- How can the burden that Air Force inspection activities place on inspected units be reduced?
- How can the quality and relevance of the information collected by the Air Force inspection system be improved?
- Are there effective inspection and information collection practices in place elsewhere that the Air Force might emulate?
The Air Force relies on inspections by the Inspector General and assessments and evaluations by functional area managers to ensure that all wings comply with Air Force standards and are ready to execute their contingency missions. These oversight activities have grown dramatically over time, and the Inspector General of the Air Force (SAF/IG) is leading an Air Force-wide effort to reduce this burden while also improving the quality of oversight that the inspection system provides. In 2010, SAF/IG asked RAND Project AIR FORCE to collect and assess data on the inspection system and to identify effective inspection and information collection practices that the Air Force inspection system might emulate. Through a review of inspection practices as the Air Force Culture Assessment Tool program (AFCAST), the Air Force Climate Survey, and the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) inspection system; an investigation of Air Force personnel's experiences in the field; and a review of literature on topics including leadership and organizational change, RAND formulated recommendations tailored to each of SAF/IG's five major inspection system goals: (1) choosing a better inspection interval, (2) reducing the inspection footprint, (3) increasing the emphasis on self-inspections and self-reporting, (4) introducing the new Unit Effectiveness Inspection (UEI), and (5) introducing the Management Internal Control Toolset (MICT). This is report provides an executive summary of the research and recommendations detailed in Charting the Course for a New Air Force Inspection System.
There Is Inconsistency Among Many Elements of the Current Inspection System
- Interviewed Air Force inspectors and inspectees generally wanted synchronized inspections and assessments to be better integrated.
- Air Force personnel indicated that the quality and the nature of wings' self-inspection programs, at least in their current incarnation, varied greatly.
There Is Often Skepticism Among Air Force Personnel About Proposed Changes
- Air Force personnel had concerns about assessing leadership and discipline, particularly within the context of inspection.
- While the interviewed Air Force inspectors and inspectees were generally in favor of a system like Management Internal Control Toolkit (MICT), they doubted that MICT will yield its promised benefits.
- Consider adopting a formal risk management system to guide Air Force inspection-related decisions and activities.
- Employ a formal approach to change management to plan, execute, and sustain change and ensure its maximum benefits.
The research described in this report was sponsored by the United States Air Force and conducted by RAND Project AIR FORCE.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation technical report series. RAND technical reports may include research findings on a specific topic that is limited in scope or intended for a narrow audience; present discussions of the methodology employed in research; provide literature reviews, survey instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research professionals, and supporting documentation; or deliver preliminary findings. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure that they meet high standards for research quality and objectivity.
Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND Permissions page.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.