PERs : All issues questions...2003-2019

[TCM621]

And herein lies the issue - one should not be "surprised" during a PER interview. If (and as you stated, assuming you stay on top of the PDR process) the PDR process is followed correctly, all members should know where they stand. Always. Remember - we give corrective PDRs (5Bs) there is no reason you can't issue a 5A if the member does exceptional at / with something. These 5As and 5Bs coupled with the regular interval (quarterly) PDRs allow the member to improve or maintain conduct all year 'round.

Also, I truly believe it's a supervisor's responsibility to stay on top of this process. Too many times have I heard "Our CoC doesn't give PDRs regularly or at all..." It's a complete cop out and sheer laziness  - to heck with the CoC - do it for your subordinates yourselves. It is a disservice to those who get YOU promoted. (Not meant towards you Tcm... just a sore spot with me...).

I 110 percent agree with you. One of the biggest problems with the PER process is that it isn't followed properly. PERs shouldn't be a surprise but they often are because what their supervisor is telling them about their work doesn't match with the fallout from the bun fight.  Or the PDR process isn't followed properly, etc.

Since our only method of promotion is the PER,  it becomes more about who is getting promoted rather than being an accurate assessment tool.  If you are in a trade with very few promotions,  you need to right your subordinates up just shy of Jesus. And often where a member's score ends up is out if the supervisor's (or anyone directly involved in that person's work) hands.

 

[Mediman14]

I agree that PER's should be no surprise if the Mbr is honest! PDR's is the same thing, should be no surprises.
  Not getting PDR's is very lazy, that had happen to me, no initial, no PDR's, no nothing, PER was blank. I put in a grievance and was told by my CO that I don't have to get a PDR every year. So needless to say I used that past CoC as examples on what not to do.
  Before I went on summer leave, I submitted my PDR's to my supervisor to be vetted, I advised him that one of the subordinates will be leaving shortly for a career course and should be given the PDR prior to leaving. He did do that but decided to change things and add things that was not in that reporting period and not accurate. Needless to say, the subordinate was shocked. The Cpl submitted an Intent to Grieve to the CO. Thank God he took my name off it!
  I think there should be formal training on PDR's and PER's, and should be introduced in great detail on the PLQ and officer equivalent. I often wondered if that issue ever got to the General level for discussion.

 

[BinRat55]

I put in a grievance and was told by my CO that I don't have to get a PDR every year.

And I quote:

103. The Personnel Development Review (PDR)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The PDR is a two step process:


Step 1 of the process occurs during the initial meeting between the supervisor and subordinate at the beginning of the reporting period or when a new supervisor or subordinate is assigned. A new supervisor has the option of either confirming the previous supervisor's PDR or initiating a new one; and


Step 2 of the process consists of a minimum of two feedback sessions; the first shall be at the mid point and the last at the end of the reporting period, which is the PER interview, or PDR interview for AB-OS/Pte, OCDT, ASLt/2Lt, or SLt/Lt. Feedback sessions may occur more often as desired or directed by local commanders.



The PDR will be used by a unit to report a person's performance to his or her home unit during operational deployments under 3 months duration or temporary assignments such as attached postings, TD, or secondments of any length. On posting, losing units will use the PDR to pass a individual's performance/potential information to the gaining unit or vice versa when a Dept ID Waiver has been approved (see sect 121). The home or gaining unit will use this information in preparing the person's Annual PER.


PDRs may be handwritten, however typed is preferable. COs are to ensure that assessments originating from their unit are accurate and not inflated. The individual's PDR is to be stored in the unit personnel file for a minimum of two years after which they are to be destroyed. Units are reminded of the importance of the PDR process and of the fact that it is mandatory for all ranks.

MANDATORY FOR ALL RANKS...

 

[BinRat55]

  I think there should be formal training on PDR's and PER's, and should be introduced in great detail on the PLQ and officer equivalent.

Yes and no. My take on it (as I alluded to in earlier posts) is that we as supervisors / Sr NCOs have a responsibility to our younger up-and-coming leaders to teach this and ensure their competence. Many CoCs have the basics which is usually a good start, but how do you teach this to a diverse group on a PLQ? Combat Arms do it a bit differently than purple trades, who do it a bit different than the Navy. No, it's something that we need to ensure our future leaders are in line with - period. We advise our CoC (how many times have I had to explain to a young officer that "No sir, we DON'T do it this way...") and teach our subordinates. It's too easy to get to a new unit and say "this is how I learned it on my PLQ" at the expense of your troops...

If one of my Cpls had to "learn" about PDRs and PERs on a PLQ, then I have failed as a leader myself. The more they know about the process that defines their career for them, the better soldier and tech I have in the end.

 

[SupersonicMax]

There are many more ways to keep your subbordinates informed of their performance throughout the year.  If someone waits for PDR time, there this is a failing in their supervisory skills. Regular verbal feedback is good.  I personally sit down individually with my guys once or twice a month go know what's in their mind, giving them a forum to voice their concerns and for me to give them feedback.  Along with daily interraction with them, they know where they stand but more importantly, I know their concerns and can take action

The PDR process really serves 2 purposes:

1- Force people unable to give relevant and regular feedback in a somewhat acceptable timeframe

2- Formally document poor performance for eventual admin actions/issues.

Top performers are normally well known within a unit and if not, it will be very apparent.

The PDR process as it is doesn't work.  The fact that many ENTIRE units (including HHQs) don't really use it is a point in case.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

My  :2c: is simple form is that while the changes over the past 2 years may have reduced the workload CFPAS imposed on us, those did little to improve CFPAS overall, as a reporting/assessment system.

 

[BinRat55]

There are many more ways to keep your subbordinates informed of their performance throughout the year.  If someone waits for PDR time, there this is a failing in their supervisory skills. Regular verbal feedback is good.  I personally sit down individually with my guys once or twice a month go know what's in their mind, giving them a forum to voice their concerns and for me to give them feedback.  Along with daily interraction with them, they know where they stand but more importantly, I know their concerns and can take action

The PDR process really serves 2 purposes:

1- Force people unable to give relevant and regular feedback in a somewhat acceptable timeframe

2- Formally document poor performance for eventual admin actions/issues.

Top performers are normally well known within a unit and if not, it will be very apparent.

The PDR process as it is doesn't work.  The fact that many ENTIRE units (including HHQs) don't really use it is a point in case.

I agree with many of your points here. It isn't just about a formal process, a piece of paper in my office and an "atta-boy" en masse from a CO. Many great leaders I have had the pleasure to serve with have gotten to know me and my subordinates over a beer, BBQ, after an O group, in the smoking pit... that's all well and good, but it only serves to garner the respect needed to lead. It doesn't mean a row of beans to any board that Cpl Bloggins is a great guy because you got to know know him. We have checks and balances in place (called the CFPAS) that, while not perfect, does serve a greater purpose. I also agree with you when you say that it becomes easier to take action from an informal standpoint. Too often, young Pte Blue or Cpl Yellow will not want to voice a concern, for fear of some kind of punishment or reprisal. Under the "old" principals of leadership - #6 (if I remember correctly) is Know your soldiers and promote their welfare.

I have to disagree with your theory of the PDR serving two purposes - Forcing feedback in a certain timeframe and to formally document poor performance. Seems a little shortsighted to me. I have been involved with the CFPAS for a very long time, seen many outcomes of abuse, proper use, manipulation, calculation and action. I can honestly tell you that in my humble experience, when done right, it (PDRs) are a wonderful tool. When the young Pte who does not receive a PER in April gets a good PDR, watch how he / she shares that with their coworkers. See the fire it lights in the less motivated to do just that much better.

I could go on forever, and I do understand that everyone has an opinion and are entitled to it. Everyone has a leadership style too, and those who know me understand me because I have learned this from many on this site.

The CFPAS is what it is - a tool. When a tool is used correctly even a dull pocket knife can skin a moose!

 

[SupersonicMax]

So, we do PDRs so people can get out of the office and brag?  There are many more ways to publicly recognize strong people in the organization. I don't believe a PDR is one of them.

I had a grand total of 0 PDRs written on me in my 15 years and I do not feel cheated or that my supervisors did a bad job of mentoring me. They just had a different approach.

CFPAS is no more than a form generator.  The program doesn't do much more more than that (there is no database or grander mechanism directly attached to it).  The process we use to assess people uses the forms generated by CFPAS.  The PDR process is, in my opinion, largely redundant when good supervision happens.  The PER process is not actually used to assess and give feedback to our people but is rather a tool to let boards know where people sit in the pack: we decide the bullets on a local board before we write the PERs. Then we write something that will match the bullets (normally something grossly exaggerated).  Backwards isn't it?

 

[TCM621]

So, we do PDRs so people can get out of the office and brag?  There are many more ways to publicly recognize strong people in the organization. I don't believe a PDR is one of them.

I had a grand total of 0 PDRs written on me in my 15 years and I do not feel cheated or that my supervisors did a bad job of mentoring me. They just had a different approach.

CFPAS is no more than a form generator.  The program doesn't do much more more than that (there is no database or grander mechanism directly attached to it).  The process we use to assess people uses the forms generated by CFPAS.  The PDR process is, in my opinion, largely redundant when good supervision happens.  The PER process is not actually used to assess and give feedback to our people but is rather a tool to let boards know where people sit in the pack: we decide the bullets on a local board before we write the PERs. Then we write something that will match the bullets (normally something grossly exaggerated).  Backwards isn't it?

If you have never received PDRs you have been cheated and your supervisor's did not do their jobs correctly. That is not up for discussion, PDRs are mandatory full stop. If you have been lucky enough to not have any major problems, good for you but it doesn't make it right.

We work in an environment where your ability to advance is decided by people who don't know you.  The only things they are allowed to base their decision on is the PER. If there is a problem,  PDRs are there to back up that PER. As a supervisor,  if someone doesn't like there PER,  you can point to their PDRs (up or down the chain as necessary) to justify what you feel is acceptable. Your supervisor telling you something is irrelevant because at the end of the day it never officially happened.

As to "bragging" about a PDR, when you sit a young private down and give him a glowing PDR, his confidence rises and he feels validated. It is a formal acknowledgement of all his hard work. For a brand new private, those are few and far between.  By their very nature privates are told they are doing something wrong constantly and given menial jobs to complete. It is good for them,  to sit them down every once in a while and show them, in writing, that the CoC recognizes their hard work and tell them if you do a, b, and C, the next one will be even better.

As someone who has seen a ton of instances where "so and so told me" has been flat out denied,  I am a huge fan of getting stuff in writing.

 

[SupersonicMax]

If you have never received PDRs you have been cheated and your supervisor's did not do their jobs correctly. That is not up for discussion, PDRs are mandatory full stop. If you have been lucky enough to not have any major problems, good for you but it doesn't make it right.

Because it is mandated it makes it a good tool?  Again, the fact that entire units don't use it is probably a good indicator that it is not suitable for what it is meant.  PDRs are mandatory sure. Just like many other things we don't follow to the letter.

We work in an environment where your ability to advance is decided by people who don't know you.  The only things they are allowed to base their decision on is the PER. If there is a problem,  PDRs are there to back up that PER. As a supervisor,  if someone doesn't like there PER,  you can point to their PDRs (up or down the chain as necessary) to justify what you feel is acceptable. Your supervisor telling you something is irrelevant because at the end of the day it never officially happened.

PDRs are not used for career advancement (read promotion boards).  PERs are.  I have seen one individual try to grieve a PER because he did not have PDRs written.  Since we tend to over-evaluate people, he did not have a leg to stand on:  his bullets were mostly Above average, never below average.  His potential was the same.  Still not enough for an immediate or a ready but according to his PER, he was doing what was expected of him and a little more.  The lack of PDR did not interfere with where we thought he ranked.  In this case, he was clearly trying to play the system to get ahead.  Still didn't work.


[quote author=Tcm621]

As to "bragging" about a PDR, when you sit a young private down and give him a glowing PDR, his confidence rises and he feels validated. It is a formal acknowledgement of all his hard work. For a brand new private, those are few and far between.  By their very nature privates are told they are doing something wrong constantly and given menial jobs to complete. It is good for them,  to sit them down every once in a while and show them, in writing, that the CoC recognizes their hard work and tell them if you do a, b, and C, the next one will be even better.
[/quote]

Or you can award the Person of the month award for whatever level you lead.  Or you can do this verbally with the individual on a regular basis.  PDRs are a lazy way to recognize your people.

I had a teacher in University that would invite students with marks greater than 90% for a diner (after each exams).  He would announce when he gave the exams back who would go for dinner.  Very small gesture that most people appreciated greatly.  Way better than a piece of paper telling you you are doing well.

In the end, because we are mandated to do it doesn't mean it's the right way to do it.  I personally find PDRs a bit of a waste of time, even though I do them....

 

[George Wallace]

Sorry, Max but I think you and your whole unit are wrong in what they are doing and that it does indeed have an affect on the careers of the service members working in your organization.

Because it is mandated it makes it a good tool?  Again, the fact that entire units don't use it is probably a good indicator that it is not suitable for what it is meant.  PDRs are mandatory sure. Just like many other things we don't follow to the letter.

And just because you and your organization have failed to use this tool, does not make that right.  If this is just a small indication of what your organization fails to comply with, there may be some very serious problems there.  Time will tell.

PDRs are not used for career advancement (read promotion boards).  PERs are.  I have seen one individual try to grieve a PER because he did not have PDRs written.  Since we tend to over-evaluate people, he did not have a leg to stand on:  his bullets were mostly Above average, never below average.  His potential was the same.  Still not enough for an immediate or a ready but according to his PER, he was doing what was expected of him and a little more.  The lack of PDR did not interfere with where we thought he ranked.  In this case, he was clearly trying to play the system to get ahead.  Still didn't work.

This is where you have made one very large mistake.  As mentioned, the PDR's lead up to the PER, giving the PER author an indication of how to evaluate the person being written up.  That is but half of what the PDR system does.  The PDR interviews will indicate to the member where they are doing well and where they may or do need to improve.  If this is all documented in the PDR's on the member, then the example of your member grieving a PER should not happen, as the member has been counselled on their shortcomings.  If you and your organization can not document, document, document; then you will see more grievances. 

Or you can award the Person of the month award for whatever level you lead.  Or you can do this verbally with the individual on a regular basis.  PDRs are a lazy way to recognize your people.

You have missed the whole object of what the PDR system is all about.  It is to document the members performance and progression in Trade and the CAF.  What is "LAZY" is a supervisor who can not do the simple administration to ensure that their personnel have their personal files kept up to date, and reflecting their performance and progression.  Don't forget, you still have to council your members individually on their PDR. 

I had a teacher in University that would invite students with marks greater than 90% for a diner (after each exams).  He would announce when he gave the exams back who would go for dinner.  Very small gesture that most people appreciated greatly.  Way better than a piece of paper telling you you are doing well.

This is not university.  Our troops don't need a 'token pat on the head'.  They need proper Course Reports, proper filing of their achievements in their Pers files, and often that piece of paper to hang on their walls.  If you haven't noticed, in today's world, our Government places a lot of worth in those pieces of paper that people hang on their walls, but NOTHING for that "atta boy pat on the back".

In the end, because we are mandated to do it doesn't mean it's the right way to do it.  I personally find PDRs a bit of a waste of time, even though I do them....

Again, I point out to you and your organization, the PDR and PER system are not what is wrong; but your complacency and lazy act of not properly keeping documentation on your personnel is what is truly wrong.

 

[MJP]

I have two PDRs in 5 years and I don't feel slighted in the least.  I have always known exactly where I stood because I have been told what to improve through verbal feedback, usually this feedback is in real time and relevant.  That is wayyyyyyyy more important than some useless piece of paper that tries to encapsulate the last 3-5 months of my work.  IMHO that is way to late to be conducting feedback.  I think the lazy CoCs are the ones that depend on the PDR as the prime piece of feedback rather than on the spot mentoring. 

I certainly don't think of my CoC as lazy as some have alluded to on the thread.  They are hard working folks that realize that there is a time and place for some administration and react accordingly. 

 

[cld617]

I have two PDRs in 5 years and I don't feel slighted in the least.  I have always known exactly where I stood because I have been told what to improve through verbal feedback, usually this feedback is in real time and relevant.  That is wayyyyyyyy more important than some useless piece of paper that tries to encapsulate the last 3-5 months of my work.  IMHO that is way to late to be conducting feedback.  I think the lazy CoCs are the ones that depend on the PDR as the prime piece of feedback rather than on the spot mentoring. 

I certainly don't think of my CoC as lazy as some have alluded to on the thread.  They are hard working folks that realize that there is a time and place for some administration and react accordingly.

Face to face mentoring and evaluations are all fine and dandy at the unit level, but people are not promoted to progress in their careers at the unit level. The PER process is essential to the success of a members career, and as an extension of that, following the PDR process is essential to bolster the PER. If a member is given an area to improve on in the first 6mo of the year, and actually follows through with rectifying the shortcoming and this can be confirmed it is much easier to justifying those bubbles moving right. In trades where even mediocre members are right dressed because they can tie their boots this isn't too important, however in the RCAF where you rarely have MCpl's these days who needed a firewalled PER to be promoted, it is essential that their PER is an accurate reflection of their performance. Accurately documenting their actions throughout the year ensures the right person gets promoted, and not the slackers who skated by all year but were 2 I/C  to the 2 I/C entertainment on the mess committee.

 

[MJP]

Face to face mentoring and evaluations are all fine and dandy at the unit level, but people are not promoted to progress in their careers at the unit level. The PER process is essential to the success of a members career, and as an extension of that, following the PDR process is essential to bolster the PER. If a member is given an area to improve on in the first 6mo of the year, and actually follows through with rectifying the shortcoming and this can be confirmed it is much easier to justifying those bubbles moving right. In trades where even mediocre members are right dressed because they can tie their boots this isn't too important, however in the RCAF where you rarely have MCpl's these days who needed a firewalled PER to be promoted, it is essential that their PER is an accurate reflection of their performance. Accurately documenting their actions throughout the year ensures the right person gets promoted, and not the slackers who skated by all year but were 2 I/C  to the 2 I/C entertainment on the mess committee.

Right we are and I am talking about PDRs.  PERs are a mechanism to get people promoted.  I am not arguing about the how we get people promoted via PERs.  I am intimately familiar with it and how a few corps and branches do their promotions.  While one can feed the other (PDR into PER) again I feel generally they don't because as Max has alluded to we overscore our folks just to keep them competitive.  IMHO PDRs and more inporatntly face to face mentoring/leading are the real developers of folks.

 

[TCM621]

I have two PDRs in 5 years and I don't feel slighted in the least.  I have always known exactly where I stood because I have been told what to improve through verbal feedback, usually this feedback is in real time and relevant.  That is wayyyyyyyy more important than some useless piece of paper that tries to encapsulate the last 3-5 months of my work.  IMHO that is way to late to be conducting feedback.  I think the lazy CoCs are the ones that depend on the PDR as the prime piece of feedback rather than on the spot mentoring. 

I certainly don't think of my CoC as lazy as some have alluded to on the thread.  They are hard working folks that realize that there is a time and place for some administration and react accordingly.

Face to face mentoring is the informal process and PDRs are the formal process. They go hand in hand. If used properly a PDR isn't useless at all, it is a valuable reporting and evaluation tool.

And you're right,  your CoC probably isn't lazy. They either don't care about PDRs or don't know the value. That is a failure of their previous supervisors. However,  at the end of the day whether they think it is useful or not is irrelevant because they are mandatory. Not filling out PDRs is a failure to do their job and not enforcing them is a leadership failure. That part is black and white and not up for argument. We do not get to choose which orders we follow.

 

[MJP]

Face to face mentoring is the informal process and PDRs are the formal process. They go hand in hand. If used properly a PDR isn't useless at all, it is a valuable reporting and evaluation tool.

And you're right,  your CoC probably isn't lazy. They either don't care about PDRs or don't know the value. That is a failure of their previous supervisors. However,  at the end of the day whether they think it is useful or not is irrelevant because they are mandatory. Not filling out PDRs is a failure to do their job and not enforcing them is a leadership failure. That part is black and white and not up for argument. We do not get to choose which orders we follow.

Meh.  I ain't getting all worked up over it.  My bosses know what orders are useful and what is fluff.  Pretty damm sure as a collective group they produce excellent leaders.  Regardless, I am bowing out because quite frankly what you (and others) think of their leadership matters not a wit to me or them.  I only came on to echo that Max's situation/posts is not unique and is more common then our valiant orders are orders posters in this forum think.  :nod: 

 

[Navy_Pete]

I find them good to use as a tracking tool, plus you can get the juniour members used to the forms by getting to fill out the tombstone data, what their goals are (ie different courses/training they want to do)  and things like that.  That way you can reference it during the formal interview and it doesn't get forgotten about as tends to happen with informal chats.  Plus, gets people thinking along the lines that they need a plan.

They are a bit of work to be useful, but most of the drafting can be done by the member with the supervisor filing in the appropriate sections and noting strengths/weaknesses with a plan.  The act of writing it out forces you to think through it a little, which may or may not get done otherwise with the million other things always on the go.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Unless you shine (good or bad  ^-^) now, your PER and even theatre PDR is pretty much blank paper.  Whats the point?

 

[cld617]

Unless you shine (good or bad  ^-^) now, your PER and even theatre PDR is pretty much blank paper.  Whats the point?

That trails into another excellent point. Should a mbr either change locations or have their supervisor changed some time  throughout the year the PDR is documentation for the new supervisor to use to write the mbrs per. I've definitely seen some brag sheets that embellish the actual accomplishments of the mbr, and some from rock stars who simply don't wish to talk themselves up and let the system run its course. PDR's level oit the playing field in that regard, as they're typically not as much fluff as a PER needs to be.

 

[SupersonicMax]

PDRs are not used to write PERs.  Where the CoC wants the member to rank will write the PER.  You will use events in the member's bragsheet and add some crafty words (less so now) to substantiate the dots...