A field test in 24 Air Force organizations, eight each from Administration, Propulsion Maintenance, and Weather, of the methodology for generating efficiency and effectiveness measures (MGEEM) was conducted to evaluate (a) the number and types of measures developed, (b) the acceptability of the process and its results to participants (e.g., unit commanders), (c) the cost effectiveness of measures in terms of their use of existing data, and (d) the extent to which independent application of the methodology in similar organizations produces similar sets of measures. For each organization, key results areas (KRAs) - categories of intended accomplishments - and quantitative efficiency and effectiveness indicators were developed for each KRA. Results showed that the MGEEM led to a usable number of indicators for each organization; however, there was a much larger percentage of effectiveness (86 to 95 percent) as opposed to efficiency indicators. The MGEEM process and its results were judged very acceptable to participants. The indicators generated were judged cost-effective to implement since approximately 80 - 90 percent made use of existing data. Finally, the indicators were found to have relatively low consistency from organization-to-organization within the three functional areas. Modifications of the MGEEM process are suggested to improve the consistency from site-to-site and to better 'set the stage' for participants. Keywords: Effectiveness; Efficiency; Efficiency measurement; Organizational effectiveness; Productivity; Productivity criteria; Productivity measurement. (Author).