Bringing clarity to the noise, Eighth AF CCC talks new EPR

  • Published
  • By Airman Quay Drawdy
  • 7th Bomb Wing Public Affairs
DYESS AIR FORCE BASE, Texas --  During a recent visit to Dyess, the Eighth Air Force command chief took the opportunity to dispel rumors and speculation regarding changes to the enlisted performance review system.

The purpose of an EPR is to accurately capture the member's performance and provide a promotion recommendation based on promotion potential compared to peers, according to Chief Master Sgt. Marty Anderson; however, when the online chatter about the system is riddled with misinformation, it is important to cut through the noise and provide accurate information to our Airmen.

One of the most misunderstood changes faced by the enlisted force is the transition from a number system where a maximum score of five was commonplace, to a system where the highest rating of 'Promote Now' is awarded to only the top 5 percent, Anderson said.

"Under the old system, an Airman that received a '3' stood nearly no chance of promotion," Anderson said. "Under the new EPR system, however, the Air Force is still going to promote five to 12 percent of individuals who receive 'Promote' Promotion Recommendation. Simply put, the new system's 'Promote' category is by no means negative."

The new system comes in two separate parts. The first part is completed by supervisors after reviewing an Airman's performance, as well as other forms of feedback, to formulate a performance recommendation for their Airmen.
"ACAs are absolutely critical," Anderson said. "Supervisors at all levels should be clearly setting and explaining what the minimum acceptable performance standards are and then explain the level of performance required to be marked in each of the other performance recommendation blocks."

The second part of the EPR is the promotion recommendation, which is completed by commanders after considering the performance recommendation submitted by supervisors.

"The promotion recommendation is where each member is compared against their peers within the unit," Anderson said. "This competitive process is used all the time in processes such as senior airman below-the-zone, recognition programs and stratifications."

When writing an EPR for an Airman, it is important to highlight their accomplishments. The purpose of the EPR, however, is to capture the individual's potential. Complete and honest communication between Airmen and their supervisors is vital, the chief said.

"All bullets should be written to give an honest and accurate description of the member's performance," Anderson said. "We should not be trying to figure out how to game the process or system. If you have a high-speed Airman, their bullets should reflect the scope of responsibility and impact."

Rank is another important factor when writing bullets for an EPR. Staying within the lanes of the Airman's particular tier ensures the proper accomplishments and abilities are accurately represented.

"Each tier in the enlisted force structure has its own responsibilities," Anderson said. "Airman tier EPRs should be capturing how they are learning and adapting to Air Force standards and job performance expectations. [Non-commissioned officers] are expected to be the technical experts and primary trainers and supervisors, but when I read NCO EPRs, a majority of their performance is written in a way that reflects job accomplishments Airmen are performing. Bullets should capture the appropriate level of responsibility for the member's rank."

The chief noted some supervisors have taken liberties in the new system, adding their own limitations and requirements for their Airmen.

"There have been instances where policies have been established which don't come from the directives outlined in the AFI," Anderson said. "This needs to stop. For example, placing limitations on new promotees that only allow them to receive a 'Met All Expectations' performance recommendation or not allowing an Airman to earn a 'Must Promote' or 'Promote Now' unless they had been marked in the far right performance recommendation block simply isn't in line with the intent of this new program."

After being asked if there are any specific acronyms or shorthand forms of writing Eighth Air Force is looking for, the chief said only approved acronyms should be used.  When it comes to articulating an Airman's accomplishments, being understood accurately is what the rater should be focused on.

"The most important thing is to make the EPR readable," Anderson said. "Avoid confusing jargon or uncommon acronyms. Supervisors should keep in mind that they are articulating their Airmen's performance and the impact, so commanders must be able to easily understand what is being written."

Ultimately, the chief said the changes to the EPR system came from a need for commanders to have a say in who are the most deserving Airmen ready for promotion.

"This is long overdue," Anderson said. "As an institutional organization, we need to ensure the right Airmen are being promoted and retained! This new process enables commanders to clearly articulate an Airman's promotion potential."