Promotion and PRF Information

[ThreeHoler]

Pawnman: the black box of how promotion boards work sucks. It also sucks that even a FOIA of the board instructions won’t help much. Just remember...Big Blue May not value you but there are people in your community who do.

Klepto: I doubt competitive categories will help. I think there is a study in the Navy showing that the “aviator” category promotes at a lower rate than the others.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Bigred]

4 hours ago, ThreeHoler said:

I think there is a study in the Navy showing that the “aviator” category promotes at a lower rate than the others.

 

I dunno if there’s a formal study but just a cursory glance at promotion zone percentages shows that’s a fact. BUPERS publishes stats after every board and aviators are typically at the bottom of the pile percentage wise. 

 

[Duck]

Bummer Pawnman, hate it when guys that want to stay in and make a difference don’t get promoted to places where they can affect positive change. Keep your head up brother!


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Skitzo]

Well boys, looks like 1206's and being in the top 20% of your wing's FGO ranks is not enough to get promoted.

I guess either way I can stop filling out awards packages and worrying about it.

What a crock. Sorry man.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FLEA]

The biggest crock is that our strat system has become so convoluted and mystical that even with a solid #/## you still don't know where you are at. How are you 4/42 or top 20% in a board that promotes 60-70% and still now selected? It makes zero sense except that commanders have been gaming the strat system for so long that even they don't know how it works anymore. 

[celtic020]

15 minutes ago, FLEA said:

The biggest crock is that our strat system has become so convoluted and mystical that even with a solid #/## you still don't know where you are at. How are you 4/42 or top 20% in a board that promotes 60-70% and still now selected? It makes zero sense except that commanders have been gaming the strat system for so long that even they don't know how it works anymore. 

Shack.   A large percentage of people get a 1 or 2 strat on an eval.   Mathematically, can that many people be truly ranked 1 or 2?  Of course not.   But commanders manipulate those numbers and if you aren’t a beneficiary, it looks like you’re an average Joe.   If a commander actually has the wherewithal and ethical conscious to strat appropriately, and a good officer gets a #7/50 or something in the range, which SHOULD be a good strat, it somehow doesn’t look good.   But it is good.  

[osulax05]

13 hours ago, ThreeHoler said:

Klepto: I doubt competitive categories will help. I think there is a study in the Navy showing that the “aviator” category promotes at a lower rate than the others.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Checks.

The rate at which the new competitive categories promote will likely go down because the AF still only needs/is authorized X number of new O-4 or O-5s per year. In the Current system, officers compete for every authorized line number. In the new system they will only compete for slots allocated to their competitive category (sts). Because smaller, support type competitive categories will have guaranteed line numbers, the result will be a lower overall selection rate (%) for the ops category. However, the goodness is that each competitive category can define what it values in its officers. Instead of competing with sitting Sq/CCs from the MSG the lead hundreds of Airmen, the ops category can place higher emphasis on things like deployments, WIC grads, etc. 

I personally think it’s a fair trade off because the goobers and queep monsters in Ops will  more easily standout amongst the purely ops records.

Edited July 9, 2019 by osulax05

[Chuck17]

1 hour ago, FLEA said:

How are you 4/42 or top 20% in a board that promotes 60-70% and still now selected? It makes zero sense except that commanders have been gaming the strat system for so long that even they don't know how it works anymore. 

The selection rate for APZ was 6.2% overall (76/1219)... APZ with a P was 3.7% (44/1176), w/ a DP 91.4% (32/35). Without a DP, it's a steep climb for APZ promotion...

Chuck

[Epiloo]

4 minutes ago, Chuck17 said:

The selection rate for APZ was 6.2% overall (76/1219)... APZ with a P was 3.7% (44/1176), w/ a DP 91.4% (32/35). Without a DP, it's a steep climb for APZ promotion...

Chuck

You've got stats and I still haven't been notified...

[bennynova]

Isn’t the list out publicly? Or is that tomorrow?

[MCO]

1 hour ago, bennynova said:

Isn’t the list out publicly? Or is that tomorrow?

List should be out

[MooseClub]

Today is official release 

[olevelo]

Some of you may remember some of my story over the last few years. Quick recap, even tho I was a TPS grad/instructor nav, I was RIFd in 2014. I separated, became a GS and IMA, but then had it all reversed a year later through the BCMR (basically I should have never even been eligible to meet the RIF board). I knew when I accepted coming back that I was likely eternally screwed.

I got lucky and I was put in charge of a new unit and got Sq/CC equivalent on my OPR/PRF. But that didn't overcome my weird looking records with a year missing "per SECAF", and not enough strats earlier on. My IPZ was moved one year behind my peers and I was still passed over, and then passed over again last year. But in the meantime I managed to get myself into a PhD slot, so I at least had that going for me.

Well, against all odds, I made it this year! Not sure what the tipping point was, although I hoped it meant even more of my APZ bros were getting selected (from the stats it doesn't sound like it).

So I know it doesn't help the folks who didn't make it this year, but there is hope out there! I know I'm not the typical example, but I had enough "negative" stuff in the record that I didn't think anything would overcome it (and neither did any of senior leaders I knew, and I only ever managed to get Ps because they were afraid even a DP wouldn't be enough).

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk

[bennynova]

I’ll tell you what happened. PhD is the new DP to Lt Col

 

congrats by the way. Big comeback.  

[olevelo]

Haha yeah. Considering that the reason I'm in this program is because the SECAF said "we need more engineering PhDs from civilian institutions", I had some hope there would be some emphasis put on it. But I figured if they did they would wait until I graduated!

Thanks though!

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk

[panchbarnes]

In case you are looking for the list:

 

https://www.afpc.af.mil/Portals/70/documents/12_PROMOTION/01_Officer Promotions/CY19A Lt Col LAF-MSC.pdf

 

[Skitzo]

You've got stats and I still haven't been notified...

Cool I know one of the guys ATZ with a DP who didn’t get promoted. I don’t understand this at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[panchbarnes]

FWIW, there are at least 2 FAOs that didn't make the cut.  The board was supposed to count Monterey as in-res IDE for the FAOs.

Edited July 10, 2019 by panchbarnes

[SFG]

1 hour ago, panchbarnes said:

FWIW, there are at least 2 FAOs that didn't make the cut.  The board was supposed to count Monterey as in-res IDE for the FAOs.

Interesting.  I think it may have been a little more complicated than that.

FAOs in the 2005 year group and on were considered for in-residence credit if they accomplished a certain combination of rigorous deliberate development which includes language training, postgraduate school training, 6 months of in-region immersion, and ACSC in correspondence. Not everyone got it. From 2007 on everyone should get in-res credit since the program has been restructured.

Now if you’re saying these guys got the in-res credit as reflected on their SURF, but got passed over, then I am a bit surprised, but not shocked.  Few people know what FAOs bring to the table. That, and follow-on jobs can vary greatly.  

Will be interesting to see what the stats are for this board and also if FAO promotions really tank in the competitive category system.

[panchbarnes]

Yeah both FAOs received in-res credit on SURF and still passed over.

Besides FAOs being undervalued... 1. not all FAO jobs are equal.  2.  part time FAOs don't help promotion.

Edited July 10, 2019 by panchbarnes

[zach braff]

1 hour ago, panchbarnes said:

Yeah both FAOs received in-res credit on SURF and still passed over.

Besides FAOs being undervalued... 1. not all FAO jobs are equal.  2.  part time FAOs don't help promotion.

I’m a FAO serving a FAO tour and I fully agree on your #1 and #2. 

That said, I think the FAO Fellowship (in-res for all FAOs) may have backfired on its creators.  Since everyone who does FAO deliberate training gets it, it becomes devalued. Mind you I don’t think too much weight should be put on in-res anyway, but which do you think a SR will value more?  The guy/gal competitively selected by the DE board for an IDE program/equivalency or the 16F whose SURF says in-res simply because they qualified as a 16F?

Better would be to go back to the old system - FAO training (and certain other programs/fellowships/etc) are eligible for equivalency, but you still have to be selected by the DE panel.  Yes this would mean not all FAOs get the cool in-res mark on the SURF, but those that earn it would match equally against their in-res peers.

zb

 

[jazzdude]

Mind you I don’t think too much weight should be put on in-res anyway, but which do you think a SR will value more?  The guy/gal competitively selected by the DE board for an IDE program/equivalency or the 16F whose SURF says in-res simply because they qualified as a 16F?
Better would be to go back to the old system - FAO training (and certain other programs/fellowships/etc) are eligible for equivalency, but you still have to be selected by the DE panel.  Yes this would mean not all FAOs get the cool in-res mark on the SURF, but those that earn it would match equally against their in-res peers.
zb
 

I don't believe In-Res IDE in of itself means a thing-big blue doesn't give a crap about what you learn at whatever IDE program (unless maybe you do a fellowship at the White House/Congress/Pentagon). All big blue cares about is that you were identified as the top 25% of your year group.

The AF doesn't consider my masters degree from AFIT as IDE in res because I wasn't identified as a school select when I completed it. If I was a school select, I could have received deliberate development credit for the degree.

It's not about learning the information, but about a stratification. In res IDE credit used to be a way to quickly identify that strat, but it sounds like with more programs that give that credit (remember when AFPAK hands were supposed to be the top 10%, get IDE credit, and fast track to promotion...), there's another decoder ring floating around with how to ID that strat.

[pawnman]

38 minutes ago, jazzdude said:

 

 

I don't believe In-Res IDE in of itself means a thing-big blue doesn't give a crap about what you learn at whatever IDE program (unless maybe you do a fellowship at the White House/Congress/Pentagon). All big blue cares about is that you were identified as the top 25% of your year group.

The AF doesn't consider my masters degree from AFIT as IDE in res because I wasn't identified as a school select when I completed it. If I was a school select, I could have received deliberate development credit for the degree.

It's not about learning the information, but about a stratification. In res IDE credit used to be a way to quickly identify that strat, but it sounds like with more programs that give that credit (remember when AFPAK hands were supposed to be the top 10%, get IDE credit, and fast track to promotion...), there's another decoder ring floating around with how to ID that strat.

 

Bingo.  I knew a guy who was selected to teach ACSC for three years.  But because he wasn't a school select, they wouldn't give him in-residence credit for the year he did ACSC in order to prep him for the job of teaching the class.

 

Quote

That said, I think the FAO Fellowship (in-res for all FAOs) may have backfired on its creators.  Since everyone who does FAO deliberate training gets it, it becomes devalued. Mind you I don’t think too much weight should be put on in-res anyway, but which do you think a SR will value more?  The guy/gal competitively selected by the DE board for an IDE program/equivalency or the 16F whose SURF says in-res simply because they qualified as a 16F?

Counter-arguement - there are a LOT more people who get picked up for IDE in residence than get picked up for an FAO Fellowship.

Edited July 10, 2019 by pawnman

[BADFNZ]

On 7/8/2019 at 4:19 PM, pawnman said:

Well boys, looks like 1206's and being in the top 20% of your wing's FGO ranks is not enough to get promoted.

I guess either way I can stop filling out awards packages and worrying about it.

Not to be a dick, but isn't think what we've been wanting?  Do we want people promoting based on awards and strats or do we want them promoting based on job performance?  Not saying your job performance sucks, I'm sure it doesn't, but I thought we we've had our pitchforks out for years because the Christmas party planner/Wing FGO OTY/Strat queen was getting promoted over dudes that might have a better overall record.

[bennynova]

1206s just shouldn’t be given to Christmas party organizers