Promotion and PRF Information

[BitteEinBit]

Rusty,

Liquid has your head spinning so fast, nobody can keep up with your flip flopping!

Your first argument is that APZ guys should have a shot to compete for DPs in future years with IPZ guys (without somehow hurting the IPZ guys), and when Liquid replies that the "best APZ guy" is almost always less deserving of a DP than the "last IPZ 'DP' guy" in any given year, you switch gears and say that APZ 'P' records should get looked at at promotion boards! That's after you earlier complained about writing APZ PRFs that nobody will look at!

You are moving into the "severely complaining" realm!

Depends on what criteria you use to determine who is "better" than who...hint: AADs is not it, and that could be why a dude is an APZ to begin with. Sure, his fault for not doing what he knew was considered by the board...but it doesn't necessarily make him less qualified to lead. Dont worry, we'll start to figure that one out.

Why don't we just stop treating all APZ bubbas as "not promotable" and lacking leadership potential just because they didn't get picked up in their IPZ board. Sure, most will probably never be promoted because of the quality of their records, but we already know some good ones slip through the cracks...but the APZ label rarely gives them a chance to rebound. Remember, the dudes in the last three promotion cycles (96-99) joined this AF at a time where 12 years was the average pin on time for O-4. There was plenty of time back then to get a Master's degree or finish PME. Just look at some of the senior leader bios of guys who didn't get a Masters until their 12-14 year point. That would get them kicked out of the AF these days.

It was the AF who accelerated promotions to O-4 to the 10 year pin-on point (that is an 8-year IPZ point). Add a war in there when these young bucks were deployed 300 days a year without the online degree mills we have now and you have a significant number of bubbas who are behind the power curve when it comes to AAD completion. I'll be willing to bet the statistics would show that specific AFSCs fall into this category. Add in the Gen Jumper "we'll-send-you-to-get-a-degree-if-we-want-you-to-have-a-degree-just-focus-on-the-mission" roadshow, and it didn't help matters either. Does it make them poor leaders because they didn't complete that Masters by their 6th year while the REMF who might have one deployment under their belt was able to get it done? No. Stop using BS criteria to determine who future leaders are. I assure you it isn't necessarily the guy who got his AAD/PME completed in record time like some want to believe.

Leadership is way more than AAD completion dates. Leadership is mostly about connecting with people and motivating them, inspiring them, molding them, mentoring them...leaving a lasting impression. Until someone can show me how obtaining an AAD in record time somehow gives dudes the ability to lead this way, I'll stand by my assertion that AADs as a leadership indicator is the wrong way to identify your leaders. My opinion only.

Edit to change my definition of "leadership"

Edited July 10, 2013 by BitteEinBit

[Rusty Pipes]

So just to clarify, you are suggesting that DPs compete against other DPs regardless of IPZ/APZ, and Ps compete against Ps? Thereby giving you 3 "IPZish" looks at major with a P?

That's what I'm taking away here. Not a bad idea, but I wonder if DPs would still be allocated against IPZ numbers or if under that construct they would use a total population. Obviously it depends on end strength, so rates would have to drop for the Ps to accommodate.

I'm guessing I would see it along the lines of how the school selection process works. I would agree that your top 25% will always stand out just as your bottom 5-10% would. The numbers in between are all relatively close to each other. How many times have you seen a Major/Maj (S) who just seemed like your average (or maybe even below average) officer hit a stride and go from someone that the Boss didn't really know to a guy he ends up pushing for School... and he gets it on his 3rd look? I've seen it happen lots of times. Maybe I'm just not getting the "Big Picture", but if you are going to go through all the trouble of writing a PRF, pulling the records, convening a Board... at least take a look at the thing and score it. If you do and realize that the guy who is APZ scored higher than the IPZ would you disqualify the APZ just because he is a year older? That is what essentially happens now when the APZ P doesn't even get his PRF looked at. Maybe there is solid reasoning as to why that should happen, I just haven't been able to hear anyone come out with it. Some of those 157 who were booted were really sharp dudes who may have just been victims of bad timing and what is basically a one look promotion system. I'm not sure if the kind of system I'm talking about would have helped my two buds who got booted get O-5, but they are both O-5s now in their respective ANG/RES units which are pretty competitive... so they weren't the passed over useless guys that many see the APZ types as.

Edited July 10, 2013 by Rusty Pipes

[Vetter]

This whole discussion is really moot. You have Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3 officers. Your tier is determined as a Lt/young Capt. At that point, your career is pretty much mapped for you. Why worry about anything after that?

[Magellan]

This whole discussion is really moot. You have Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3 officers. Your tier is determined as a Lt/young Capt. At that point, your career is pretty much mapped for you. Why worry about anything after that?

That works for 75%, but what about the 25% that are late rated, FAIPs, guys that change MWS, and late bloomers.

[AnimalMother]

Willing to risk burning to death or taking an RPG in the head, but unwilling to risk that next promotion or assignment? Courage is more than risking your life to defend your country and your team. It is also doing the right thing in the face of possible adverse consequences. Do it respectfully and with some passion and your commander should at least respect your opinion and your courage to say something unpopular but founded in logic and truth. Not calling you out brick, or saying you are not courageous. Just countering your caution to not have the discussion because it may piss off your boss.

Sounds insane doesn't it? But look at the statistics and the results. This shit is epidemic. Why? Probably because we have unwittingly instsitutonalized a culture in which this type of feedback is not valid. I have had a lot of commanders in my short time in teh Air Force, and I mean a disproportionately high number. Only 1 has directly asked me (and other dudes in the squadron) for honest feedback and input. And, i only felt both comfortable and effective at bringing serious concerns to one. It can be hard to give when solicited, but nearly impossible to do so unilaterally. Part of it is human nature, part of it is concern for career (which is also human nature), but at the end of the day, that dude got shown the door rather quickly. If we really think this is valuable, then we need to motivate leadership to seek (and provide!) this type of feedback. I have seen one seek it, are any providing it up where you live liquid? And I mean really providing it. And, just fyi, Historically, there have been three options when junior leaders engage in disagreements with more senior leaders; either the junior officer resigns in protest ( if he has that luxury), is fired or otherwise removed from his job (effectively ending his career), or is expected to execute himself due to the humility of failure and insult (this would be somewhat anachronistic if we saw it today).

Leaders aren't getting this feedback because they aren't promoting an environment in which this type of feedback is valued. Sure you have the occasional rogue wave who steps up up, but it usually ends with figurative seppuku. It also needs to be the right person with the proper motivation. If you open up to CSAF, for example, about some shit that's f'd, it sounds like he'd genuinely listen and respect your pov. If I did it, he would certainly temper my assertions with the fact that his son is probably older than I am and and teh fact that I have no PME in res and am just finishing up my masters now; and then probably eviscerate me. //sarcasm. The point is, it may seem easy from one standpoint, but the nuances of the entire process make it much more challenging.

Liquid, you have opened up a channel to receive this feedback, (maybe not personally) in a way that bypasses most of these difficulties. I hope you have manged to figure a way to do this at the office, and more importantly, I hope you are able to propagate it (or at least some of the valuable info) to the rest of the force. We receive the behaviors that we reward, even if its a behavior that we don't think we are rewarding.

[Vetter]

That works for 75%, but what about the 25% that are late rated, FAIPs, guys that change MWS, and late bloomers.

Tier 3. Maybe Tier 2 if they kiss the correct ass.

Edited July 11, 2013 by Vetter

[General Chang]

Maybe I'm just not getting the "Big Picture"...

From the lamb's mouth...

[Rusty Pipes]

From the lamb's mouth...

Liquid actually explains things with logic which is why he has actually gained some credibility here even if many don't agree with his (Big Blue's) philosophy... You pretty much lost all credibility out of the chute with your "you should be thankful just to be here" and "If you don't like it, do us all a favor and quit" philosophy.

[Gravedigger]

I've got to concur with Rusty here. Mr. Chang you seem content with riding Liquid's coattails. You both arrived around the same time, initially posted interesting info, got flack, and now Liquid has continued to provide perspective/opinions while being perceptive to the dissenting views out there. You seem to be stuck in the "oh my career is perfect so fuck you guys" mentality.

I once learned this awesome model of forming, storming, norming and performing. Liquid is in the norming phase, you are in storming. It's time to consolidate your feces if you plan to have utility on this forum.

A final note, not agreeing with the way Big Blue operates doesn't ID you as a bottom-feeder. I've been fairly successful thus far, and I think a lot of the things we do are idiotic. It sounds like Gen Welsh and others agree on some level. It's important for leaders at all levels to remember it's not only ok, but essential for people to question why we do the things we do.

[ClearedHot]

Nope, still missing my point... all I'm saying is to let the APZ guy with a P compete with an IPZ guy with a P (in that 3 year window for example). Why do you say the senior rater is saying the IPZ guy is more worthy? I'm saying to let the 2002 guy compete with the 2003 guy... score them both out and the best record wins. Are you saying that you think it is better to have the 2003 guy promoted over the 2002 guy with a far better score sheet just because he was comissioned 6 months later? How does that make sense to anyone?

What I'm saying is that we would not have those guys fall through the cracks if your IPZ was a 2-3 year window instead of just a one time look.

The flaw is the guy that is two or three years above has had two or three more years to build a better record than the guy who is in the zone, how is that fair to the IPZ guy?

Tossing a kick save to an APZ dude is not a small thing, are there cases where the system screwed up, absolutely, but each time the system corrects itself it comes at the expense of an IPZ guy.

I don't think you are arguing from the perspective of "everyone has to be a winner", at least I hope not, more along the lines of the system overlooks someone who should have been picked up?

[Guest ThatGuy]

Will a SQ/CC, GP/CC, WG/CC, or board take into consideration when you completed in residence PME? I am asking because I completed SOS via correspondence a few days before pinning on captain. However, I did not attend SOS in residence until 3 years later and that was on a waiver. A SURF does not show when you completed your SOS correspondence course because that is something you can control. Not everyone has control of when they can go to SOS in residence.

I'm not going to even be dishonest about my AAD. I volunteered for two 6 month deployments pretty much back to back. I was tired upon returning from downrange the second time and my brain was fried. I had 3 classes remaining after returning in 2011 and did not complete them until January 2013. My DO told me to make sure I knock them out and I did.

[Tonka]

Historically, there have been three options when junior leaders engage in disagreements with more senior leaders; either the junior officer resigns in protest ( if he has that luxury), is fired or otherwise removed from his job (effectively ending his career), or is expected to execute himself due to the humility of failure and insult (this would be somewhat anachronistic if we saw it today).

A week after a "disagreement" with a Sq/CC I was surprisingly booted to a less than "lateral" wing position (I respectfully told him that what he wanted to do wouldn't work)... two months later I was proven correct (the Sq tried at the expense of many many late nights/weekends by everyone, but they eventually returned to original operations). I served my penance for 2 years and never looked back/ had no regrets. It probably lasted a month longer in an attempt to save face for the CC.

Didn't end my career, but it was obvious I was no longer seen fit to be a high performer... Ever seen Pentagon Wars? The career result to the officer in that Movie is often what happens to Jr Officers that speak their mind in the AF and is exactly why we have $34 million buildings in Afghanistan that we are going to demolish without ever using (because Jr Officers are dismissed or won't bother to speak up)... Many leaders will simply not admit that what we are doing is wrong.

[BitteEinBit]

The career result to the officer in that Movie is often what happens to Jr Officers that speak their mind in the AF and is exactly why we have $34 million buildings in Afghanistan that we are going to demolish without ever using (because Jr Officers are dismissed or won't bother to speak up)... Many leaders will simply not admit that what we are doing is wrong.

Don't forget about the failed $1B logistic system that never got off the ground but somehow took 7 years to figure out it wouldn't work...I know the reasons are much more complicated than 'junior officers' not speaking out, but I do wonder how many times anyone not in a position of power ever said 'this isn't going to work' and was told to shut up and PCS to a less than lateral position....

[Rusty Pipes]

The flaw is the guy that is two or three years above has had two or three more years to build a better record than the guy who is in the zone, how is that fair to the IPZ guy?

Tossing a kick save to an APZ dude is not a small thing, are there cases where the system screwed up, absolutely, but each time the system corrects itself it comes at the expense of an IPZ guy.

I don't think you are arguing from the perspective of "everyone has to be a winner", at least I hope not, more along the lines of the system overlooks someone who should have been picked up?

It wouldn't actually be an APZ guy getting promoted over an IPZ guy. Remember that I'm saying it would be modeled after the 3 year School look window which would mean that your IPZ would be that 3 year window. When someone gets picked up for school on their third look it isn't seen as him taking away the school slot of someone who is on their first look. You would become APZ if you didn't get picked up in that window and then either be continued or not, but you certainly couldn't complain if you had 3 legit looks and didn't make it. Right now they pretend you have 3 looks before being continued or not, but even Liquid admits that unless you have a DP APZ (far more rare than being picked up BPZ) that your records aren't even really being considered... if they even look at them at all.

I think this would also give us more developed FGOs as well as (just as important) better mentorship from those in leadership positions. "Hey Maj, you didn't get picked up on this look, but here are some of the things I think you can work on that I think might get you there on the next round." Right now you might get a "best guess" reason from some guy down at AFPC or your Boss as to why you didn't make it, but its after the fact and too late to do anything about it at that point.

I'm not seeing the major downside to this process. The guys who are going to get promoted early are still going to get promoted early (you could even look at a 1 year BPZ for your true fast burners which would still line up with timing they have now). They did away with the BPZ to O-4 years ago because too many guys were just box checking to try to get there (it was good that they did away with it), but then they eventually slid the boards 2 years to the left which essentially means that not only is everyone "BPZ to Maj" now but EVERYONE needs to box check just to get there. There were a few true fast burners back then who could check the right boxes and still hack the mission (they were your 1% that got BPZ), but obviously everyone isn't talented enough to pull that off which is why the guys today are being forced to choose one or the other. Keep in mind... if you get a guy who got picked up on his second or third look for O-4/O-5 he is actually pinning on the same time as he would have under the promotion system that was in place less than 10 yrs ago. I'd rather have an FGO who is wearing that rank because he/she has the actual experience and right knowledge set... not just because they checked the AAD/SOS box earlier than the other guy (because that is what we are getting now which does not equal leadership).

I'll even take it one step further... the only School "selects" are the BPZ guys (1%) and everyone else needs to compete in the School window. If what Liquid is saying is true and only School selects are actually going to be going for the next few years (no candidates), you are going to see a low in morale/motivation among your FGOs (anyone who is not a select) like you have never seen. Maybe it is just the competitive nature in me, but I sure as hell was motivated and worked a lot harder in UPT knowing that I was competing with the whole class to ensure I had a choice when track select and assignment night came around. If you told everyone what their assignment was going to be on day one of UPT I don't think we would have nearly as good pilots in the Air Force as we do now... just my opinion.

Edit: I will now wait for Liquid to explain why this idea would never work and for Chang to tell me to stop complaining

Edited July 11, 2013 by Rusty Pipes

[ClearedHot]

It wouldn't actually be an APZ guy getting promoted over an IPZ guy. Remember that I'm saying it would be modeled after the 3 year School look window which would mean that your IPZ would be that 3 year window. When someone gets picked up for school on their third look it isn't seen as him taking away the school slot of someone who is on their first look. You would become APZ if you didn't get picked up in that window and then either be continued or not, but you certainly couldn't complain if you had 3 legit looks and didn't make it. Right now they pretend you have 3 looks before being continued or not, but even Liquid admits that unless you have a DP APZ (far more rare than being picked up BPZ) that your records aren't even really being considered... if they even look at them at all.

To completely change to a system like this you would no doubt screw a bunch of folks in the process thus creating another long thread on BO.NET. I don't like because you are pushing year groups together and as previously stated, you give an advantage to those who have been in longer to build a better record. The three year school window is not based on performance as much as timing and how the DT wants to manage an officer post IDE.

Liquid is correct on the APZ folks, promotion boards don't have a lot of time for each record so the sorting process is actually very simple..."DP"'s with no issues go right into the promote pile, "P"s with out PME go right into the do not promote pile. "P"s with everything complete (the majority), go into the big pile that have to be ranked. APZ records without a "DP" just don't compete. That being said, I personally know several officers who were promoted APZ (two on one board), and one of those was four above.

If what Liquid is saying is true and only School selects are actually going to be going for the next few years (no candidates), you are going to see a low in morale/motivation among your FGOs (anyone who is not a select) like you have never seen. Maybe it is just the competitive nature in me, but I sure as hell was motivated and worked a lot harder in UPT knowing that I was competing with the whole class to ensure I had a choice when track select and assignment night came around. If you told everyone what their assignment was going to be on day one of UPT I don't think we would have nearly as good pilots in the Air Force as we do now... just my opinion.

It is true, the USAF is trying to save every penny and they are going to reduce the number of school slots. As for morale/motivation, I guess that is one way to look at it. Full disclosure here, I've done all the schools In Res, IDE/ASG/SDE, and that does not mean I was a better officer. I know of some very sharp folks who did not get IDE and went on to multiple command tours, sometimes the system just gets it wrong. Yes they will decrease the number of PME slots, but they will still need the same (approximately), number of folks for staff/command and such so it would seem they would have to turn to other discriminators (like job performance), when picking those folks.

[pawnman]

It wouldn't actually be an APZ guy getting promoted over an IPZ guy. Remember that I'm saying it would be modeled after the 3 year School look window which would mean that your IPZ would be that 3 year window. When someone gets picked up for school on their third look it isn't seen as him taking away the school slot of someone who is on their first look. You would become APZ if you didn't get picked up in that window and then either be continued or not, but you certainly couldn't complain if you had 3 legit looks and didn't make it. Right now they pretend you have 3 looks before being continued or not, but even Liquid admits that unless you have a DP APZ (far more rare than being picked up BPZ) that your records aren't even really being considered... if they even look at them at all.

I think this would also give us more developed FGOs as well as (just as important) better mentorship from those in leadership positions. "Hey Maj, you didn't get picked up on this look, but here are some of the things I think you can work on that I think might get you there on the next round." Right now you might get a "best guess" reason from some guy down at AFPC or your Boss as to why you didn't make it, but its after the fact and too late to do anything about it at that point.

I'm not seeing the major downside to this process. The guys who are going to get promoted early are still going to get promoted early (you could even look at a 1 year BPZ for your true fast burners which would still line up with timing they have now). They did away with the BPZ to O-4 years ago because too many guys were just box checking to try to get there (it was good that they did away with it), but then they eventually slid the boards 2 years to the left which essentially means that not only is everyone "BPZ to Maj" now but EVERYONE needs to box check just to get there. There were a few true fast burners back then who could check the right boxes and still hack the mission (they were your 1% that got BPZ), but obviously everyone isn't talented enough to pull that off which is why the guys today are being forced to choose one or the other. Keep in mind... if you get a guy who got picked up on his second or third look for O-4/O-5 he is actually pinning on the same time as he would have under the promotion system that was in place less than 10 yrs ago. I'd rather have an FGO who is wearing that rank because he/she has the actual experience and right knowledge set... not just because they checked the AAD/SOS box earlier than the other guy (because that is what we are getting now which does not equal leadership).

I'll even take it one step further... the only School "selects" are the BPZ guys (1%) and everyone else needs to compete in the School window. If what Liquid is saying is true and only School selects are actually going to be going for the next few years (no candidates), you are going to see a low in morale/motivation among your FGOs (anyone who is not a select) like you have never seen. Maybe it is just the competitive nature in me, but I sure as hell was motivated and worked a lot harder in UPT knowing that I was competing with the whole class to ensure I had a choice when track select and assignment night came around. If you told everyone what their assignment was going to be on day one of UPT I don't think we would have nearly as good pilots in the Air Force as we do now... just my opinion.

Edit: I will now wait for Liquid to explain why this idea would never work and for Chang to tell me to stop complaining

The sad truth is, we are about to have a significant drawdown. There is no upside for the Air Force to find a way to promote more people. In fact, the more people they can boot from the system for not getting promoted, the easier it is for the PR machine to work. After all, it is much easier to explain to the press why you are cutting the bottom 20% for not getting promoted than it is to explain why you are RIFing people after paying them a bonus. And if even more get out when the school slots dry up? Even better. Eventually we'll get somewhere the Air Force's accounting starts to look good again.

Granted, we won't have anyone left to fight the next war...but that's OK, we're wrapping up this Afghanistan thing next year, and there won't ever be another conflict anyway, right?

[moosepileit]

I'll take 10 Tony Carrs in the USAF over 1 Chang. I knew and flew with him. GC, you are no TC.

Stick to quoting Shakespeare in Klingon.

The world will be better for it.

[Liquid]

The Lt Col list will be released on 17 Jul. Do any of you think AAD and IDE (res or corr) should be complete prior to IPZ to O-5? Should SR, MLRs and boards consider advanced education when determining who should be promoted? I am in favor of completely masking AAD at O-4 board, but not O-5. Thoughts?

[Jughead]

The Lt Col list will be released on 17 Jul. Do any of you think AAD and IDE (res or corr) should be complete prior to IPZ to O-5? Should SR, MLRs and boards consider advanced education when determining who should be promoted? I am in favor of completely masking AAD at O-4 board, but not O-5. Thoughts?

AAD: no. With certain exceptions in certain career fields, it's a silly requirement at any level (O-4, O-5, or beyond). Half the issues raised in this thread could be eliminated if the AF simply stopped tracking AADs altogether.

IDE: yes, with strong emphasis on the "or" in "res or corr," and absolutely no weight on when completed and equal weight given to correspondence

EDIT: Disclaimer: recent O-5 retiree, no dog in this fight. FWIW, I played the game--got the worthless* AAD, and SOS/ACSC/AWC (all correspondence); while the AAD was simply to make myself promotable, I actually agree with the PME requirement (though the implementation requires a LOT of work).

*worthless = said degree did not make me a better officer; better manager; better leader; better pilot; better anything. Its "value" was solely in punching the ticket for O-5.

Edited July 11, 2013 by Jughead

[Rusty Pipes]

The sad truth is, we are about to have a significant drawdown. There is no upside for the Air Force to find a way to promote more people. In fact, the more people they can boot from the system for not getting promoted, the easier it is for the PR machine to work. After all, it is much easier to explain to the press why you are cutting the bottom 20% for not getting promoted than it is to explain why you are RIFing people after paying them a bonus. And if even more get out when the school slots dry up? Even better. Eventually we'll get somewhere the Air Force's accounting starts to look good again.

Granted, we won't have anyone left to fight the next war...but that's OK, we're wrapping up this Afghanistan thing next year, and there won't ever be another conflict anyway, right?

Its not about getting more people promoted, its about making sure we get the right people promoted. Under the current system we are literally deciding who will become O-5s and especially Commanders when they are Lts because when you are using "when did you check your box" as a discriminator that is when you need to start checking those boxes. I have talked to countless O-6/O-7s (granted about 5 yrs ago) who have said that when they were Majors they didn't know if they even wanted to stay in, didn't really know what school was about, was just flying the line and doing their job, never even knew what a School Select was until they told them they were a Select, etc... and they became Wing CCs and Generals. Liquid actually said those same things in this thread. I think that is great, but under our current system that is literally impossible to do today unless you get multiple DFCs or something extreme along those lines.

When I fly with that young co-pilot who doesn't know his Ops Limits, but is taking 2 Masters classes at a time it pisses me off because he is obviously putting his AAD check ahead of being an expert at his job (again, not his fault... I blame his Commanders for that). But that co-pilot is eventually going to be an Aircraft Commander as a young Capt who is going to be more worried about what box he needs to check and still won't be an expert at his job! Now I have an Aircraft Commander AND a co-pilot who are literally putting flying combat missions #2 behind queep. I'm not sure the folks wearing Stars really understand that is what is happening... and it is of their own creation.

Liquid talked about providing feedback to bosses and I agree there is a difference between whining and bitching, there just seems to be very little room for innovation or new ideas with the new mold of "leaders" in our Officer corps today. The unspoken feedback being given to the boss by the Lt who puts the AAD first over job performance is that they are willing to fall in line while the kid who does it in reverse is seen as some sort of "trouble maker". If you want to say you need an AAD to make O-5 then I'm completely onboard with that, but we need to pull out of this senseless box checking nose dive that we are in where that has somehow become associated with how well someone can lead.

[Rusty Pipes]

Do any of you think AAD and IDE (res or corr) should be complete prior to IPZ to O-5? Should SR, MLRs and boards consider advanced education when determining who should be promoted? I am in favor of completely masking AAD at O-4 board, but not O-5. Thoughts?

I have no issues whatsoever with AAD being required prior to O-5 IPZ... same for IDE. I think it should be Y/N for both though... in other words remove all dates associated with it. I actually think that AAD should not appear anywhere on your records prior to pinning on O-4 unless you were specifically sent to school by the AF to do your job (AFIT, USAFA Academic Instructor, etc). If Lt Jenkins wants to get his AAD to get it out of the way then more power to him, but he shouldn't be "rewarded" for it... especially if it means that others need to "pick up the slack". Lt Jenkins may be a single FAIP at Laughlin with a hell of a lot more time to knock it out than Lt Smith who is married with a 4 month old flying MC-130s 300+ days a year in places that most people have never heard of. Jenkins having that box checked does not make him a better leader than Smith... right now that is how it is seen.

[Gravedigger]

The Lt Col list will be released on 17 Jul. Do any of you think AAD and IDE (res or corr) should be complete prior to IPZ to O-5? Should SR, MLRs and boards consider advanced education when determining who should be promoted? I am in favor of completely masking AAD at O-4 board, but not O-5. Thoughts?

I still think we need different promotion boards for different career fields. I don't think 13S, 13N, 17D, 61S, 62E, 63A and a few others should even make major without an AAD. We have plenty of time and opportunity to complete a degree as Lts and Capts, and honestly these career fields should be required to pursue degrees that are relevant to their AFSC. I got an MS in Space Studies that directly contributed to my operational knowledge and proficiency. Our engineers that have AADs in their fields save the Air Force millions of dollars with unique solutions to anomalies and better ways to operate.

Rated folks on the other hand don't have the time nor need for an AAD until O-5 maybe even O-6 boards. So, to answer your question, it really depends on AFSC IMO.

Edit: Why does the Air Force have separate boards for JA, BSC/Med, and Chaplains but not differentiate between rated/non-rated? Are they not just as different and unique as the separate boards we already have?

Edited July 11, 2013 by Gravedigger

[slackline]

The Lt Col list will be released on 17 Jul. Do any of you think AAD and IDE (res or corr) should be complete prior to IPZ to O-5? Should SR, MLRs and boards consider advanced education when determining who should be promoted? I am in favor of completely masking AAD at O-4 board, but not O-5. Thoughts?

IMHO, until someone can show some concrete proof that the AAD's people are getting actually do the Air Force any good, it shouldn't be a requirement at anytime. At best, you're getting someone who is only slightly wasting his time. At worst, you're taking someone's attention and focus (at every level O-3, O-4, or O-5) away from their primary job to force them to prove they "care about being promoted" and nothing else. Then add in the stress that the lost time contributes to family life, and you get disgruntled individuals.

I have zero AAD. I started 3 times and each time I couldn't stomach the garbage, so I stopped and put my focus where it belonged. The mission. Somehow I got picked up for school, and I even got an incredible push from my SR. When my current boss told me I needed to get my AAD now to be competitive I politely told him that I wouldn't be doing it. I even asked him if he thought it was legit, or just for box-checking to be promotable. You wouldn't like his answer. Nice guy, but drunk on kool aid. If I still am able to continue pushing up the line without my AAD (I firmly believe in PME, even if correspondence is stupid just to do in residence), I will continue to fight against AAD's until I get fired for it.

When will senior leadership realize that AAD's are ZERO ADDED VALUE? Caveat: you send someone to a real school somewhere for a real degree, but then we're talking IDE aren't we?

I still think we need different promotion boards for different career fields. I don't think 13S, 13N, 17D, 61S, 62E, 63A and a few others should even make major without an AAD. We have plenty of time and opportunity to complete a degree as Lts and Capts, and honestly these career fields should be required to pursue degrees that are relevant to their AFSC. I got an MS in Space Studies that directly contributed to my operational knowledge and proficiency. Our engineers that have AADs in their fields save the Air Force millions of dollars with unique solutions to anomalies and better ways to operate.

Rated folks on the other hand don't have the time nor need for an AAD until O-5 maybe even O-6 boards. So, to answer your question, it really depends on AFSC IMO.

Good points. I was typing when you did that up. Again though, we're talking apples and oranges AADs. Real and applicable to careerfield vs. diploma mill in order to promote. Thanks for the insight.

[Tonka]

The Lt Col list will be released on 17 Jul. Do any of you think AAD and IDE (res or corr) should be complete prior to IPZ to O-5? Should SR, MLRs and boards consider advanced education when determining who should be promoted? I am in favor of completely masking AAD at O-4 board, but not O-5. Thoughts?

It really doesn't matter if the board considers it, the PRF process will and the raters will continue to. As long as the culture continues to worship AAD and IDE like they are some magically-delicious vision of 10 years into the future the problem will persist.

[moosepileit]

"The Lt Col list will be released on 17 Jul. Do any of you think AAD and IDE (res or corr) should be complete prior to IPZ to O-5? Should SR, MLRs and boards consider advanced education when determining who should be promoted? I am in favor of completely masking AAD at O-4 board, but not O-5. Thoughts? "

short answer- "2" to jughead's post.

long answer-

I got a "real" masters before entering active duty in 1995 after an ROTC commision with 1 in 100 qualified graduates receiving a pilot slot. It was a direct follow-on to my "real" BS. I knew I might need one in life, was already in school mode, and didn't not want to take away from my real work in the future. My classmate was an Army O-5 Assigned to the same degree program, full time. I also knew it was a pilot training trough, and it would get better towards the end of my first assignment non-flying. Timing isn't everything, but it covers for a lot.

I am biased against work outside of one's assignment. How do you fully bloom where you are planted, otherwise? Why take away from your personal time or the taxpayers' time? Amazing what you can learn as a tier 2 late rated, ex-Mx officer when you don't need to sweat SOS and a masters. SOS- got sent as a last second pick before I'd even signed up- lucky. ACSC? That was 8 weeks of time wasted after a deployment, ORI and ASEV- but- I wanted to make it to O-5 and that was the final box to check.

I found the joint points process to be a joke, I hit it towards its infancy, though and never cracked the code before it was time to move on in the ARC. If it could be wrapped into a better officer development that removes the AF centric DE AND replace the need to self-serve an AAD- that would be great. I wasn't taking a bronze star 179 as an airline pilot by then. The ACSC/Masters was a good start, but look at it honestly.

You have to remove the AAD from all levels of rack-n-stack, not just those you listed, if you mask it.

I agree, by O-5 board, you are in it for a career and the game is changed- that does not mean the current self-service option for AAD is correct. I agree that PME is PME- if required to be completed, equal credit for in or out of residence. Don't look at the date vs. promotion. I get the requirement to stratify all and hurt some in the current mindset.

I was lucky to be an OG's exec as a O-3 after being late rated. I learned there was no way I could do what I saw the O-6s doing with their 7 days per week. Couldn't just be a Sq/CC or DO and be happy- those turned into springboards or parking stalls. That used to be the goal when I was a kid. Chiefed every other office job in a flying sq you can name through the inspection cycles, then saw the writing on the wall.

Happily flying in the ARC as a crustifying O-5, insert appropriate Rainman remarks here..

Big elephant of which to take that first bite- if you don't fix the OPR, you won't have an easy fix to the PRF. The stratification whack-a-moles are by-products. I argue that drives this entire thread's root cause. Fix one issue, another will crop up. Hope you know the decoder ring when your PRF is in the cue. Great thread, wish every 2Lt could learn these lessons early- and be driven to be an expert in their assignment, not in their future PRF.