So 2015 was an interesting year in regard to the EES. The biggest changes in the EES was the top promotion recommendations. As many of you know, the force distribution system aka quota system was the biggest thing to get used to. For technical sergeant eligible for master sergeant only the top 10% got higher promotion recommendations. For example in a large unit (those with 11 or higher [am I correct?]) could rack and stack their own eligible for promotion. The top 10% got must promote and the top 5% got the promote now recommendation. I will use my unit to help clarify:
We had 21 total technical sergeants eligible for master sergeant. I have no knowledge of how they determined who got the promotion recommendations, but the shady part is that no other SNCOs in the unit had a say....anyway the commander "racked and stacked" all eligibles in the unit from #1 (top) to the bottom (#21). Remember that the force distribution system only authorized the top 10% for promote now or must promote recommendations. Anyone above the 10% (10.01 or higher) would only be eligible for a promote recommendation. Here is how it looks:
Promote Now (Top 5%)
Must Promote (Top 10%)
Promote (all other that don't receive "not ready")
Not ready
So again, based on the math. The #1 received the promote now; the #2 received the must promote. All others received a promote while some received the not ready.
So is it better to be in a large unit or a small unit? Well its really hard to say. The small units are consolidated into the wing rack and stack. Where you have an appointed panel rack and stack Airmen in different career fields. You could have contracting compared to Defenders etc...this in my opinion is the disadvantage because now you are comparing apples and oranges to determine who is stacked higher...the upside is there are more people here and there for "more" promote and must promote ratings. As hinted in an earlier post...I was racked #3 in my large unit of 21...so yeah I was rated as a promote.
The BIG misconception about the new EES is the thing they refer to as performance based or primary duties. Airmen make the common mistake to think they are rated on their specialty. Meaning you will be only rated on how you perform in your AFSC. If you think this way then DONT! Here is why:
Believe it or not your primary duty is to be an Airman; not your job or specialty. Let that soak in for a few...whenever leadership talks about you being rated based on your primary duties you have to understand that they are talking about being an Airman! I believe the Airman Handbook reads the enlisted forces structure identifies us as Airmen first; specialist second (forgive me if it isn't word for word, it changed over the years). Well what is the enlisted force structure? I hope you know this by now but it is AFI 36-2618 or the little brown book. This is the book that tells you how to be an Airman! More importantly it tells you what you should be doing to meet or exceed the expectations for that particular rank. So until that AFI changes the "whole person concept" will not go away. This is because of all the general responsibilities listed, I can think of only two of them that states to do your specialty. The majority lists to pursue off duty education, be involved in private organizations, and even community projects.
Heres the bottom line: YOUR LEADERSHIP is always going to be the kicker. Are you LEADING Airmen in your roles (in your specialty)? Are you LEADING Airmen in private organizations or just going to meetings? Are you LEADING Airmen in community projects or are you just showing up?
As a master sergeant select I am now a part of our units rack and stack and I am assisting selecting the eligible technical sergeants whom will receive the top two promotion recommendations. Guess how our senior NCOs (under new leadership) is debating the rack and stack??? They compare the eligible technical sergeants performances to their specific rank in the enlisted force structure (both specific and general responsibilities)!!!!!!
Is it a perfect system? Honestly not yet; however, I do believe it is a push toward the right direction. Normally when a system fails its because of the people running it; not the system itself. The last 1-5 rating was great, but people started being push overs and gave majority (higher than 80%) the highest ratings. Look around your work center....are more than 80% of your peers promote nows?!?! most likely not if they are...you're lying to yourself and you're part of the reason we got to an inflated system!
So why do I bring all this up in an OTS application blog?
I talk about this because of my experience in both the SNCO and the OTS Board. The ratings listed above or simply promotion recommendations from their commander. The board looks at these as just that...recommendations. In my opinion the recommendation is not a make or break factor for the technical sergeants eligible for promotion to master sergeant. Here is why:
There isn't an EPR point value system in play for those considered to master sergeant. You simply test and the SNCO Board will rate your past 5 years based on your performance reports. For those that don't know the SNCO Board consist of two chiefs and one full bird colonel within your AFSC. They rate each package on a scale of 6-10. All three of these rates must have a difference no larger than 1 point. Once that is achieved it is totaled for a max point of 30. That number is then multiplied by 15 which will result in your board score. As mentioned earlier, I received a promote on my latest performance report and this report was on both my SNCO Board and OTS Board. The SNCO Board gave me a board score of 390. The highest board score in my career field was 420 something...there were 4 others that earned a 390. What does this mean? This means the board rated me higher than some of those that earned a promote now or must promote recommendation.
The point I am trying to make is that you should not worry if you did not receive a promote now or a must promote. Be confident in your abilities as a LEADER. The board may see you as "The Better Leader" and they will rate you appropriately. I have seen a lot of trend data on Facebook where people shared that their board score was higher than their peers that earned the top two recommendations. Meaning they were in the same unit, got stacked lower, but scored higher on the board! What does this mean? This means the board simply does not let let the recommendation be the make or break factor in their rating. Do they consider it? Absolutely, but they do not make this the sole reason for their ratings.....whole person concept is in play.
If you think about it the board panel is like the checks and balances against the authority that determines your promotion recommendation.
The promote, must promote, and promote now are HUGE for those eligible for promotion without a board. Why? Simply because there is no board and EPR points are a huge part of the WAPs. I believe the difference between promote and promote now is 50 total points. Meaning the Airmen receiving promote now have 50 less questions to get correct on their promotion testing...wow ha ha!
OTS Boards:
No one truly knows (or not their not willing to share) how the board rates packages for OTS applicants. HiFlyer on the OTS Foundation Portal broke down some awesome intel where each category was worth no more than 3% of the total application package. Meaning even if you scored 99s on all categories of the AFOQT; that portion was only worth 3% of the total board rating. It was a very interesting read and I apologize for not being able to link it here. Check out the OTS Foundation Portal and search for HiFlyer posts...
I assume that the OTS Boards follow the same type of procedure as the SNCO Boards. This time three colonels rate your package and I assume they are not allowed to be within x amount of points of each other...
I truly have no idea what they are looking for or how they do it, but if anyone has any intel please pass it along and I will be sure to post it.
What is the second bottom line?!?? Do your best to put in a package regardless of your promotion recommendation and DO NOT be overconfident if you received the top two ratings....but surely be happy about it!
Culture Shift:
The Air Force as a whole needs to change its culture. We got into a terrible habit of thinking a 3 rating was bad when it was actually average. We also go into a habit of thinking 4 was mediocre..when it was actually good. We then thought of 5 as the norm when it was supposed to be the very few. I have seen people not even be considered for DSD because they received a 4 on their EPR and that is sad.
I hope the Air Force and the Airmen look at promote as a good rating; must promote as stellar; and promote now as a true superstar well-rounded LEADER of LEADERS.
Imagine this; you have one master sergeant stripe to give and there are three eligible technical sergeants in your unit. You know them all professionally and personally. Do you think you could determine the top performer to give the stripe to? YOU SHOULD! Because no matter what there is ALWAYS someone better than the other. This is what the Air Force is trying to do and I think it is on the right track to get there.
No comments:
Post a Comment