognizes the Air Force core values as
fundamental to its people: 2

1
The Air Force core values were originally released in the 1997 Air Force Core Values Handbook (the
“little blue book”). Text follows the basic structure of this handbook. AFI 1-1, Air Force Standards,
updates the “little blue book” to encapsulate this information.
2
Adapted from the Air Force Core Values Handbook (1997), Chapter II.
 The core values identify the attributes all Airmen should live. All Air Force
personnel must possess integrity first. At the same time, a person’s “self” must take
a back seat to Air Force service: rules must be acknowledged and followed faithfully;
other personnel must be respected as persons of fundamental worth; discipline and
self-control must be demonstrated always; and there must be faith in the system.
The Air Force demands each of us places service before self. It is imperative we
seek excellence in all we do—whether the form is product/service excellence,
resources excellence, community excellence, or operations excellence.

 They point to what is universal and unchanging in the profession of arms. The
values are road signs inviting us to consider key features of the requirements of
professional service, but they cannot hope to point to or pick out everything. By
examining integrity, service, and excellence, we also eventually discover the
importance of duty, honor, country, dedication, fidelity, competence, and a host of
other professional requirements and attributes.

 They help us get a fix on the ethical climate of an organization. Big ticket
scandals grow out of a climate of ethical erosion. Because some believe our
operating procedures or the requirements levied upon them from above are absurd,
they tend to “cut corners” or “skate by.” As time goes by, these actions become
easier and they become habitual until the person can no longer distinguish between
the “important” taskings or rules and the “stupid” ones. Lying on official forms
becomes second nature. Placing personal interests ahead of the mission becomes a
natural response. And they develop a “good enough for government work” mentality.
In such a climate of corrosion the core values can bring a person back to recognition
of what is important: integrity, service, and excellence.

 They serve as beacons vectoring us back to the path of professional conduct.

Adherence to the core values ensures the Air Force will not degrade from a climate
of ethical commitment into a climate of corrosion.

Integrity First

Integrity is the willingness to do what is right even when no one else is looking. It is the
"moral compass"the inner voice, the voice of self-control, the basis for the trust
imperative in today's Air Force.

Integrity is the single most important part of character. It makes Airmen who they are
and what they stand for, and is as much a part of their professional reputation as their
ability to fly or fix jets, operate a computer network, repair a runway, or defend an
airbase. Airmen must be professional, both in and out of uniform. Integrity is not a suit
that can be taken off at night or on the weekend or worn only when it is important to look
good. Instead, it is the time we least expect to be tested when possessing integrity is
critical. People are watching us, not to see us fail, but to see us live up to their
expectations. Anything less risks putting the heritage and reputation of the Air Force in
peril.
 Quotations from the Air Force Memorial in
Washington, DC

Integrity; a man’s word is his bond.

—General Jimmy Doolittle,

US Army Air Forces Leader of the WWII Tokyo Raid

Integrity is the fundamental premise of service in a free

society. Without integrity, the moral pillars of our military
strength—public trust and self-respect—are lost.

—General Charles Gabriel, 11th CSAF

We’re entrusted with the security of our nation. The tools of

our trade are lethal, and we engage in operations that involve
risk to human life and untold national treasure. Because of
what we do, our standards must be higher than those of
society at large.

—General Ronald R. Fogleman, 15th CSAF

There will be demands upon your ability, upon your

endurance, upon your disposition, upon your patience…just
as fire tempers iron into fine steel so does adversity temper
one’s character into firmness, tolerance and determination.

—Senator Margaret Chase Smith, Lieutenant Colonel,

US Air Force Reserve

Integrity is the adherence to a strong moral code and consistency in one’s actions and
values. A person of integrity acts with conviction, demonstrating appropriate self-control
without acting rashly. An Airman’s word is binding, and honesty is the foundation of that
trust. Airmen always behave in a manner that brings credit upon themselves, their unit,
the Air Force, and the profession of arms. Airmen should be guided by a deeply held
sense of honor, not one of personal comfort or uncontrolled selfish appetites.

Airmen act with confidence, determination, and self-control in all they do to improve
themselves and their contribution to the Air Force. They maintain proper professional
relationships with subordinates, superiors, and peers as well as possess the moral
courage to do what is right even if the personal cost is high. As professionals, Airmen
refrain from openly displaying self-pity, discouragement, anger, frustration, or defeatism
or displays that would bring discredit upon themselves or the Air Force. Airmen
encourage the free flow of information within organizations and never shy from criticism.
They actively seek constructive feedback from superiors, peers, and subordinates and
take responsibility for their own successes and failures. A person with integrity accepts
the consequences of actions taken, never accepting or seeking undue credit for the
accomplishments of others. Airmen also hold each other accountable for their actions
and uniformly enforce standards. They ensure all people are treated with equal respect.
Finally, Airmen comprehend the awe-inspiring task of defending the Constitution of the
United States, maintaining the highest traditions of honoring the Air Force’s
responsibilities to the nation, and understanding the sacrifices made by others who
came before them.

…there is nothing more important to the nation than the integrity and the
trustworthiness of the people who defend it and…anyone who doesn't
understand that should find another line of work….

—General Mark A. Welsh, Chief of Staff, United States Air Force

(CSAF), 2014

Service Before Self

As an Air Force core value, service is not about the Air Force institution, it is about an
enduring commitment and dedication of the individual Airman to the age-old military
virtue of selfless dedication to duty at all times and in all circumstances. This includes
putting one’s life at risk if called to do so. It is a willingness to set aside one’s needs
and to make personal sacrifices. It is an understanding of the 24-hour-a-day
commitment, accepting expeditionary deployments and assignments away from home
and accomplishing the task at hand no matter the hardship. Service before self means
taking the time and making the effort to properly plan and execute with precision
regardless of the personal costs. Service before self is total commitment to the highest
ideals of personal sacrifice in defense of the Constitution and the United States.

Further, service before self does not mean service before family. Airmen have a duty to
the Service and an equally strong duty to their families. The difference is there are
times when service to the nation requires subordinating the needs of the family. It is the
responsibility of the Airman to prepare and provide for his or her family when deployed
or when duty requires it. Airmen understand they have a duty to fulfill the unit’s mission.
This includes performing to the best of one’s abilities the assigned responsibilities and
tasks without worrying how a career will be affected. As professionals, they exercise
good judgment while performing their duties and understand rules exist for good reason.
They also understand service before self asks us to subordinate our personal interests,
attitudes, and aspirations to the greater cause and the demands it places on us. It
means Airmen place the welfare of their peers and subordinates ahead of their own
personal needs or comforts.
 Quotations from the Air Force Memorial in
Washington, DC

I have been recognized as a hero for my ten minutes of

action over Vietnam, but I am no more a hero than anyone
else who has served this country.

—A1C John L. Levitow, lowest ranking Air Force

Medal of Honor Recipient

Service is a willingness to sacrifice…the setting aside of

personal desires, comfort, and security when the safety of
the country is at stake.

—General George S. Brown, 8th CSAF

and 8th Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff

Service before self is that virtue within us all which elevates

the human spirit, compels us to reach beyond our meager
selves to attach our spirit to something bigger than we are.

—General John P. Jumper, 17th CSAF

This value also demands each Airman keep “faith” in the system. This does not mean
we may not question what we are doing or that we will blindly follow our leaders without
a second thought. It means that we place our trust in the processes, procedures, and
other Airmen to get the job done and in the right way. Airmen understand an
organization can achieve excellence only when all members are encouraged to excel in
a cooperative atmosphere free from fear, unlawful discrimination, sexual harassment,
intimidation, hazing, or unfair treatment. In addition, Airmen understand they must be
loyal to their leaders, fellow Airmen, and the Air Force institution they serve. This
includes demonstrated allegiance to the Constitution and loyalty to the military chain of
command and to the President and Secretary of Defense.

Excellence in All We Do

This core value demands Airmen constantly strive to perform at their best. It is a
commitment to high standards and an understanding that each Airman has been
entrusted with our nation’s security. Airmen understand the Air Force mission is very
complex and exists in a constantly changing world. They understand that all efforts in
planning and executing airpower are designed to ensure the national security interests
of the United States. Therefore, they must always strive to meet or exceed standards
objectively based on mission needs and continuously search for new and innovative
ways to successfully accomplish the mission. It is not only a professional obligation but
a moral responsibility as well.
On a personal level, Airmen seek out and complete developmental education; work to
stay in their best physical, mental, and moral shape; and continue to enhance their
professional competencies. They are diligent to maintain their job skills, knowledge,
and personal readiness at the highest possible levels. They understand organizational
excellence can only be achieved when its members work together to successfully reach
a common goal in an atmosphere that preserves individual self-worth. No Airman wins
the fight alone. Each organization should foster a culture that emphasizes a team
mentality while maintaining high standards and accomplishing the mission. As stewards
of the nation’s resources, Airmen should aggressively protect and manage both human
and material assets. The most precious resource is people, and it is each Airman’s
responsibility to ensure he or she is trained, fit, focused, and ready to accomplish the
mission safely and effectively.

Quotations from the Air Force Memorial in

Washington, DC

The future is always decided by those who put their

imagination to work, who challenge the unknown, and who
are not afraid to risk failure.

—General Bernard A. Schriever, The Father and

Architect of Air Force Space and Ballistic Missile
Programs

The power of excellence is overwhelming. It is always in

demand and nobody cares about its color.

—General Daniel 'Chappie' James, First African-

American United States Air Force Four-Star General

That commitment to excellence is more than desirable; in

the profession of arms, it's essential. Lives depend on the
fact that we maintain high standards.

—General Michael E. Ryan, 16th CSAF

Courage and innovation form our heritage and excellence

is our standard. America's Airmen - Active, Guard, and
Reserve - serve as a force unmatched in our air and space.

—General T. Michael 'Buzz' Moseley, 18th CSAF

The Air Force recognizes these core values as universal and unchanging in the
profession of arms. They provide the standards with which to evaluate the ethical
climate of all Air Force organizations. Finally, when needed in the cauldron of war, they
are the beacons vectoring the individual along the path of professional conduct and the
highest ideals of integrity, service, and excellence.

In exemplification of the Air Force Core Values, Senior Airman Jason Cunningham
performed actions during Operation ENDURING FREEDOM that earned him the
thanks of a grateful nation, but at the cost of his life:

CITATION TO ACCOMPANY THE AWARD OF THE AIR FORCE CROSS

(POSTHUMOUS) TO

JASON D. CUNNINGHAM

The President of the United States of America, authorized by Title 10, Section 8742,
U.S.C., awards the Air Force Cross to Senior Airman Jason D. Cunningham for
extraordinary heroism in military operations against an opposing armed force while
serving as a pararescueman near the village of Marzak in the Paktia Province of
Afghanistan on 4 March 2002. On that proud day, Airman Cunningham was the
primary Air Force Combat Search and Rescue medic assigned to a Quick Reaction
Force tasked to recover two American servicemen evading capture in austere terrain
occupied by massed Al Qaida and Taliban forces. Shortly before landing, his MH-
47E helicopter received accurate rocket-propelled grenade and small arms fire,
severely disabling the aircraft and causing it to crash land. The assault force formed
a hasty defense and immediately suffered three fatalities and five critical casualties.
Despite effective enemy fire, and at great risk to his own life, Airman Cunningham
remained in the burning fuselage of the aircraft in order to treat the wounded. As he
moved his patients to a more secure location, mortar rounds began to impact within
fifty feet of his position. Disregarding this extreme danger, he continued the
movement and exposed himself to enemy fire on seven separate occasions. When
the second casualty collection point was also compromised, in a display of
uncommon valor and gallantry, Airman Cunningham braved an intense small arms
and rocket-propelled grenade attack while repositioning the critically wounded to a
third collection point. Even after he was mortally wounded and quickly deteriorating,
he continued to direct patient movement and transferred care to another medic. In
the end, his distinct efforts led to the successful delivery of ten gravely wounded
Americans to life-saving medical treatment. Through his extraordinary heroism,
superb airmanship, aggressiveness in the face of the enemy, and in the dedication of
his service to his country, Senior Airman Cunningham reflected the highest credit
upon himself and the United States Air Force.
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

WARFIGHTING AND THE PROFESSION OF ARMS

Last Updated: 8 August 2015

Since the Nation's birth, it has been the

constitutional duty of our military to ensure
national survival, defend lives and property,
and promote vital interests at home and
abroad. The enduring responsibility of the
United States Air Force is to provide strategic
deterrence for the Nation and fly, fight and
win as an integral part of the Joint Team.
Together with our brothers and sisters in
arms, we underwrite the national strategy of
defending the Homeland and assuring allies,
while dissuading, deterring and defeating
enemies.

—General Norton A. Schwartz,

CSAF, 2008

The central focus of the profession of arms is warfighting. As Airmen, we are given a
special responsibility to ensure the most effective Air Force the world has ever seen flies
and fights the right way. Airmen have inherited an Air Force forged through the ingenuity,
courage, and strength of Airmen who preceded them. An Airman should strive to
continue to provide the nation and the next generation of Airmen an equally dominant Air
Force. Doing so requires Airmen to fully understand the profession of arms they have
chosen, the commitment each Airman made by taking an oath, and the acceptance to
abide by the Air Force core values. It is a mindset designed to build confidence and
commitment necessary to shape the professional in each of us, and how we work as a
team to accomplish the mission. This mindset is shaped through the expeditionary nature
of the Service, especially in support of combat, humanitarian response, and disaster relief
operations and the lessons learned from those operations. The Airman’s Creed is a
condensation of this mindset. 1 Fundamental to this mindset is the Code of Conduct for
members of the Armed Forces of the United States, applicable to the nation’s uniformed
Airmen as warfighters, fighting in the Service which guards our country and our way of
life. It grounds every American warfighter with an established standard of conduct to

1
For insight into the reasoning behind the Airman’s Creed, see the CSAF Vector, Airman Warriors, April
2007.
support him or her at all times, especially those times of greatest stress and duress. The
Code of Conduct is presented at Appendix B.

Airmen share a long history of service, honor, and sacrifice forged in times of peace and
war. From the earliest days of airpower to the heights of space to the boundless realms
of cyberspace, Airmen have built an extraordinary heritage that forms the foundation of
the Service’s perspective. Even though we are technology focused, we value quality
over quantity. We embrace change and, through transformation and innovation, we
ensure a viable Air Force for the future.

Even something as straightforward as the Air Force symbol has evolved over time from
the days of General Hap Arnold to the symbol we have today. It represents a sweep
through our history, from a rich heritage to the horizons of the future. Through the
current Air Force symbol, Airmen continue to honor the heritage of our past and build
the promise of a brighter future.

Heritage to Horizon: The Air Force Symbol

Today’s symbol retains the core elements of our Air Corps heritage—the Hap
Arnold wings and star with circle—yet modernizes it to reflect the Air Force of
today and tomorrow. The symbol has two main parts: The upper half, the
stylized wings represent the stripes of our strength—the enlisted men and
women of our force. They are drawn with great angularity to emphasize our
swiftness and power. The lower half has a sphere, a star, and three diamonds.
The sphere within the star represents the globe. It reminds each of us of our
obligation to secure our nation’s freedom with global vigilance, global reach, and
global power. The globe also reminds us of our challenge as an expeditionary
force to respond rapidly to crises and to provide decisive airpower worldwide.
The area surrounding the sphere takes the shape of a
star. The star has many meanings. Its five points
represent the primary components of the Total Force
and family—our regular, Guard, Reserve, civilians, and
retirees. The star symbolizes space as the high ground
of our nation’s air and space force, and as a rallying
symbol in all our wars; it represents the officer corps,
which is central to our combat leadership. The star is
framed with three diamonds that represent the Air Force
core values. Combined, the Air Force symbol presents
two powerful images—at once it is an eagle (the emblem
of our nation) and a medal, representing valor in service
to our nation.

Airmen, firmly grounded in the core values and ingrained with a focus on the profession
of arms, react to the stresses of combat, the pressures of deployed operations, and the
demands of daily activities at home station with valor, courage, and sacrifice. While
these characteristics are within each one of us, they usually come to the surface in
times of great difficulty or unforeseen circumstances. Those times can happen in the
workplace, on the way home from work, during a humanitarian operation, or on the
battlefield. While many acts go unseen, other examples helped shape the finest
traditions of the Air Force and its history. They are something not only to recognize as
part of our history, but also to showcase that all Airmen may be called upon to perform
above and beyond in the profession of arms.

Valor

Quotations from the Air Force Memorial in

Washington, DC

Saving the lives of your fellow Airmen is the most

extraordinary kind of heroism that I know.

—General Curtis E. LeMay, 5th CSAF

When I think of the enlisted force, I see

dedication, determination, loyalty and valor.

—Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force Paul

W. Airey, First Chief Master Sergeant of the Air
Force

As I prepare for this…mission, I am a bit

homesick…. Mother and Dad, you are very close
to me, and I long so to talk to you. America has
asked much of our generation, but I’m glad to give
her all I have because she has given me so much.

—Sergeant Arnold Rahe, US Army Air Forces,

WWII, Killed in Action over France,
from a letter to his parents

Valor is the ability to face danger or hardship in a determined and resolute manner.
It is commonly known as bravery, fearlessness, fortitude, gallantry, heart, nerve, and
many other terms. Valor is the willingness to step outside of one’s comfort zone to deal
with an unexpected situation. Such situations can happen almost anywhere. Valor exists
in places other than on the battlefield; an Airman can exhibit valor when presented with
unusual circumstances in the daily routine of life. When acting with valor, one expresses
heroic qualities.
Courage

Quotations from the Air Force Memorial in Washington, DC

Courage is rightly esteemed the first of human qualities…because it is the

quality which guarantees all others.

—Sir Winston Churchill,

Prime Minister of the United Kingdom during WWII

Courage is doing what you are afraid to do...

—Captain Edward V. “Eddie” Rickenbacker,

Leading American Ace of WWI

It isn’t just my brother’s country, or my husband’s country, it’s my country as

well. And so the war wasn’t just their war, it was my war and I needed to
serve in it.

—Major Beatrice Hood Stroup, Women’s Army Corps, WWII

Our nation is blessed by the courageous families who give us our courageous
Airmen.

—General David C. Jones, 9th CSAF and

9th Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff

Courage is about the ability to face fear, danger, or adversity. Courage primarily comes
in two forms—physical and moral. Physical courage encompasses the ability to
overcome fears of bodily harm to get the job done or to risk oneself for another, in battle
or the course of everyday life. Moral courage is the ability to stand by the core values
when confronted with difficult choices. These choices could arise from situations where
unacceptable behavior (illegal drug use, sexual harassment, etc.) is condoned or
ignored by certain members of an organization. They might also come from situations
discovered by accident or because others are boasting of the behavior. Recognizing
the behavior as inconsistent with Air Force standards should lead an Airman to inform
superiors even when peer pressure exists or threats are made.

Finally, integrity breeds courage at the times and places when the behavior is most
needed. More often than not, courage is shown in acts of bravery on the battlefield as
Airmen step up to the challenges presented to them in a combat situation.

Sacrifice

Quotations from the Air Force Memorial in Washington, DC

They know not the day or hour nor the manner of their passing when far from
home they were called to join that great band of heroic airmen that went before.

—Inscription from the American Cemetery and Memorial, Cambridge,

England

…am going on a raid this afternoon…there is a possibility I won’t return…do not

worry about me as everyone has to leave this earth one way or another, and this
is the way I have selected. If after this terrible war is over, the world emerges a
saner place…pogroms and persecutions halted, then, I’m glad I gave my efforts
with thousands of others for such a cause.

—Sergeant Carl Goldman, US Army Air Forces, WWII, B-17 Gunner, Killed
in Action over Western Europe, from a letter to his parents

Tell them that we gave our todays for their tomorrows.

—Inscription from the Allied Cemetery, North Assam, India

…Our military families serve right alongside those of us in uniform. A special

thank you to all the spouses and children and moms and dads out there praying
for your loved ones in harm’s way – we add our prayers, too, for their safe return.

—General Richard B. Myers, 15th Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff

Sacrifice entails a willingness to give up one’s life, time, or comfort to meet the
needs of others. Personal sacrifice can be seen on a number of levels. Most
commonly, one thinks of the heroic actions of uniformed Airmen in combat with the
enemy. However, day-to-day deployed installation support activities can also present
opportunities to put the needs of fellow Airmen before the wants of an individual
dedicated to providing excellence to the warfighter.
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

THE AIRMAN’S CREED

Last Reviewed: 8 August 2015

On 18 April 2007, General T. Michael

Moseley, CSAF, introduced the Airman’s
Creed to the Air Force. 1 At that time, the
Air Force had been involved in THE AIRMAN’S CREED
continuous combat operations for over
16 years. During that period, Airmen I AM AN AMERICAN AIRMAN.
became highly specialized and I AM A WARRIOR.
I HAVE ANSWERED MY NATION’S CALL.
technically capable across a broad
spectrum of operations, which resulted in I AM AN AMERICAN AIRMAN.
a drift toward an emphasis on technical MY MISSION IS TO FLY, FIGHT, AND WIN.
proficiency and away from a warfighting I AM FAITHFUL TO A PROUD HERITAGE,
orientation. As a result, General Moseley A TRADITION OF HONOR,
AND A LEGACY OF VALOR.
created the Airman’s Creed in an effort
to reinvigorate the warrior spirit and I AM AN AMERICAN AIRMAN,
articulate the fundamental beliefs that GUARDIAN OF FREEDOM AND JUSTICE,
capture the essence of the Airman MY NATION’S SWORD AND SHIELD,
warrior. The Airman’s Creed is intended ITS SENTRY AND AVENGER.
I DEFEND MY COUNTRY WITH MY LIFE.
to remind all Airmen that they are not
just a “conglomeration of diverse I AM AN AMERICAN AIRMAN:
specialties, skill sets, or jobs,” but theirs WINGMAN, LEADER, WARRIOR.
is the profession of arms. It allows I WILL NEVER LEAVE AN AIRMAN BEHIND,
Airmen to think and act with one mind, I WILL NEVER FALTER,
AND I WILL NOT FAIL.
and with a commitment to fundamental
warfighting beliefs. Airmen are warriors,
and are dedicated to flying, fighting, and
winning. Following its release, it replaced
all existing Air Force-related creeds.

1
“Airman’s Creed Exemplifies Warfighting Ethos,” http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123049390,
accessed 10 Jun 09.
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

CHAPTER 2: LEADING AIRMEN

Last Updated: 8 August 2015

I’m firmly convinced that leaders are not born; they’re educated, trained, and
made, as in every other profession. To ensure a strong, ready Air Force, we
must always remain dedicated to this process.

—General Curtis E. LeMay, CSAF, 1961-1965

Leadership is the art and science of motivating, influencing, and directing Airmen
to understand and accomplish the Air Force mission in joint warfare. 1 This
highlights two fundamental elements of leadership: (1) the mission, objective, or task to
be accomplished, and (2) the Airmen who accomplish it. All facets of Air Force
leadership should support these two fundamental elements. Effective leadership
transforms human potential into effective performance in the present and prepares
capable leaders for the future.

Any Airman can be a leader and can positively influence those around him or her to
accomplish the mission. Leadership does not equal command, but all commanders

1
AFM 35-15, Air Force Leadership (1948): “Leadership is the art of influencing people to progress with
cooperation and enthusiasm toward the accomplishment of a mission.” AFP 35-49, Air Force Leadership
(1985): “Leadership is the art of influencing and directing people to accomplish the mission.” The
definition in the text is a distillation of these earlier efforts to define leadership for the Air Force.
should be leaders. 2 The vast majority of Air Force leaders are not commanders.
Individuals who have stepped forward to lead others in accomplishing the mission
simultaneously serve as both leaders and followers at every level of the Air Force, from
young Airmen working in aircrew flight equipment, to captains at wing staffs, to civilian
directors, to generals at the Pentagon. Leaders positively influence their entire
organization, without necessarily being the commander.

The Air Force expects its members to develop leadership skills. The nature and extent
of that development depends on the member’s status: officer, enlisted, or civilian. The
Air Force expects an officer to move quickly through the levels of leadership, from
tactical expertise into operational competence. Many will move into the level of
strategic vision. 3 Air Force enlisted members will operate chiefly at the level of tactical
expertise, where their technical skills are combined with their direct influence on
subordinate members. DAF civilians can function at all levels of leadership, but, with
the exception of the President of the United States and authorities granted to the
Secretary of Defense, 4 they can never command. The pinnacle of leadership is to
command where the responsibility for making life and death decisions as well as taking
organizational responsibility resides. Officers can rise to command Air Force forces or a
joint force.

Followers also have a critical role in displaying loyalty, as well as core values needed to
accomplish the Air Force mission. A commander should be comfortable leaving his or
her unit in the hands of the next in command, without feeling the need to routinely check
in to ascertain the status of the unit. If the commander has done his or her job right in
developing followers who can step in with competence and confidence, no fear for the
health of the unit during absence should exist.

The abilities of a leader can be improved through deliberate use of force development,
built from education, training, inclusive collaboration, and experience (see Annex 1-1,
Force Development, for a full discussion of force development). All Airmen can achieve
excellence by living the Air Force core values, developing institutional competencies,
acquiring professional and technical competence, and then acting on such abilities to
accomplish the unit’s mission, while taking care of the unit’s personnel. Core values
permeate leadership at all levels, at all times. Leaders at the more junior levels
demonstrate personal institutional competencies needed to create a cohesive unit fully
supportive of its mission. Mid-level leaders use institutional competencies at the
people/team level to advance the organization’s responsibilities within the framework of
the operational mission. The more senior the leader, the more crucial becomes his or
her use of organizational competencies in effecting mission accomplishment. The ability

2
This concept dates back to AFM 35-15 (1948): “You can be a commander without being a leader, or
you may be a fine leader without a command. But you must be a good leader to be an efficient
commander” (AFM 35-15, page 4).
3
Levels of leadership are defined more thoroughly here:
https://doctrine.af.mil/download.jsp?filename=V2-D10-Levels-Leadership.pdf.
4
The President’s authority is derived from the United States Constitution, Article II, §2. The Secretary of
Defense’s authority is derived from 10 U.S.C. §113 and 50 U.S.C. §401.
to influence people, improve performance, and accomplish a mission—leadership
actions—are part of all levels of leadership.
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

FOUNDATIONS OF AIR FORCE LEADERSHIP

Last Reviewed: 8 August 2015

From its inception in 1947, 1 the Air Force has recognized its distinctiveness as a
Service and the importance of leadership in the accomplishment of the mission. For a
variety of reasons, the Air Force focus on the foundational leadership elements—people
and mission—has evolved over time from an emphasis on one foundational element
over the other, to today’s more balanced approach.

The first effort to codify leadership for US Air Force Airmen, rather than US Army Air
Force Soldiers, was Air Force Manual (AFM) 35-15 (1948); its thrust was in
emphasizing the psychological aspects of leadership, taking much of its tone from a
1943 National Research Council study, Psychology for the Fighting Man. 2 The
emphasis was on the “art” of leadership:

The very fact that leadership is an art should discourage your becoming a
mechanical leader. Leadership does not provide formulas, rules, or
methods which will fit every situation. Leadership is an intangible quality
which cannot be seen, felt, or measured except through its results.
Moreover, you cannot predict the results with mathematical accuracy. If
you have skill as a leader, however, you can predict results within the
limits of your objectives. 3

The manual emphasized seven “aspects” of leadership and discussion of them was
interspersed throughout: Mission, Integrity of Character, Responsibility, Influencing
Men, Knowing Men, Unity, and Morale. 4 The current definition of leadership owes much
to the emphasis on the mission and the people (Mission, Influencing Men, and Knowing
Men), and the current Air Force core values are foreshadowed in the other aspects
(Integrity of Character, Responsibility, Unity, Morale). It also listed six “attributes of a
leader:” Integrity of Character, Sense of Responsibility, Professional Ability, Energy,
Emotional Stability, and Humaneness. 5 The attributes individualized the seven aspects,
by applying them to the officer as a leader. The current Air Force core values trace their
origins directly to these attributes.

1
The National Security Act of 1947 (as amended).
2
AFM 35-15, Air Force Leadership (1948), p. 1.
3
Ibid.
4
Ibid., p. 3.
5
Ibid., pp. 48-53.
Admittedly, the manual recognized the lessons incorporated were based on “an
organization similar to a World War II air force unit composed of civilians who had to be
quickly trained as soldiers.” 6 It acknowledged that the future Airman will function in
more intricate organizations with more complex duties, requiring the Airman to become
a more “complex being whose behavior can less and less be placed within any simple
pattern.” 7 The entire publication focused solely on the Air Force officer. Its discussions
revolved around both leadership and command for officers, with no direct information
written to address the leadership concerns or challenges of the enlisted force or
civilians.

In 1955, the Air Force published AFM 50-21, Living for Leadership. It represented a
dramatic change of focus from its 1948 predecessor, with chapter titles such as
Patterns for Living, Convictions for Living, and Courageous Living. Heavily illustrated, it
provided insight into the culture of the day as interpreted by the Air Force for its officers.
This manual was a product of its time, which emphasized Western faith and values to
combat “the faith of the Communist.” In the aggregate, the document is a time capsule
of America, giving guidance for how to live, vice how to lead.

In 1964, the Air Force returned to AFM 35-15 form and structure with the introduction of
AFM 50-3, Air Force Leadership. The aspects of leadership and attributes of a leader
are identical to the earlier edition but focus more on the mission and place a greater
urgency in deterrence and readiness. The chapter on “Mission” highlights this edition’s
emphasis, appropriate for its time. Then-Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) Eugene
M. Zuckert (1961-1965) was quoted to establish the overarching responsibility of the Air
Force, hence the Airman’s perspective at the time:

Ours is the primary responsibility to prevent the domination of the

aerospace by any power or combination of powers whose interests are
inimical to freedom and national independence on Earth…Space is a
medium of possible military action. As such, we must view the operating
problems in space as an extension of those in the atmosphere. That is
why we in the Air Force call it the aerospace. 8

With the United States engaged in a struggle for nuclear dominance with the Soviet
Union, the CSAF, General Curtis E. LeMay placed his emphasis on how Air Force
officers should lead (the document continued to focus exclusively on officers): “We
maintain our aerospace forces in readiness to respond to any kind of military challenge
the Communists may make. We must be prepared to emerge victorious from a general
war should it be forced upon us.” 9 Consistent with AFM 50-3’s emphasis on the
mission, LeMay went on to say, “No matter how well you apply the art of leadership, no

6
Ibid., p. 2. The term “soldier” was still used to describe members of the Air Force at this time.
7
Ibid.
8
AFM 50-3, Air Force Leadership (1964), p. 10.
9
Ibid.
matter how strong the unit or high the morale of your men, if your leadership is not
directed completely toward the execution of the mission, your leadership has failed.” 10

In 1985, the Air Force recognized the importance of balancing the people and the
mission which led to the development of Air Force Pamphlet (AFP) 35-49, Air Force
Leadership. This pamphlet simplified the Service’s discussion on leadership, defining
the term in succinct language: “Leadership is the art of influencing and directing people
to accomplish the mission.” 11 It also provided a new list of leadership traits for the Air
Force, most derived at least tacitly from the leadership attributes from AFMs 35-15 and
50-3: integrity, loyalty, commitment, energy, decisiveness, and selflessness. In
addition, it provided leadership principles, similar to the earlier leadership aspects:
know your job, know yourself, set the example, care for people, communicate, educate,
equip, motivate, accept your responsibility, and develop teamwork. 12 AFP 35-49 was “a
basic guide for the new and for the aspiring Air Force leader.” 13 Unique to this Air Force
document on leadership was the removal of its explicit application to officers only. The
document referred to all leaders, without regard to rank or command authority.

Finally, AFDD 1-1, Leadership and Force Development, the predecessor to this volume,
was signed by General John P. Jumper, CSAF, in 2004. Aspects and attributes of
leadership became core values, supported by enduring leadership competencies, which
now have been updated into the Service’s institutional competencies. This current
version is based on that document’s framework, expanded to meet the needs of today’s
Air Force. The figure, Evolution of Air Force Leadership Dimensions, illustrates the
evolution of leadership dimensions from attributes, to traits, to core values—Integrity,
Service, Excellence—which now provide the underpinning for leadership in today’s Air
Force.

10
Ibid., p. 11.
11
AFP 35-49, Air Force Leadership (1985), p. 1.
12
Ibid., pp. 2-5.
13
Ibid., p. 1.
 AFM 35-15, AFM 50-3, AFP 35-49, AFDD 1-1,
Air Force Air Force Air Force Leadership and
Leadership Leadership Leadership Force Development
(1948) (1964) (1985) (2004/2011)

Attributes: Attributes: Traits: Core Values:

Integrity of Integrity of Integrity Integrity

Character Character
Loyalty Service Before Self
Sense of Sense of
Responsibility Responsibility Selflessness Excellence in All We
Do
Professional Professional Commitment
Ability Ability
Energy
Energy Energy
Decisiveness
Emotional Emotional
Stability Stability

Humaneness Humaneness

Evolution of Air Force Leadership Dimensions

 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

LEVELS OF AIR FORCE LEADERSHIP

Last Updated: 8 August 2015

The Air Force operates in a dynamic global context across multiple domains requiring
leadership skills at a variety of levels. The Air Force characterizes these leadership
levels as the tactical expertise, operational competence, and strategic vision levels. 1
The leadership level at which an Airman operates determines the institutional
competencies required to lead Airmen in mission accomplishment. As shown in the
figure below, as Airmen progress from the tactical expertise to strategic vision
leadership levels, emphasis on the use of institutional competencies shifts from
personal to organizational, with a generally consistent focus on people/team
competencies.

1
Terms for the leadership levels were approved by General John P. Jumper, CSAF (2001-2005).
Tactical Expertise

I think it’s important that leadership opportunities be forced to as

low a commissioned level as possible. That’s a good time to start
looking at a guy. For heaven’s sake! What can you put in his ER
besides the fact that the guy is a great stick, he does well on
instruments, is a good gunner, and he talked to the Kiwanis club
once a quarter downtown. What else can you put in there? How
do you separate the wheat from the chaff? Get him in a
leadership role!

—General Hoyt S. Vandenberg

CSAF, 1948-1953

Personal competencies are the primary focus at the tactical expertise level. Airmen are
also gaining a general understanding of team leadership and an appreciation for
organizational leadership. Airmen at this level master their core duty skills, develop
experiences in applying those skills, and begin to acquire the knowledge and
experience that will produce the qualities essential to effective leadership. Airmen at
the tactical expertise level are the Air Force’s technicians and specialists. They learn
about themselves as leaders and how their leadership acumen can affect others
through the use of ethical leadership. They are being assimilated into the Air Force
culture and are adopting the core values of our Service. Airmen at this level are
focused on honing followership abilities, motivating subordinates and influencing peers
to accomplish the mission while developing a warrior ethos. They are learning about
themselves and their impact on others in roles as both follower and leader in addition to
developing their communication skills.

Tactical expertise in the Air Force encompasses chiefly the unit and sub-unit levels
where individuals perform specific tasks that, in the aggregate, contribute to the
execution of operations at the operational level. Tactical expertise includes activities
such as flying an aircraft, guarding a perimeter, loading a pallet, setting up a firewall for
a base, identifying a potentially hostile radar return, treating a broken arm, and many
other forms of activity, accomplished by both military and civilian personnel.

Training and education at the tactical level include training in a primary skill and initial
education in leadership. New Airmen should be educated in the common Service
culture and should understand the core values that bond Airmen together. In addition,
they should receive an understanding of, and gain expertise in, their unique specialty.
This may be accomplished by the following tactical education and training activities:

 Basic and primary developmental education and undergraduate academic degree

programs.

 Specialty training.
 Continuation training.

The following examples illustrate use of the above activities: Junior enlisted Airmen will
complete basic training for indoctrination into Air Force culture, attend the relevant
technical schools to obtain the occupational skills needed for their duties, and then
receive orientation into their new organization at the local First Term Airman Center. As
they gain experience and advance within their units, they will attend Airman Leadership
School to enhance their ability to function as leaders within their organizations.
Similarly, recently commissioned officers will obtain indoctrination to the Air Force
through their commissioning sources, then receive the appropriate technical training.
After several years of practical experience in their initial assignments, they will receive
further leadership education through Squadron Officer School. Air Force civilian
members may similarly attend these or comparable civilian education courses.
Throughout this time, Airmen gain experience in their specific duties through daily
performance, making them more competent and qualified to accomplish their assigned
missions. Throughout these education and training events, individuals are assessed to
monitor their progress. Mentoring by those senior to these Airmen and civilians is vital to
their progress in the Air Force.

Effective commanders and supervisors find the proper balance of training, education,
and leadership opportunities to develop the tactical competence of their Airmen. They
should work closely with educators and trainers and follow the guiding principles of the
personal institutional competencies when developing their Airmen at the tactical level.

Leaders should also ensure an inclusive environment among Airmen in this tactical
level, to encourage their full participation and development. The diversity of
perspectives and backgrounds at this level, if properly incorporated, strengthens the Air
Force, and encourages talent at this level to pursue greater responsibilities and growth
into the higher leadership levels.

The leadership study, “Security Police Defense of Tan Son Nhut and Bien Hoa Air
Bases, January 1968,” in Appendix D is provided to present tactical expertise in a
concrete and demonstrable setting.

Operational Competence

The full-spectrum of institutional competencies is balanced across the operational

competence leadership level. At this level, Airmen are able to understand the broader
Air Force perspective and the integration of diverse people and their capabilities in the
execution of operations. This level is where an Air Force member transitions from being
a specialist to understanding Air Force operational capabilities. Based on a thorough
understanding of themselves as leaders and followers and how they influence others,
they apply an understanding of organizational and team dynamics. They continue to
develop personal leadership skills, while developing their people/team competencies.
The operational level includes continued broadening of experience.
Leading people through developing and inspiring others, taking care of people, and
taking advantage of the diversity in the ranks of followers is vital to this level of
leadership. 2 Also at this level, fostering collaborative relationships through building
teams and coalitions, especially within a large organization, and negotiating with others,
often external to the organization, becomes a necessary competence. Airmen
operating at this level of leadership normally assume such responsibilities following
intermediate developmental education. The focus of Air Force organization and
employment is at the operational level. It is here where warfighting is executed and
day-to-day command and control of Air Force operations are carried out. At this level,
the tactical skills and expertise Airmen developed earlier are employed alongside new
leadership opportunities to affect an entire theater or joint operations area. By now the
Airman has developed a family of skills at both the personal and people/team level,
grounded in the Airman’s perspective and guided by ingrained core values.

(General Carl) Spaatz possessed a good measure of (a)

necessary ingredient of a successful general—the ability to
inspire trust in both superiors and subordinates. His chief
lieutenant, Jimmy Doolittle, in an oral-history interview with
Ronald R. Fogleman, then a major, stated, “I idolize
General Spaatz. He is perhaps the only man that I have
ever been closely associated with whom I have never
known to make a bad decision.” This praise, coming from a
man of enormous physical and moral courage and high
intellect, speaks for itself.

—Dr. Richard Davis, published in General Carl Spaatz,

Aerospace Power Journal, Winter 1997 First CSAF, 1947-1948

Education and training at the operational level allow Airmen to integrate expertise to
produce operational effects for Air Force missions. At this level, education assumes a
larger role in an Airman’s development. Intermediate developmental education is
intended to enhance professional competence. Operational-level education focuses on
furthering expertise across related specialties and increasing leadership responsibilities.
Operational-level training continues to build tactical skills and develops professional
competence.

Operational education, training, and experience may consist of:

 Intermediate developmental education.

 Joint professional military education.

 Professional continuing education programs.

 Advanced academic degree programs.

2
For additional information on diversity in the Air Force, see AFPD 36-70, Diversity.
 Education with industry.

 Fellowships.

 Specialty schools/advanced training.

 Experience through career broadening assignments within the Air Force.

 Training through assignments at the major command or combatant command level.

During an operation, decisions have usually to be made at

once; there may be no time to review the situation or even
to think it through…. If the mind is to emerge unscathed
from this relentless struggle with the unforeseen, two
qualities are indispensable: First, an intellect that, even in
the darkest hour, retains some glimmerings of the inner
light [commander’s vision] which leads to truth; and second,
the courage to follow this faint light wherever it may lead.

—Karl von Clausewitz, On War

The following examples describe elements of operational competence: Majors will be

expected to perform duties as flight commanders or operations officers to gain skills at a
higher level in the squadron and complete intermediate developmental education or a
selected graduate-level degree program to further their learning as maturing
professionals. Noncommissioned officers complete the basic enlisted professional
military education requirements based on their time in service. Civilian personnel at this
level fill positions with greater organizational and technical responsibilities. As with their
military counterparts, they may be selected to attend an advanced academic degree
program; Service schools, such as intermediate developmental education; or education
with industry.

The leadership study, “General Creech and the Transformation of Tactical Air
Command,” in Appendix E is provided to present operational competence in a concrete
and demonstrable setting.

Strategic Vision

At this level, Airmen combine highly developed personal and people/team institutional
competencies to apply broad organizational competencies. They develop a deep
understanding of Air Force capabilities and how Airmen achieve synergistic results and
desired effects with their operational capabilities. They also understand how the Air
Force operates within joint, multinational, and interagency relationships. At this level,
an Airman’s required competencies transition from the integration of people with
missions to leading and directing exceptionally complex and multi-tiered organizations.

At this level of leadership, an Airman employs military capabilities, applying the

operational and strategic arts with a thorough understanding of capabilities of units, the
Air Force at large, and joint and coalition forces. The Airman with strategic vision has
an enterprise perspective, with a comprehension of the structure and relationships in
the overall enterprise with which he or she is involved. This perspective requires an
awareness of the processes of our government and of the global, regional, and cultural
issues surrounding a given mission. Strategic thinking is imperative at this level,
emphasizing the need for a broad vision and adaptability to circumstances for which
earlier leadership challenges in his or her career have prepared the Airman. Managing
organizations and resources become more significant to exercising leadership at this
level.

Hindenburg looked back to Hannibal’s Battle of

Cannae, and made his disposition to fight the
Russians at Tannenberg. Napoleon studied
the campaigns of Alexander the Great and
Genghis Khan, the Mongol. The navies draw
their inspiration from the Battle at Actium in the
time of the Romans, and the sea fight of
Trafalgar. In the development of airpower, one
has to look ahead and not backward, and
figure out what is going to happen, not too
much what has happened. That is why the
older services have been psychologically unfit
to develop this new arm to the fullest extent
practicable with the methods and means at
hand.

—Brigadier General Billy Mitchell

The level of strategic vision includes challenges to gain breadth of experience and
leadership perspective (e.g., educational opportunities; training focused on the
institutional Air Force; joint, intergovernmental, business, and international views).
Senior developmental education strengthens an Airman’s grasp of the complexities
required to operate at this level of leadership. Strategic vision focuses on the effects an
Airman can have across a major command, a theater, the Air Force, or even other
Services or the Department of Defense. A commander of Air Force forces dual-hatted
as a joint force air component commander, the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force,
or a Senior Executive Service civilian responsible for Service personnel policies operate
at this level. Senior leaders need strategic comprehension and competence, as well as
broad perspectives and the ability to effectively lead in an expeditionary environment. At
the strategic level of leadership, Airmen receive further opportunities to expand their
breadth of experience and have the greatest ability to impact and support the Air
Force’s role in military operations. 3

Education, training, and experience at the strategic vision level help an Airman develop
the skills to form accurate frames of reference, make sound decisions, uncover
underlying connections to deal with more challenging issues, and engage in creative,
innovative thinking that recognizes new solutions and new options. At this level,
education assumes a predominant role in an Airman’s development. Education
emphasizes understanding of broad concepts and offers insights into complex issues
not commonly available in operational environments. It focuses on the institutional Air
Force and joint, interagency, business, and international views. Exercises and
wargames provide opportunities to validate training and education. Development at the
strategic level is commonly presented through:

 Senior developmental education.

 Operational assignments.

 Exercises and wargames.

 Self-development.

 Mentoring.

At the strategic vision level, assignment to senior command (for officers) or staff (for all
Airmen) duties in both Service and joint or coalition organizations round out the skills of
the Airman through experiential growth. Senior developmental education programs,
such as Air War College or the Senior Noncommissioned Officer Academy, improve
breadth of professional development.

The leadership study, “Strategic Noncommissioned Officer Leadership and Establishing

a Strategic Vision for the Enlisted Force,” in Appendix F is provided to present strategic
vision in a concrete and demonstrable setting.

3
Policy guidance on force development through the leadership levels can be found in AFI 36-2640,
Executing Total Force Development, and AFI 36-2618, The Enlisted Force Structure.
The greatest lesson of this war has been the extent to which air, land, and
sea operations can and must be coordinated by joint planning and unified
command.

—General Henry H. “Hap” Arnold

 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

LEADERSHIP COMPONENTS
Last Updated: 8 August 2015

Good leaders are people who have a passion to

succeed…. To become successful leaders, we must first
learn that no matter how good the technology or how shiny
the equipment, people-to-people relations get things done
in our organizations. People are the assets that determine
our success or failure. If you are to be a good leader, you
have to cultivate your skills in the arena of personal
relations.

—General Ronald R. Fogleman,

CSAF, 1994-1997

In the Air Force, leadership is comprised of two main components: institutional

competencies and leadership actions. These are intrinsic to all Airmen, building on the
foundation laid by the core values. Leaders apply these components at all three
leadership levels: tactical expertise, operational competence, and strategic vision.

Institutional Competencies

The nature and scope of leadership challenges, as well as the methods by which
leadership is exercised, differ based on the level of leadership and responsibility.
Leadership at the tactical level is predominantly direct and face-to-face, first exercised
at the junior officer and noncommissioned officer levels. As leaders ascend the
organizational ladder to the operational level, leadership tasks become more complex
and sophisticated, accomplished most regularly at the field grade officer and senior
noncommissioned officer levels. Strategic leaders have responsibility for large
organizations or systems, and deal with issues requiring more interorganizational
cooperation and longer timelines. Senior officers, routinely at the general officer rank,
the most senior enlisted personnel, and civilians in the Senior Executive Service
perform most often at this level.

As leaders move through successively higher echelons in the Air Force, they need a
wider portfolio of competencies, those typically gained at previous levels of leadership.
As military and civilian leaders progress within the Air Force, they serve in more
complex and interdependent organizations, have increased personal responsibility and
authority, and require significantly different competencies than their subordinates. As
leaders advance into the most complex and highest levels of the Air Force or become
involved in the strategic arena, the ability to conceptualize and integrate becomes
increasingly important. Leaders at this level focus on establishing the fundamental
conditions for operations to deter wars, fight wars, or conduct operations other than war.
They also create organizational structures needed to deal with future requirements.

The personal competencies are among the first taught to new Airmen; for example, they
are key elements of officer and enlisted accession training. While personnel at all levels
of leadership use these competencies to varying degrees, company grade officers and
junior to mid-ranking enlisted members most extensively use them. Curricula for the
Noncommissioned Officer Academy and Squadron Officer School emphasize the
importance of personal competencies. The people/team competencies are emphasized
more for field grade officers and senior noncommissioned officers. Intermediate
developmental education, such as Air Command and Staff College or the Senior
Noncommissioned Officer Academy, places great stock in the education of these
competencies. Senior developmental education, such as Air War College and the Chief
Master Sergeant Leadership Course, is the provenance of organizational competencies.

Leadership Actions

You don't lead by hitting people over the head—that's

assault, not leadership.

—President Dwight David Eisenhower

Air Force leaders act in a decisive manner to influence their subordinates through
techniques that include communication, motivation, inclusive collaboration, and setting
of standards. The result is a unit able to effectively perform a mission. Air Force
leaders also improve their unit’s abilities through development via education, training,
experience, and mentoring. The result is an enhanced ability to accomplish the unit’s
assigned missions. Leaders influence and improve their units in order to accomplish
their military mission.

 Influence. Leaders motivate and inspire people by creating a vision of a desirable

end-state and keeping them moving in the right direction to achieve that vision. To
do this, leaders tailor their behavior toward their fellow Airmen’s need for motivation,
achievement, sense of belonging, recognition, self-esteem, and control over their
lives.

 Improve. Leaders foster growth by insisting their people focus attention on the
aspects of a situation, mission, or project they control. Challenge should be an
integral part of every job; for people to learn and excel, they must be motivated.
Leaders should provide challenging and enlightening experiences. It is important to
 identify and analyze success to make the underlying causes and behaviors
permanent and pervasive, not temporary and specific. Leaders encourage the
learning process by formally recognizing individual and unit success, no matter how
large or small. Leaders create more leaders.

 Accomplish. Air Force leaders influence people, improve their abilities, and direct
their activities to accomplish their military mission. Leaders ensure the effects that
successfully achieve desired objectives. Leaders learn their subordinates’ strengths,
and apply those strengths to create more unit cohesiveness, and improve
operational outcomes.
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

CONCLUSION
Last Reviewed: 8 August 2015

If we should have to fight, we should be prepared to

do so from the neck up instead of from the neck
down.

—General James H. Doolittle

General Doolittle leading the
18 April 1942 raid on Tokyo.

Leadership is fundamental to the US Air Force. Creating future Air Force leaders is
the responsibility of the current leaders, and force development is their tool to do so. By
using the organized approach of developing leaders from the tactical expertise level,
through operational competence, leading to the most senior strategic vision levels in the
Air Force, the Service will ensure its continued preeminent position in the world. The
Airman’s perspective and core values provide the foundation for developing and
nurturing the Airmen of today and tomorrow. Through the force development framework,
the Air Force will educate, train, and provide the experiences necessary to grow our
future Airmen and develop the leadership attributes required to meet the challenges of a
constantly changing and extremely complex international security environment. Leaders
are inextricably linked to mission effectiveness; developing Airmen with a deliberate
process enables the Air Force to produce the requisite leaders. Leadership and force
development will continue to provide the Air Force with its most valuable asset:
its motivated and superbly qualified Airmen.
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

APPENDIX A: THE OATHS OF OFFICE AND ENLISTMENT

Last Updated: 8 August 2015

Oath of Office Oath of Enlistment

I (FULL NAME), I (FULL NAME),

HAVING BEEN APPOINTED A (Grade in

which appointed) IN THE UNITED
STATES AIR FORCE,

DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR (OR AFFIRM) DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR (OR AFFIRM)

THAT I WILL SUPPORT AND DEFEND THAT I WILL SUPPORT AND DEFEND
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED
STATES AGAINST ALL ENEMIES STATES AGAINST ALL ENEMIES
FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC,

THAT I WILL BEAR TRUE FAITH AND THAT I WILL BEAR TRUE FAITH AND
ALLEGIANCE TO THE SAME, ALLEGIANCE TO THE SAME,

THAT I TAKE THIS OBLIGATION

FREELY WITHOUT ANY MENTAL
RESERVATION OR PURPOSE OF
EVASION

AND THAT I WILL WELL AND AND THAT I WILL OBEY THE ORDERS
FAITHFULLY DISCHARGE THE DUTIES OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
OF THE OFFICE UPON WHICH I AM STATES AND THE ORDERS OF THE
ABOUT TO ENTER, OFFICERS APPOINTED OVER ME
ACCORDING TO REGULATIONS AND
THE UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY
JUSTICE,

SO HELP ME GOD.* SO HELP ME GOD.*

*Airmen may choose to omit this line.

Why we administer an oath of office or enlistment:

 Legal Requirements. Federal law (5 U.S.C. §3331 for the oath of office used for
officers and civilians; 10 U.S.C. §502 for the oath of enlistment) requires persons
enlisting in the Armed Forces, or persons elected or appointed to a position of honor
or profit in the government of the United States, to subscribe to an oath before
beginning in the position. Any individual enlisting in, or elected or appointed to an
office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed Services, takes the
appropriate oath, as shown above.

 Ethical Purpose. By executing the oath of office/enlistment when they accept the
commission or appointment, Airmen make a promise—an ethical agreement or bond
of a person’s word.

Airmen commit to the basic core values, placing service to the Constitution before self.
It is where we place integrity on the line by giving our word as our bond. It is where we
swear (or affirm) to “well and faithfully” discharge our duties, or obey orders to do so,
thus committing ourselves to excellence. The oaths are distinct in that the allegiance
established is to the ideals of the Constitution, not to any individual or organization.
This source for the oaths gives them their greatest strength.
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

APPENDIX B: CODE OF CONDUCT FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED

FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES
Last Reviewed: 8 August 2015

Executive Order 10631--Code of Conduct for members of the Armed Forces of the
United States 1

Source: The provisions of Executive Order 10631 of Aug. 17, 1955, appear at 20 FR
6057, 3 CFR, 1954-1958 Comp., p. 266, unless otherwise noted.

By virtue of the authority vested in me as President of the United States, and as

Commander in Chief of the armed forces of the United States, I hereby prescribe the
Code of Conduct for Members of the Armed Forces of the United States which is
attached to this order and hereby made a part thereof.

All members of the Armed Forces of the United States are expected to measure up to
the standards embodied in this Code of Conduct while in combat or in captivity. To
ensure achievement of these standards, members of the armed forces liable to capture
shall be provided with specific training and instruction designed to better equip them to
counter and withstand all enemy efforts against them, and shall be fully instructed as to
the behavior and obligations expected of them during combat or captivity.

[Second paragraph amended by EO 12633 of Mar. 28, 1988, 53 FR 10355, 3 CFR,

1988 Comp., p. 561]

The Secretary of Defense (and the Secretary of Transportation with respect to the
Coast Guard except when it is serving as part of the Navy 2) shall take such action as is
deemed necessary to implement this order and to disseminate and make the said Code
known to all members of the armed forces of the United States.

[Third paragraph amended by EO 11382 of Nov. 28, 1967, 32 FR 16247, 3 CFR, 1966-
1970 Comp., p. 691]

1
As published in the Federal Register: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-
order/10631.html, accessed 10 March 2009.
2
Since the promulgation of this executive order, the Coast Guard has been transferred to the Department
of Homeland Security.
Code of Conduct for Members of the United States Armed Forces

I
I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I
am prepared to give my life in their defense.

[Article I amended by EO 12633 of Mar. 28, 1988, 53 FR 10355, 3 CFR, 1988 Comp., p.
561]

II
I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the
members of my command while they still have the means to resist.

[Article II amended by EO 12633 of Mar. 28, 1988, 53 FR 10355, 3 CFR, 1988 Comp.,
p. 561]

III
If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to
escape and aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the
enemy.

IV
If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no
information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am
senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over
me and will back them up in every way.

V
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank,
service number and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost
of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its
allies or harmful to their cause.

[Article V amended by EO 12017 of Nov. 3, 1977, 42 FR 57941, 3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p.

152]

VI
I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my
actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my
God and in the United States of America.

[Article VI amended by EO 12633 of Mar. 28, 1988, 53 FR 10355, 3 CFR, 1988 Comp.,
p. 561]
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

APPENDIX C: EDUCATION AND TRAINING

Last Reviewed: 8 August 2015

Education and training facilitate the transition from one level of experience to the
next and are critical to creating productive experiences in an Airman’s
development. Force development seeks to provide experiences that deliberately
develop tactical expertise, operational competence, and strategic vision. Airmen who
are prepared for the experiences to come are not only better able to perform their
assigned duties, but also gain more from each experience. Skills training and
developmental education are foundational to preparing the Airman for developmental
experiences, and it is critical to employ the proper approach. Although interdependent,
education and training are fundamentally distinct in application. Education prepares
individuals for dynamic environments, while training is essential in developing skill sets.
Education and training are complementary and will commonly overlap; however,
recognition of the distinction between them is essential to the approach taken. Training
approaches applied to educational situations will be less effective, as will educational
approaches applied to situations in which training is more appropriate. The following
items distinguish education from training in several critical areas:

 Training is appropriate when standardized outcomes are required. Training is

focused on building specific skill sets to produce reliable, consistent results.
Although skill application involves judgment, it is the purpose of training to teach
skills that are associated with desired outcomes. (When repairing jet engines, for
example, it is desirable to have the engine meet standardized performance
measures upon completion of the repair tasks—proper training ensures a
standardized, predictable outcome.) Standardization in training and evaluation helps
commanders to ensure outcomes are predictable. Tasks (the tangible questions to
be dealt with), conditions (the operating environment where the function is to be
performed), and standards (the minimum of acceptable proficiency) are vital to the
training process.
 Education is appropriate when adaptive outcomes are desired. Education is
focused on developing critical thought that enables creative solutions. Although
creative thought may involve skill application, it is the purpose of critical thought to
form successful solutions to new problems. (An engineer, for example, is able to
design a new jet engine that exceeds all known performance measures through
application of creative design concepts and unusual materials applications.)

 Training is task dependent. Training is generally focused on a specific skill.

Although specialties may be quite complex, each is composed of elements having
 distinct tasks that when correctly performed lead to successful, predictable
outcomes. (When operating a radar system, for example, power-up is distinct from
data recall operations and each task is required, but each task is distinct in the steps
taken—proper training ensures the proper steps are followed in the proper sequence
to successfully operate the system.)
 Education is process dependent. Education is generally focused on combining
familiar and unfamiliar information to produce a suggested course of action. The
intellectual demands of consolidating past experiences and ideas with new
experiences and unfamiliar information to produce new ideas depend on the process
of critical thought. (Radar data, for example, only becomes useful when analyzed
and screened to produce relevant information—the intellect required to make sense
of multiple items forms the process of critical thought.)

 Training is technically specific, focusing on specific situations and the tools of that
specialty. Training is intended to develop skill sets that are generally associated
with specific duty requirements. While some skill sets are generally universal (such
as computer skills), specialty training is specific to a particular skill set. Skill sets are
generally associated with specific duty requirements and the tools of that specialty.
Training is focused on specific situations and the tools of that specialty. (A tanker
boom operator, for example, would not be prepared to take on the duty requirements
of a pararescue Airman or vice versa—each has received training that is specific to
the technical tools of his or her duties.)
 Education is not dependent on a specific situation. Because education seeks to
develop critical thinking skills, it attempts to prepare individuals for new experiences
and new challenges. While education can readily prepare individuals for known
situations, the fundamental aim is to develop individual talents to create successful
outcomes in unfamiliar situations. (For example, a weather forecaster, using a
comprehensive understanding of atmospherics, is able to predict weather patterns
across regions around the globe.)

 Training requires restrictive application. Because training is generally focused on a

specific skill set, the skills learned are usually limited to the specialty related to that
skill set. Training aims to instill certain specific skills that when applied in a
systematic and predictable way produce predictable outcomes. Training is,
therefore, generally restricted in application to the known circumstances related to
the skill set. (A jet engine mechanic, for example, would not be well equipped to
repair a piece of complex communications equipment any more than an electronics
technician could be expected to repair a jet engine.)
 Education requires transformative application. Knowledge and skills, such as
critical thinking, that are cultivated during education are of great benefit in unfamiliar
circumstances. Education provides the individual with logic skills that encourage
creative thought and allows individuals to create new solutions to unfamiliar
problems. In application, education is most beneficial when transitioning from the
known to the unknown. (An engineering team, for example, confronted with the task
 of repairing an unfamiliar foreign communications network devises a successful
solution using equipment that is both familiar and foreign.)

 Training is most effective within defined parameters. Training develops skill sets
and the talent to successfully cope with deviations from normal, within the bounds of
the specialty. Training is skill specific and variations from those normally expected
circumstances are also limited to that skill set. (An aircraft hydraulics specialist, for
example, is trained to deal with hydraulic systems and expected problems, but would
likely not be as successful in coping with an unfamiliar hydraulic system that
experiences an unfamiliar failure.)
 Education is most effective outside defined parameters. The essential strength of
education is to prepare individuals to create successful outcomes in unfamiliar
situations. The value of education is most apparent when the individual is
confronted with creating solutions beyond the set of parameters in which they may
normally operate. (A hydraulic specialist, for example, relying on an understanding
of hydraulic principles and system functions is able to create a solution to an
unfamiliar failure.)

 Training is most effective in stable, expected environments. Training generally

serves to impart skills necessary for success in known situations and circumstances.
Circumstances that are known as normal operating environments and situations that
can be anticipated may be considered as occurring within an expected environment.
Training provides the skills necessary for success in stable environments.
(Emergency drills and realistic exercises, for example, help develop skills to cope
with anticipated scenarios under stress or in critical situations.)
 Education is most effective within unexpected environments. In unexpected or
unanticipated situations there are no procedures or checklists to provide guidance.
Skill sets generally become less applicable in scenarios that have not been seen or
practiced. Education provides the tools necessary to cope with new challenges. It is
in rapidly changing environments that produce unexpected problems that education
can provide the mental talents to succeed. (A fire fighter, for example, when being
confronted with unmanageable flames, understands the mechanics of fires to
successfully egress the situation.)

 Training value diminishes with uncertainty. The further the situation progresses
from the talents of the individual, the less effective the individual becomes in
implementing a successful solution. Because training is focused on a specialized
skill set, those circumstances that fall outside of the skill set produce a greater
amount of uncertainty. Thus the value of skill set training is reduced in the face of
uncertainty.
 Education value increases with uncertainty. Education provides the tools for
innovation and creative thought. In circumstances of new challenges and unfamiliar
situations, education can allow individuals to create solutions to reduce uncertainty
 and implement successful solutions. (Combat presents leaders with many
opportunities to experience unfamiliar situations, but relying on historical precedents,
lessons learned in wargames and exercises, and past personal experience, leaders
can develop successful strategies and tactics to prevail.)

 Training is not inherent in education. Learning can take place in individuals having
few specialized skills. Even in unstructured environments, learning can proceed
successfully. Education involves the process of learning new concepts and/or
developing logic talents to create new thought. There are many examples of
successful artists creating great works without a formal training in the medium. It is
creative talent that is among the most beneficial results of education.
 Education is inherent in training. Basic talents are critical to learning. Individuals,
for example, should be able to read proficiently to access training materials.
Individuals must also have a good grasp of vocabulary to understand training terms
and concepts. Subjects such as reading, vocabulary, mathematics, and similar
topics are the product of education. Training cannot take place without first having
individuals who meet the qualifications to receive training. Training that exceeds the
qualifications required of the participants is less effective.

 Training shows immediate benefits. Learned skills can be demonstrated almost

immediately. It is often part of the training process that individuals demonstrate the
skills acquired. Repetition of skills serves to reinforce those skills and provides a
measure of training success. (A 'three-level' technician can be placed in positions of
responsibility and produce successful outcomes as a result of training.) Training
usually produces immediate effects by imparting new skills or developing existing
skills.
 Education provides long-term benefits. Skills in critical thinking are usually not
demonstrated until encountering unfamiliar circumstances. Logic skills are also
developed over time through formal education and experience, thus are constantly
evolving and maturing. Consequently, the benefits of education are closely linked to
experience and tend to grow over time. Because logic skills are not as demonstrable
as technical skills, these talents are usually not as apparent in the short term
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

APPENDIX D: LEADERSHIP STUDY: TACTICAL EXPERTISE

Last Updated: 8 August 2015

Security Police Defense of Tan Son Nhut and Bien Hoa Air Bases, January 1968

ATTACK ORDER, 30 January 1968

From: The Presidium of the National Liberation Front Central Committee

To: - Cadres and Soldiers of the People’s Liberation Armed Forces
- Compatriots

After successive victories in recent months, the situation in-country as well as in the world
becomes very favorable for the liberation of our Country and People. The American
aggressors are being defeated and the Puppet Government is being on the way to
disintegration. Our Revolutionary Forces are grown up and become stronger than ever.
The North (VN), a large rear of the South (VN), is more and more strong and is striking the
American invaders with dead-blows.

Friendly Nations on [sic] over the world (including progressive American people)
unanimously and positively support us.

The presidium orders all Liberation Armed Forces, Political Struggle Force, members of all
Liberation Associations and other Patriotic Forces and the whole Nation to unanimously
stand up in order to:

- Destroy the enemy vital force as much as possible, defeat US and Allied troops,
and liquidate Puppet government troops.
- Break down all Puppet Government Administrative organizations and severely
punish Vietnamese traitors and tyrants.
- Establish Revolutionary Administration and make every effort to defend it,
decidedly punish and break up all enemy counterattack forces under any circumstances.
- Carry out policies in the essential line of action promulgated by the Front.

Compatriots, Cadres, and Soldiers

Move forward bravely
We will certainly win.
The Tet offensive of January, 1968, began with limited to no intelligence available to the
forces defending the installations in South Vietnam near major cities. Outside Saigon,
the 377th Security Police Squadron (377 SPS) on Tan Son Nhut Air Base and the 3rd
Security Police Squadron (3 SPS) at Bien Hoa Air Base were in normal alert condition
until 1732 on 30 January 1968, when orders came down from the commander, 7th Air
Force, putting Air Force units into “Alert Condition Red,” a posture providing the
commander with the option for using all security police and augmentees to provide the
maximum security possible over a short period of time. According to the 377 SPS
combat operations after action report, “[t]he intelligence situation for the days
immediately preceeding [sic] the attack remained relatively unchanged from the
normal.”

The descriptions below of the actions at each base vary in their styles; for Tan Son
Nhut, the information is derived from the unit after-action report, demonstrating the
dynamism of the action that called for leadership at the tactical level by numerous
members of the Security Police squadron. For Bien Hoa, the focus is on the
recollections of one member of the Security Police squadron, emphasizing the human
impact leadership can have on an individual.

Tan Son Nhut Air Base

On Tan Son Nhut, only the 377 SPS and the supporting Army Task Force (TF) 35 were
placed into Alert Condition Red, with the rest of the base in Condition Yellow. When
Alert Condition Red was implemented, three platoons of US Army personnel (TF
35) were alerted and placed on five-minute standby status as augmentation reserve
forces for the 377 SPS, under the operational control of the commander, 377 SPS.

At 0300 on 31 January 1968, the joint defense operations center (JDOC) received
notification that the US Embassy in Saigon and the Saigon radio station were under
attack. At 0320, the guard in Tower 16 at the east-southeast corner of the base
reported observing small arms fire from off base directed at the petroleum/oil/lubrication
(POL) site on the installation. Security Police were dispatched and members of the
quick reaction force (QRF) and TF 35 responded to predesignated rendezvous points.
Reports of small arms, grenade, and mortar fire began to increase dramatically from
various points around the base.

At 0340, the Security Police at the 051 bunker on the west side of the base reported
being hit by mortar or rocket fire and the rounds were landing on base. At 0344, they
reported the west perimeter fence was breached near the 051 gate. The 051 bunker
was manned by five personnel: Sergeants Louis Fischer, William Cyr, Charles Hebron,
Roger Mills, and Alonzo Coggins. Sergeant Fischer, in charge of the personnel at the
bunker, directed its defense until enemy fire killed him, along with Sergeants Cyr,
Hebron, and Mills. Sergeant Coggins survived, but was severely wounded. The assault
on the west side of the base, centered around the 051 bunker, was the main thrust of
the attack on Tan Son Nhut.
 051 Bunker, Tan Son Nhut Air Base, January 1968
At 0529, enemy troops
were sighted by Tower 1 Security Police near the Alpha/Echo sector line, to the
northeast of the 051 bunker. Security Police deployed to a main line of resistance
(MLR) from east to west to act as a blocking force, as the enemy had penetrated
approximately 600 meters into the base in an area approximately 300 meters wide.
Intense defensive resistance by the Security Police, along with TF 35 personnel and
forces of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN). stopped the attack, and by 0603,
some enemy forces were observed withdrawing through a break in the perimeter fence
south of the 051 gate.

At 0630, The US Army’s C Troop, 3rd Squadron, 4th Cavalry, from Cu Chi arrived in the
area after fighting its way down the highway to the base. This counterattack by friendly
forces outside the base allowed the defenders on Tan Son Nhut to mount their own
counterattack, which began at 0635.

Small arms fire continued around the perimeter of the base until 0730, with posts in the
north, east, and south sectors reporting small arms and automatic weapons fire. At
0725, the defensive lines on base received heavy concentrations of fire to cover an
attempted enemy assault on the friendly counterattack line. This enemy fire was used
chiefly to cover the withdrawal of their wounded and the part of the main force still inside
the perimeter. Fighting continued around the base for several more hours. Several
attempts to recapture the 051 gate during this time were unsuccessful, but at 1210, 377
SPS personnel assaulted again and neutralized the enemy fire from there, recapturing
the bunker. This was the last area of the base held by the enemy. At 1217, the base
perimeter was resecured. Hostile fire continued from off base for several hours
afterwards.
Bien Hoa Air Base

Simultaneous with the attack on Tan Son Nhut, North Vietnamese and Viet Cong forces
totaling four battalions hit Bien Hoa Air Base, northeast of Saigon. At the time, it was
the busiest air base in the world, with 150 aircraft assigned and numerous transient
aircraft flowing through. When the attack occurred, the key thrust of the enemy assault
centered on the east side of the base around a heavy bunker built originally by the
French, named Bunker Hill 10 by the 3 SPS. The following transcription of an interview
with Senior Master Sergeant (SMSgt) (Retired) William “Pete” Piazza provides a clear
view of the intensity of the fighting at the time. For his actions at Bunker Hill 10,
Sergeant Piazza was awarded the Silver Star. During the battle, as a staff sergeant, he
was in charge of an ammunition resupply team, and had been dispatched to Bunker Hill
10 to resupply the squadron operations officer, Captain Reginald Maisey, at the bunker
where he and 30 other personnel were engaged in a firefight.

Bunker Hill 10, Bien Hoa Air Base, January 1968

“We brought slap flares to Captain Maisey. He had already gone through two boxes
of them; if you’ve ever seen elephant grass, you can hardly see anything in it. At
0330, the first RPG [rocket-propelled grenade] round hit. We were all behind the
bunker at the time. There was a QRT [quick reaction team], a SAT [security alert
team], even the fire department was there.

“The first RPG round hit. The M-60 gun was sitting on top of the bunker. When it got
hit the M-60 fell over the edge; it was just sitting on the sandbags. We all turned
around and looked at each other, and somebody said, ‘Look!’ and pointed up. If
you’ve ever seen the movie Superman, all we saw was a B-40 round coming right
over the top of the bunker into the elephant grass [with sparks flying out looking like a
cape]. It never went off; it was a dud. Everybody just looked at each other, then
somebody said, ‘Hit the dirt,’ then a ‘Boom!’

“The next round hit the bunker and that’s when the fire department personnel
decided to get the hell out of there. Captain Maisey had the 145th Aviation Battalion
coordinator that was supposed to be in CSC (central security control) if we needed
him because we didn’t have communication radios with them. We’d call CSC who in
turn would call 145th aviation headquarters and then the choppers would go. Well,
the coordinator was out at Bunker Hill 10 with us, so we had no way of talking with
the Army. He was sitting behind the bunker with an M-16 with the XM-148 grenade
launcher (which evolved into the M-203 rifle with grenade launcher), sitting there not
knowing what to do with it; he’s a pilot, not a rifleman. I gave him my CAR-15 [rifle]
and I took the XM-148 with the M-16 attached, and took the rounds he had.

“I could see Charlie because I was on the right-hand side of the bunker. I could see
the firing coming at us. There were two posts out in front of that, both were Quan
Canh [Vietnamese Air Force security police] posts…. That was our first information
that Charlie was coming because the guys that got out alive ran down to Bunker Hill
10 in their underwear screaming, ‘VC, VC, VC!’

“We got into a situation like, when you’re sitting in a theater watching a western, one
guy comes out and fires from behind a building, the other guy waits till the round hits,
then comes out and shoots, then ducks back behind the building. Charlie fired 13
RPGs at us, and I fired 9 or 10 rounds. My last round hit ‘em, because there was a
big explosion, and all I saw were three bodies and a big flash. I must have hit
whatever ammunition they had with ‘em. It was a lucky shot.

“Before they blew, they fired a shot that hit here [pointing to a photo of the bunker,
low firing point slit]; I figured that was the one that killed Captain Maisey. He was
inside, talking on the radio, and the 13th round, because I got ‘em on the next round,
burrowed through the bunker and caught him square in the back. Unfortunately,
there wasn’t enough light inside; we knew somebody had been hit and killed, but
didn’t know who.

“When the 145th Aviation Battalion started firing with miniguns from gunships and
such, I decided to get the hell out of Dodge and went inside the bunker. I tripped
over the person. We picked him up and carried him outside, but we still did not know
it was Captain Maisey at the time. Matter of fact, we didn’t know it was him until the
sun came up. [For his efforts defending Bien Hoa Air Base from the North
Vietnamese attack during Tet on 30-31 January 1968, Captain Maisey was awarded
the Air Force Cross posthumously.]

“I was about 24-25 years old, not the youngest guy, not the oldest guy out there.
One of the things that really kept everybody together was this lieutenant colonel here
(gesturing to Lt Col Kent Miller, 3 SPS commander, seated next to him) got on the
radio and he started talking to us like he was right with us, and he started telling us,
‘Understand, calm down, calm down; you know what you gotta do; tell me what’s
going on,’ in a calm voice. It really calmed everybody down. One of the guys told me
a couple of hours later when the colonel came in and told ‘em ‘you guys do what you
gotta do, I’ll be on the radio and be the communicator to make sure everybody knows
what’s going on. You take care of the basics and let me do this;’ he took over the
radio and he just started talking to us. I say the old man calmed us down, and he
did. That really was a plus factor. A lot of officers you hear about, ‘I’m going to lead
you in the charge,’ well, he led us in a way that a lot of people would not think of, and
today I know several officers that follow in this gentleman’s footsteps, in that they
don’t try to get out in front like Custer and yell charge. Take your time, move along
cautiously, you know what’s going on, what you’ve got to do, so do your job.”

Leadership in the Security Police during Tet, 31 January 1968 1

These very abbreviated descriptions of operations during the battles for Tan Son Nhut
and Bien Hoa are necessary for full comprehension of what occurred, but are only part
of what is needed to understand why the US forces were victorious. The leadership,
specifically the tactical leadership by the officers, noncommissioned officers, and
Airmen of the 377 and 3 SPS, proved to be the key to their success. Leaders at all
levels overcame inhibiting factors to accomplish their mission.

A common theme among veterans of this set of actions was the frustration with the lack
of training and equipment to accomplish the duties they were tasked to perform. There
was a continuing challenge for the unit leadership to obtain the requisite equipment they
believed was necessary to perform their tasks. At Tan Son Nhut, the Airmen on the
MLR had chronic shortness of ammunition: “We had a severe problem with ammo
resupply,” stated one member who felt the lack of ammunition on his post. At Bien Hoa,
the resupply system established by the commander, Lt Col Kent Miller, and executed at
the NCO level, was robust, but the equipment limitations hampered its effectiveness
even so: “During the battle, some of the troops still ran out of ammunition because of a
lack of magazines. The rounds were handed out, and they had to fill their magazines.
You got bandoliers and had to strip them into the magazines yourself.”

As is common with many organizations, one of the most vexing problems dealt with by
the unit leadership was insufficient and ineffective communication. At Tan Son Nhut,
“There were big gaps in communications…the Army ran JDOC…the tower called in
forces [observed at the base perimeter], that was relayed to CSC, then to JDOC, and
we got the word it was friendly forces…Those ‘friendly forces’ were actually NVA [North
Vietnamese Army] battalions.” For one Airman posted in an internal patrol on the base,
information that an attack had commenced came abruptly: “The only thing that alerted
me to the attack was the helicopter gunships going over my head, shooting those
miniguns, and the casings were hitting my helmet.” At Bien Hoa, the squadron
commander, having been in the position for 11 ½ months before the battle, continued to

1
Quotations throughout are from first-person interviews with veterans of the battles at Tan Son Nhut and
Bien Hoa. They volunteered their memories over the course of five days during a reunion of the Vietnam
Security Police Association (http://www.vspa.com/), October, 2006. The author is indebted to them for
their forthrightness and openness in discussing leadership as they observed it at that time and place.
be rankled by the lack of accurate and actionable intelligence coming from
organizations tasked to provide that information. In describing the value of intelligence
from 7th Air Force and Military Assistance Command-Vietnam (MACV), it was
“nonexistent; nonreliable [sic] anyway.”

In contrast, all members interviewed expressed praise for the leadership within their
units, reserving the highest accolades for the officers and noncommissioned officers
who demonstrated competence during the battle: “We were not trained properly, we did
not have the right equipment, intelligence was horrible, but we had some wonderful
officers and NCOs who kept it together.” “The NCO leadership really kept you alive.
You weren’t prepared for what happened, you were in shock. The NCOs led us through
that.”

“Some people didn’t get recognized for leadership until something happens and their
leadership comes out…It’s not always recognized.” In positions of command and
control, both officers and NCOs presented the strongest front of guidance and direction
for the forces in contact with the enemy. At Tan Son Nhut, the NCOIC in CSC,
Technical Sergeant (TSgt) James Bloom, provided a voice of calm and efficiency readily
recognized by the forces on the line: “If it were not for him…he was the key…he knew
what he was doing.” On one occasion, he forcibly removed an officer from CSC who
was impeding his efforts to obtain accurate information from the field. The 377 SPS
operations officer, Major Carl Bender, was not known for his approachability on a daily
basis, “Nobody liked him because he had no personality,” but during the attack, he
proved to be a rock of competence to the troops: “He was the most incredible
officer….” He was severely wounded during the battle, driving himself to the aid station,
stopping his jeep by running it into a pole, then directing the personnel how to put him
into a stretcher.

At Bien Hoa, the 3 SPS personnel reserved their highest praise for Lt Col Kent Miller,
the squadron commander. His leadership during the battle was seen as steady,
calming, and, appropriately, commanding. By his own admission, he actually made only
“about six orders during the whole battle.” He stated one of his biggest contributions
was to decide on the call signs “Big Ears 1 and 2” for listening posts. In reality, his
leadership was felt long before 0320, 31 Jan 68, as expressed by Sergeant Piazza:
“The thing that set apart the officers we had, from the colonel to Captain Maisey, the
operations officer, [and the other officers in the squadron], was that, in their hearts and
minds, if you’re going to do something for the troops you have to train them.”

Lt Col Miller initiated a training program for his forces, known as Eagle Flight, in an
effort to provide his personnel combat training. This effort was a conscious decision to
improve the survivability of Security Police even though it had to circumvent the
directive that Security Police were restricted to actions inside the base perimeter, with
the Army maintaining the responsibility to secure the perimeter outside the wire. He
obtained training from the 173rd Airborne Brigade, US Army, who were located in a
base camp to the east of Bien Hoa. His all-volunteer force received intensive air assault
training, culminating in their establishing a circular defense at a landing zone several
kilometers from the base, then patrolling back to the base. While in violation of 7th Air
Force and MACV directives, it gave the forces training and experience that proved
invaluable during Tet.

Equipment needed to perform their duties was often in short supply or nonexistent.
NCOs exercised their initiative to support their forces by working trades for weaponry
they otherwise could not obtain. The Security Police supply NCOIC at Tan Son Nhut
procured quad-.50 caliber machine guns, considerably more firepower than was
available with the standard issue M-60 machine guns, by working with contacts in
nearby Army units. These weapons proved highly effective in blunting assaults during
Tet.

Perhaps the most cogent statement made regarding the effectiveness of the tactical
leadership among the Security Police during Tet was made by Franklin Ybarbo, an
Airman during the battle at Tan Son Nhut, who said, “Regardless of how much
equipment or training we had, it was enough. The battle was fought and won with
nothing but small arms. The American initiative and ingenuity was enough to defeat the
enemy.” The military during Vietnam was overwhelmingly a conscript force, unlike
today’s all-volunteer force, but the leadership exhibited during Tet by the Security Police
assigned to Tan Son Nhut and Bien Hoa is the kind today’s forces would recognize
immediately as being effective; doing the right thing for personnel so they can do the
mission they have been assigned. The North Vietnamese Army forces attacking the air
bases were carrying their dress uniforms in their packs and had been issued new AK-47
assault rifles, with the intent that the bases would be rapidly captured and they could
march in a victory parade on the flightlines. The courage and leadership at all levels of
the men of the 377 and 3 SPS ensured this never happened. The estimate of NVA
killed at Tan Son Nhut alone was placed at over 900, as opposed to 4 Security
Policemen and 19 US Army soldiers killed. Tet was an overwhelming loss to the North
Vietnamese, thanks in good measure to the men of the Security Police.
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

APPENDIX E: LEADERSHIP STUDY: OPERATIONAL COMPETENCE

Last Updated: 8 August 2015

General Creech and the Transformation of Tactical Air Command (TAC)

General Wilbur L. “Bill” Creech was the commander of TAC from 1978 to 1984.
Recognizing the multiple demands associated with surviving and performing effectively
in the low-altitude arena, General Creech sought an appropriate blend of technology
and tactics that might help pilots return to higher altitudes where they could escape the
dangers of the low-altitude regime and improve their chances of successful target
attack. During earlier Red Flags, all starting scenarios each day presumed it was the
first minute of the first hour of a war against undegraded Warsaw Pact air defenses. No
kill removal was provided to account for surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) destroyed in
previous missions, and low-level penetration to target was invariably the standard
practice, on the premise that radar-guided SAMs could not be negated from higher
altitudes. Not only did the resulting simulated loss rate to enemy antiaircraft artillery
(AAA) and short-range infrared SAMs soar to a point where many pilots concluded that
they could not survive in actual combat, the actual aircraft accident rate rose
dramatically as a consequence of the unforgiving nature of the training environment.
During the first two years of Red Flag, more than 30 heavily task-saturated aircrews lost
their lives as a result of either having flown into the ground inadvertently while
maneuvering to avoid getting locked up by a simulated threat radar or having collided in
midair during a maneuvering engagement with the aggressors.

This sobering situation starkly underscored what General Creech came to call “go-low
disease,” motivated by his concern that the emphasis on low-altitude ingress was not
only causing a needlessly high accident rate in peacetime training, but also was
jeopardizing aircrew survivability and future flexibility in actual combat while, at the
same time, constraining TAC’s appreciation of the equipment needed to perform the
ground-attack mission more effectively. In response, General Creech insisted on new
tactics aimed at making defense rollback the first order of business. The emphasis
instead swung to developing equipment and tactics that would enable the opening of a
medium-altitude window because the most lethal Soviet SAMs could not be successfully
underflown within the heart of their engagement envelopes. Aircrew proficiency at low-
level operations was maintained as a fallback measure. The new focus concentrated
on sanitizing the air defense environment by taking out or neutralizing enemy SAMs as
a first priority, so attacking aircraft could operate more safely as soon as possible at
higher altitudes beyond the lethal reach of AAA.
At the same time, General Creech eliminated the initial “core squadron” mission
planning practice and instead put TAC’s air division commanders in charge of scenarios
on a rotating basis. There emerged a heightened emphasis on acquiring the needed
equipment that would render medium altitude tactics both possible in principle and also
effective. In addition, new capabilities and tactics for operating at night were pushed
hard and ultimately validated at Red Flag. Thanks to that, the character of Red Flag
shifted notably toward something more closely approximating realistic large-force
employment against an enemy whose defenses would eventually be degraded in actual
combat. The result was more real-world training realism, as opposed to the false
realism of an impenetrable enemy defense, which was finally understood in hindsight to
have produced more negative than positive training.

Getting Serious About Electronic Warfare

Closely connected to this stress on greater realism and greater emphasis on enemy air
defense suppression was a mounting concern over the need to introduce the
complexities of electronic combat into peacetime tactical training, especially those
connected with coping effectively in a heavy communications jamming environment.
Both during his previous assignment as the commander of the USAF’s Electronic
Systems Division and later as TAC commander, General Creech figured prominently in
this effort to integrate a serious program of offensive and defensive electronic combat
into the Air Force’s training repertoire. In 1981, he initiated Green Flag, a Red Flag-like
exercise conducted biennially at Nellis with special emphasis on electronic warfare and
SAM suppression.

During the first Green Flag, General Creech directed that communications jamming be
turned on at the outset and left on throughout the operation just as the Soviets would do
in actual combat. As a result, 72 percent of the training sorties flown were ineffective.
That ended once and for all the assumption that one could overcome enemy jamming
efforts merely by manually changing radio frequencies.

TAC Turnaround

Along with the major advances in aircrew training and proficiency outlined above, a
largely unsung but nonetheless groundbreaking parallel improvement also took place in
the organizational efficiency of TAC during the late 1970s and early 1980s under
General Creech’s command. Earlier in the 1970s, upward of half of TAC’s $25 billion
inventory of aircraft were not mission-ready at any given time, and as many as 200 of its
3,800 aircraft were classified as “hangar queens”—grounded for three weeks or more
due to a lack of maintenance or needed parts. Moreover, pilots who required a
minimum of 20 hours of flying time a month to remain operationally ready were getting
only half that amount in most cases.

TAC suffered high maintenance inefficiencies and an unacceptably high accident rate
that was partly caused by them. Air Force leadership accommodated this financial
crunch by raiding its operations and maintenance accounts. All of this was heavily
driven by the top-down management style that had come to afflict the entire US defense
establishment as a result of Defense Secretary Robert McNamara’s dogma of
centralization from the business world which, by the end of the Vietnam war, had
pervaded almost all walks of American military life.

Among the many pernicious results of this affliction was a mounting lapse in integrity at
the operational level, in which small lies about unit performance became ever larger
sins of self-deception which ultimately undermined both mission readiness and safety.
Driven by a perceived need to worship statistics for their own sake rather than the
underlying facts they were supposed to represent and by a bureaucracy which insisted
on hearing the “right” answers irrespective of reality, USAF aircrews would falsify their
mission reports to show they had performed events such as inflight refuelings and
weapons deliveries which they had in fact not conducted. Thanks to the same felt
compulsion, unit supervisors would record takeoffs which had been delayed by
maintenance as “on time” and assign aircraft to the flight schedule which had not been
properly released by maintenance control. In sum, bureaucratic gridlock and an overlay
of regulations and statistical imperatives, aggravated by diminished funds, had come to
stifle morale and to discourage initiative and innovation at the command’s grass-roots
level.

With the strong backing of Air Force Chief of Staff General David Jones, General
Creech quickly sized up the situation and proceeded to invert the traditional top-down
centralization of TAC by imposing a strict bottom-up approach to the organization and
management of his command, in the process forcing authority and responsibility down
to its very lowest reaches. At the same time, he introduced a radically new and different
tone by replacing the former pattern of leadership intimidation and bluster with what he
called “reasoned command.” The new watchword became management through
motivation rather than regulation, on the premise that professionals will willingly assume
greater responsibility when they are treated with dignity and given a sense of personal
ownership of their contribution to the larger whole.

General Creech’s leadership philosophy was based on a recognition that loyalty was a
two-way street and on the premise that if a commander always looked up to those at the
front, he would never talk down to them. It was profoundly intolerant of centrocratic
practices and recognized an organization can only be as successful as those at the
bottom are willing to make it. Toward that end, General Creech emphasized focusing
more on the product than on the process. He sought to minimize excess regulation,
which he believed merely depressed the spirit and stifled motivation. He also sought to
replace inhibitions on communication with full openness, and he shifted his
headquarters function from restricting to facilitating. Above all, he constantly stressed
that there were no poor units, only poor leaders.

General Creech insisted that a mistake was not a crime and a crime was not a mistake,
and he incessantly played up the importance of honoring the difference between the two
in meting out discipline for mishaps and lesser oversights. His abiding goal was to
infuse the system with trust and respect so coherence and control might be maintained
through incentive rather than through top-down authoritarianism. He sought to instill
throughout the ranks an appreciation of the crucial difference between quality control
and quality creation and to focus predominantly on the latter, which demanded both
different language and a different mindset. To achieve it, he strove to inhibit excess
micromanagement of inputs from above. He also spotlighted pride, a quality that
needed creating and sustaining by empowering those at the working level to show
initiative, while providing for responsibility and accountability at every level.

As General Creech later explained it, “the villain wasn’t any particular person, but the
whole system.” By systematically pushing decisions down to the level of those front-line
supervisors who actually carried them out, the risk of poor decisions was sharply
reduced. General Creech personally played a lead role in selecting, mentoring, and
grooming those at the working level who showed the greatest promise for future
leadership, motivated by his credo that the cardinal imperative of a leader is to produce
more leaders. His four simple “pass/fail” standards of conduct expected of all
subordinate TAC leaders entailed a staunch refusal to countenance any manifestations
of lying, displays of temper, abuse of position, or lapses in integrity.

The payoff of this turnaround in the TAC culture soon became widely apparent. Time
came to be used more efficiently, quality in all domains of command activity went up,
and excellence became a TAC-wide fixation. Units became competitive in all major
areas of endeavor, particularly in maintenance delivery and flight operations. Unit
commanders were encouraged to fly more often and to lead from the front. All of this
generated measurable improvements in all major categories of performance with no
more aircraft, personnel, or money than TAC had when General Creech first assumed
command. He narrowed the gap in trust between TAC’s leaders and led, installed a
system based on mutual respect and mutual support, and instilled a quality mindset at
every level, basing the product (TAC’s organizational efficiency and mission readiness)
on persuasion rather than ex cathedra orders. The ensuing effect of reducing the
number of TAC’s aircraft that were down for maintenance at any given moment by
three-fourths yielded an inventory availability and increase in combat capability from
existing assets that would have cost more than $12 billion had they been purchased
anew.

These reforms eventually permeated all elements of TAC down to the lowest front-line
operators, in the process fundamentally changing their former roles, relationships, and
responsibilities by enhancing the creativity and commitment of those who ultimately
determined the command’s success. The impact of the reforms on TAC’s morale
quotient was palpable. TAC’s first-term reenlistment rate increased by 136 percent, a
resounding vote of approval for the new, decentralized, and team-based approach to
management. Other early returns included a substantial increase in available flying
hours for aircrews, better quality of aircraft maintenance, and a sharp increase in TAC’s
overall mission readiness rates.

Impact of “Robusting”

In a significant departure from previous resource management practice which he called

unit “robusting,” General Creech dramatically increased the combat capability of TAC’s
wings simply by applying a new organizing principle. Instead of sharing shortages
across all three squadrons in a given wing, as had been the previous practice, General
Creech took the existing assets of a wing (both assigned aircrews and aircraft) and built
up two of the three squadrons to full strength rather than spreading the pain equally
among all three.
The corrective measures instituted by General Creech in 1978, with full Air Staff
support, established explicit criteria for “robust” units, namely, those that were manned
and equipped at a level that made them ready to meet their wartime tasking. The
advantages of this new approach included greater honesty in unit status reporting by
highlighting rather than hiding shortages and by sharing a wing’s strengths rather than
its weaknesses. Robusting made TAC’s wings better organized for prompt deployment
to meet wartime obligations by preventing the suboptimization of key assets and by
putting pressure where it belonged, namely, on resource suppliers so that unit tasking
would be more in line with actually available resources.

In all, these reforms lent a sharper focus to authority and accountability and got unit-
level peer pressure working in positive rather than negative directions. They also drove
authority, accountability, and a sense of ownership to the lowest possible levels
throughout TAC, giving everyone in the system both pride of involvement and a
personal stake in the product. In short order, TAC went from a vertically- to a
horizontally-organized command. Each squadron became responsible for its own 24
assigned aircraft, with all disciplines working together in small teams within the
squadron to get the job done. Along the way, paperwork was reduced by 65 percent,
and the average time required to deliver a needed part was lowered from three and a
half hours to eight minutes. The net result was a genuine personalizing of a once-
impersonal system, as well as a doubling of the number of peacetime training sorties
flown during a given training period with no increase in operating cost.

In an enduring legacy of the TAC turnaround, this transformation in management style

and organizational efficiency instituted during General Creech’s tenure later swept the
rest of the Air Force. The team-based, decentralized approach to management flowed
from the premise that desired accomplishments are achieved by individuals and small
collectives working as teams.
 VOLUME 2 LEADERSHIP

APPENDIX F: LEADERSHIP STUDY: STRATEGIC VISION

Last Updated: 8 August 2015

Senior Noncommissioned Officer Leadership and Establishing a Strategic Vision

for the Enlisted Force 1

The Air Force enlisted corps comprises over 80% of uniformed Airmen (regular Air
Force, Air National Guard, and Air Force Reserve). Within the enlisted force structure,
Air Force senior noncommissioned officers (SNCOs) lead an enlisted corps that is
professional, technically competent, and highly motivated. The primary role of the Air
Force SNCO is to ensure mission accomplishment by providing highly effective
leadership. SNCOs are also responsible for evaluating, developing, and executing the
Service’s institutional competencies through the NCO corps at all levels of leadership.
A critical function of the SNCO is to develop an enlisted force with the required skills
and abilities to meet today’s peacetime, conflict, and contingency requirements. They
emphasize developing leaders with tactical expertise early in their careers, and with
operational competence and strategic vision when they reach the SNCO ranks and
responsibilities.

Strategic Vision Level

The strategic vision level of the enlisted corps involves senior enlisted leaders (SELs)
who have responsibilities for large organizations, and who deal with issues requiring
inter-organizational cooperation and extended timelines. Although this strategic level of
leadership normally applies to chief master sergeants (CMSgts), it can sometimes
include senior master sergeants in higher headquarters positions (Department of
Defense, combatant commands, HAF, MAJCOM, direct reporting units, field operating
agencies, and select agencies and headquarters).

From the SNCO perspective, strategic vision centers on the development of enlisted
Airmen. Taking an enterprise and holistic approach, it sets the deliberate development
path for the enlisted force. The SNCO translates this effort into an effective enlisted
force development plan by shaping, and navigating in, the environment. It is a broad
and encompassing concept that is forward looking and focused on the sustainment, re-

1
Information is a consolidation of interviews conducted in May-June 2010 by Mr. David Scott Johnson,
Air Force Research Institute, with 15 chief master sergeants (CMSgts), including the Chief Master
Sergeant of the Air Force (CMSAF). Each CMSgt was either a Combatant Command, Major Command,
numbered Air Force or wing-level Command Chief Master Sergeant or enlisted career field managers at
the Air Staff.
evaluation, and development of required competencies necessary to achieve the
desired effects in support of the joint force commander. Therefore, the strategic vision
as espoused by SELs should outline the expectations for all enlisted Airmen, providing
them with a logical, consistent, forward-looking perspective that supports the
development of the future SELs in the Air Force.

Today’s and tomorrow’s enlisted Airmen are truly “Strategic Airmen.” Our enlisted corps
is consistently required to operate outside of the traditional construct of the Air Force in
concert with or in support of sister Service, allied, coalition, federal, state, and non-
governmental operations. This ability to excel and contribute to our national objectives is
achieved by determining the required enlisted force structure necessary to be
successfully prepared for future challenges and demands. Once the required force is
determined, the SNCO sets the direction, steps, and timeline to reach that end-state.
Senior NCOs are leaders.

The Senior Enlisted Leader

The senior enlisted leader understands what it means to be an Airman from a doctrinal,
whole of government, and joint perspective. SELs work closely with senior officers,
consistently taking an enterprise-wide whole of government approach, which embraces
all levels, and understand commander’s intent, their unit’s mission, vision, and goals.
Not only must SELs understand senior officers’ intentions, they must also be able to
clearly interpret and articulate that commander’s intent to the lowest enlisted levels.
They accomplish this by understanding and articulating the linkages that each enlisted
member, regardless of rank, has to the overall success of the unit’s mission.

The SEL understands and appreciates the future requirements of the enlisted Airmen in
the joint, coalition, and interagency environments. In doing so, the SEL is able to
complement their senior officer’s leadership as they pursue their strategic vision. One of
the primary responsibilities of the SEL is to champion the continued professional
development of the enlisted corps and take up the mantle of leadership to set future
enlisted leaders up for success. SELs are the key stakeholder in maintaining the
traditions of the enlisted corps, ensuring these traditions are carried on by future
generations of NCOs and SELs.

SELs are strategic advisors and provide the enlisted perspective into the overall
strategic vision. They are an integral part of the overall strategic-level decision making
process, and are expected to serve as an “honest broker” to the senior leader as well as
champion and protect the strategic vision.

The Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, Command Chief Master Sergeants,
Career Field Managers, and other strategic Chief Master Sergeants

The Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, Command Chief Master Sergeants, and
enlisted career field managers have diverse backgrounds with experience at the
squadron, wing, headquarters, joint, and combatant command levels. Having an
enterprise-wide perspective, they are politically savvy and have developed relationships
with the other Service SELs. These SELs also follow a deliberate developmental path,
building on people/team and organizational competencies, which leads to the creation
of effective institutional leadership competencies. Overall, the Chief Master Sergeant of
the Air Force will have a balanced and diverse career built on a foundation of deliberate
tactical, operational, and strategic leadership education and training, varying
assignments at all levels within the Air Force, and joint experience.

Enlisted Development

The enlisted role is not centered around the individual, it is about service; service to the
Nation, the Air Force, and to the unit. As a result, the Air force takes a deliberate
approach to enlisted force development, which includes career progression with
increased levels of supervisory, leadership, and managerial responsibilities. The
foundation of the enlisted force development is the institutional competencies that
provide the common force developmental language and represent the leadership,
management, and warrior ethos qualities required of all Airmen.

Professional military education (PME) plays a key role in the overall development of
enlisted Airmen. PME is part of the enlisted continuum of education, which begins when
they enter the Air Force and continues throughout their careers. Although the Air Force
provides a wide range of educational schools, courses, programs and opportunities,
each enlisted member also has a personal responsibility for his or her own professional
and personal development. Because education is essential for the development of
enlisted Airmen, they are not only expected but highly encouraged to actively pursue
educational and experiential opportunities throughout their careers. Airmen should also
be educated in their roles associated with the Air Force’s interagency partners. Off-duty
education provides development by enhancing one’s intellectual capability, capacity,
and critical thinking skills. Moreover, diverse personal and professional developmental
paths provide our Airmen opportunities to undertake varying degrees of challenges and
build problem solving skills derived from new knowledge and experiences.

Support of Enduring Deployments and Contingency Operations

Support of enduring deployments and contingency operations creates a better, more

culturally aware enlisted corps. Due to the wide range of mission sets and support
requirements, such as joint expeditionary tasking and coalition support assignments,
our combat hardened enlisted corps often performs duties outside of its specifically-
trained specialty. The result is a more well-rounded and experienced enlisted member
with joint, coalition, and whole-of-government perspectives. As a result, the enlisted
corps is capable of taking on new roles and missions in support of the ever-changing
global environment. In the past, enlisted Airmen were only assigned duties within their
specialty fields. It was uncommon to find enlisted members working outside of their
specific specialty code. Today, the Air Force enlisted member can be found across the
battlespace supporting the joint force commander in many different ways. The
professional enlisted corps has transitioned from an attitude of “it’s not my job,” when
asked to perform non-specialty code tasks to “what can I do to help make the mission a
success,” regardless of what Service or nation they are supporting.
Enlisted Joint Perspectives

Today’s Airmen, across the entire Air Force, develop a joint perspective early in their
careers. For some career fields that have similar technical foundations, such as medical
and explosive ordnance disposal, initial training is conducted in a joint environment.
This joint perspective provides an understanding of other Service cultures,
competencies, and terminologies, while preserving the Air Force culture. The enlisted
force should understand the core competencies that Soldiers, Sailors, and Marines are
educated and trained in and employ. This provides them a much greater understanding
of their responsibilities to execute operations with a strategic vision, but also understand
how their Air Force competencies merge with our sister Services. Understanding of
culture, responsibilities and shared competencies builds early interoperability that is
necessary for immediate success in the joint/deployed environment.

Airmen should also be educated in their roles associated with the Air Force’s
interagency partners. Enlisted Airmen work daily to support U.S. Northern Command as
they defend the homeland. Through the National Incident Management System (NIMS)
military members are always subordinate to an interagency or local responder. They
don't take over; they enhance capabilities to save lives, property and secure the
homeland.

All Airmen should have a thorough understanding of the contributions of all joint and
total force Services. In-depth perspectives and the ability to think multi-dimensionally
are becoming increasingly important as the global nature of Air Force operations
demand that Airmen continue to deploy jointly.

Future Role of the Enlisted Airman

Throughout the history of the Air Force, enlisted Airmen have often performed the same
functions as officers. For example, during the early days of the Air Force, the first pilots
and instructor pilots were enlisted. Since then, certain officer-only career fields have
successfully transitioned to the enlisted force. An example of this is in space and
cyberspace operations, where a growing number of enlisted Airmen are becoming key
to those operations. Undoubtedly, the future will see even more traditional officer-only
duties being introduced to the enlisted corps. These emerging career fields will be
manned by highly skilled, trained, computer/technology savvy, and adaptable enlisted
Airmen.

As the Air Force continues to reexamine technical skill set requirements in the
application of airpower across the full spectrum of operations, especially with emerging
technologies, enlisted Airmen will have greater opportunities to expand their specialty
areas as critical team members. This will allow officers to better function in leadership
positions that develop and lead strategic vision while the enlisted Airmen carry out those
visions.