AFI 1-1 reveals the importance the United States Air Force places on character. Even a quick glance reveals the value placed on honesty, courage, accountability, humility, duty, loyalty, mission, discipline, and teamwork.[i] Additionally, the Air Force develops these virtues in professional military education courses required throughout an Airman’s career. Conversely, performance evaluations do not explicitly address the virtues that compose character. If an individual reads through these documents, they will not find “character” written. While, in the Air Force, character is discussed and trained but not evaluated, while the Army explicitly discusses, trains, and evaluates character. For the Army, character is the number one leadership attribute of three: character, presence, and intellect.[ii]
U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Curtis Taylor, center, commanding general of the 1st Armored Division, places the Sergeant Audie Murphy Award on Staff Sgt. Brian McCoy, left, assigned to the William Beaumont Army Medical Center, during the Sergeant Audie Murphy Club induction ceremony on Fort Bliss, Texas, Dec. 8, 2025. SAMC members exemplify leadership characterized by personal concern for the needs, training, development and welfare of soldiers and concern for the families of soldiers. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Jacob Suess)
The Air Force values character, but the service does not have a formal way to evaluate or measure it. Challenges of the 21st century require the USAF to focus on character more than in the past. Talking about virtues was a great start, but modern challenges require an evaluation of character. The requirement for employees to work with little oversight will not change, and technological change and competition further drive this requirement. The shift in responsibility requires more soft skills from leaders in organizations, which translates to a change in thoughts on leadership.
Colin Powell was a leader who possessed excellent soft skills, evidenced through decisions, proven competence, and his character. He delivered results for his leadership and country.[iii] Examining Colin Powell’s leadership journey reveals the importance of competence and character in leadership. The Air Force would benefit from evaluations of these aspects of an individual leader. The assessment should be challenging enough to test a person’s character, but the current test that the Air Force uses examines competence alone.[iv] These tests are perfect for ensuring candidates can pass their technical training and enter the Air Force. Proper character development in the pre-affiliation stage opens doors for prospective Airmen. As evidenced by Colin Powell’s leadership journey, there are particular virtues leaders should have and model before advancing to different levels of leadership. Fredrick Taylor argued that companies must build competent employees.[v] Once the person joins, the Air Force is responsible for developing that Airman to lead it into the future. It would be optimal for the USAF to be purposeful and deliberate
and focus on character development and the evaluation process of that development.
Paid Advertising
The USAF should know each candidate’s positive and negative virtues. It can no longer just talk about the virtues its members should possess and demonstrate. Air Force Instruction 1-1 identifies the primary character traits the organization desires.[vi] The interviewees identified traits the Air Force desires and added to them with others they deemed important and visible. They recognized the following virtues as paramount to a leader’s success and the success of their organizations: authenticity, integrity, moral courage, and self-examination. The evaluation system is one method of ensuring Airmen possess these positive virtues and other positive qualities in prospective leaders, while seeking to extinguish unwanted character traits.[vii] The evaluation of character traits does not guarantee a 100% success rate, but it beats the 50/50 mark discussed in Article 3 of this series.[viii]
This series demonstrated that identifying character is not as difficult as people think. Character is visible and can be evaluated. Colonel Matthew Psilos discussed how the special operations community viewed and evaluated character during training to help identify good and bad character traits in trainees.[ix] This series used examples from Colin Powell’s career to identify additional methods of evaluating a person’s character through decision-making.[x] The interviewee’s assessment of different people’s characters and the examination of Colin Powell’s life prove that character can be observed and evaluated. Understanding the importance of competence and character in leadership and how they can be observed and evaluated is foundational to preparing for future operational requirements and a mission command structure in which the Air Force will rely on individuals at all levels to make virtue and competence-based decisions with little to no oversight.
The Competence Character Continuum builds upon understanding the importance of the fusion between competence and character in leaders. It provides a way of evaluating an Airmen’s readiness to progress to different leadership levels. Colin Powell’s life and experiences may be laid over the continuum to understand the virtues
a person should possess at each leadership level.
Evaluating competence is easier than evaluating character. Metrics such as sorties flown, job knowledge, test scores, and the like are hard data points that allow leaders to measure one Airman against another. Character is much more challenging to evaluate, but not impossible, and extremely important. The interviewees recognized and identified character traits in the men and women they worked with. Like the interviewees, supervisors can recognize and identify character traits in those they supervise. The Air Force identifies virtues on their feedback forms and performance reports. It would not be difficult to add a line for character. The Army has found a way to evaluate character based on its operational requirement of mission command, and it is definitely time for the Air Force to do the same. In doing so, the Air Force will be better prepared to face the challenges of tomorrow. The requirement for Airmen to work largely unsupervised using mission-type orders compels a change in the Air Force evaluation system. This change will increase the likelihood that the USAF will select the right leaders at the right time and place.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Lt Col Michael A. Bradford is a USAF Missileer. After graduating from the University of Oklahoma’s Reserve Officer Training Corp program in 2008, he served in a variety of assignments, including 341st Missile Wing Emergency War Order Instructor, 576th Test Operations Squadron Assistant Director of Operations, and 217th Training Squadron Director of Operations. He is a Master Instructor who has educated Airmen in operation, accession, and professional military education programs. He served on the 9th Air Expeditionary Task Force – Afghanistan Staff as the Deputy A3 and supported Operations in United States Central Command (CENTCOM) as the Rotations Branch Chief. He holds degrees in political science and military operational art and science. After graduation from the School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, He was assigned to CENTCOM J5 MacDill AFB, as a Strategic Theater War Planner. He is currently the commander of the 38th Student Squadron, Maxwell AFB.
References:
[i] Air Force Instruction 1-1 (United States Air Force, 2023), 5, https://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_cc/publication/afi1-1/afi1-1.pdf.
[ii] James C. McConville, Army Doctrine Publication No. 6-22 (Washington, D.C: Headquarters Department of the Army, 2019), 2–1, https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN18529-ADP_6-22-000-WEB-1.pdf. 1–16.
[iii] Jeffrey J. Matthews, Colin Powell: Imperfect Patriot (Notre Dame, and Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 2019), 308.
[iv] Deborah L. Rogers, Bennie W. Roach, and Lawrence O. Short, “Mental Ability Testing in the Selection of Air Force Officers: A Brief Historical Overview 1986; Rogers, Deborah L ; Roach, Bennie W ; Short, Lawrence O” (Brooks Air Force Base, Texas: Manpower and Personnel Division, October 1986), https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA173484.pdf.
[v] Frederick Winslow Taylor, The Principles of Scientific Management (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc, 1911), 6.
[vi] Air Force Instruction 1-1 (United States Air Force, 2023), 5, https://static.e-publishing.af.mil/production/1/af_cc/publication/afi1-1/afi1-1.pdf.
[vii] Ferda Erdem and Janset Özen Aytemur, “Mentoring—A Relationship Based on Trust: Qualitative Research,” Public Personnel Management 37, no. 1 (March 2008): 55–65, https://doi.org/10.1177/009102600803700104.
[viii] Kaleth Wright, Lieutenant Colonel Michael A. Bradford’s Interview with Chief Master of the Air Force Kaleth Wright (retired), Zoom Meeting, January 25, 2024.
[ix] Matthew Psilos, Lieutenant Colonel Michael A. Bradford’s Interview with Colonel Matthew Psilos, Microsoft Zoom Meeting, November 8, 2023.
[x] J. L. Pierce et al., “Organization-Based Self-Esteem: Construct Definition, Measurement, And Validation.,” Academy of Management Journal 32, no. 3 (September 1, 1989): 622–48, https://doi.org/10.2307/256437.