Promotion and PRF Information

[Guest ThatGuy]

Will not being an IP due to DNIF kill your chances at making major if you have checked the other boxes and have sound strats?

[Jaded]

No. The cop O-6 on the board has no idea why being an IP is a big deal.

[Spinner]

Will not being an IP due to DNIF kill your chances at making major if you have checked the other boxes and have sound strats?

No. The cop O-6 on the board has no idea why being an IP is a big deal.

Correct. I was still a CP when I went to my major's board, and had no problems. If you have all boxes checked, you'll be good to go. Late-rate sucks though...

[Champ Kind]

From what I saw at the last board, at least on the rated side, SOS in-res and combat experience were assumed. Other than that, there were three big boxes to have checked (in no particular order):

-Flight Commander

-Instructor

-AAD

If you had at least one of those, you were good. If you were missing all three, you were in danger of being passed over.

[nrodgsxr]

Will not being an IP due to DNIF kill your chances at making major if you have checked the other boxes and have sound strats?

However it's probably important to your Senior rater for getting that DP. Just don't be a shitbag and you'll probably be fine.

[Guest ThatGuy]

From what I saw at the last board, at least on the rated side, SOS in-res and combat experience were assumed. Other than that, there were three big boxes to have checked (in no particular order): -Flight Commander -Instructor -AAD If you had at least one of those, you were good. If you were missing all three, you were in danger of being passed over.

The more boxes you have checked lessens the likelihood you will be passed over. I had someone tell me if you are an assistant flight commander then that shows "less potential." I told this individual I have a buddy who was an assistant flight commander for 3 years and at two different duty stations. He became a flight commander before his board and he got promoted.

[Liquid]

Those that get passed over tend to have an inflated sense of how good they are at their job. They have a tendency to blame Christmas parties and execs for their bottom 25% performance. Further most part, the senior raters and the board get it right.

[pcola]

Those that get passed over tend to have an inflated sense of how good they are at their job. They have a tendency to blame Christmas parties and execs for their bottom 25% performance. Further most part, the senior raters and the board get it right.

GRENAAAAADE!

[billy pilgrim]

Those that get passed over tend to have an inflated sense of how good they are at their job. They have a tendency to blame Christmas parties and execs for their bottom 25% performance. Further most part, the senior raters and the board get it right.

Could you please elaborate on this? Are you one of those senior raters or board members?

[Snooter]

Those that get passed over tend to have an inflated sense of how good they are at their job. They have a tendency to blame Christmas parties and execs for their bottom 25% performance. Further most part, the senior raters and the board get it right.

LURKER!

[Vetter]

See, that's the thing. I was never told that I was a shitty officer. Not once was I told how I could improve my performance as a pilot and officer. Even when I asked. I was always told I was doing what I needed to do, I was upgraded on time, and I showed job progression. Then I volunteered for VSP, was denied, and was passes over 9 months later. Yep, you're correct. Douche.

[Liquid]

Top half is easy to identify. Good to great officers with their shit done (SOS, Flt CC, skill, depth, breadth, strats, combat, AAD). Good at their jobs, paper to prove it. Bottom half gets tougher. Records look the same. Distinguishers are any of the above. Any. Most that get passed over don't give a shit and show it with what they do, what jobs they take and how hard they work. Not trolling. I'm sure there are plenty of good officers that got passed over for no easily identifiable reason. For every "good" officer you know that got passed over, there are 50 that deserved it. They all are clearly not in the top half of their year group and did not have the distinguishing accomplishments to get them above the red line. It happens, but it is rare that top 50% performers get tripped up by the little stuff that makes the difference around the red line and gets widely bitched about. AF wide, rater and additional raters document sub 50% performers on OPRs. It is not hard to identify the bottom 25% but it gets trickey drawing the red line. AF gets it right most of the time.

[Karl Hungus]

Top half is easy to identify. Good to great officers with their shit done (SOS, Flt CC, skill, depth, breadth, strats, combat, AAD). Good at their jobs, paper to prove it. Bottom half gets tougher. Records look the same. Distinguishers are any of the above. Any. Most that get passed over don't give a shit and show it with what they do, what jobs they take and how hard they work. Not trolling. I'm sure there are plenty of good officers that got passed over for no easily identifiable reason. For every "good" officer you know that got passed over, there are 50 that deserved it. They all are clearly not in the top half of their year group and did not have the distinguishing accomplishments to get them above the red line. It happens, but it is rare that top 50% performers get tripped up by the little stuff that makes the difference around the red line and gets widely bitched about. AF wide, rater and additional raters document sub 50% performers on OPRs. It is not hard to identify the bottom 25% but it gets trickey drawing the red line. AF gets it right most of the time.

This, ladies and gents, is why I can't wait to take my services elsewhere.

[Vetter]

The blue force is strong with this one.

[Gravedigger]

How many of the FGOs on the forum believe they were inferior candidates to those that were not selected during their promotion boards? There are absolutely dirtbags that get promoted and good dudes passed over every board, but I bet most of you, when you look at the non-selects you competed against felt like the right cuts were made. Everyone always bitches about the process until you ask them who they would have promoted in their place. If something is vastly different in the flying world, I defer, but I bet most of you agree with liquid here on some level; despite the obvious senior leader kool aid qualities of his posts. I'm a lowly Captain, and have no dog in this fight, but the baseops mafia likes to shit on anything that smells like Big Blue, regardless of merit. That's not a good way to operate, IMHO.

Vetter, it seems your leaders fucked you for showing your hand. That sucks.

[Jaded]

Ask those folks at Misawa who had their "SOS, Flt CC, skill, depth, breadth, strats, combat" done when they went to their board how that worked out for them.

[pcola]

Top half is easy to identify. Good to great officers with their shit done (SOS, Flt CC, skill, depth, breadth, strats, combat, AAD). Good at their jobs, paper to prove it. Bottom half gets tougher. Records look the same. Distinguishers are any of the above. Any. Most that get passed over don't give a shit and show it with what they do, what jobs they take and how hard they work. Not trolling. I'm sure there are plenty of good officers that got passed over for no easily identifiable reason. For every "good" officer you know that got passed over, there are 50 that deserved it. They all are clearly not in the top half of their year group and did not have the distinguishing accomplishments to get them above the red line. It happens, but it is rare that top 50% performers get tripped up by the little stuff that makes the difference around the red line and gets widely bitched about. AF wide, rater and additional raters document sub 50% performers on OPRs. It is not hard to identify the bottom 25% but it gets trickey drawing the red line. AF gets it right most of the time.

The problem isn't in identifying who falls above/below your "red line." The problem is in the criteria that defines the line.

[Guest ThatGuy]

Ask those folks at Misawa who had their "SOS, Flt CC, skill, depth, breadth, strats, combat" done when they went to their board how that worked out for them.

I know one of the guys that you are talking about. I don't know him on a personal level but I know someone close to him. Anyway, he didn't get promoted because he only had his BAC+. I beleive the WG/CC gave him a "P" as a result. I can't speak for everyone though. This individual thought he was getting promoted for certain. Correct me if I am wrong but not every FAIP becomes a Flt/CC in UPT.

Top half is easy to identify. Good to great officers with their shit done (SOS, Flt CC, skill, depth, breadth, strats, combat, AAD). Good at their jobs, paper to prove it. Bottom half gets tougher. Records look the same. Distinguishers are any of the above. Any. Most that get passed over don't give a shit and show it with what they do, what jobs they take and how hard they work. Not trolling. I'm sure there are plenty of good officers that got passed over for no easily identifiable reason. For every "good" officer you know that got passed over, there are 50 that deserved it. They all are clearly not in the top half of their year group and did not have the distinguishing accomplishments to get them above the red line. It happens, but it is rare that top 50% performers get tripped up by the little stuff that makes the difference around the red line and gets widely bitched about. AF wide, rater and additional raters document sub 50% performers on OPRs. It is not hard to identify the bottom 25% but it gets trickey drawing the red line. AF gets it right most of the time.

If you fall in the sub 50% category what are some ways your direct supervisor may document that in an OPR? I know if you lack a push line for more job responsibility is one of those ways.

Edited June 5, 2013 by slick999

[ThreeHoler]

If you fall in the sub 50% category what are some ways your direct supervisor may document that in an OPR? I know if you lack a push line for more job responsibility is one of those ways.

My insights as a supervisor.

It is tough given the constraints of the OPR writing guides. You can't say something negative without making it a referral. And you can't always count on the presence or absence of a strat...our wing restricts starts to "top 15%" only. Makes it tough when you supervise a flight and you can only give out #1/x because 2/3rds of your flight is enlisted. So, unless you are creative and/or lucky with close out dates...some good people (your #2s) don't always get strats. Meaningful strats are "#x/y CGOs" or "#x/y Lts" and to a lesser extent "#x/y IPs" or "#x/y ACs" and meaningless strats are "#1 pick for..." or "#1 pilot."

However, to write an OPR to "the level of a person's performance" is the key in our fucked up system. This is what distinguishes a bad OPR from a good but not the best OPR. If the person is a performer, the bullets should scream it. Every bullet on a great OPR has meaningful impact and result. Use either "action, impact, result" or "action, impact" format. I prefer the latter personally, but I know the board looks for the former. On a mediocre to poor OPR, the bullets don't pop. They don't show leadership. They read along the lines of "person was here, did stuff, some vague result." Also, the composition of the push line matters. "Continue to challenge" is the classic weak push, but there are other ways. Typically no job push or a weak PME push.

Finally, for the really bad OPR that doesn't fall under the referral process, you have the "spelling and grammar" at your disposal. This requires a note from the rater or additional rater so that the chain doesn't kick it back. Usually to the effect of "spelling and grammar mistakes on this OPR are intentional." I've only seen that used once in my career though.

I don't like the way we do OPRs, but I know how to work within the system to get accolades for my performers and how to communicate that someone is a bump on a log. Some days I wish I could write something like "His officers would follow him anywhere, but only out of morbid curiosity."

[NKAWTG]

People are referring to a top 50% / bottom 50%. That's not really the way the Air Force makes the cuts. More like a top 20% / bottom 80%. First time the Air Force will tell you where you stand in relation to everyone else is the Major's board, and whether you are a school select. Once on that path, your career is managed, and big blue will put you into positions to succeed up to being a SQ/CC. You can screw it up at that point, but you'll make it that far once a school select. The occasional late bloomer will appear, but the system isn't really set up to accommodate them. Good dudes will get passed over all the time, but enough competent people will get promoted to keep the machine running. Promotion boards are about getting enough of the right people, not getting all the right people.

As a corollary, the reason our recent RIF boards were so screwed up is they took same process for ID'ing the top 20%, and tried to get the bottom 20% out of it. It simply didn't work because the bottom 80% looked roughly the same, and it never really mattered before to separate 25th percentile from 90th percentile.

[Guest ThatGuy]

Ask those folks at Misawa who had their "SOS, Flt CC, skill, depth, breadth, strats, combat" done when they went to their board how that worked out for them.

Are you for certain they all checked the right boxes? Or are you making a blanket statement without the facts?

[goingkinetic]

Liquid could you please provide one example of how an AAD made the air force more effective in flying, fighting and winning? I'm pretty sure you can't. The system you've described is very good at selecting the best hoop jumper not the best leader.

[pbar]

Just finished up writing a performance report on a USMC major and I've also written on Navy and Army types as well. Our system is definitely the worse of the four from what I can see.

On the other hand, I remember a anecdote one of my ROTC professors relayed about the process the AF went through to switch from the OER (Officer Effectiveness Report) to the OPR (really dating myself here). He said they had a team that went and talked to most of the Fortune 500 companies about how they did evals and every company told them, "When you figure it out, come back and tell us." Performance evals will always be a hideously wicked problem to tackle and subject to human frailties. Of course, it'd be nice if the AF didn't screw it up worse than the other services...

[ThreeHoler]

On the other hand, I remember a anecdote one of my ROTC professors relayed about the process the AF went through to switch from the OER (Officer Effectiveness Report) to the OPR (really dating myself here). He said they had a team that went and talked to most of the Fortune 500 companies about how they did evals and every company told them, "When you figure it out, come back and tell us." Performance evals will always be a hideously wicked problem to tackle and subject to human frailties. Of course, it'd be nice if the AF didn't screw it up worse than the other services...

Supposedly, the DoD is starting up "360 feedback."

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/article/20130501/NEWS/305010023/Dempsey-360-degree-reviews-could-help-select-better-leaders

"May you live in interesting times."

[Liquid]

Liquid could you please provide one example of how an AAD made the air force more effective in flying, fighting and winning? I'm pretty sure you can't. The system you've described is very good at selecting the best hoop jumper not the best leader.

I got my AAD from Embry Riddle. Every class I took was related to flying. It made me a better pilot and prepared me for what I thought was going to be my next career in the airlines. It was easy and I knocked it out going to night school for 18 months. I was a better officer because of what I learned from my classmates and the course.

Most of our flying, fighting and winning is done by our steely eyed CGOs and Airmen/NCOs. They probably don't need AAD to be more effective. FGO, command and joint leader requirements are different. If you want to do more than your primary technical job, you need to broaden your education and experience. We do that with AAD, PME, staff and assignments.

Hoop jumpers understand the requirements for promotion defined by Big Blue and taught at many levels. If you don't want to broaden or get AAD/PME done, or accept the value of the hoops, you are in luck. You will most likely be passed over but "continued" and offered the opportunity to keep doing your kick ass job at the same grade without the expectation of more responsibilities. I know many passed over Capts and Majs who continue past 20 doing the technical job they love. Most, but not all, later regret not jumping through hoops and taking the well defined expectations for promotion and advancement seriously. They gambled, lost and regret it.

PME, AAD and broadening aren't that hard to get done. Call it useless box checking or not, if you know the expectations and deliberately self eliminate or at least lessen your chance of being in the top 80% of your year group, don't bitch about it later.

The top 20% of our force in every grade and AFSC are ######ing squared away, dedicated and deserve what they get. It is very competitive at that level and Christmas parties don't mean shit. The bottom 20% are not squared away and for the most part do not deserve to continue service at a higher grade, with different responsibilities and more pay.

Good officers get passed over. Most have a reason. A few just get caught up by mediocre records, bad timing or stronger peers. The system isn't perfect, but it also isn't too complicated.

You can be a leader as a passed over Capt, but you can't be a commander or joint leader without being in the top 20% crowd. Sure, we have plenty of leaders who meet the criteria, are selected by their functional DTs and wing CCs to lead/command but fall short. Some get fired, some squeak through, some kick ass.