Naval Aviation Retention Crisis: An Alternate Approach to Recovery

April 23, 2019

Abstract

Naval Aviation’s current retention challenges, especially of strike-fighter pilots following their Minimum Service Requirement (MSR), approaches a fourth consecutive year with an insufficient number of candidates willing to continue service as aviation Department Heads to ensure selectivity and is perilously close to not having enough prospective strike-fighter pilot Department Heads to fill fleet needs for a second year in a row. Today’s retention recession was predicted as early 2014 and the factors driving retention are not fully understood. Furthermore, current mitigation strategies to offset low retention are exacerbated by low accession Year Groups migrating to the potential Department Head Screen Group population and initial flight training and Fleet Replacement Squadron training slowdowns resulting from limited aircraft availability and instructor capacity. Current approaches to effect Naval Aviation’s retention recovery are limited in focus and do not fully address the factors affecting retention, understand motivation theories and their effect on retention, or realize the variation in motivational influences across the generational groups comprising the today’s active and reserve aviators. This paper explores those issues and identifies potential opportunities for research to design and implement agile organizational approaches improving retention outcomes and overall fleet performance.

Do today’s Naval Aviators lack the motivation for continued service?

Naval Aviation will convene the annual Aviation Department Head Screen Board selecting aviation officers in early May 2019, selecting officers to advance to department head positions in Fiscal Year (FY) 2020. Aviation bonus takers and department head decliners ahead of the board convening provide a good indication of board selectivity rates and the risk to filling the projected fleet needs based on the number of candidates, or size of the screening group. The historical trends do not bode well for the Navy’s strike-fighter community.

In 2018, 61% of eligible strike-fighter pilots declined to accept their career-milestone department head opportunity, signaling their intention to separate from active duty. The resulting 42% department head shortfall marked the third consecutive year the Navy was unable to retain an adequate number of strike-fighter aviators beyond their MSR (Department of the Navy, 2019). Trends indicate the Navy has not adequately addressed the factors driving low retention as highlighted in Snodgrass’ Keep A Clear Eye On The Horizon (2014) for the third consecutive year (Snodgrass, 2014). As a result, the Navy was only able to fill 68% of the strike-fighter pilot department head goal and sacrificed the desired 70% selectivity rate (Department of the Navy, 2018). Data from multiple sources show that the factors negatively affecting retention are not isolated to Naval Aviation and indicates a service-wide problem. 2018 survey results projected a 35% attrition rate across the Navy (Navy Office of Talent Optimization, 2018). The leading reasons to remain in the service are external motivators such as pay and benefits while the prevailing dissatisfiers are internal motives like career impacts on family and work-life balance.

Senior leadership responses to current retention challenges are “all good things come from up jets,” and “this is a leadership problem.” Efforts to improve aircraft material condition and availability are well underway, but progress is slow. The assertion retention is a leadership problem is partially correct. At worst, it is perilously close to assigning responsibility to subordinate leaders within the organization, potentially reinforcing negative perceptions that influence low retention. At best, it implies that aviation squadron leadership can positively affect retention, but it does little further to address how. Ultimately, these two approaches, “up jets” and “more leadership,” do not speak to all the issues causing Naval Aviation’s retention challenges.

Retention is a lagging indicator of an individual’s motivation and motivation is typically directly proportional to performance. The analysis shows that recovery to healthy manning levels will take several years, which poses a risk in any emerging strategic Great Power competition. Despite this strategic imperative, the Navy has done little analysis beyond small sample survey data to understand and frame the problem effectively, identify potential systemic issues, and develop enduring solutions to improve motivation, performance, and retention outcomes.

To better understand the current retention challenges, the service needs to identify the root causes in an objective and quantifiable manner and effectively frame the problem. This paper will explore the factors affecting retention, a literature review of motivation theories and differences in motivation across generations, and suggest opportunities for further research.

Factors Affecting Retention

Naval Aviator retention, like the other services, is cyclical and there are four general factors affecting retention. These categories are positive internal factors, positive external factors, negative external factors, and negative internal factors. The cyclical nature of retention results in common historical factors affecting retention; however, data indicates new factors are emerging in addition to variations on historical influences.

Positive Factors

Positive internal factors are the original individual, almost intrinsic, motives inspiring Naval Aviators to join the profession. They are a desire to be a part of something bigger than themselves, a patriotic call to serve the nation, or the fulfillment of a lifelong dream to fly (115th Congress, 2017).

Positive external factors include what Navy leadership calls a fair compensation package consisting of pay, allowances and bonus opportunities, comprehensive health care, and a retirement plan. Additionally, other personnel and retention initiatives such as advanced education opportunities, career intermission, and planned improvements to performance evaluations are potential positive external factors enabling retention if properly applied (115th Congress, 2018).

Negative Factors

Negative external factors impacting retention include an improving economy and low unemployment resulting in increased job opportunities. Increased commercial airline opportunities are no longer limited to just jet and multi-engine aviators; many airlines offer transition training for rotary-wing aviators to meet the growing commercial demand (GAO, 2018). Spouse career stability and future earning potential is an additional external factor that can influence retention decisions, especially for aviators assigned to non-fleet concentration areas who experience greater geographic instability caused by multiple career permanent change of station moves (Department of the Navy, 2017). The implications of Continuing Resolutions are inadequately resourced budgets to sustain military readiness; this is factor results in tangible impacts undermining positive external motives and enhancing negative internal factors (Snodgrass, 2014).

Quality of service and quality of life are the two categories comprising negative internal factors and are often interrelated. Poor quality of service includes limited aircraft availability and reduced flying hours causing delayed qualifications ultimately impacting career progression (Department of the Navy, 2017). A perception that aviators are not doing what they signed up to do is another aspect of poor quality of service. Views of excessive administrative burden reinforce this perception (Snodgrass & Kohlmann, 2014). The aviator’s normal career progression is rigid, limiting flexibility. Reduced initial aviation accessions from 2005 to 2012, the T-45 jet trainer physiological episodes slowing down primary jet training, and subsequent strike-fighter Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS) material issues further delaying replacement pilot arrival to fleet squadrons, aggravating career flexibility (Department of the Navy, 2019).

The compounding impact of these issues caused the time to initially train aviators to increase from approximately three years to nearly five years, and the strike-fighter FRS achieved less than 20% of its annual pilot production target by mid-year. The resulting gaps in fleet squadrons increase the shared administrative requirements across less personnel (Pendleton, 2018). Mitigations result in unplanned extensions increasing aviator fatigue, as well as potentially impacting competitive performance evaluation timing. Another significant factor adversely affecting the quality of service because it is intangible but palpable is the perception of declining trust in senior leadership (Snodgrass & Kohlmann, 2014).

The leading quality of life issues adversely effecting retention includes operational tempo, family stability, and work/life balance. Over 50% of the Fiscal Year 2018 Aviation Department Head decliners reported they deployed three or more times in their careers (Department of the Navy, 2017). Frustration from operational tempo extends beyond just the frequency, duration, and instability of deployments, but also includes time away from home for schools, training detachments, and exercise support. Family instability is caused by the frequency of permanent change of station moves, location of assignments, lack of professional opportunities for spouses, and individual demands to augment other units for deployment (Snodgrass & Kohlmann, 2014). An imbalance between work and home life is the manifestation of forced prioritization of professional obligations and duty over family needs and desires.

Historic Factors vs. Emerging Factors

Historically, low retention spans typically correspond with a stronger economy and an increase in commercial air transport job opportunities (GAO, 2018; G.D. Gibb, Nontasak, Dolgin, & Helm, 1987; Hill & Gaupp, 2006; Mitchell & Albright, 1972). A 1988 study stated low flight time, increased time away from home, and less competitive financial compensation compared to civilian opportunities were additional factors which further push them away from continued service (Gibb, Nontasak, & Dolgin, 1988)(Gibb et al., 1988). The current period of low retention began in 2013 and is not solely limited to Naval Aviation; military aviation career dissatisfaction stems from variations related to time away from home and family impacts caused by career demands and is consistent factors across the services (Pendleton, 2018). Reduced financial compensation (caused by ending senior officer critical skills bonuses), when contrasted with a stronger economy, are historical factors adversely impacting retention (Snodgrass, 2014).

Declining trust in senior leadership, reduced operational funding without reducing the operational tempo, and a rapidly changing demographic composition of the force are new factors exacerbating the current retention crisis (Snodgrass, 2014).

The factors affecting Naval Aviation’s retention challenge are a low perceived quality of life and quality of service as well as perceived improvement of family stability and financial opportunity in the civilian marketplace. Motivation research offers theories and provides insight to explain why these factors cause lower retention.

Motivation Theory

Motivation theories explain work-place human behavior. Research shows connections between motivation, organizational performance, and organizational behaviors resulting in employee retention. Management and human resource theories inform military retention initiatives. Such popular retention strategies include a market-driven approach and provide a framework for practitioners (Cappelli, 2000). However, these approaches fall short of articulating why such measures are effective. A review of seven social science motivation theories and their associated research highlights the emerging significance of creativity, groups, and culture (Ambrose & Kulik, 1999); however, the theories do not provide a holistic view of motivation.

Self-determination theory (SDT) evolved from 30 years of research to understand intrinsic (internal) and extrinsic (external) motivation; it evolved into an overarching macro theory describing a spectrum of motivation types categorized as autonomous, controlled, and amotivated (Deci, Olafsen, & Ryan, 2017; Deci & Ryan, 2015; Gagné & Deci, 2005). SDT assumes that human motivation satisfies the basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci et al., 2017). Many factors that influence retention link to one or multiple of SDT’s basic needs. Evidence indicates autonomous motivation, an aspect of SDT, enables organizational citizenship and prosocial behaviors and it can improve organizational trust, commitment, and job satisfaction (Gagné & Deci, 2005).

Work-place retention is a function of motivation, and various disciplines have successfully integrated SDT; yet, there is limited research focused in the military context. A longitudinal study spanning 14 years which evaluated the impact of compounding external motives and internal motives and the effect on near-term performance, long-term performance, and the likelihood of career retention for West Point cadets stands out as the only published research focused on understanding motivation in the military (Wrzesniewski et al., 2014). Considering the broad factors affecting Naval Aviator retention, exploring motivation theory provides a framework for why the identified factors impact retention. Additionally, because different generational demographic groups comprise the service, factors affecting motivation should be considered in the context of generational differences.

Generational Differences

Current research suggests generational differences in factors affecting motivation. Factors affecting retention are essential to frame the problem, and motivation theory provides a heuristic to connect the factors to a basic psychological need; however, motives and values are not homogenous across the currently serving aviator demography.

Four generational demographic groups comprise the modern day workforce (Baby-boomers, Generation X, Generation Y or Millennials, and Generation Z) and each has a different character and attitude towards work (Iorgulescu, 2016). Abrupt shifts in behaviors and attitudes do not occur at clearly defined dates. Instead, those closer to the edge of a generational group are more likely to demonstrate the characteristics of the adjoining group. In this case, many of today’s Admirals may identify more with the Baby Boomer generation than Generation X. Most of the Navy’s policies and programs were established by the now retired from Active duty Baby Boomer generation. Some continue to serve, advise and influence the service in a civilian or contractor capacity. Generation Xers comprise the service’s senior leadership and are at or near retirement eligibility. The Millennials of Generation Y comprise the mid-grade and junior officer corps. Generation Z are entering the junior officer ranks, and the emerging Alfa Generation are just coming of age to enlist in the service.

Millennials, who comprise the demographic core of the Navy’s strike-fighter pilot retention problem, are less vested into a career by the time they satisfy their MSR than their Baby-boomer and Generation Y predecessors (Snodgrass, 2014). Research suggests career success and financial gain motivated Generation Y; whereas, Generation Z values agility and flexibility (Juhász, Bencsik, & Horváth-Csikós, 2016). However, the data does not always agree, and some evidence suggests that Millennials value personal growth and a work-life balance over financial gain (Pricewaterhouse Cooper, 2011). Additionally, they greatly value workplace culture and community as well as transparency, especially about their careers, and recognition (Finn & Donovan, 2013). Pricewaterhouse Cooper’s 2013 study stated, “the reasons for staying or leaving the firm are virtually the same between both Millennials and non-Millennials, their relative importance differs,” (Finn & Donovan, 2013). This aspect emphasizes the importance of understanding cross-generational motives as a significant element to consider when framing the problem of aviator retention. The literature indicates that addressing factors driving low retention may not yield the same outcomes depending on the generation affected, further adding to the complexity of enterprise-wide solutions.

Research Opportunities

There are clear gaps in research and an opportunity to improve organizational understanding and response to low retention. There are few published longitudinal studies on attitudes and motivation in a military context, and none focused on naval aviation. There is no research examining the impact of service- or enterprise-level issues on individual unit level retention; therefore, the literature review of factors affecting retention was expanded to other contexts outside the military where military-specific empirical data may be deficient yet can still provide relevant insights. Studies suggest that positive organizational citizenship behaviors improve performance and retention outcomes in retail and customer-service (Koys, 2001); dissatisfaction and job-related stress reduce retention (Patterson, Probst, Leith, Corwin, & Powell, 2005) and organizational culture, work-life balance, and rewards and recognition emerge as leading factors affecting retention (Arora, 2012).

The review of recent data and relevant literature potentially identified the root causes of lower retention as well revealed several emerging themes. The themes evolved as potential research questions. Q1. Is current Navy retention policy focused on the limited application of career flexibility and monetary incentives and missing an opportunity to improve retention outcomes through increasing non-monetary incentives? Q2. Are current retention policies informed by relevant motivation theories and understand the implications posed by multiple generational demographics in the workforce?

Interviews with leading experts in the field further informed the development of these questions. Dr. Jennifer Griffin, a Senior Research Scientist at the Center for Naval Analyses (CNA) currently exploring aviation bonus program structuring, suggested, “exploring the relationship between current behavior theory and motivation across generations to assess how that fits within the [policy] current framework.” (Griffin, 2019)

Researching connections between prevailing human resource and management methods and the potential to satisfy individual psychological needs of autonomy, competency, and relatedness led to an interview with Peter Cappelli, the George W. Taylor Professor of Management and Director of the Center for Human Resources at The Wharton School. Exploring why the methods suggested in his article A Market-Driven Approach to Retain Talent are effective, Cappelli acknowledged his work does not explore psychology or organizational behavior to understand why his measures are effective. His recommendations are “close to operations research, so they don’t rely on a profit motive to make them work, they should apply in any organization.” (Cappelli, 2019) Additionally, Cappelli suggested a pragmatic insight worth exploring:

(T)he opportunities for good jobs for pilots after leaving the military was one of the key factors getting people to join in the first place, especially flying cargo planes, so their efforts to make it more difficult to leave would be counter-productive.

This informs Q3. Does the Navy understand what motivates individuals to join careers in Naval Aviation and how to sustain that motivation for a 20-year career?

The Naval Aerospace Medical Institute’s Aviation Selection Test Battery (ASTB) is used to assess aviation applicant’s potential aptitude for aviation service. The Naval Aviation Trait Facet Inventory is the personality test portion of the ASTB implemented in 2013. It consists of 99 uni-dimensional and cross-dimensional self-characterization statements that currently indicate an aviation applicant’s likelihood to complete flight training (Moclaire, 2019). The test does not explore the importance of basic psychological needs and their potential influence on retention. Evaluating what underpins an individual’s original motivation to pursue Naval Aviation then subsequently applying Bronefenbrenner’s Bioecological Theory of human development may result in a predictive model for retention.

Bronefenbrenner’s ecosystem of layered interactions provides a framework to consider the transactional relationship between individuals and their environment (Gardiner & Kosmitzki, n.d.). This model includes the chronosystem, a methodological construct that adds an element of time to consider the compounding impact as humans interface with their environment and the effect of those interactions over time to influence individual motivation. It is a framework to consider the impact of external influences on an individual’s development within an organization as they potentially compound to change an individual’s motivation and organizational commitment.

Conclusion

There is an immediate need to stem the poor retention trends and ensure enough qualified pilots are available to serve in squadrons (GAO, 2018). Additionally, because the Navy promotes from within, retaining the best and brightest is essential to develop future military leadership (Snodgrass, 2014). Historical trends and current data suggest Naval Aviation has not hit the nadir of its retention challenges and analysis indicates it will take years to recover to normal manning levels (Pendleton, 2018). Furthermore, current strategies to mitigate the gaps caused by low retention may further exacerbate the problem ultimately creating challenges to effectively deploy fully manned fleet units, undermining national defense.

Current efforts to improve retention appear to only address a portion of the problem and miss an opportunity to fully understand all of the factors affecting individual motivation and retention decisions. Any indications of improving retention performance are a singular data point and should be supported by evidence clearly linking outcomes to the factors affecting motivation and in turn retention behaviors. Navy leadership has an opportunity to expand analysis beyond small sample survey data to effectively understand and frame the problem. Investing in an integrated research campaign can identify systemic issues, design an actionable retention strategy, and develop enduring solutions to improve motivation, performance and retention outcomes. A retention strategy grounded in understanding the psychological needs underpinning motivation and how those factors may vary across generations will enable a resilient and agile organization able to improve warfighter retention and performance.

References

115th Congress. (2017). Military Pilot Shortage. Washington DC: U.S. Government Publishing Office.

115th Congress. (2018). Personnel Posture of the Armed Services. Washington DC: 115th Congress.

Ambrose, M. L., & Kulik, C. T. (1999). Old Friends, New Faces: Motivation Research in the 1990s. Retrieved from https://journals-sagepub-com.libproxy2.usc.edu/doi/pdf/10.1177/014920639902500302

Arora, R. (2012). A Research Study of Factors Influencing Talent Retention In BPO Industry. Journal of Strategic Human Resource Management, 1(2), 54–62.

Cappelli, P. (2000). A Market-Driven Approach to Retaining Talent. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1086/250095

Cappelli, P. (2019). Personal communication.

Deci, E. L., Olafsen, A. H., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-Determination Theory in Work Organizations: The State of a Science. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav, 4, 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2015). Self-Determination Theory. International Encyclopedia of Social & Behavioral Sciences, 21, 486–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.26036-4

Department of the Navy. (2017). FY18 Aviation Department Head Screen Board Decliner survey data.

Department of the Navy. (2018). FY-19 Aviation Department Head Selection Board Lessons Learned. Retrieved from https://www.public.navy.mil/bupers-npc/boards/screenboards/aviation/Documents/FY19 ADHSB Lessons Learned.pdf

Department of the Navy. (2019). PERS-43 Aviation Community Update. Washington DC.

Finn, D., & Donovan, A. (2013). PwC’s NextGen: A global generational study:Evolving talent strategy to match the new workforce reality. 14. Retrieved from https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/hr-management-services/pdf/pwc-nextgen-study-2013.pdf

Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.322

GAO. (2018). DOD Needs to Reevaluate Fighter Pilot Workforce Requirements. Washington DC.

Gardiner, H., & Kosmitzki, C. (n.d.). Theories and Methodology. In Lives Across Cultures.

Gibb, G.D., Nontasak, t., Dolgin, D. L., & Helm, W. R. (1987). Factors That Influence Career Motivation In The Fighter Community. Retrieved from https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a178487.pdf

Gibb, Gerald D, Nontasak, T., & Dolgin, D. L. (1988). Factors Affecting Career Retention among Naval Aviators. In Journal of Business and Psychology (Vol. 2). Retrieved from https://www-jstor-org.libproxy2.usc.edu/stable/pdf/25092154.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A702b7ec7c86a59b70e05170396e2bc2a

Griffin, J. (2019). Personal communication.

Hill, R. R., & Gaupp, M. P. (2006). Visualization Tools for Prescriptive Analysis of a Complex Adaptive System Model of Pilot Retention. International Journal of Modeling and Simulation, 26(4), 378–384.

Iorgulescu, M.-C. (2016). GENERATION Z AND ITS PERCEPTION OF WORK Case Study. Cross-Cultural Management Journal, XVIII(1), 47–54. Retrieved from https://statistici.insse.ro/shop/

Juhász, T., Bencsik, A., & Horváth-Csikós, G. (2016). Y and Z Generations at Workplaces. Journal of Competitiveness, 6(3), 90–106. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2016.03.06

Koys, D. J. (2001). The effects of employee satisfaction, organizational citizenship behavior, and turnover on organizational effectiveness: A unit-level, longitudinal study. Personnel Psychology, 54(1), 

Mitchell, T. R., & Albright, D. W. (1972). Expectancy theory predictions of the satisfaction, effort, performance, and retention of naval aviation officers. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 8(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(72)90033-5

Moclaire, C. (2019). Personal communication.

Navy Office of Talent Optimization. (2018). 2018 Navy Personal and Professional Choices Survey Summary. Washington DC.

Patterson, P. D., Probst, J. C., Leith, K. H., Corwin, S. J., & Powell, M. P. (2005). Recruitment and retention of emergency medical technicians: a qualitative study. Journal of Allied Health, 34(3), 153.

Pendleton, J. H. (2018). GAO-19-225T, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS: Rebuilding Ship, Submarine, and Aviation Readiness Will Require Time and Sustained Management Attention. Retrieved from https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/695911.pdf

Pricewaterhouse Cooper. (2011). Millennials at work Reshaping the workplace. Retrieved from www.pwc.com

Snodgrass, G. M. (2014). Keep a Weather Eye on the Horizon. Naval War College Review, 67(4), 1–24.

Snodgrass, G. M., & Kohlmann, B. (2014). 2014 Navy Retention Study. Washington DC.

Wrzesniewski, A., Schwartz, B., Cong, X., Kane, M., Omar, A., & Kolditz, T. (2014). Multiple types of motives don’t multiply the motivation of West Point cadets. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(30), 10990–10995. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1405298111