A semi-formal after action report would be great, but aren't board members forbidden to discuss board deliberations?
I don't know the specifics of the rules, but I have seen the AAR for both officer and enlisted boards. If it makes it to your community it was put together by your Commodore (if he was on the board) or your community rep or it got passed to him from another member. On the enlisted side some Master Chief puts it together and it's passed through the goat locker network.
We've all seen the stats and facts Millington puts together, but it seems that some inside information is needed to determine if a sailor with "potential" actually means he's a dirtbag. I can write a positive report for a junior sailor stating that he has "potential for more demanding billets" and be unknowingly hurting him. Why must we be forced to decipher, and understand, faint praise in order to firmly grasp documented performance?
That's just the way it is, it's an evolutionary inflating cycle, similar to awards. Every time a CO submits FITREPS, he's looking for ways to make his guys stand out. Whatever one CO dreams up that appears successful starts to be mimicked by others. Then another CO takes it up another small notch, etc. etc. Then every 10 (or more?) years the Navy resets the rules. BUPERS sends out all kinds of arcane rules (specific font, no more than XX lines, specific font size) and the process starts all over again.
The awards cycle is very similar. Awards inflation is always happening with COs trying to make their troops stand out. After some years when the leadership finally decides enough is enough, they clamp down again.
Frankly, it's no use for COs not to participate in these phenomenons. Sure you will find COs who are adamant that a NAM won't be given out for anything less than XX, but when his peers around the entire Navy are doing it, he's just making the members of his command less competitive.
