I believe major issue with the evaluation system is not the form or format but the "up or out" promotion system and the fact that one bad or mediocre OER from say 10 years ago can ruin your chances for a competitive promotion selection or assignment. These things are rarely a problem in a civilian job. If a person makes a good company commander why cant he do that all his/her life. Another issue is mandatory staff/command rotations. Some are strong in one but not the other. There are some merit to breadth. That can be done by varying the types of command or staff positions and soldiers in all specialties should get general leadership and management training. A good logistician might make a poor commander and vice versa. Perhaps a few exceptions like a high level commander getting experience as an S/G/J3 but it should not become a practice to put square pegs in round holes; it hurts the Army and it hurts the soldier. I may have strayed a little off-topic but as the SECDEF is looking at ways of modifying career patterns to compete with civilian industry; these are some of my ideas.

As an Air Force officer what I didn't like about our OER system was at the time the top rankings were limited. I remember being told I was doing a great job as an Lt but couldn't get the top marks because only a certain percentage could get that and it was normally reserved for people close to promotion time. Another annoying fact for me was being told to write my OER on more than one occasion. Writing on yourself is a whole lot harder than evaluating someone else and I always thought if I was doing a good job my boss should take the time to write my OER.

I know I am not an officer, however; our NCOER 2166-9 now mirrors the OER. I have over heard issues with the new ranking of rated and the struggle raters are having. My concern is one bad NCOER, OER or previous can cost you career; especially if poorly written or reviewed. There are persons that deserve to be rated in the top 10% of there peer group but have to wait to be rated if deserving if their rater has already rated too many in that time period. At least this is my understanding. So now ratings are going to be delayed or given a lower rating depending on the rater. I honestly think more latitude needs to be given in this area.