G2TT
来源类型Report
规范类型报告
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.7249/RRA189-1
来源IDRR-A189-1
Cost-Benefit Analysis of Special and Incentive Pays for Career Enlisted Aviators
Patricia K. Tong; Michael G. Mattock; Beth J. Asch
发表日期2021-01-07
出版年2021
语种英语
结论

There are trade-offs between increasing accessions and increasing SRBs to maintain end strength

  • If a more experienced CEA force is needed, then increasing SRBs is more cost-effective than increasing Critical Skills Incentive Pay (CSIP).
  • Holding force size constant, increasing SRBs causes the composition of CEAs to change by increasing the proportion of more experienced CEAs.
  • The trade-off between increasing SRBs to retain CEAs and increasing accessions to sustain a given CEA force size depends on recruiting and training costs. With the exception of a subset of Flight Engineers, increasing accessions is more efficient than increasing SRBs to sustain a given force size.
  • For Flight Engineers who are training to be part of the flight crew on CV-22 aircraft, retaining more experienced personnel using SRBs is more efficient than increasing accessions to sustain force size if SRB multipliers are below 2.5, whereas increasing accessions is more efficient if SRB multipliers are above 2.5.

Tipping-point values show that increasing accessions is generally more cost-effective

  • With the exception of Flight Engineers on CV-22 aircraft, increasing accessions is generally more cost-effective than increasing SRBs to retain more experienced CEAs, and recruiting and training costs would have to increase significantly for this not to be the case.

Tipping-point values show that increasing accessions is generally more cost-effective

  • For CV-22 Flight Engineers, estimated recruiting and training costs are sufficiently close to the estimated tipping point that the costs of either approach are approximately the same.
摘要

To justify budgets for special and incentive (S&I) pays for career enlisted aviators (CEAs), the Air Force needs rigorous analyses on how to efficiently set S&I pays for CEAs to achieve and maintain required end strength.

,

The authors of this report develop an analytic capability to calculate the efficient amount of S&I pays for CEAs, using RAND's Dynamic Retention Model to create separate models for each CEA specialty. They use these models to estimate the per capita cost for each CEA specialty under different policies to show the trade-offs between increasing accessions versus retaining more experienced CEAs for a given force size. They also calculate tipping-point values: the values that recruiting and training costs would need to reach in order for retaining more experienced CEAs using selective reenlistment bonuses (SRBs) to become more cost-effective than increasing accessions.

目录
  • Chapter One

    Introduction

  • Chapter Two

    Dynamic Retention Model Overview, Data, Estimates, and Model Fits

  • Chapter Three

    Retaining Career Enlisted Aviators Versus Expanding the Training Pipeline

  • Chapter Four

    Concluding Thoughts

  • Appendix A

    Background on Career Enlisted Aviator Occupations and Special and Incentive Pays

  • Appendix B

    Retention Profiles of Career Enlisted Aviators

  • Appendix C

    Simulations of the Retention and Cost Effects of Alternative Special and Incentive Pay Policies

主题Econometric Models ; Enlisted Personnel ; Military Career Field Management ; Military Compensation ; Military Personnel Retention ; United States Air Force
URLhttps://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA189-1.html
来源智库RAND Corporation (United States)
引用统计
资源类型智库出版物
条目标识符http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/524326
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
Patricia K. Tong,Michael G. Mattock,Beth J. Asch. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Special and Incentive Pays for Career Enlisted Aviators. 2021.
条目包含的文件
文件名称/大小 资源类型 版本类型 开放类型 使用许可
RAND_RRA189-1.pdf(1549KB)智库出版物 限制开放CC BY-NC-SA浏览
x1610024601122.jpg.p(4KB)智库出版物 限制开放CC BY-NC-SA浏览
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[Patricia K. Tong]的文章
[Michael G. Mattock]的文章
[Beth J. Asch]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[Patricia K. Tong]的文章
[Michael G. Mattock]的文章
[Beth J. Asch]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[Patricia K. Tong]的文章
[Michael G. Mattock]的文章
[Beth J. Asch]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享
文件名: RAND_RRA189-1.pdf
格式: Adobe PDF
文件名: x1610024601122.jpg.pagespeed.ic.9nzMlNpZq8.jpg
格式: JPEG

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。