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

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Way to go, CDR Andrews! Thanks for your initiative in getting some straight talk out to our officers about the promotion process. Based on my six years as a detailer and my own career experience, your guidance is right on the mark!

CDR Jim Andrews said...

Admiral,
Thanks for the words of encouragement, sir. It is no exaggeration that most of what I learned came from watching others like yourself, Matt Sibley, Charlene Downey, Mike Day and John Dailey. I have been really blessed to learn these things - and want to share it as widely as I can.

I look forward to catching up with you again soon. Thanks as always for your leadership, sir. ~jea

Jon said...

Sir,
Your subject is performance, but it seemed like the post primarily discussed the impact on a career that a particular job will have versus the level of performance within those jobs. The takeaway for me goes like this: The assignment process allows you to have input into shaping your career path, and if you play your cards right you can create a job record that will demonstrate sustained strong performance and value added to the service. My question is what distinguishes good performance from great performance at mid-level paygrades? The opportunity of selection (OOS) for O-6 is many multiples of that for O-7, and O-6 performance has a very strong impact on that. However, I think that for many readers it is more important for us to examine those aspects of performance rather than assignments in the middle grades of O-3 thru O-5 that will get a member to the O-6 level (or stall them at the O-4/O-5 level). Next, I would like to share with you a document I found on the Army's Center for Company Level Leaders web site (http://companycommand.army.mil/aboutccl/). The PDF link on the site has more information about the below topic:

Seven Habits of Highly Ineffective Commanders: Things NOT to do as a commander
Author: Jeb Downing, E/2-3 CAV
1. Always worrying what the commander next door is doing.
2. Constantly being confrontational with the next higher level staff.
3. Having no vision of how you want your unit to look when you leave.
4. Refusing to listen to good ideas.
5. Constantly being confrontational with the Squadron/Batallion Command Sergeant Major.
6. Being aloof around your soldiers.
7. Dismissing the Family Support Group.

My last question is how does our OER system capture the above items as career ruiners at the middle grades versus the typical version of the Coast Guard "boneheaded" 7 habits shown below?...it seems like very few of the 40% of O-5's that are non-select for O-6 will meet these criteria:

Seven Boneheaded Moves By Junior Officers
Author: Me
1. Violate the 8H policy.
2. Violate the alcohol policy.
3. Run ship aground.
4. Mishandle public affairs cases.
5. Violate the drug policy.
6. Violate the weight policy
7. Failure to attain basic qualification

I am looking forward to your insight on this question.

Very Respectfully,
JRH

CDR Jim Andrews said...

jonathan,
thanks for the post, shipmate. Great questions and I can tell you have done your homework. To answer your first question/comment, yes the post discussed career management in performance's clothing. Your comment about "career shaping" is exactly what I was trying to get at - better worded than I could have. So what distinguishes good performance from great performance? It is easier to describe "great performance" by saying you took care of your troops, accomplished all your missions with distinction, left your command better than you found it, and in general "you moved the ball down the field." Where I think a lot of JOs run into trouble is worrying about their OERs. A wise boss of mine once said, "spend your time worrying about your job, not about your marks. Do your best in your job and the marks will take care of themselves." If you stay focused on getting the mission done, strike the right balance between strategic and tactical accomplishments, and above all, take care of your people...that is great performance.
Your list of "bad career moves" is pretty instructive. The underlying behavior in all of those items is someone who is self-motivated, and spends a lot of time trying to beat his or her teammates, and not enough time figuring out how to beat the enemy.

To answer your other question about how do OER's track and account for career blunders. Well, with good leadership, they don't. A good leader will spend time with his or her subordinates conducting training to make them more effective. If the subordinate has an abrasive personality that hinders her performance, that needs to be discussed - so that she can learn from it and be guided into becoming more effective. Does it always happen? Sadly, no. Could it always happen? Absolutely. Peer feedback can go a long way towards improving that performance, too. If caught and managed early and properly, it may never need to appear in an OER at all. But let me leave you with a life lesson that I have observed to be very true in the Coast Guard. Your reputation will precede you and often represent you - our Service is so small that I'm willing to bet that the entire officer corps is no more than 3 degrees (a la Kevin Bacon) separated from each other. That sort of thing may not show up in your OER, and it will never be introduced into a promotion board, but your detailer may hear about it and it will almost certainly affect your chances for job offers at the O-6 level. So treat your reputation like gold, by treating your peers, seniors and subordinates like gold.

Now regarding your pretty comprehensive list of officer pitfalls, I'll say that everyone of those will ruin your day, but they may not all necessarily ruin your career. Running your ship aground may not necessarily result in your relief for cause. Not following your own nav standards, standing orders or TTPs, negligently hazarding your cutter, or mismanaging your assets probably will...particularly if that negligence culminates in a grounding. If you do find yourself on the wrong side of the line, get back on the right side quicklyly and honestly. We need to be willing to admit to making small errors, and allowing ourselves to fix them and improve. If you feel like you have to hide every mistake, you're putting yourself on a trackline straight into shoal water. Accept that others may question your judgment - never allow them to question your integrity.
Thanks again for reading - let me know if you have more questions!!
~jea

Anonymous said...

CDR,
Another great post. One thing I have concern with is producing an effective narrative for my e-resume. I've read guidance that advise against making it too long, too short and/or a recital of your career. Where can I go for examples of a well-written e-resume narrative?
v/r
LH

CDR Jim Andrews said...

LH, that is a good question. A lot of e-resume strategy is word-of-mouth, or picked up at OPM roadshows. Let me give you some good gouge on e-resumes...

The "peoplesoft" eresume feature is more-or-less an off-the-shelf applet that came with the system when the Coast Guard bought it, and made it into Direct-Access. It isn't perfectly suited to our needs, but it is what we have, so understanding how to work an effective eresume is a learned art. Your eresume will likely depend on the program you are applying for. If it is an eresume for CWO appointment, PG school or a specialized application program (CG Astronaut Candidate, etc), the announcement instructions should tell you exactly what to include. Be scrupulous about following those directions to the letter. If you don't, you may send the message that you don't follow instructions very well - probably not the message you are hoping to send!

If you are applying for jobs as a part of the officer assignment process, the rules are a little less structured. But in general, follow these rules for eresumes:
1) only put a job on your eresume if you really would like to do the job. You may list "Training Center Basketball Distribution Officer" as your 46th choice - in order to suggest that it is not your preferred job, but you would do it. On the other hand, your detailer may have no one but you asking for the job. If that happens, your detailer COULD consider your adding the job to your list as a willingness to do that job, meaning it now became your 46th Number 1 pick! The command is happy because they got someone who is asking for the job, your detailer is happy because that is one more of the 600 jobs she has to fill done, and you? My advice is get a read from opm-2 or opm-4 during a unit visit, roadshow or career counseling call on the strength of your record, relative to the jobs you are going to ask for. If you get a good feeling that you are competitive for the jobs you like, then ask for a limited number the first time out.

2) Only ask for 10 or so jobs, BUT... The detailer can only see the first 10 jobs on your eresume when she calls you up in Direct-Access. She can eventually get to number 46, by clicking "next page" four times, but time is a premium. About 10 jobs is enough to convey what you are looking at. Start with a "dream job" like military aide to the President or White House Situation room if you are trying to compete with the cream of the crop. Next, work your way back from that to some other jobs you are interested in, and then go with jobs that satisfy all the criteria for a job you want to do. Hard to explain in a blog... but don't list six individual jobs at Sector San Francisco, just list the one you most want, and in your comments say, "i would take any job at Sector SF, or any job in the Alameda area".
3) Do not, DO NOT, paste your entire professional resume into the comments, even though D-A says to do this. You can count on the fact that your Detailer will have read your entire record before looking at your eresume. There is no reason to list any OER bullets or performance qualifications in your comment, unless they do not appear in your record already. A big one here is "3/4 complete on my MBA off-duty". If you haven't included that on a CG-4082 (and why haven't you?), you could list it in your comments, particularly if you are shopping for a finance or resources job.
4) Do list assignment preferences that may not be clear from a read of your record. If you prefer to stay in the Detroit area for another tour, because you can't sell your house, or because of your spouse's job, say that in your eresume comments. Otherwise, your detailer is going to be trying to maximize the strength of your record...and that may mean geographic diversity.
5) Always list the following:
- enrollment in special needs (do not list what the need is...just that you are enrolled);
- spouse in service, with your spouse's emplid if CG, and the name and phone number of your spouse's detailer if another service.

Your eresume comments are your opportunity for an "elevator conversation" with your detailer. Think of it as a 45-second explanation or justification of what your career aspirations are, what personal factors play into your next assignment, and any other notes you think your detailer needs. Be concise, to the point, and professional. DO NOT WHINE!! At 2130, when your detailer is reading your comments, your statement that you deserve a certain assignment because you have moved 8 times in the past 16 years will sound incredibly shrill. Truth is, everyone has it rough and we all move. Don't waste your valuable space with such comments.

Final note - I have found it effective to convey what I'm looking for in my career...future PG programs I'll apply to, any language competency that may not be evident in my record, a desire to gain a new specialty, or what my desired O-6 operational command will be. With your desires and long term aspiration in mind, your detailer can effectively consider your personal desires against the needs of the Service, and stands a good shot of making a match first time out. Let me know if you have any more questions on this great topic. ~jea

Anonymous said...

Thanks CDR! I've printed out your response and will use it as a guide for drafting my narrative.

LCDR Eagan said...

CDR,
Great information...wish I had it about 10 years ago. I would like to see something like this aimed at Reserve officers, since command positions are non existent below O5 and rare at and above that grade; plus geographics are usually less of a consideration (but I'm guessing here). What does the service look for differently in a Reserve O7?

R. Wester said...

CDR Andrews: Very informative blog - I will forward it to my JOs. Congrats on taking command of DAUNTLESS. After being CO of JUNIPER for more than 3 yrs now, I have some general observations about performance that may be of interest to the JOs reading this blog, more to follow. But first I wanted to comment on the posting that mentioned how a CO WLB tour is easier than an XO tour on a WMEC - some of our young JOs may get the wrong idea reading that. Having been an XO twice, I do agree that an XO tour is generally always going to be very much a challenge - I'd imagine even more so on a WMEC. While any CO tour is likely to be "easier" as far as admin, hours, and watchstanding burdens, the responsibility is much greater, esp in a post-9/11 DHS world. Each position is challenging in its own way. As we all know, as XO you will face challenges on a daily basis, regarding both major and minor issues. As I expected as CO, I have found major challenges dealing with big-picture issues. Let me explain:

Since I took command 3 yrs ago, the crew has established and maintained boarding teams that have completed 87 boardings, issued 47 violations, terminated 4 voyages, 1 personal use case, etc... I have been informed that we do more boardings than some WMECs. We also served as CTU for a week, coordinating the efforts of aircraft and TUs in the enforcement of LMR regs in D1. We also conducted JUNIPER's first-ever 37 day D7 AMIO patrol in support of the 123 Mitigation Project, during which we interdicted a stolen go-fast and had 138 migrants/smugglers cross our decks. In addition to these "white-hull" missions, we also need to conduct our MEP, NDBC, Icebreaking, SAR standby, and AtoN missions, which is an enormous challenge since we have the 2nd most buoys among all WLBs. This increased optempo has resulted in vastly increased u/w hrs. Juggling optempo with maintenance, ensuring we obtain the training and conduct proper risk assessments to safely juggle our missions amidst consistently bad wx, all while also maintaining a proper Work/Life balance for the crew has been extremely challenging for me as CO - but a challenge I have very much enjoyed. And JUNIPER is not an isolated case - CG-751 issued a memo to LANT/PAC back in January directing all WLBs to max use of available u/w hrs and engage in non-AtoN missions (many already were). Anyone going to be WLB CO will face these same challenges.

Having a recent tour on a 225 provided me with platform expertise from day one, and having 3yrs helped to provide the time required to lead the very significant culture change. Had my AtoN experience been dated and limited to a 157 or 180, I would have had the added challenge of coming up to speed on a relatively very technologically-advanced cutter.

The blog also mentioned that going XO of a MEC was a better career option. That is unfortunately probably true - especially if the WLB career track has a reputation as easy, low-optempo and AtoN-focused in a post 9-11, DHS world. Hopefully our new normalcy will continue to supplant any past reputation.

As far as advice for JOs.... There are 4 levels of performance that I have observed. The 1st, least desired, is a JO who needs to be told what to do and doesn't do it. Obviously bad. The 2nd, is a JO who does what he/she is told. This may seem like a good thing, but note this is only level 2 out of 4. The 3rd level if a JO who does what he/she is told and also takes initiative. The 4th level, the most desired, is a JO who not only takes initiative, but also seeks out additional responsibility. JOs need to strive for this 4th level as much as possible. Another bit of advice is to read the message board. Sometimes officers get too wrapped up in email and internet and forget about the msg board. And for OERs, perhaps "Crafting Effective OER Input" would be a good topic for a dedicated blog entry.

Anyhow, just my observations and thanks for providing an excellent venue,

CDR Rick Wester
Commanding Officer
USCGC JUNIPER (WLB 201)

Anonymous said...

A minor point to disagree with, dual aircraft qualifications are not something that the aviation community encourages or allows except at the CO/XO level and for billet mismatches caused by fleet size changes or aviation engineering slots. Other than that, it incurrs a large cost to the Coast Guard to put a pilot through re-training and the multi-year upgrade process and is really just a dead-weight loss to the service. Additionally it prevents a pilot from reaching full competancy in any airframe and moving to more responsible positions like instructor pilot. As a result, I wouldn't recommend any junior aviator strive to switch airframes, as the post might have mistakenly implied.