Promotion and PRF Information

[Weezer]

So with an overall promotion opportunity of 85%, that equates to a 75% I/APZ selection rate if the 10% BPZ opportunity is used completely.

If I was a betting man, I'd put this year's IPZ rate at 73% and APZ at 5%.

So:

There were around 1439 IPZ elibles.  the 85% opportunity equates to ~1223 promotions available.  ~122 are available for BPZs.  That leaves ~1101 for I/APZs to share.  The IPZ DP rate was 50%, so there were 719 DPs, so 382 Ps that got promoted in the I/APZ category (assuming 100% of DPs got picked up).  So the P selection rate for I/APZ (with ~1063 APZ) was 382/(719+1036) or 21%.  Realistically, that'll skew towards IPZ vice APZ.

Historically, IPZ rates are (from AFPC):

2016:  74.13%

2015:  72.03%

2014:  67.00% (opportunity was only 75% that year I believe)

2013:  74.40%

2012:  75.43%

2002-2011 average:  73.69%

So, USUALLY (2014 and 2012 being probable exceptions), 10% gets taken off the 85% opportunity to give to BPZ.  Some small percentage of the remaining 75% goes to APZ guys, and the rest goes to IPZ.

[HossHarris]

1 hour ago, Champ Kind said:

How does lowering the IPZ opportunity this year to accommodate APZ help? It will just kick the can to subsequent years.

What are you, new?

[Weezer]

1 hour ago, Champ Kind said:

How does lowering the IPZ opportunity this year to accommodate APZ help? It will just kick the can to subsequent years.

They don't lower the "IPZ opportunity."  What they've done for the past few years is instruct the board to discount the IPZ/APZ status of the record and compete them equally.  So, the IPZ opportunity isn't lowered, but APZ records that have good paper on top could "steal" an IPZ slot.

[Champ Kind]

They don't lower the "IPZ opportunity."  What they've done for the past few years is instruct the board to discount the IPZ/APZ status of the record and compete them equally.  So, the IPZ opportunity isn't lowered, but APZ records that have good paper on top could "steal" an IPZ slot.

Words matter and I didn't precisely phrase my comment. The point stands, though. IPZ guys that otherwise would have gotten promoted in favor of APZs only to create the same issue next year. Doesn't make sense.

[Champ Kind]

So with an overall promotion opportunity of 85%, that equates to a 75% I/APZ selection rate if the 10% BPZ opportunity is used completely.
If I was a betting man, I'd put this year's IPZ rate at 73% and APZ at 5%.
So:
There were around 1439 IPZ elibles.  the 85% opportunity equates to ~1223 promotions available.  ~122 are available for BPZs.  That leaves ~1101 for I/APZs to share.  The IPZ DP rate was 50%, so there were 719 DPs, so 382 Ps that got promoted in the I/APZ category (assuming 100% of DPs got picked up).  So the P selection rate for I/APZ (with ~1063 APZ) was 382/(719+1036) or 21%.  Realistically, that'll skew towards IPZ vice APZ.
Historically, IPZ rates are (from AFPC):
2016:  74.13%
2015:  72.03%
2014:  67.00% (opportunity was only 75% that year I believe)
2013:  74.40%
2012:  75.43%
2002-2011 average:  73.69%
So, USUALLY (2014 and 2012 being probable exceptions), 10% gets taken off the 85% opportunity to give to BPZ.  Some small percentage of the remaining 75% goes to APZ guys, and the rest goes to IPZ.

Where are you getting 10% BPZ? It's typically ~3%.

[Dogs-N-Guns]

1 minute ago, Champ Kind said:

 

Where are you getting 10% BPZ? It's typically ~3%.

It's part of the fuzzy AFPC math. 10% of the promotions are given to BPZ, but 10% of the total promotions are only ~3% of the BPZ eligibles.

[Weezer]

6 minutes ago, Dogs-N-Guns said:

It's part of the fuzzy AFPC math. 10% of the promotions are given to BPZ, but 10% of the total promotions are only ~3% of the BPZ eligibles.

Correct...the 10% is the percentage of the IPZ slots that are given to BPZers.  This year, since there are 1223 IPZ, there are ~122 BPZ promotions theoretically available.  Given that there are 2 YGs competing BPZ (that are often larger than the IPZ), that means it's at most a ~5% selection rate, assuming the 1 and 2 BPZ YGs are equal to the IPZ one.

For some reason, the RAW application where the stats are stored on AFPC Secure isn't showing up for me right now, so I can't give the actual numbers.

[Weezer]

22 minutes ago, Champ Kind said:

 

Words matter and I didn't precisely phrase my comment. The point stands, though. IPZ guys that otherwise would have gotten promoted in favor of APZs only to create the same issue next year. Doesn't make sense.

I think it serves as a quality check and a second chance.  Dudes were nonselects in the gray can bust their butt the next year if they really want to and still possibly make it, while those IPZ guys who were just kind of coasting get a wakeup call that they need to improve somehow if they want to get the nod.

If my numbers are correct, the APZ numbers this year were around 57, which is a fairly small percentage (although much higher than last year).  In my mind that also accounts for subjectivity and human error in the promotion board process.  Basically, if 1-5% of the promotions are going to APZs, then they're acknowledging that there's a 1-5% margin of error over the year before.

[jazzdude]

I think it serves as a quality check and a second chance.  Dudes were nonselects in the gray can bust their butt the next year if they really want to and still possibly make it, while those IPZ guys who were just kind of coasting get a wakeup call that they need to improve somehow if they want to get the nod.
If my numbers are correct, the APZ numbers this year were around 57, which is a fairly small percentage (although much higher than last year).  In my mind that also accounts for subjectivity and human error in the promotion board process.  Basically, if 1-5% of the promotions are going to APZs, then they're acknowledging that there's a 1-5% margin of error over the year before.

I would add that, if this becomes the norm, this could help ease career pressures, and maybe even make the AF a better place. It attacks one of the fundemental problems where everything is done by year groups. This seems like the first step in making year groups matter less, and would provide a bigger pool of experience to select commanders from, so the AF wins (no longer has to pick from the best of what's left in a year group for command, and hopefully screen out toxic officers from taking command by virtue of just not getting out).

But the average officer wins as well: less pressure to check boxes on an artificially short timeline to meet what in the past was essentially a one shot at promotion (where APZ really did seem like correcting for a margin of error), and time to learn a job and make a difference. Maybe there would be less pressure for commanders to cycle people through jobs every six months to make them look good on paper, and allow people to acquire some semblance of depth of knowledge and experience. And once there are people with actual knowledge and experience in jobs, maybe they can start to fix a broken system (vs now, when, by the time someone is knowledgeable enough to start to fix problems in their shop, they are moved out elsewhere, so nothing ever really gets fixed, or no meaningful changes are ever enacted). Or they could choose to just fly the line for a few years, but not completely close the door to promotion later down the line. Or just fly the line under continuation. It gives us career options again, and I think that's a good thing.

Maybe I'm just trying to be (cautiously) optimistic about the AF, despite all the problems I've seen/experienced. I don't really get mad at the AF anymore, just disappointed that what the AF says it values and what it values doesn't always line up. I think increasing APZ rates is a step in the right direction though.

In full disclosure, I was APZ to major. My commanders were shocked when I got passed over, and happy the AF "righted a wrong" about 7 months later. I had decided if I want picked up APZ that I'd decline continuation, primarily because there was no real career path for a continued Capt (also, I remember how AMC treats anyone not on the golden path, especially the passed over guys). That being said, once I came to that conclusion, I had an incredible amount of freedom to say no to stupid stuff (what are you going to do, kick me out? My airline apps are just waiting for an availability date, and I hear there's a hiring wave going on). It's amazing how good life gets when you don't feel like you have to play the game anymore.

[bennynova]

For clarification, and most picked up on it

 

   I was seeing the following percentages.

85% overall selection rate out of estimated 1300 eligibles 1105 promotees

At the Maicon level, seeing following percentages.... iPZ will go up slightly when not in a MAJCOM

65% effective promotion rate for IPZ, or 845 promotees

13% of 1300 or 169 BPZ promotions

  obviously 169/3500 is a smaller percent

 

7% of 1300 or 91 APZ promotees

 

  when it's all said and done and the total Af stats are announced I think it will be closer to 900 in zone   140 below and 75 above 

 

 

[Weezer]

1 hour ago, bennynova said:

For clarification, and most picked up on it

 

   I was seeing the following percentages.

85% overall selection rate out of estimated 1300 eligibles 1105 promotees

At the Maicon level, seeing following percentages.... iPZ will go up slightly when not in a MAJCOM

65% effective promotion rate for IPZ, or 845 promotees

13% of 1300 or 169 BPZ promotions

  obviously 169/3500 is a smaller percent

 

7% of 1300 or 91 APZ promotees

 

  when it's all said and done and the total Af stats are announced I think it will be closer to 900 in zone   140 below and 75 above 

 

 

Interesting:  I saw (AF wide) -

IPZ:  1045/1439 (72.62%)

APZ:  57/1063 (5.36%)

I don't have the BPZ at my fingertips.  Wonder where the delta is...I like your numbers for APZ and BPZ better, but obviously not great for IPZ.

[CopyShot]

Interesting:  I saw (AF wide) -
IPZ:  1045/1439 (72.62%)
APZ:  57/1063 (5.36%)
I don't have the BPZ at my fingertips.  Wonder where the delta is...I like your numbers for APZ and BPZ better, but obviously not great for IPZ.

Is that truth data from this year's board?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[Weezer]

1 minute ago, CopyShot said:

 

Is that truth data from this year's board?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

It's supposed to be...

[bennynova]

I'm extrapolating mine from one majcom.   Acc

 

and I'd  imagine acc has a higher rate of APZ promotions with many 11fs

 

 

Edited May 16, 2017 by bennynova

[Champ Kind]

3 hours ago, jazzdude said:

 

I would add that, if this becomes the norm, this could help ease career pressures, and maybe even make the AF a better place. It attacks one of the fundemental problems where everything is done by year groups. This seems like the first step in making year groups matter less, and would provide a bigger pool of experience to select commanders from, so the AF wins (no longer has to pick from the best of what's left in a year group for command, and hopefully screen out toxic officers from taking command by virtue of just not getting out).

But the average officer wins as well: less pressure to check boxes on an artificially short timeline to meet what in the past was essentially a one shot at promotion (where APZ really did seem like correcting for a margin of error), and time to learn a job and make a difference. Maybe there would be less pressure for commanders to cycle people through jobs every six months to make them look good on paper, and allow people to acquire some semblance of depth of knowledge and experience. And once there are people with actual knowledge and experience in jobs, maybe they can start to fix a broken system (vs now, when, by the time someone is knowledgeable enough to start to fix problems in their shop, they are moved out elsewhere, so nothing ever really gets fixed, or no meaningful changes are ever enacted). Or they could choose to just fly the line for a few years, but not completely close the door to promotion later down the line. Or just fly the line under continuation. It gives us career options again, and I think that's a good thing.

Maybe I'm just trying to be (cautiously) optimistic about the AF, despite all the problems I've seen/experienced. I don't really get mad at the AF anymore, just disappointed that what the AF says it values and what it values doesn't always line up. I think increasing APZ rates is a step in the right direction though.

In full disclosure, I was APZ to major. My commanders were shocked when I got passed over, and happy the AF "righted a wrong" about 7 months later. I had decided if I want picked up APZ that I'd decline continuation, primarily because there was no real career path for a continued Capt (also, I remember how AMC treats anyone not on the golden path, especially the passed over guys). That being said, once I came to that conclusion, I had an incredible amount of freedom to say no to stupid stuff (what are you going to do, kick me out? My airline apps are just waiting for an availability date, and I hear there's a hiring wave going on). It's amazing how good life gets when you don't feel like you have to play the game anymore.

 

I think you're giving the AF way too much credit.  I applaud your optimism, though.

 

It's amazing how good life gets when you don't feel like you have to play the game anymore.

 

Absolutely spot on.

Edited May 16, 2017 by Champ Kind

[pcola]

B/I/APZ is all a stupid holdover of an antiquated system of "paying your dues." Everyone should always be eligible to compete for the next higher grade, regardless of time in rank. That's where the cream is able to rise to the top. The best talent often get frustrated at the prospect of having to wait 20 years to be in a position to make any real changes and move on long before then. Tim Kane wrote a great book about it..."Bleeding Talent." I think the moment one pins on Capt, he/she should be eligible to compete for Maj the next year, and so on. You keep competing until you get out. Everyone is ITZ all the time.
ETA : And yes, I'm aware of DOPMA. Doesn't make it any less stupid.

Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network Forums

[Weezer]

5 minutes ago, pcola said:

B/I/APZ is all a stupid holdover of an antiquated system of "paying your dues." Everyone should always be eligible to compete for the next higher grade, regardless of time in rank. That's where the cream is able to rise to the top. The best talent often get frustrated at the prospect of having to wait 20 years to be in a position to make any real changes and move on long before then. Tim Kane wrote a great book about it..."Bleeding Talent." I think the moment one pins on Capt, he/she should be eligible to compete for Maj the next year, and so on. You keep competing until you get out. Everyone is ITZ all the time.


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network Forums

How about instead of a flat out time standard (3 years TIG, minimum by DOPMA, waived for BPZ), you have a performance-based one?  Pick a key qualification or upgrade (or set thereof) that you have to meet before you're eligible...could be as simple as "Pilot" rating for Captain, "Senior Pilot" for Major, and "Command Pilot" for Lt Col.  Could be something else.  Similar to how the enlisted have to have a certain skill-level at a certain grade.  That way, you balance experience with quality.

Probably have to figure out something similar for maintenance and mission support, but the possibility is there.

[Guest]

I think the moment one pins on Capt, he/she should be eligible to compete for Maj the next year, and so on. You keep competing until you get out. Everyone is ITZ all the time.

This would only make the HPO system worse. It's bad enough that a lot of BPZs are staff weenies. If you were immediately eligible for promotion, it would be the guys with proximity to General Officers who would get picked up soonest. We'd have career execs/aide de camps pinning on faster than anyone's business while the guys hacking the mission get left in the dust. A pure meritocracy doesn't work when the "merits" are based on utter bullshit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pcola]

Valid point about current BS metrics.  It is not a stand-alone solution, but revising DOPMA and up-or-out is certainly a part of any real solution.


Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network Forums

Edited May 16, 2017 by pcola

[baileynme]

I've recommended reading this report on a different thread, but Panetta's bi-partisan commission report on military personnel changes covers this and many other issues in their recommended changes. Here's the section on DOPMA:
"T-1: Replace “up-or-out” promotion processes with a “perform-to-stay” system.
For officers, remove DOPMA and ROPMA field-grade-officer- strength tables in order to allow the services to extend the careers of valuable service members who are not competitive for continued promotion. Additionally, allow individual service members to voluntarily remove themselves from promotion consideration in order to continue building technical expertise while also continuing to strengthen their professional résumés to become more competitive for future promotions.

For enlisted service members, although there are few statutory limitations on their ability to continue serving, the military services have implemented policies that mimic the officer system of up-or-out. Service secretaries should use their authority to ensure valuable, high-performing enlisted members are not being forced out of the military just because they are not competitive or interested in further promotion.

This recommendation would take advantage of the existing military-promotion-board process. Those service members continuing to remain in uniform must continue performing at a high level as verified by annual performance reports and supervisor assessments."

It's a pretty cool read if you just skip to the recommendations (we all know the issues so no reason to read the first 50 or so pages).
Link: https://cdn.bipartisanpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/BPC-Defense-Building-A-FAST-Force.pdf


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[17D_guy]

Next SOS class was cancelled to do a course re-write.  Gouge is they're going to add another week back, so future schedule is in the air also.

Class was supposed to start 5 Jun, so lots of people just had summer plans nixed.

[Weezer]

2 hours ago, 17D_guy said:

Next SOS class was cancelled to do a course re-write.  Gouge is they're going to add another week back, so future schedule is in the air also.

Class was supposed to start 5 Jun, so lots of people just had summer plans nixed.

Hope they add flickerball back in.  Probably would increase retention.

[Guest]

Hope they add flickerball back in.  Probably would increase retention.

What??? ICARUS is far better than flicker ball!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SurelySerious]

What??? ICARUS is far better than flicker ball!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could be their only chance in life to perform OCA.

 

Edit to add parody:

[Weezer]

23 minutes ago, ihtfp06 said:

What??? ICARUS is far better than flicker ball!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk