OCR Text |
Show Pago 24 HILL TOP TIMES September Ed Mew 10, 1976 jstem Conclusions based on early experience with the new Officer Effectiveness Rating (OER) system as compared to its predecessor have been announced by personnel officials. The old rating system had its strong and weak points, a headquarters spokesman stressed. However, it had one basic flaw that convinced Air Force a change was needed. That was a chronic and worsening rating inflation that threatened to rob the OER of its usefulness. With the great majority of officers routinely receiving k it was and more more for difficult ratings, becoming promotion boards, school selection panels and job assignment officials to pick the best qualified people. top-bloc- Equally important, this inflation penalized many officers. A k single less than rating often made it difficult for highly effective officers to remain competitive for promotion. Also, there was no clear signal that increased effort or counseling was needed until an unexpected promotion passover or reduction in force occurred. As long ago as 1968, personnel experts recognized that this lack of differentiation could not be corrected merely by tinkering with the OER form. The problem required a fundamental change to place responsibility for judgments on top-bloc- I ADWEE$TB WHERE IT PAY$ HLL Top IflMES Ogden 394-965- 5 foPredece ssir Com paired zoners of the higher three ranks received 24.9 per cent, 22.1 per relative capability squarely on rater's and reviewer's shoulders. In the six years before the new system went into effect, Air Force made careful and extensive preparations including tests of early versions in 10 major commands, the year-lon- g Air Force Reserve, and the Air National Guard. Recommendations were solicited from all levels of conferences participants in these tests. Air Force-wid- e examined the test conclusions and recommendations. The best civilian and military personnel evaluation talent participated in both the initial design and later refinements. Modified by this Air Force-wid- e shakeout, the present in 1974. was introduced Personnel officials November system of the system's confidence say early trends arebearingout the architects. They stress, however, that all the returns are not yet in. One might think that all the answers should be available after being under the system for 21 months. But a complete cycle includes not only rendering reports, but also conducting promotion and other kinds of selection boards using the new form. The latter has not yet been completed for all grades. Moreover, the OER is a recurring, not a operation. Personnel spokesman expect that most officers will receive a variety of ratings as they change jobs and as they move upward through the rank structure. Ratings will also be affected as officers gain experience and more responsible jobs within any one rank. Officials say such changes and the consequent sequence of OER ratings require considerable time to come about and more time to examine. cent and 27 per cent respectively. Officers previously passed over to Major got 9.8 per cent 1 ratings to Lieutenant Colonel 17.2 per cent and to Colonel 11 per cent. Those not yet eligible, even below the zone, earned 1 ratings at rates of: Lieutenant, 22 per cent; Captain 12.7 per cent; Major, 27.2 per cent and Lieutenant Colonel, 7.3 per cent. Personnel officials expect that as a promotion year group grows in experience and responsibility the groups share of top ratings will increase until promotions remove many who have been earning high OERs. Then the share will likely decrease. e variations cannot Whether they represent trends or data base. Officials be decided on the basis of a single-poiwill monitor future results closely. Passed-ove- r officers are faring better under the current system. Although officers who were passed over once for Colonel received fewer top block ratings under the current system, their overall selection rate was 11. 9per cent, almost double the 6.2 per cent average of the previous four boards. e Moreover, passovers who received a 1 were selected at a rate virtually seven times greater than their 4 predecessors under the old system. With two or more passovers the previous four boards selected slightly less than 1 per cent, about the same as the 0.8 per cent for the most recent board. However, those passed over twice or more and who earned a 1 enjoyed a 14.37 selection rate, again much higher under the old system. than the rate of those who received Another concern is for the person who transfers during the h OER window. Will he be gone and forgotten? First-roun- d statistics show such is not the case. Top ratings for people going PCS who get rated after they leave ranged from 21.4 per cent for lieutenant colonels up to 27 per cent for lieutenants. One bit of speculation suggests that an officer projected to move PCS as of the OER closeout date might receive low ratings, presumably because evaluators would want to motivate people who would be around for a long time. Results k of the initial rating cycle do not bear this out. percentages for this group ranged from 24.6 per cent for captains to 28.9 per cent for colonels. The opposite concern is for the new officer who might not have enough time to demonstrate what he can do. Percentages of Is grew by rank from 12.6 per cent for lieutenants with less than six months on base to 20.6 per cent for lieutenant colonels. These early results reinforce headquarters' confidence that the new system is working basically as designed. They feel this is to the long-terbenefit of both the officer group and personnel managers. It was pointed out that promotion opportunity has not been affected by the new system. What has changed is that controls require evaluators to give rates a much clearer picture of where they stand relative to other officers within their rating and review groups. Officials stress that any new system will have growing pains and the present system is no exception. Top Air Force leadership is keenly aware that, for all the improvements there are still a number of individual imperfections in management and application. Headquarters noted that much work may still be needed to iron out any weaknesses which show up as more experience is gained with the maturing system. Also, plans are underway for a senior-leve- l conference of commands and agencies to address mutual concerns, share helpful techniques and insure a common understanding of the OER system. As one spokesman observed, "everyone from the Chief of Staff on down is keeping a close eye on how the new system is working. We all want to be sure it works well and fairlv ' " one-timnt first-tim- 9-- one-sho- t, 9-- 4s four-mont- Finally, they say the developing reliable statistical data will take several complete cycles of the new system. Noting the above cautions against premature optimism or pessimism, Air Force officials offered the initial statistical data. Personnel spokesmen say these suggest the new program is working as expected. Statistics show the majority of officer records will soon contain a variety of ratings. Of Lieutenants with two controlled OERs 41.3 per cent changed on the second cycle with 29 per cent higher and 12 per cent lower. Lieutenant Colonels were surprisingly similar with 42 per cent moving the second time: 24 per cent up, 18 per cent down. There was no effort to control, encourage or direct such changes. Some officers have questioned whether persons entering the primary zone for the first time may receive highratingssimply because of their promotion eligibility. In the 1975, cycles, first-timprimary-zon- e eligibles received "1" ratings as follows: Lieutenants, 21.2 per cent; Captains, 33.9 per cent; Majors, 27.6 per cent and Lieutenant Colonels, 37.4 per cent. Secondary Top-bloc- e, Salt Lake City 277-465- 0 1150 West Riverdale Rd. Ogden. Utah m vim &XNd& (AFNS) First enlisted man to die in military aircraft honored A plaque was dedicated at Scott AFB, III., July 20, Watch Foir Our the first enlisted honoring mm mam HAVE YOU SEEN KM ALSO FEATURING Mushroom Candles BurUood Clocks Plants Stoneware Handcrafted furnishings Sign (Up FsiDD ihv X man to be killed in a military airplane crash. CPL Frank Scott died in an airplane crash Mow Foir 10 V1 Wash. (GDsisses ij j . f ' 'i mt I r Its Now In Ogden At DISCOUNT TO GOVERNMENT EMPLOYES & SERVICEMEN Blvd. i 3941883 , t't'li. r . .1 ft Sept. 28, 1912. On July 20, 1917, Scott AFB, 111., was named in his honor. Scott AFB is the only Air Force base to bear the name of an enlisted man. The bronze plaque was junveiled by Gen. Paul K. Carlton, commander, Military Arilift Command, and CMSAF Thomas Barnes, chief master sergeant of the Air Force. As the dedication guest Chief Master speaker Sergeant Barnes said, "This nation didn't forget Corporal Scott's sacrifice back in 1912 when he died in that tragic crash. In honoring Corporal Scott, we are also recognizing all Air Force enlisted people for their dedication, hard work and daily sacrifices." (LOGNEWS from MAC News Service) |