My goal is to contrast leadership development in my current environment with my experience on active duty in the U.S. Air Force’s Air Mobility Command (AMC). The thing is, I didn’t really experience much formal leadership development during those 12 years on active duty. So what do I want to share?

I’ve settled on this: The active duty Air Force is purging leaders that were developed the hard way over a decade of constant war and other contingency operations, while nearly exclusively retaining candidates who developed their careers and resumes according to official timelines and benchmarks. There is a need for both types of leaders and I want to close this series by advocating for a compromise. Strong leaders, in any stage of their careers, should be considered for positions that have come to be reserved for career development.

In part one of this series, I described my transition from active duty flying in the US Air Force to my current job as a civilian airline and Air National Guard pilot. I addressed how I found my concepts of service and excellence to be more aligned with my post-separation life than my active duty experience.

I also asserted that many leaders I encountered focused more on serving their careers than serving their subordinates and that this mentality has become a cultural issue within the Air Force’s Air Mobility and Training Commands, if not the Air Force itself.

Today’s post compares the active duty and civilian/National Guard leadership environments that I experienced.