This report assesses historical cases of U.S. Air Force innovation or apparent failure to innovate: innovations in strategic reconnaissance, nuclear survivability, suppression of enemy air defenses, and precision strategic attack; and apparent failures to innovate in close air support after World War II, early efforts to defeat Soviet integrated air defenses, and airborne high-value targeting in the post–Cold War era.

Innovation in the United States Air Force

Evidence from Six Cases

Adam R. Grissom, Caitlin Lee, Karl P. Mueller

ResearchPublished May 13, 2016

Developing innovative means to go "over not through" national strategic challenges has long been central to the Air Force's contribution to American security. In recent months, however, U.S. Air Force (USAF) senior leaders have raised the questions of whether the service is sufficiently innovative today and what can be done to make it more innovative for the future. This report assesses historical cases of Air Force innovation or apparent failure to innovate. These case studies include innovations in strategic reconnaissance (1946–1972), nuclear survivability (1950–1960), suppression of enemy air defenses (1975–1985), and precision strategic attack (1990–1999). Cases of apparent failure to innovate include close air support after World War II (1946–1951), early efforts to defeat Soviet integrated air defenses (1960–1970), and airborne high-value targeting in the post–Cold War era (1990–2001).

Key Findings

Air Force Innovation Begins with Strategy

  • Identification and framing of a strategically important operational problem are more likely to lead to innovation than technological change.

The Air Force Innovates Differently from Other Military Organizations

  • While most military innovation comes from formalized changes to doctrine and organizational structures, Air Force innovation is more likely to come from efforts of individuals and operational units leading to the generation of a new type of air campaign.

Air Force Innovation Is a Decentralized, Diffuse, and Diverse Phenomenon

  • Different parts of the Air Force innovate in different ways, in "immediate adaptation," "short-cycle," and "long-cycle" innovation.

Recommendations

  • To drive innovation, the Air Force senior leadership requires a mechanism for deliberately identifying and framing strategically important operational problems.
  • The Air Force should carefully preserve its capacity to foster short-cycle innovation.
  • Airpower innovation, as a distinct phenomenon, is poorly understood outside the Air Force; more published scholarship on USAF innovation would foster an informed conversation in the broader defense community.

Order a Print Copy

Format
Paperback
Page count
118 pages
List Price
$32.00
Buy link
Add to Cart

Topics

Document Details

  • Copyright: RAND Corporation
  • Availability: Available
  • Year: 2016
  • Print Format: Paperback
  • Paperback Pages: 118
  • Paperback Price: $32.00
  • Paperback ISBN/EAN: 978-0-8330-9184-0
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.7249/RR1207
  • Document Number: RR-1207-AF

Citation

RAND Style Manual
Grissom, Adam R., Caitlin Lee, and Karl P. Mueller, Innovation in the United States Air Force: Evidence from Six Cases, RAND Corporation, RR-1207-AF, 2016. As of October 10, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1207.html
Chicago Manual of Style
Grissom, Adam R., Caitlin Lee, and Karl P. Mueller, Innovation in the United States Air Force: Evidence from Six Cases. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2016. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1207.html. Also available in print form.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

The research reported here was sponsored by Maj Gen Steven Kwast, Air Force Quadrennial Defense Review Office, and Maj Gen David Allvin, Director of Strategic Planning, Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategic Plans and Programs, Headquarters, United States Air Force. It was conducted within the Strategy and Doctrine Program of RAND Project AIR FORCE.

This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

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.

RAND 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.