It may be natural to worry about your own OER, however the highest performing officers recognize this focus as counter-productive, and thus spend little time and energy worrying. In this article, we gain understanding on what the OER is and is not, what the most important part of the OER is, how to write an effective recommendation, the difference between the OER and performance feedback, and how to consistently get great OERs.
First, it helps to understand what the OER is and isn’t. Your OER is:
o A snapshot of your performance, professionalism and leadership capabilities at a point in time,
o A summary of your achievements and potential as rated by the two officers who see you most: your supervisor and your reporting officer,
o Used by your selection boards, panels and detailers to determine if you get promoted, assigned to command/advanced education and what jobs you compete for,
o Governed by chapter 10.A of the Personnel Manual,
o A time-tested and legally sufficient exchange between the officer and the Coast Guard, with built in protections for those who believe or suspect they may be “vicitms of the system.”
Your OER is not:
o Feedback on job performance
o An opportunity for charity or a reward for your subordinates
o A numeric assessment of your success
o A good place to surprise the reported on officer (either with marks and comments better than, or worse than, he or she expected).
o A perfect surrogate for talent – which is what it is trying to measure
It is no exaggeration to say that the OER is the most important annual or semi-annual document you will receive. That said, excessive focus or worry about your OER is unhealthy. Your job as an officer is to exert your efforts taking care of your subordinates and your command. Time spent worrying if you will get a five or a six in “professional competence” is time when you should be taking care of real Coast Guard business. By focusing outward instead of hand-wringing inward, the OER will take care of itself, because your supervisor and reporting officer will see that you have your priorities straight.
A good OER is more than just a herky-jerky list in broken English of all the things you did this year (or half year). A good OER leaves the reader with no question about how hard you worked, how capable you are, how effective as a leader you are and exactly what challenges you are capable of overcoming in the future. But like a work of art from the skilled hands of a professional practitioner, a great OER paints a picture of who you are, leaving no question unanswered. To do this, you have to spend some time. How much time? A great OER can take upwards of a week to write…and requires several drafts and a great deal of editing. Before you start writing, think about the subject. What is she like, what does he do well, what traits and characteristics come to mind when one thinks of that officer? Military, professional, upbeat, enthusiastic, focused, exacting: different adjectives will steer the reader’s mental imagery as appropriate, and will humanize and make real your OER commentary. On the other hand, twenty-five to thirty-lines of text saying how perfect, incredible, superior or how many myriad tasks the officer performed flawlessly will inevitably come off as excessive, overblown and faintly ludicrous. In this case, “keepin’ it real” is really good advice.
If the OER is the most important part of your record, the potential block is the most important part of the OER. The documentation in the other blocks is a summary of what you did and the circumstances in which you did it. By contrast, the potential block is more free form and captures what you can do in the future. In Boards, every potential block of every OER will get dedicated scrutiny. If you are one of the many officers who write your own OER, you should never repeat wording in your potential block from another OER. And if you are writing OERs on a number of subordinates, never use the same phraseology in more than one officer’s OER. Humans are masters of pattern recognition, and your board members may not remember the exacts words in your OER, but rest assured they will recognize patterns of identically worded phrases in different OERs.
Regarding recommendations, they should be scaled, appropriate to the officer and paygrade, and exceedingly clear. Boards, panels and Assignment Officers like nothing better than a clear recommendation or a clear non-recommendation.
For example, contrast these potential-block recommendations:
o Strongly recommended for O-4 command afloat.
o Should be considered for a command opportunity.
The first recommendation is clear, and appropriate both to the officer’s paygrade and experience. The second is called a “soft-kill.” The recommendation is positive, but is so passive and ambivalent as to be construed as a negative.
Now compare these:
o Clearly tracking towards a strong endorsement for post-graduate education.
o Not recommended for post-graduate school.
The first leaves the reader wondering if the officer is or is not recommended. The words “clearly” and “strong endorsement” are undercut by the words “tracking towards” and the intent is muddied as a result. The second is unambiguous, and while we would not want to be the officer earning such a recommendation, it makes the PG Panel’s job easier.
One of the hardest things to do is not recommend someone who is truly nice, friendly, or hard-working. Most of us don’t want to hurt the feelings of others, and our conscience can wrestle for weeks on how to recommend an officer for promotion, command, advanced training, flight school, etc, who is not clearly exceeding our expectations. But if in your heart you suspect the officer is not cut out to command others at sea, doesn’t follow-through on assignments, lacks the attentiveness needed to succeed in detail-oriented situations or lacks the requisite fitness or military bearing for a particular high-profile assignment, honesty is the best policy. Making your recommendations realistic and appropriate will allow the system to work the way it is designed. Inflating the marks or recommendations serves no one, and in fact jeopardizes the officer, perhaps the future command to which he may be assigned, and the fairness of the promotion system. It can also detract from your own credibility. Make sure you can live with whatever opportunities come from the OERs you sign for others.
Objective, timely and honest feedback is the high-octane fuel that drives the best-performing organizations, and is most important thing you can provide as a leader to improve and increase the performance of your team. Encourage subordinates who are doing well. Give them harder challenges as they improve. Let them know you appreciate their efforts, and help them get better. When objective, timely and honest feedback is a frequent occurrence, the end-of-period OERs are easy to write, because we will have created a team of capable and high-performing subordinates, one task at a time. The feedback may not always be a “pat on the back.” It may be corrective, and perhaps at times, stern. But if the coached officer comprehends the feedback and works harder to improve, there will be no reason to document the learning event for all time in his or her OER at the end of the marking period.
Again, the OER is not so much about the things we do right or wrong, it is showing a pattern of performance and capability with specifics. As such, the OER is not a feedback and counseling tool. OERs that contain examples of performance remediation are appropriate only when it is clear that the officer is unable or unwilling to perform his duties in a manner necessary for success. In that case, however, it should not be a surprise to the officer when the OER documents his or her failings. It is good leadership to have that discussion with your subordinate before completing and submitting the OER. This is even more important in the case of a special or derogatory OER, as Chapter 10.A of the Personnel Manual allows the officer to reply to an OER. While there is a presumption of fairness and propriety on the part of the rating chain, nothing weakens this presumption like the rating chain failing to follow the guidelines set out in policy. It may be hard, but it is only harder if we don’t do it right.
Here are three ways of saying the same thing:
o The reward for a job well done is usually a harder job,
o In an ideal world, the person with the strongest record would go, not to his or her first pick, but to the hardest job,
o There is a constant tension between what is best for us, and what is most appealing to us.
Phrases like these echo in the board room. The officer with the strongest record is not usually the one with the highest numeral scores, or the strongest recommendation. It is usually the one that shows the most successively greater challenges overcome, for the officer who consistently put others first, and always accomplished the mission but never at the expense of the crew. Hard work is always rewarded, but it also shows that you are ready to tackle bigger challenges. When strung together over a series of assignments, those strong performances make for great records. However, the phrase “the circumstances make the man (or woman)” is also true. Many officers are capable of performing even better than their records would indicate. Therefore, when your detailer calls with the challenging assignment that wasn’t on your e-resume, think hard before you attempt to wriggle off that hook. The move to another part of the Service, another coast or as a liaison to another agency may not be the offer you want, but the opportunity to showcase your ability may be just what you need.
In the end, the sum of your OER is an imperfect proxy for your capability and talent. As humans and social animals, we can sometime act irrationally or counter-productively, and in the work-environment, our success or failure in acting rationally will ultimately affect our OERs. The best approach is to be the type of follower you’d like to lead. Underpromise and overdeliver, make your boss’ job easy, look out for your boss, take care of your people, and never sacrifice your subordinates’ needs for the sake of your own. Officers who consistently put the needs of others ahead of their own, who achieve and maintain alignment with their supervisors and who exceed their supervisors’ expectations regularly don’t worry about their own OERs. How rational!
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Saturday, November 22, 2008
The Big Four - Education
Greetings, again. The final of the "Big Four" in the Personnel Manual's chapter on personnel boards is Education. Education is a little different from the other three: performance, professionalism and leadership. First off, you won't really find a dimension on education in the OER. You may sneak a reference to some college courses you are taking in the initiative block, but there is no section where you can be graded on going to school. Second, the term education makes you automatically think only being in school will satisfy this dimension. The Commandant, in his Guidance to Boards and Panels, calls the term "life-long learning". What he and Boards are looking for is innovation, smarter better ways of doing things and accomplishing the mission, and officers who will continue to improve themselves, to help improve the Coast Guard.
For all the junior officers out there, the fourth dimension is applied differently for you than it is at more senior boards. Before the junior boards, the Coast Guard expects you to establish yourself as an expert in some officer specialty, preferrably an operational specialty. You should put the majority of your effort into learning your craft, whatever that is. There is nothing wrong with getting some additional college under your belt as an O-1 or O-2, but don't sacrifice learning your specialty for getting more college just for the sake of it. The ideal scenario is where you can align the needs of the Service with your own personal goals and desires. Taking a course on database management and using your skills to better track progress at your unit is a great example of this. You get to do something you are passionate about, and it benefits the Service.
At more senior boards, you could sum it up as "can this old dog learn and use new tricks"? Where most of the candidates have extremely strong performance, professionalism and leadership, education can be the tie breaker that puts them over the top. A prevalent question from officers before they go before O-4 and O-5 boards seems to be, if I don't have a masters degree, am I doomed to be non-selected? It doesn't work that way...again getting back to my mental model of managing weakness, if you are an extremely strong performer, the paragon of professionalism and a skilled leader, your lack of an advanced degree will not necessarily doom you. But say your OERs have been more to the center, you have had brushes with the weight program and you have stayed in the same geographic area for 3 full tours, AND you don't have an advanced degree. You can see how this second hypothetical board candidate is at greater risk before a board. For the first one who is hitting all her marks, I say enroll in a masters program, or get some technical certification, or acquire a new technical skill - 2-3 years BEFORE you come into zone. Remember - you aren't doing this to maximize your OER - you are doing it to improve yourself and thus improve the Coast Guard. Is it more work? You bet. But boards consistently reward hard work. Hard work demonstrates a commitment, and when combined with productive results, that shows a readiness to perform at the next higher paygrade. But if you are going to do it, you might as well get it in your OER, AND on your CG-4082. So start early enough to show results before the board. For the second officer, identify the source of weakness and correct it ASAP. Get alignment with your supervisor...ask for pointed feedback, and take decisive action. If you do get non-selected, don't assume it was your lack of an advanced degree that doomed you. Look at yourself holistically, be ruthlessly objective and determine to make improvements.
A quick plug for Direct-Access. Education has been one of the most difficult things for Boards to decipher. Does this candidate have any education, what was this masters degree for, what school? Do me and your boards a huge favor...get your transcript in your record, and ensure your SPO enters your degree or coursework in Direct-Access. To see if your degree info is up to date, log into D-A and go to Self-Service > Employee > View > Member Info Additional and click on the text that says View All. If you don't see all your degree info, bring your transcript or diploma to your SPO or Admin Support and ask them to get it up to date. If that doesn't work, call your detailer, Career Counselor or me and send a copy of the transcript or diploma - we'd prefer for your SPO to do it - it is their job, but the important thing is that it gets done!
As always - let me know if you have any questions and keep chargin! ~ jea
For all the junior officers out there, the fourth dimension is applied differently for you than it is at more senior boards. Before the junior boards, the Coast Guard expects you to establish yourself as an expert in some officer specialty, preferrably an operational specialty. You should put the majority of your effort into learning your craft, whatever that is. There is nothing wrong with getting some additional college under your belt as an O-1 or O-2, but don't sacrifice learning your specialty for getting more college just for the sake of it. The ideal scenario is where you can align the needs of the Service with your own personal goals and desires. Taking a course on database management and using your skills to better track progress at your unit is a great example of this. You get to do something you are passionate about, and it benefits the Service.
At more senior boards, you could sum it up as "can this old dog learn and use new tricks"? Where most of the candidates have extremely strong performance, professionalism and leadership, education can be the tie breaker that puts them over the top. A prevalent question from officers before they go before O-4 and O-5 boards seems to be, if I don't have a masters degree, am I doomed to be non-selected? It doesn't work that way...again getting back to my mental model of managing weakness, if you are an extremely strong performer, the paragon of professionalism and a skilled leader, your lack of an advanced degree will not necessarily doom you. But say your OERs have been more to the center, you have had brushes with the weight program and you have stayed in the same geographic area for 3 full tours, AND you don't have an advanced degree. You can see how this second hypothetical board candidate is at greater risk before a board. For the first one who is hitting all her marks, I say enroll in a masters program, or get some technical certification, or acquire a new technical skill - 2-3 years BEFORE you come into zone. Remember - you aren't doing this to maximize your OER - you are doing it to improve yourself and thus improve the Coast Guard. Is it more work? You bet. But boards consistently reward hard work. Hard work demonstrates a commitment, and when combined with productive results, that shows a readiness to perform at the next higher paygrade. But if you are going to do it, you might as well get it in your OER, AND on your CG-4082. So start early enough to show results before the board. For the second officer, identify the source of weakness and correct it ASAP. Get alignment with your supervisor...ask for pointed feedback, and take decisive action. If you do get non-selected, don't assume it was your lack of an advanced degree that doomed you. Look at yourself holistically, be ruthlessly objective and determine to make improvements.
A quick plug for Direct-Access. Education has been one of the most difficult things for Boards to decipher. Does this candidate have any education, what was this masters degree for, what school? Do me and your boards a huge favor...get your transcript in your record, and ensure your SPO enters your degree or coursework in Direct-Access. To see if your degree info is up to date, log into D-A and go to Self-Service > Employee > View > Member Info Additional and click on the text that says View All. If you don't see all your degree info, bring your transcript or diploma to your SPO or Admin Support and ask them to get it up to date. If that doesn't work, call your detailer, Career Counselor or me and send a copy of the transcript or diploma - we'd prefer for your SPO to do it - it is their job, but the important thing is that it gets done!
As always - let me know if you have any questions and keep chargin! ~ jea
Sunday, November 16, 2008
The Big Four - Leadership
The next stop on our tour through Chapter 14 of the Personnel Manual is Leadership. The below excerpt is straight from the Manual.
Leadership. Officers selected demonstrate those leadership traits and values that allow them to serve in a series of assignments with increasing responsibility in the grade to which promoted. Officers must exemplify our core values of honor, respect and devotion to duty in the highest degree.
a. A leader influences people to accomplish a purpose. Coast Guard leaders concentrate on “doing right things right,” integrating a leader’s focus on effectiveness with a manager’s focus on efficiency.
b. A successful leader inspires others by:
(1) Convincing them they have the solution and acting decisively and confidently;
(2) Sharing a vision of service, excellence and achievement;
(3) Demonstrating a commitment to innovation and quality team work; and,
(4) Modeling strength of character in word and action.
I'd first like to comment on what is in the manual, and then provide you with some thoughts that extend beyond the manual and can help you in molding your own leadership style. The first paragraph seems to tie back to professionalism, by stating that officers must "be" a particular way - embody Core Values, etc. Since we discussed professionalism thoroughly already, and since everyone already knows we need to be strong of character, let's focus instead on what this section of policy tells us to "do."
Influencing People and Accomplishing a Purpose: pretty much wherever you go as an officer in the Coast Guard, you are going to need to influence people to execute or support a mission. Many of these leadership circumstances are unique: it may be different for a LTjg co-pilot as it is for a LTjg Marine Inspector trainee as it is for a LTjg Deck Watch Officer. But in all circumstances, you will need to convey a sense of purpose to your crew or subordinates, and you will need to direct or guide them to perform some duty. How are your interpersonal skills? What do your peers or subordinates think of your ability to lead? You should at least be a bit curious about the answers to those questions. Unless you are constantly assessing your own performance, you will be unable to improve your performance. It is not about accomplishing the mission at any cost - the motto, "you have to go out, you don't have to come back" is no longer applicable to the way we operate. Nowadays, we have to plan ahead to be ready to accomplish today's mission, but be thinking about how we're going to respond to the next call coming in. No one, not even the Commandant, can do that alone. Get your people on board, oriented and moving in the same/right direction. Tell your crew what to do - don't tell them how to do it. If you have trouble inspiring your folks to achieve, you may see that in page 2 of your OER. If you tell your folks in exhaustive detail how to accomplish every task, and leave them no room for creativity, inspiration or flexibility, how fun is that? The technical term is "micro-management" - and it keeps you and your crew from blossoming into your full potential. You will find there are occasions where you need to be exceedingly directive. But I hope that doesn't encompass every interpersonal transaction.
Leader vs. Manager - Note that this criterion, though named "leadership," actually requires you to be both a good leader and an effective manager. What is the difference? Here is the way I think about it: a be the type of leader you would like to follow, be the type of manager you'd like to have working for you. A leader needs to be optimistic, engaging and energetic. A leader is a person who calms the fears, calmly guides the unit and makes change palatable and achievable. A leader "does the right thing right." In contrast, a manager does the staff work, figures out how to make the "trains run on time". She looks for the risk and gets ahead of it. There is a lot of yin and yang here, you can be a great leader and a miserable manager. You can be a detail-oriented manager, and lousy with people. To be really successful in the Service, you have to be ambidextrous when it comes to the leader vs. manager balance. Having trouble establishing a good balance? Often the best officers will recognize a weakness in their own make-up - not good with technology, challenged at managing conflict, etc. Where those senior officers successfully compensate is by finding a deputy who covers their blind spot. If you know you have a weakness, try to develop competency in that area - but in the interim, you may consider joining forces with a deputy and agree on roles. You may find your rating chain might credit your overall results, not necessarily the individual skills you bring to the table - so the "deputy compensation" can give you a boost in those areas of your record where you may not necessarily be the strongest.
Think like the Service. One of the biggest differences between successful officers and less-successful ones is the sense of mission or commitment. When I was a lieutenant, I had doubts about doing a career in the Coast Guard. I was holding myself back from committing. I didn't realize it then, but that hesitantcy was adversely impacting my effectivenss as a leader. How could I inspire, convince, share a vision, or serve as a model, when I wasn't committed to what I was doing? Most of my work-thoughts were hedged by a low commitment level, I was thinking about "me versus the Service." To fix it, I began imagine myself as the Service - I realized I needed to make it more than a job, and stop being so transactional about the whole thing. Once I committed, to say that I was going to have to live with the results of my leadership efforts in the Coast Guard, my passion went up, and my results went up, and it continued to spiral upward. It is a big step - but if you can convince yourself that doing your best for the Service will actually pay the biggest personal dividends of effectivenss and satisfaction - you won't regret it.
As you progress in your career, ask your detailer or career counselor what jobs would assist in showing progress in leadership. As you are factoring in future assignment options, what jobs stretch you, give you new skills, exposure to new ideas and opportunities, fill in a gap in your development? If you have done a deputy (manager) job and succeeded, your next job should be a principal (leader) job. If you have done a series of CO or leader jobs, you may not want to take the deputy job, but chances are, it is the best opportunity for you to develop and grow.
My next entry will be on Education. I really appreciate all the positive feedback on the blog. Keep spreading the word and let's keep the dialogue up. For those of you doing the math at home, Education is the last of the Big 4. I would love to hear from you and guide this blog to provide you with the answers you need, as we wrap up the Big 4 and start expanding out from there. Thanks again, shipmates!! ~jea
Leadership. Officers selected demonstrate those leadership traits and values that allow them to serve in a series of assignments with increasing responsibility in the grade to which promoted. Officers must exemplify our core values of honor, respect and devotion to duty in the highest degree.
a. A leader influences people to accomplish a purpose. Coast Guard leaders concentrate on “doing right things right,” integrating a leader’s focus on effectiveness with a manager’s focus on efficiency.
b. A successful leader inspires others by:
(1) Convincing them they have the solution and acting decisively and confidently;
(2) Sharing a vision of service, excellence and achievement;
(3) Demonstrating a commitment to innovation and quality team work; and,
(4) Modeling strength of character in word and action.
I'd first like to comment on what is in the manual, and then provide you with some thoughts that extend beyond the manual and can help you in molding your own leadership style. The first paragraph seems to tie back to professionalism, by stating that officers must "be" a particular way - embody Core Values, etc. Since we discussed professionalism thoroughly already, and since everyone already knows we need to be strong of character, let's focus instead on what this section of policy tells us to "do."
Influencing People and Accomplishing a Purpose: pretty much wherever you go as an officer in the Coast Guard, you are going to need to influence people to execute or support a mission. Many of these leadership circumstances are unique: it may be different for a LTjg co-pilot as it is for a LTjg Marine Inspector trainee as it is for a LTjg Deck Watch Officer. But in all circumstances, you will need to convey a sense of purpose to your crew or subordinates, and you will need to direct or guide them to perform some duty. How are your interpersonal skills? What do your peers or subordinates think of your ability to lead? You should at least be a bit curious about the answers to those questions. Unless you are constantly assessing your own performance, you will be unable to improve your performance. It is not about accomplishing the mission at any cost - the motto, "you have to go out, you don't have to come back" is no longer applicable to the way we operate. Nowadays, we have to plan ahead to be ready to accomplish today's mission, but be thinking about how we're going to respond to the next call coming in. No one, not even the Commandant, can do that alone. Get your people on board, oriented and moving in the same/right direction. Tell your crew what to do - don't tell them how to do it. If you have trouble inspiring your folks to achieve, you may see that in page 2 of your OER. If you tell your folks in exhaustive detail how to accomplish every task, and leave them no room for creativity, inspiration or flexibility, how fun is that? The technical term is "micro-management" - and it keeps you and your crew from blossoming into your full potential. You will find there are occasions where you need to be exceedingly directive. But I hope that doesn't encompass every interpersonal transaction.
Leader vs. Manager - Note that this criterion, though named "leadership," actually requires you to be both a good leader and an effective manager. What is the difference? Here is the way I think about it: a be the type of leader you would like to follow, be the type of manager you'd like to have working for you. A leader needs to be optimistic, engaging and energetic. A leader is a person who calms the fears, calmly guides the unit and makes change palatable and achievable. A leader "does the right thing right." In contrast, a manager does the staff work, figures out how to make the "trains run on time". She looks for the risk and gets ahead of it. There is a lot of yin and yang here, you can be a great leader and a miserable manager. You can be a detail-oriented manager, and lousy with people. To be really successful in the Service, you have to be ambidextrous when it comes to the leader vs. manager balance. Having trouble establishing a good balance? Often the best officers will recognize a weakness in their own make-up - not good with technology, challenged at managing conflict, etc. Where those senior officers successfully compensate is by finding a deputy who covers their blind spot. If you know you have a weakness, try to develop competency in that area - but in the interim, you may consider joining forces with a deputy and agree on roles. You may find your rating chain might credit your overall results, not necessarily the individual skills you bring to the table - so the "deputy compensation" can give you a boost in those areas of your record where you may not necessarily be the strongest.
Think like the Service. One of the biggest differences between successful officers and less-successful ones is the sense of mission or commitment. When I was a lieutenant, I had doubts about doing a career in the Coast Guard. I was holding myself back from committing. I didn't realize it then, but that hesitantcy was adversely impacting my effectivenss as a leader. How could I inspire, convince, share a vision, or serve as a model, when I wasn't committed to what I was doing? Most of my work-thoughts were hedged by a low commitment level, I was thinking about "me versus the Service." To fix it, I began imagine myself as the Service - I realized I needed to make it more than a job, and stop being so transactional about the whole thing. Once I committed, to say that I was going to have to live with the results of my leadership efforts in the Coast Guard, my passion went up, and my results went up, and it continued to spiral upward. It is a big step - but if you can convince yourself that doing your best for the Service will actually pay the biggest personal dividends of effectivenss and satisfaction - you won't regret it.
As you progress in your career, ask your detailer or career counselor what jobs would assist in showing progress in leadership. As you are factoring in future assignment options, what jobs stretch you, give you new skills, exposure to new ideas and opportunities, fill in a gap in your development? If you have done a deputy (manager) job and succeeded, your next job should be a principal (leader) job. If you have done a series of CO or leader jobs, you may not want to take the deputy job, but chances are, it is the best opportunity for you to develop and grow.
My next entry will be on Education. I really appreciate all the positive feedback on the blog. Keep spreading the word and let's keep the dialogue up. For those of you doing the math at home, Education is the last of the Big 4. I would love to hear from you and guide this blog to provide you with the answers you need, as we wrap up the Big 4 and start expanding out from there. Thanks again, shipmates!! ~jea
Sunday, November 2, 2008
The Big Four - Professionalism
Welcome back, shipmates...sorry this one took so long to get posted - I was hamstrung by some technological challenges and a bit of travel. The second of the Big Four in the PERSMAN is professionalism. Professionalism is a tough one - I don't know if there is a way to max out on professionalism, but there are certainly countless ways to "inject weakness" into your record in this regard. Many boards lately are looking at professionalism, or more often its antithesis, unprofessionalism, as a "trapdoor" where selection and appointment are concerned. The most common for junior officers involve sex, alcohol, weight, and a general phrase coined in Chapter 12 of the PERSMAN, which is "inability to adapt to military life." Can you recover from a brush with unprofessionalism? Clearly the answer is "yes," but it takes an enormous amount of focus, humility, effort and talent. And it often is not going to happen on your first board after the incident. Maybe not the second either. By far, the better strategy is to not have that brush with unprofessionalism in the first place.
So I'd like to pass on a few recommendations here:
1) maximize your professionalism, by working hard to "adapt to military life,"
2) don't fall into one of the professionalism trap doors,
3) perform each day as if your career depended on it.
Virtually, every transgression in the professionalism bin is avoidable. We lose more good, talented officers to professionalism gaffes than anything. It is an incredible waste. So what can be done about it? First off, look out for each other and keep each other from stepping onto the trap door in the first place. One of the Gold-Badge Master Chiefs, Master Chief Isherwood, has a quote at the bottom of his emails that goes something like, "a sailor can only fail alone if left alone." Trust me when I say, you aren't being nosy or intrusive when you tell your shipmate that he or she has been drinking too much, or is not getting enough exercise, or appears to be spending more time and emotional energy with one of the crew than appears proper. Carried to the extreme, you would be better to step in and take control early, than let the scenario play itself out to an unfortunate extreme later. This can be a tough problem to solve, particularly for officers who commissioned up through the hawsepipe, or from a permanent enlisted grade. That O-1E may feel more at home and more comfortable in the crew's lounge than in the wardroom. But if she was going to stay in her comfort zone, she should not have gone to Officer Candidate School. The Coast Guard Regulations may be old, and they may seem old-fashioned to some of the younger generation, but they are time tested over hundreds of years - and establish the separation between officer and enlisted deliberately. It is important to state, before anyone argues that I'm trying to be elitist, that officers are not better than enlisted, or the other way around. We each are important to the smooth running of the Service. However, we ARE different, and that difference is important and must be respected. When officers disregard that separation, bad things happen. Professionals at every level (enlisted, junior officer, and senior officer) need to be aware of their surroundings, and address even appearances of unprofessional behavior objectively, non-judgmentally and immediately. Most times, the person you pull aside will thank you for taking action.
I'd like to blog a little about weight and how it factors into your professionalism. I heard a claim a few years ago that "weight will be the new alcohol" in terms of getting officers in trouble. The problem with weight is that it naturally creates a subliminal bias against you, but the good news is that it is something that is completely within your ability to control. If you are battling a weight problem, enlist the help and support of your shipmates, and take control. Every year, a handful of officers fail probation for weight, and we commence the special board process. In every case, the officer had the ability to rebound - but you have got to take it seriously. The most successful recoveries are those where the officer has a strong web of support. So my best advice here is to treat yourself better and start dropping the pounds. And if your shipmate or office mate is the one in the fight, lend a helping hand and hit the trail together.
So I'd like to pass on a few recommendations here:
1) maximize your professionalism, by working hard to "adapt to military life,"
2) don't fall into one of the professionalism trap doors,
3) perform each day as if your career depended on it.
Virtually, every transgression in the professionalism bin is avoidable. We lose more good, talented officers to professionalism gaffes than anything. It is an incredible waste. So what can be done about it? First off, look out for each other and keep each other from stepping onto the trap door in the first place. One of the Gold-Badge Master Chiefs, Master Chief Isherwood, has a quote at the bottom of his emails that goes something like, "a sailor can only fail alone if left alone." Trust me when I say, you aren't being nosy or intrusive when you tell your shipmate that he or she has been drinking too much, or is not getting enough exercise, or appears to be spending more time and emotional energy with one of the crew than appears proper. Carried to the extreme, you would be better to step in and take control early, than let the scenario play itself out to an unfortunate extreme later. This can be a tough problem to solve, particularly for officers who commissioned up through the hawsepipe, or from a permanent enlisted grade. That O-1E may feel more at home and more comfortable in the crew's lounge than in the wardroom. But if she was going to stay in her comfort zone, she should not have gone to Officer Candidate School. The Coast Guard Regulations may be old, and they may seem old-fashioned to some of the younger generation, but they are time tested over hundreds of years - and establish the separation between officer and enlisted deliberately. It is important to state, before anyone argues that I'm trying to be elitist, that officers are not better than enlisted, or the other way around. We each are important to the smooth running of the Service. However, we ARE different, and that difference is important and must be respected. When officers disregard that separation, bad things happen. Professionals at every level (enlisted, junior officer, and senior officer) need to be aware of their surroundings, and address even appearances of unprofessional behavior objectively, non-judgmentally and immediately. Most times, the person you pull aside will thank you for taking action.
I'd like to blog a little about weight and how it factors into your professionalism. I heard a claim a few years ago that "weight will be the new alcohol" in terms of getting officers in trouble. The problem with weight is that it naturally creates a subliminal bias against you, but the good news is that it is something that is completely within your ability to control. If you are battling a weight problem, enlist the help and support of your shipmates, and take control. Every year, a handful of officers fail probation for weight, and we commence the special board process. In every case, the officer had the ability to rebound - but you have got to take it seriously. The most successful recoveries are those where the officer has a strong web of support. So my best advice here is to treat yourself better and start dropping the pounds. And if your shipmate or office mate is the one in the fight, lend a helping hand and hit the trail together.
Okay, it is time to take on alcohol. The Coast Guard's relationship with alcohol is long-standing and complex. I think for many years, we reveled in the image of the hard drivin', hard drinkin' sailor. "Work hard, play hard" was a phrase I frequently heard in the black hull community when I was a JO. I am going to tell you - our relationship with alcohol these days is not as complex anymore - if you get in trouble, or embarass the Nation, Service, your command or yourself, and alcohol is involved, it is a virtual certainty that you will get an alcohol incident out of it. Once it is in your record, it is going to be a weight you have to pull along with you. And it will inevitably slow you down. Again, the best strategy is to be smart about it. If you are going out in a group, identify a "designated thinker," someone who will be going along on the outing, but whose judgment will not be clouded by alcohol. The best strategy is to not get the alcohol incident in the first place. You need to have your antenna up and at full power if you are going to "have fun" and alcohol is involved. A classic tripping hazard is the mid-patrol break, where everyone in the crew decides to cut loose. If you don't conduct a risk assessment before this evolution, shame on you. As a strong leader, your plan should be to have fun, and facilitate fun for the crew, but to get everyone back home safely, securely, professionally and in one piece. If that means everyone else is having more fun, such is the burden of command.
Another aspect of professionalism requiring comment is 8-H, or interpersonal relationships. I guarantee that every ensign, PCO, PXO, department head, Chief and LAMS graduate knows that engaging in inappropriate or prohibited relationships are bad. If that is true, how can it happen? How can we have highly regarded senior officers falling into these pitfalls? My thought are: it happens slowly, gradually, and in increments. These hardly ever are the one-time incidents that you might think abound. For one reason or another, often because we're hard-wired toward seeking others out, we take a gradual step over the line, and then another, and then another...until one day, we're way over the line. Defense #1: be ever vigilant for this relationship-creep, and take steps to ensure your relationships always stay above board and beyond reproach. Defense #2: beware of the judgment-deadening effects of alcohol where relationships are concerned. Defense #3: have someone looking out for you, and look out for others. It goes back to the shipmate/Guardian thing. I am certain that every one of the most recent high profile 8-H cases could have ended better than they did, if the perpetrators had adhered to the above 3 defenses. As Admiral Brown has said over and over again: "Do the right thing." If that means forcing a peer or friend to see a relationship for the danger it represents - you have to do the right thing.
Another aspect of professionalism requiring comment is 8-H, or interpersonal relationships. I guarantee that every ensign, PCO, PXO, department head, Chief and LAMS graduate knows that engaging in inappropriate or prohibited relationships are bad. If that is true, how can it happen? How can we have highly regarded senior officers falling into these pitfalls? My thought are: it happens slowly, gradually, and in increments. These hardly ever are the one-time incidents that you might think abound. For one reason or another, often because we're hard-wired toward seeking others out, we take a gradual step over the line, and then another, and then another...until one day, we're way over the line. Defense #1: be ever vigilant for this relationship-creep, and take steps to ensure your relationships always stay above board and beyond reproach. Defense #2: beware of the judgment-deadening effects of alcohol where relationships are concerned. Defense #3: have someone looking out for you, and look out for others. It goes back to the shipmate/Guardian thing. I am certain that every one of the most recent high profile 8-H cases could have ended better than they did, if the perpetrators had adhered to the above 3 defenses. As Admiral Brown has said over and over again: "Do the right thing." If that means forcing a peer or friend to see a relationship for the danger it represents - you have to do the right thing.
One final word here - when I say look out for your shipmates, I think it is important to mention the importance of a sense of "guardianship". If you are in a wardroom with folks from different accession sources and backgrounds, those with a strong knowledge base, either through education or prior experience, we're pretty much counting on you to step forward and help those less fortunate. Commit yourself to dedicating your skills to improving the abilities of the entire command, division or staff. If your shipmate is not good at the six-minute rule, step up and help out. If you have spreadsheet skills and your shipmate is struggling with the morale account, leverage your skills to help everyone (yourself included) by tossing a life ring to your compadre. Rating chains consistently reward those who think "bigger than themselves" and expend effort to help those less fortunate or who are further back on the learning curve. Be a Guardian...and place your sense of self behind your sense of Service. By putting others ahead of yourself, you will ultimately achieve the kind of recognition and advancement you deserve. Conversely, if you consistently put yourself ahead of others or try to make others look bad so that you can look good, you also will eventually get the kind of recognition you deserve.
So, keep charging and take care of your people. I'll get cracking on Leadership next. I'll work to get that on by midweek, to get back on DR. Keep sending the questions and keep mentoring your folks. ~jea
Saturday, October 25, 2008
The Big Four - Performance
To be entirely precise, the PERSMAN calls this first one of the Big 4 "performance evaluations," however, the Commandant calls it just performance in his Guidance to Boards and Panels, so I'll stick with that. Do not fall into the trap of thinking this is just how high your marks are. Performance, in the way that boards look at it, is the sum total of your ability to perform your duties, across all the OERs you have received.
In my last entry, I introduced the concept of record weakness. From what I have observed, getting continuously promoted along the way in the Coast Guard is really about managing weakness in your record. When I say weakness, what do I mean? Let's look at it this way. Our promotion system is all about making Flag Officers. Since our service does not allow us to hire executives from outside the "company" like say Xerox, IBM or GE, we have to grow all of our own uniformed executives (SES civilians are excluded from this discussion) from lower ranks. If you accept that, then our promotion system is all about taking a given officer from junior ranks and selecting the ones best suited for continuing on - all the way up to O-7. Okay then, what are we looking for in our senior executives? They have to be absolutely committed to the Service, willing to pretty much move wherever and whenever the Boss needs them next, they have to be experts in their chosen fields of endeavor (often in several), they have to be seasoned leaders and able to handle people, resources, information, technology and negotiate in the national and international arena. Almost all have distinguished themselves in large O-6 commands, all have advanced degrees, have experience in multiple geographic and functional areas of the Coast Guard, and did I mention they are absolutely committed to the Service?
So as you look at your career history, record of performance, and documented potential, ask yourself where you see weaknesses. Have you been unwilling to move out of Florida, New England or Alaska? Have you made a conscious decision to end your operational career (or allowed it to happen to you), minimizing your chances for O-6 command? Have you been overly operational, or overly assigned to staff? Have you avoided straying outside your comfort zone, or resisted the need to pursue your education? These are all potential sources of weakness. Of course, it goes without saying that a violation of the UCMJ, civil court conviction, DUI, alcohol incident, violation of the drug policy, maximum allowable weight policy, or 8H policy inject often unrecoverable levels of weakness in an officers record. If you stray into one of these "trap doors," you should realize that you have committed an act of severe career jeopardy. We'll discuss this more when I blog about professionalism.
So when your detailer is calling to offer you a job that is nowhere on your e-resume, she is probably trying to shore up a weak area in your record, to give you needed exposure or experience in a performance dimension to make you more competitive for promotion and keep you on track (or put you back on track) for promotion to O-7. That could be a resources job, it could be a west coast job, it could be an OPS Boss job. Ask your detailer how this assignment helps you professionally. Often, this is the biggest reason for those "out of the blue" job offers - and you should be aware of what you are turning down when you say no. Your detailer (and the board) has no access to what your family/spouse wants to do, where you own property, or where your elderly parents live. Those factors do not play much into what the Coast Guard needs...but they do play into what makes you happy. So it isn't that they aren't important - it is just that they don't usually factor into an assignment decision. So it becomes up to you to know what the best next step is for you, and ask for jobs that satisfy both needs (your personal desires and the needs of the Service). But realize that if you eschew the advice of your detailer, because your personal desires are more important, you may be adding weakness to your overall record. Maybe that weakness won't hurt you at your O-3 board, maybe you can sustain through O-4 board, but maybe it catches up with you before the O-5 board. I get calls all the time from officers non-selected at O-5 or O-6 boards, whose career decisions as an O-3 and O-4 presented weakness that they were unable to overcome. The tough part is, before the board, it is hard to tell how much weakness you can carry, or what pushes you past the tipping point and into the non-select pile. Where possible, take the harder job, the one that maximizes the value you offer to the Coast Guard.
A brief anecdote from my own career: about half-way through my tour as a detailer, I knew I needed to head back to operations as an O-4. I had already been a DWO in a 180' buoytender, and XO and CO in a 140' icebreaking harbor tug. It was very tempting to take the easy road and screen for command of a 225' buoytender. The harder road, but one better for my career was to go as XO of a WMEC. The balance between three years in WLB command and two years as WMEC XO was one of fun versus value. In the end, I asked to remove my name from the command afloat screening panel and requested orders to 210's and 270's as XO. In the end, I increased the measure of value I offer the Coast Guard, learned a whole host of new skills, and had fun anyway (though it is no lie to say that it was a lot of work)!
Okay, the final point I'll make on performance is this. In general, for two officers performing equally, the Board will give higher credit to the officer doing the harder job. Let's look at a couple of examples: two LTjgs, one qualified as DWO and boarding officer in a 270', the other qualified as EOIT in a 270' and completed her DWO and boarding officer quals as well. Often the detailer, board and/or screening panel will credit the EOIT more for the same marks because the EOIT's job was harder. She represents a higher individual unit of value to the Coast Guard. Let's look at another case: two O-4 pilots, one only rotary wing qualified, duty stander and in the OPS track, and the other qualified both fixed and rotary wing, in the aviation engineer track and serving as assistant department head...both the same marks. You guessed it! Here's a harder one: two O-5 WMEC COs: both have east and west coast experience, both have advanced degrees, but one has never served in a Headquarters staff tour, the other served in Coast Guard Headquarters in an O-4 staff assignment. With equal records, my money is on the CO who has been to HQ. So if you are an O-3 select coming off your 87' CO ride, you can bet your next conversation with the afloat detailer is going be about OPS on a WMEC/WHEC, as opposed to back to command of a 110'. If your recent operational job was as Supervisor of an MSD in the Virgin Islands, you can bet the prevention detailer wants to offer you that ACID job at a large Sector, even if the Gulf Coast isn't on your e-resume. If you are a senior O-3 or O-4 pilot with Miami and Savannah under your belt, and you haven't been to the proving grounds of Kodiak, AK...yep, that's probably what the aviation detailer is calling you about. And if you haven't been to HQ before O-5, I would include some choice HQ staff jobs on your initial e-resume.
You can ask for the right jobs, coming out of the gate at e-resume deadline, or you can play the high-stakes detailer game, and ask for all stuff you want, but which adds weakness to your record. If you are smart, you'll compete fairly and strongly on a realistic eresume. If you are less lucky, you'll be revising your e-resume late, when many of the jobs that might have been good for you are gone. If you are less lucky still, you might get what you ask for over your detailer's good advice, and weaken your record in the process. But this is really a situation where it's better to be good than lucky. Because, eventually, everybody's luck runs out.
Next up - Professionalism. ~ jea
In my last entry, I introduced the concept of record weakness. From what I have observed, getting continuously promoted along the way in the Coast Guard is really about managing weakness in your record. When I say weakness, what do I mean? Let's look at it this way. Our promotion system is all about making Flag Officers. Since our service does not allow us to hire executives from outside the "company" like say Xerox, IBM or GE, we have to grow all of our own uniformed executives (SES civilians are excluded from this discussion) from lower ranks. If you accept that, then our promotion system is all about taking a given officer from junior ranks and selecting the ones best suited for continuing on - all the way up to O-7. Okay then, what are we looking for in our senior executives? They have to be absolutely committed to the Service, willing to pretty much move wherever and whenever the Boss needs them next, they have to be experts in their chosen fields of endeavor (often in several), they have to be seasoned leaders and able to handle people, resources, information, technology and negotiate in the national and international arena. Almost all have distinguished themselves in large O-6 commands, all have advanced degrees, have experience in multiple geographic and functional areas of the Coast Guard, and did I mention they are absolutely committed to the Service?
So as you look at your career history, record of performance, and documented potential, ask yourself where you see weaknesses. Have you been unwilling to move out of Florida, New England or Alaska? Have you made a conscious decision to end your operational career (or allowed it to happen to you), minimizing your chances for O-6 command? Have you been overly operational, or overly assigned to staff? Have you avoided straying outside your comfort zone, or resisted the need to pursue your education? These are all potential sources of weakness. Of course, it goes without saying that a violation of the UCMJ, civil court conviction, DUI, alcohol incident, violation of the drug policy, maximum allowable weight policy, or 8H policy inject often unrecoverable levels of weakness in an officers record. If you stray into one of these "trap doors," you should realize that you have committed an act of severe career jeopardy. We'll discuss this more when I blog about professionalism.
So when your detailer is calling to offer you a job that is nowhere on your e-resume, she is probably trying to shore up a weak area in your record, to give you needed exposure or experience in a performance dimension to make you more competitive for promotion and keep you on track (or put you back on track) for promotion to O-7. That could be a resources job, it could be a west coast job, it could be an OPS Boss job. Ask your detailer how this assignment helps you professionally. Often, this is the biggest reason for those "out of the blue" job offers - and you should be aware of what you are turning down when you say no. Your detailer (and the board) has no access to what your family/spouse wants to do, where you own property, or where your elderly parents live. Those factors do not play much into what the Coast Guard needs...but they do play into what makes you happy. So it isn't that they aren't important - it is just that they don't usually factor into an assignment decision. So it becomes up to you to know what the best next step is for you, and ask for jobs that satisfy both needs (your personal desires and the needs of the Service). But realize that if you eschew the advice of your detailer, because your personal desires are more important, you may be adding weakness to your overall record. Maybe that weakness won't hurt you at your O-3 board, maybe you can sustain through O-4 board, but maybe it catches up with you before the O-5 board. I get calls all the time from officers non-selected at O-5 or O-6 boards, whose career decisions as an O-3 and O-4 presented weakness that they were unable to overcome. The tough part is, before the board, it is hard to tell how much weakness you can carry, or what pushes you past the tipping point and into the non-select pile. Where possible, take the harder job, the one that maximizes the value you offer to the Coast Guard.
A brief anecdote from my own career: about half-way through my tour as a detailer, I knew I needed to head back to operations as an O-4. I had already been a DWO in a 180' buoytender, and XO and CO in a 140' icebreaking harbor tug. It was very tempting to take the easy road and screen for command of a 225' buoytender. The harder road, but one better for my career was to go as XO of a WMEC. The balance between three years in WLB command and two years as WMEC XO was one of fun versus value. In the end, I asked to remove my name from the command afloat screening panel and requested orders to 210's and 270's as XO. In the end, I increased the measure of value I offer the Coast Guard, learned a whole host of new skills, and had fun anyway (though it is no lie to say that it was a lot of work)!
Okay, the final point I'll make on performance is this. In general, for two officers performing equally, the Board will give higher credit to the officer doing the harder job. Let's look at a couple of examples: two LTjgs, one qualified as DWO and boarding officer in a 270', the other qualified as EOIT in a 270' and completed her DWO and boarding officer quals as well. Often the detailer, board and/or screening panel will credit the EOIT more for the same marks because the EOIT's job was harder. She represents a higher individual unit of value to the Coast Guard. Let's look at another case: two O-4 pilots, one only rotary wing qualified, duty stander and in the OPS track, and the other qualified both fixed and rotary wing, in the aviation engineer track and serving as assistant department head...both the same marks. You guessed it! Here's a harder one: two O-5 WMEC COs: both have east and west coast experience, both have advanced degrees, but one has never served in a Headquarters staff tour, the other served in Coast Guard Headquarters in an O-4 staff assignment. With equal records, my money is on the CO who has been to HQ. So if you are an O-3 select coming off your 87' CO ride, you can bet your next conversation with the afloat detailer is going be about OPS on a WMEC/WHEC, as opposed to back to command of a 110'. If your recent operational job was as Supervisor of an MSD in the Virgin Islands, you can bet the prevention detailer wants to offer you that ACID job at a large Sector, even if the Gulf Coast isn't on your e-resume. If you are a senior O-3 or O-4 pilot with Miami and Savannah under your belt, and you haven't been to the proving grounds of Kodiak, AK...yep, that's probably what the aviation detailer is calling you about. And if you haven't been to HQ before O-5, I would include some choice HQ staff jobs on your initial e-resume.
You can ask for the right jobs, coming out of the gate at e-resume deadline, or you can play the high-stakes detailer game, and ask for all stuff you want, but which adds weakness to your record. If you are smart, you'll compete fairly and strongly on a realistic eresume. If you are less lucky, you'll be revising your e-resume late, when many of the jobs that might have been good for you are gone. If you are less lucky still, you might get what you ask for over your detailer's good advice, and weaken your record in the process. But this is really a situation where it's better to be good than lucky. Because, eventually, everybody's luck runs out.
Next up - Professionalism. ~ jea
Saturday, October 18, 2008
The Big Four - Intro
Okay- this is going to be a little 101...but I realize that I didn't really read the PERSMAN until I had to, so I think this could be valuable for others. Chapter 14 of the Personnel Manual covers in very thorough detail how we conduct boards. The first, and most valuable, nugget from it is this:
Selection for promotion "is not a reward for satisfactory service. It confirms an officer's demonstrated potential to serve the Coast Guard in a higher grade. "
What does that mean? It means getting promoted and continuing to promote is all about you...but it's about you as an individual unit of value to the Coast Guard. I know that sounds impersonal - and it doesn't mean that the Coast Guard doesn't appreciate all members of Team Coast Guard and whatever it is they do for the service. It means that, in general, jobs get harder, and we need people who have endured the challenges at their current paygrade, have overcome those challenges, and have started to orient themselves on other challenges at the next higher paygrade.
So how does a board decide if you have "demonstrated potential" to serve at the next paygrade? It reviews your record against a standard and a developed set of criteria. For this, your Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs) are of crucial importance. Over the next few weeks, I'll be blogging about the criteria used to evaluate records. Each board develops its own unique spin on what we call "the basic criteria", which has 4 main attributes: performance, professionalism, leadership, and education. Now it depends on what board you are up for as to how those criteria are applied (ie- performance for an officer before an O6 board is distinct from one before an O-3 board...same for education, etc), but in general, the board looks at what the Coast Guard expects from officers in the grade to which they are selecting, and then it compares the officers in the pool either against a standard (fully qualified boards), or against each other (best qualified boards), and works out how many to select based on the Opportunity of Selection, if the board is best qualified. Those officers who carry excess weaknesses in the "big 4" often end up in the non-select pile.
Next up - performance. ~jea
Selection for promotion "is not a reward for satisfactory service. It confirms an officer's demonstrated potential to serve the Coast Guard in a higher grade. "
What does that mean? It means getting promoted and continuing to promote is all about you...but it's about you as an individual unit of value to the Coast Guard. I know that sounds impersonal - and it doesn't mean that the Coast Guard doesn't appreciate all members of Team Coast Guard and whatever it is they do for the service. It means that, in general, jobs get harder, and we need people who have endured the challenges at their current paygrade, have overcome those challenges, and have started to orient themselves on other challenges at the next higher paygrade.
So how does a board decide if you have "demonstrated potential" to serve at the next paygrade? It reviews your record against a standard and a developed set of criteria. For this, your Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs) are of crucial importance. Over the next few weeks, I'll be blogging about the criteria used to evaluate records. Each board develops its own unique spin on what we call "the basic criteria", which has 4 main attributes: performance, professionalism, leadership, and education. Now it depends on what board you are up for as to how those criteria are applied (ie- performance for an officer before an O6 board is distinct from one before an O-3 board...same for education, etc), but in general, the board looks at what the Coast Guard expects from officers in the grade to which they are selecting, and then it compares the officers in the pool either against a standard (fully qualified boards), or against each other (best qualified boards), and works out how many to select based on the Opportunity of Selection, if the board is best qualified. Those officers who carry excess weaknesses in the "big 4" often end up in the non-select pile.
Next up - performance. ~jea
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Raison d'etre
Shipmates, when I prepared to leave Coast Guard Personnel Command (opm-2) last time I was assigned there, Assignments Branch covered the career management and advice missions that are now performed by (opm-4). I recall thinking that I frequently answered the same questions over and over again, and even the road shows didn't necessarily achieve a critical mass in communicating the ins-and-outs of officer assignment and career management. I thought, "what I need is a combination web bulletin board and chat room". Of course, that was before blogs were big and the Coast Guard was a little slow coming to the social networking table. I'm convinced that there is still a market for this sort of thing, and that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of officers and prospective officers looking for advice or the answer to their questions, often at critical junctures in their careers. I didn't plan to come back to Ballston, to opm. It truly was needs of the service, and while there are other things I may have preferred to do, I do have a passionate desire to help others navigate the system. So, while I didn't have the time and energy to start this up before I left last time, and am just now getting done with more urgent tasking and requirements in opm-1 this time around, I am now making the inaugural entry in what I hope will be a useful forum to share professional thoughts about officer personnel management, career paths, critical decision points and planning points. I have some awareness about most aspects of officer career management, to include accession, assignment and separation as well as advanced education, selection (promotion) boards, special (where special means "not good") boards and separations.
So it is the confluence of need, opportunity and a more fecund social networking culture in the Coast Guard that has brought me here. I'll try to share some anecdotes of scenarios and questions, what people are doing well and not so well. I'll change the names to protect the innocent, and unless you introduce a matter of your record, I will not discuss matters of record of any officers in this blog. I would ask you for your leadership and professionalism. If you don't like the Coast Guard or the Coast Guard's officer management system, please keep your mind open if possible, and try to refrain from flaming me out of mere boredom or malevolence. It is worth remembering that the system is not personal - and nor should you be. I have found by trial and error (mostly error) that emotion and the personnel system do not mix well, and thus I try to remain emotionless where the system is concerned.
Thanks and I look forward to serving you in this new way. ~jea
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)