Download

Download eBook for Free

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 1.7 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Purchase

Purchase Print Copy

 FormatList Price Price
Add to Cart Paperback52 pages $23.00 $18.40 20% Web Discount

A description of an analytical model of airmen supply in the context of occupational choice. The model is used to examine the distribution of volunteers in terms of the Armed Forces Qualification Test scores of new airmen over time. By considering the manner in which the Air Force creams the volunteer population to obtain its recruits, the model can be used to explain the variation in the quality of recruits under different situations. Findings show that the ratio of military pay to civilian pay is positively correlated with the changing quality of recruits over time. This is an important finding because it indicates that recruit quality does respond to pay increases and provides the Air Force with a device for controlling enlistee quality. Recruit demand, on the other hand, is negatively correlated with respect to quality, which underscores the validity of the creaming process.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation Research memorandum series. The Research Memorandum was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1948 to 1973 that represented working papers meant to report current results of RAND research to appropriate audiences.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

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.