This html article is produced from an uncorrected text file through optical character recognition. Prior to 1940 articles all text has been corrected, but from 1940 to the present most still remain uncorrected. Artifacts of the scans are misspellings, out-of-context footnotes and sidebars, and other inconsistencies. Adjacent to each text file is a PDF of the article, which accurately and fully conveys the content as it appeared in the issue. The uncorrected text files have been included to enhance the searchability of our content, on our site and in search engines, for our membership, the research community and media organizations. We are working now to provide clean text files for the entire collection.
It used to be that a collision at sea or a grounding was the most feared act of God—or man—which could blast a promising naval career. Now it is likely that a reporting senior who cannot write and mark fitness reports is a more imminent danger. The remedy is better and more carefully written judgments of juniors. For even though fitness report writing is an art, the rudiments are easily mastered.
A Pentagon bureaucrat may seem an unlikely source of useful advice on how to mark and write fitness reports. However, for a decade or so, I have been gleaning comments from everyone I know who has sat on a command-screen or selection board- These comments have necessarily been general, because of the oath taken by participants on boards, but they have built a pattern of what constitutes an effective—or damaging—fitness report. They have also indicated a surprising, almost alarming, incidence of apparently unintentional “poor” fitness reports. By “poor” I mean a report which superficially looks okay and was meant to be favorable but which doesn’t help and may hurt.
Case, but it can happen in highly selected groups: ‘P department heads, squadron commanding offiCers in an air wing, a test and evaluation squadron, tVen some places in Washington. I know of one case
WhD? The fitness report form is reasonably straightforward; the problem comes about through inflation. Periodically, the format is revised to roll ack the inflationary effect and spread the grades, nis works temporarily with the inexperienced and some others, but many old hands don’t bite. Those who follow the new form literally soon find that s°me good people they graded “Good” have gotten Passed over, contrary to everyone’s expectations. The ensuing shock waves get the word around, and it °esn 1 rake long for the grades to cluster around the *Sh, left end again. All of the above is directly contrary to all official policy. It is nevertheless a fact of 1 e that high graders give their subordinates a selector! advantage while “realistic” graders prematurely and unintentionally terminate some careers.
The way selection or screening boards learn to live Wlth this apparent but unreal uniform pattern of excellence is reliance upon service reputation and, if r at fails, by a search for nuances, oddities, and sub- c eties. These may tell a story which separates the Promising officer from the merely diligent one. As C e rank of an officer increases, so does the stringency ^irh which these judgments are applied. It is just t e«e subtle distinctions which open the door to the ^intentionally damaging fitness report (and provide |_.e opportunity to kill intentionally while being *°d). Because the whole thing is contrary to policy, t ere is obviously not much official guidance on what to do or not to do.
. Unintentional Bad Marks: Frequently, the most SlgnifiCant thing on fitness report is the officer’s ranking. Because of the breakout of contemporaries y Percentage and the actual ranking of those rec- urnrnended for accelerated promotion, it is often pos- Sl e to accurately place an officer in a definite peck- lng order. This can be bad, intentionally or uninten- tlonally. Avoid
the unintentional. For example, if Seven officers are being reported on and the seventh ^ the only one not recommended or the only one in e 10% block, he is being singled out as a distant perhaps dead) Jagj p)on’t do things like that if you °n 1 mean to. The above sounds like an extreme
in which more than a dozen officers were involved, and one was (probably inadvertently) singled out by being the only man ranked in the lowest percentage block. Being last is never good, even if ranked in the top one percent. Being last and singled out is a real hit. (But words can sometimes repair or even eliminate the damage; see below.)
Ranking can lead to even finer distinctions. An operations officer who has three or four—or possibly more—officers of the same rank graded ahead of him is in trouble. Any officer in a billet usually considered to lead the pack will be hurt by a ranking which does not confirm that he does, in fact, lead the pack. Conversely, a junior department head will really be boosted by a ranking which indicates he is performing as well as or better than his more senior cohorts. But rankings which retrogress on succeeding reports by the same senior will hurt.
While many “performance,” “desirability," and “personal traits” grades are tertiary in impact, a few can convey a distinct negative impression. For example, the comments may indicate that an officer has been in charge of a detachment or has been acting executive officer. If so, a “B” grade in desirability for command isn’t even faint praise. Many people will interpret it as a warning flag. In a different vein, any professional who received less than an “A” in “Navy Organizational Support” will appear to have been guilty of some kind of deviant activity. A mediocre mark in “Personal Behavior” has the same effect.
Most reporting seniors (but not necessarily all drafters) recognize that a failure to recommend for promotion is a hit, almost no matter what else the report says. Some, however, don’t recognize (or forget) that a failure to recommend for command also hurts after a certain seniority is reached. Such a failure will gain added impact if the same reporting senior has previously made a positive recommendation. It will appear that he is backing off as a result of more careful reflection. Add these two to your check-off list. Omit them only when you mean to.
Failure to provide specifics and substance in the remarks is a mild form of hit. Whether intentional or not, a report relying largely on adjectives is weak. And that brings us to writing the comments. But before discussing that, we should note that no single subtle slam will severely damage an officer. Rather, it is the occurrence of several—not necessarily
similar—slams which suggests a pattern and permits inference to harden into judgment.
The Comments: The first key element of the comment section is an attention-getting first paragraph. It should be aimed at a selection board member screening his 49th jacket of the day at 0830 on a rainy Saturday morning. On this initial screen, he has only seconds per fitness report. Your objective is to make him stop and read this one, or at least flag the microfiche for later reading. Set the tone of the whole report in the first sentence.
“LCDR X has succeeded where most have failed.” (Note the most instead of many.)
“We have tried hard to find the limits of LT Y’s abilities and failed.” (Maybe too strong for a J.O.)
“LT F can do anything superbly(Note the emphasis.)
“This officer goes through life pushing doors marked ‘pull.’” (Apocryphal.)
Then there should be a sentence describing the officer’s billet or simply naming it if that is enough.
The next paragraph(s) should be specific and clear. You’ve got that board member’s attention; now you’re trying to arm him with facts which he can use to convince other members of the board. First you tell him what the officer has done. Exactly what you write depends upon the actual facts. If an officer has enough concrete accomplishments, a listing of them all, one after another, may suffice. Such a case is relatively rare, or at least unintelligible to someone of a different warfare specialty. Instead, you should describe the officer’s work briefly, emphasizing any unusual or onerous demands encountered. For staff and Washington jobs, the description may be a little longer, because it should be written so that someone unfamiliar with that particular area can form a judgment.
Next describe how he did the job. If you have enough specifics, well done’s, and the like, you can afford to understate the adjectives. Quotations from higher authorities describing the quality of work, even if informal, are useful and unusual. (Keep a file quoting oral atta-boys from the commodore, air wing commander, etc., which can be largely attributed to
A primary objective in writing fitness reports is to get the finest officers promoted. But because grades are generally inflated, the reporting senior does well to use some finesse in articulating the qualities of his best-performing officers.
an individual’s effort, even if they are directed at the command as a whole.) But the key is being specific. If all you can think of are adjectives, you’re weakening the report. Specifics are hard to come by sometimes, especially in judgmental, day-to-day things such as seamanship and airmanship. Think hard. You can probably say something like this:
“This officer’s superb seamanship has converted one actual and at least two potential emergencies into smooth, safe evolutions.”
“The quality of this officer’s airmanship is suggested by the fact that he is invariably selected to fly senior officers and high-ranking civilians (including on one occasion the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State) ...”
Even if you don’t have the basis for making such statements, you can refer to competitive exercise scores, bombing scores, admin inspection grades, and the like. Be sure also to mention combat time or major fleet exercises.
Possibly also relevant are extracurricular activities, especially graduate school or correspondence courses and, if related to warfare specialty, sport flying, skydiving, and the like. If an aviator in a desk job has somehow managed to log some Navy flight time
but
a tiger when you get to know him, maybe that
<n anything, say so and describe it in some detail if S1gnificant (for example, an attack aviator who has own back-seat in an F-14). Similarly, if an officer has had unusual breadth of contact with seniors or those outside the Navy, describe it here.
LCDR q is comfortable and effective in face-to- face discussions with flag officers and senior OSD civilians.”
n some cases, there is enough to say about an officer s personal attributes to warrant a separate ^hort paragraph. If your man is superficially quiet s °uld be said (but emphasize that the quietness is superficial, or say nothing). If he has shown exceptional moral courage, say so. Ditto for other unusual talents such as negotiating ability. If an officer as an impressive personality inventory, it’s not a ad idea to sketch it out, perhaps as a lead-in before ' e final paragraph. My favorite is this one:
It is unusual to encounter someone who is at the same time forceful and persuasive, subtle and direct. This rare blend of qualities led to CAPT L’s greatest. . .”
In writing the above, do not forget that most readers of fitness reports will be straining their eyes '"to a microfiche reader. The problem applies with °rce to members of selection or screening boards.
tee dense pages of verbiage with no spacing will ttty even a Navy Cross for heroism. Underlining or 'he use of ^ bullets
rea,ly makes things jump out onto the screen. Use 'j’.nderlining sparingly, or the effect will be reversed, tdlets used to highlight a fist of specific accomplishments and more specifics
are very useful and are hard to overdo if restricted to
sPecifics.
Another editorial comment is to avoid anything y lch could be construed as faint praise. If he is the est, say so; don’t say “one of the best” unless you mean to weaken the impact. Say “the best Lieutenant 'his ship” or use key phrases such as “head and °ulders.” Keep the tone positive, use the first per- s°n (but don’t overdo it), and keep the sentences 0rt and hard-hitting. One strong short descriptive Sentence about a specific accomplishment is worth rtl0re than four adjectives. Quality is much more important than quantity; a three-page comment almost 8uarantees skimming.
Finally, the general comments should avoid detail ‘ °ut things which could be two-edged swords. Excruciating detail about an aircraft accident designed t0 show it wasn’t the officer’s fault, for example, could easily backfire. It would be better to say nothing unless you want it in the record as an explanation for a hit in airmanship.
The final paragraph summarizes your recommendations on the officer and what you believe to be his ultimate potential. Promotion potential, command capacity, and future duty recommendations are obligatory unless, as stated previously, you desire a weak or harmful report. Some positive phrases can convey an added impact:
“Promote him now. ”
“He would be an outstanding destroyer captain now.”
“LCDR T is unmistakably displaying the early signs of flag potential.”
The warning about two-edged swords also applies here. The following phrase is literally exact for an officer recommended for early promotion:
“[B] should be promoted ahead of the majority of his contemporaries.”
But rather than conveying urgency or enthusiasm, the phrase suggests a weak position. Unless weakness is intentional, it would be much better to write:
“. . . ahead of the vast majority . . .”
Even the common
“. . . most strongly recommended for early promotion” is stronger than the first example.
The final paragraph is also the place to set right the slam, if any, implicit in an officer’s ranking. When you’ve been forced to hit someone, say why you ranked him where he is or where he stands in normal competition. Even the best-written fitness reports frequently omit this optional form of ranking. The omission throws the burden of research or judgment onto the reader of the fitness report. He may not have the time, insight, or data to do anything. Clear it up yourself, if you can:
“LCDR D ranks four of four. This is because two of the LCDRs are selected CDRs and the third was a CNO fellow. In almost any other ship, LCDR D would rank one of any number.”
“LCDR L’s ranking reflects the composition of this division: highly-selected officers of all warfare specialties. Among my submarine officers, LCDR L ranks first."
This latter type of explanation is especially helpful, if relevant, because it also allows the reviewer to construct his own, more accurate, ranking by warfare specialty. “My best destroyerman” takes on special importance and meaning if the officer was ranked 8 for early promotion and there were 14 officers covered by the fitness report. This ranking could help not only the officer but also all the other destroyer types involved. Explicit ranking also can be used to
add meaning to the kiss-goodbye one-of-one fitness report. The detaching report, or one in which an officer is not ranked against anyone, will be weak otherwise. If the officer really ranks high in your estimation, say so unmistakably, but without adjectives.
“This officer stands number two of all the CDRs I have known.”
“His performance has improved, and were this a regular report, I would rank him 2 of 9 LTs.” “CAPT K was preceded in his billet by a series of distinguished officers, four of whom subsequently attained flag rank. He has always equalled and frequently exceeded this performance.”
For competing superstars, something like the following is really good news:
“I have reluctantly indicated a ranking for the four top LCDRs in FLAPLANT. The difference between them in performance and potential is razor- thin. I emphasize to any selection board that LCDR N would stand number one in almost any other group of 14 line officers. I may be wrong in not so ranking him here.”
Merely stating that N is one of a specially selected group usually doesn’t have the desired impact. After all, the Navy is full of elite groups of officers (just ask around in any submarine wardroom or fighter ready room). A real “head and shoulders” type being ranked in the middle or bottom of a group of superstars needs something more striking.
The final paragraph is also the place to say something important about special people:
“I strongly recommend him for detailing to those positions of special responsibility which require fearless objectivity.”
“He should be flagged for detailing to positions of responsibility usually considered beyond the capability of one his rank.”
Specific Aspects of Performance, Skills, and the Other Marks: So much for sketching out the fundamentals. But what about the front half of the fitness report worksheet, which covers “Specific Aspects of Performance” and the half of the back which has places for marks on “Warfare Specialty Skills,” “Desirability,” and “Personal Traits”? The marks on “Command,” “Seamanship,” “Airmanship,” and "Watchstanding” are very important, particularly if they’re not the highest. The other marks, as implied by the fact that they’re discussed third in this article, take third place to the evaluation ranking and comments. Although they take a lot of space on the rough, they’re not nearly so prominent to our harassed board member. Someone may refer to them to shed light on an otherwise deviant fitness report, but the reasons probably showed up in the write-up. But remember, a deviation to the right here is a hit, nevertheless. It just doesn’t show as prominently as others.
In conclusion, here are some mechanical techniques which may be useful. First, have everyone keep notes and ticklers. As the first step in report preparation, have each officer list what he thinks were his specific accomplishments. These lists help ensure against failing memories up the line, particularly in large ships and units. They also may disclose the unsuspected correspondence course or civic activity of note. Some think it reasonable to ask each officer to include his preferences for future duties and schools- When the roughs are all written up, spread them all out on your desk. You already know who your superstars are; their reports are almost always easy and enjoyable to write. Your next level of talent may not be quite so obvious but will probably show up with comment sections markedly longer than the average. Last, there will be the officers with short write-ups. Be sure this is a reflection of the officers’ performance itself, not of the drafter’s performance- Then review your own checklist of do’s and don’t’s with all the reports in front of you and make corrections accordingly.
Finally, the art of writing a well-conceived fitness report is not just an exercise of leadership, altruism, and loyalty to the Navy. It is all of those, but it is also an act of enlightened self-interest. Obviously, a reporting senior can judge his drafters by the quality of their drafts. A screening or selection board will quickly identify the commanding officer who grades everyone the same or the one who is a hard marker- A systematically hard marker may become notorious- The way you grade and write fitness reports may become part of your own service reputation.
a Mr. Haering was a Naval Reserve midshipman and was graduated from Princeton in 1952. He served on active duty on board the USS Cambria (APA-36) from 1952 to 1955 as an air controller and CIC officer. He then worked successively in the Bureau of the Budget and the Operation* Evaluation Group (OEG). In 1961-1962 he was Commander Task Force 77 and Commander Seventh Fleet OEG representative. In 1965-1966 he was senior OEG representative at CinCPacFlt and had temporary additional duty with several carrier division staffs on Yankee Station. He was awarded the Secretary of the Navy’s Distinguished Public Services Award for his analyses of combat operations. Since 1967, he has been Assistant for Special Analysis and Head, Strike Warfare Branch in the CNO Systems Analysis Division.