Policy and Methodology to Incorporate Wartime Plans into Total U.S. Air Force Manpower Requirements

Manuel J. Carrillo, H. G. Massey, Joseph G. Bolten

ResearchPublished Nov 30, 2004

Every few years, the U.S. Air Force reviews its authorized manpower to ensure that it has enough people with the right skills and experience to meet national security demands. In the past, this was assumed to include the ability to prosecute two concurrent MTWs, but that assumption is being reexamined. RAND was asked to develop a methodology for examining less-extensive scenarios and to comment on the Total Force Assessment Phase I (TFA-I), which drew to a close in 2001. This report presents the resulting methodology, demonstrates its use by applying it to suitable data (including that from TFA-I), and draws lessons from RAND’s assessment of the TFA-I experience. Among the conclusions are that TFA’s methodology and process could fall prey to pitfalls the most significant of which is the potential for double-counting. It would also be helpful to develop models outside the TFA process, so that a short timeline does not compromise the process. Finally, controls should be improved, including quality control, accountability, and auditing trails.

Topics

Document Details

Citation

Chicago Manual of Style

Carrillo, Manuel J., H. G. Massey, and Joseph G. Bolten, Policy and Methodology to Incorporate Wartime Plans into Total U.S. Air Force Manpower Requirements. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2004. https://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR144.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

The research reported here was sponsored by the United States Air Force and conducted by RAND Project AIR FORCE.

This publication is part of the RAND technical report series. RAND technical reports, products of RAND from 2003 to 2011, presented research findings on a topic limited in scope or intended for a narrow audience; discussions of the methodology employed in research; literature reviews, survey instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research professionals, and supporting documentation; and preliminary findings. All RAND technical reports were subject to 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.