Federal Workforce Study Grant Thornton

8/8/2019 Federal Workforce Study Grant Thornton

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/federal-workforce-study-grant-thornton 1/40

AUGUST 2010

Seven Obstacles to a First-Class Federal Workorce

CLOSING G



The Partnership or Public Service is a nonpartisan, nonproft organization that works to revitalize the ederalgovernment by inspiring a new generation to serve and by transorming the way government works.

Grant Thornton LLP is the U.S. member frm o Grant Thornton International Ltd, one o the six global accounting,

tax and business advisory organizations. Through more than 100 countries, including 50 oces in the United States,the partners and employees o Grant Thornton International Ltd member and correspondent frms provide audit, tax

and advisory services to public and private clients around the globe.

Grant Thornton’s Global Public Sector Practice, based in Alexandria, Virginia, is dedicated to helping government

agencies improve their human capital, fnancial, inormation technology, and cost and perormance managementactivities.



Closng the gap | seven obstaCles to a Frst-Class Federal WorkForCe

i

On May 11, 2010, President Obama sent a memo to

his Cabinet and other agency heads directing themto “overhaul the way they recruit and hire our civilian

workorce,” declaring that the “complexity and ine-fciency o today’s ederal hiring process deters many

highly qualifed individuals rom seeking and obtaining jobs in the ederal government.”

The directive was unique in the 127-year history o theederal civil service, and represents a clear recognition

by a president with a very ull and challenging agendathat the ability o our government to serve the needs o

the American people depends on having a strong andhighly capable workorce.

This hiring reorm eort is part o a broader initiative todeal with a series o troubling ederal workorce man-

agement policies and practices—issues o great con-cern to the government’s Chie Human Capital Ocers

(CHCOs).

In the third series o in-depth interviews since 2007,the Partnership or Public Service and Grant ThorntonLLP sought the views o 68 CHCOs and HR leaders on

the state o the ederal workorce and the president’sgovernment reorm agenda. They also were asked or

recommendations on what it will really take to bring about change, urther strengthen the civil service and

improve government operations.

The CHCOs suraced seven major obstacles to build-

ing a frst-class ederal workorce: hiring practices; pay,classifcation and perormance management systems;

the sometimes tense relationship between ederal agen-cies and the central HR authority, the Oce o Person-

nel Management (OPM); the leadership capabilities o ederal managers; the competency o HR workers; sub-standard HR inormation technology systems; and labor

relations.

As the primary policy advisors or ederal agencies onall human resource management issues, the CHCOs are

supportive o the president’s new hiring initiative andmany o his eorts to reorm ederal workorce man-agement policies. They are anxious to close the gap be-

tween the status quo and where the government couldand should be in the not too distant uture. But this en-

thusiasm is tempered by the diculties that they willace in reaching many o these important objectives.

When it came down to describing the state o human

capital management in the ederal government today,there was broad consensus among the CHCOs and the

other HR leaders that the ability to build and maintaina high quality workorce is being seriously harmed by

longstanding, systemic and oten dysunctional prac-tices and policies.

Chie among them is the arcane ederal hiring system,a problem the president is now seeking to address with

plans to make the process more applicant-riendly; toeliminate requirements or responses to essay-style

questions during the early stages o the process; to im-prove the speed and quality o hiring; and to more ully

involve managers and supervisors in the hiring deci-sions.

Though the CHCOs ully support these eorts, they ex-pressed strong doubts that the human resources com-

munity, the very people who will be on the rontlinesseeking to implement the hiring reorm plan, are up to

the task. Forty-six percent o the CHCOs believe theirHR stas either do not have the competencies neededto succeed in the uture or possess those capabilities

only to a limited extent.

The CHCOs believe that ar too many o the 25,000 HR proessionals in the ederal workorce do not have the

necessary skills to help their agencies transition to anew state o improved human resource operations andworkorce management. In act, they believe the situa-

tion may get worse with new demands and expectationsdriven by the administration’s hiring reorms and other

initiatives.

As one CHCO warned, “They want us to hire all thesepeople, but HR itsel does not have the skill set.”

In addition, the CHCOs said insucient resources are

being devoted to HR training—an important elementneeded to improve the competency o this pivotal work-orce and to bring about other important changes in

personnel policies across the government.

Moreover, the CHCOs said the HR community is handi-

capped by a lack o robust inormation technology sys-tems. The CHCOs said many agencies are orced to rely

on outdated manual systems or have ended up devel-oping unique IT systems to manage the HR operations

because o the absence o common or standardized sys-

ExECuIE Suay



partnershp For publC servCe | grant thornton

ii

tems to use across government. This current approach,they said, is wasteul and inecient.

In addition to the problems with the hiring system, the

skill gaps o the HR workorce and the resource prob-

lems, the CHCOs identifed a number o other challeng-es that will need to be addressed. The CHCOs said:

• An antiquated and overly rigid pay and classifca-

tion system and inequities in the pay exibilitiesavailable to agencies are hindering eorts to attract,

motivate and retain the quality workorce that isneeded.

• A number o agencies believe they have made prog-ress with their perormance management systems—

particularly in linking individual perormancestandards to organizational goals. Yet there is un-

certainty and some apprehension over the uture o pay-or-perormance eorts, especially in light o the dismantling o the National Security Personnel

System initiative at the Department o Deense.

• The relationship between CHCOs and OPM is un-even. The OPM director and his chie advisors gen-

erally receive good marks, but there is tension overOPM’s aggressive reorm agenda that is straining the resources o some agencies. CHCOs also believe

there is a disconnect between what OPM’s leader-ship says and what some o the career OPM sta do.

• Federal managers and supervisors need additional

investment in their training and development, par-ticularly in leadership and eective workorce man-agement. They also need to be given the exibility

to manage well and be held accountable when theymanage poorly.

• While the relationship between management and

unions remains largely adversarial in a ew agencies,the recent Executive Order on Labor-ManagementForums and the administration’s stated goal o a

more collaborative and constructive relationship

were seen as having a positive impact and providing movement in the right direction.

Many o the issues cited in the 2010 survey parallel thepresident’s workorce and management agenda, includ-ing initiatives to improve ederal labor-management re-

lations, to help agencies design or improve their peror-mance systems, and to improve ederal pay and reward

systems. These views also are consistent with the 2008CHCO survey, “Elevating Our Federal Workorce.”

The CHCOs strongly indicated that they are ready to dotheir part by helping repair and overhaul the systems

and policies that are hurting the health and eective-ness o our ederal workorce.

The more challenging question on which there is lessagreement is how to achieve these changes. The re-

sponses rom the CHCOs suggested the task will not beeasy, and will require substantial resources and a sus-

tained commitment rom top political and career lead-ership at every agency to make any real headway.

The report lists a number o specifc recommendationsrom the CHCOs. While answers varied based on ac-

tors such as the size o the agency, the resources avail-able, and how much change to existing agency policies

and practices would be required, below are the over-arching consensus recommendations:

• The government’smuch needed hiring reorms

shouldocusontheendresults,anddepartments

andagenciesshouldhaveconsiderablefexibility

todeterminehowbesttoachievethoseresults.

The road to improving the hiring process must bepredicated on the merit system principles and public

policy goals, as well as requirements such as work-orce diversity and veterans’ preerence. Beyond that,

agencies should be allowed to select rom among avariety o approved tools (or example, rom among dierent hiring authorities) that work best or them.

Accountability or results and adherence to meritprinciples should be determined largely by an audit.

• When“asterandbetter”arepotentiallycompet-

inggoalsorhiringandotherreormeorts,the

priorityshouldbegivento“better.”

While the CHCOs and other HR leaders understandthe value o aster turnaround on a number o HR systems and processes, they also emphasized that

getting the right end result is the more importantgoal—even i it takes a little longer than planned.

While there is clearly a connection between thelaudable goals o speeding up the hiring process and

the ability to hire highly qualifed candidates wellmatched to the job, the most important goal is to endup with the right candidate or the position.

• A greater investment is needed to improve the

capabilities and competencies o ederalmanag-

ersandHRstas—andtoensurethosenewlyse-

lectedorthesejobshavewhatittakestosucceed.

Federal managers and HR stas have a demanding

role to play in putting needed HR reorms into place




i ii

and making sure they work. Unortunately, too manyhuman resources employees and too many manag-

ers are simply not prepared or this role. The antici-pated turnover among many current managers and

HR proessionals creates an opportunity to improve.

• Thetrackrecordorederalpayreormisspotty

atbest,buttheCHCOsarenearlyunanimousin

their conviction that the government must do

betterthanthecurrentsystem.

The CHCOs recognized that changing the pay sys-

tem is likely to be an extremely dicult endeavor,but there was agreement that the status quo will

prevent the ederal government rom being a mod-el employer and hinder its ability to recruit, retainand honor a world-class workorce. Among the is-

sues that need to be addressed: a dysunctional po-sition classifcation system; requently noncompeti-

tive entry-level pay and pay compression at higherpay levels; lack o a level playing feld in that some

agencies are able to pay more than others or com-parable jobs; and a need to know more about whypast eorts at pay-or-perormance were unsuc-

cessul. The CHCOs believe there is more that canbe learned rom successul alternative pay systems.

• The current leadership at OPM receives high

marksromtheCHCOs,buttheyseesomeinter-

nal“disconnects”withinOPMandanopportuni-

tyorOPMtoengagein“moreassistingandless

insisting.”As in the previous CHCO surveys, there are some di-

erences o opinion about the proper role or OPM.Overall, though, the CHCOs agreed that they would

like OPM sta to better understand their needsand ocus less on pointing out problems and more

on helping fnd or implement solutions. Among thespecifc recommendations is that OPM’s policy sta have agency-level operational experience; that OPM

remove any requirements no longer needed whenadding new HR requirements or workorce initia-

tives; that OPM champion a government-wide ini-tiative to improve the ederal HR workorce; that

OPM provide assistance in developing a short list o HR IT solutions; and that OPM show a demonstrat-ed understanding that “one size doesn’t ft all” with

regard to how agencies achieve the administration’svision or the workorce.

• TheCHCOs and otherHR leaders stronglysup-

portgreatercollaborationandsharingwithinthe

ederal governmentand amongotherstakehold-

ersinbuildingamoreeectiveederalworkorce.

Not only do the CHCOs desire a more collabora-

tive partnership with OPM, they also recommendand support more cross-agency collaboration with

the other C-suite communities (chie fnancial o-cers, chie inormation ocers and chie acquisition

ocers); more involvement by ederal employeeunions and other stakeholders in implementation o

civil service reorms; and more cross-agency shar-ing among HR oces such as providing inormation

on highly qualifed applicants or common jobs. TheCHCOs also noted that Congress would need to beinvolved in enabling, via legislation, some o the de-

sired changes.




iv




1

INOduCION

The Partnership or Public Service and Grant ThorntonLLP conducted the third in a series o surveys o chie human capital ocers (CHCOs), seeking their views

and recommendations on a wide range o human capi-tal management policies and practices that are imped-

ing our government’s ability to hire, develop, motivateand retain the high-caliber talent the government and

the American public need.

The views o the CHCOs are important. As the primarypolicy advisors on all human resource management is-sues or ederal agencies, CHCOs are responsible or

helping leadership manage an eective, productive gov-

ernment workorce. Since the position was created byCongress in 2002, the role o the CHCO has grown instature as government leaders have come to realize that

good workorce management makes a dierence—andthat good government needs good people.

Our frst survey in 2007 took a broad look at the stateo human capital management in the ederal govern-

ment. In our 2008 survey, CHCOs oered advice tothe incoming Obama administration. Now that Presi-

dent Obama and his team have established their humancapital agenda, we asked CHCOs to weigh in on thosegoals and objectives, many o which correlate with the

CHCOs’ “wish list” outlined in our 2008 survey.

The larger question in the 2010 survey centered on howwe reach some o those important goals, including cre-

ating a better hiring system, developing a more compe-tent human resources workorce, improving workorcemanagement and leadership, and designing a better pay

and classifcation system. What will it take to bridge thedivide between where we are today and where we want

to be tomorrow?

Between November 2009 and May 2010, we inter-viewed 68 CHCOs and human resource leaders, both

political appointees and career civil servants, rom allmajor departments and a number o small and indepen-dent agencies. Interviews were conducted on a “not-

or-attribution” basis to encourage candor.

To maintain consistency, all interviews were conductedby John Palguta, vice president or policy at the Part-nership and a retired member o the Senior Executive

Service (SES) with more than 30 years o experience inederal government human resource management and

policy. Other proessionals rom the Partnership and

Grant Thornton attended interviews, recorded and ana-lyzed responses, and helped develop this report.

We asked survey participants a series o open-endeddiscussion questions and eight closed-ended questions

on critical human capital issues. The goal was to allowthe CHCOs to shape the discussion. This report sum-

marizes and analyzes their responses. All analysis or in-terpretation contained in this report is based on inor-

mation collected during our interviews, and all directquotes are those o survey participants.1

Where is the government’s workforcemngement hee?

In the 2008 CHCO survey, the CHCOs called on thenew president to make civil service reorm a govern-ment-wide eort and to concentrate on people issues.

They urged creation o 21st century systems to supporta 21st century workorce; reorm o the General Sched-

ule (GS) pay and classifcation system; improvement o the hiring process; a retooling o the Oce o Person-

nel Management (OPM); investments in the humanresources workorce; and providing CHCOs with theresources they need to be eective.

The Obama administration hit the ground running on

the human capital ront in 2009, taking early and boldsteps to outline a new vision, mission and strategy or

the OPM.

OPM’sVision

The Federal Government will become America’smodel employer or the 21st Century.

OPM’sMission

Recruit, retain and honor a world-class workorce toserve the American people.

OPM’sStrategicGoals

Hire the best; respect the workorce; expect the

best; honor service.

1 Because we asked open-ended questions, the percentages report-ed or these questions should not be interpreted in the same way asthe answers to the closed-ended questions. For example, i one-thirdo survey participants mentioned a specifc topic in response to a dis-cussion question, this is signifcant because the answer was oeredwithout prompting, as opposed to chosen rom a list o options. An-swers to closed-ended questions are represented with graphs.




2

During the frst year, the president and a number o hiskey appointees demonstrated a high level o commit-

ment to these three overarching OPM objectives.

Most recently, the administration laid out detailed plans

and timetables or reorming the ederal hiring process.The administration also has advocated or, and in some

cases begun to take, armative steps on a number o other ronts. These include improving ederal manager

and employee training; strengthening the capacity o ederal agencies to use the results o employee surveys

to improve agency operations; analyzing the balance be-tween work done by ederal employees and by contrac-tors; assisting veterans to fnd ederal jobs; improving

ederal labor-management relations; helping agenciesdesign or improve their perormance systems; and im-

proving ederal pay and reward systems.

So, it would appear that CHCOs and other HR leadersreceived at least some o what they asked or—an ad-ministration that has made an eective government

workorce a top priority and one that has outlined anumber o ambitious goals and plans or modernizing

the ederal civil service. Does the saying, “Be careulwhat you ask or—you might just get it” apply here or is

the ederal HR community pleased with the attentionbeing paid to its issues?

The CHCOs and the other HR leaders we interviewedgenerally agreed that the overall workorce manage-

ment challenges and goals identifed by the administra-tion were the right ones. They were enthusiastic about

the potential or improvement, but were also sobered byan understanding that the degree o diculty involvedin meeting a number o those goals is substantial and

that the resources they have available are potentially in-adequate.

While our conversations with the CHCOs were ar-

ranging, they revealed seven major issue areas that in anumber o instances overlap the administration’s agen-da: the cumbersome hiring process; the antiquated pay

and classifcation systems and less than eective peror-

mance management systems; the uneven relationshipbetween CHCOs and OPM; an HR workorce that toooten lacks the competencies needed to move orward;

outdated, manual processes and a lack o robust HR inormation technology solutions; insucient leader-ship and workorce management skills among too many

ederal managers; and the adversarial relationships be-tween high-level management and employee unions.

In each o these areas, there was a clear consensus about

the need or change, and at the heart o each discussion

were the practical considerations and the obstacles thatmust be overcome. The CHCOs, in act, worried that

the gap between where they are and where they are be-ing asked to go may be wider than many realize. How-

ever, they are ready to try, and through this report, have

oered their views and recommendations on what isneeded to achieve meaningul reorms.




3

Wa WE aE Wa WE NEEd

A cumbersome, complex hiring process 1

A nimble, modern system to recruit

and hire a diverse and productive21st century workorce

Antiquated pay and classication system

and inefective perormance management2

The ability to attract, airly compensate,

reward, motivate and retain the

right people with the right skills

Uneven relationships between

CHCOs and OPM3 OPM as a trusted advisor and resource

An HR workorce that too oten lacks the

competencies needed going orward4

HR proessionals with the ability to

think and manage strategically and

to be true business partners

Manual processes and a lack

o robust HR IT solutions5

Technology and processes that streamline

operations and produce the data and

results needed to manage efectively

Insucient leadership and workorce

management skills among too

many ederal managers6

Trained and capable leaders who inspire

and bring out the best in the workorce

Adversarial relationships between high-

level management and employee unions7

A shared vision and collaboration

between managers and unions




4

1 W W

a cmbersome, comple hiring process

Despite numerous attempts to improve the hiring pro-

cess, including reductions in cycle time, the current hir-ing system has been a chie complaint o respondents

or the past three surveys. While nearly every aspecto ederal hiring is designed to meet laudable public

policy goals—to give priority to veterans, preserve meritprinciples and oster a diverse workorce—the result isa complex, cumbersome system that does not meet the

needs o workers in today’s era o instantaneous com-munication.

Nearly every CHCO agreed that the ederal hiring sys-

tem should undergo major reorm in order to build theworkorce the ederal government needs. In act, OPM,with the support o the Oce o Management and Bud-

get (OMB), has made hiring reorm a centerpiece o itsagenda. As one CHCO said, “Hiring is the most impor-

tant thing we do—and it is the lowest rated.”

ChAllenGe

Hiringiscomplexduetomeritprinciples

CHCOs eel that the complexity o ederal hiring createsa situation where only those in government can navi-

gate the system. “We only end up hiring people who arealready amiliar with the system. We end up just can-nibalizing each other,” said one interviewee. Many are

concerned that this keeps a great many talented peoplerom considering government service, depriving the

American people o the best skills available.

However, making things easier or applicants is not theonly consideration. Several CHCOs maintained that thegoals o a aster and more applicant-riendly hiring sys-

tem must be balanced with the requirements o publicpolicy and the statutory merit system principles.2 “It’s

ar rom ecient, but there are certain public values

that the system is intended to protect. There is an in-herent tension between those competing values. Youcan have both eciency and merit, but there has to be acertain balance,” said one CHCO. Another commented,

“Merit system is important. I would be saddened i wewent too ar away rom merit principles; we would let

the American public down.” Another interviewee alsosuggested, however, that the merit principles them-

2 Title 5, U.S.C. §2301( b).

selves may need to be updated, “Do [the principles] re-ally match this generation’s expectations?”

ChAllenGe

Veteranspreerenceisocusedonprocessinsteado

outcome

To recognize the sacrifce o veterans and prevent themrom being penalized or time in service to the military,veterans have been entitled to preerence in ederal

hiring since the Civil War. Today’s rules are based onthe Veterans’ Preerence Act o 1944, as amended and

codifed in Title 5 o the U.S. Code. All CHCOs inter-viewed support the intent behind veterans preerence

and applaud the Obama administration or making it atop priority, or example, by issuing a November 2009Executive Order, “Employment o Veterans in the Fed-

eral Government.”

While the law does not create entitlement to a ederal job—only entitlement to preerential consideration—

the clear intent o the Veterans’ Preerence Act is to en-able more qualifed veterans to become civilian employ-ees in the ederal government than would otherwise be

the case. In practice, the application o the law has otenbecome a matter o ensuring adherence to process and

procedure regardless o whether qualifed veterans are

actually being hired. Most o the CHCOs interviewedwould rather see the emphasis be on goals or hiring veterans rather than prescriptions on the process.

Interviewees spoke o the need to change preconceivednotions many managers have about the abilities o vet-

erans. A ew interviewees said it may simply be a mat-ter o control. As one said, “When you tell someone

you have to hire a certain person, they dig their heelsin.” Others believe that this lack o confdence may bemore ingrained. Some hiring managers believe that they

receive lists o eligible candidates containing veteranswho are unqualifed or the position to be flled and who

block better qualifed candidates. Sometimes a hiring manager expresses surprise when he or she receives a

veteran candidate who is well qualifed. One interview-ee lamented, “I’ve heard people say, ‘Even though theyare a veteran, they are good.’”

Hiring managers may elect not to use a list o reerred

candidates i they do not believe there is a suitable can-didate or the job. They may instead not fll the position

or they may fll the position a dierent way, such as alateral transer o another ederal employee. Sometimes

WEE WE aE aNd Wa I WILL aE O IOE




5

they may use internal competitive merit promotion pro-cedures or which the preerence does not apply. For

all o these reasons, a majority o CHCOs believe thatocusing on end results, in this case qualifed veterans

actually being hired, would ultimately be more produc-

tive than ensuring that certain process or proceduralrequirements were being met.

ChAllenGe

DiversityislaggingorHispanicsandwithintheSES

Diversity was described as a top priority or CHCOs,

and interviewees were generally pleased that OPM andthe Obama administration were ocusing on it. As one

respondent said, “There is no question that or any or-ganization to succeed today it must keep pace with the

nation’s changing demographics.” Others noted that di-versity was more than just demographic diversity andthat it also included diversity o experience and back-

grounds.

Most o the CHCOs also thought their organizationswere doing a good job bringing in a diverse workorce

through the hiring system, although diversity at highergrade levels is still an issue. Workorce statistics seemto support that contention. For example, the annual

Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program re-port issued by the OPM has shown steady increases in

the total representation o minorities and women in thegovernment. In act, with the exception o Hispanics,

other minorities and women are represented at a ratethat is close to or exceeds their representation in the

civilian labor orce. While progress is also being madein increased representation o women and minorities athigher grade levels, they are still underrepresented in

the Senior Executive Service compared to their overallrepresentation in the ederal workorce.

ChAllenGe

Itisdiculttoobtainauthorityorcurrenthiring

fexibilities

Current laws and regulations oer a ew exibilities toenhance the ability o the ederal government to hire

and recruit in certain situations. Particularly useul aredirect-hire authority, dual compensation waivers, stu-

dent loan repayments, and hiring and retention bonus-es. In 2007, our interviewees said it was dicult to usethese exibilities, so we included a direct question on

the useulness o each in both our 2008 and 2010 sur-veys. The results are depicted in fgures 1-4.

Generally, CHCOs said it has not become any easierto use dual compensation waivers since 2008, with 37

percent saying they were useul to a great or very greatextent in 2008 and 38 percent saying the same thing in

2010. The barrier is how dicult it is to get approvalrom OPM. According to one interviewee, “It takes an

act o God to get a dual comp waiver, and by the timeyou get it the need is gone.” Mitigating this situation,

however, is the act that several ederal agencies have

delegated authority to provide a dual compensationwaiver or situations that meet prescribed criteria.

The useulness o direct-hire authority has stayed

roughly the same since 2008. While the percentage whodescribed it as useul to a great or very great extent de-

clined (rom 52 to 46 percent), the proportion who saidit’s moderately useul increased rom 19 to 28 percent.Again, the barrier is the diculty o getting authority

rom OPM unless that authority has been delegated tothe agency as part o a blanket authority or a hard-to-

fll occupation.

CHCOs also indicate that it has become more dicultto use student loan repayments over the past two years,with the percentage saying it was useul to a great or

very great extent declining dramatically rom 52 per-cent in 2008 to 26 percent in 2010. The primary barrier

is budget constraints.

Budget constraints also limit the ability to use hiring and retention bonuses, according to respondents. Thepercentage o CHCOs who said they were able to make

use o them to a great or very great extent declined rom60 percent in 2008 to 42 percent in 2010.

ChAllenGe

USAJOBS.govhindersthehiringprocess

Despite many improvements, CHCOs still are not happy

with current inormation technology solutions, includ-ing OPM’s hiring portal, USAJOBS.gov. According to

one respondent, “We are chasing people away in droves.”(It is important to note that some interviews took placebeore OPM revamped its USAJOBS.gov website based

on eedback and ocus groups. CHCOs were generallysupportive o this eort.)




6

Figre 1

o what extent are OM-approved dual compensation waivers a useful tool? ( 2010 / 2008)

Not at all or to a limited extent 53%

37%

To a moderate extent 9%

6%

To a great or very great extent 38%

37%

Figre 2

o what extent is direct hire authority useful as it is currently structured? ( 2010 / 2008)


30%


9%


5%

Figre 3

o what extent do you nd student loan repayment to be a useful tool? ( 2010 / 2008)


3%


7%


5%

Figre 4

o what extent are you able to make optimal use of hiring and retention bonuses? ( 2010 / 2008)


7%


3%


60%






8

and interviewing reerred applicants, some o the bestapplicants may be lost to other employers.

Key To SUCCeSS

Cross-agencyapplicantpools

Even i the government is sometimes viewed as one em-ployer, it operates as multiple employers. The truth o the matter is that depending on what aspect o the hir-

ing process is being examined, it can be both. Can weleverage those agencies with better “brand identity,” asone CHCO suggested, by sharing well qualifed appli-

cants across agency lines?

It was noted that OPM is also re-establishing centralregisters or common positions, where agencies can

choose rom among pre-selected candidates. A ew o our interviewees thought well o this idea, although anumber o them were skeptical that the quality o appli-

cants reerred would meet their high standards. Also, asone CHCO put it, “Once upon a time, central registers

were too inconvenient and too slow.” Another agencyleader, however, expressed support or the idea o shar-

ing pre-screened, well-qualifed job candidates, but alsonoted that OPM need not be the only source or suchapplicants. However, it will take congressional action

to allow individual agencies to share candidates withother agencies.

Key To SUCCeSS

Congressionalaction

The majority o CHCOs interviewed said that hiring

reorm cannot be achieved by process improvementspermissible under current law alone. Real reorm will

require legislative changes. For example, the inexibil-ity o the ederal pay system can put the government

at a signifcant disadvantage when recruiting talent atboth the entry and senior levels even i average pay ora particular occupation is adequate. The conusing ar-

ray o ederal hiring authorities is rooted in the law. “Alot o what has to be done requires congressional action,

but Congress is great at kicking the can down the road.I know I am not alone in worrying about the level o ex-

pertise in Congress,” said one interviewee.

Key To SUCCeSS

Long-termplanning

As in years past, CHCOs cautioned policy leaders to con-sider the broad implications o changes. One interview-ee said, “We have scars rom other initiatives because

they were not thought out ully. When that happens,the process is ripping and tearing rather than anything

smooth. Make sure you’re changing what needs to bechanged—not just reacting rom crisis to crisis. We need

to think big picture and long term. What we cannot dois go rom one band aid solution to another.”

Along those lines, CHCOs mentioned a ew consider-ations that should be taken into account when devel-

oping policy. For example, the current economy haschanged many o the old assumptions about the attrac-

tiveness o government service. “With this job market

people are actually excited about working or the ed-eral government,” said one CHCO. Another interviewee

agreed, noting, “It used to be that the conventional wis-dom was that you had to entice people. Now they are

coming to us.” The overriding message, however, is thatthe economy is cyclical in nature, so when setting policy,

it is important not to put permanent provisions in placebased on temporary conditions. When the overall econ-omy improves and unemployment declines, the ederal

government will need more tools than it has now to at-tract the right talent.

Key To SUCCeSS

ApplicationrequirementsPart o OPM’s look at reorming the hiring process has

included a discussion o the useulness o Knowledge,Skills and Abilities (KSA) essays. The presidential memo

issued May 11, 2010 directs agency heads to discontinueasking applicants or KSA essays at the initial stage o the application process. KSAs were designed to acili-

tate the process o culling the hundreds o thousands o resumes the ederal government receives in the absence

o a test or other assessment tools. An essay written byprospective employees to describe how their skills will

ft a specifc position, KSAs are burdensome or appli-cants—particularly those new to government. A ew o

our interviewees argued that they keep talent away. Inact, a small number o CHCOs interviewed said theydo not use KSA essays. Several, however, said it does

not make sense to get rid o these essays. For one thing,they ease the burden on an already stretched HR sta.

As one CHCO said, “I you make it so all you need is aresume, you’ll open the oodgates.” Some CHCOs sawOPM’s suspension o the KSA requirement as giving an

ununded mandate to a workorce already stretched artoo thin.

Subsequent to many o these interviews, OPM issued

guidance to agencies pledging assistance and clariying that agencies can still require additional inormation—

presumably including KSAs—besides a resume romthose who pass an initial screen o basic qualifcations.




9

2 W W

an ntiqte p n clssiction sstem

n ineective performnce mngement

Laws that govern all aspects o ederal employment—in-

cluding compensation—are contained in Title 5 o theU.S. Code. The current structure has been in place sincethe Classifcation Act o 1923, which divided govern-

ment jobs into fve distinct services or classifcations.The Classifcation Act o 1949 expanded the 1923 law

and established the General Schedule (GS), which isstill used today.

Both the 2007 and 2008 CHCO surveys revealed grow-ing discontent with the GS and its ability to support a

modern 21st century workorce. The specifc aspect o the GS pay system garnering the most criticism now

and in previous surveys is the position classifcation

system, which is based on broad statutory descriptionso the types o work (in terms o diculty and level o

responsibility) that should be assigned to each o 15grade levels.

ChAllenGe

Theclassicationsystemisantiquatedandtoorigid

A large majority o CHCOs said that the position clas-

sifcation system is outdated and needs an overhaul. A50-year-old system, created when 70 percent o the

workorce perormed clerical or low-level technicalwork, is not the right structure or today, respondentssaid. According to one CHCO, “The classifcation sys-

tem is ancient.” When asked what should be done withthe classifcation system, one CHCO bluntly suggested

“We should just blow it up!”

The need to divide all jobs into one o 15 grade levels canlead to seemingly arbitrary distinctions. For example,

the dierence in the position classifcation standardsbetween a GS-11 and a GS-12 level job is, in part, thatthe GS-11 position perorms work o “marked diculty

and responsibility,” while the GS-12 position perormswork o “a very high order o diculty and responsi-

bility.” The result is rigidity that stymies the ability o managers to compensate workers airly by limiting the

eectiveness o other pay initiatives. For example, oneCHCO noted, “Market-based pay makes sense, but yourun into problems with the classifcation system.” An-

other CHCO mentioned the problem o converting em-ployees back to the GS rom the National Security Per-

sonnel System (NSPS), explaining how dicult it willbe to fnd the right ft or people within the classifca-

tion system. In act, recent reports indicate that manyworkers converting back to the GS rom NSPS will needto orgo raises or the next several years as their salaries

all back in line with the classifcation system under theGS.

ChAllenGe

SESpaycompressionisanongoingconcern

Many respondents also volunteered that they worryabout pay compression. In the ederal government, thishas occurred because some members o the SES have

reached the maximum salary allowable by law and can-not receive raises or perormance bonuses, while em-ployees under the GS system, who are not subject to

the same limitations, can continue to earn annual payadjustments. Since the SES pay scale is tied to pay or

members o Congress, executives are held hostage ev-ery ew years while they wait or Congress to take (or

not take) the politically unpopular step o voting itsel a raise. Right now, GS-15 pay at the higher steps signif-cantly overlaps the SES pay range. “Our executives are

not making much more than top employees,” said oneCHCO. Another added, “There needs to be congressio-

nal action. History shows that we reach the cap all thetime.”

ayaNGES

GS-5(Base) $9856 $7604

GS-5(D.C.) $0830 $5300

SES(Base) $7787 $6900

SES(OPMapproved) $7787 $77000

ChAllenGe

Paybandingisviewedpositively,butthereisuncer-

taintyoverpay-or-perormance

By and large, interviewees had a positive view o paybanding as a possible alternative to the more rigid 15grade classifcation system. Most o the alternative pay

systems and demonstration projects that have beenapproved over time use a pay banding approach, with

the GS grade levels combined into a smaller number o broad bands. Managers typically have greater author-

ity and exibility to set pay or individuals within theirband and to set the initial pay or new hires.

However, uncertainty over the uture o pay-or-peror-mance increased since our 2007 and 2008 interviews,

with the majority o CHCOs saying that while they sup-ported eorts to recognize and reward high perorming

employees, they had reservations about the ability o government to implement a true pay-or-perormance

system. Several mentioned the dicult path o theNational Security Personnel System, the Deense De-partment system established in 2002 that was recently

abolished by Congress. Other concerns about pay-or-




10

perormance include budget limitations and the lack o credible perormance management systems.

A number o interviewees said that budget constraints

limit the eectiveness o pay-or-perormance. Said

one CHCO, “The use o perormance awards is totallybudget driven, yet, ironically, it is in tough budget times

that employees have to perorm more creatively and e-fciently—and they should be rewarded or it. In some

places they have money or SES pools, but nothing orthe ront line. We should have a consistent amount and

budget or it at the beginning o the year. People need toeel they are being treated airly. [Perormance] awardscan be negative on morale i they are not air.”

ChAllenGe

Faithneedstoberestoredinperormance

managementeorts

President George W. Bush made employee perormancemanagement a priority in the President’s Management

Agenda, and our 2007 and 2008 surveys showed a highlevel o support and optimism in that area. Human capi-

tal management leaders pushed or—and agencies be-gan to implement—fve-level rating systems in place o three-level or pass/ail systems, and a number o pay-

or-perormance systems were rolled out, beginning with the SES. The 2010 survey, however, showed less

optimism and perhaps less aith in the ability o agencyperormance management systems to actually improve

employee perormance, and some agencies have plansto move away rom the fve-level systems in avor o

three-level systems.

2 W W N

he bilit to ttrct, firl compenste,

rewr n motivte the right people with the

right skills

Key To SUCCeSS

Alevelplayingeld

When considering reorm ocused on compensation, amajority o survey participants want to level the playing feld by taking a government-wide approach. Several

CHCOs in agencies under the GS system noted that theywere losing some o their best employees to other eder-

al agencies that can pay more. “I eel like [new] eds cuttheir teeth at our expense, then leave or another agen-

cy with more [pay] exibility. I eel like I’m working with one arm tied behind my back. This is particularlyevident in the support unctions—acquisition, fnance,

HR.” One CHCO o a large department with multiple

components under dierent statutory pay systems said,“Title 5 can’t keep up.”

Key To SUCCeSS

Otherormsocompensation

Several respondents discussed the need to broaden

how we look at compensation beyond monetary awardsor salaries. Most people who work or the governmentare not motivated by money, but by a call to serve, the

CHCOs said. “We got a good thing going: who we are.We need to tout that a bit more, and people will come,”

said one CHCO with pride. “The whole thing aroundbeing competitive with the private sector is not going

to work. People who work or the government want toserve their country.” Respondents suggested that ed-eral workers—particularly those in the new generation—

are more motivated by recognition, awards or involve-ment in the mission o their agency.

According to our interviewees, promoting work-lie bal-

ance is also an important tool in attracting and motivat-ing the workorce. “We are seeing a change in attitudeamong applicants,” observed one interviewee. “They

select agencies that oer more work-lie benefts.”

Key To SUCCeSS

Alternativeworkschedulesandpart-timework

The ederal government oers a host o exibilities and

benefts to promote work-lie balance, and OPM hasmade this a cornerstone o reorm eorts. As we did in

2008, this year’s survey asked CHCOs to rate the use-ulness o certain work-lie exibilities: telework, alter-native work schedules and part-time work. As noted in

fgures 5-7, ederal agencies are making very good useo alternative work schedules and, in act, three out o

our interviewees reported that their agency was able






12

to make optimal use o this exibility to a “great or verygreat extent.”

It’s a dierent story, however, or telework. As shown in

fgure 6, well over hal o our interviewees indicated that

their department or agency could productively makebetter use o telework. The main barriers to greater use

o these authorities was seen as resistance rom somemanagers with a negative mindset; IT limitations that

make it dicult or some employees to work remotely;concerns about security; and organizational culture. As

one interviewee noted, “One thing that doesn’t helptelework: an out o oce message that says, ‘I am tele-working today. Please contact someone else.’ When you

are teleworking, you need to be available.”

Just a little over hal o the CHCOs interviewed thoughtthat their organizations were making optimal use o

part-time employees. Once again, a negative manage-ment mindset was seen as the main reason or resis-tance.

In a time when budget constraints limit the ability o

ederal agencies to attract applicants with bonuses orstudent loan repayment and to reward current employ-

ees fnancially, the use o other ways to make working or the government attractive will become increasinglyimportant. In this context, the CHCOs see telework,

part-time work and alternative work schedules as im-portant but requently underused options in the man-

ager’s toolkit.

Key To SUCCeSS

Alignedperormanceandagencygoals

CHCOs agreed that even with the ailure o some majorattempts at expanding pay-or-perormance within the

ederal government, at least one silver lining remainedin that agency perormance management systems werestill able to provide a line o sight to employees by show-

ing how individual perormance standards supportedthe overall goals o the organization. More than hal

o the interviewees thought their organizations did a“great or very great” job aligning employee perormance

standards to organizational goals, although there wassome drop-o between 2008 and 2010.

Perhaps, more importantly, a very small percentage(eight percent) saw little or no alignment.

Key To SUCCeSS

Transparency,credibilityandeedback

The most important aspect o perormance appraisals,said the majority o CHCOs, is transparency and cred-

ibility. “Managers need tools and training to help them

understand how best to evaluate and communicatewith employees,” said a CHCO, echoing the concerns o many others. Several opined that regular eedback is armore important than once-a-year ratings.

When discussing the dierent perormance appraisal

rating systems, there was broad agreement with oneCHCO’s statement: “The biggest challenge is the place

between ‘exceeds expectations’ and ‘outstanding.’ Thiswill only get worse with a move to a three-level system.”




13

3 W W

uneven reltionships between

CCOs n O

CHCOs eel ambivalent toward OPM. They under-

stand that OPM serves as the president’s HR advisorand shares responsibility or ensuring that the ederalgovernment has an eective civilian workorce. They

accept that part o OPM’s mission is to issue guidanceon all personnel matters rom recruitment to retire-

ment administration, and that OPM designs govern-ment-wide human capital strategies. CHCOs also note,however, that while OPM provides a central clearing-

house or human capital practices, most day-to-day HR responsibilities such as hiring new employees, negotiat-

ing with unions representing their employees and pay-ing their employees, are delegated to each agency.

The OPM director receives high marks or his vision andenergy and his ability to gather support or addressing

the people issues in government. However, a number o CHCOs said they do not eel connected to OPM over-

all. “OPM portrays things as i the HR community is an-tagonistic to its vision—as i we are on opposite sides,”

said one CHCO. “OPM needs to talk to the CHCOs frstbeore they lay out these initiatives,” expressed anotherinterviewee. Others elt their voice was not being heard.

Said one CHCO, “I made one suggestion to OPM, and itwas totally dismissed. That really turned me o.”

A number o CHCOs took issue with what they saw as

a tendency by OPM to involve itsel in the minutiae o operating HR decisions. “We want to—and can—run ourown oce,” said one interviewee.

ChAllenGe

Thereisaconfictbetweenpolicyandoperations

Several interviewees said that OPM’s mission is unclear.However, there was some disagreement among our in-terviewees as to whether OPM should ocus on strat-

egy or operations—or both. Some said OPM should be apolicy shop. I that is the case, said one CHCO, “There

is a undamental question o whether a policy shopcan fx operations.” The dichotomy concerned another

interviewee, who said, “Throughout government wehave taught HR people to be technicians, but not stra-tegic thinkers. So it worries me that [the OPM director]

might try to realize a vision by using technicians. Whenyou try to get the technicians to be the visionaries, it

doesn’t work. The vision gets orced into the traditionalramework. Getting people to think outside the current

parameters is dicult.”

ChAllenGe

Thereisadisconnectbetweenleadershipandsta

Interviewees also observed that policies do not seemto “trickle down” rom management to implementers.

“There is a big disconnect between OPM leaders and the

people who end up making decisions with certain ex-ibilities,” said one CHCO. “Leaders encourage agenciesto maximize use, but when you go through the processo submitting requests, they are not warmly received.”

Another added, “My sense is that [the OPM director] isway ahead o his people.”

Feeding the ambivalence that was voiced regarding

OPM is a perception that OPM sta members are notsupportive or do not truly understand agency HR needs.

“It makes me nervous that OPM sees getting an execu-

tive order out as a success,” said one CHCO, adding thatit is not unusual to be given directives without adequate

guidance on how to implement them. “We have beenburned on so many initiatives. There is lots o talk about

change, but very little support.” Another oered an ex-ample o a mixed message: “We got authority to usethe dual compensation waiver to hire annuitants, and

then we got a memo saying that in this economy no oneshould have to use it.”

Some CHCOs also opined that OPM may not be struc-

tured or resourced correctly in terms o skills. “Desk o-fcers are not knowledgeable and have no agency expe-

rience,” said an interviewee.

Others believe that OPM should be arther up the oodchain: “OPM needs more clout, more authority. Some o the things that make us who we are as a ederal govern-

ment are doing things right. We need oversight, other-wise Congress will step in. I would much rather OPM

beat me up than sit in ront o Congress and get beat up.”

Generally, CHCOs do not eel they have the resources to

meet new mandates rom OPM. “We are not staed todo constant initiatives,” said one CHCO. Another add-

ed, “The overarching theme is that we don’t have theresources. It becomes a question o, ‘what do you NOT

want us to do?’” Resources are the key to successullyimplementing OPM’s visions. “You can’t move on initia-tives without resources. Otherwise we’re just keeping

the lights on,” said one CHCO.




14

3 W W N

O s trste visor n resorce

Key To SUCCeSS

Flexibility

As OPM makes changes or seeks to implement govern-ment-wide initiatives, CHCOs implore OPM leadership

to recognize that one size does not ft all. As one inter-viewee put it, “Trying to get one shoe that will ft every-body will not work. It would be a unny looking shoe,

and you wouldn’t be able to walk in it.” Some CHCOsdo not eel they can communicate these dierences to

OPM. One interviewee said, “When we oer our ownideas or suggestions, we are not trying to be dicult.

Some take it as resistance, but bigger organizations di-er rom small organizations, and every option needs tobe discussed.”

Many understand, however, that there still needs to bea government-wide strategy and that customizationis the key to making government-wide policies work.

“One size does not ft all, but look at Army uniorms,” o-ered one respondent. “They all wear the same uniorm,but they have dierent sizes and specifcations.”

Key To SUCCeSS

Specialconsiderationsorsmallagencies

As part o the survey process, we sat in on a meeting o the Small Agency Council’s Human Resource Com-mittee. They were especially concerned that reporting

requirements would overwhelm their small stas—in

some cases only our or fve people. Being orced tomeet the same mandates as larger departments does notmake sense. As fgures 9-11 illustrate, compared to larg-

er agencies, small agencies are much more likely to seethemselves as limited by resource considerations. Parto the issue or both small and large agencies is that as

new mandates and reporting requirements are imposedon agencies, ew, i any, prior mandates are removed.

Small agencies, however, have ewer resources to copewith an “accretion o requirements.”

Key To SUCCeSS

Reasonablerequirements

We asked respondents to tell us what they thoughtabout the pace o change under President Obama. Theanswer was mixed, but the underlying message was thatit was not the pace or timing that was important—it was

the scope o the change and the results sought. Accord-ing to one HR leader, “It’s a mix. At one point it seemed

overwhelming, maybe too much, too aggressive. Butnow I haven’t heard a thing. We’re trying to do our bud-

gets, but don’t know where to put resources. There’s astrong need to bring change rom the bottom. Peopleare eeling like it’s too top down.”

“The initiatives are worthwhile, and the pace is ambi-tious,” said a CHCO o OPM’s goals. “When all is said

and done, the public should have a dierent perspectiveon government.”

Many interviewees cautioned that it is important not totry to accomplish too many disparate goals at the same

time. “When you try to address everything, you don’timprove anything,” one CHCO said. CHCOs generally

agreed that hiring reorm should be at the top o thelist, but there was disagreement over whether too much

was being taken on. A number recognized that there isa window o opportunity or change and delaying someinitiatives could mean losing that opportunity.

Perspectives also seemed to be driven in part by the

level o resources available to individual agencies andby how much a proposed change would require internal

retooling. It seemed clear that or many agencies, adapt-ing to change would be easier i some old requirementsor programs could be removed, thus reeing up resourc-

es that could be reallocated.

Key To SUCCeSS

Cleargoalsandguidance

CHCOs said it is important to develop clear goals andguidance, and a ew made comparisons to the Bush ad-

ministration’s President’s Management Agenda (PMA).One respondent said, “The PMA gave us a way to look

at human capital issues logically. It gave me a context tomeasure what we were doing. It made it easier to do our

end-o-year human capital report. The PMA gave us allinormation we needed on a quarterly basis, so we could

just roll it up. But I don’t want to go back.” In this re-

spondent’s view, over time the PMA devolved into moreo a paper exercise than a strategic planning tool or a

real measure o success.




15

Figre 9

o what extent do you have the resources you need to be an eective CCO? ( Smll agencies / Large gencies)


%


8%


50%

Figre 10

o what extent are you able to make optimal use of hiring and retention bonuses? ( Smll agencies / Large gencies)


3%


34%


63%

Figre 11

o what extent are you able to make optimal use of student loan repayment? ( Smll agencies / Large gencies)


7%


37%


37%




16

4 W W

an workforce tht too often lcks the

competencies neee going forwr

Human resources proessionals play a critical role in

the government. In addition to the strategic element o workorce planning, they must be experts in navigating the complex web o civil service laws and regulations,

all the while making payroll, acilitating hiring and re-cruiting, maintaining diversity and helping employees

transition to retirement.

Yet as CHCOs deal with the issues aecting the entire

government and their own agencies, such as competen-cy gaps and large numbers o impending retirements,

they are acing the same challenges within their ownstas.

Since our frst round o interviews in 2007, many CHCOshave made it clear that the ederal HR workorce is not

where it should be in terms o skills or resources. “Theywant us to hire all these people, but HR itsel does not

have the skill set,” warned one CHCO.

However, it’s not all bad news. Figure 12 depicts theresponses to the question o resources over the threesurveys, with the trend being positive, going rom 32

percent o respondents saying they had the resourcesthey needed to a great or very great extent in 2007 to 46

percent in 2010.

We also asked survey participants to rate the skills o their stas. The responses, depicted in fgure 13, show asteady state since 2007, with only about 40 percent say-

ing they have the skills they need to a great or very great

extent. To some degree, the gap in needed skills mayalso reect that agency HR needs are changing.

Several CHCOs said that training needed to become

a core HR skill. “As a result o the downsizing o the

1990s, HR got really good at helping people fnd jobsand retire. We stopped being good at training, but we’re

coming back to it,” said one HR leader. Nearly all eelthat training is under-resourced despite the act that it

is very important.

ChAllenGe

StrategicHRadvisorsareinshortsupply

The Chie Human Capital Ocers Act adopted by Con-gress in 2002 sought to establish human capital man-

agement as a strategic unction, with the CHCO serving as trusted advisor to the agency head. Further down theorganizational ladder, the HR proessionals working

under the CHCOs were also to be advisors to the orga-nization’s managers and line supervisors. In 2007, more

than two-thirds o CHCOs surveyed elt their HR pro-essionals were viewed as trusted business advisors by

the managers to whom they provided HR services. Asfgure 14 shows, however, that number has allen, going rom just over hal in 2008 to only 46 percent by 2010.

“The CHCO position is a challenge because o the lack

o money. The CIO used to have that same problem, butit’s gotten better or them. The CFO is powerul be-

cause they have the money. It’s not just about sitting atthe table, it’s about being able to make things happen,”

explained one CHCO. “It’s what you [and your sta ]bring to the table.” It’s also a question o what’s on thetable in terms o resources.

Figre 12

o what extent do you have the resources you need to be an eective CCO?

00%

Not at all or to a limited extent

80%

To a moderate extent

60%

To a great or very great extent

40%

0%

0%

46%

34%

20%

007 00008




17

Figre 13

o what extent does your R sta have the competencies it needs to succeed in the future?

00%


80%


60%


40%

0%

0%

Figre 14

o what extent is R viewed by your agency leadership as a trusted business advisor rather than a transactionmanager?

00%


80%


60%


40%

0%

0%

Figre 15

o what extent are you able to measure the impact/eectiveness of the R function in your agency? ( 2010)

Not at all 4%

To a limited extent 14%


To a great extent 36%

To a very great extent12%

46%

36%

18%

007 00008

46%

40%

14%

007 00008




18

4 W W N

professionls with the bilit to think n

mnge strtegicll n to be tre bsiness

prtners

Key To SUCCeSS

CHCOCouncil

The CHCO Act also established the CHCO Council toprovide a orum or HR leaders to develop eective pol-icies and share best practices across government. Gen-

erally, CHCOs would like to see OPM use the councilmore or vetting ideas. They would also like to see the

council and OPM become more collaborative and pro-active in the eort to improve the overall quality and

eectiveness o the ederal HR workorce.

Another motivation behind the creation o the CHCO

position and the CHCO Council was to better enable

them to work eectively with the suite o chies (e.g.,chie fnancial ocer, chie inormation ocer, chie acquisition ocer), and to oster integrated manage-

ment. We asked how well the C-suites work together.Interestingly, nearly all echoed the sentiments o oneCHCO who said, “Within the agency, the C-suite rela-

tionships work well.”

This was not the case, however, on a government-widebasis according to respondents. “Each business line has

their blinders on,” said one CHCO. Another added, “It isterritorial. Stepping on toes is not productive.” The di-erent legislative underpinnings create dierent class-

es o “chies.” As one CHCO put it, “Some animals aremore equal than others.” Perhaps the reason or this is

that CHCOs frst and oremost serve their agencies. Asone interviewee said, “It’s not what I do or OPM or the

Oce o Management and Budget, it’s how I serve myboss.”

Key To SUCCeSS

HRmetrics

Reliable, timely inormation also is important both or

managing the workorce and or better understanding the impact o HR operations. As one CHCO said, “Whatyou measure is what people pay attention to.” We asked

respondents to tell us how well they are able to measurethe eectiveness o the HR unction in their agencies.

More than hal said they could only measure it to a mod-erate extent or not at all.

Most interviewees stressed that metrics should ocus oncustomer needs—not necessarily the speed o processes,

but the quality o outcomes. “My customers measureme better than I measure mysel,” commented one sur-

vey participant. Specifcally, the ocus should shit rom

transactions to end results. “Right now,” said one CHCO,“we measure process, not outcome.” Another added,

“We do a lot o tracking, but impact is hard to measure.”While process metrics are the easiest to quantiy and

communicate, the most important ones ocus on out-

comes, such as the quality o hires. A ew respondentsadvocated or common metrics across government to

acilitate comparison and glean best practices.

Key To SUCCeSS

FederalEmployeeViewpointSurvey

OPM recently announced that starting in 2010 it willconduct an annual government-wide employee survey,

called the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS).This survey (ormerly known as the Federal Human

Capital Survey) was frst conducted in 2002 on a bienni-al basis to measure “employees’ perception o whether ...conditions characterizing successul organizations are

present in their agencies.” The Partnership or PublicService uses the results as the basis or its Best Places to

Work rankings. An annual employee survey is requiredevery year under Section 1128 o the National Deense

Authorization or Fiscal 2004, and OPM’s Federal Em-ployee Viewpoint Survey will satisy that requirement.

A ew CHCOs said that they did not fnd the FEVS re-sults to be particularly useul, but or others, it is a key

metric used in measuring the eectiveness o HR poli-cies and operations. For the latter interviewees, the abil-

ity o the organization and the willingness o managersto use the results to inorm changes in workplace poli-

cies and practices was a key asset. Additionally, somerespondents said they would preer a biennial ratherthan an annual survey so they would have more time be-

tween surveys to respond to the fndings. The decisionby OPM to conduct the survey every year—rather than

require agencies to conduct a survey in the odd yearswhile OPM conducted it in the even years—should helpreduce the burden on agencies. For 2010, OPM was able

to provide agencies with the survey results within lessthan 120 days ater the survey was concluded. This is

the astest turnaround since OPM began conducting agovernment-wide survey, and the relative timeliness o

the data should also help agencies make better use o the results.




19

5 W W

nl processes n

lck of robst I soltions

The human resources community is just beginning to

establish standardized processes, but IT systems arestill decidedly substandard and are underused to sup-port and oster good HR processes and practices.

Several CHCOs mentioned the need or standardized

procedures and cited the OPM directive to map the hir-ing process as an important exercise. “Any time you mapout a process, it gives you a chance to highlight certain

steps,” stated an interviewee. “It’s like taking cod liveroil—there’s a beneft, it’s just tough going down.”

In addition to antiquated systems, the ederal govern-

ment does not have integrated systems to manage the

workorce. “I have a payroll system, not a managementinormation system, and that’s what I need,” said one

CHCO. “Reorm needs investment.”

5 W W N

echnolog n processes tht stremline

opertions n proce the t n reslts

neee to mnge eectivel

Several CHCOs advocated or a standard government-wide system to ully manage the spectrum o HR opera-tions. It was noted that in some cases, individual agen-

cies are paying high ees to the same IT vendors to builda “unique” HR IT solution when in act it is simply the

same HR IT system with slight modifcations. Severalsuggested that it would be easier and most cost eectiveto have a coordinated eort to approve a small number

o common systems so that agencies could choose theone to best meet their needs rom among those with

standard attributes.

One CHCO who wanted OPM to have minimal or no

involvement in their HR operations acknowledgedthat the HR IT area was probably an exception. “OPM

should lead agencies in building HR IT solutions, simi-lar to e-OPFs (Electronic Ocial Personnel Folders).”

In the absence o one system o record, most CHCOs

would at least like to see their current systems linked tocut down on manual processes. “What we really needis something that can connect everything, something to

integrate dierent data sets,” said one interviewee.




20

6 W W

Inscient leership n workforce

mngement skills mong too mn

feerl mngers

According to our respondents, management skills areincreasingly important, but oten overlooked. In 2007,many interviewees expressed concern that manage-

ment competencies, especially the ability to eectivelymanage their employees, were weak across government

in comparison to technical skills, and in 2008 we addeda question to develop a baseline on this subject.

In 2008, only 44 percent o CHCOs said line managershad the leadership skills they needed to be successul;

in 2010, that number dropped to 32 percent. “Leader-ship is the most important thing—specifcally how you

treat people. You can use all the exibilities you have,

but i you treat people like dirt they won’t want to stickaround,” said one CHCO. Another CHCO agreed with

this sentiment, saying, “The reason most people leavean organization is because o their direct supervisor.”

“There is a dierence between being the top shining

star in your technical role and leading a group o peoplewho are shining stars,” said a respondent.

6 W W N

rine n cpble leers who inspire n

bring ot the best in the workforce

Key To SUCCeSS

BetterselectionandtrainingNearly all survey participants agree that training is the

key to developing leadership skills among managers.“Leadership development training is the big thing,” saidan interviewee. “We need to create a culture o cross-

training and knowledge sharing,” said another. Man-agers need training on everything rom how to fll out

orms and handle the everyday tasks o being a supervi-sor to managing telework programs and understanding

veterans preerence and diversity laws. Several CHCOssaid that training should be a line item in the budget.

The great majority o respondents elt that training is

under-resourced. “When you cut training,” warned oneinterviewee, “you cut your uture.” Another interview-ee commented, “Without enough money [or training],

we’ll be let using whatever is ree.”

It was also noted, however, that training is most eec-

tive when you start with the right “raw material.” Clear-ly, not every technical expert has the same potential

to be a great supervisor and manager. Development o good assessment tools to identiy supervisory potential

and, at the higher levels, expanded use o candidate de-velopment programs or similar programs that combinedevelopmental experiences with the opportunity to as-

sess the skills o the participants would be helpul.

Figre 16

o what extent do your managers and supervisors (line and operations, not R) have the managerial and su-

pervisory competencies (i.e., the soft skills) they need to be successful? ( 2010 / 2008)


8%


38%


44%




21

7 W W

aversril reltionships between high-level

mngement n emploee nions

Generally, most interviewees elt that the Bush admin-

istration’s stance on ederal employee union issues haddamaged labor-management relationships in many de-partments and agencies. Many o those interviewed saw

a need to repair those relationships: “We’re coming o an administration that was seen as being against unions.

We elt the pendulum was avorable to management un-der the Bush administration.”

For the most part, respondents expressed a positiveview o Executive Order 13522, “Creating Labor-Man-

agement Forums to Improve Delivery o GovernmentServices,” released on December 9, 2009, which estab-

lished a cooperative and productive orm o labor-man-

agement relations throughout the executive branch.“The issuance o the executive order should create con-

ditions that will require the parties to work togetherand communicate,” said one interviewee.

The executive order also established a new National

Council on Federal Labor-Management Relations, co-chaired by the directors o OPM and the deputy direc-tor or management at the Oce o Management and

Budget (OMB). Additional membership on the coun-cil is comprised o the chair o the Federal Labor Re-

lations Authority; a deputy secretary or other ocialswith agency-wide authority rom fve ederal depart-

ments and agencies; and the presidents o seven ed-eral employee unions and two managerial associations.For many o the CHCOs we interviewed, the executive

order and the new council were reminiscent o a 1993executive order (No. 12871) on labor-management part-

nerships issued by President Bill Clinton but rescindedby President Bush.

A number o the CHCOs noted that even ater the with-drawal o the 1993 executive order, their agencies still

voluntarily worked closely with unions and ollowedmany o the “partnership principles.” Said one CHCO,

“The executive order just gives us cover to keep doing what we are doing.”

7 W W N

a shre vision n collbortion between

mngers n nions

The consensus is that it will be more productive i labor

issues are managed at the local/unit level. “The artherdown the ood chain, the better the relationships get,”said one CHCO. The possible exception may be contract

negotiations, which could be more productively con-ducted at a higher level in the organization and possibly

at the national level with the appropriate union. It was also noted that unions could be quite useul in

capturing continuous eedback rom the workorce. Ac-cording to one interviewee, “One advantage to having a

union is that you know what your workorce is think-ing.”

Other thoughts with regard to improving the relation-ship between unions and managers included streamlin-

ing the dispute resolution process and educating unionleaders and management on labor laws. One CHCO

bluntly noted that, “Educating managers and unionrepresentatives is very important—many people don’t

know the laws.” It is also important to involve unionleaders in leadership development programs.

Overall, the CHCOs thought it would ultimately be moreproductive to work with unions through an open and

collaborative relationship rather than an adversarialone. And since most agencies have prior experience

along these lines, the CHCOs also thought that closing this gap would not be as dicult as some o the other is-sues discussed in this report. Finally, the cooperation o

the unions could help in other reorm areas o concernto CHCOs.




22

Our interviews or this 2010 update on the views o theCHCOs and other HR leaders in the ederal government

ocused on what it would take to close the gap betweenthe ambitious HR management goals o both the Obamaadministration and the CHCOs, and where their de-

partment or agency is now. While answers varied basedon actors such as the size o the agency, the resources

available, and how much change to existing agency poli-cies and practices would be required, below are the ma-

jor consensus recommendations we heard.

1 iring eform

There was clear agreement that the ederal hiring pro-cess is in need o an overhaul. However, a number o

concerns were raised regarding the current capacity orchange in terms o both sta and other resources, espe-cially within a timerame or change measured in weeks

and months. The ollowing recommendations were o-ered to make the reorm successul:

• While the timeliness o hiring and the quality o

those hired are both important and are interrelated,quality is more important than speed, and emphasis

should be placed on quality when tracking progress.

• The degree o diculty associated with hiring re-

orm varies signifcantly by agency—some are muchurther along and/or have more resources than oth-

ers—and this should be taken into account in devel-oping agency specifc timerames or implementa-tion.

• Validated applicant assessment tools are crucial to

the eectiveness o eorts to improve hiring, andor a number o agencies, help with development o

cost-eective assessment solutions would be valu-able—either rom OPM and/or via a coordinated in-

teragency eort.

• Sharing lists o eligible candidates via OPM’s “shared

registers” initiative or by allowing agencies to sharescreened candidates is seen as a valuable option, but

one that should remain voluntary. Agencies shouldcontinue to have a range o options available to them

or selection o well qualifed candidates.

• Agencies want more rather than ewer hiring ex-ibilities—the Federal Career Intern Program (FCIP)

was one hiring authority that a number o ederalagencies specifcally mentioned as particularly use-ul, and they urged that it, or something similar, be

retained.

• There was clear consensus that managers need tobe more involved in the recruitment and hiring pro-

cess—a specifc requirement o the president’s May11 memo and something that will require a culturechange in a number o agencies.

• In plotting the course or hiring reorm, it was rec-

ommended that particular attention be paid to repli-cating eatures o existing models that work, such as

Title 38 at the Department o Veterans Aairs (VA),hiring in the Foreign Service and some excepted ser-vice hiring authorities such as the FCIP.

• Strong support was voiced or the goals o veteran

preerence in hiring, but there also was generalagreement that being held accountable or results in

terms o the percentage o veterans hired would bemore eective than rigid process requirements such

as the “rule o three” that is currently being phasedout.

• Share and expand successul initiatives that haveincreased actual hiring opportunities or veterans,

such as “hiring heroes” job airs; interagency part-nerships such as one that currently exists betweenthe VA and the DOD; use o internships and volun-

teers that allow managers to see veterans in action;and use o current employees who are veterans to

recruit other veterans.

• Measure progress, including on issues o diversityand veterans preerence, via agreed upon and re-

sults-oriented metrics.

CCO ECOENdaIONSBIdGING E GOaLS S. EaLIy Ga IN FEdEaL aNaGEEN




23

2 eform n erformnce

ngement

With rare exception, the CHCOs and other HR leaderswere dissatisfed with the status quo o the ederal pay

system. However, there was less unanimity about theway orward. Agencies still ully operating under the GSpay system were particularly concerned not only about

their ability to pay a competitive rate when hiring romoutside government, but also about losing some o their

best employees to other agencies with more exiblepay systems. Quite a ew agencies thought their peror-mance management systems did a good job o linking

individual employee perormance to mission require-ments, but only a handul thought their systems could

support a pay-or-perormance approach. There wasconsensus, however, around the ollowing recommen-

dations:

• As in the 2008 CHCO report, there is still consid-

erable support or pay banding, but less support ortrying to tie pay as strongly to perormance as had

been advocated in 2008—quite possibly a reactionto the dismantling o the NSPS pay-or-perormance

system.

• Whatever pay system is adopted or the uture, there

is a strong sentiment that it “level the playing feld”among ederal agencies, especially or common oc-

cupations, so that there is no longer an unair com-petition or talent among agencies.

• There have been some useul lessons learned among agencies with alternative pay systems, and lessons

should be taken rom the successes o those agen-cies in designing a new government-wide pay sys-

tem.

• A number o CHCOs made note o the slow increasein “pay compression” and the diminishing fnancialincentive or employees to advance to higher ranks,

especially the SES.

• Managers and HR stas need better guidance oncompensation policies and practices. It was suggest-

ed that some “best practices” in this regard alreadyexisted, or example, in the DOD.

• While perormance management and perormanceappraisal systems were likely to remain a work-in-

progress or some time, the ocus going orwardshould be on increasing the transparency and cred-

ibility o the system and development o manage-ment tools and training.

Most agencies are already making considerable use o the work-lie exibilities available or employees, es-

pecially alternative work schedules. The one area withperhaps the greatest potential or expansion is telework.

While a ew agencies have demonstrated a commitment

to telework, most are still below where they might be interms o the percentage o employees participating. The

biggest barriers to expanded usage o this latter exibil-ity were identifed as organizational culture, particular-

ly a management mindset against telework; and inor-mation technology limitations, including both concerns

about data security and lack o equipment or networksto support expanded teleworking arrangements. Somemanagers are skeptical that teleworking employees can

be productive outside a traditional oce setting.

• A gradual expansion o work-lie exibilities, espe-cially telework, should take place through a ocus on

management awareness and training and an invest-ment in IT inrastructure.

• A ocus on improved perormance management andthe development o better methods or tracking em-

ployee results would also help address the concernso some managers that teleworking employees may

not be as productive and as accountable as theirnon-teleworking counterparts.

3 rining n development for ngers

n Spervisors

With some notable exceptions, the majority o thoseinterviewed elt that their agencies were still under-investing in training and development, especially or

managers and supervisors. Not surprisingly, no dis-agreement was voiced over the recent change in regu-

lations that mandated ormal training or supervisorswithin one year ater becoming a supervisor and every

three years thereater. The major recommendations areas ollows:

• Although most agencies expect to see tightened

budgets, the CHCOs urge the administration tomaintain its commitment to employee training anddevelopment, especially or managers and supervi-

sors, and to ollow through on its stated intention tosaeguard or even improve unding or that training.

• Mentoring or coaching programs or managers andsupervisors should be part o training and develop-

ment whenever possible.






25

• Federal agencies should be encouraged to selecttheir HR IT solutions rom among a set o “ap-

proved” systems with standardized attributes.

• Cross-agency training or ederal HR stas on the

use and maintenance o their HR IT should be de-veloped, promoted and used.

6 Improving the Workforce

As in the two previous reports based on interviews withthe CHCO community and other ederal HR leaders,there was almost unanimous agreement that too many

o the more than 25,000 ederal HR proessionals in theederal government do not have the skills and compe-

tencies needed to do their jobs at the level needed bytheir agencies. This situation was seen as worsening

rather than improving relative to the demands currentlybeing made o ederal HR proessionals and with moreexperienced HR sta leaving government (over 1,000 in

FY 2009 alone). This fnding is not too surprising giventhat improving the competencies o this many people is

a long-term and multi-aceted eort and extremely im-portant. The CHCOs oered the ollowing recommen-

dations in this regard:

• Much as the ederal acquisition and IT workorces

have been the subject o a sustained drive to im-prove capabilities and competencies, the ederal HR

workorce similarly needs to be the subject o a con-centrated and coordinated long term improvement

eort.

• As the central HR agency or government and the

president’s HR advisor, OPM should be the champi-on o this improvement eort (see the previous rec-

ommendations regarding the role o OPM). It startswith initial hiring into the HR proession—ederal

agencies need to actively recruit and select individ-uals or HR specialist positions who have interest in,and a demonstrated aptitude or, a career in HR.

• There needs to be a clear path or career develop-ment based on agreed upon competencies—and ex-perience in more than one HR oce and more than

one HR unctional area should be strongly encour-aged.

• There need to be clear perormance standards andmetrics to better guide the development o HR stas

and to hold them accountable or providing the nec-essary level o assistance and service. There also

should be an expectation that HR sta members

who do not perorm at a satisactory level will be re-moved rom their positions.

7 Lbor-ngement eltions

One o the contrasts between the current administra-

tion and its immediate predecessor is its approach todealing with ederal employee unions. An early action

taken by the Bush administration, on February 17, 2001,was to revoke Executive Order 12871 o October 1, 1993,

establishing labor-management partnerships. By con-trast, the Obama administration on December 14, 2009,issued Executive Order 13522, Creating Labor-Manage-

ment Forums, to build a more collaborative approach todealing with the unions.

In discussing this change during our interviews, we

discovered the change made little dierence or anumber o agencies, since they had continued to workcollaboratively with employee unions rom 1993 to to-

day. For other agencies, however, the new executive or-der marked the start o a slow return to a less adversarial

relationship with unions. Regardless, there was consen-sus around several “common sense” recommendations,

as ollows:

• Agencies with employees represented by unions

should seek to actively involve those unions in theimplementation o some o the civil service reorm

eorts noted here, such as hiring reorm.

• Unions can also be helpul as a source o continuouseedback rom employees and, or example, may behelpul in trying to interpret the results o the an-

nual Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey adminis-tered by OPM.

• Seeking to streamline the dispute resolution process

has been a long-standing goal, and it deserves con-tinued attention.

• Training or both managers and union ocials on

eective approaches to labor relations and the newlabor-management orums can also be useul. TheFederal Labor Relations Authority and the Federal

Mediation and Conciliation Service recently begana series o joint training sessions or agencies on thenew orums—while much more needs to be done,

this is a good start.




26



on demand government | deploYng FleXbltes to ensure servCe ContnutY

27


27

aENdIx a: aICIaING FEdEaL OFFICIaLS

The titles and positions listed were current at the time they were interviewed.

Appalachian Regional Commission

Barbara BrownHuman Resources Manager

Corporation for National & Community Service

Raymond LimonChie Human Capital Ocer

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

Jackie DurkeeHuman Resources Director

Department of CommerceDeborah JeersonDirector, Oce o Human Resources Management

Janice GuinyardDirector o Corporate Human Capital Strategy and

Development

Department of Defense

Marilee Fitzgerald

Deputy Under Secretary, Civilian Personnel

Department of EducationJoann Ryan

Former Acting Assistant Secretary

Donna Butler

Chie o Sta

Debra Bennett

Human Capital Management Sta Director

Department of Energy

Rita Franklin

Deputy Chie Human Capital Ocer

Department of Health and Human Services

Denise Wells

Deputy Assistant Secretary and Chie HumanCapital Ocer

Department of Homeland Security

Jerey NealChie Human Capital Ocer

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Janie PayneGeneral Deputy Assistant Secretary and Chie

Human Capital Ocer

Department of Justice

Mari Barr Santangelo

Deputy Assistant Attorney General and HumanResources Director

Rodney MarkhamHuman Resources Sta Director

Department of LaborSusan BarkerDirector, Human Resources Center

Department of State

Linda TagliatelaDeputy Assistant Secretary

Department of the Air Force

Tim BeylandAssistant Deputy Chie o Sta, A1 Manpower,

Personnel and Services

Leslie Roberson

Chie Airman Development Division Directorate

Department of the Army

Joseph McDade

Assistant Deputy Chie o Sta, G1 Manpower andReserve Aairs

Department of the Interior

Pam MalamSenior Advisor or Human Capital

Rosemary Downing Director o Talent and Retention Programs

Sharon EllerDirector o the Oce o Civil Rights

Sandra WellsDirector, Oce o Strategic Employee Development




28

Department of the Navy

Patricia Adams

Deputy Assistant Secretary o the Navy, CivilianHuman Resources

Department of the Treasury

Rochelle GranatDeputy Assistant Secretary or Human Resourcesand Chie Human Capital Ocer

Nichole Johnson

Associate Chie Human Capital Ocer

Gordon Danning

Deputy Director o Human Capital StrategicManagement

Department of Transportation

Linda WashingtonAssistant Secretary or Administration

Department of Veterans Aairs

John Sepúlveda

Assistant Secretary or Human Resources andAdministration and Chie Human Capital Ocer

Mara PatermasterSpecial Assistant to the Assistant Secretary or HR

and Administration

Armando Rodriguez

Executive Assistant

Export-Import Bank of the United States

Natasha McCarthy

Director, Oce o Human Resources

Federal Aviation Administration

Ventris Gibson

Assistant Administrator or Human ResourceManagement

Federal Highway AdministrationPatricia ProsperiAssociate Administrator

Pat TooleDirector, Oce o Human Resources

Federal Trade Commission

Karen LeydonDirector, Human Resources Management Oce

General Services Administration

Gail Lovelace

Chie Human Capital Ocer

Internal Revenue Service

James Falcone

Human Capital Ocer

Millennium Challenge Corporation

Dennis Slagter

Deputy Director, Human Resources

Mary Tamberrino

Strategic Planner and Workorce DevelopmentSpecialist

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Toni DawseyAssistant Administrator or Human CapitalManagement

Gretchen DavidianExecutive Ocer, Oce o Human Capital

Management

National Capital Planning Commission

Barry Socks

Chie Operating Ocer and Congressional Liaison,Oce o the Executive Director

Phyllis VesselsHuman Resources Specialist, Oce o the Executive

Director

National Endowment for the Humanities

Anthony Mitchell

Director, Human Resources Oce

National Gallery of Art

Meredith Weiser

Acting Personnel Ocer

National Institutes of Health

Christine Major

Director, Oce o Strategic Management Planning

Philip Lenowitz

Deputy Director, Oce o Human Resources



on demand government | deploYng FleXbltes to ensure servCe ContnutY

29


29

National Nuclear Security Administration

David Amaral

Director, Oce o Human Capital ManagementPrograms

National Science Foundation

Marilyn DickmanDeputy Director, Division o Human ResourceManagement

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Jim McDermottDirector, Oce o Human Resources

Miriam CohenDeputy Director, Oce o Human Resources

Oce of Government EthicsBarbara Mullen-RothDeputy Director, Oce o Administration

Oce of Personnel Management

Ronald FlomAssociate Director, Management Services Division

Mark ReinholdDeputy Associate Director, Center or Human

Capital Management Services

Oce of the Director of National IntelligenceDr. Ronald Sanders

Former Chie Human Capital Ocer

Rural Housing Service, Department of Agriculture

Allen Hatcher

Director, Human Resources

Smithsonian Institution

James Douglas

Director, Oce o Human Resources, Oce o theUnder Secretary or Finance and Administration

Social Security Administration

Dr. Reginald WellsDeputy Commissioner and Chie Human CapitalOcer

Transportation Security Administration,

Department of Homeland Security

Richard WhitordAssistant Administrator and Chie Human Capital

Ocer

Elizabeth Buchanan

Deputy Assistant Administrator or Human Capital

U.S. Agency for International Development

Deborah Kennedy-Iraheta

Director and Chie Human Capital Ocer, Oce o Human Resources, Bureau or Management

U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum

Antonio Guzmán

Human Resources Director

U.S. Institute of Peace

Paula King

Director, Human Resources Group

Veterans Health Administration, Department of

Veterans Aairs

Joleen ClarkChie Ocer Workorce Management and

Consulting Oce




30

rtnership for blic Service

John Palguta, Vice President for Policy

Jennifer Benner

Janelle Callahan

Bob Cohen

Judy England-Joseph

Daniel Fass

Sally Jaggar

Bevin Johnston

Joshua Joseph

Bob Lavigna

Karen RogersLara Shane

Max Stier

Grnt hornton

Robert Shea, Partner

Scott Cameron, Director

Tabetha Mueller, Project Manager

Interview Participants:

Naval Aggarwal

Karin Armour

Tim Brown

Rob Buhrman

Karen Burbage

John Charters

Nadine Cipriani Tom Cocozza

Robert Cook

George DelPrete

Diana Devaney

David Gardiner

Rob Justus

Phil Kangas

Lindsey Sharpe

Lisa Taylor

John Wetzel

aENdIx B: CONIBuOS O E EO






32

CLOSEd-ENdEd QuESIONS

On a scale o 1-5 using the benchmarks below, please answer the ollowing questions:

Not at all Moderate extent Very great extent

1 2 3 4 5

To what extent:

1. Do you eel that HR sta is viewed by your agency leader ship as a trusted business advisor (versus a transactionmanager)?

2. Do you have the resources you need to be an eective CHCO?3. Do you eel that, in general, your agency does a good job aligning organizational goals and individual employee

perormance standards?4. Do you believe your HR sta members have the competencies needed to help your agency succeed in the uture?5. Do you believe your managers and supervisors (i.e., line and operations, not HR) have the managerial and super-

visory competencies (i.e., the sot skills) they need to be successul?6. Are you able to measure the impact/eectiveness o the HR unction in your agency?

Periodically, ederal agencies have been encouraged to make greater use o existing HR exibilities to respond to a

variety o workorce challenges.

To what extent are you able to make optimal use o the ollowing exibilities?

Not at all Moderate extent Very great extent

1 2 3 4 5

1. Telework

2. Hiring and Retention Bonuses3. Student Loan Repayment

4. Alternative Work Schedules5. Direct Hire Authority6. OPM approved Dual Compensation Waivers

7. Part-time Employment

What are the barriers, i any, that are keeping or you rom making optimal use o the above or other existing ex-ibilities?





NewYorkAvenueSuite

Washington

JohnCarlyleStreetSuite

Alexandria

Date post:	29-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	sue-marks
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

Federal Workforce Study Grant Thornton

Documents