Open reporting - assessment creep and honesty

[Biggus]

A few thoughts of my own on the new(ish) OJAR system.

The subject now gets to see the 2nd and 3rd RO's comments, thus avoiding the old 'knife in the back' type situation. However, as a result I get the impression that ROs are becoming less critical, dare I say honest, in what they write (afraid of redress perhaps). I get the impression that reports are becoming more generous in their content and touchy feely in style.

If somebody is rubbish at their job I could see something like '...Bloggs is always well turned out, keen, punctual and hard working...', being written on their OJAR, just admitting to mention that the work Bloggs actually produces is c@*p!

If reports are not honest, warts and all, we are doing everyone a diservice, and will increasingly end up with the wrong people in the wrong jobs, and find it increasingly difficult to tell the good guys from the duffers!! (shades of all kids getting A* GCSE grades?) Let alone having a paperwork trail to make it easier to get rid of complete duffers (shades of flying training reports??)

These are just my own thoughts from vibes I have picked up over the last year or so. I am not an RO by the way. Does anyone out there agreed/disagree with me.

Or will this be a thread that withers on the vine?

[JessTheDog]

I get the impression the reporting chain is moving back to a more honest methodology after complaints from on high that the reports were too generous. Also, the six-monthly appraisal should hepl things greatly and, personally, I wouldn't be surprised if it becomes an OJAR annex for administrative reasons - data protection, FOI, to ensure compliance etc.

I feel the performance grades should be tied to a candidate's place in the promotion (or lack of!) list after some weighting depending on the challenge and responsibility of the post. A B+ in one job is not the same as a B+ in another job! One reassuring development is the lack of focus on secondary duties and the acceptance that performance in the job is what matters. Unfortunately the SNCO chain takes the opposite view!

One thought I had this morning was that, considering SNCOs are both well-paid and highly experienced, why are so many responsibilities (even to do with signing off destruction and signals!!) designated to a "commissioned officer"? Don't we trust these guys? This is a hang-up from the Brylcreem days!!!!:yuk:

[RADAR SCRATCHPAD]

JESS,

I like your thinking: delegate another job down to the Knockers, thereby relieving the 'commisioned officers' of the responsibilities commensurate with their higher rates of pay.

[SpotterFC]

Jess,

Provided you are an honest reporting officer, there is a very good reason why the Mid Period Appraisals are not included in the OJAR, that being that the MPA can be used as a warning shot across the bows to 're-educate' those that are in danger of transgressing. If the counselling is taken and no further action is required, then a quick sentence along the lines of "Bloggs initially had difficulty in knowing where to draw the line, but responded well to counselling and now performs well blah blah" will do and nothing further needs to be said. If not then valuable space on the OJAR will be taken up recounting his failings. The MPA is designed as a vehicle to 'force' the 1st RO to tell the subject how he is doing and where he needs to improve so that it does not come as a shock at OJAR time. Obviously if the 1st RO is any good, this guidance will not come but twice a year!

The other thing is that the MPA can be fairly freeform and less formal than an OJAR. If it gets formalised into an ANNEX then the admin just keeps piling up.

[insty66]

SFC
As a RO it does indeed fall upon me to point out areas "that could be improved upon" during the entire reporting period however if I do not "formalise" my comments and the subject does not improve and I then appraise him of his continued failings he can still say that he was not told of these shortcomings and you then enter my word againt his arguments. That said adjusted appraisals never look good.

[COLOR=deeppink]Male gender used for ease but I'm sure females are treated the same.

[BEagle]

Why do you still need all these silly School Reports when the RAF is so small that everyone knows eachother?

[JessTheDog]

SpotterFC

Agree on the positive aspects of the relatively informal MPA, however I think data protection/FOI/ensuring RO compliance will drive us to a formal system, albeit one where the MPA is not passed up the chain to the 2nd RO onwards, who look at potential rather than performance.

Whenever have we been given less work as part of "improvements"?:D

Radar Scratchpad

That's one way of looking at it but most of the seniors I know would rather be granted more responsibility especially with regard to something like signing off signals - with RAF CCIS/CHOTS etc you do exactly that - ....particularly if it helps job evaluation with regard to pay banding or AFPRB reports!

And why do we need so many reports? Because we are somewhere in between a school and a Soviet-style command economy!!:*

[CatpainCaveman]

There' nothing wrong with the reporting system. Last one I got, my ROs said I was great - even gave me a little piece of paper with it written on to prove it!

[JessTheDog]

I got one that had lots of D's - the higher up the alphabet the better, right.....er, right:uhoh:

[CatpainCaveman]

Jess - you're a CAS in the making!! Can you sign off my claim for a working visit to Stringfellows in the Bahamas????