Guys,
Just wondered if anyone has a performance review form for use when it comes to conducting reviews of the nco teams.
Thanks
Something we are working on too. Perhaps this is something that should be generated generically from HQAC.
That way every Squadron is singing off the same sheet and we get a defined class of Cadet and Staff NCOâs.
In the mean time, I am creating one soon so I too would be grateful for any ideas of what to include too.
Not 100% relevant, but I made this a long time ago as (I think) a Cdt FS.
It was designed as a self-evaluation form for cadet NCOs.
There might be some useful bits in there but it doesnât mention any specific responsibilities.
Performance reviews for cadets?
:sick:
What else? Key performance indicators? Compedencies ?
They will get to this type of crud all too soon enough in the real world⌠spare them for now!!
As a civil servant of 33 years its all a load of bunkum. we have had this tripe for years. Each cadet should be looked at on their own merits, not by some fits-all list from some herbert up the line who has no idea.
Staff should be watching not just doing tick boxesâŚtrust me⌠thats what it will turn into.
Rant overâŚ
1 Like
[quote=âddr61â post=16840]Performance reviews for cadets?
:sick:
What else? Key performance indicators? Compedencies ?
They will get to this type of crud all too soon enough in the real world⌠spare them for now!!
As a civil servant of 33 years its all a load of bunkum. we have had this tripe for years. Each cadet should be looked at on their own merits, not by some fits-all list from some herbert up the line who has no idea.
Staff should be watching not just doing tick boxesâŚtrust me⌠thats what it will turn into.
Rant overâŚ[/quote]
Not sure it will turn into KPI or similar.
All this is for is to show the merits you identified and place them in a clear and concise log which can be referenced when promotions are on the horizon.
Nobody wants to see the like of what you mention, but surely the basis of what we have described earlier in this thread can only benefit???
Just what every Squadron needs, more paperwork!
I know it is very well intentioned but is there a lot of purpose in it unless it is reviewed regularly for consistency (by who) and for lessons to be learned and promulgated.
It just seems a bit much for an average cadet length of service of 2-3 years.
The OP says heâs doing it for the NCO teams, who should hopefully have a greater lifespan.
Forget about forms, and paperwork and KPIs and all the MANAGEMENT rubbish and provide your NCOs with some LEADERSHIP instead!
Set them SMART objectives and goals, coach them to achieve and succeed, Inspire them to try and always better themselves, challenge them to go the extra mile.
Reward and praise them for their efforts and achievements, build them back up when they fall short.
Remember the 4th unwritten aim of the ACO, and the most important⌠It should be fun!
MW
I have a checklist that Iâm using to conduct three month assessments on the NCOs on my squadron. It covers their appearance, deportment, motivation & conduct. Although it is a list of questions in each box it has space to write in, and then you can give a score out of five. It can be changed/adapted as you see fit.
PM me for a copy.
I agree with you ddr61, I was a Civil Servant in the MoD for about the same length of time as you, I was glad to get away from that. It meant everyone ended up trying to meet artificial targets passed down from on high and not getting on with their real jobs.
I sure hope that it doesnât follow me into the ACO or I might just be moving on.
[quote=âM0XSDâ post=16852]I agree with you ddr61, I was a Civil Servant in the MoD for about the same length of time as you, I was glad to get away from that. It meant everyone ended up trying to meet artificial targets passed down from on high and not getting on with their real jobs.
I sure hope that it doesnât follow me into the ACO or I might just be moving on.[/quote]
I donât understand the negativity.
As has been stated itâs for the NCO teams and surely it is our duty to select the right ones. I donât see it as rubbish as was mentioned earlier, I see it as an Aide Memoire to assist us all.
Nobody makes you do it. As for who keeps it updated, then surely thatâs the person who is running the potential NCO Cadre, the Training Officer or someone who is ideally placed.
Someone has asked for assistance off their fellow forum members, if you canât assist might I suggest you just donât bother replying.
Before starting this sort of process you have to have the criteria being âmeasuredâ, rationale for doing so and then being purely objective in any assessment and then having ready access to any training/development requirements that you or the one being reviewed feel is required.
Then applying âsmartâ as the reviewer you have to understand within the constraints of a hobby volunteer organisation, how achieveable, realisitic and the time constraints with respect to the availability of the resource and or the individual.
Judging by the tone of some on here and the general theme from on high, I would see the rationale as being more stick than carrot.
Obviously there may be some things that are achieved easily and others that arenât.
In my experience, most Cadet NCOs enjoy the challenge of meeting high standards. They also enjoy the âfairnessâ that a review process offers. Even without any written evidence, I think that regular âreflectiveâ meetings are good idea, and genuinely help the NCO understand how they are being seen by others, and how they can develop.
For cadet SNCOs, it helps to define and strengthen the relationship between the staff and NCO team.
Performance appraisal is seen differently in the world of employment, but I think that most cadet NCOs find it helpful at this stage.
OK, I will try one last time to explain my view, since my previous two attempts havenât made it into the forum.
I wasnât being negative about the âPerformance Reviewâ process, if it is done right it should benefit the Cadets.
If a process is implemented like Jacques is suggesting it should work fine.
My warning (when I agreed with ddr61) was with targets etc being passed down from âon highâ (as I experienced in the MoD), they should be coming from the NCOs and SNCOs within the Squadron. I have no problem with guidance coming back down from Wing level (or Region at most) to give some consistency but it should have been up the chain first.
I was hoping my comments would assist in developing the processes the best way to benefit the Cadets.
What is interesting in this post is that so far weâve been discussing performance assessments only of cadet NCOs. Does anyone know of assessments being done for adult staff? Iâm not sure what the book says on Junior Officer development, but I personally think we should have something, and not just for Jnr Offs, everyone should get told every year how well (or otherwise) they are doing. Iâm not advocating a full OJAR/SJAR for our staff, but the advantages of documenting, even very basically, the performance of our people will probably pay big dividends later if you are considering appointments or disciplinary matters. Some may remember the marking guide matrix that the old RAF F6442 had for determining the separate marks which made up the scores within the overall ABC boxes. That was a pretty objective marking method and did not take a lot of time to do, the effort was on the supporting narratives. Perhaps something along the lines of the F6442 matrix could work?
Thoughts?
although i know of no Adult NCO review process there is a significant process for promotion.
when you consider that it makes a minimum of four years to be eligible for SNCO (adult) promotion and the average Cadet sticks aroudn for less than 3 years an annual review Vs 4 years is almost on par.
my point being a Cdt NCO review will help them in the short term (6 months) on how to work towards promotion (a clear aim for most Cdt NCOs) while the long term reaches of a Adult NCO promotion would simple not be inspiring on an annual basisâŚ
the way the system is set up it indicates nicely that if not âperformingâ then an Adult isnât promotedâŚwhich is no different to a Cdt NCOâŚ
(in my experience demotions have been based on a single incident of bad behaviour/letting themselves down rather than poor performance)
Itâs nice to get a well done from the OC from time to time, however as soon as something goes wrong there is suddenly more interest. As a junior CFAV what would be beneficial would be guidance & advice to nurture development, however I see no reason to formalise this into an appraisal process.
ADMIN BURDEN REDUCTION :!: :!: :!:
Of course, it all depends what you mean by âadmin burdenâ Major; some admin activities are essential and beneficial. I would suggest that something which is aimed at developing our staff, which an appraisal process should do, is beneficial. I would also argue that our staff are, in the long term, more important than the cadets. Sure, we have a duty to develop the young men and women who join as cadets, but their interest and time with us is limited. We hope to retain our adult staff for much longer and therefore we have to invest in them to at least the same degree. Moreover, the âforce multiplying effectsâ of well-trained and developed staff should not be ignored; better staff should mean better cadets.
My Bold.
Iâm not saying that we should not carry out an appraisal, but is there a need for it to be documented, sure Junior staff regardless of position should have a sit down with the boss every 6 months or so to review what has been done well, and what could have been done better.
The extra time that would be used to documented adds more workload to the OC and doesnât directly benefit the cadet experience, hell will it ever be looked at again?
How many times do we hear people complaining about the poor standards of some of our adult staff and then also stating that thereâs nothing anyone can do to get rid of them? Also, we often learn of the amount of cases being referred to the AFB which could and should have been dealt with at a much lower level; many of these issues would have been disposed of far quicker if there was some sort of record of the individualâs performance over the years. Fg Off X or Sgt Y cannot complain about not being signed on for a further term if their appraisals (the content of which they have been made aware and they have been given remedial training etc of course) have consistently shown that they are poor.
I am all in favour of reducing the admin task, but letâs get rid of some of the pointless trivia rather than finding reasons why we shouldnât do some basic personnel development activity.