TOPICS
TOPICS
Obama performance czar to wear dual hats
President-elect Barack Obama on Wednesday named Nancy Killefer as the government's first chief performance officer, responsible for making federal programs run more efficiently. Killefer, who was an assistant secretary of the Treasury Department in the Clinton administration, confirmed to Government Executive that she also will be the deputy director for management at the Office of Management and Budget.
"During the campaign, I said that we must scour this budget line-by-line, eliminating what we don't need or what doesn't work, and improving the things that do," Obama said during a press conference. "Working with Peter Orszag and Rob Nabors at the Office of Management and Budget, Nancy Killefer is uniquely qualified to lead that effort."
Obama touted Killefer's career at Treasury, where she served as assistant secretary for management, chief financial officer and chief operating officer, as well as her private sector experience at McKinsey and Co., a management consulting firm where she is a senior director. The president-elect said Killefer is an expert at streamlining processes and eliminating inefficiencies who also understands that government services are delivered by people.
"She has always worked tirelessly to empower employees to take matters into their own hands, to rethink outmoded ways of doing things, to embrace new systems and technologies and to take initiative in developing better practices," Obama said.
Killefer will meet with Cabinet members and other key agency officials soon after the inauguration and then on a regular basis.
"I am convinced the success of every policy of this administration will be influenced by the people executing it, and I'm committed to engaging and drawing on the talents of the federal workforce in order to deliver on our promise of a new more efficient and effective government," Killefer said.
Jim Flyzik, president of the consulting firm TheFlyzikGroup, worked with Killefer when he was chief information officer at the Treasury Department, and called her "a fantastic selection."
"I enjoyed working for her -- she was tough, you had to justify everything you were doing and she required you to do your homework ... but she was very fair and supportive," Flyzik said. "When you were able to demonstrate you knew what you were doing and put the performance metrics and governance structure in place, she would certainly get behind you."
Robert Shea, former OMB associate director for administration and government performance, said he has heard her described as "unflappable."
"She has been looked to by both parties as someone who is nonpartisan, super smart and can carry an enormous load and make it look effortless," Shea said. "Provided she gets additional resources -- which I expect her to get -- on top of what she can draw on at OMB, she can be successful."
COMMENTS
- I worked in the Financial Industry for 27 years before I came to the Federal position I hold now. I can tell you from up-close & personal experience that every single time a company (insert government) hired an "effeciency expert" to "root out waste" & streamline processes .... It Always lead to the same thing, People will get fired, good, bad & indifferent... Staff will be cut, it is the only real tangible way to make an impact on the Expense-side (insert Program) Labor is still the biggest single line item in Business and in Government alike. So don't say i didn't warn you you watch & see what happens ..... Chris Posted January 9, 2009 8:22 PM
- If Ms. Killefer is able to free up the annual gridlock caused by extended continuing resolutions, the efficiency of federal programs will soar. Jonathan Lash Posted January 8, 2009 11:20 AM
- Subject: the new performance czarina will scour the budget and eliminate "what we don't need" – Here’s some cogitations on “need” -- Aren't many of our daily "needs" as healthy Americans, essentially political and cultural based non-essentials? For example: do we "need" air conditioning? Do we “need” bike paths built on old rail road beds? Do we need iPods and cell phones? Do we "need" shopping malls in upper income neighborhoods? Do we "need" the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, Ohio? -- located, I might add, in one of the big number states in the Electoral College -- and an institution that receives federal government funding? Why doesn't the NY Times, even GovExOnline, the Gallop organization, or maybe the have-survey-will-travel Pew Foundation convene one of those focus groups – you know those butcher, baker, candle stick maker rainbow groups that the big TV networks so ostentatiously feature during the Presidential campaigns- and pose some “need” type questions - Here's the opening – by one of the wrinkle brow news anchors, say, Brian Williams of NBC: "Citizens of Cleveland we have tough times in the land. We’re told by our new President Obama, that it's time to stop spending federal money on operations and projects we don't really need. President Obama has said we have some tough choices to make and his new czarina is here. She’s about to start her scouring work, and you can help her. You each have a list of federally funded projects and operations in your town. Please explain which projects, if any, you think should be cancelled in the interest of the nation as a whole. Please understand, we must cancel these for all time, once stopped they will not be restarted, ever, with any federal tax money, or tax credits. You have one hour." Wow! TV like this will get really low ratings, but, the clips will be catnip for the networks and those egg head seminars on wither-the-American-voter at the Barone Center and such like. But, just maybe the focus group might shine a light for the Congress on assessing "needs." 'Til then, just makin bacon on the Potomac. Concerned Retiree Posted January 8, 2009 11:18 AM
