1 / 18

As of 19 MAR 13

Revised Officer Evaluation Report. US Army Human Resources Command. As of 19 MAR 13. Background. Senior Leader focus for Evaluation Review : Re-establish the company grade box check Reduce the frequency of reports Strengthen rater accountability

cheryl
Download Presentation

As of 19 MAR 13

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Revised Officer Evaluation Report • US Army Human Resources Command • As of 19 MAR 13

  2. Background • Senior Leader focus for Evaluation Review: • Re-establish the company grade box check • Reduce the frequency of reports • Strengthen rater accountability • Reflect current leadership doctrine (ADRP 6-22) • Incorporate ability to document, “data mine” and identify talent • Address the “one size may not fit all” assessment of different skills and competencies at different grades • Keep the OER relevant and adaptive • SECARMY guidance (9 Mar 11): • Ensure responsibilities are clearly defined and vested with appropriate individuals • Assess the usefulness of Academic Evaluation Reports • Identify clear standards to assist raters with drafting evaluation reports • Informed By • 36th and 37th CSA framing guidance/intent (2010/2011) • Other Services and Industry review • Officer Selection Board AARs • Profession of Arms Forum • OPMS CoCs and GOSCs • Army White Paper, The Profession of Arms • CG, TRADOC guidance • OEMA & CSI Officer Corps Strategy Series • Army Leader Development Strategy for a 21st Century • ADRP 6-22, Army Leadership • Socialized With • Hundreds of General Officers • Thousands of Army Officers • Multiple Pre-Command Courses • Multiple Selection Board Panels • Office Chief Army Reserve Staff • Army National Guard Bureau Staff OER remains the primary tool documenting officer performance and potential 2

  3. OER Changes • Clear delineation of responsibilities: Rater-Performance; Senior Rater-Potential • Three separate evaluation reports based on grade plate: • Company Grade (2LT-CPT & WO1-CW2) • Field Grade (MAJ-LTC & CW3-CW5) • Strategic Leaders (COL-BG) • Implementa Rater Profile for the Company and Field Grade Plate • Future Operational and Broadening Assignment Recommendations • Redefine Senior Rater box label techniques (49% top box remains) • Strengthen the Rating Chain via regulatory guidance • Rating Schemes approved one level up • Limit use of Intermediate Raters to Special Branches and dual supervisory situations • Support Form realigned and mandatory for WO1-COL 3

  4. Rater Assessment: Company Grade Form 2LT-CPT; WO1-CW2 c. 1)Character: (Army Values, Empathy, and Warrior Ethos/ Service Ethos and Discipline) • Focused on core attributes and competencies in ADRP 6-22 • More prescriptive • Performance based assessment • Narrative only (3-4 sentences per entry) • Encourages specific discussion with rated officer on desired traits c. 2) Presence: (Military and Professional Bearing, Fitness, Confident, Resilient) c. 3) Intellect: (Mental Agility, Sound Judgment, Innovation, Interpersonal Tact, Expertise) c. 4) Leads: (Leads Others, Builds Trust Extends Influence beyond the Chain of Command, Leads by Example, Communicates) Comments on performance – not potential c. 5) Develops:(Creates Positive Environment/Fosters Esprit de Corps, Prepares Self, Develops Others, Stewards the Profession) c. 6) Achieves:(Gets Results) 4

  5. Rater Assessment: Field Grade Form MAJ-LTC; CW3-CW4-CW5 • Narrative comments focused on performance in line with field grade competencies and attributes • Performance based assessment; no comment on potential 5

  6. Rater Recommended Broadening and Operational Assignments (Field Grade and Strategic Level) Field Grade Plate- Rater Recommended Strategic Grade Plate- Rater Recommended 7

  7. Rater Box Check • Rater overall assessment of rated officer’s performance compared to officers in same grade • Limited to Company and Field Grade forms e. This Officer’s Overall Performance is Rated as: (Select one box representing Rated Officer’s overall performance compared to others of the same grade whom you have rated in your career. Managed at less than 50% in EXCELS.) I currently rate____ Army Officers in this grade. EXCELS (49%) EXCELS PROFICIENT CAPABLE UNSATISFACTORY () X Comments: Example Rater Label: HQDA COMPARISON OF THE RATER’S PROFILE AND BOX CHECK AT THE TIME THIS REPORT PROCESSED PROFICIENT EXCELS (49%) () R: RANK/GRADE NAME SSN: xxx-xx-xxxx TOTAL RATINGS: RO: RANK SOLDIERS NAME SSN: xxx-xx-xxxx DATE: RATINGS THIS OFFICER: 8

  8. Senior Rater Box Check • Four box profile remains consistent with current system; provides more options for senior raters • Highly Qualified and Qualified enable greater stratification • Most Qualified becomes the control box (limited to 49%) • No restart of profile; no close-out reports • Continue to mask 2LT/1LT after promotion to CPT; WO1 after selection to CW3 MOST QUALIFIED: Strong potential for BZ and CMD; potential ahead of peers HIGHLY QUALIFIED: Strong potential for promotion with peers QUALIFIED: Capable of success at the next level; promote if able NOT QUALIFIED: Not recommended for promotion Box Check Assessment = Current COM Not Adverse 9

  9. Discussion and Questions 10

  10. Draft FormsAs of 29 NOV 12 15

  11. Company Grade Form (front) 16

  12. Company Grade Form (back) 17

  13. Field Grade Form O4/O5; CW3-CW5 (front) 18

  14. Field Grade Form O4/O5; CW3-CW5 (back) 19

  15. Strengthening the Rating Chain • Develop regulatory guidance to strengthen rating chain accountability • The updated policy strengthens accountability within the members of a rating chain to maintain relationships that provide rated officers with leaders who have first-hand knowledge of their responsibilities, performance and potential. • Still allows commanders and senior leaders to be responsible for designating rating schemes / Approved one level up • Intermediate Raters limited to special branches and dual supervisor situations 24

  16. Army Leadership Requirements 25 ADRP 6-22 AUG 2012 Figure 1-1. The Army leadership requirements model

  17. Attributes - What a Leader Is 26 *Extracted from Leader Development Strategy for a 21st Century Army, 25Nov09

  18. Competencies - What a Leader Does *Extracted from Leader Development Strategy for a 21st Century Army, 25Nov09 27

More Related