Promotion and PRF Information

[Champ Kind]

Senior raters have been read in for a while.

Maybe on the possibility of the change, but I'm fairly confident not read in that it would happen this board, and particularly not in the middle of the cycle.

[Truman08]

19 hours ago, LookieRookie said:

Ya, the board had school selects bit that's all being stripped and everyone is competing separately again.

Not according to the feedback I was given by my SR. I was told school selects would still come directly off of the board. 

[LookieRookie]

2 hours ago, Champ Kind said:

 

Source?

If this is true, it is a major change to the "rules of the game". Worse, the fact that it occurred in the middle of a promotion cycle indicates a lack of transparency with senior raters--I know, shocker. Promotion stratifications are awarded with likelihood of IDE selection in mind based on strength of record. I'm not saying that the #1-3 guys out of the wing wouldn't have had that strat on their PRF had this been the policy going in, but it absolutely would have affected the conversation that occurred in the Nov-Jan timeframe when these PRFs were being written.

 

Someone very much involved in that area of A1. Sorry can't name names. It's something closely held.

 

I could be wrong and then I'll shack myself.

[Duck]

So the only thing we know for sure is that nobody knows what's going on. Standard AF. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[tkc10chief]

2 hours ago, Duck said:

So the only thing we know for sure is that nobody knows what's going on. Standard AF. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Can we safely say that there is a high probability of finding out tomorrow or the next day? Or will AFPC try to surprise us with yet another standard delay. 

[08Dawg]

3 hours ago, LookieRookie said:

Someone very much involved in that area of A1. Sorry can't name names. It's something closely held.

 

I could be wrong and then I'll shack myself.

Not throwing this spear at you....but why the damn secrecy???  Leave it to the AF to make a major change and find the shadiest, most opaque way possible to do it.  "We're going to make a major change to the way we do promotions....and not tell any of you about it". 

[Lord Ratner]

Not throwing this spear at you....but why the damn secrecy???  Leave it to the AF to make a major change and find the shadiest, most opaque way possible to do it.  "We're going to make a major change to the way we do promotions....and not tell any of you about it". 

Because pilots don't make good organizational leaders

Sent from my Vitamix 450x Professional using Tapatalk

[skosh]

On 7/8/2017 at 7:57 PM, LookieRookie said:

No more schools selects on O-4 boards, everyone competes separately. Getting that approved is  what's taking so long for release.

I heard this same rumor a couple weeks ago from a fellow 08er.  He's pretty well connected and generally has good gouge.  He also mentioned that they may keep the "selects" they have chosen but just wait to release them until they start the usual 3849 process.  It's just a matter of changing perceptions regarding the "haves and have-nots" when the O-4 results are (finally) released.

[tkc10chief]

18 minutes ago, skosh said:

I heard this same rumor a couple weeks ago from a fellow 08er.  He's pretty well connected and generally has good gouge.  He also mentioned that they may keep the "selects" they have chosen but just wait to release them until they start the usual 3849 process.  It's just a matter of changing perceptions regarding the "haves and have-nots" when the O-4 results are (finally) released.

What could go wrong?

[dream big]

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Because pilots don't make good organizational leaders

Sent from my Vitamix 450x Professional using Tapatalk
 

My sarcasm detector may be A2 today, but I hope you're not being serious? 

[flyusaf83]

On 7/8/2017 at 9:57 PM, LookieRookie said:

No more schools selects on O-4 boards, everyone competes separately. Getting that approved is  what's taking so long for release.

Can anyone explain why the AF would change this? 

Edited July 10, 2017 by flyusaf83

[Lord Ratner]

51 minutes ago, dream big said:

My sarcasm detector may be A2 today, but I hope you're not being serious? 

TL;DR: We like to think that pilots have to run the Air Force, but they got us into this mess.

What other conclusion is left to be drawn? With very few exceptions, the Air Force is helmed up and down the chain by pilots. Groups, wings, NAFs, MAJCOMs, staff positions, functionals, CAOC spots, deployed units, IGs... Lots and lots of pilots. Who is responsible for the failings of an organization if not for the leaders? How many excuses are we supposed to make for them? And let's not play the "good dude" game either. Being a successful organizational leader is not about how fun you were to drink with 10 years ago, or how sh*t-hot you were in the jet, or how much you "get it" when you're having a closed door town hall with a random unit in their bar heritage room. There is only one measure-- how is the organization doing. 

The examples are legion. I'll give a few that have, over the years, stood out as very distilled, specific instances of poor leadership.

1. DV visits. If I had a dollar for every DV that said they didn't want the base to stop doing it's mission to prepare for their arrival after they arrived, you'd think I was paying my way through medical school the old fashioned way. If you can't fathom the way your rank and position affect your subordinates in an organization you've been a part of for 30+ years, on what planet should you be leading it? Can we all just finally admit that yes, they do want it? They like it a lot. Even if not for themselves, then for what they believe the military should look like. But most likely because that type of treatment is addictive. Name one theory of leadership taught in any level of PME that promotes the type of behavior we see when senior leaders visit a base. Did they skip those classes? Because I have a f*cking masters degree in it from ACSC. 

2. We have been at the Deid since what? 2002? I have no clue. A long time. And of those years, every. single. summer. has been excruciatingly hot. Yet somehow, despite there being an airport right down the road in the exact same climate with hundreds of flights per day, leadership at AUAB has not figured out how to get every plane suitable air conditioning for the preflight. Seriously? Some flight doc measured the internal surfaces of the aircraft at over 160F, and the air temp inside a boom pod at over 140. This isn't a war against the Axis in an austere location, it's normal ops. If you can't look at that as a leader (and one who has flown planes!) and deduce that there should be adequate cooling for the aircraft... RyanAir is the human equivalent of a Pakistani poultry trailer without the rights activists, yet they manage to keep the planes cool on the ground. Oh, and let's not forget about the black mold that no leader saw fit to address until Congress heard about it. 

3. Of course, the pilot crisis. And not that it happened, not the years of neglect that led up to it, not the countless forums and round-tables, and hangar-flies that went ignored, while the CGO/Maj force screamed for attention. I actually understand how we got to where we are today. What I don't get is how now that the problem exists, announced, published, and even presented to congress, how can we still be bungling the response? This thread is proof. Changes to the promotion process? Secret. Timeline? Mystery. People who apply for the bonus early? Gotcha! 

I'm not saying pilots can't make great organizational leaders. I'm sure some are great. But we have two things to compare:

A. That a war-fighting organization can be effectively led by selecting from a small percentage of the overall population (pilots) those who demonstrate over the first half of their career a talent for paperwork, physical fitness, administrative tasks, and personal presentation, but who generally have little to no experience leading people until squadron command. This, as of today, is an unproven theory. 

B. That a war-fighting organization led by a small percentage of the overall population (pilots) who demonstrated over the first half of their career a talent for paperwork, physical fitness, administrative tasks, and personal presentation, but who generally have little to no experience leading people until squadron command, will crumble under external pressures, e.g., Congressional inquiries, workforce competition, etc. This, as of today, is supported by the evidence. 

If pilots make such great organizational leaders, I'd love to see it. Check rides aren't graded on who had the best attitude. I'd rather choke that go through it, but I'm guessing WIC grads, the best of our pilots, didn't get their patch because they filled out the 781s better than anyone else. No one cares how your flight suit looks if you show up the the ARCP late. The flying world, last I checked, prides itself of results-based assessment, yet when it comes to leading the organization, we abandon the principal for proclamations of past dudeliness... At some point we have to assign responsibility. If you want to say that it's just because we are picking the wrong pilots for the job, fine, but guess what? Pilots are the ones doing the picking. Pilots are the ones who have signed off on our ludicrous promotions system. Pilots are the ones standing by silently while the legal system is twisted to suit the preferences of a vindictive wing commander. Pilots are the ones telling congress it's pretty darn good. Pilots are the ones telling young captains to quit if they don't like it, someone will gladly replace them. 

Please, tell me why I'm wrong. 

[HU&W]

14 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Please, tell me why I'm wrong. 

You're wrong because you are looking at individual behaviors and assigning them to all members of a group.  We need pilots (and the other actual warfighters/operators across each of our domains) in leadership to lead the fight, because they know how to fight, because they've lived and breathed fighting.

You're right in that the qualities that make a great warfighter or combat problem solver don't necessarily make a good organizational leader or peacetime politician.

[Lord Ratner]

11 minutes ago, HU&W said:

You're wrong because you are looking at individual behaviors and assigning them to all members of a group.  We need pilots (and the other actual warfighters/operators across each of our domains) in leadership to lead the fight, because they know how to fight, because they've lived and breathed fighting.

You're right in that the qualities that make a great warfighter or combat problem solver don't necessarily make a good organizational leader or peacetime politician.

I'm looking at the whole group (made up of individuals, yes), and how the Air Force is as a result. I don't care about the individuals. But the system where pilots run the Air Force has not yielded results. And the argument that only only those with first-hand experience in the tactical operation of an organization can run it at the strategic level is disproved by many organizations outside of the Air Force.

I won't go as far as to say that pilots can't run the Air Force. But the idea that they must in order for it to run well is an unproven theory. And honestly I don't know that it's worth it, or affordable, to keep testing the theory. 

Edited July 10, 2017 by Lord Ratner

[FourFans]

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

But the system where pilots run the Air Force has not yielded results. And the argument that only those with first-hand experience in the tactical operation of an organization can run it at the strategic level is disproved by many organizations outside of the Air Force.

Your millennial is showing.  Next you'll be aiming us at a civilian organization to help us become a better employer of today's youth.  Warfighting is a profession unlike any other, hence civilian organizations look and are led differently.

Leaders who can't lead individuals in combat, shouldn't lead the military organizationally.  Of course there are always exceptions, and you appear to be building your case entirely based on those exceptions.

Edit:

Ok.  Having found some more time for a reply, you need to re-visit your TL, DR post.  Not a single one of those arguments points to pilots being the problem.  In my tenure in the air force, I have seen lots of queep get put into place, almost every bit of which was started by a "support requirement" and not from a pilot leader.  You want to know what's wrong with the Air Force?  Look at the MXG and MSG.  In my time, they went from being pilot led to being support Colonel led, ever since we've taken a massive slide since then.  Not placing cause, simply noticing outcome.

There is no such thing as a single root cause to a morale collapse.

The heart of your complaint is not pilots but mission focus.  I would argue that is an outcome of having LESS operators (pilots or not) in charge.  The worst command decisions I've witnessed came from MXG and MSG...but those were individual, and I forgot you're not concerned with them.

Carry on in your ignorant bliss and enjoy your right to whine.

Edited July 10, 2017 by FourFans130
words

[Lord Ratner]

Just now, FourFans130 said:

Your millennial is showing.  Next you'll be aiming us at a civilian organization to help us become a better employer of today's youth.  Warfighting is a profession unlike any other, hence civilian organizations look and are led differently.

Leaders who can't lead individuals in combat shouldn't lead the military organizationally.  Of course there are always exceptions, and you appear to be building your case entirely based on those exceptions.

 

I'd like to respond, but I don't honestly know what your point is. I'll aim for what I think you're getting at.

Under fighter pilot leadership (for all but four of the past 30 years), the Air Force can't seem to convince a bunch of fighter pilots to stay in the Air Force. And at a time when fighter pilots are doing more fighter pilot-y things than in the past decade.

And yes, we should be looking at civilian (and all other successful) organizations to learn from their retention and resource management strategies. Or would you rather keep trying to extinguish this fire with gasoline?

Besides, if you're not a millennial, then there's at least a reasonable chance that you're high enough ranking to be part of the problem.

[di1630]

The best leadership for the Air Force is rooted in the pilot community....unfortunately "most" of the best pilot leaders are in the guard already or not on a path in the AD system to be in control.

Sad fact, the system doesn't promote the best leaders into leadership...which is why you see the kid who got picked on his whole life until he figured out that he could join the USAF, fill some squares and be the mfwic.

Most of the great pilots and bros I respected when I was a LT are gone...many of the ones I saw as ass-kissing careerist, risk adverse square fillers are now the decision makers you are blaming for the USAF woes.

There are still some great ones though.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[FourFans]

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Besides, if you're not a millennial, then there's at least a reasonable chance that you're high enough ranking to be part of the problem.

I'm neither (10 minutes of searching would have helped you there...), but please allow me to clarify:  I mean millennial in only the most derogatory, degrading, and hurtful possible sense.  Much as I would use the term "gay" while having absolutely no reference to sexual orientation or lifestyle.

Here I mean "millennial" to reference the 5-year-old minded 28-year-old who points out injustices that are, in fact, wholly just, but that leave said millennial getting an outcome they don't like.  The "millennial" response being to whine and complain instead of seeking a rational, effective, and practical solution.  These "millennials" want the world perfectly presented on a silver platter, in a safe space free of insult or discomfort, at a time that perfectly suits their whimsically felt 'need' at that specific moment.

To be honest, I know a lot of people that fall in that associated generation who are in no way shape or form "millennial."  I've worked 6 month deployments with them.  I've flow combat missions with them.  They are what I profess to be: professionals focused on the employment of combat airpower.

Look at any generation and you will find that the true military professionals have a hard time wholly identifying themselves with the Gen-Xers, millennials, hippies, grudge rockers, oregon trailers (my year group), or whatever other subculture/sociological term might be blanket applied to that year group.  That's because we have a culture rooted in who we presently are, not an identity externally stamped by sociological academia.

 

You sound like a whiny child instead of an airpower professional.  Improve yourself.  Find and present a plausible solution through reasoned and constructed argument so we can discuss it instead of just bitching how some non-specific people group wronged the world and it hurts.

Edited July 10, 2017 by FourFans130
more words

[Lord Ratner]

6 minutes ago, FourFans130 said:

You sound like a whine child instead of an airpower professional.  Improve yourself.  Find and present a plausible solution through reasoned and constructed argument so we can discuss it instead of just bitching how some non-specific people group wronged the world and it hurts.

Oh, there it is. The problems are within! Fix thyself. 

So, to be clear: It is not the leader's job to identify the problem, nor develop a solution, nor implement it. Instead, identify the fighter pilots as "whine children" and ask them for solutions, but "plausible" ones, because we have to start from a position of impossibility. Did you read my post? What about it was lacking reason or construction?

It's amazing how many people in charge keep telling their subordinates it's their responsibility to fix this problem. Discuss it? I gave you a whole page to discuss, and you blamed it on my age. Sounds like the old guys telling us we whippersnappers just don't get it, but hang on while I tell you about how great it was when I was a captain and SF would escort you driving home drunk. Great story, Colonel.

Could I solve this problem? Maybe. Probably not though. Either way it's a pointless argument. I'm not in a leadership position. Lots of people are (maybe you)? Now that DOD, Congress, AMC, CAF, and CNN have all agreed there is a shortage, who should constructively argue for a fix? I would have guessed the leaders might, but apparently it falls to the line flyers?

You mistake me for a leader, or a source of solution. I am neither. I am a symptom. The Doctor (AF Leadership) looks at the symptoms (retention, morale, opstempo) to create treatment plan (organization changes) for the patient (Air Force). The doctor doesn't ask the patient to suggest which course of antibiotics would best alleviate their ailment. 

 

Once again, I pose this: Under fighter pilot leadership the Air Force is imploding, with the fighter pilots allegedly "worst off." So when I say, this isn't working, you say.... Well it's not my job to fix it. You'll be a general in no time.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, FourFans130 said:

I'm neither (10 minutes of searching would have helped you there...)

Your profile states your birthday is 1/23/1981.  Like it or not, by most definitions, you are a millennial. 

[i.o.w.a]

5 hours ago, flyusaf83 said:

Can anyone explain why the AF would change this? 

A theory I heard goes like this...

In the current system your chances of getting selected for school across your first, second and third look are 10%,1%,3% respectively.  This means your best chance for getting selected for school is your Majors board when you are competing with only your Captain peers.  This also means that since so many school slots are filled by Majors board selects, that the Wing Commanders only have so many slots left to fight over for their young Majors.  

New system, your chances of being selected probably go 3%,5%,8% (total speculation) as your package is competing with all the promoting Capts and first two year majors.  One would presume that the package of a 2 year major is better <sts> than the Major selects and hence more worthy of school.  It also means that if the Wing King wants to put someone back on the train to command, they have more slots for these Majors instead of having to have got their guy in on the first look where their best chance was. 

The intended consequence is the train leaving the station on the command track leaves two-three years later. 

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, i.o.w.a said:

A theory I heard goes like this...

In the current system your chances of getting selected for school across your first, second and third look are 10%,1%,3% respectively.  This means your best chance for getting selected for school is your Majors board when you are competing with only your Captain peers.  This also means that since so many school slots are filled by Majors board selects, that the Wing Commanders only have so many slots left to fight over for their young Majors.  

New system, your chances of being selected probably go 3%,5%,8% (total speculation) as your package is competing with all the promoting Capts and first two year majors.  One would presume that the package of a 2 year major is better <sts> than the Major selects and hence more worthy of school.  It also means that if the Wing King wants to put someone back on the train to command, they have more slots for these Majors instead of having to have got their guy in on the first look where their best chance was. 

The intended consequence is the train leaving the station on the command track leaves two-three years later. 

As it currently stands, for most non-selects, your chance of going in-res is a whopping 0% because the Wing/CC is the gatekeeper for which records even get seen by the IDE board (candidates can only make up 20% of nominations, IIRC).

Edited July 10, 2017 by Guest
words

[Bozo]

5 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Please, tell me why I'm wrong. 

I think that Lord Ratner is hitting center of mass on this one but with one exception: the bureaucracy has become so stifling that even the best-intentioned leaders are struggling to make a difference.  I do not blame pilots.   A bunch of MSG Colonels and Generals wouldn’t do any better.

Exhibit A: When Gen Welsh was appointed CSAF everyone was fired up about him righting the ship.  By most accounts people were disappointed.  I think it was death by a thousand cuts once the bureaucracy got it hands on him.

And by bureaucracy I mean HAF, SAF, OSD, and Congress.  Having seen these monstrous staffs from the fringe I can't imagine how we accomplish anything.

[Snooter]

2 hours ago, ihtfp06 said:

Your profile states your birthday is 1/23/1981.  Like it or not, by most definitions, you are a millennial. 

Oh badass, I'm a millennial too.  Can I get some avocado toast?  I'm gonna take it all back and be a libtard millenial. I own it so what big whoop, wanna fight about it?

[Guest]

Oh badass, I'm a millennial too.  Can I get some avocado toast?  I'm gonna take it all back and be a libtard millenial. I own it so what big whoop, wanna fight about it?

I'll fight, but only if we don't keep score and both get trophies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk