GovernmentExecutive.com

In response to a report recommending that the Bush administration test the consolidation of agency financial management systems before making the moves permanent, the Office of Management and Budget released a statement arguing that the testing phase has already occurred.

The "pilot" or "proof of concept" for the financial management "line of business" took place over the past decade as seven large agencies and 79 smaller agencies moved to a government or commercial shared service center for hosting their core financial management systems, OMB stated.

According to OMB, the financial management line of business project, which is part of the President's Management Agenda, represents a continuation of these ongoing efforts to improve the cost, quality and performance of financial management systems.

A recent Congressional Research Service report by CRS analyst Garrett L. Hatch said the OMB effort to streamline financial management systems by moving them into shared service centers would stand a greater chance of success if tested using pilot projects. Hatch, who used to work in OMB's Office of Federal Financial Management, could not be reached for comment.

Karen Evans, OMB administrator of e-government and information technology, initially said in response to the suggestion that government pilot projects "never go away" and agencies should work testing, along with associated costs, into the initial implementation.

OMB also stated that the notion agency officials are fearful of investing funds into shared service center migrations because of the potential for failure is misguided, because the centers have all shown they are capable of performing well.

As for the concern raised by critics that transitions to shared service centers should not occur until potential risks are addressed, OMB said migration planning guidance urges agencies to consider the financial management line of business as part of their long-term planning process and take into account performance gaps, business case analysis and budget requests.

COMMENTS

• HR; sorry you think that I am communist but it clearly indicates you have a total inability to operate effectively as an HR specialist. What are you a specialist at? Running concentration camps for those that disagree with you? I thought we only imported the German scientists and not the HR people as well. I have no problem dealing with an Indian call center. Generally I get well qualified people that are willing to spend time to help me do whatever is needed. It is too bad that the USA does not have qualified HR people to help us travel the maze of programs that the HR specialists are supposed to know. Every time I talk to one in DoD they automatically assume a CRS retirement program and I have yet to find one that knows what vesting means in the FERS program. Finally my experience in both government and private industry with HR people has been consistently BAD! Most of the HR specialists have no idea of how people should be treated or how they can use the benefits they have been awarded. Most of the HR people hold themselves out to be "on the side of the employee!” Guess what - they are hired by and work for management and they put forth the "company line" top the employee. They are not there to help anyone but management and if employees do not believe that they are going to face a sad problem someday in the future. Hopefully it is not after some HR specialist has screwed up your retirement plans and given you extremely bad advice that you cannot correct. When that happens to you I bet you wish you had some help desk in India to give you good advice! The only problem with an Indian help desk is that it is hard to understand many of them but I would rather take the time than get the bad advise I have experienced with HR people who think they know how to do financial planning when they are so wrong it is painful for many that have to rely on them. You rant about communists illustrates the point very well taxpayer Posted March 1, 2007 7:45 AM
• Dear Taxpayer, Give me a break -- the next time you have a problem with your service from a major multinational corporation, I hope you enjoy calling the India Call Center for help. We have a major philosophical difference as I mentioned -- you enjoy centralization ala the Kremlin and centralized planning. I understand your need for such stability Comrade, but I like decentralization. There is no need to get personal and think I can't solve problems out of the box simply because I don't buy into your socialized, centralized world view. Cheers, HR Specialist GovExec.com reader Posted February 27, 2007 9:49 AM
• "We HR folks know that when you consolidate many HR offices into one big monster office and have OPFs 3,000 miles from the employees it works so much better than simply having HR folks on-site.” This is the major problem in government - the lack of any ability to think of new ways. Consolidation of a function into a single massive agency does not mean that the location of the people has to be central as well! You could consolidate a function like HR into a central agency such as OPM and still benefit without a significant reduction in hand holding. Just because the function is in a single agency does not require a reduction in people or the centralization of people! Many multinational firms achieve the benefits of centralization without a loss of personal contact on a local basis. However, centralization improves information flow and availability and allows single policies to be applied to all employees! The problem HR sees is an HR problem in management of the centralized function. You have to be able to manage to make a centralized function operate properly. taxpayer Posted February 27, 2007 6:54 AM