PREPARATION OF FITNESS REPORTS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP82-00357R000700020002-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 7
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 10, 1998
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: October 30, 1956
• Content Type: REPORT

Approved For Release 2000/08/~.s.~ CAA-DP82-00357R000700020002-5
*air
TO: All Area Chiefs
25X1A2d2 FROM. Chief,
SUBJECT: Preparation of Fitness Reports
25X1A2d2
OC 564603
30 October 1956
1, Under date of 30 August I sent you reference, which I hoped
would help in making fitness reports as realistic and meaningful as
possible. The same material was furnished to all Division and Staff
Chiefs here at Headquarters. Very soon the question was raised "If
anMtakes the lead in this matter and makes fitness reports honest 25X1A2d2
realistic, will not the members of 1111111 suffer by ccmyparison
with other components of KUJSM?" My answer was: "Well, not necessarilys
Promotions,. rotations and assignments within re well controlled 25X1A2d2
and rarely will our people be placed in comparison with other components."
This, of course, is not true when application for membership in the
career staff is being considered by a Panel of Examiners or the KUBARK
Selection Board. There may possibly be other instances which do not
come to mind at the moment.
2.'I held a meeting today, attended by all Staff and Division Chiefs,
some Deputues and the Chairman of our CSB to consider the problem. We
had a frank discussion of this matter, and after discussing all the
parts of the fitness report where ratings must be made, we came to the
conclusion that. there should be typed on Part I of the report under
Section B 2, a statement substantially as. follows: "This report has 25X1A2d2
been prepared under the criteria established by Chief - in 0C-56. 5'
dated 30 August 1956, to make fitness reports as realistic and meaningful
as possible, As an example, therefore, a ntuerical rating of 3 in
Section'1, Part 11 should not be considered as indicative of inadequacy
but more appropriately as average within the age,,. experience and grade
of the individual rated. "
3. Fitness reports are of primary interest to two groups. Employees
being rated or evaluated are rightly interested because of their natural
desire to know where they stand with their supervisors. The second
roup is in the management field and this group requires as a tool of
management, information on the performance and potential of each indivi?
dual. Therefore, what is required in a fitness report is that the
supervisor making the rating gives his honest opinion about the indivi-
dual being rated. Important functions of a supervisor are making such
honest opinions, accurately reporting them and ccmmunica taming them-te the
individual. Attempts on the part of the supervisor ro guess what
Approved For Release 2000/08/16 CIA-RDP82-00357R000700020002-5
 S E C R E T
Approved For Rase 2000/08/16 CIA-RDP82-07R000700020002-5
f 2 .
standards others will use and to influence action by deliberately rate
hjg2l can only result in the long run in increased errors in personnel
management and a less efficient organization. Would our tasks not be
25X1A2d1 easier and would not be even more effective than it is if it were
possible in every instance to have in each position the "best qualified"
individual for that position? This, of course? is not completely possible,
but honest and realistic fitness reports will tend to make that more
nearly possible,
4. i think that we will get more realistic fitness reports if we
depart from the injunction that "individuals will be rated by the immediate
25X1 A2d 1 supervisor." In larger elements of this gets pretty far down the
line and the rater and reviewing official are too close to the individual
rated to permit complete objectivity, It would be better if one supervisor
rated all the personnel in an activity because then he would apply one set
of standards to all individuals. Here at Headquarters, I have asked that no
one below a Branch Chief rate and the Divisiea Chief review.
5? After a discussion, longer than the above# but in general along
the same line, we considered the fitness report itself. We started with
Section C-i "Job Performance Evaluation." The evaluation properly lies
somewhere between 3 and 4, but there is too large a jump between 5 and. 6.
In my opinion;, 5 should read "a fine performance; carries out most of his
responsibilities exceptionally well." Some people have, and rx'gb fully so
in my opinion, inserted a rating of 5.5 or 5.8 for example. In this same
Section there's a small place for cc2mments, Here, where you can't honestly
rate a man 6, but think he is better than 5, you can say just that.
Incidentally, in all ratings it must be considered that no one is perfect
and you strengthen the evaluation of above average and outstanding ratings
by rating some people, and perhaps most people, in some respect somewhat
below the average.
6. About the same comments seem applicable to the ratings under
Section C-2. Almost no one really merits a 6 or 7 rating here, It is
much better to rate 4 or 5 and then under Item C-3 where you have an
opportunity to discuss strengths and weaknesses, tell really what the man
is capable of. On the subject of weaknesses,, I do not rate a characteristic
or an idiosyncrancy as a weakness unless it is so pronounced that it, (a)
interferes with the performance of his job, or (b) interferes with others
in the performance of their job, or (c) its so glaring as to require an
inordinate amount of attention from the supervisor. We all have weaknesses
but unless they fall in one of the above categories, they are probably not
worth mentioning. I usually say "no significant weaknesses."
7. With respect to Section D. the above remarks I think are equally
applicable.
SECRET
Approved For Release 2000/08/16 : CIA-RDP82-00357R000700020002-5
 S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2000/08/16 : CIA-RDP82-00857R000700020002-5
-
?5X1 A2d 1
?5X1 A2d 1
-3
3. With respect to part II, Section G, I recently rated a Division.
Chief who'has twice been an'Area Chief and who is one of our "stars." I
gave him a numerical rating of 5. This means exxCtly what it says, that
he "will probably adjust quickly to more. responsible duties without further
training." Here I had in mind that the "more responsible duties" would be
Deputy.Chief,~ He no doubt will adjust quickly without further
training, other than an the job, but I couldn't rate him 6 or 7. On the
other hand, in Section G-1+, concerning his potential, I stated that he
definitely is one of those who should be considered for a tour as Deputy
Chief Whatever we do in giving numerical ratings, we must not
establish a comparison based solely on a numerical system. A balancing
of the numerical rating with modifying ccamnents in other parts of the
form will prevent any injustice being done to our people when they are
compared with others in other components. I didn't hesitate when applying
descriptive rating n mbers in Section G-2, to rate him 2; i.e., an
average supervisor in the situation "when immediate subordinates include
members of the opposite sex." He laughingly admitted,, when I showed him
this rating that he didn't merit a rating of 3 - "that he would be a
strong supervisor in this situation." In Section G-1, you really have
a'good opportunity to help in the management of personnel by indicating
what you think an individual's growth potential is in this organization.
You can indicate how far you think the individual may go if he continues
at the same rate of progress that he has demonstrated to you. There
will be some individuals., and I am sure you know several, who have
reached or will shortly reach their maximum potential. Others will
spring up ahead of their contemporaries and be expected to excell them
in the years to come.
9. With respect to Section H, you may have no plans for training or
other developmental experience for this individual, however, you can
indicate what training, etc., he should have or what assignment you think
would broaden him.
10. In Section H-2 there should be put down things that the CSB
should be aware of in dealing with rotation assignments. It s isa important
or
to know whether or not the individual's family may limit h
affect his assignability.
11. Section 1, description of the individual is quite important.
This one we had considerable discussion about today and I will run over
the categories briefly using the same numbers that are in this Section:
1. Able to see another's point of view thinktthere
m~are
fewer to be rated above average in this category
to be rated below average. Most people are just about average when
it comes to seeing anthers viewpoint. The ones who are below
average in this category are likely to 19e older ones, those more
set in their ways and mere obstinate.
Approved For Release 2000/09/16: t&DP82-00357R000700020002-5
 Approved For Release 2000/08/16s CIA.tD 82-00357R000700020002-5
2. Can make decisions on his own when need arises - This is
a very important'category and we will find more departures from
average in this category than in scare of the others.
3. Has initiative - This, like category 2 will show more
divergence.
4. Is analytic in his thinking. 19. Thinks clearly -
These two are related, but of the two.. I think 19 more important.
A person who is above average in analytical thinking really must
be one who puts down all the pros and cons and ccmeS out after
analysis with an objective answer.
5. Strives constantly for new knowledge and ideas - it seems
to me that we have a sharp divergence here perhaps along the line
that those who read only the comic sections are below average and
those avid students who keep abreast of things are above average.
6. Knows when to seek assistance - This requires little
discussion. Again there are those who don't.
7. Can get along with people - Most people get along with
other people and they are just about average in this respect.
Occasionally you will find one who stands out above his contempo-
raries and also there are scme who are not really members of the
team because they can't get along with their fellows.
8. Has memory for facts - This is an 'important attribute in
certain jobs, but most people are about the same, i.e., average,
and it is not derrogatory if they are rated as average. A secretary
or an administrative assistant is expected to have developed a good
memory for facts. Also, I think an engineer and technicians have
this more highly developed than the rest of us.
9. Gets things done - People fall pretty much into two categories
here, average and below average. Occasionally you will find one who
is above average, possibly even outstanding, but I think they would
be a rarity.
10. Can cope with emergencies - Here there is a fairly sharp
demarcation line between those who can deal with unusual and sudden
situations and those who are ccmpletely helpless when confronted
with something "not in the pattern." We discussed today, what is
meant by emergencies. Of course, this varies widely. It is my
belief that this is meant to deal with situations in which the
individual has had no previous experience. For example, the Office
of a Division Chief. I call him on the phone, neither he nor his
Deputy are present, only a recent MD. The one who answers the
phone says they are neither here, but. I think Mr, so and so can
S E C R E T
Approved For Release 2000/08/16 : CIA-RDP82-00357R000700020002-5
 Approved For Rase 2000/08/19 ECW lfDTP82-O .57R000700020002-5
help you and proceeds to find Mr. so and so. He too is faced with
something he hasn't. encountered before, but he picks up the ball
and starts action to satisfy my requirements. I would say that
he could cope with an emergency. Of course, there will be other
situations in which a radio operator at a one man station, or one
man who is alone on shift, but handles the situation as best he
can and stays with it until he has gotton results. He can cope
with an emergency. You all know other examples.
ll. Has high standards of accomplishment - We demand of
all our people high standards of accomplishment and you all well
know those who do not have such standards. This is an important
category and I agree that there are a number of people who are
above average.
12. Shows originality - This is one of the categories, if
possessed by an individual, tends to raise him well above mediocrity.
13. Accepts responsibilities - This is an important category,
and we expect most people to show an increasing ability to accept
responsibility as they grow in stature and have more experience.
14. Admits his errors - I think most of us are about average
in this respect., I know I an. It is hard to picture and individual
who is above average or outstanding in this respect, but it is
easy to pick out those who are obstinate and categorically refuse
to admit errors even when proven to be wrong.
15. Responds well to supervision - It is also the exception
to find an individual who doesn't respond to supervision, but we
should definitely rate those few below average.
16. Does his job without strong support - I think most
people are average, and a few definitely below average, and
these should be so rated.
17. Comes up with solutions to problems - I really don't
know what it means and have no comment.
25X1A2d1 ^ Is observant - I don't think this was written with
in mind.
19. See No. 1+.
20. Completes assignments within allowable time limits -
It is only the lar;gard that sho-ild be pointed out here although
you will ocuasioyu1 !y find an who in"rariabiy completes
his assig=rents Pr21y and. accurately within the allotted time and
even ahead of time. He should be marked above average,
Approved For Release 2000/00/f6C U LDP82-00357R000700020002-5
 Approved For Rase 2000/08/16 : CIA-RDP82-0 '578000700020002-5
-6-
21. Is effective in discussions with associates - I think
the majority of people are average, aitho there are sane who are
almost ccmpletely ineffective in discussion with associates and
a few others you are always content to have represent you on
important matters.
22. Implements decisions regardless of own feelings - This
is most important because you can't have a good team if a
subordinate dons at act wholeheartedly as if you' dacision
was his, r wro`.1.1.1-1 not co:1$ der a .rata g of in thiti as in
many other cate;ri'Jes, as an i~idication of d?eficienc.tes, However,
there are sate who do this more naturally and more willing than
others and contrihntte greatly to team work. These should be
marked above average and in some cases, perhaps outstanding.
23. .%s th.-iiightfu'. of other .-s - I don't think its difficult
to rate indf.t idua1 ob j'.:-otlvrciy in this category.
24. Works we.L1 +tndar pressure - Here we have marked
diffeiences in people as to how they work under pressure.
25. Displays judgment - This is a difficult one because
it is often ;jo'tr jud ~mo it vs his judgme n.t, but over a considerable
period, an after the fact e-riew will show t;a~!,ner an individual
ecnsistertiy s.ac rs gooc. judLment or not- Often a clue can be
found in th;: way lie :nan--.gt,a his personal). li:L,o.
26, Is security conscious - In my opinion, this should be:
"is he or ain't he?" I maintain that members, of -who are 25X1 A2d 1
concerned with this category are no better than; average because
it is their job to be security c=seiou:;? I think everyone is
average except the indi'rc.dual. who repea-'W-e.lly has seeur ty
violatf.oxls e
27. Is versatile .. An individual who is a good ooeratcfri
a good technician, and a good supervisor is certainly more
versatile than the average when c ared to a contemporary who
may be only a fair technicians, but a good operator an(I not much
of a supervisor..
28. H:is criticism is constructive - It is easy to pick out
the people who have something to offer in their criticism as
opposed to those who complain., but have nothing constructive to
offer.
29., Feet.itates smooth operation of his office - offers a
wider atigv '_>j.' .l'& t; t.Q` :1 : 'nc o the Ct+.ie 3 ? ne I e y;:LQ are
exec:"' ~ "nl~'n"ab" s of tale 4v'a::1.f .3;:1~. be .I.TJ41"1 it
is 'i?a:l',_.. c=' " .S'11J;:i1C. (~~ cr
accordi:-.igly,
Approved For Release 2000/0 / 6 : PCFATRDP82-00357R000700020002-5
 " Approved For Re ase 200~/~891% ~ 1A-RDP82-Oq, 57R000700020002-5
_7_
30. Does not require strong and continuous supervision -
This may be said of almost all our people, and the ones who do
require strong and continued supervision are no doubt below
average in many other characteristics.
12. I don't 'know whether this discourse is of any value to you,
but it was worthwhile in our discussion today. I hope, if you have
..any questions, you will direct them to me either by dispatch or thru
the occasional visitors frcm Headquarters with when you have an
opportunity to discuss this matter.
ORIG: HIM
25X1A9a
Approved For Release 2I1 0: CIA-RDP82-00357R000700020002-5