The Army And Air Force Exchange Service

The United States Army is a complex organization made up of several commands and managed by different command levels. The U.S. Army is an organization different from that of a business in many unique ways. Specific examples of these differences include: financial reporting, disciplinary review procedures, and tactical operations. Although different in many ways, the Army shares many similar characteristics of a normal profit business. Army personnel are managed by supervisors arranged in a command structure similar to that of a business hierarchy. The Army will also encounter internal and external factors that could impede or enhance operations. As such, planning, organizing, leading, and controlling must be used by managers appropriately

As a Senior Enlisted Leader I aspire to develop a better comprehension of strategic issues. Having in-depth knowledge of the complexities behind decisions, processes, and the totality of circumstances is instrumental when addressing matters to Coast Guard field units. Furthermore, this perspective is integral to a Senior Enlisted Leader’s ability to provide timely, complete and reliable counsel to operational and strategic leaders, particularly when making decisions that significantly affect the workforce.

As I mentioned, I had a conversation with a past Advisory Board member “Carol Sherwood.” She is best friends with Peggy Newman, who was one of the wealthier board member. Carol’s husband is HR director for Falcon Bank and best friend with the banks’ president. In our meeting Carol mentioned her love for the Army, because of the help she received as a single mother. She was cordial and diplomatic in discussing the Army during the leadership of Jim Lawrence and Reyes. Carol shared the story of why half of the advisory board left during Reyes leadership. If, more information is needed on this subject please let me know.

Army Doctrine Reference Publication 1-0 states, “living by and upholding the moral principles of the Army Ethic” is the foundation to our profession. An organization cannot survive if there are no foundation for morals. The organization will internally implode. This is a critical fact for the Army. Individuals that do not have a foundation that aligns with the Army’s foundation is detrimental to the organization. The purpose for this short paper is to explore the fundamentals of our profession; examine the need for structure; how to return to basics of the profession; who needs to enforce standards; finally, implementing a culture change within the Army. Army leaders have categorized the four problems that currently plague the Army

The situation in today 's Army is clearly much different from what existed years ago. Many changes have occurred, moving the Army 's EO program from a strictly educational and training initiative to a multifaceted management program with clear goals and objectives. These goals and objectives are also an integral part of human relations and are nurtured and developed through a professional military education system.

Officers is to advise all levels of commands on these issues. Continuing the Army ethic

With each passing year, current technologies continue to evolve or change while new technology or innovations emerge that, in some instances, profoundly change markets, societies, or ways of living. For all organizations, to include the military, the persistent change of technology means that organizations must also evolve and change accordingly. Based on research by Accenture’s Paul Nunes and Tim Breene in 2011, only 7 percent of companies that cease to grow ever survive over the long term, which serves as a strong warning for any organization about the need to change. In addition to technological change, the military faces many other challenges as well. The most significant challenges include budgetary constraints, mandated drawdowns in personnel strength, and numerous mission demands across the globe.

On a cold March day, GER Mike Zellen landed in Washington, D.C., bringing with him the message of the Elks, and ready to ask the Order’s quintessential question, “How can the Elks help you?” Welcomed by leader who have met with past GERs, GER Zellen took the opportunity to establish a new friendship with Vice Chief of the National Guard Lieutenant General (LTG) Daniel Hokanson. The meeting was one for the books. LGT Hokanson’s enthusiasm and insightful thinking quickly led to a new partnership to help empower National Guard members and their families with needed programs and resources.

The United States army started in 1775 with only a group of volunteer fighters who opposed against the rule and the oppression of the British. (Hogan 2005) The U.S army is still an all-volunteer fighting force today defending and defeating enemy threats to the United States. Since the creation of the U.S army it has built on tradition and honor for its country and willing to defend the constitution for more than two and a half century. Learning the culture of the United States Army will help give people an understanding of the people who serve in the army as well as learn what shaped the army today.

On August 2, 2011, Congress passed the Budget Control Act (BCA) of 2011 which cut $487 billion from projected defense spending over the next 10 years.1 The act also established a system of sequestration, which would cut an additional $495 billion from the defense budget.2 Altogether, the BCA would cut almost $1 trillion dollars from the Department of Defense (DoD). The passing of the BCA and the subsequent loss of funding mark an end to a 13-year period of robust budget allocations to support the global war on terrorism. From 2001 to 2013 over $1.6 trillion has been allocated to the DoD to support preparations for and execution of operations in various overseas areas.3 Within this $1.6 trillion, 94% of the funding was allocated to support operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.4 This robust amount of funding cultivated a culture within the DoD that there would always be funding available to cover costs at home and abroad. This culture is deeply entrenched within the United States Army due to large budgets provided to the Army over the past 13 years. In today’s environment of shrinking budgets, this culture can no longer stand true and must be changed. Establishing a cost-conscious culture (CCC) within the Army is critical to our ability to sustain the current Army force structure and make the needed modernization investments to ensure our capability to fight and win our nations wars.

The current political and business environment has created many challenges for HQ USAASC from continuing resolutions, change in ASA(ALT) Leadership and most recently an administrative change in our political environment. Looming on the horizon is the prospect of major changes in the “Way” we do business and our Priorities as a Governmental Enterprise. These coupled with the ever-changing and increasing demands and expectations of our customers, partners, and stakeholders, swift technological changes on the “hard” side and advancing communication capabilities on the “soft” side, complexity & uncertainty of systems and their effects, changes in warfare as well as being asked to do more without more and to generate greater efficiencies provide

Best Business Practice: We recommend that HQ USARPAC adopt Army in Korea Pamphlet 37-47, Representation Funds of the Secretary of the Army, dated 4 December 2012 as the command’s start point for the drafting and issuance of a new command-wide ORF

Too often in business as well as the military, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” (Powell, C #7). Too often the command as well as enlisted soldiers will use this analogy to continue to do what they have always done and fight change. Also this leads to allowing small details to be overlooked because it’s been allowed before, these small details, such as production schedules become larger details. These small little details will cause larger details to be overlooked in the future. This culture will foster reactivity instead of promoting proactivity (Powell, C #7). This type of culture is a struggle for leaders to change in the National Guard because of the hometown mentality, all though we strive to keep the since of community in our units as leaders we have to be the supporters of change. Be able to answer the “why” when it is necessary to move in a different direction, we have to be able to always look beneath the surface and not take situations at face value. When we have questions or concerns as long as they are morally and

This paper discusses public relations of the Army and Air Force Exchange Services (AAFES) located at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. The Post Exchange (PX) stores are generally located on military bases and wherever US military personnel are stationed. AAFES sells products to military families, civil service employees, government contractors, and retired military personnel. The paper discusses the arena of their public relations endeavors. In this paper, I will discuss some of those public relations areas in grave detail, which links to the company’s structure and its consumers. This paper is organized as follows: In the first section, I will give a brief introduction to the history of company known as AAFES. In the second section, I will analyze

The Army and the Air Force have many similarities and differences, some of the similarities are the troop’s dedication, diversity, and patriotism, and some of the differences are the way each branch trains, their respective customs, and quality life.