New NCOER changes good or bad?

CSM Uhlig, if you use the knife hand when pointing at someone then all fingers and thumb are pointing at the person you are addressing.........LOL

But onto a serious note. I agree that the NCOER needed an upgrade. Is the new system perfect? No. If the rated Soldier and their rater have a 'good ol' boy' relationship versus the raters other Soldiers of same rank then they may more than likely 'stack' that Soldier ahead of the others regardless of performance.

I for one tend to call a spade a spade when I feel it's warranted and this tends to ruffle a few feathers. So I feel like it may hurt leaders like me in the long run that place the mission and Soldier well being ahead of being popular or a 'yes man'. For we all know those leaders that despise those under them that won't go along to get along or spend every free moment smoking and joking with them.

Or this could just be the way I perceive it.

I think the new NCOER, when it debuts next fall, will create a great deal of angst in the NCO Corps, especially for mid-grade and senior NCOs, based primarily on the forced distribution of ratings in the rater and senior rater profile. Simply, no more than 49% of NCOs in a rater or senior rater profile (noting that raters are given 3 blanks to cushion their profile) will get top block reports. Thus, 51% of NCOs in a given senior rater's profile will get less than a top block. I think that is going to be difficult to digest for mid-grade and senior NCOs who for their entire careers could get top marks along with all of their peers. (The key point here is that the math is no more than 49%, not "no more than half" as you state---in your example, though, as a rater you'll get a cushion of 3, so you could give both top blocks to both of your first two ratings, as 2 of 5 is less than 49%...but for your third rating, you'd be forced to give a less than top block, as 3 of 6 is 50%; and then for your next rating, you'd be able to give another top block, for 3/7 is 42%...but then for the next rating, you'd be at 4 of 8 if you gave another top block, so its back to less than a top block). Your case is illustrative, though--down to the E6 level, NCOs will need to understand how to manage their own rating profiles, and to understand that the math will become just as (or more) important as performance.

I also think that the new NCOER will force substantial changes to rating schemes as commands attempt to shield mid-grade and senior NCOs from the forced distribution in the rater and senior rater profiles. Take a normal infantry battalion that has one Operations Sergeant Major. In the past, this OPS SGM would normally be rated by the S3 and probably senior rated by the BN CDR or BN XO, and would get top blocks all across the board (because who really ever gave a senior NCO less than a top block?). Now, if the rating scheme held, the S3 rater could give the OPS SGM top blocks for 2 of 3 rating periods (assuming the S3 and OPS SGM served simultaneous 3 year tours) as the S3 gets 3 blanks in the rating profile. But the senior rater (BN Cdr or BN XO) would only be able to give the OPS SGM a top block once in 3 ratings, as the OPS SGM is the only E-9 in the senior rater's profile (assuming the BN CSM gets senior rated by the Brigade Cdr). That's tough math for a senior NCO serving as an OPS SGM in an infantry battalion---and if the BN CDR has previous ratings for E-9s, an OPS SGM might not get a top block at all in a 3 year tour--simply based on math. So I'd guess enterprising units would try to circumvent the forced distribution by pooling OPS SGMs in a senior rater profile, which would agitate against the basic concept of the new NCOER (which operates off the baseline that the first line supervisor is the rater and that the rater's rater is the senior rater).

The same issue will exist for all NCO ranks---for the first time (ever? in decades?), NCOs will compete against others NCOs for top block NCOERs. Its been this way for officers for years, and at times this means that math is often more important than performance; NCOs should prepare themselves to get used to hearing "well, I'd give you a top block if I could, but I just don't have any room in my profile."

Can always say (without actually saying it) that the nco would have been top block if the rating profile allowed it. Don't you officers do that with some of the OERs? At least NCO s won't have promotion jeapordy.

We do, and the narrative is meaningless. Only the block check matters.

SSG Squires. Myself and the other NCO's in my unit (there's four SSG's and one SFC besides the SGM, S-3, XO and BN CDR in my unit) discussed the new NCOER and it was stated that the bullets on the new NCOER would now be more important to support 'stacking' rated Soldiers.

Proposed changes for the new NCOER system


Recently I was made aware the Army is considering changes to the NCOER system. The new system is scheduled for implementation by June 2012. I understand the following changes are being considered:
•Senior Raters must address the specific position held by the rated Soldier
•A signature block will be added for CSM/SGM review to indicate the CSM/SGM has reviewed the report
•A referred report concept will be added for SFC and above. Provides the Soldier the opportunity to submit comments along with a derogatory report.
•Removal of counseling dates; invigorate actual counseling within other areas of the NCOER system
•Redesign place of value block and incorporate bullets by individual values
•Remove 3 future assignments and have rater address future assignment positions in Responsibilities and Values section
•Consider creating a Senior Rater profile, similar to the OER system

It is my understanding that these changes are being made in an effort to reduce scoring inflation within the current system. While I applaud the review of evaluation process and believe there is room for improvement in the evaluation process I have some specific concerns:

Rating inflation is caused by raters

First when it comes to the issue of inflated ratings I am not sure I understand the reason for change. When we changed from the older Enlisted Evaluation Report (EER) to the new Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER) system in the late 80’s one of the primary reasons was to combat inflated ratings. Now some twenty odd years later we are considering changing a reporting system to combat inflated ratings. I would argue that changing the system only stops or inhibits inflation for a period of time until leaders learn the ropes of the new system. I believe the true way to combat inflation is to enforce the standards of the reporting system. This means leaders at all levels need to understand the system and enforce it accordingly. If a rating chain inflates a report the reviewer should address the inflated ratings and hold the rating chain accountable for failing to enforce standards. Changing a form does not combat inflated ratings. Enforcing the standards reduces inflated ratings. The NCO corps should take notice of the Officer Evaluation Report (OER) with regard to reducing inflated rating. Inflated ratings are controlled by the rating chain not by the reporting system.

Counseling dates keep leaders honest

Second I am concerned about the proposal to remove counseling dates from the NCOER form. The counseling dates are a safeguard to ensure leaders inform subordinates of substandard performance. Far too often subordinates receive derogatory comments on their NCOER and never receive the required counseling. Let’s not make it easier for leaders to make derogatory comments about subordinates. Leaders are responsible for mentoring their subordinates. If they are not capable of addressing the issue in writing and proving the subordinate the appropriate counsel to improve they should not be in a position of leadership. I am for any effort that improves leader accountability to ensure counseling is conducted. I suggest any effort that reduces leader accountability and responsibility is an admission that Senior leaders are not holding subordinate leaders accountable with regard to their duty and responsibility to counsel subordinates. Let’s not lower the standard but enforce the standard. Experience tells me Soldiers tend to do those things that are inspected. If counseling is a command priority Soldier will execute it. Counseling done properly helps grow the future leaders of this great Nation.

Leaders find many reasons not to counsel subordinates. Usually the response is “I didn’t have time… I verbally counseled the Soldier. That should be sufficient.” Leaders who use these excuses would find it unfair if their rater used the same excuses on them and then provided a less than favorable evaluation about them. The standard is to inform the subordinate of inappropriate or substandard conduct so that they can improve. Any movement that reduces the responsibility of the rating chain to counsel less or lightens the burden of leader responsibility with regard to counseling or mentoring is inappropriate and a disservice to the rated Soldier. I will be interested to see how the new rating system will invigorate actual counseling. I hope I am proven wrong and that a better counseling system is put in place. The proof will be in the pudding as they say.

It’s not all doom and gloom

On a positive note I applaud the referred report concept, CSM/SGM review box, and the possible implementation of a senior rater profile. I believe these changes will do much to enhance the overall validity of the report. With regard to a senior rater profile I do have some concerns as the NCO corps has not traditionally used this process. It will be very important to ensure the NCO corps is properly educated with regard to the intricacies of the profile process.

In summary, inflation is controlled by leaders who enforce the standard. It is not controlled by changing a rating form. Counseling is a duty and responsibility of a leader. While counseling can be time consuming, it ensures the Soldier knows exactly where they stand with you and documents your actions. Treat your Soldiers how you want to be treated!

here is a website with a slide show on whats changing.


http://the-military-guide.com/2014/08/26/new-ncoer-coming-2015/