SENIOR LEADER PERSPECTIVE

What Do People Want from Work?

The Simple Question that Can Transform Unit

Engagement and Retention

Brig gen george M. reynolds, UsAF

C
reating an organization that can consistently attract, engage, and retain talented
people is difficult. It is especially challenging in industries where competition for
talent is intense. Likewise, the transitory nature of careers is forcing organiza­
tions to pay special attention to how they discretely manage employees. Individuals have
redefined their expectations and relationships with employers. Today’s employees view
work differently and are progressively reevaluating and prioritizing work attributes such
as flexibility, development, and enjoyment. These changes can be problematic for tradi­
tional human resource departments and organizational leaders. Developing effective
cross-organizational programs, policies, processes, and culture that can satisfy employees
while staying competitive is difficult for even the best teams. Organizations realize they
must adapt and shift their focus toward employee-centric approaches. In short, they are
asking and solving a simple question: What do people want from work?
On its surface, this seems like an easy question for any organization to answer and
maybe even too simplistic to base a complex human resources strategy. However, organi­
zations are repeatedly struggling to get this right. Many consistently miss recruiting,

4 AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019

 What Do People Want from Work?

productivity, or retention goals. Even those which are succeeding have difficulty antici­
pating external and internal changes that can quickly drain talent. These are not easy
tasks, but organizations that can focus on this simple question have the best chance to
successfully attract, engage, and retain talent.
This question is especially important for military organizations. Answering and focusing
on what people want from work is not only necessary but also requires an organization-
wide effort. Although most personnel solutions are conceived and executed at the higher-
headquarter level, commanders and supervisors play an incredibly important role,
especially with unit productivity and retention. Yet, they may not know where to focus
their limited time and resources. This article’s individual-centric framework (ICF) pro­
vides organizations, commanders, and supervisors that focus by considering the question:
“What do people want from work?” The ICF uses five distinct categories to answer this
question—compensation, enjoyment, interest (and balance), career opportunity, and
recognition.

Why Should the Military Use an Individually-Focused Talent

Management Framework?

During the past decades, numerous social and business changes reshaped the relation­
ships, expectations, and social contracts between employees and companies including
those within the military. These changes include improved productivity, declining union
influence, the flattening of corporate structures, automation, a reliance on technology and
information operations, lean operations, consolidations, and shifting from manufacturing
to services and technology. Individual work experiences also changed and could involve
telecommuting, flexible work schedules, extensive use of electronic communications and
scheduling, and improved benefits transportability. Maybe more consequential, attitudes
toward work and happiness have shifted. Research has shown “emotions matter a lot at
work. Happiness is important. To be fully engaged, people need vision, meaning, purpose,
and resonant relationships.”1 It turns out individuals are increasingly expecting more
from work and are willing to explore other employment options when expectations are
not met.
Today’s dynamic, competitive labor markets are putting pressure on existing human
resource programs and forcing them to be more flexible, transparent, creative, and re­
sponsive.These changes also apply to the military in unique ways as well.The all-volunteer
force model requires a consistent flow of high-quality recruits and sufficient numbers
deciding to make the military a career. The all-volunteer force is not only expensive but
also sensitive to societal changes and perceptions about military service. Today, there are
numerous factors that should cause the military to rethink how it recruits, engages, and
retains personnel. These factors include:
• Recruiting and retaining talent is difficult when “the economy is robust, civilian
unemployment is low, and young people find it easy to secure civilian employment.”2
In fact, there is a strong correlation between the unemployment rate and number of

AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019 5

Reynolds

high-quality recruits. As unemployment rates remain low or the military expands,

recruiting (and retention) will become more difficult.3
• There are fewer Americans qualified and available to serve. According to an Office
of the Under Secretary of Defense Accession Policy study, “only 17 percent of 17- to
24-year-olds are qualified and available (for example, not enrolled in college) to enlist
without a waiver.”4 This number drops to 13 percent if those scoring in the bottom
30th percentile on the Armed Forces Qualification Test are excluded, which is a
common practice of the military services.
• The number of recruits joining the military who have a close relative in the military
is high. In fact, “between 77 and 86 percent of new military recruits have a family
member who has served in the military, and approximately one-third have a parent
who has served.”5 Although it is not surprising that children follow in the parents’
professional footsteps, this trend highlights that the all-volunteer military force is
less diverse and is appealing to a very small subset of the population.
• The number of entry-level positions across industries is shrinking. According to
Axios, “Despite a growing worker shortage, American companies today are only
rarely prepared to spend the money to train their own workers. Instead, they want
fully formed workers to show up at the door.”6 If this trend continues, it could benefit
military recruiting. However, the demand for highly-trained and highly-educated
military members will remain high. Those joining the military as a path to future,
nonmilitary careers may be less likely to pursue a military career.
• Technologies such as artificial intelligence, automation, quantum computing, big-
data analytics, and smart manufacturing will change the nature of work including
within the military services. Future Airmen will be aided by these technologies and
will move up the “value chain” into analysis, diagnostics, information operations, and
problem solving. Some existing jobs will be eliminated, but most that remain will
require individuals who possess advanced skills, training, and experiences. These su­
per-enabled technicians will be in high demand by the military and private sectors
alike.
• It is increasingly expensive to train highly-skilled professionals. “The cost to train a
fifth-generation fighter pilot to prepare him or her for their first operational squadron
is approximately $11 million.”7 The cost to prepare a cyber-security professional
could exceed $250,000.8 Equally important, it takes years to fully train and certify
these professionals.The investment of both time and money in these Airmen is enormous.
• The military services do not typically access personnel laterally from outside organi­
zations. Although there are career fields that access highly specialized professions
and fast-track new recruits to higher rank (doctors, lawyers, and dentists), this is a
very small percentage of the total force.

6 AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019

 What Do People Want from Work?

• Although the Air Force is expanding, it has contracted in the past two decades,
while the demand for USAF capabilities remains high. For example, since Opera­
tion Desert Storm, the number of Air Force personnel and aircraft have decreased
by 30 percent and 37 percent, respectively.9 This combination of high demand and
low supply is overloading units and individuals.
• Specific career fields are either not meeting retention goals and/or are short-staffed.
• Benefits and retention incentives such as the 20-year retirement plan have changed.
Although it is too early to conclude how these changes will impact recruiting or
retention, existing retention models and goals may be affected.
• Retention models require accurate predictions; however, the science of prediction is
still imperfect. This problem is further complicated when existing systems do not
have sufficient excess capacity and/or fluidity to offset earlier inaccurate predictions.
This is even more problematic for the military’s up-or-out personnel model.
• The world is too dynamic and military weapon systems too complex to rely on a
surge of new recruits or draftees. The Air Force’s dependence on advance technology
requires a sufficiently sized, highly skilled, and experienced force.
Singularly, each of these trends poses a challenge, but collectively, they require the
military to reexamine how it approaches the recruitment, engagement, and retention for
all Airmen—enlisted, officers, and civilians—individually. Focusing on “individualism” is
a departure for military organizations that value self-sacrifice, teamwork, dedication, and
selflessness. These attributes are absolutely necessary to accomplish the mission, and for
unit cohesion and esprit de corps. However, when it comes to recruitment, engagement,
and retention, individuals and families are making decisions based on their own needs,
goals, and aspirations. The ICF acknowledges people are self-reflective, internally and
externally motivated, and seek to optimize opportunities. This framework provides answers
to address what individuals want from work as a mechanism to specifically improve
recruitment, engagement, and retention.

What do People Want from Work?

Research and exit surveys regularly confirm individuals join organizations, stay pro­
ductive, and ultimately decide to stay or leave for very similar reasons. According to the
article, “Why People Really Quit Their Jobs,” Facebook employees “left when their job
wasn’t enjoyable, their strengths weren’t being used, and they weren’t growing in their
careers.”10 In their book What Millennials Want from Work: How to Maximize Engagement
in Today’s Workforce, Jennifer J. Deal and Alec Levenson offer a compelling model focused
on people, work, and opportunities.11 In Annie McKee’s article, “Being Happy at Work
Matters,” she highlights, “To be fully engaged, people need vision, meaning, purpose, and
resonant relationships.”12 In his article, “Keeping the Talent: Understanding the Needs of
Engineers and Scientists in the Defense Acquisition Workforce,” Alan K. Jenkins stresses

AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019 7

Reynolds

“pay and benefits, growth and development opportunities, relevance or meaning of job,
supervision, feelings toward coworkers, job security, and workplace satisfaction” as essential
to workplace satisfaction and organizational commitment.13 Even Air Force surveys pro­
vide lists of similar reasons ranging from interesting, but balanced work, assignment flexi­
bility, meaning and purpose, development opportunities, and enjoyment.
The ICF is a consolidation of the most common individual wants or attributes. They
are organized into five categories—compensation, enjoyment, interesting (and balanced),
career opportunity, and recognition. Individuals generally want each of these. The degree
to which one prioritizes individual attributes varies, but ultimately, most employees want
a mix of these attributes. The consideration of these attributes applies when individuals
consider joining, staying engaged, or remaining with an organization. Although it could
be argued engagement also affects retention and therefore they are not mutually exclu­
sive. However, the use of the ICF provides organizations a mechanism to improve pro­
ductivity and engagement independent of retention decisions.

Table. Individual-centric framework: what people want from work

Enjoyment
Friends and Mentors
Team
Supervisor

Interesting (but balanced)

Meaning and purpose
Adventure and challenge
Innovative and creative
Goal-oriented
Autonomy and empowerment
Flexibility and predictability

Compensation
Pay
Benefits
Retirement

Career Opportunity
Feedback and communication
Development
Training and education
“Experience”
Promotion, upgrade and leadership

Recognition
Want to be valued (formally and informally)
Supervisor’s appreciation
Support network to value their work

Compensation
Although this framework in the table lists only three compensation categories—pay,
benefits, and retirement—these categories can also include overtime, bonuses, commis­
sions, allowances, insurance, and paid vacation. Regardless of what compensation in­
cludes, it remains important. According to What People Want from Work: Motivation,

8 AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019

 What Do People Want from Work?

“Money still provides the basic motivation for employees.”14 In fact, “compensation is
important to 99 percent of millennials and very or extremely important to 81 percent of
them.”15 This is not unique to younger employees. Compensation is still at the top of
most employee priority lists regardless of age, but it may be prioritized differently.
It is important to point out that compensation is only one dimension of what people
want from work. In fact, “almost two-thirds (64 percent) of millennials said they would
rather make $40,000 a year at a job they love than $100,000 a year at a job they think is
boring.”16 But, even in this example, they did not say $0 a year, but rather quantified their
premium for interesting work. It is important to make this distinction because compen­
sation represents more than paying bills, providing disposable income, or creating sav­
ings. Organizations use compensation to entice potential employees, measure perfor­
mance, shape behavior, provide a comparable yardstick, and retain talent; and employees
still value compensation and use it to make comparison judgements about other factors.
The military is no different. Service members value compensation, too. Since imple­
menting the all-volunteer force in 1973, improving military pay and benefits was impor­
tant to entice and retain high-quality recruits. The 1970 Gates Commission recognized
“adequate pay alone will not attract, but inadequate pay can certainly deter.”17 Compen­
sation is also one of the most utilized levers to influence recruiting and retention goals.
The military offers new recruits college tuition, medical insurance, paid vacation, and
housing to entice them to join the military. Bonuses and monthly incentive pay are uti­
lized to retain members of critical career fields. Spouse tuition, expanded GI Bill, and
commissary access are provided to support and retain families. Pay and benefit programs
are implemented to shape decisions, behavior, and offset bills. Compensation may not be
the most important or influential factor when individuals consider military service or
remain in uniform, but it is still an important variable nonetheless, especially when com­
paring employment options.

Enjoyment
Individuals want to come to work and enjoy the experience with coworkers, mentors,
teammates, or supervisors. These relationships are incredibly influential on enjoyment,
productivity, and desire to stay with an organization. In fact, “we know that people join
an organization and leave a boss. A dissonant relationship with one’s boss is downright
painful. So, too, are bad relationships with colleagues. Leaders, managers, and employees
have all (said) that close, trusting and supportive relationships are hugely important to
their state of mind—and their willingness to contribute to a team.”18 A bad work envi­
ronment may be offset by other work attributes but certainly at a cost.

Interesting (and Balanced)

Generally, people want to belong to organizations that do meaningful and purposeful
work. They want work that is challenging, innovative, goal oriented, and an adventure.
“People want to feel as if their work matters, and that their contributions help achieve

AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019 9

Reynolds

something really important. They want to know that they—and their organization—are
doing something big that matters to other people.”19 More and more organizations are
turning to “purpose” to motivate and fulfill employee desires to belong to meaningful
organizations. Some companies offer volunteer opportunities, direct profits toward char­
ities, and even ensure employees understand the broader, positive impact their products and
services provide to the world community.
Although the separation between work and life have blurred as technology connects
people to work, people still want scheduling control and predictability. Having a constant
connection to work is becoming a standard. Many people see a positive side of continuous
connectivity, but they also want the flexibility that should come with this technology. In
fact, “Millennials expect flexibility. It is critical to them because of the way they live their
lives, because they are independent, and because it is logical.” 20 However, like many
attributes, this phenomenon is not unique to only one generation.
It is also important to note that balancing life and work requires sufficient resources,
competent leadership, and accommodating policies. Organizations that lack these crucial
ingredients often rely on individuals to make up the shortfalls. Work/life balance can be
affected as employees put in longer hours, become overloaded, work during weekends, or
delay vacations. Military personnel and their families also have additional unique chal­
lenges, including long deployments, a lack of predictability, stressful environments, and
the possibility of physical injury. Most people will tolerate an imbalance—but only to a point.

Career Opportunity
Having career opportunities are important to individuals regardless of their experience
and age. According to Deal and Levenson, Millennials “place a high priority on development.
About three-quarters say they see their position as an opportunity to develop technical
expertise, develop leadership potential, and demonstrate their abilities as a leader.”21 Baby
Boomers are exploring different career opportunities. They value giving back. “Many
(Baby Boomer’s second) careers tend to be in education, nonprofits, healthcare and faith-
based organizations as this generation seeks to ‘self-actualize and make a meaningful
contribution in their life.’ ”22 Regardless of priorities and aspirations, belonging to orga­
nizations that provide career opportunities remains essential. Development is one of the
most important reasons employees join specific companies, while the lack of develop­
ment is a reason many leave a company.
Yet, career opportunities must also include training and education programs, feedback,
and open communications. It is important to recognize that “people want to be able to
see the future and know how they fit in. People learn and change when they have a personal
vision that is linked to an organizational vision.”23 The best organizations link career op­
portunities to development programs, promotions, upgrades, and leadership positions—and
are open and transparent about their processes. Career opportunities and development
must also align with enjoyment, interests, compensation, and recognition programs. Get­

10 AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019

 What Do People Want from Work?

ting these attributes and processes aligned correctly is especially important in today’s
work environment.
Military members share similar expectations and goals. Promotions offer additional
responsibility, pay increases, improved chances for future advancement, validation for
hard work, and a measuring stick among peers. Assignment actions provide leadership
opportunities, experience, adventure, but also unpredictability and stress. Professional
development provides certifications, experience, and opens doors for greater opportunities.

Recognition
People want to be formally and informally recognized for their hard work. They want
their supervisor to appreciate their efforts and give them time and attention. Individuals
want responsibilities and autonomy, but they also need recognition and feedback. The
author of Business Innovation for Dummies, Alexander Hiam, may say it best: “Responsi­
bility is about giving them a chance to make a difference, but attention is the human
dimension of managing.”24
Recognition can also serve as a measuring stick and an informal feedback loop, but it
needs to connect to broader company incentives. In their book The Human Capital Edge,
Bruce N. Pfau and Ira T. Kay point out: “People want recognition for their individual
performance with pay tied to their performance.”25 Although in general, the military
cannot tie performance directly to pay, feedback should reflect in statements on perfor­
mance reports and signal a supervisee’s ability to handle greater levels of responsibilities.

If the Attributes are Simple and Obvious, Why is This

So Hard to Implement?

It is not easy crafting the right policies, procedures, and programs that satisfy every
employee’s wants. Although there are many reasons why it is difficult, each organization
has their own distinct challenges. Some of these challenges, relevant to both the private
sector and the military, are summarized below.
Organizations have another purpose. Organizations exist for purposes beyond satis­
fying employee wants. They create shareholder wealth, provide needed services, educate
students, or defend the country. Individuals are central to achieving these objectives, but
many organizations have historically viewed employees as “inputs” and “requirements.”
Organizations have competing priorities. Often organizations must place their pri­
orities ahead of individual wants to accomplish their missions. Supervisors may ask an
individual to work on weekends or put in longer hours to meet an impending deadline.
Typically, organizational priorities outweigh individual wants, which employees under­
stand. However, they may vote with their feet if the balance becomes lopsided for too long.
Organizational personnel requirements can change quickly. Most organizations
compete in environments that are complex and change rapidly. This puts extra pressure
on organizations to find experienced talent and keep their employees relevant. If they
have the flexibility, organizations can hire individuals directly to fill voids or offer training

AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019 11

Reynolds

to redirect existing employees to an emerging career field. However, these changes may
not align with existing employee expectations.
Numerous stakeholders with degrees of influence. All organizations have relation­
ships with external and internal agents. Organizations with diffused relationships must
work with these agents who have their own equities, interests, and priorities. Military
organizations also have numerous relationships with groups with different levels of influ­
ence, authority, and priorities including Congress, contractors, combatant commands,
interagency partners, foreign militaries, and sister services.
Lack of authority. Hierarchical institutions retain and delegate authority throughout
their organizational structure differently. Although unit-level leaders have direct interac­
tion with their personnel, they may lack specific authorities to address individual wants
such as pay, benefits, and promotion selection.
Supervisors are overloaded. It takes time and energy to lead and support individuals.
Supervisors can also experience too much work, which leads to little time for feedback,
recognition, or time to focus on individuals. Following a framework that is focused on
individual wants requires supervisors who have sufficient resources including time.
Individuals prioritize wants differently and change them over time. Individual de­
mands, attitudes, and priorities toward specific attributes change from person to person,
as well as throughout an individual’s employment. For example, an employee with sig­
nificant college debt may value compensation, loan forgiveness programs, and rapid career
development until they repay their loans. It is not to say individuals with no student loans
do not value similar benefits, but they may prioritize travel, adventure, and working with
likeminded teammates more.
Difficult to anticipate change. Prediction is tough business, but it is even harder to
implement precrisis steps when there is no crisis. This is especially true for government
organizations that use a complex budgeting process. It is challenging to put retention
strategies in place in advance of an anticipated exodus, while retention is good.This situa­
tion can place organizations in reaction mode. Fairness drives policy. Employees demand
fair and transparent policies but also want unique consideration of their own individual
circumstances. This paradox is especially challenging for large organizations where im­
portant processes are centralized. Fairness drives the creation of universal standards and
policies.
Processes must work for thousands of people. Beyond fairness, large organizations’
policies, programs, and processes must work on an industrial scale. To manage, organiza­
tions often use requirements or ridged standardized processes to ensure consequential
personnel actions are manageable including promotions, assignments, and development.
As a result, organizational requirements and processes can overshadow individual wants.
There is a supply and demand problem for important development positions. The
quality of today’s military personnel is remarkable. Often, there are too many qualified
candidates to fill coveted positions such as squadron superintendent or commander.
Those not selected still have meaningful opportunities available. However, they may re­

12 AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019

 What Do People Want from Work?

prioritize their willingness to accept other positions, especially if they believe future pro­
motion opportunities are affected.
People are not open or honest with supervisors about their current and future aspi­
rations. It is tough to share personal aspirations if an individual believes their organiza­
tion or supervisor will react negatively. However, supervisors must have open and honest
feedback with supervisees, because individuals will evaluate their non-Air Force options
with or without their supervisors and may not have the benefit of understanding their Air
Force opportunities.
Culture plays an important role. Culture includes the values, priorities, and behaviors
emphasized by and within an organization. The ICF describes the basic cultural building
blocks that are valued, prioritized and emphasized. No organization is the same because
the mix of attributes is different. Some place a higher value on teamwork, while others
might embrace individual empowerment. Regardless of the mix, it is possible to see an
organization’s culture using the ICF. Culture is often referenced as an organization’s most
important attribute, while changing an organization with a strong culture is difficult. This
is especially true for the military. Although the military is certainly adaptive, it can take
time to change culturally-influenced processes. For example, the military recruits, develops,
and promotes leaders within the existing military force structure. Changing this para­
digm goes against years of traditional norms. This is not to say change will not happen,
but rather it takes time to change large institutions. The importance of culture cannot be
overemphasized.
These are just a few reasons why it is difficult to use the ICF. Although each of these
issues are complicated or labor intensive, this does not mean change will not occur. In
fact, the Air Force is undertaking unprecedented steps to support Airmen and their
families. However, to truly improve recruitment, engagement, and retention, the entire
organization must take an active role, including at the unit level. Commanders and supervi­
sors have tremendous influence to improve productivity, engagement, and retention. Yet,
some may find it difficult to see how and where they can make a difference. The ICF
provides commanders and supervisors with a useful guide to focus their limited time and
energy to improve unit engagement and retention.

How Can This Framework Help Commanders and Supervisors

Improve Engagement and Retention?
Today, senior Air Force leaders are tackling numerous individual concerns, most of
which are found in the ICF (see the table). They are pushing for better work/life balance,
eliminating barriers, and rethinking how to support individual goals. For example, a task
force is seeking root causes for low pilot retention, which led to initiatives such as adding
more “white space” to personal schedules, increasing time at home station, adjusting exer­
cise schedules, reducing deployments to 179 days, limiting year-long fighter pilot deploy­
ments to those in command or Joint Staff assignment, increasing aviation bonuses and
aviation incentive pay, and establishing a second assignment in-place program.26 Senior

AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019 13

Reynolds

leaders are also exploring how to give “female pilots time off when they have children, give
them access to the base, have them maintain proficiency through simulators, and roll back
their year group so they remain competitive for assignments and promotions.”27 Each of
these initiatives address specific ICF attributes such as development, flexibility, and rec­
ognition.
Senior leaders are also championing cross-enterprise initiatives such as revitalizing
squadrons, changing course 14 and 15 requirements, cutting assignment cycles from
three to two, opening remotely piloted aircraft training to enlisted members, reducing Air
Force instructions, delegating waiver authorities, changing the officer in-residence pro­
fessional military education (PME) declination process, increasing Stripes for Excep­
tional Performers promotion opportunities, eliminating additional duties, changing
computer-based training requirements, modifying squadron commander training, as­
signing more support personnel to units, and considering direct accessions programs for
cyber security experts. They are also supporting military spouses and their families by
pushing local governments to accept reciprocity for out-of-state certifications, improving
quality of schools near bases, and supporting spouse employment. Using the ICF as a
guide, it is easier to explain why each of these initiatives are being implemented or dis­
cussed—they address individual and family wants and concerns. More succinctly, senior
commanders are reducing barriers and improving support to unit leaders. But what can
commanders and supervisors do if most of these efforts are above their unit level?
For hierarchical organizations like the Air Force, it is understandable that large-scale
changes occur above the unit. However, commanders, supervisors, and peers still play a
critical role in improving engagement and retention—especially within their unit. They
have the most direct impact on Airmen, and they know them best. The following are
some examples of how commanders and supervisors can improve unit engagement and
retention by using the ICF.
Do Airmen enjoy work? Research shows that people want to enjoy their work, and
those who loathe their boss, peers, or team will probably leave. The adage, “Supervisors
need to know their Airmen,” remains important. This includes the need to find out if
their Airmen enjoy work. If they do not, why? Regardless of the reasons, supervisors must
be cognizant of their Airmen’s connection and interest with work. The ICF illustrates
enjoyment is important to individuals. Hence, commanders and supervisors need to con­
sider Airmen enjoyment during feedback sessions, while reviewing unit climate assess­
ments, and when constructing unit policies, programs, and processes.
Empower Airmen to improve unit processes, policies, and programs. In his article,
“Top Ten Reasons Why Large Companies Fail to Keep Their Best Talent,” Eric Jackson writes,
“When top talent is complaining (about big company bureaucracy), it’s usually a sign that
they didn’t feel as if they had a say in these rules.”28 Using the ICF, commanders and
supervisors can take an active role to reverse these frustrations and empower unit personnel
to change unit policies, programs, and processes, or better yet, make recommendations on
how to change policies, programs, and processes outside the unit. Commanders can ask
specific, meaningful questions such as, “If you could change two things that would make

14 AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019

 What Do People Want from Work?

work more balanced, what would they be?” The ICF provides a mechanism to frame and
understand Airmen concerns so root causes can be uncovered and identified for change.
Commanders and supervisors can then improve engagement by empowering their per­
sonnel to tackle these specific suggestions.
Set the example, and do not fake it. This is not a new insight, but it remains valuable.
Commanders and supervisors are always being watched by those they lead. If commanders
dislike their jobs, or they do not have good life/work balance, those considering a similar
career track will notice. Commanders and supervisors can use the ICF to make a self-
assessment of their own engagement and satisfaction with work. If their life is off-
balanced, they should discuss this with their supervisors, peers, family, and friends.
Commanders and supervisors are asked to do a lot, but forcing them to put in long
hours and getting out of work/life balance will affect their performance and may dampen
their replacement’s excitement to replace them in the future as well.
Conduct meaningful unit self-assessments. The ICF offers a framework for unit
self-assessments. For example, unit leadership can evaluate specific attributes such as how
much unit Airmen are working, if they are working on the weekends, or lack predict­
ability. It is essential to understand why individuals are putting in the long hours and have
unpredictable schedules, especially if the root cause is within a commander’s span of
control. If the lack of resources is the root cause, supervisors and commanders can iden­
tify the shortfalls and seek relief. The ICF is useful to uncover blind spots, resource short­
falls, and process gaps that affect unit engagement and retention.
Fight for and give feedback. Constant, relentless feedback is important. To truly
improve engagement and retention, commanders and supervisors need to know their
personnel’s goals and expectations. This engagement must happen on a consistent basis
because people’s priorities change over time. Those considering outside employment will
make comparison judgments about their future employment, including their own pros­
pects within the Air Force. Feedback sessions must be more than the Airman Compre­
hensive Assessment’s minimums. Supervisors and leaders must consider “what people
want from work” during their feedback sessions and map out a plan. They should also
ensure their supervisees understand existing compensation and benefits, development
expectations, and career options. Airmen want to develop and know they are on the right
track. If they are off-track, then they need to know and have a path to improve. The ICF
places an emphasis on a better understanding an individual’s goals, expectations, and as­
pirations because today’s employees expect it.
Establish recognition that matters. One important aspect to the ICF, is that each
attribute interacts and supports other attributes. This aspect goes for the commander’s
and supervisor’s priorities as well. If commanders value those who fly safely, use good
crew resource management practices, and make appropriate judgments, they should re­
ward and incentivize this behavior. If awards are not what interest certain Airmen, but
rather, they would like to lead an innovation project or attend a unique training class,
these might be better incentives and forms of recognition. Regardless of the forum or

AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019 15

Reynolds

format, everyone wants recognition for their work. The best informal and formal recogni­
tion programs reward the behavior and decisions valued by individuals and unit leadership.
Address individual wants during commander calls. Creating engaging commander’s
call presentations can be challenging, but the ICF provides a good starting point. Before
addressing any audience, it is useful to review each ICF attribute to identify items of in­
terest. Commanders can select topics that address new compensation programs, develop­
ment opportunities, meaningful recognition, and impacts from the unit’s work.
Lead innovation through experimentation and pilot projects. Individuals can be­
come frustrated with organizations and supervisors who are risk adverse or unwilling to
try something different. Innovation, creativity, empowerment, autonomy, and flexibility
are important to Airmen. Experimentation and pilot projects are useful approaches to
create an innovative environment while also providing unit leadership a measured, goal-
oriented process. Some organizations are fortunate to have visionaries and critical thinkers
who can identify problems. Others need commanders to play this role. Regardless of who
initiates a project, commanders must empower and support Airmen, knock down barriers,
and flight following progress.
Assessment for additional authority and command flexibility. Commanders who
want to improve their unit’s ability to retain personnel should consider the ICF attributes
to determine how much authority, influence, and decision space they possess to support
their Airmen. If they believe they lack any of these, they need to address their concerns
with higher-level commanders and staffs. In some cases, they will not gain delegated
authority (e.g., the ability to give pay increases); however, there are numerous other indi­
vidual concerns upon which commanders could and probably should have input (e.g.,
assignments, attending PME, announcing promotions, and eliminating unnecessary
additional duties).
These are just a few examples of how commanders and supervisors can use the ICF to
address their Airmen’s concerns and goals. Improving unit productivity and retaining
talent requires feedback, an understanding of what individuals want, providing meaningful
recognition, and connecting people to organizational success and purpose. Most impor­
tantly, unit-level engagement is essential and complimentary to servicewide engagement
and retention initiatives. It requires a cultural shift—a mindset focused on individuals.
Although these examples do not specifically address how they can improve recruitment,
the elements within ICF are what potential employees are looking for from an organization.
Organizations who address “what people want from work” and make this synonymous
with their culture will successfully and consistently attract talent.

Conclusion
Out of necessity, organizations are rethinking how they can better recruit, engage, and
retain their employees. By focusing on individuals, many are making themselves more
competitive at attracting talent, making their workforce more productive, and retaining
talent. The ICF simplifies complex human resource programs, processes, and policies by

16 AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019

 What Do People Want from Work?

answering the question, “What do people want from work?”Why? Because, this is exactly
what potential and existing employees consider when they join or decide to remain with
an organization. Individuals desire work that is enjoyable, interesting (but balanced), pro­
vides compensation, gives career opportunities, and recognizes their efforts.
Clearly, improving organizational recruitment, engagement, and retention is compli­
cated. It is also very personal for individuals. Organizations must execute their mission,
which will require individual sacrifice. Airmen understand this, and in fact, they are seek­
ing meaningful, productive work and want to be part of a profession that is bigger than
themselves. However, there must be a balance and a recognition that individuals have
their own goals, priorities, and limited patience. Military commanders and supervisors
may not think about adopting unit policies, processes, and programs with engagement
and retention in mind, but they have consequential influence on Airmen within their
unit. The practical problem is commanders and supervisors may not know where to focus
their limited time and resources to improve productivity and retention. The ICF provides
a simple guide to help commanders and supervisors address what Airmen want from
work. This approach has to become a part of their unit's culture and more broadly, part of
the service’s culture. Having a culture that considers and addresses individual goals and
desires is an advantage. Today’s Airmen are highly educated, motivated, and in demand.
Focusing on what they want from work is not only necessary but is essential to improve
recruitment, engagement, and retention throughout the Air Force. 

Notes
1. Annie McKee,“Being Happy at Work Matters,”Harvard Business Review, 14 November 2014, https://
hbr.org/2014/11/being-happy-at-work-matters.
2. Aline Quester and Robert Shuford, “Population Representation in the Military Services: Fiscal Year
2015 Summary Report,” CNA Analysis & Solutions, January 2017, 18, https://www.cna.org/CNA_files
/PDF/DRP-2017-U-015567-Final.pdf.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid., 4.
5. Phillip Carter et al., “AVF 4.0: The Future of the All-Volunteer Force: A CNAS Working Paper,”
Center for a New American Society, 28 March 2017, https://www.cnas.org/publications/reports/avf-4-0-the
-future-of-the-all-volunteer-force.
6. Steve LeVine, “Companies: Train Your Own Workers,” AXIOS, 11 April 2018, https://www.axios.com
/companies-train-your-own-workes-1523466665-b038a7bb-bcaa-421f-8204-54ab8b2d748e.html.
7. Amy McCullough, “The High Cost of the Pilot Shortage,” Air Force Magazine, 30 March 2017, http://
www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pages/2017/March%202017/March%2030%202017/The-High-Cost
-of-the-Pilot-Shortage.aspx.
8. Tobias Naegele, “DoD Battles to Train Enough Cyber Practitioners,” GOVTECH Works, 14 December
2016, https://www.govtechworks.com/dod-battles-to-train-enough-cyber-practitioners/#gs.kDY7hAM.
9. Department of the Air Force, USAF Posture Statement 2016, a presentation to the Senate Committee
on Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, 10 February 2016, https://www.af.mil/Portals/1/documents
/airpower/FY16_AF_PostureStatement_FINALversion2-2.pdf.
10. Lori Goler et al., “Why People Really Quit Their Jobs,” Harvard Business Journal, 11 January 2018,
https://hbr.org/2018/01/why-people-really-quit-their-jobs.

AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019 17

Reynolds

11. Jennifer J. Deal and Alec Levenson, What Millennials Want from Work: How to Maximize Engagement
in Today’s Workforce (New York: McGraw Hill, 2016), loc. 2580 of 4316, Kindle.
12. McKee, “Being Happy at Work Matters.”
13. Alan K. Jenkins, “Keeping the Talent: Understanding the Needs of Engineers and Scientists in the
Defense Acquisition Workforce,” Defense Acquisition Review Journal 16, no. 1 (April 2009): 25, http://connection
.ebscohost.com/c/articles/43096388/keeping-talent-understanding-needs-engineers-scientists-defense-acquisition
-workforce.
14. Susan M. Heathfield, “What People Want from Work: Motivation,” Balance Careers, 17 June 2018,
https://www.thebalance.com/what-people-want-from-work-motivation-1919051.
15. Deal and Levenson, What Millennials Want from Work, loc. 2246.
16. Sam Tanenhaus, “Generation Nice,” New York Times, 15 August 2014, https://www.nytimes
.com/2014/08/17/fashion/the-millennials-are-generation-nice.html?_r=0.
17. Viraktep Ath, “45 Years Later: Nixon and the Gates Commission,” Richard Nixon Foundation Library
& Museum, 20 February 2015, https://www.nixonfoundation.org/2015/02/45-years-later-nixon-gates
-commission/.
18. McKee, “Being Happy at Work Matters.”
19. Ibid.
20. Ira S. Wolfe, “Digital Addiction: Are Baby Boomers Calling the Kettle Black?,” Huffington Post, 28
March 2016, https://www.huffingtonpost.com/ira-wolfe/digital-addiction-are-bab_b_9550628.html.
21. Deal and Levenson, What Millennials Want from Work, loc. 2314.
22. Catherine Conlan,“5 Great Second Careers for Baby Boomers,”Monster Worldwide, accessed 2 November
2018, https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/5-great-second-careers-for-baby-boomers.
23. McKee, “Being Happy at Work Matters.”
24. Issie Lapowsky, “10 Things Employees Want Most,” Inc., 27 August 2010, https://www.inc.com
/guides/2010/08/10-things-employees-want.html.
25. Bruce N. Pfau and Ira T. Kay, The Human Capital Edge: 21 People Management Practices Your Company
Must Implement (or Avoid) to Maximize Shareholder Value (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001).
26. Amy McCullough, “The Pilot Shortage Quandary,” Air Force Magazine, June 2018, http://www
.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2018/June%202018/The-Pilot-Shortage-Quandary.aspx.
27. Ibid.
28. Eric Jackson, “Top Ten Reasons Why Large Companies Fail to Keep Their Best Talent,” Forbes, 14
December 2011, https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2011/12/14/top-ten-reasons-why-large-companies
-fail-to-keep-their-best-talent/#1ad30f45741d.

Brig Gen George M. Reynolds, USAF

Brigadier General Reynolds is the vice commander, Twenty-Fifth Air Force. He holds master’s degrees from
Gonzaga University, George Washington University, the Air Force Institute of Technology, and Air War College.
He was previously assigned as the Air Force Military Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations, New York.

18 AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL  SPRING 2019