Jump to content
Guest navobd

Promotion and PRF Information

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

That's the rub, how do you actually execute your reform so you don't open up another can of worms.

To reference the example you cited and to expand on the idea of a generalist leader, some part of the career experience would have to be combat operations to lead/command combat operations.

Mission commanding combat aviation?  Bomber/Fighter/Attack/Strike/EW/ISR with Kinetic Finish/JTAC experience required but that leader also having direct experience in mobility/logistics/cyber/intel is best.  

Mission commanding cyber operations?  Cyber experience required but that leader also having aviation/intel/ndo/space/etc... is best.

We should broaden the opportunity for cross flow between career paths for those we believe will be able to use that direct experience and knowledge in likely roles as senior leaders.  

More opportunities for heavy dudes to flow to bombers/cyber/ndo/etc... (fighters & attack also if it is appropriate and meets the needs of the AF) if said heavy guy is identified and assessed based on his/her operational performance and intellectual capability to be an effective combat leader.

Opportunities for fighter/bomber/attack dudes identified as future leaders to flow for an operational assignment to heavies/rpa/isr/cyber/ndo/space without it being a black mark or viewed as a demotion to broaden their experience so as senior leaders, they effectively lead the team in delivering air/space/cyber power.

Opportunities for cyber/space/ndo/battlefield airmen to crossflow into aviation/mx/logistics/etc...

Right now we have leadership dependent on having a team around them to be the expert in X field to give them advice on how to bring all the elements together to deliver air/space/cyber power.  It works but IMO, having a career policy that encourages/guides broadening for those recruited/selected for a leadership path after proving themselves in the first operational community is better.

Breadth is not always a good thing, in fact most here would be very hesitant to agree to this “cross-pollination” of sorts.  Phoenix Mobility in AMC (where airlift guys fly tankers and vice versa) has been a disaster.  Both the airlift and tanker communities have ended up with careerist toads who have no idea what they are doing.  This isn’t to say that knowledge of other career fields isn’t critical as a strategic leader; but the depth and knowledge of being an expert in your career set goes a long way in developing a credible combat leader.  

Another hesitation is the creation of the HPO “high potential officer” caste.  I believe the Air Force has been doing away with this concept, and rightfully so.  For instance, we no longer have school selects.  There is no way of knowing whether someone as a Captain would be a good strategic leader.  The HPO lists, and believe me, they are out there, have created a class of untouchable “rising stars” regardless of performance while ignoring potentially strong leaders that didn’t fit a certain mold.  

Edited by dream big
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the perspective of this very middle of the road officer, I have been in the company of some very big brained dudes who performed commensurate with their IQs in combat and as leaders and were identified as captains. Maybe bureaucracies don’t do a good job at quantifying this on paper via the “HPO” track or whatever they call it, but as sure as BQZips mom swims after troopships, they were identified early as being above their peers in leadership ability and I’m glad they were as the AF got it right in those instances. I’m sure some sniveling whiners bitched about their success out of jealousy, but bitches gonna bitch- always.

Also, ma Robinson is an ABM for fvcks sake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bender said:

[quote post="437079" timestamp="1514202387" name="xaarman" userid="
I was at a UPT base and resumed flying 4-5x a week.


Pfft...thanks for the help. My "additional duties" are beyond stupid and I still fly 4-5 for them.

What the were you doing all day?

Bendy

What plane?

 

Edited by xaarman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Gen Robinson’s bio:

She has “more than 900” hours in the E-3 and the E-8.

I’m an E-3 pilot.  For an ABM, 900 hours is about 2 years of flying the line in the E-3.  She has been in the AF for 35 years.  She also has zero air medals and zero combat hours. I know 1Lt ABMs with a more impressive flying resume than that.

Lots of staff, school, and command though.  She was put on this path long ago, before she flew much.  Makes you wonder about how we develop our senior managers.

http://www.af.mil/About-Us/Biographies/Display/Article/108119/general-lori-j-robinson/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From Gen Robinson’s bio:
She has “more than 900” hours in the E-3 and the E-8.
I’m an E-3 pilot.  For an ABM, 900 hours is about 2 years of flying the line in the E-3.  She has been in the AF for 35 years.  She also has zero air medals and zero combat hours. I know 1Lt ABMs with a more impressive flying resume than that.
Lots of staff, school, and command though.  She was put on this path long ago, before she flew much.  Makes you wonder about how we develop our senior managers.
http://www.af.mil/About-Us/Biographies/Display/Article/108119/general-lori-j-robinson/


Nah, I don’t wonder. She did well under the last administration and I can only assume given her success that she did pretty well. I have a biased opinion that someone who is responsible for the air strategy in the pacific should be a warrior, but WGAF what I think. If I wanted my opinion to matter, I should have done better in SOS. chucking Spears at someone for not having combat time seems lame. Luck and timing got me mine.

However, I do wonder about navs (or ABMs) who don’t wear glasses- I heard somewhere that they’re not to be trusted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, dream big said:

Breadth is not always a good thing, in fact most here would be very hesitant to agree to this “cross-pollination” of sorts.  Phoenix Mobility in AMC (where airlift guys fly tankers and vice versa) has been a disaster.  Both the airlift and tanker communities have ended up with careerist toads who have no idea what they are doing.  This isn’t to say that knowledge of other career fields isn’t critical as a strategic leader; but the depth and knowledge of being an expert in your career set goes a long way in developing a credible combat leader.  

Another hesitation is the creation of the HPO “high potential officer” caste.  I believe the Air Force has been doing away with this concept, and rightfully so.  For instance, we no longer have school selects.  There is no way of knowing whether someone as a Captain would be a good strategic leader.  The HPO lists, and believe me, they are out there, have created a class of untouchable “rising stars” regardless of performance while ignoring potentially strong leaders that didn’t fit a certain mold.  

True and this career path would not be for everyone.  

If it were CSAF Clark Griswold this program would only be open at the O-4 (selects included) and only based on nomination at the OG/SQ level or possibly by the wisdom of the crowd, allow nominations anonymously of peers that are believed to be the right guy and bypass the filter of the admin/queep/company man filters at various middle levels.

Just to home in on one of your comments and to echo it, a strategic leader.  That's what I am arguing for, a program/policy to only begin the long process of recruiting and developing a strategic leader vs another company man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Breadth is not always a good thing, in fact most here would be very hesitant to agree to this “cross-pollination” of sorts.  Phoenix Mobility in AMC (where airlift guys fly tankers and vice versa) has been a disaster.  Both the airlift and tanker communities have ended up with careerist toads who have no idea what they are doing.  This isn’t to say that knowledge of other career fields isn’t critical as a strategic leader; but the depth and knowledge of being an expert in your career set goes a long way in developing a credible combat leader.  
Another hesitation is the creation of the HPO “high potential officer” caste.  I believe the Air Force has been doing away with this concept, and rightfully so.  For instance, we no longer have school selects.  There is no way of knowing whether someone as a Captain would be a good strategic leader.  The HPO lists, and believe me, they are out there, have created a class of untouchable “rising stars” regardless of performance while ignoring potentially strong leaders that didn’t fit a certain mold.  


Good thing AFGSC didn't copy both those initiatives. Phoenix/Striker crossflow also hurts the bleeding instructor manning since (on the Striker side at least) the year groups we send are guys who have been instructors for 1-2 years and get crossflow guys who won't upgrade for that same length of time
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, flyusaf83 said:

From Gen Robinson’s bio:

She has “more than 900” hours in the E-3 and the E-8.

I’m an E-3 pilot.  For an ABM, 900 hours is about 2 years of flying the line in the E-3.  She has been in the AF for 35 years.  She also has zero air medals and zero combat hours. I know 1Lt ABMs with a more impressive flying resume than that.

Lots of staff, school, and command though.  She was put on this path long ago, before she flew much.  Makes you wonder about how we develop our senior managers.

http://www.af.mil/About-Us/Biographies/Display/Article/108119/general-lori-j-robinson/

Nailed it.  Look, when I was in PACAF while she was CC, she was very well liked.  I’m not knocking her as a leader and she very well could kick ass as CSAF.  However, when I see her (and many others) with less hours than a mid level Captain, it makes me wonder what their priorities were that helped them get to where they are.  

Anyone who has been a scheduler understands who the “Penguins” are.  They were the folks who would ask to be taken off flights for: masters homework, volunteer work, Air Force ball meetings, etc.  While flying hours don’t translate to strategic leadership; we peons are just untrusting of someone who rose up the ranks without excelling at their primary duty.  After the leadership clown shows from San Antonio to the Died, can you blame us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of saltiness in this thread...

I do believe CAF pilots should led the service for many of the reasons mentioned above, but that aside how is Lori not qualified to be a senior leader?

She was a line IP/weapons officer for the first 13 years in the Air Force. Went to school, was a WIC SQ/CC, OG and Wing/CC x 2.  She's had 2 "exec" type jobs totaling less than 2 year over 34 years of service. She led the House office of SAF/LL (Secretary of the Air Force Legislative Liaison) and led the entire SAF/LL division. Last time I checked, we could use a senior leader or two that knows how to handle Capitol Hill. She didn't do anything other than war fighting work for 13 years...and its more like 15 years because you probably are a bit more tactical as a WIC SQ/CC. Anyhow, I don't work for her, but I have heard that she is well liked. As far as "qualifications" that most of us sport bitch about what else do you want?

     

ASSIGNMENTS 
Line ABM - 1. January 1982 - June 1982, Student, Basic Air Weapons Controller School, Tyndall AFB, Fla.  
Line ABM - 2. June 1982 - January 1983, Air Weapons Controller, Homestead AFB, Fla. 
IP/Line ABM 3. January 1983 - January 1985, Instructor Air Weapons Controller and live-fire senior director, 81st Range Control Squadron, Tyndall AFB, Fla. 
Overseas Line IP/AMB/Shop Chief in the PI! 4. January 1985 - February 1986, Chief of Training; and Chief of Standardization and Evaluation, 848th Air Control and Weapons Squadron, Wallace Air Station, the Philippines 
Neilis WIC Controller - 5. February 1986 - September 1986, Air Weapons Controller, Air Weapons Controller Division, Air Force Fighter Weapons School, Nellis AFB, Nev. 
Nellis WUG (in the 8th no less) 6. September 1986 - December 1986, Student, Air Force Fighter Weapons School, Nellis AFB, Nev. 
Nellis WIC Instructor 7. December 1986 - October 1989, Instructor and Course Manager, Air Weapons Control Division, Air Force Fighter Weapons School, Nellis AFB, Nev. 
PACAF Staff DO 8. October 1989 - August 1992, Chief of Current Operations and command briefer, Headquarters Pacific Air Forces, Hickam AFB, Hawaii 
Line ABM 9. August 1992 - May 1993, Air Weapons Controller, 552nd Air Control Wing, Tinker AFB, Okla. 
Wing Weapons Officer 10. June 1993 - June 1994, Chief, Weapons and Tactics Branch, 965th Airborne Warning and Control Squadron, Tinker AFB, Okla. 
School 11. July 1994 - June 1995, Student, College of Naval Command and Staff, Naval War College, Newport, R.I. 
School 12. June 1995 - September 1995, Student, Armed Forces Staff College, Norfolk, Va. 
DC Staff 13. September 1995 - December 1997, Command, Control and Communications Officer, Deputy Chief of Staff, and executive assistant to the Director, Defense Information Systems Agency, Arlington, Va.
WIC ABM CC Training 14. December 1997 - June 1998, Student, mission crew commander training, Nellis AFB, Nev. 
WIC SQ/CC 15. June 1998 - February 2000, Commander, Command and Control Operations Division, Air Force Weapons School, Nellis AFB, Nev. 
ACC Exec 16. February 2000 - July 2001, Executive Officer to the Commander, Air Combat Command, Langley AFB, Va. 
School (outside the AF) 17. July 2001 - June 2002, Air Force Fellow, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C. 
ABM OG 18. June 2002 - August 2004, Commander, 552nd Operations Group, Tinker AFB, Okla. (March 2003 - May 2003, Vice Commander, 405th Air Expeditionary Wing, Southwest Asia) 
Intel Wing CC 19. August 2004 - August 2005, Commander, 17th Training Wing, Goodfellow AFB, Texas 
CAG Director - Pentagon 20. August 2005 - September 2006, Director, Secretary of the Air Force and Chief of Staff of the Air Force Executive Action Group, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C. 
Led SAF/LL-House, Congress experience  21. Sep 2006 - May 2007, Chief, Air Force House Liaison Office, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Secretary of the Air Force, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, D.C. 
ABM Wing Commander 22. May 2007 - August 2008, Commander, 552nd Air Control Wing, Tinker AFB, Okla. 
Staff 23. September 2008 - October 2010, Deputy Director for Force Application and Support, Directorate of Force Structure, Resources and Assessment, Joint Staff, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C.
Commander of SAF/LL, more Congressional experience 24. October 2010 - June 2012, Director, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Secretary of the Air Force, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C. 

CENTCOM - 25. June 2012 - April 2013, Deputy Commander, U.S. Air Forces Central Command; Deputy, Combined Forces Air Component Commander, U.S. Central Command, Southwest Asia.

ACC Vice/CC -  26. May 2013 - October 2014, Vice Commander, Air Combat Command, Langley AFB, Va. 

PACAF CC 27. October 2014 - May 2016, Commander, Pacific Air Forces and Air Component Commander for U.S. Pacific Command; Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii.

NORTHCOM/CC (Combatant Commander) 28. May 2016 - Present, Commander, North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM). Colorado Springs, Colo.  

 

Edited by BeerMan
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Along the lines of what BeerMan was saying, hours counts can be misleading when it comes to ABMs since they can do hard time in CRCs and air defense. In her case, she didn't make it to a flying assignment until year 10 of her career. That lasted for two years and not counting episodic flying at the Weapons School (which for ABMs I believe only happens during ME/WSINT) she didn't have another one until she was an OG/CC. Yet she was absolutely in the ops mainstream of her career field for that first decade... Unlike (to make a negative comparison) Gen Klotz, the first AFGSC/CC, who bounced around different fellowships, advanced degree programs, and exec gigs before he made it to a missile squadron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Disco_Nav963 said:

Along the lines of what BeerMan was saying, hours counts can be misleading when it comes to ABMs since they can do hard time in CRCs and air defense. In her case, she didn't make it to a flying assignment until year 10 of her career. That lasted for two years and not counting episodic flying at the Weapons School (which for ABMs I believe only happens during ME/WSINT) she didn't have another one until she was an OG/CC. Yet she was absolutely in the ops mainstream of her career field for that first decade... Unlike (to make a negative comparison) Gen Klotz, the first AFGSC/CC, who bounced around different fellowships, advanced degree programs, and exec gigs before he made it to a missile squadron.

Valid points, I didn’t think of the CRC duty aspect of ABMs.  I apologize for contributing to the thread drift from cyber all the way to whether Robinson is fit to be CSAF! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish we would all get back on topic and reassure Duck that he will in fact be a twice passed over Capt.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Duck said:

I wish we would all get back on topic and reassure Duck that he will in fact be a twice passed over Capt.

Did you include a bottle with your letter to the board?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you include a bottle with your letter to the board?

Nah, but I ended every sentence with a red punctuation mark. i.e. “red dot”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This will be an interesting case study, duck.   I think there's a 99% chance you were selected for promotion.  Will they even see your letter?

It sounds like the board actually reviewed each record individually, hence the reason it took so long. Hoping for the best but not expecting much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this has been discussed, I must have missed it.  Looks like Big Blue is looking at static close-out dates for OPRs just like the EPR change, according to AFPC commander Lt Gen Grosso. Also, she said that OPRs are inflated and that needs to be fixed.  I completely agree, but it’s not a numbers thing since we don’t have the “firewall 5” problem on our OPRs like EPRs.  The inflation is in how we write bullets like everyone is a rock star.  I’m not sure how that gets fixed without getting rid of bullets... which would be awesome.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2017/12/23/new-in-2018-officer-promotion-overhaul-on-the-way/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, flyusaf83 said:

If this has been discussed, I must have missed it.  Looks like Big Blue is looking at static close-out dates for OPRs just like the EPR change, according to AFPC commander Lt Gen Grosso. Also, she said that OPRs are inflated and that needs to be fixed.  I completely agree, but it’s not a numbers thing since we don’t have the “firewall 5” problem on our OPRs like EPRs.  The inflation is in how we write bullets like everyone is a rock star.  I’m not sure how that gets fixed without getting rid of bullets... which would be awesome.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2017/12/23/new-in-2018-officer-promotion-overhaul-on-the-way/

I pity the poor exec in a flying squadron when it comes time to close out the captain OPRs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I pity the poor exec in a flying squadron when it comes time to close out the captain OPRs.


The answer to that lies in the changes to the promotion system. If you don’t need to show in 10 lines on a PRF that you have breadth and depth and are therefore worthy to serve in the next higher grade, then you no longer need 10 bullets of fluff in an annual OPR from which to collect inputs for the PRF.

Now your OPRs can be simplified to:

Does the officer suck? Y/N and a brief narrative why.

Is the officer a rockstar? Y/N and a brief narrative why.

Does the officer adequately perform his duties per standards? Y/N—no further explanation needed.

Do that and break out rated from the LAF category for promotions, and you might just be on to something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, flyusaf83 said:

If this has been discussed, I must have missed it.  Looks like Big Blue is looking at static close-out dates for OPRs just like the EPR change, according to AFPC commander Lt Gen Grosso. Also, she said that OPRs are inflated and that needs to be fixed.  I completely agree, but it’s not a numbers thing since we don’t have the “firewall 5” problem on our OPRs like EPRs.  The inflation is in how we write bullets like everyone is a rock star.  I’m not sure how that gets fixed without getting rid of bullets... which would be awesome.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2017/12/23/new-in-2018-officer-promotion-overhaul-on-the-way/

Thing is, the bullets we spend so much time writing matter very little.   The strat, (or lack there of) job/staff level push and school push are what count.  Omitting them can't be overcome by well written bullets, or even being good your job.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thing is, the bullets we spend so much time writing matter very little.   The strat, (or lack there of) job/staff level push and school push are what count.  Omitting them can't be overcome by well written bullets, or even being good your job.

Yep, dudes in reality about your 6 year point you should be able to take stock of your future in the USAF by what type of strats/push you are getting/have gotten.

It pains me to see dudes not realistic with their lack of push at that point and still think they have HPO potential. I see people volunteer for some truly sh-t jobs/deployments/TDY’s thinking it’s the boost they need but in reality they are working twice as hard for half the results.

I’ve seen a few buck the trend and get on the HPO track late but the personal cost was enormous.

This is my experience looking back over 15 years and seeing how peers and subordinates ended up in the long run vs indicators early on.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
18 minutes ago, di1630 said:


Yep, dudes in reality about your 6 year point you should be able to take stock of your future in the USAF by what type of strats/push you are getting/have gotten.

It pains me to see dudes not realistic with their lack of push at that point and still think they have HPO potential. I see people volunteer for some truly sh-t jobs/deployments/TDY’s thinking it’s the boost they need but in reality they are working twice as hard for half the results.

I’ve seen a few buck the trend and get on the HPO track late but the personal cost was enormous.

This is my experience looking back over 15 years and seeing how peers and subordinates ended up in the long run vs indicators early on.

Shack!

however, the sad thing is folks aren't mentored on that reality early enough and after "truly sh-t jobs/deployments/TDY’s thinking it’s the boost they need" they end up on the back end of their careers, mad at the world that they never got to that unreachable goal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, NKAWTG said:

Thing is, the bullets we spend so much time writing matter very little.   The strat, (or lack there of) job/staff level push and school push are what count.  Omitting them can't be overcome by well written bullets, or even being good your job.

Maybe we should stop writing so many bullets?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like some have mentioned, strats are overinflated.  Everyone is #1/something

each squadron seems to have 8 different stray categories and everyone looks great

 

  the only real way to tell someone apart is to see who has the actual #1/rank strat.    Static closeouts would help this out.    But the band aid being ripped off would hurt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×