What Does Average Mean?

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 01:28:31 -0400

With regards to the new MSgt Board it has been noted that some individuals feel they were scored too low. It's been stated that the "average" EPR is a "firewall 5" does NOT equate to a "more than 'average' board score".

What do you all think about the results of the new MSgt board?

Response by MSgt Alan H made Aug 2 at 2015 10:23 AM

MSgt Alan H — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 10:23:49 -0400

heres what's going to happen with the AIR FORCE "new" PROMOTION SYSTEM OR boards for all enlisted ranks. Yes, fabulous for the CMSAF and his fabulous new efforts to stop fire wall five EPRs for most but for the same very reason we had fire wall fives for too many, the allocation of points will also be skewed and ineffective. The reason the old AF evaluation system became so inflated and ineffective was that enlisted and officer raters did not have the backbone to reflect true performance and take the time to do effective feed back and effective rating when feed back expectations were not met. Now what's going to happen is that once again we will have raters with no backbone that will refuse to give the allocated higher marks to young, smarter, more goal reaching and more effective workers that greatly outshine some of their older more time in grade lackluster mediocre or even ineffective performers. It already happens with officer evaluations, officer definate promote "DP" and just promote "P" evaluations are normally handed out to more senior based on year group and time in service/time in rank not their over all performance which can lead to ineffective leadership, poor use of resources, politically motivated promotions within their organizations.

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Aug 2 at 2015 10:24 AM

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 10:24:46 -0400

I reviewed someone I mentor's records because they are completely heart broken they missed MSgt by 40 points (missed it by less then 4 last year). When I looked at the EPR's it was pretty easy to see why their board score was so low, poor writing by their previous supervisors not accurately capturing what they did as a SSgt and new TSgt. Sure all thier EPR's were FW5's but the writing in them was less than lackluster. One bullet basically read (translated back in to English) wrote a course. What they actually did was develop an ENTIRE course of 90+ modules, revamping an entire school house program allowing them to cut an entire WOT out. Had the bullet reflected THAT it would have made a difference. The EPRs were littered with examples like that.

When asked what they can do to "fix" it? Honestly, not much, those EPR's will get pushed down each year and hopefully each EPR that is written from this point forward will frankly be written better.

Is it fair that someone doesn't get promoted based on the lack of writing skills of someone else? No. However, that is all the board has to you off of. Now for this individual, they were also "weak" in other traditional "high interest" areas as they don't have the "qtr/annual/AFSC based award" on each EPR (or even some) so that hurt their board score as well. The have also not completed the optional PME available to them (JSEPME).

Overall this board was "rough" on folks. It "graded" EPR's that were never designed to be looked at in this level which in turn means supervisors historically may not have put as much effort in to them as they would if they would have know 5 years ago that the EPR would effect the member making MSgt. This IS a self correcting problem as each year passes, supervisors (and rating chains as a whole), should be making sure that the EPRs are written in such a way that it provides really hard impacts and clearly articulates what the member did and not just in broad strokes. This will also be aided by competing at the unit level (or higher for small units) for the top two promotion recommendations each year. A quality written EPR along with all the "checklist" items will surely be key deciding factors, especially if the authority is rolled up to a higher level commander.

There is a table out there (don't have it here at home) that does a great job explaining "expected" board scores based on multiple factors. It is designed for the "Old" EES systems so some of the stuff on it wont really be accurate moving forward (IE FW5's), but it is a great tool to gauge "where you are. It also doesn't take in to account any AF level special interest items that maybe inserted nor does it factor in the different preferences of the two Chiefs and Colonel that are grading packages that year. This years group could weigh off duty education more heavily, next year's group deployments, the following number of PCS's, etc.

As for writing a quality EPR, I can't speak highly enough of CMSgt (R) Eric Jaren's http://www.brownbaglessons.com/. IF you are not a good, writer, this will help, if you ARE a good writer, this will make you great.

Thanks for bringing up this great topic Maj Private RallyPoint Member

Brown Bag Lessons

Check out http://brownbaglessons.com! As someone who has traveled just a bit further down the road. Warm regards, Eric Jaren CompTech Computer Technologies Inc. (CompTech) Mr. Allen Stephen

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 2 at 2015 10:37 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 10:37:44 -0400

This issue will work itself out in a few years with the implementation of the quota system being applied to EPR ratings. On the old EPR system (though not the way the system was intended), a firewall 5 was a barrage for a vast majority of TSgts. That doesn't mean the average TSgt didn't do far more than his/her duty description requires or that most TSgts aren't extremely strong performers/career field experts. There just was not a way to give greater weight to the truly superior, top 5% or 10% on the old system. The boards also take into account other factors when weighing personnel against their peers; has this person reached certain milestones commensurate of grade (i.e. CCAF or NCOA completion). The EPR only reports performance over a short period of one year or less. The board looks at consistent performance over a longer period of time (up to 10 years).

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Aug 2 at 2015 11:05 AM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 11:05:13 -0400

Mediocre

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 2 at 2015 2:30 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 14:30:13 -0400

Wow. Did not realize that they changed the promotion system for MSgt! To me, average is you come to work, do your job, go home at the end of the day. Nothing more, nothing less. The EPR system needs to be revamped from top to bottom. I believe that a Meet or does not meet ratings and either a promote or not ready rating. If someone is truly above their peers,, then you have awards and step promotions.

Response by TSgt Gwen Walcott made Aug 2 at 2015 5:33 PM

TSgt Gwen Walcott — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 17:33:13 -0400

== 5 == on an EPR???
When I was in, a 5 equated to a Bad Conduct Discharge

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 2 at 2015 10:00 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 22:00:46 -0400

Average when it comes to military members is the guy who comes to work, does a great job, stays out of trouble, and will (when prodded) step up to do something, but usually its just for "the bullet."

When I was Sq Sup I had folks try to pass fire-wall fives all the time for Airmen just because they were a "good guy" and "never got in trouble" and "did a good job".....I would tell folks that's the expectation come to work, do good job, don't screw up not the exception.

My favorite quote on this is from one of the first SSGts I supervised she told me..."But Sergeant Stacy I have three Airmen I rate A1C Crackhead got popped for UA and SrA Drunkard got a DWI so by default Sra Stayedoutoftrouble should get a five right?".........I just shook my head.....and took the young NCO to lunch for a long talk.

How is this hard to understand.

If you want a five you have to step up and earn it......if you really want to stand out you need to step up and succeed without being asked on a continuous basis.

In the simplest terms you, and in reality, you probably should not get a 5 unless you brought down an award of some kind during the year....any award....quarterly, annual, IG recognition, commander coin....something to set you apart and above...but of course we will never do this....it would mean having to tell someone who did not get an award that they are average. (BTW being nominated for Sq NCO of the Qtr means you were the Unit or Section NCO of the Qtr)

Bottom line....just doing your job is not, and should not be, enough.......sorry at best you should get a 3 or 4 ...but with over-inflation and fear on the part of raters to do the right thing you will probably get a 5.

Cannot lie about .....i'm glad this got pushed around until after I retired....but I'm sure these are all the same conversations that have had when we went from APR to EPR, added PT, and any other change....

Actual bottom line....until all supervisors are willing to tell a subordinate that they are average there will always be over inflation in the system....and until all rates are willing to accept that their "crap might stink" there will be over inflation......the key is to keep the over inflation equal across the board....which is why we have a Chief PME school.....lol

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Aug 3 at 2015 10:16 AM

MSgt James Mullis — Mon, 03 Aug 2015 10:16:14 -0400

Average is the guy who works hard every day, is technically competent, gets things done, and is the backbone of the Air Force. Put down the "average" at your own peril. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The new quota system will drive many of the superior technical performers out of the Air Force and in the long run will lead to a less effective force. This system rewards people for being good looking, outgoing type A personalities. However, that does not equate to being the most capable worker, or team player and they definitely do not make for the best supervisors and managers. If I were a pilot, risking my life every day, I'd much rather the Airman working on my jets engines, avionics, egress system, weapons system, munitions, etc. was as a hard working, detail oriented, technical expert then an out going, snappy dresser, who volunteers to set up the chairs for squadron functions.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 3 at 2015 3:22 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 03 Aug 2015 15:22:02 -0400

Luckily, I was selected this year for MSgt. I was shocked when I saw that I had a low board score. But then I started talking to others that were selected and asked them about what was in their records that I didn't have. The ones who scored 25-50 points higher had multiple awards in their EPRs and I didn't. But since this year I didn't know what to expect, I focused on the only thing in my control which was studying. I missed it by .16 last cycle but made it by over 9 points this time. I also increased my combined test scores by 18. That proved to be the difference. So for all the E4s and E5s testing for promotion and are worried about not getting the top EPR rating, I show them my last two score notices and tell them to study.

Response by SSgt Khanh Pham made Aug 4 at 2015 1:36 PM

SSgt Khanh Pham — Tue, 04 Aug 2015 13:36:10 -0400

I believe the question is well intended.

THe question, to my opinion, is not relevant to the issue. We cannot fix a culture of curruption by printing more rules, printing new rules.

TO fix the culture of curruption... I am afraid I would have to elaborate this work. Look at the last 3 epr for you or someone else. Do you notice how the rating on the front and back always matches? Look at 20 years of EPR, do you find a harmoginized opinion from the rater and rater's rater? I have had rater's rater forced my rater to change his rating. That is BULLSHIT, and violates the very design of the EPR system.

It is tuff being an evil overlord, but with everyone being the good guy there should only be Promote for everyone. Just remove the rating. Promote everyone. Communism flag hoisted high on the base flag pole. We already practice it, mine as well celebrate it like we're proud of our actions.

The rating system will work better, when you start penalizing people for unacceptable behaviors. Send the death squad out to destroy fake EPR. With enough heads rolling, the mass will dance to the rhythm of your beat.

Another thought came to mind, the root of the having such a system in the first place. To facilitate the selection procession, to help discriminate what you want from what you do not want.

Taking the easy way out is a common trend. EPR does help pave the road for our laziness in making decisions that impact people's live and the live of the nation. Boad is a bit more complex but no less an easy way out. (not that I have a better offering).

Good decision or bad decision the board and review process can be blamed. When a child turns into a monster, who does the father and mother blame. When the AirForce/Army/Navy raised a monster who does the AirForce/Army/Navy blame. Some truth may be lost in translation.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 4 at 2015 3:39 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:39:06 -0400

Basically average means "does not stand out" from the pack in either a good or bad way.

Unfortunately our (old) rating system really doesn't give an outside viewer an accurate look at who is "the absolute best hands down". Who is the "best of the best at their job, but doesn't volunteer or take classes", and who "volunteers and takes classes, but doesn't pull his own weight on the job". Usually either all 3 got "firewall 5's" or the first and third got "Firewall 5's" while the 2nd gets a "5 with markdowns". This unfortunately makes boards largely about who's rater(s) are the best writers.