Military titles → civilian occupations

Extend the occupational map to job titles

An occupation-level relatedness map can also connect job titles to civilian work. Here, established title-to-SOC crosswalks link military job titles to civilian occupations, which provide starting points in the relatedness map. Job descriptions supply task evidence for inspecting those connections.

  1. 1

    Build civilian profiles from postings

    TitleMatch maps posting titles to occupations; TaskMatch retrieves task IDs from posting text. We aggregate these into occupation-task profiles and compare their task weights to build the posting-task relatedness model.

  2. 2

    Extract tasks from military descriptions

    TaskMatch retrieves the same task IDs from official military duty descriptions. We compare these military task profiles with the civilian posting profiles. For three worked examples, we also review whether the military text supports the retrieved tasks.

  3. 3

    Connect job titles to the occupational map and compare with established crosswalks

    Task similarity connects military job descriptions to civilian occupation-task profiles. Compare these rankings with established military-to-civilian crosswalks, and open shared tasks to inspect the source text. Crosswalk matches also provide starting points for exploring related civilian occupations.

What this shows: job titles and descriptions can extend an occupation-level map. The crosswalk supplies documented connections; task similarity supplies a separate comparison. Neither establishes a verified career transition.

59% recover a documented civilian match

Among military entries with a crosswalk occupation covered by our civilian data, the task-based model includes a documented match among its top 20 recommendations for 59% (647 of 1,091).

Supporting results, sources and code

This comparison uses tasks retrieved from military descriptions before the additional review of the three worked examples. Military crosswalk codes do not enter the task ranking. The reference is the Defense Manpower Data Center’s July 2024 military-to-civilian crosswalk, using its active entries and six-digit civilian occupation codes.

Entries with at least one documented match among the recommendations
ReferenceEntriesTop 1Top 5Top 10Top 20
Defense Department crosswalk1,29217.3%31.0%39.1%50.1%
Occupation references in military manuals94722.3%34.6%41.6%51.2%

The table includes references outside the civilian comparison data. Restricting to entries with at least one covered reference gives 59.3% for the Defense Department crosswalk and 62.7% for military manuals. Entries can repeat a military occupation across source versions; grouped, future-effective and general-standard records are excluded. Tied rankings are averaged. Agreement with a crosswalk is distinct from recovery of observed transitions.

Results for each military entry (CSV) · Results by service (CSV) · Ranked civilian matches (CSV) · Analysis code (ZIP) · Source descriptions, crosswalk and coding (ZIP)

Try a worked example

Army 15R, AH-64 Attack Helicopter Repairer, maps to Aircraft Mechanics and Service Technicians (49-3011). Select that civilian match and open its tasks to compare the official military duties with the retrieved task statements.

Explore documented civilian matches and the task evidence supporting the reviewed examples. The overall crosswalk comparison above covers the larger set of military titles; review of individual examples is separate from that comparison.

Methods and interpretation ·

Download the connections

Data files and field guide · Connections · CSV · Complete navigator data · JSON

Explore the military-to-civilian connections

Explore documented civilian matches and the task evidence supporting the reviewed examples. The overall crosswalk comparison above covers the larger set of military titles; review of individual examples is separate from that comparison.

Loading…

Website layout and explanatory text were prepared with generative AI (Codex). Data sources, model methods and code.

The National Labor Exchange (NLx) Data Trust bears no responsibility for the analyses or interpretations of the data presented here. The opinions expressed herein, including any implications for policy, are those of the authors and not of the NLx Data Trust members or others.