Jump to content

Promotion and PRF Information


Guest e3racing

Recommended Posts

You gotta be in the top 50% of P's....a few decent strats, probably more importantly though job progression, duties held, etc.

I have good job progression and solid strats and good top 10% Maj strats at SQ and WG level, numerous FGO awards including SQ FGOY, and a SR push that strats me 1/5 IAPZ and "if I had a DP, he'd get it" with all the right pushes. My SR didn't have a DP, and I didn't get one at MLR. I feel good about being in a good position but you never really know with a "p" and what the competition is bringing to the table. 

Sounds like you'll be fine. I've known people with less get picked up in years with lower rates. Chances are that if you look in the mirror honestly and say "I'd be surprised if I got passed over", you won't. Of all the guys I've met passed over, few to none have been a total shock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On March 11, 2016 at 7:59 PM, Hot Sauce Hoy said:

I have good job progression and solid strats and good top 10% Maj strats at SQ and WG level, numerous FGO awards including SQ FGOY, and a SR push that strats me 1/5 IAPZ and "if I had a DP, he'd get it" with all the right pushes. My SR didn't have a DP, and I didn't get one at MLR. I feel good about being in a good position but you never really know with a "p" and what the competition is bringing to the table. 

Based ONLY on this info, without looking at your record or PRF...you are in good shape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have good job progression and solid strats and good top 10% Maj strats at SQ and WG level, numerous FGO awards including SQ FGOY, and a SR push that strats me 1/5 IAPZ and "if I had a DP, he'd get it" with all the right pushes. My SR didn't have a DP, and I didn't get one at MLR. I feel good about being in a good position but you never really know with a "p" and what the competition is bringing to the table. 

How are we in a spot where a guy even wonders here? Unless there is "the rest of the story", this is a slam dunk. Almost makes think there is something you're now sharing and trying to get a half truth here.

Bendy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bender said:

How are we in a spot where a guy even wonders here? Unless there is "the rest of the story", this is a slam dunk. Almost makes think there is something you're now sharing and trying to get a half truth here.

Bendy

I do not have anything negative I am not sharing. Really it comes down to I haven't seen a lot of other O-5 PRF's to compare myself to.  I was hopeful ( and thought I would) get a DP but realize that I am on a small staff and my SR doesn't have an outright one.  I probably would have gotten one at my old wing. I figure I must have been going against a bunch of IDE in res grad guys at the MLR. I have not personally talked to my SR about it because he is a 3 star and has a very busy schedule and has been TDY a lot. My supervisor (O-6) said he would be surprised if I don't get promoted.

This is the first time I have ever gotten a "p" (of course it's only my 2nd IPZ PRF) and have never been an exec so I don't really know how to compare myself against the competition.  "P" has always had a negative connotation amongst my peers--like once they hear you got a "p" they assume you are going to get passed over. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From yesterday's exec help wanted ads:

QUALIFICATIONS:
- Mandatory:
  -- Lt Col/Maj may apply
  -- Master’s Degree and PME commensurate with grade (In-res or Correspondence)

QUALIFICATIONS:
- Mandatory:
  -- Non-rated Lt Col or Maj required
  -- Master’s Degree and PME commensurate with grade (In-res or Correspondence)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, panchbarnes said:

From yesterday's exec help wanted ads:

QUALIFICATIONS:
- Mandatory:
  -- Lt Col/Maj may apply
  -- Master’s Degree and PME commensurate with grade (In-res or Correspondence)

QUALIFICATIONS:
- Mandatory:
  -- Non-rated Lt Col or Maj required
  -- Master’s Degree and PME commensurate with grade (In-res or Correspondence)

 

Makes sense, if you think about it.  People seeking out these jobs voluntarily are looking to put themselves on a trajectory toward Colonel.  If they don't already have their Master's degree complete as a Major (and especially Lt Col), the person volunteering for this job is likely to be working on one in the very near future.  The GO for whom he/she will be working wants your undivided attention/no distractions (like Master's degrees) for the 1-2 years the exec asst is in the job.  These are not run-of-the-mill Sq/CC or even Wg/CC EA jobs.

You guys really needs to open the aperture of your minds a little bit before you come onto his forum and spew about stuff.  Critical thinking is appreciated.

Edited by General Chang
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good critical thinking Chang. Requiring CGOs to have masters degrees for advancement never had second order effects before. Should be fine this time too. 

 

Kind of standard for A1 though - can't think more than 1 assignment cycle down the line. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good critical thinking Chang. Requiring CGOs to have masters degrees for advancement never had second order effects before. Should be fine this time too. 

 

Kind of standard for A1 though - can't think more than 1 assignment cycle down the line. 

Makes it seem like the one criticizing for lack of critical thinking is themselves not thinking or participating in a forum using critical thinking, just big words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So many wrongs with your thinking...

3 hours ago, General Chang said:

Makes sense, if you think about it.  People seeking out these jobs voluntarily are looking to put themselves on a trajectory toward Colonel. 

Don't disagree with people volunteering for these positions are looking for personal gains.  But the AF has been hiring/promoting careerists/box-checkers for the past decade+ and I'd say that hasn't turned out well for the AF based on the AF-wide retention issues and the strategic-level miscues.  Of course, you'd disagree with that assessment.

3 hours ago, General Chang said:

The GO for whom he/she will be working wants your undivided attention/no distractions (like Master's degrees) for the 1-2 years the exec asst is in the job. 

I'm glad you acknowledged that a working on a Master's degree is a distraction to a person's primary AF job.  So it's okay for a GO to get your undivided attention but not your current/previous bosses and colleagues because you want to be on that O-6 trajectory.  Got it!

3 hours ago, General Chang said:

These are not run-of-the-mill Sq/CC or even Wg/CC EA jobs.

You sound arrogant here, but typical for the number of careerists I've encountered in my career.  Can you explain what a "run-of-the-mill" Sq/CC job is as opposed to a "special" Sq/CC job?  At any point in your career, does the word "leadership" ever come across your mind (besides required PME readings/discussions) and/or is a part of your normal decision-making process?

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seen a number of IPUGs rammed through in min time, only to watch the newly minted IP go up to wing and occasionally log some IP time on the 781 to maintain currency for the next year or so, and then it's off to school. But hey, got that K prefix...check.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You sound arrogant here, but typical for the number of careerists I've encountered in my career.  Can you explain what a "run-of-the-mill" Sq/CC job is as opposed to a "special" Sq/CC job?  At any point in your career, does the word "leadership" ever come across your mind (besides required PME readings/discussions) and/or is a part of your normal decision-making process?

 

For the first time, I find myself coming to Chang's defense. He said Sq/CC EA, as in Exec. From what I've seen, GO's Execs are subjected to much, much longer workdays. Before undertaking such a job, which would normally happen as an O-5, it would probably be ideal to have a Masters knocked out given the presumption that you are on track for O-6, at which point it would be required for promotion.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, I re-read that particular sentence and I agree that Chang meant Sq/CC EA jobs and not Sq/CC jobs.

Since these jobs are open to O-4s, you are essentially sending the message that you better get your Masters knocked out early to be competitive for one of these "opportunities."  And this takes us right back to the pre-Gen Welsh days.  It makes sense for an IPZ O-5 applicant to complete the AAD beforehand but not for an O-4 applicant.

 

11 hours ago, General Chang said:

If they don't already have their Master's degree complete as a Major (and especially Lt Col), the person volunteering for this job is likely to be working on one in the very near future.

And if you are a Major who gets selected to be a GO Exec, you are more than likely to get a school slot later and a Master's along with it.  So this is really not an issue, unless you just wanted to see how devoted someone is to climbing the career ladder.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a rule of thumb for what level of strats should be included in a PRF?  I have seen some senior raters include only top 10% ones and I have seen others include top 25% or even top 50% level strats. I have seen some only include 1 if there are 2 similar stats of the same category from different OPRs, while I have seen others include all, even if they are repetitive. 

Is it better to include every strat or include only the best (if enough) to try and paint a top 10% performer and leave some out?

Edited by ArcticGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is coming from a Capt who spent a couple years as an exec, so feel free to disregard the rest of my post.

The answer is "it depends".  If you have only top 10% strats, then you'd want to include them all.  If you have some top 10%, some top 25%, and some top 50%, I'd say include only the top 10% and 25% strats.  Of course, this will vary based on how many of each you have.   If you have 7 10% strats and 1 top 25%, then omit the top 25%.  If you have 2 10% strats, but 5 top 25% strats, omitting all but the top 10% to paint a better picture would look awkward.  When writing it, keep in mind your overall goal.  If it's to get a school slot, then obviously you're going to have to paint a rosier picture.  If you're just trying to prove that you're not in the bottom 10% of your YG, then throwing in a top 50% strat (who gives these out anyways) wouldn't hurt anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BADFNZ said:

When writing it, keep in mind your overall goal.  If it's to get a school slot, then obviously you're going to have to paint a rosier picture. 

What does this mean?  Th board doesn't directly decide who gets promoted with school and who doesn't...it just scored the PRF's and AFPC gives the top X number of PRF's selects with school based off how many there's to go it that year.  So why would a senior rater not make the PRF the best it can look?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I am tracking where BADFNZ is coming from.  The ultimate goal of a promotion board is to select individuals who show the potential to excel at the next rank, which is why a SR may elect to leave off some strats if they are heavily weighted towards a lack of breadth.  For example, we all agree on this forum that being an expert in your airframe should be a top priority but a PRF that is overwhelming geared towards flying strats (#1/69 IPs, Top 10% ACs, etc) would not "look" appealing to a promotion board that is looking for an officer with future leadership potential (don't hate the player, hate the game).  That thought process is why I have seen "decent" strats left off (assuming there is a decent size pool to choose from) to include a lesser strat of a different category or even a strong bullet that highlights FGO potential (lead team of SARM NCOs through MAJCOM inspection over #1/15 Flight Leads from an OPR 3 cycles ago).  Of course, if all the strats are #1 type strats it would be hard to argue leaving them off.  The PRF also has limited space to relay the SRs message so filling it with "soft" starts may look more like a way of masking a perceived weakness or lack of breadth.  

Although determining school selects is not a separate process but a function of taking a slice off the top XX% of the PRFs, a SR could certainly shift focus on a PRF when compared to an individual he/she may be more concerned about simply making the promotion list.  I would imagine an individual a SR wants to get promoted but their record isn't great would prioritize grabbing everything remotely positive when compared to an individual the SR is trying to push for school via the promotion board.  That person's PRF would probably have some decent bullets/strats left off in order to present the "big picture" of someone who is primed for leadership (more whole person compared to the greatest IP I have ever seen).  Although most of us would prefer to have the greatest IP promoted it is not how the system works.  So this is why the SR is making the PRF look the best it can, but what is best for one person is not the best for another. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, TheInner said:

  Although most of us would prefer to have the greatest IP promoted it is not how the system works.

Why would you just want the greatest IP promoted?  Some of the best IP's are Capt's and Maj's...does this automatically equate to these IP's being good commanders?  Some of these great IPs are average officers, at best.  Regardless of whether or not you agree with the promotion 'system' (I definitely agree it can be approved upon), you are very foolish if you believe technical skill (i.e. being a sharp IP) should trump overall officership.  Being good at your craft (i.e. a good pilot/IP) is only a piece of what makes this person a good officer/commander.  So while being good at your technical skill should be weighed, it should not be weighed as much as your post suggests...it should be more of a binary question:  Is this person a strong/solid pilot:  Yes or No.

So I guess I'm not in your 'most' category...and this is from someone who has worked for awesome commanders who were average to above average pilots, and who has also worked for commanders who were awesome pilots but below average officers/commanders.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, TheInner said:

I think I am tracking where BADFNZ is coming from.  The ultimate goal of a promotion board is to select individuals who show the potential to excel at the next rank, which is why a SR may elect to leave off some strats if they are heavily weighted towards a lack of breadth.  For example, we all agree on this forum that being an expert in your airframe should be a top priority but a PRF that is overwhelming geared towards flying strats (#1/69 IPs, Top 10% ACs, etc) would not "look" appealing to a promotion board that is looking for an officer with future leadership potential (don't hate the player, hate the game).  That thought process is why I have seen "decent" strats left off (assuming there is a decent size pool to choose from) to include a lesser strat of a different category or even a strong bullet that highlights FGO potential (lead team of SARM NCOs through MAJCOM inspection over #1/15 Flight Leads from an OPR 3 cycles ago).  Of course, if all the strats are #1 type strats it would be hard to argue leaving them off.  The PRF also has limited space to relay the SRs message so filling it with "soft" starts may look more like a way of masking a perceived weakness or lack of breadth.  

Although determining school selects is not a separate process but a function of taking a slice off the top XX% of the PRFs, a SR could certainly shift focus on a PRF when compared to an individual he/she may be more concerned about simply making the promotion list.  I would imagine an individual a SR wants to get promoted but their record isn't great would prioritize grabbing everything remotely positive when compared to an individual the SR is trying to push for school via the promotion board.  That person's PRF would probably have some decent bullets/strats left off in order to present the "big picture" of someone who is primed for leadership (more whole person compared to the greatest IP I have ever seen).  Although most of us would prefer to have the greatest IP promoted it is not how the system works.  So this is why the SR is making the PRF look the best it can, but what is best for one person is not the best for another. 

B-E-A-Utiful analysis.  People should read, then re-read, then re-re-read this post.  Spot on.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...