Jump to content
Baseops Forums
Guest e3racing

Promotion and PRF Information

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Majestik Møøse said:

I didn’t apply for school, but if I did it would’ve been to one of those foreign ACSC deals as a backup to what I primarily want to do. I would’ve appreciated the ability to say “no thanks.”

Maybe I'm still thinking in the box in that my initial thought was that if someone applies to school they are applying to school in general, and their preferences are just that... but maybe you're right... the system in general is just too rigid and we should send best-fit folks to the right schools to get them the skills we require as opposed to using "school" as a reward.  With that line of thinking, maybe all Foreign DE schools should be filled with Air Advisors... folks apply directly to schools that benefit their specific development and career field.  But if we're talking current system, when I applied to school I did so knowing I might not get the school I preferred, kind of like when I joined the AF, went to UPT, etc.  Again, times have changed and I think we ought to look at the real world a bit more and see how future leaders out there are developed... surely it's not gambling, left up to chance, or throwing mud at the wall to see what sticks like we have been doing for years.  Thanks.

Share this post


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

Maybe I'm still thinking in the box in that my initial thought was that if someone applies to school they are applying to school in general, and their preferences are just that... but maybe you're right... the system in general is just too rigid and we should send best-fit folks to the right schools to get them the skills we require as opposed to using "school" as a reward.  With that line of thinking, maybe all Foreign DE schools should be filled with Air Advisors... folks apply directly to schools that benefit their specific development and career field.  But if we're talking current system, when I applied to school I did so knowing I might not get the school I preferred, kind of like when I joined the AF, went to UPT, etc.  Again, times have changed and I think we ought to look at the real world a bit more and see how future leaders out there are developed... surely it's not gambling, left up to chance, or throwing mud at the wall to see what sticks like we have been doing for years.  Thanks.

In regards to a lot of those foreign schools or special oppurtunities, the majority of aircrew find out too late about them. I had realised after talking to a few of the people selected that many of those slots are filled by people who spent their whole career trying to get there. They are smart and write the entire story of their OPRs on what makes them ideal for that oppurtunity, the pick a master's degree tailored for that result, etc etc.... If you are just now deciding Korean ACSC is your tea when you are doing your school apps, you are too late. There is a dude that is 4/4 in Korean, volunteered 2 short tours there and has a master's in Korean Military History or something like that already. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

In regards to a lot of those foreign schools or special oppurtunities, the majority of aircrew find out too late about them. I had realised after talking to a few of the people selected that many of those slots are filled by people who spent their whole career trying to get there. They are smart and write the entire story of their OPRs on what makes them ideal for that oppurtunity, the pick a master's degree tailored for that result, etc etc.... If you are just now deciding Korean ACSC is your tea when you are doing your school apps, you are too late. There is a dude that is 4/4 in Korean, volunteered 2 short tours there and has a master's in Korean Military History or something like that already. 

Most of the guys I know had no language, no prep, and were a bit surprised to get Overseas IDE. The majority did however put those schools somewhere on their list and had been GOs’ Execs and such. Maybe times are changing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/8/2019 at 5:02 PM, FLEA said:

In regards to a lot of those foreign schools or special oppurtunities, the majority of aircrew find out too late about them. I had realised after talking to a few of the people selected that many of those slots are filled by people who spent their whole career trying to get there. They are smart and write the entire story of their OPRs on what makes them ideal for that oppurtunity, the pick a master's degree tailored for that result, etc etc.... If you are just now deciding Korean ACSC is your tea when you are doing your school apps, you are too late. There is a dude that is 4/4 in Korean, volunteered 2 short tours there and has a master's in Korean Military History or something like that already. 

I didn't have any of that and got Korean ACSC as a B-1 WSO.  The only thing I had going for me is my wife is Korean.  I know I beat out some prior enlisted Korean linguists; how, I don't know.  The F-15C guy that came after me had absolutely nothing to do with Korea and didn't even have any foreign schools on his IDE app.  And I think the F-16 guy after him had nothing to do with Korea either except a Kun or Osan tour under his belt.  My impression was that AFSC was more important than other factors.

 

Edited by pbar
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Any good RUMINT on 07-08 boards during the transition?

It’s terrible that we have people waiting for months with no heads up whatsoever and then this. Equivalent to flying along in a full pattern with tower trying to call you, but wait, you can’t answer because you’re still planning out the fine print of your approach and landing. Unsat. At least give people an idea about what you’re doing (months ago) so they don’t start breaking out.

But what’s done is done. Now don’t let our people hang while wondering if they’re even going to meet this board. These are people who may still be deciding whether to stay or go. Let’s not add another hundred to the shortage.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Well, 5 year window/end of BPZ is AF Amn/NCO Official - https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/12/09/air-force-to-drop-below-the-zone-promotions-for-officers/

Any good RUMINT on 07-08 boards during the transition?

The Navy started merit based reordering last year. I have two friends that both screened for O-5 and squadron command. One guy ‘merit reordered’ to promote at the start of the new FY, the other didn’t.

 

Both were weapons school grads, had masters degree, and jpme-1 complete. Point being, a lot of squadron commanders (and the rest of us) were left scratching our heads on what was being used to define the merit reorder. It’ll be interesting to see what the AF uses.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, 5 year window/end of BPZ is AF Amn/NCO Official - https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/12/09/air-force-to-drop-below-the-zone-promotions-for-officers/
Any good RUMINT on 07-08 boards during the transition?


If you’ve seen the stats, one of the discriminators for people making General was being Below the Zone to O-5 and O-6. I’m curious how this works “upstream”.

Hopefully this whole shift is a change for the better...
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t get it.  Will the board be able to tell whether you’re in zone or above the zone because on the PRF it’s the same check mark.  If it’s one giant 5 year zone, some good IPZ records will be victimized.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, celtic020 said:

If it’s one giant 5 year zone, some good IPZ records will be victimized.  

Yes. The idea is that better APZ folks get picked up.

Not that it’s perfect, but I agree with it and it actually makes sense for the AF. It does, however, suck for folks who might have been picked up IPZ in the old system, but may now have to wait five years if APZers continue to outperform (or out-record) them.

The question right now is if this  new IPZ window starts where BPZ or IPZ used to start.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone seems to think somehow APZ will displace IPZ. It is not likely because most people APZ are not given strats or good pushes regardless of their performance. It will be less than a 1% change in the overall stats because the records just die after being non-selected the first time.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Everyone seems to think somehow APZ will displace IPZ. It is not likely because most people APZ are not given strats or good pushes regardless of their performance. It will be less than a 1% change in the overall stats because the records just die after being non-selected the first time.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app


As an APZ guy, the vast majority of Commanders won’t waste their DP’s on us once we’ve missed our chance. I don’t know how this will change that...after you don’t get promoted, we unfortunately aren’t who leadership is focusing on anymore.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jrizzell said:

As an APZ guy, the vast majority of Commanders won’t waste their DP’s on us once we’ve missed our chance. I don’t know how this will change that...after you don’t get promoted, we unfortunately aren’t who leadership is focusing on anymore.

Well, I think some more strat rules will come as well as clear direction to the board.  That should help. God forbid the "leaders" actually rate those that are performing well and providing feedback.

Just had a Grp CC retire that was the epitome of the shit we've had to trudge through with the myopic "golden child" view for the past 15~20 years (maybe longer).  He had someone else's #1 come into the group and the rating Sq/CC said they were absolutely not performing worthy of a Group/Wing Strat.  Shit-bird didn't want to "impact his on-ramp" and got him a grp/wg strat.

I think about staying in and all of this getting figured out, and seeing where we go as a force.  The future is bright...but I'm really fucking tired, and I don't want to move.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, K_O said:

Yes. The idea is that better APZ folks get picked up.

Not that it’s perfect, but I agree with it and it actually makes sense for the AF. It does, however, suck for folks who might have been picked up IPZ in the old system, but may now have to wait five years if APZers continue to outperform (or out-record) them.

The question right now is if this  new IPZ window starts where BPZ or IPZ used to start.

There's a slide deck out there that shows this year's 1BPZ meeting 1 year later and 2BPZ meeting 2 years later.  So it looks like a move to align eligibility periods to start when IPZ starts.

But we're still chugging along like '07/'08 are meeting boards this spring so who knows what the aimpoint is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AFsock said:

There's a slide deck out there that shows this year's 1BPZ meeting 1 year later and 2BPZ meeting 2 years later.  So it looks like a move to align eligibility periods to start when IPZ starts.

But we're still chugging along like '07/'08 are meeting boards this spring so who knows what the aimpoint is.

IPZ only, starting with the (now May scheduled) O5 board.... no more BPZ. 

And the Five year window (Once in place) starts on your fragged IPZ as well. 

These are big changes for the better for the service. Maybe we will gain some credibility in the joint world...

They are So big In fact that the way I heard it was the “Senior Statesmen” (retired four stars) started lobbying the CSAF to slow or reverse the train... because, by god the promotion system (which hadn’t changed this substantially since 1986) worked for them. They were told their input was welcome and appreciated, but the train has left the station (AKA decision-made...).

Chuck

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


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

 


If you’ve seen the stats, one of the discriminators for people making General was being Below the Zone to O-5 and O-6. I’m curious how this works “upstream”.

Hopefully this whole shift is a change for the better...

 

They already got rid of the "pole year" idea that someone MUST be a one star by 24 years of service.  Sounds like they finally recognized the vast majority of us will not be CSAF

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.airforcetimes.com/opinion/commentary/2019/12/10/the-end-of-early-promotions-and-the-way-ahead/
 

There’s no perfect system, but I think what “Ned” is proposing would do more good than bad. If the AF does not follow through with at least some of these changes (i.e. 5-year looks) asap, then the latest announcement will be all for naught... or worse.

One point I don’t necessarily agree on is hiding all but recent OPRs. Sure, hide all OPRs from raters, but maybe not from promotion boards or hiring authorities. Even when gamed, OPRs are still sources of information about an officer’s background and experiences that can help put the right person in the right place at the right time. If hidden we’ll be back to promoting and hiring by checked boxes which is what we’re trying to get away from right?

Edited by K_O
Point of order.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, K_O said:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/opinion/commentary/2019/12/10/the-end-of-early-promotions-and-the-way-ahead/
 

There’s no perfect system, but I think what “Ned” is proposing would do more good than bad. If the AF does not follow through with at least some of these changes (i.e. 5-year looks) asap, then the latest announcement will be all for naught... or worse.

One point I don’t necessarily agree on is hiding all but recent OPRs. Sure, hide all OPRs from raters, but maybe not from promotion boards or hiring authorities. Even when gamed, OPRs are still sources of information about an officer’s background and experiences that can help put the right person in the right place at the right time. If hidden we’ll be back to promoting and hiring by checked boxes which is what we’re trying to get away from right?

I know several people who “bloomed” early, Ie Shoe Flag DG, and kept earning top strats despite working as little or less than their peers.  They kept riding the wave as FGOs knowing they were gaurenteed school, etc.  Meanwhile, their FGO counterparts worked their tails off but never could reach the golden children in terms of strats or pushes. 

Thus, removing BPZ and eliminating CGO OPRs from a Lt Col board is absolutely the right move and may just retain some talent that, under the previous system, weren’t golden children and thus not given a chance.  It also eliminates the notion of “one mistake Air Force.”  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another interesting thing moving to the merit promotion and 5 year window.

It's a feedback system.  If you promote early, but pin on in Dec...it's an indicator.  If you promote year 5, in Dec... it's another indicator.

By all means not the best, but it's something else to look at.

Share this post


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

I know several people who “bloomed” early, Ie Shoe Flag DG, and kept earning top strats despite working as little or less than their peers.  They kept riding the wave as FGOs knowing they were gaurenteed school, etc.  Meanwhile, their FGO counterparts worked their tails off but never could reach the golden children in terms of strats or pushes. 

Thus, removing BPZ and eliminating CGO OPRs from a Lt Col board is absolutely the right move and may just retain some talent that, under the previous system, weren’t golden children and thus not given a chance.  It also eliminates the notion of “one mistake Air Force.”  

Understood, but I’m also trying no to think more real world lately and less AF world. In the real world I may want or need someone with a certain set of skills or experiences. Someone who deployed to one place or another. Someone with more of a background in A or B. Oh and while that person was doing that job, I also kind of want them to have done it well. It may not matter if it was 5 or 10 years ago, though I might weight that accordingly. There’s no perfect system and the jerks you mentioned might still make it through, but I think it’s less likely if all OPRs are hidden from commanders and SRs. For promotion boards and hiring authorities Duty Titles and AFSC pre-fixes (checked boxes) are not enough to shape the force and put the right people in the right jobs and don’t tell the whole story. Let’s  black out all strats ever received if you want, but when I am considering hiring you or promoting you I want to read about how much crap you hauled, lives you saved, bad guys you killed, and your work with that joint, interagency, or international partner. Just doing your last job well does not tell me much. As we know, working at Popeyes is not the same as working at Chick-fil-a (shots fired!). Last three OPRs would be better, but I’m still not getting that whole-person picture. At some point we need to realize that there is no perfect system to select and promote the right people. In the end there must be a person evaluating on the other end and they should have the information they need to make the best decision based on America’s needs. I’m not an idiot and I trust others won’t be when looking at someone’s records and it’s quite easy to tell if someone was a one hit wonder or not. So go ahead and get rid of strats, but the people promoting the next wave of what we need in this rapidly changing world should have all of the information they need about the person they are considering promoting to make the best decisions for our national security.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd argue there's a pretty wide gulf between what the promotion boards are doing and what hiring authorities are doing.  My command chain has access to my entire record, including the fact I have a master's...but the board doesn't.

The point is to give the promotion boards the information they need to PROMOTE people.  Not to vector them to the next job.  Not to put people on the command list.  Not to fill vacancies in a staff.  There are other process for those things, and the people that run those processes have access to the entire record.  Promoting someone to Lt Col shouldn't hinge on the fact that they finished #20/21 in their UPT class as a 2 Lt or were the DG of SOS 8 years ago.

I think last 3-5 OPRs should be plenty for that.  The enlisted side only uses last 3 EPRs for all SNCO ranks.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, pawnman said:

I'd argue there's a pretty wide gulf between what the promotion boards are doing and what hiring authorities are doing.  My command chain has access to my entire record, including the fact I have a master's...but the board doesn't.

The point is to give the promotion boards the information they need to PROMOTE people.  Not to vector them to the next job.  Not to put people on the command list.  Not to fill vacancies in a staff.  There are other process for those things, and the people that run those processes have access to the entire record.  Promoting someone to Lt Col shouldn't hinge on the fact that they finished #20/21 in their UPT class as a 2 Lt or were the DG of SOS 8 years ago.

I think last 3-5 OPRs should be plenty for that.  The enlisted side only uses last 3 EPRs for all SNCO ranks.  

As stated, black out strats if you want, but promotion creates the pool from which to hire and skills and experiences should matter for promotion. It does outside the AF and it should inside. 3 OPRs don’t provide the whole picture.

Edited by K_O
Add: I don’t expect folks to DG or get #1 everywhere and everyone makes mistakes. How many of our best leaders had issues at one point or another? Let’s let this play out a bit more following these massive changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2019 at 2:31 AM, Chuck17 said:

IPZ only, starting with the (now May scheduled) O5 board.... no more BPZ. 

And the Five year window (Once in place) starts on your fragged IPZ as well. 

These are big changes for the better for the service. Maybe we will gain some credibility in the joint world...

They are So big In fact that the way I heard it was the “Senior Statesmen” (retired four stars) started lobbying the CSAF to slow or reverse the train... because, by god the promotion system (which hadn’t changed this substantially since 1986) worked for them. They were told their input was welcome and appreciated, but the train has left the station (AKA decision-made...).

Chuck

So, I know there's a telecon coming up on 16th to discuss details, but you seem to know quite a bit.

The idea that this somehow does away with the "anointed" seems silly to me.  Are raters and boards going to lose the ability to count?  Everyone can count to five.

Edited, because I found what I think are answers here:
https://www.airforcemag.com/app/uploads/2019/12/Talking-Points-BPZ-and-Merit-based-Reordering_ao-9-Dec-19.pdf

Edited by FltDoc
new info
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

So, I know there's a telecon coming up on 16th to discuss details, but you seem to know quite a bit.

The idea that this somehow does away with the "anointed" seems silly to me.  Are raters and boards going to lose the ability to count?  Everyone can count to five.

Edited, because I found what I think are answers here:
https://www.airforcemag.com/app/uploads/2019/12/Talking-Points-BPZ-and-Merit-based-Reordering_ao-9-Dec-19.pdf

Concur. All this seems to do is create new push-line language that tells the board who should/shouldn't be promoted. I don't see how these changes would have any impact on any current APZ folks due to the fact that our records have been so disregarded over the last few years that they look terrible (no strats, etc.)

Raters are going to push for the folks they know will get promoted on their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd look. All this does is change the timeline for the shiny pennies. Will there be some type of requirement to promote a specific percentage from each "look group"? if not, how will this system allow raters to highlight the folks on their 4th or 5th look that are performing at a higher level?  Those folks still won't be able to compete against the folks with better records that are on their 1st or 2nd look. In fact, I think it would be more of a negative that you have been non-selected for promotion the first 3-4 times.

On top of that, if you aren't promoted on your 1st/2nd/3rd look, won't that make you less likely to be selected for a Command position or be considered for future promotion? These changes seem to solidify who the chosen ones are much more than the old system did and I think it will turn into a, "not promoted on your first 3 looks? Well, you might want to consider a different career because this isn't going to happen for you".

Finally, fully support removing CGO OPR's from O-5 promotion packages. If a person performed well as an FGO, and was given leadership opportunities, then what they did as a 2LT is, for the most part, irrelevant. Looking at the last 4-5 years of a candidates professional record would a.) give the board more time to spend on reviewing packages, and, b.) Even the playing field for folks that have been riding the gravy train because they were an exec as an O-3 (or folks that had a rater crap on them as a CGO).

My only other question is, what happens if you don't get promoted after your 5th look? Does the AF boot you? If my math is right, wouldn't a 5th look non-select put a lot of folks at 18-19 years active duty time if your IPZ/1st look is at 13/14 years? 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...