...at least among the people who frequent the CAC website.
Every week the Combined Arms Center runs a web poll on their public website.
Last week they asked about the Officer Efficiency Report... the results were, um, *not* encouraging.
Mind you, it's an internet poll, with all the caveats that go with those, but if I were in the leadership I'd certainly be looking at asking the question again, under more controlled conditions. No evaluation system is perfect, and people who are unhappy with it are more likely to respond to a poll like this, so it probably overstates the level of dissatisfaction.
That said - that is *still* a pretty lop-sided result that I'd want to follow-up on.
Every week the Combined Arms Center runs a web poll on their public website.
Last week they asked about the Officer Efficiency Report... the results were, um, *not* encouraging.
Last weeks poll results
Are Army Officer Evaluation Reports helping produce better officers?
Yes: 7% | No: 93% | Total Responses: 2183
Mind you, it's an internet poll, with all the caveats that go with those, but if I were in the leadership I'd certainly be looking at asking the question again, under more controlled conditions. No evaluation system is perfect, and people who are unhappy with it are more likely to respond to a poll like this, so it probably overstates the level of dissatisfaction.
That said - that is *still* a pretty lop-sided result that I'd want to follow-up on.
The "Controlled" system was touted by many as a way to break the de-facto standard of OER inflation, but all it did was re-institute the feudal system. You had to kiss a lot of patoot to get a nine then. Patootey-kissing company-grade officers generally DON'T make good field grade officers, and we all know what happens when we get patootey-kissing SENIOR officers...we get Wesley Clarks and Merrill McPeaks.
My Senior Rater kicked it back, saying that, since I was the only one in that particular group, that *automatically* made me the center of mass.
And the beauty of that shafting was, I couldn't even begin to formulate a rebuttal...
Respectfully, Grumpy
Even after writing this, you may say, “Grumpy, does not get it.” You just may be right, only history will tell.
How do you pick a good military officer? They always do what command likes? Underling popularity? Must be worse in peacetime.
The margin of error is going to be double digits, but even for laughs and giggles, let's say that 100 votes were from either one person or friends of that person who voted negatively. That is still less than 5%. That means the majority would still be over 1900 who are *not happy*.
It does deserve looking at.
But then again, I am just a bean counter who is almost finished with her training. I have one more class after this Defense Against the Dark Arts class (where we are taught to hide the Horcruxes. Income Tax accounting was how to *make* them)
I'd like to get away from the numbers game and require individually written evaluations. Except that the number of raters who are unable to write will produce suckage for their subordinates. And the good writers will unfairly promote their proteges.
Wrasslin' is out (I'm too feeble to show well there).
Even brown nosin' doesn't work reliably. I've seen master brown nosers try it out on the wrong guy and find their nose stapled to their kneecap.
I think we're fated to continue a semi organized paper jostling five legged race. Backwards.
I mind, back in ROTC, when I had to fill out a pretend OER, getting remonstrated at by Captain whatshisname because I wasn't effusive enough in my praise of the ratee. I mean, the guy I was "rating" was perfectly adequate, and in the middle of the range. I think this is known as "grade inflation" in the colleges and universities.
Not being on the Inside Loop, as it were, the only reason I can think of for this rating system is that the computer reads the mass and the rater reads the verbage, and then they powwow as to who gets the promotion, who is retained, and who is weeded out.
Having seen truely incompetent officers get good ratings I know the current system is serious flawed.
Yup. Somebody read Deming's book on quality management, decided that you could treat people like manufactured goods, and sweet-talked the clueless in the Puzzle Palace into going with it.
If US senior officers knew how to write as well as the Brits,
there wouldn't be the ridiculous emphasis on trying to quantify quality.
The Sovietization of the US military continues apace...