Let's hear some suggestions...
1. Make them more like the USMC FITREPs. I did a tour at VMFAT-101 through 2013 and was amazed at how superior their ranking/evaluation system was. First of all, its all digital and online -- no NAVFIT98 and lost FITREPs on a terrible online database. Next, timing doesnt matter as much (although it still matters some). You don't get #1 of 1 kisses on the way out because you are always being ranked against everybody else that reporting senior has ever evaluated. If he is the best s/he has ever seen, they can put you at the top of the stack of folks. If you are mediocre, you end up middle of the pack versus all other people ever being ranked by that person. Also, the reporting senior's boss also ranks you. This really helps in the situation like you see among squadrons in an air wing -- if you have 2 SH DH's, one of them is going to get the kiss of death #2 no matter what, and if you have 2 terrible DH's, one of them is going to get the #1. CAG could theoretically rank the 2 SH DH's over the 2 terrible DH's thus mitigating that issue.
2. Instead of doing periodic FITREPS and CoC FITREPS, just have 2 bi-annual FITREPs. That way ticket length doesnt come into play as much, which is in many cases determined by the dumb luck of when you check in or check out.
3. Make the graded items actually matter -- right now they are simply adjusted to meet the averages and rankings the Boss wants to get for his people. USMC FITREPs have clearly defined objectives (and have many many more quantatative blocks than we do) for how each item should be graded...and reporting seniors actually grade accordingly.
This doesn't address FITREPs persay, but the following have foundational effect on how they are managed. Indeed, many of our personnel policies in general shape how we rank, detail and stack people:
4. Eliminate year groups. An individual and his detailer should determine when someone is up for a board, not some arbitrary timeframe based on when you graduate. This would eliminate the oft heard phrase "this guy needs an EP for an upcoming board, and you have more time left to make it up, so we're giving you the MP." It would allow folks to progress either faster or slower. There would need to be bounds -- i.e. you could only defer your O-4 board until say 12 or 13 YCS, but this would also enable folks to deviate from the golden path and not get a head shot. Say I want to do the Olmstead Scholar program...instead of fearing the impact of a NOB, I can still do a competitive second sea tour, then do Olmstead and delay my promotion board. Or, I'm a SH guy, I could get an EP after 2 years in a squadron -- and then early promote would actually mean something. At the very least, we should reshuffle lineal numbers after promotion boards based on performance.
5. Speaking of which, the Navy is one of the only services that doesnt actively early promote anybody below zone. There are a few outliers of course, but their miniscule numbers actually calls the practice into further question (see the attached spreadsheet I made last year looking at AZ, IZ and BZ promotion rates - note it hasnt been updated for this year). The Army and USAF do 3 percent or so. And yes, there are follow on problems with early promotes -- but that is an issue with the system and year groups. If you eliminate year groups, you dont have the Early Promote dead zone problem.
6. Furthermore, promotion should be job, not rank based. I should not put on O-4 until I screen for DH or failing that, another job that requires an O-4 billet. Just like I should not screen or put on O-5 until i get picked up for CO. We have the administrative/statuatory board process backwards. This is partly a Congressionally mandated issue -- which is why our personnel policies are stuck in the Industrial Age when the Information Age is passing us by.
7. Why do flag officers put on their next rank 3-4 months after being selected ( I see this all the time in my office), but most of us wait 15 months to get the pay raise Congress and the military say we are entitled to because of our superior performance?
That's enough for now...i'm only getting started, but look forward to comments/thoughts.