• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

It's finally happening . . . Big Navy is canning the stack rank FITREP/Eval

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Also, the Myers-Briggs is wildly inaccurate and easily manipulated. It might help identify people at either extreme, but the way the War College, NLEC, and others use it amounts to not much more than a parlor trick.
From what I've read, part of the problem is that Jungian typology is supposed to be interpreted by an actual analytical psychologist, with the MBTI used as one tool of many, not just some "facilitator" filling out a form in some class. And the MBTI tendencies, or whatever they're called, follow a normal distribution. Any of those four letters could signify someone who's very strong one way or the other, or a "tweener." If you just slap the same label on those people, of course it's going to be inaccurate, and people with the same label will differ wildly. Because they're (spoiler alert) different people.

To use introversion/extraversion as an example, on one side you've got your massive stereotypical introverts who might actually have schizoid personality disorder or social anxiety disorder. And on the other side you have your average politician. :p But most people are closer to the middle. They might tend to like alone time, or they might tend to like to be "chatty Cathy." But too much of either makes them look for the other one. To say you're only an introvert or only an extravert, or judger vs. perceiver, and so on is almost always wrong. It's a continuum.

And we haven't even talked about the shadow aspect yet. :)
 

Pags

N/A
pilot
From what I've read, part of the problem is that Jungian typology is supposed to be interpreted by an actual analytical psychologist, with the MBTI used as one tool of many, not just some "facilitator" filling out a form in some class. And the MBTI tendencies, or whatever they're called, follow a normal distribution. Any of those four letters could signify someone who's very strong one way or the other, or a "tweener." If you just slap the same label on those people, of course it's going to be inaccurate, and people with the same label will differ wildly. Because they're (spoiler alert) different people.

To use introversion/extraversion as an example, on one side you've got your massive stereotypical introverts who might actually have schizoid personality disorder or social anxiety disorder. And on the other side you have your average politician. :p But most people are closer to the middle. They might tend to like alone time, or they might tend to like to be "chatty Cathy." But too much of either makes them look for the other one. To say you're only an introvert or only an extravert, or judger vs. perceiver, and so on is almost always wrong. It's a continuum.

And we haven't even talked about the shadow aspect yet. :)
Let's not confuse a teaching tool used to bring on some self reflection and discussion in support of a class with actual psychological analysis.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
A lot of the complaints about the current FITREP system seem to stem from a misunderstanding of how it works, so it seems to me that is the biggest flaw in the current system - it is not easy or intuitive to understand and not every CO/XO is good at explaining it. It's like the tax code - it's sensible as long as you can understand all of the nuances contained within.
Yes.
 

RadicalDude

Social Justice Warlord
Seems to me thbe only people who really care about the system being "broken" are those who don't get what they want.

Which is the case in most systems, I'd imagine...
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
As has been alluded to in this thread, the question to ask is whether the system serves its intended purpose effectively. I think it's fair to say that some reporting seniors are more savvy at using the current system than others, but the same thing can be said of any number of other RS traits, like writing ability and the ability to effectively manage the PRDs and timing of their officers in order to maximize opportunity. The fact that the current system can be used in a suboptimal way by a less savvy RS is not, in my opinion, a compelling reason to change it.
 

nittany03

Recovering NFO. Herder of Programmers.
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Seems to me thbe only people who really care about the system being "broken" are those who don't get what they want.

Which is the case in most systems, I'd imagine...
d9F6nAR.jpg
 

RadicalDude

Social Justice Warlord

Agree to disagree that I'm making an ad hominem. I think the argument that the system is flawed is wrongheaded. Any system would be flawed. But most gripes here seem to be coming from the fact that not everyone can get what they want in the Navy--which is not a valid indictment of the fitrep system, but of the simple fact that there are fewer desirable billets than there are bodies to fill them. Any change in the officer evaluation system will not change that fundamental fact. Someone is gonna have to suck down the shitty jobs and fitreps.

The operational Navy is, unfortunately, not a flying club. If you want that you should rush a VFC/SAU as a SELRES or FTS, and be an overpaid bus driver to pay the rent. (See now that's an ad hominem.)
 

DanMa1156

Is it baseball season yet?
pilot
Contributor
Seems to me thbe only people who really care about the system being "broken" are those who don't get what they want.

Which is the case in most systems, I'd imagine...

I admit I am one of those people (kind of... got what I wanted, but in sup-optimal circumstances). However, when I was a MIDN and and ENS, I thought the same thing about hearing LT's say "timing is what matters the most." I used to think the people saying that were either lazy or otherwise messed up or were incompetent. I felt that way until the rug was pulled out from under me and I saw how badly timing can get messed up. It is amazing that a difference of maybe 4-6 months of timing in either direction for me would have at least given me the opportunity to have a career; instead bad timing has led to probably the end of my career.

The ironic part of it all is for my final mid-tour counseling, my Skipper said something to the effect of: "you can never control your timing and you can never control your boss. You did everything on your end of the bargain right, your timing is working out, and your boss likes you. Just remember things may not always work out this way. Always just do your best." Then... circumstances changed drastically in the following couple months and the conversation, I remember started: "remember I said you can never change your timing or your boss? Unfortunately, now, the timing is going to screw you." And it definitely has. Doors have been shut on me. My career is likely over. I will admit, it is an unbelievably difficult pill to swallow when I look back and think, overall, I had a pretty successful first tour. I certainly was not perfect; and I know I made mistakes. I do not think I was deserving of a #1, but I definitely think a #2 EP was warranted, and I think I was being lined up for it, but timing wouldn't have it that way. At the end of the day, my final (non-competitive) FITREP, my Skipper mentioned that if the competitive FITREP had been when my final one was, things would probably have shaken out different... but it wasn't. Timing man. It's a bitch.

What's my point? I think, overall, timing shouldn't have as much of an impact. I understand what Brett was saying about DH's and who is most ready to command, but I'm not certain the same could be said of larger sample sizes, especially when people are in a role they have held in a past squadron/ship (i.e.: LPO). You know who the stand out First Classes are. You know which ones will make good Chiefs. But, they haven't paid their dues until at least 1 full cycle so they have to wait another year; that sucks, especially if they had been an established (albeit new/junior) First Class in his/her previous command. Typically, you make them wait even more because you don't want to "lock them into an EP" for the remainder of their tour in case they don't pick up Chief and we (potentially) delay that person's advancement all the longer. The worst is when someone did break out in year 2 or 3 of a 5 year tour, you do give them an EP, and their remainder of their time they barely do anything, but we still hand out the EP because dropping them down would be disastrous. How about instead, we make our Sailors face the consequences of not earning their rank every single day? You want that EP? Prove to me you're ready to be a Chief. Every. Single. Day. When you have a year that your peers surpassed you because you got lazy and comfortable, "sorry man, you're a #4 MP, better luck next year!" But, we don't have the balls to call a spade a spade when it will hurt someone's feelings, and bureaucratic Navy refuses to acknowledge that someone could have possibly had a down year, picked themselves back up, realized their issue and fix themselves in their following 2 years - instead - they blacklist that Sailor which only reinforces the idea that commands cannot have Sailors that have any regression. This makes them give out the EPs to less-than-deserving-Sailors after they have earned one already and proven to the command they are the most capable, qualified, and likely to succeed in their next promotion compared to their peers.

Now, I look at some of the people who went before me who got EP's, lower ones, like 3's or 4's. They were given them as a bone, a lifeline, like "you weren't good enough, but this can help you lat transfer in the future." I certainly thought I was deserving of them at the time, but understood the system and knew I'd wait my turn and probably end up with a higher one than they received. Alas, my turn never came around because of... timing. And those people, who were poor performers, have much more viable career paths than I do now, albeit, not in aviation. Timing is a bitch, and yes, it's definitely negatively affected me, I admit that, I am biased now, but I guess I was disappointed at timing back then too, when I thought "man, he/she is not deserving of an EP at all, he/she really lucked into that. Oh well, my turn will come. I'm doing well; this will pan out for me anyway, no need to be jealous of others' success. It's just a matter of time before I get mine."
 

Spekkio

He bowls overhand.
...stuff...
Implicit in your post wrt enlisted evals is almost no value placed on experience. Having dealt with 7-9 year CPOs on a routine basis, I think that there is a lot of value in a guy who knows his MRC deck like the back of his hand and says "I've seen this before..." and knows what to do when his equipment breaks down vs. a guy who's struggling to plan out his work list over the DPP because he's not familiar with it.

So yea, that guy getting his last competitive eval after 42 months of sea duty might not be the hot runner that the guy with 30 months is, but he's got a lot more experience. Like it's been said, the eval/fitrep is an evaluation for readiness to perform in the next career milestone, not a report card, and the average to above average guy with more experience as a leading first is almost always more ready to do the job of a chief than a hot runner with only 1-2 years of experience as a leading first.

As for general timing: Somewhere, there is a better officer than [insert your favorite General/Admiral] who never got the opportunity to succeed because there was no war. That's the nature of the business. The widespread opportunity to be a career officer in peacetime is a relatively recent thing. Some guys who want to stick around, even good guys, will be told no thank you.

The fact that the current system can be used in a suboptimal way by a less savvy RS is not, in my opinion, a compelling reason to change it.
I think that there's certainly room to improve this aspect of it, especially since it sounds like there is no formal training on how to become savvy at managing FITREPS to ensure the right officers get promoted and the right officers get passed over.
 

Randy Daytona

Cold War Relic
pilot
Super Moderator
I admit I am one of those people (kind of... got what I wanted, but in sup-optimal circumstances). However, when I was a MIDN and and ENS, I thought the same thing about hearing LT's say "timing is what matters the most." I used to think the people saying that were either lazy or otherwise messed up or were incompetent. I felt that way until the rug was pulled out from under me and I saw how badly timing can get messed up. It is amazing that a difference of maybe 4-6 months of timing in either direction for me would have at least given me the opportunity to have a career; instead bad timing has led to probably the end of my career.

The ironic part of it all is for my final mid-tour counseling, my Skipper said something to the effect of: "you can never control your timing and you can never control your boss. You did everything on your end of the bargain right, your timing is working out, and your boss likes you. Just remember things may not always work out this way. Always just do your best." Then... circumstances changed drastically in the following couple months and the conversation, I remember started: "remember I said you can never change your timing or your boss? Unfortunately, now, the timing is going to screw you." And it definitely has. Doors have been shut on me. My career is likely over. I will admit, it is an unbelievably difficult pill to swallow when I look back and think, overall, I had a pretty successful first tour. I certainly was not perfect; and I know I made mistakes. I do not think I was deserving of a #1, but I definitely think a #2 EP was warranted, and I think I was being lined up for it, but timing wouldn't have it that way. At the end of the day, my final (non-competitive) FITREP, my Skipper mentioned that if the competitive FITREP had been when my final one was, things would probably have shaken out different... but it wasn't. Timing man. It's a bitch.

What's my point? I think, overall, timing shouldn't have as much of an impact. I understand what Brett was saying about DH's and who is most ready to command, but I'm not certain the same could be said of larger sample sizes, especially when people are in a role they have held in a past squadron/ship (i.e.: LPO). You know who the stand out First Classes are. You know which ones will make good Chiefs. But, they haven't paid their dues until at least 1 full cycle so they have to wait another year; that sucks, especially if they had been an established (albeit new/junior) First Class in his/her previous command. Typically, you make them wait even more because you don't want to "lock them into an EP" for the remainder of their tour in case they don't pick up Chief and we (potentially) delay that person's advancement all the longer. The worst is when someone did break out in year 2 or 3 of a 5 year tour, you do give them an EP, and their remainder of their time they barely do anything, but we still hand out the EP because dropping them down would be disastrous. How about instead, we make our Sailors face the consequences of not earning their rank every single day? You want that EP? Prove to me you're ready to be a Chief. Every. Single. Day. When you have a year that your peers surpassed you because you got lazy and comfortable, "sorry man, you're a #4 MP, better luck next year!" But, we don't have the balls to call a spade a spade when it will hurt someone's feelings, and bureaucratic Navy refuses to acknowledge that someone could have possibly had a down year, picked themselves back up, realized their issue and fix themselves in their following 2 years - instead - they blacklist that Sailor which only reinforces the idea that commands cannot have Sailors that have any regression. This makes them give out the EPs to less-than-deserving-Sailors after they have earned one already and proven to the command they are the most capable, qualified, and likely to succeed in their next promotion compared to their peers.

Now, I look at some of the people who went before me who got EP's, lower ones, like 3's or 4's. They were given them as a bone, a lifeline, like "you weren't good enough, but this can help you lat transfer in the future." I certainly thought I was deserving of them at the time, but understood the system and knew I'd wait my turn and probably end up with a higher one than they received. Alas, my turn never came around because of... timing. And those people, who were poor performers, have much more viable career paths than I do now, albeit, not in aviation. Timing is a bitch, and yes, it's definitely negatively affected me, I admit that, I am biased now, but I guess I was disappointed at timing back then too, when I thought "man, he/she is not deserving of an EP at all, he/she really lucked into that. Oh well, my turn will come. I'm doing well; this will pan out for me anyway, no need to be jealous of others' success. It's just a matter of time before I get mine."

I used to brief my flight students that 5% were going to make flag, 5% shouldn't be in the Cub Scouts and the remaining 90% were at the whim of timing (See T-Notch and Cold War drawdown for examples of either extreme). All you can do is prepare - and if things don't break your way, start over in the reserves - where counter-intuitively you seem to have more control of your career (i.e., no detailer - you can volunteer for whatever airframes, schools, mobs, staff tours are available or just sit in a squadron and fly.) And if you are an airline bubba, your seniority number just keeps getting better simultaneously.
 

jtmedli

Well-Known Member
pilot
Implicit in your post wrt enlisted evals is almost no value placed on experience. Having dealt with 7-9 year CPOs on a routine basis, I think that there is a lot of value in a guy who knows hiS MRC...

Isn't this exact opposite of what our current system does though? If there's value on knowing the MRC that well then it's there not value in having pilots that know the A/C that well? Our current system is rather wasteful and expensive and it's pretty much all in the name of taking a very large swath of people and training them all to be XOs and COs and then throwing away the other 90% who don't screen. Has it ever occurred to this group of officers that maybe we should be coming up with a more economical way to approach Pers management/Manning because money isn't exactly what used to be?

I used to brief my flight students that 5% were going to make flag, 5% shouldn't be in the Cub Scouts and the remaining 90% were at the whim of timing (See T-Notch and Cold War drawdown for examples of either extreme). All you can do is prepare - and if things don't break your way, start over in the reserves - where counter-intuitively you seem to have more control of your career (i.e., no detailer - you can volunteer for whatever airframes, schools, mobs, staff tours are available or just sit in a squadron and fly.) And if you are an airline bubba, your seniority number just keeps getting better simultaneously.

Have we really accepted that "well, fuck you because....timing" as an excuse for a guy who was outright told by his CO that he would be the #1 or 2 EP getting MP'd (or whatever) on his way out? I mean, I get it. Not everyone is going to make Admiral. Cool story, bro. But we're not talking about that. We're talking about a guys first JO tour here.

*For the record, my timing has been good so far and I've done well but that doesn't mean we can't look at it objectively any realize it doesn't work when it screws a guys whole career up over 1 FITREP that was probably well beyond his control.
 

robav8r

Well-Known Member
None
Contributor
Implicit in your post wrt enlisted evals is almost no value placed on experience. Having dealt with 7-9 year CPOs on a routine basis, I think that there is a lot of value in a guy who knows his MRC deck like the back of his hand and says "I've seen this before..." and knows what to do when his equipment breaks down vs. a guy who's struggling to plan out his work list over the DPP because he's not familiar with it.

So yea, that guy getting his last competitive eval after 42 months of sea duty might not be the hot runner that the guy with 30 months is, but he's got a lot more experience. Like it's been said, the eval/fitrep is an evaluation for readiness to perform in the next career milestone, not a report card, and the average to above average guy with more experience as a leading first is almost always more ready to do the job of a chief than a hot runner with only 1-2 years of experience as a leading first.

As for general timing: Somewhere, there is a better officer than [insert your favorite General/Admiral] who never got the opportunity to succeed because there was no war. That's the nature of the business. The widespread opportunity to be a career officer in peacetime is a relatively recent thing. Some guys who want to stick around, even good guys, will be told no thank you.


I think that there's certainly room to improve this aspect of it, especially since it sounds like there is no formal training on how to become savvy at managing FITREPS to ensure the right officers get promoted and the right officers get passed over.
It's called the Command Screen Board. If you look holistically at how we make CO's, how we report on the fitness of Officers, we do a pretty good job based on the number of folks in the system. People will always lament on the shortcomings of our FITREP system, is it perfect? No. But it could be a LOT worse.
 
Top