While it can be tempting to hire someone else to draft your EPRs for you, there are several important considerations to weigh before having someone else “write my EPRs for me.” EPRs, or enlisted performance reports, are a critical part of any service member’s personnel record and career progression. As such, having someone else write them carries certain risks that are worth understanding fully.
To begin, it’s important to remember the purpose of EPRs. Fundamentally, EPRs are intended to provide an honest and objective assessment of a service member’s actual performance and contribution over the reporting period. They help establish a record of an individual’s qualifications, strengths, and areas for improvement. Supervisors rely on accurate EPRs to make promotion and assignment decisions. Hiring an outside party to draft your EPRs undermines this purpose and integrity of the evaluation system.
There is also a risk that an external writer may include claims or accomplishments that were not actually achieved by the rated individual. While “fluffing” may seem harmless, including dishonest or unearned accomplishments could amount to falsification of an official government record. If ever discovered, this level of deception would severely damage one’s credibility and career. It’s simply not worth the risk for the sake of a stronger-looking EPR.
In addition, having someone other than your supervisor or rater draft the EPR means they will lack first-hand observation and knowledge of your actual performance in your duty position. An outside contractor would have to rely entirely on any self-reported accomplishments and metrics provided by the rated individual. This removes the objectivity and credibility that comes from an evaluation by someone directly overseeing one’s work. Promotion boards and senior raters will rightly question evaluations that appear too glowing or lack the insight that direct supervision provides.
Practically speaking, hiring an external writer may also raise eyebrows within one’s chain of command. Supervisors are expected to draft evaluations for the individuals they are responsible for formally rating. Outsourcing this task could lead supervisors or senior raters to wonder whether the rated member is trying to obscure actual performance or push responsibility for the evaluation elsewhere. This type of perception could damage otherwise strong working relationships within a unit and hinder future support from supervisory leadership.
There are also legal and regulatory considerations regarding having third parties write official government records like EPRs. Military regulations and instructions provide specific guidance on who is authorized to draft evaluations and the evaluation process. Outsourcing the writing may violate these rules and policies. While penalties may be rare, it’s never advisable to take actions likely to violate military directives governing personnel evaluations.
At a practical level, having someone outside the chain of command draft an EPR also transfers ownership and responsibility away from the rated individual. Part of the developmental purpose of receiving feedback through evaluations is to stimulate self-reflection and improvement. When someone else generates the content, it provides less opportunity for personal engagement with the evaluation criteria, feedback, and goal-setting discussions with supervisors. This hampers one’s ongoing growth.
That said, it’s reasonable and advisable for service members to take active roles in managing their careers and evaluations. Some best practices include thoughtfully tracking one’s own accomplishments and impacts over the reporting period, developing draft bullets that highlight strengths and successes, and having supportive conversations with raters and senior support members. The supervisor should retain final control over the specific content and integrity of the official evaluation document. An outside third party drafting the entire report crosses ethicallines.
In the end, the risks of having someone else “write my EPRs for me” usually outweigh any perceived benefits. Performance evaluations are a fundamental part of military career management and should accurately reflect a service member’s actual work and development. While seeking feedback and advocacy is wise, outsourcing the evaluation process itself undermines its intended purpose and credibility. The smarter approach is to engage positively with one’s chain of command, maximize development opportunities, track meaningful contributions, and rely on true self-advocacy rather than potential acts of deception. One’s career progression and integrity are best served through honestly navigating the evaluation system as designed, not circumventing its intent and processes.
Before considering having a third party draft your official EPRs, carefully weigh the potential professional and ethical implications. Performance evaluations play a permanent role in documenting qualifications and are relied upon heavily for choices that impact career advancement. While self-advocacy has its place, the better path is to build real accomplishments, gain genuine support from leadership, and participate constructively in an evaluation system meant to promote transparency, fairness and development. Outsourcing the writing introduces too many risks to credibility, policy, and the integrity of what is intended to be an accurate record of one’s real contributions and potential. With engaged self-development and leadership support, quality EPRs will take care of themselves over time.
Andrew Stroud