COMMENTARY: Honest feedback is key to performance improvement

  • Published
  • By Lt. Col. Charles Barkhurst
  • 100th Comptroller Squadron commander
RAF MILDENHALL, England --  Most people don't fail on purpose. Failure usually stems from one of three reasons: lack of training, lack of resources or lack of guidance. As supervisors, providing guidance is critical to ensure our subordinates' success. Guidance in the form of written feedback is an important technique that is both inexpensive and offers a great return on investment.

As a squadron commander, when reviewing draft enlisted performance reports, I sometimes find evaluations with markdowns in performance areas. I then review the performance feedback to see if the ratee's feedback correlates to the markings on the EPR. On occasion, the ratee received no feedback, or received feedback with no reference about performance issues identified in the EPR. Delving into the ratee's personal information file and talking to the rater, I've discovered that the supervisor never presented any letters of counseling, letters of admonishment or letters of reprimand to rectify behavior and rehabilitate the individual. The feedback might just say, "You are doing great, keep up the good work." However, the ratee received an EPR with one or more markdowns.

When asking supervisors why they didn't provide feedback or take disciplinary action, most said they didn't want to hurt their subordinate's career. Nonetheless, they chose to use the EPR itself as a counseling tool and marked the person down. That is quite a contradiction. While LOCs and LORs don't become part of an enlisted member's permanent record, the EPR does; and it seldom explains the reason for the markdown.

The key for a supervisor is to honestly evaluate a subordinate's performance. Supervisors must have the courage to look their subordinates in the eyes and give them truthful written feedback. Feedback must be relevant and outline performance expectations. It's better to receive an honest negative feedback than a career-impacting EPR. The markings and the rating should never be a surprise to the ratee. The first time a subordinate finds out he/she is not performing well should not be when that person reads his/her EPR.

Sometimes strong feedback isn't enough and an LOC, LOA or LOR is appropriate. But it doesn't mean a career death sentence. Depending on the disciplinary issue, it's possible for an enlisted member to receive an LOC or LOR and completely recover during the reporting period. With the concurrence of the squadron commander and first sergeant, if a person had no further disciplinary issues during the period, a supervisor may request the LOC, LOA or LOR to be removed from the subordinate's personal information file. In that case, the document served its intended rehabilitative effect with negligible, if any, adverse impact on the EPR.

Bottom line, at the end of the reporting period both the rater and ratee need to be on the same page. Written feedbacks -- LOCs, LOAs and LORs -- provide the tools for supervisors to provide guidance, and for the ratee to understand expectations and areas of improvement. If used properly, feedback ensures subordinates will never be surprised by their EPR ratings and supervisors will have concrete examples that justify EPR ratings.