Empirical Evaluation of the Civil Engineer Career Pyramid and Career Guidance

Air Force civil engineer officers rely on published guidance to assist in establishing their career objectives. This thesis uses empirical data to evaluate the published Air Force career guidance. The data set is comprised of complete duty histories from all active duty lieutenant colonels in the civil engineer career field. The guidance implies a career path to become a civil engineer squadron commander but provides no empirical validation. This thesis follows a rigorous procedure to objectively evaluate the Air Force guidance. The guidance is translated into 24 research questions based on its main tenets. Each duty occurrence is categorized by type of position, associated MAJCOM, overseas proximity, and leadership level. The data analysis uses tests of proportion and X2 categorical tests to address each research question. The results suggest that officers in the data set exhibit conformance to the comprehensive career guidance and to most of the Air Force guidance tenets. However, civil engineer squadron commanders demonstrated stronger conformity than non-commanders only in the areas of progression, career broadening and education. Finally, the results are integrated with Expectancy Theory and Goal Theory to provide recommendations to improve the value of the Air Force guidance.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.

This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.

As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.