FY16 Chief Selection Board

[Guest sparks2801]

Yes, I would greatly appreciate that I've got a few hours to kill.

http://www.navy.mil/mcpon/docs/CPO%20365%20GUIDANCE.pdf     This is the guidance put out by the MCPON.  It goes over a lot of things to include Phase II events, and final test, and pinning.

[Guest NDFAN]

How much weight do reporting evals have in regards to SUM and CUM averages? I was .04 under the CUM avg on my reporting eval, does this really hurt me?

[Guest passionateshorty123]

Does anyone know what changed from the guidance mcpon posted for fy14-15 selects to fy16 selects?

[Guest Squidly]

http://www.navy.mil/mcpon/docs/CPO%20365%20GUIDANCE.pdf This is the guidance put out by the MCPON. It goes over a lot of things to include Phase II events, and final test, and pinning.

That, is from last year.

Does anyone know what changed from the guidance mcpon posted for fy14-15 selects to fy16 selects?

I think someone already answered it...

We got the Guiding principles for phase 2, but they are the same as last year.

[Guest Squidly]

To save myself (and the rest of us) from replying to all the specific CDB quotes individually, I offer this general reply (sorry Tony).

There have been great points made regarding the value of the post-results CDBs, and I can't say that I disagree with much of it. But (you knew that was coming) for those PO1s that are engaging their respective CPO messes (and any happenstance or historical contacts), that actively search for the blunt opinions and hard truths, proactively seek out opportunities to challenge themselves (and their peers, subordinates, etc)...

The "keep doing what you're doing", "wait your turn" or "you tell me why" CDBs seem to me (personally) to be the norm rather than the exception. Are they perfect? Certainly not. Were they born from genuine good intentions? Absolutely.

I think what the frustrated few that have voiced an opinion regarding the topic are trying to say is; when it comes down to it, after we have followed all the guidance (solicited and not) and are told the same thing year after year - what's next? How can we help to, or actively effect an improvement in this process? For us, giving up is as much of a viable option as would be just deciding not to come to work anymore. I love my Navy, and I know you do too!

[Tony]

 (sorry Tony).

 

I am clueless why you are apologizing to me but okay. 

[Tony]

It's 2011 but detailed 

 

Youtube

NAVY CDB PART 1 OF 2

 

NAVY CDB PART 2 OF 2

[Guest Squidly]

I am clueless why you are apologizing to me but okay.

It was an attempted quip at the several reminder posts about how to properly quote and reply to a post.

[Tony]

Career Development Board (CDB)

 

I don't know if I can deleted this because this is where I made the poll 

 

[Tony]

It was an attempted quip at the several reminder posts about how to properly quote and reply to a post.

 

 

Ooooohhhhh.... you da man!! Thanks 

[Tony]

okay, I made a poll. I think you might have to refresh or go to the main page and come back in. It will be at the top. If I should question it better let me know fast.

[Tony]

Somebody a while ago stated that post selection-CDB's are not useful because we do not get any feedback from the board.  Maybe your question could be, "Would you consider CDB useful if you got feedback from the selection board on why you were not selected?"

 

Thanks but I think that is too narrowly defined because there might be other reasons.

[Guest TheDCman30]

I transfered two weeks ago so the results will be sent to my old command they are currently on deployment. Will my new command be able to access them?

[Guest FC1B]

There seems to be a lot of talk about post-selection CDBs. If you are being told that you are doing everything right and you just have to wait your turn, then you need to take a second and seek out advice from more Chiefs. There is no check in the box, you cannot simply do x amount of things and become a Chief. If you enter your CDB with the mindset that you wont get anything out of it, or that you don't have any areas that you need to improve on, then you're not ready to be a Chief. Every person has room to improve and we all should approach every day as an opportunity to learn and grow more. Best of luck to all of you!

If there is nothing from the selection board telling you why you didn't get selected, then why have a non-select CDB. They put out the precepts every year, most of which say the pretty much the same thing every year. A person can fulfill everyone of them every year and still not get selected. I agree people should always look to improve, but when told what they are looking for, then do that and not get selected can be frustrating. Then at the non-select CDB they just tell you to keep doing what your doing "your number/day will come". At some point you run out of numbers and days and obviously what that person is doing isn't "good" enough.

[Tony]

The poll is in full swing if you don't know. Just scroll to the top. 

[Guest NavySquid79]

For all the Chief's in this forum, did any of you have a eval within the last five years that was under the co cum average when you were selected?

[Guest]

For all the Chief's in this forum, did any of you have a eval within the last five years that was under the co cum average when you were selected?

Yes, my first eval at current command.

[Guest NavySquid79]

Yes, my first eval at current command.

Ok so one will not sink you then. I will have two out of the seven in my last five years. My frocking and my check in at my current command. All others are high above the co cum average, my last one was soy and number one of 22. So the way I'm looking at this, please correct me if I'm wrong, is if you are consistently under the co cumulative average that is a killer. But say you take a check in eval or a frocking eval (like in my case) under the co cum ave and bounce out on your next eval it should not be looked at negativity.

[Tony]

I'll open the forum to new registration for an hour or so.

[Guest]

Ok so one will not sink you then. I will have two out of the seven in my last five years. My frocking and my check in at my current command. All others are high above the co cum average, my last one was soy and number one of 22. So the way I'm looking at this, please correct me if I'm wrong, is if you are consistently under the co cumulative average that is a killer. But say you take a check in eval or a frocking eval (like in my case) under the co cum ave and bounce out on your next eval it should not be looked at negativity.

Correct. Should look like a sawtooth, low medium high. Low at first with progression as each eval is slid across the table for your viewing pleasure! Any place that gives you high marks right off the bat is doing you a disservice. How can one improve so to speak. The marks say very little as long as they go up each time at a given place (don't stagnate). The writeup is where you can explain why! #1MP due to % restrictions or something similar.

[Guest DeepseaSeabee]

I've got a question about details in an eval. Specifically about me being the SOY runner up two years in a row. I wasn't selected as the senior SOY but I was the runner up 2 years in a row. I kind of feel like Ricky Bobby on this subject where he says "if your not first your last". So my thought on it is, board members would make that same joke when they saw mention of being the runner up, laugh and say "why even mention it in your eval if your werent selected". I'm pretty proud that out of 33 First classes I was number 2 when it came to SOY. So again, my question to you is would you even mention it somewhere?  

[Guest]

I've got a question about details in an eval. Specifically about me being the SOY runner up two years in a row. I wasn't selected as the senior SOY but I was the runner up 2 years in a row. I kind of feel like Ricky Bobby on this subject where he says "if your not first your last". So my thought on it is, board members would make that same joke when they saw mention of being the runner up, laugh and say "why even mention it in your eval if your werent selected". I'm pretty proud that out of 33 First classes I was number 2 when it came to SOY. So again, my question to you is would you even mention it somewhere?

Opinion: no. Other Chief's may say yes. However, I would mention as much as possible how your guidance and leadership directly led to your Sailor's success on x, y, and z. While the other guys eval is half filled with look how good I am, yours will be about your folks. Which is what right looks like!

[Guest msteve0910]

If there is nothing from the selection board telling you why you didn't get selected, then why have a non-select CDB. They put out the precepts every year, most of which say the pretty much the same thing every year. A person can fulfill everyone of them every year and still not get selected. I agree people should always look to improve, but when told what they are looking for, then do that and not get selected can be frustrating. Then at the non-select CDB they just tell you to keep doing what your doing "your number/day will come". At some point you run out of numbers and days and obviously what that person is doing isn't "good" enough.

my point exactly if I am not selected I would like to know where I fell short, my rate has a 34% advancement which is the lowest it's been in a long time but giving me a 1 in 3 chance so I guess if I am not selected I will have to contact the 29 people selected and found out what they have in their records that put them on top

[Guest]

if I am not selected I will have to contact the 29 people selected and found out what they have in their records that put them on top

Now that sounds like a solid plan.

A lot of mention of "why" IRT non-select CDB's, if you are not reaching out to more recent board members and you are settling for "keep doin what you're doing" or "you time will come" then you are wrong shipmates!

What I am saying may not be the popular thing people want to hear BUT just like the Chiefs didn't know the results would be out, a Chief doesn't know what the board is looking for if he or she has sat one (and recently at that!).

The key to being successful as leaders ESPECIALLY Chiefs and Chiefs in training is our ability to network.....Simple every day tools such as FLTMPS to locate a rated MCPO who sat the board, or last years board, a respectful E-Mail from you to him or her introducing yourself and asking for guidance is all it takes to give you that insight to see the man behind the cutain....

(Not to sound like a broken record but I feel like reaching out to help, share what I did that gave me the honest feed bact IRT a mystical process AND NOW? it's all clear to me and I've never sat a board in my life but made CPO first time up (after PRT failure fell off) and SCPO first time up.)

[Guest]

I do want to clarify something from my previous post, I would be remiss if I did not....

Chiefs know how to make Chiefs out of FCPO's, we know the key elements the board is looking for, I guess my ultimate point is don't settle for the staple answer. Challenge the statuesque, that's what Chiefs do, that's what Chiefs in training should be doing, we can all express our frustrations on the lack of feedback from the board process or we can take action but remember, there is a reason the Chiefs Mess is held at such a high esteem. We are the only service that goes through this riggerous process for selection, the only service who dedicates time IN ADDITION TO COMPLETING THE MISSION to train our replacement for 6 weeks.

For those of you who are selected, you should be overwhelmed with a sense of pride to know you were selected as the best and fully qualified, a sustained superior performer.

For those of you who were not as fortunate to be selected, the above statement should make you want to strive to he that FCPO who should be wearing khakis next year!