Defense News and Headlines
  • All Technology
  • AI
  • Autonomy
  • B2B Growth
  • Big Data
  • BioTech
  • ClimateTech
  • Consumer Tech
  • Crypto
  • Cybersecurity
  • DevOps
  • Digital Marketing
  • Ecommerce
  • EdTech
  • Enterprise
  • FinTech
  • GovTech
  • Hardware
  • HealthTech
  • HRTech
  • LegalTech
  • Nanotech
  • PropTech
  • Quantum
  • Robotics
  • SaaS
  • SpaceTech
AllNewsDealsSocialBlogsVideosPodcastsDigests

Defense Pulse

EMAIL DIGESTS

Daily

Every morning

Weekly

Sunday recap

NewsDealsSocialBlogsVideosPodcasts
DefenseNewsManpower Analysis to Improve the Functional Alignment and Organizational Structure of Space Training and Readiness Command Headquarters
Manpower Analysis to Improve the Functional Alignment and Organizational Structure of Space Training and Readiness Command Headquarters
Defense

Manpower Analysis to Improve the Functional Alignment and Organizational Structure of Space Training and Readiness Command Headquarters

•February 10, 2026
0
RAND Blog/Analysis
RAND Blog/Analysis•Feb 10, 2026

Why It Matters

Addressing these workforce deficiencies is critical for STARCOM to deliver effective training and readiness, directly impacting the U.S. Space Force’s ability to conduct space warfighting. The recommendations also set a precedent for organizational design in emerging military domains.

Key Takeaways

  • •Staffing gaps across all STARCOM directorates
  • •Civilian and contractor reliance masks personnel shortfalls
  • •Ambiguous roles hinder unity of effort
  • •Flat structure conflicts with mission command needs
  • •Optimization model proposed to align workforce

Pulse Analysis

Space Training and Readiness Command (STARCOM) sits at the nexus of the U.S. Space Force’s talent pipeline, responsible for turning guardians into combat‑ready operators. As the space domain grows more contested, the command’s ability to staff critical training, doctrine, and testing functions directly influences national security. The RAND analysis underscores that STARCOM’s current manpower model, heavily weighted toward civilian and contractor support, cannot sustain the expanding mission set, creating a vulnerability that could erode operational tempo and innovation.

The report’s findings paint a picture of structural misalignment: fragmented responsibilities, ambiguous authority lines, and a flat organizational chart that hampers decisive command and control. These internal frictions are compounded by external pressures, including unclear expectations from the Air Force and the nascent Space Futures Command. When personnel are split across start‑up, steady‑state, and ad‑hoc tasks, mission‑critical activities suffer, raising risk levels for both training outcomes and broader space warfighting readiness. The analysis quantifies these gaps, offering a data‑driven foundation for reform.

To remediate, RAND proposes a staffing optimization model paired with a suite of governance changes—elevating key entities to O‑6/O‑7 authority, instituting a senior executive service management layer, and creating a chief‑of‑staff role to centralize coordination. By clarifying roles, consolidating contracts, and instituting performance‑management programs, STARCOM can align its workforce with mission priorities and reduce reliance on external support. Successful implementation not only strengthens the Space Force’s training pipeline but also provides a template for other emerging service components grappling with rapid capability expansion and organizational inertia.

Manpower Analysis to Improve the Functional Alignment and Organizational Structure of Space Training and Readiness Command Headquarters

Sandra Kay Evans, Nelson Lim, Andrea M. Abler, Naoko Aoki, Lisa Pelled Colabella, Ethan Doshi, Caroline Margaret Johnston, Sarah Nicole Kosic, Robert Romer, Joshua Simulcik, et al.

Research Published: February 10, 2026

The mission of the U.S. Space Force (USSF) shapes all USSF activities, from doctrine and organization to training and policy. The Space Training and Readiness Command (STARCOM) plays a central role in this mission by preparing the force through training, education, doctrine development, exercises, wargames, and capability testing. However, its headquarters (HQ) has been concerned that it does not have the manpower needed to meet its evolving set of requirements. To examine this issue, HQ STARCOM sought to understand the manpower requirements and optimal workforce composition needed to address its missions and how it can organize to achieve improved alignment between its functions and missions.

To assess and improve its functional alignment and human‑resource allocation, RAND researchers determined HQ STARCOM’s manpower needs as it prepares its guardians—military and civilian personnel in the USSF—for space combat operations. In this report, the researchers present the findings and recommendations from their work, including an estimation of HQ STARCOM’s current and projected staffing levels and workload, an optimization model for staffing decisions, and an assessment of HQ STARCOM’s mission alignment and organizational structure.

Key Findings

  • Staffing gaps exist in virtually every directorate. There is more reported workload than personnel to conduct the workload. Civilians and contractors are used heavily across most directorates.

  • Unity of effort is difficult because personnel are fractionated across missions, roles are ambiguous, and the connection between functions and missions is unclear.

  • Structural tensions stem from the friction between STARCOM’s flat structure and the need for mission command and control, the misalignment of functions, and insufficient support from the U.S. Air Force and others.

  • Mission‑related risks include strain on resources and personnel as a result of the mix of start‑up, steady‑state, and emergent or ad‑hoc functions and non‑operational tasks diverting staff from operational missions.

  • External factors also affect operations, including other entities’ misunderstanding STARCOM’s functions, split organizational alignment of the Operational Test and Training Infrastructure Integrated Program Office, and uncertainty related to the establishment of the Space Futures Command.

Recommendations

  • Use the STARCOM Staffing Optimization Model described in this report to aid staffing decisions and implement changes to improve organizational design.

  • Improve unity of effort by:

    1. Establishing Guardian Development and Combat Credibility entities as O‑6 or O‑7 authorities;

    2. Establishing a Management entity as a Senior Executive Service authority;

    3. Organizing management HQ under a chief‑of‑staff role;

    4. Emphasizing mission and management integration across all organizational levels;

    5. Conducting a formal process for assigning responsibilities.

  • Relieve structural tension by:

    1. Aligning staff structure and processes with clearly defined roles and responsibilities;

    2. Prioritizing primary missions;

    3. Addressing external support concerns.

  • Address mission‑related risks by:

    1. Developing and implementing an organizational change‑management plan;

    2. Conducting bottom‑up strategic planning;

    3. Establishing a comprehensive organizational performance‑management program;

    4. Establishing a support‑contracts consolidation plan.

  • Influence or address external factors by establishing operational policies and procedures clarifying how HQ and deltas can navigate external factors, including how to elevate issues with external support entities.

  • For internal alignment of program managers and contracting officers within acquisition and contracting, keep the program manager as the lead; having a contracting officer oversee a program manager is not advisable.

Read Original Article
0

Comments

Want to join the conversation?

Loading comments...