Recommendation following grading board

#2
Is it Army policy to only recommend individuals for promotion if they place in the top third of a grading board?

Mung
I cannot confirm it but I would understand it.

Why would you even want to promote someone who is only mediocre or even below average.
Before anyone else says it, I must be the exception to the rule ;)

Ece_Tech

"edited due to funny words appearing at the bottom"
 
#3
Is it Army policy to only recommend individuals for promotion if they place in the top third of a grading board?

Mung
No. Recommendation for promotion is entirely subjective; there is no reason why an officer cannot recommend every subject that he or she writes on (or not recommend for that matter).
 
#4
Surely it depends on the grade they receive? If they are 'performing above the level expected in all areas' etc? Of course, they won't promote being middle third but it doesn't mean to say that they are rubbish. You might have a lot of stars in that particular troop/platoon. It happened in my unit 2 years ago. One bloke came top of the grading board but a year later he was being outshone by 4 really strong blokes who had been posted in so he slipped down the rankings but he was still good enough for promotion.
 
#5
Check JSP 757, in one of the annexes there is a really useful table that spells out clearly what each recommendation by 1RO & 2RO actually means. If i could do that clever clicky linky thing i would (i'm sure somebody can help!); but note there is a difference in meaning between the same recommendation given by 1 & 2 RO. I would say, from experience, top of middle 3rd and above get a 'yes', top half of the top 3rd get 'high' and occasionally and 'excep' may be given to the most outstanding individuals.
 
#6
Surely it depends on the grade they receive? If they are 'performing above the level expected in all areas' etc? Of course, they won't promote being middle third but it doesn't mean to say that they are rubbish. You might have a lot of stars in that particular troop/platoon. It happened in my unit 2 years ago. One bloke came top of the grading board but a year later he was being outshone by 4 really strong blokes who had been posted in so he slipped down the rankings but he was still good enough for promotion.
SC

Recommendation refers to potential - bizarre as it may sound an individual may have performed above the standard required in all areas, but have limited potential, whereas another may have only performed to the standard required in all areas, by virtue of lack of seniority or experience, but may have much greater potential.
 
#7
No. Recommendation for promotion is entirely subjective; there is no reason why an officer cannot recommend every subject that he or she writes on (or not recommend for that matter).
Thanks for the reply

If there has been a lack of recommendation for purely mechanical reasons can anything be done? Also, is there policy, JSP etc, that states report writing must be subjective?

Mung
 
#8
All report writing is subjective (within the parameters of JSP 757) because its subject to individual interpretation, up and down the reporting chain.
 
#9
All report writing is subjective (within the parameters of JSP 757) because its subject to individual interpretation, up and down the reporting chain.
Would you regard the statement "we are only recommending those that board in the top third of the unit" as subjective.
It strikes me as a purely mechanical decision, a tad unfair and open to redress.
Is it?
 
#11
Would you regard the statement "we are only recommending those that board in the top third of the unit" as subjective.
It strikes me as a purely mechanical decision, a tad unfair and open to redress.
Is it?
Nope.....if that's what the CO has decided then that is a decision he can make. As an example - if you are a Cpl in a unit that has a total of 75 Cpls on strength then I'd suggest that the top third (25 blokes) is probably more than should be recommended.

Multiply the top third of each unit by the strength of the particular rank range in the Corps and the job for the blokes in Glasgow becomes colossal (not to mention the mind numbing amount of time spent by promotion board members).

In short, reporting officers need to be robust, yet fair, with grading and recommendations for promotion. In this way those being reported on will have a realistic outlook when the board results are released.

The answer to you question regarding recalling SJARs is that yes it can be done. The RCMO or his deputy (or clerk) can speak with Glasgow and get the report in question released to the unit for amendment. However, in your case there is absolutely no point is going through this rigmarole in order to try and get a recommendation for promotion if you are middle or lower third.
 
#12
Check JSP 757, in one of the annexes there is a really useful table that spells out clearly what each recommendation by 1RO & 2RO actually means. If i could do that clever clicky linky thing i would (i'm sure somebody can help!); but note there is a difference in meaning between the same recommendation given by 1 & 2 RO. I would say, from experience, top of middle 3rd and above get a 'yes', top half of the top 3rd get 'high' and occasionally and 'excep' may be given to the most outstanding individuals.
Is this the table Danny?
 

Attachments

#14
Nope.....if that's what the CO has decided then that is a decision he can make. As an example - if you are a Cpl in a unit that has a total of 75 Cpls on strength then I'd suggest that the top third (25 blokes) is probably more than should be recommended.

Multiply the top third of each unit by the strength of the particular rank range in the Corps and the job for the blokes in Glasgow becomes colossal (not to mention the mind numbing amount of time spent by promotion board members).

In short, reporting officers need to be robust, yet fair, with grading and recommendations for promotion. In this way those being reported on will have a realistic outlook when the board results are released.

The answer to you question regarding recalling SJARs is that yes it can be done. The RCMO or his deputy (or clerk) can speak with Glasgow and get the report in question released to the unit for amendment. However, in your case there is absolutely no point is going through this rigmarole in order to try and get a recommendation for promotion if you are middle or lower third.
You make a very good point about the poor buggers who trek up to Glasgow iot spend hours cooped up in a small room reading and grading OJARs and SJARs. It isn't an easy task and it is made much worse by Reporting Officers who fail to grade clearly in the pen picture.

Litotes
 
#15
Nope.....if that's what the CO has decided then that is a decision he can make. As an example - if you are a Cpl in a unit that has a total of 75 Cpls on strength then I'd suggest that the top third (25 blokes) is probably more than should be recommended.

Multiply the top third of each unit by the strength of the particular rank range in the Corps and the job for the blokes in Glasgow becomes colossal (not to mention the mind numbing amount of time spent by promotion board members).

In short, reporting officers need to be robust, yet fair, with grading and recommendations for promotion. In this way those being reported on will have a realistic outlook when the board results are released.

The answer to you question regarding recalling SJARs is that yes it can be done. The RCMO or his deputy (or clerk) can speak with Glasgow and get the report in question released to the unit for amendment. However, in your case there is absolutely no point is going through this rigmarole in order to try and get a recommendation for promotion if you are middle or lower third.
I can see the sense in doing that, especially with the current workload on those in Glasgow. I don't have any sympathy for those 'poor buggers' going up to Glasgow to sit on the boards as it is a highly sought after privilege in my experience and can only assist you in your job.
There appears to have been either a complete lack of transparency in the recommendation process or a snap decision has been made locally.
Either way, what can be done?
 
#16
As stated earlier in the thread a recommendation for promotion is an entirely subjective decision (notwithstanding your CO appears to have applied a formula) by ROs. As such there is very little you can do about it. You are of course free to comment on your 1RO recommendations which will be read by the board, and equally free to submit a service complaint. But the bottom line is that if your ROs don't believe a recommendation is warranted then a service complaint stands little chance of success.
 
#17
As stated earlier in the thread a recommendation for promotion is an entirely subjective decision (notwithstanding your CO appears to have applied a formula) by ROs. As such there is very little you can do about it. You are of course free to comment on your 1RO recommendations which will be read by the board, and equally free to submit a service complaint. But the bottom line is that if your ROs don't believe a recommendation is warranted then a service complaint stands little chance of success.
I was under the impression that not recommended means it won't get to the board this year, I take it that is wrong?
 
#18
See my earlier attachment. A up-to-date positive recommendation (Excep, High or Yes) will see your report book going to the board whereas a negative recommendation (Dev or No) will see you filtered out by desk officers well before the board even starts.
 
#19
The decision to not recommend was made because the subject was not in the top third as opposed to a lack of ability. If the lack of recommendation was due to a CO lead policy it has not been transparent. It appears to have been a local decision that does not reflect the write up. All the replies learn towards the matter not being worth pursuing, what would you recommend to avoid the situation happening in the future i.e. a briefing or statement before any local boards sit?
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top