Quotas are nothing new, but this just makes it official. How long do you think it will take for this system to become inflated?

MSgt Michael Durkee — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 12:17:53 -0400

http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2015/06/19/firewall-5s-are-history-quotas-for-top-ratings-announced/28975691/

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 19 at 2015 12:21 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 12:21:36 -0400

People better start putting their best foot forward if they want that promotion

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Jun 19 at 2015 12:25 PM

SCPO David Lockwood — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 12:25:16 -0400

Navy has been using the quota system for years. You knew what to expect and knew what you needed to do to achieve you next promotion.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 19 at 2015 12:34 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 12:34:56 -0400

They'll be inflated before the first one is written.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 19 at 2015 1:21 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 13:21:30 -0400

The system is already broke the only way to fix this is take the EPR out of the equation.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jun 19 at 2015 2:10 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 14:10:09 -0400

When dealing with what is arguably a "meritocracy" which constantly reviews its personnel, "inflated ratings" isn't the issue. It's not being able to properly measure skill, proficiency, etc using a simple metric like a performance evaluation.

Of course the vast majority of people are getting top marks. We've weeded out the people who don't want to be here. It creates an uneven distribution. There is no "bottom 50%." The bell curve is completely skewed to one side, which means that differentiating between the 95th percentile and the 90th percentile is near impossible, likely down to the bottom 20%. Even our "mediocre" performers are likely performing above current grade.

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 19 at 2015 2:12 PM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 14:12:04 -0400

And inflated in T-minus 5....4....3.......
:)

Response by MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P made Jun 19 at 2015 3:03 PM

MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:03:53 -0400

I see this program doomed from the start. We tried it in the early 90's by moving from APR to EPR. It took all of about two years for a "3" rating to become a career ender. Heck, in some cases even a "4" can get you a boot out the front gate. Guess we can kiss all the special duty assignments good bye as well since most of them require straight 5's to even be considered for the position.

Response by Maj Matt Hylton made Jun 19 at 2015 3:13 PM

Maj Matt Hylton — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:13:14 -0400

Man, most of you SNCO's have a doom and gloom outlook on this. I think the quotas are the only way to fix the current system. They've systematically put in specific language in the new feedback forms and EPRs to really show what equates to a 5. Everyone getting 5's is useless. I tried to give a real dirtbag a 3 one time back around 2007 and had to FIGHT to get it up the chain.

If everyone get's 5's, no one is "truly outstanding" / if the majority of people get 3's (which IS NOT a bad thing) then the EPRs will actually reflect reality. In my last office, I knew exactly who would get 3's and who'd be in the running for the 4's and 5's.

Response by Maj Mike Sciales made Jun 19 at 2015 3:35 PM

Maj Mike Sciales — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:35:38 -0400

Three years to figure out how to game it.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Jun 19 at 2015 4:20 PM

MSgt James Mullis — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 16:20:49 -0400

First off, if I ever received the equivalent of a "promote," "not ready now" or "do not promote" performance report, in any job, military or civilian, I would quit. Its not sour grapes, just a clear indication that their priorities and mine are not aligned and my time and effort would be better spent elsewhere. Second, throughout my career I've told each of my supervisors that would give them 100%, 24/7 and that I expected to receive firewall 9/5's, unless they told me differently and gave me a chance to improve. As I see it, this system cuts out the supervisors input and WILL DEFINITELY give people worthy of "promote now's" lower ratings then they deserve and drive them out of the Air Force. In essence the system will lead to degraded performance as a whole. My fall back on evaluating a performance evaluation system is how it will play out in a hand picked unit such as the Thunderbird's. Everyone selected for the unit is considered the "best of the best", but under this system only "5 percent" of them will get promoted. While lesser performing Airman in other units will be promoted. The only way I can see to counter this is to over inflate the awards and decs system.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 19 at 2015 8:30 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 20:30:07 -0400

Nothing is going to change with this new system. The ones that put in the time AT work will be overlooked and the promotions will be received by those that spend half their work hours on their knees and the other half volunteering for everything under the sun, while those of us at work have to pick up the slack.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 19 at 2015 8:50 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 20:50:44 -0400

The system was actually working. There was a level playing field and the ones that actually studied and were ready for promotion, did so. Nothing will really change, it will be what the supervisor chooses to push. Being in MX, I've seen both, one supervisor will write a five with good performers on the job and the other will write one for who does the most school/vol work. The commander doesn't see all of it, only relies on his senior enlisted. So it will still be a biased system depending on what the ones who came before value most. I realize it will weed out the bad troops who just test well, but the old system had a good thing going off of experience and knowledge. It shouldn't have changed until people are just not reaching tenure anymore, I've seen 12 at 3 bases in 6 years in a small career field.

Response by TSgt James Mrdutt made Jun 19 at 2015 9:04 PM

TSgt James Mrdutt — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 21:04:27 -0400

Right about the same time a large squadron has a quota of 2 for 5 ratings, and 4 really superior airmen.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 19 at 2015 10:28 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 22:28:55 -0400

Quotas are nothing new and end up a total failure. Now, here are my thoughts. The system does need to be fixed. However, it starts with the supervisor. The supervisor needs to be honest and make those hard decisions. When I wrote or reviewed an EPR, I looked a the whole person concept and sustained performance throughout the rating period. The whole person concept in a nut shell is work, leadership/management, fitness, off-duty education, volunteering, etc. Sustained performance is: did they do great work, leadership, etc., for the entire year? For example, I knew my Airman who consistently volunteered throughout the year and those who "volunteered" a few months before their EPR was due (just to get those bullets). Those who had sustained performance got higher marks than those who were just filling in the blanks. I would also like to point out, that is why the Air Force has Performance Feedback. If you are giving them their feedback, they have a road map to success. And should be no surprise to them if they get less than a 5 on their EPR. One thought that I have toyed with over my years was an EPR with only a Does not meet Standards or Meets Standards. Some would say, well what gives a person the motivation then? Perhaps an Achievement Medal, Commendation Medal, or a STEP promotion would be warranted for those who consistently go above and beyond.

Response by CSM Charles Hayden made Jun 19 at 2015 10:30 PM

CSM Charles Hayden — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 22:30:01 -0400

It is about time someone faced facts, not all are created equal!

Response by SSgt Brycen Shumway made Jun 20 at 2015 1:43 AM

SSgt Brycen Shumway — Sat, 20 Jun 2015 01:43:48 -0400

The biggest issue I see coming out of this, is that even if this system were to be followed; you're going to end up with Bullets like: My #1 of 15 Airman!

Yeah, it may not be so blatant, but think about it. If 5% of the eligible Airman/NCO are allowed to have "Promote Now" and netting them max points for their EPR... Doesn't that just scream (between the lines) "This guy is the shop #1 Go-To guy!"

I could have sworn that the entire reasoning behind the 5-point EPR system was to eliminate those kinds of "Fluff" Bullets.
So now we are going back to the whole "#1 Go-To Guy" bullets but in less obvious words... "Promote Now"

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 20 at 2015 6:01 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 20 Jun 2015 18:01:53 -0400

...

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 20 at 2015 9:37 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 20 Jun 2015 21:37:44 -0400

It's not going to become inflated. If the regulations say that only 15-20% of people can get those top two ratings then that's all that can get them. If a commander sends up more than that % say 30% AFPC is going to send the rating back and have him redo them. Under these rules there can never be higher than an average score of 3.25/3.2 for any AFSC-Rank pairing (5*5%+4*(10/15%)+3*(80/85%)=3.2/3.25) I mean if this policy is enforced by AFPC then mathematically there is no way for it to inflate up to a 5.

Response by SSgt Michael Cox made Jun 22 at 2015 11:15 AM

SSgt Michael Cox — Mon, 22 Jun 2015 11:15:55 -0400

This is possibly the worst thing they could have done to the EPR. You will try and write a fair report and then it will get kicked back to you because they ran out of the total 5s or 4s for the squadron.

Response by Maj Kim Patterson made Jun 22 at 2015 12:39 PM

Maj Kim Patterson — Mon, 22 Jun 2015 12:39:55 -0400

Last time I saw the quota system fail, they had gathered many top performers (such as instructors who had already proved themselves under pressure) in single units. The order came down x% can receive the highest rating from each unit. This resulted in the pick of the litter being marked down and subsequently looking for civilian jobs while at other units, mediocre members were getting top marks compared to others in the same unit. If you had put the downgraded person next to the other, you would clearly see who deserved the max rating and the opportunity to continue to rise and lead.

But there were quotas and commanders were forced to pick. We lost a lot of top talent.

So let's try this proven failure of a system idea again and watch the fallout. I give it 2 years max because surely there will be supervisors and commanders strong enough to keep all if they deserve it and give the boot to those who attempt to pad just before ratings time rolls around.

Response by Maj Kim Patterson made Jun 23 at 2015 12:05 AM

Maj Kim Patterson — Tue, 23 Jun 2015 00:05:00 -0400

We can build a better wheel. Let's add corners. How many corners? 80% of the wheel needs corners.

Response by MSgt Matthew Meindl made Jun 23 at 2015 12:11 PM

MSgt Matthew Meindl — Tue, 23 Jun 2015 12:11:40 -0400

Just like when the EPR's first came out, a lot of airmen will be hurt by the mandated quota system for a few years before supervisors take it into their hands to protect the futures of young airmen and reinflate it again.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 25 at 2015 3:11 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 25 Jun 2015 15:11:15 -0400

The EPR system as it has been is effectively worthless... but I have my doubts that this will truly change much. I'm especially uneasy with them removing TIS and TIG points. In some ways there is just no substitute for experience, and removing TIS and TIG requirements (IMO) will only exaggerate the "halo effect" where someone who can barely do their job is getting Firewall 5's (or the new Promote Now), because they are active volunteers and take classes.

Response by MSgt Jim Wolverton made Jul 15 at 2015 8:41 AM

MSgt Jim Wolverton — Wed, 15 Jul 2015 08:41:58 -0400

From what I understand, there will be a larger role for the unit CC in determining ratings for troops, is this correct? I would like to know how that is going to work? A CC from a large unit doesn't have the time to review EPRs at that level and hand out the ratings. The highest it can feasibly go to determine that is to the unit Chief and even then you have the same problem as with the CC, a Chief from a large unit simply doesn't have the time for that in depth level of scrutiny. Are flight chief's recommendations going to be the deciding factor in ratings? IMO, that's the only way this can work.

Response by TSgt Marcus Ayala made Jul 15 at 2015 8:43 AM

TSgt Marcus Ayala — Wed, 15 Jul 2015 08:43:56 -0400

Unfortunately, it won't change at all. The current standard is that you NEED to be a 5. Anything else, and it's almost as bad as having an A15 on your record. Not exaggerating, but I recall a lot of fellow members being told to prep that resume because some years ago, they had a 4 on their record during the rack and stack when the cuts were being made.

And it is because of this culture of anything but a 5 being a kiss of death is why supervisors hesitate to rate fairly. Why would anyone rate a good (not great) airman a 3 or a 4 if it means that somewhere down the line, it will close many opportunities for them to exceed? Until that mentality changes, inflation will always be here to stay.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jul 16 at 2015 3:21 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 15:21:33 -0400

This is why I wan't to eliminate ratings entirely. Bullets and narratives only.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 16 at 2015 3:39 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 15:39:02 -0400

I doubt that inflation will be the issue with this system. The issue I see is that the Air Force has just solidified the "good ol' boy" program. I've already had my sit down with an E-9 and was told that ratings will not be based on merit/accomplishments but rather on who he and the CC wants to see promoted. This is not a fix for inflation, this is making sure that Officers have more say in who promotes.
The biggest issue I see is not that favoritism is now officially sanctioned, but that big Air Force is pitting the enlisted corps against each other. If a peer(sorry opponent) is falling behind and needs help with a task are you going to help? Or are you going to help your own career and leave them to fail? By helping them you might get marked down on your EPR. I'm not saying that every Airmen is suddenly going to straight to back stabbing, but now that behavior is encouraged.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 16 at 2015 3:51 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 15:51:03 -0400

Perhaps instead of being negative-Nancy pessimist about this change, try a bit of open-mindedness. Give it a year or two and see how it goes before setting your flame-thrower on "11."

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 10 at 2016 12:27 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Oct 2016 12:27:50 -0400

MSgt Michael Durkee Well, the old APRs were inflated. In these time of inflation.. lol