Is your rater supposed to write your evaluation?

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 01:21:37 -0500

Fact: Your rater is supposed to write your evaluation. Right? Or is that fiction? What are your thoughts and experiences?

Response by SSG Trevor S. made Jan 4 at 2017 1:38 AM

SSG Trevor S. — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 01:38:46 -0500

If you are not contributing to your eval you are not helping your own cause. That being said, your rater is "supposed" to do the eval.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2017 1:49 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 01:49:01 -0500

I don't know how it works with the O's, LTC Private RallyPoint Member , but the recent revision of the NCOER was supposed to introduce a collaborative effort. Raters and their NCOs working together throughout the rating period to establish and evaluate goals and to do a better job of tracking accomplishments (and in some cases failures). My 1SG admonishes us to be updating and annotating our NCOER Support form after every Battle Assembly (Drill Weekend). The electronic format makes this process relatively easy and if it is followed as intended, not only will it make writing the actual review more efficient, should greatly reduce late submissions.

Yes, the literal NCOER is "written" or, perhaps "filled out" by the rater, but it is a collaborative effort.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Jan 4 at 2017 2:20 AM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 02:20:39 -0500

Harsh Major but I like it! Truth can be a Bitter Pill Sometimes. I could write Evals but when Push came to Shove it was the Chiefs, Officers and Skippers name on it not mine.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2017 2:36 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 02:36:29 -0500

Yes, but would you really complain about writing your own evaluation? There is times where people get switched around and next thing you know the person writing their eval knows nothing about them. I think by them letting them give a list of things they accomplished that could greatly benefit their eval. Now whether or not the rater chooses to put those things in the eval and what ratting you get is ultimately up to them either way. I think every thing SFC William Squires said is true though he pretty much hit the nail on the head.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Jan 4 at 2017 3:06 AM

Capt Seid Waddell — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 03:06:38 -0500

Back in the day, I wrote most of my evaluations as well as a list of possible comments for the endorsers. Of course my rater had the ability to edit any or all of the comments and the endorsers were free to use my comments or write their own. Mostly they used my prepared comments, as I recall.

Response by CPT Mark Gonzalez made Jan 4 at 2017 7:45 AM

CPT Mark Gonzalez — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 07:45:54 -0500

Fact, the system is broke and evals are consistently inflated based upon date of rank. It is a magical occurrence, but average officers become awesome every time they go into zone. There is a tremendous benefit to promoting being average as the vast majority of people are not exceptional. However, the system is broke and if you find yourself in a promotable status it doesn't matter how good of a job you do the next year, as most likely you will not get the highest block check.
Always write a draft of your eval as unfortunately some officers cannot write and in a decentralized environment the writing ability of your rating scheme means a lot more than your actual accomplishments. Take care of your Soldiers and just realize that a lot of your superiors benefited from a flawed talent system and now they are your boss.

Response by SGT David T. made Jan 4 at 2017 7:55 AM

SGT David T. — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 07:55:22 -0500

There are the way things are supposed to be and the way things are. More often than not, the rate writes their own in its entirety. With that being said, the rated person needs to provide comments and inputs.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made Jan 4 at 2017 10:23 AM

COL Vincent Stoneking — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 10:23:52 -0500

"supposed"

Response by COL David Turk made Jan 4 at 2017 11:21 AM

COL David Turk — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 11:21:24 -0500

As a rater and senior rater, I wrote the narrative for all of my subordinates. Starting in the mid 80's, I was asked to write my own (rater portion) on most of my own OER's. Towards the end of my career, I wish I had written the "senior" rater block on one of my OER's. It was a great rating, but had a misspelled word. Turns out, they used this misspelling in an ARPERSCOM on line and touring presentation on OER preparation; in the section on what NOT to do.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Jan 4 at 2017 11:30 AM

SGM Erik Marquez — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 11:30:11 -0500

Something I picked up from a very good CSM...
Do both..at each counseling period (you know those 4 times a rated period the rater is supposed to counsel the subordinate)
Have them "write" their own NCOER, you write one as well... then trade at counseling time.. You get a feel for what they view there strengths and weakness are. They get an azimuth check on if they are moving the direction you want them to,,and they see how you "see them" vs how they see them selfs. It sparks discussion on the drift between the two.
and you get some insight in to their ability to write a subordinate NCOER. a few more minutes spent then, means a lot fewer minutes spent with a red pen on a NCOER they turned in for review later.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2017 4:29 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 16:29:46 -0500

Your Rater does your Eval, you do your support form. So, in reality....you BOTH write it.

Response by 1SG Bill Farmerie made Jan 4 at 2017 4:54 PM

1SG Bill Farmerie — Wed, 04 Jan 2017 16:54:05 -0500

When I was a PSG, I wrote it and gave it to the LT to sign. No way was I going to place my career in a butterbar's hands. But really our soldier's actions wrote our NCOER

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Jan 5 at 2017 8:59 AM

CSM Michael J. Uhlig — Thu, 05 Jan 2017 08:59:43 -0500

Your performance (actions) actually write your evaluation, your rater simply documents what you've done along with identifying your potential for future service & promotion. Many leaders (at all levels) fail their people by simply not knowing their people or not taking the time to know what they are doing/what they are supposed to be doing and holding them to the standards!

Response by CW2 Donald Kempf made Jan 5 at 2017 4:50 PM

CW2 Donald Kempf — Thu, 05 Jan 2017 16:50:40 -0500

Of course if you provide your rater with a good worksheet of what you've done in a well written format, it is amazing how that can help.

Response by MSgt Mark Bucher made Jan 7 at 2017 3:15 PM

MSgt Mark Bucher — Sat, 07 Jan 2017 15:15:40 -0500

Tell ya the truth, last 12 years of my career I usually ended up writing my own.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 10 at 2017 2:16 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:16:09 -0400

The rated soldier should contributed to the NCOER/OER but shouldn't be writing it. However - I have written the majority of my NCOERs. I think two or three I only gave input to.

And counseling? Before the new system for enlisted I had one rater counsel me quarterly.

Response by SSgt Holden M. made Jul 11 at 2017 10:09 AM

SSgt Holden M. — Tue, 11 Jul 2017 10:09:57 -0400

Well it's a double edged sword so to speak. At least in the Air Force your rater is suppose to be the one to write it, but who knows better of what you have done then you. I have heard some raters say to the ratee "I'm trying to teach you how to be a good evaluation writer for when you have peers" I have also heard from some ratee's that they feel as though their rater can't write for crap and would rather write it themselves.

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Jul 11 at 2017 11:24 AM

Lt Col Jim Coe — Tue, 11 Jul 2017 11:24:57 -0400

I selected "fiction." Your rater should write his or her portion of your evaluation; however, it should never be done without your input. My brief work with the Army leads me to believe Soldiers complete some type of "support form" to give to their rater. This is the Soldier's opportunity to provide input to their evaluation. In principle this is a good process allowing both the rater and ratee to have inputs to the evaluation. My limited observation of the process (6 years at a 2-star HQ) shows it works well in terms of getting the evaluations done on time. I can't speak to the quality of the evals in terms of content, grammar, etc., because I wasn't invited to review any evaluations.

Looking back at my Air Force career (1969-1991) it was definitely fiction. To my recollection, there was no AF equivalent to the Army Support Form during my career. For the first couple of performance reports, my rater wrote the report without my input. It was near the end of the Vietnam ear and I was a new LT. The Captains cranked out two reports per LT per year and they did a creditable job. After I made captain in 1972 I received one OER per year. My raters asked me to provide "bullets for each section of the OER" about things I would like to see in the report. The raters and ratees in this case were both captains. In essence they were asking me to write my own OER, so I did. The results are what one might expect: they lifted the words I gave them and put them directly in the OER with an occasional change in an adjective. Then I went to a major command headquarters assignment. My new boss, a Lt Col, said he would write my OER himself, let me read and comment on it, and then complete it and send it up-channel. This was a sea change in approach and I respected him a great deal for his professionalism. Next assignment was to an operational squadron and it was back to the "write some bullets for your OER approach." The main thing that changed was my raters were Lt Col or Col. Finally, at the unified command, non-AF raters wanted bullets for the OER and advice on how to complete an AF OER without screwing the ratee by applying words that matched the Army lexicon instead of the AF preferred wording. This was a wise approach and one I mirrored when I wrote OERs for officers from other services. Also the first time I saw an Army Support Form. I thought at the time it was a great idea and used the inputs from my Army ratees to write their OERs.

Response by CW2 Donald Kempf made Jul 11 at 2017 5:39 PM

CW2 Donald Kempf — Tue, 11 Jul 2017 17:39:45 -0400

Both in the Military and in the Civilian workplace, I've always provided input on my evaluations. Depending on your rater's writing ability (and workload) some, most or all of what you wrote, may be used.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 4 at 2019 1:01 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Feb 2019 13:01:49 -0500

It’s in the regulation. I don’t see how it’s up for debate. If you appeal to the SR and/or SR’s next level NCO/CSM or whenever it is, the rater/SR will have a difficult time explaining why the subordinate is in charge of the evaluation.

If you write it, then I’d say your in charge of it.

When the CSM asked me where SFC’s eval was, my answers were:
- In your queue
- In my queue
- In the signature process
- I’m late, this is why, update my support form if necessary

Not- ‘let me ask the SFC.’