GovernmentExecutive.com

Federal agencies are embarking on the most dramatic personnel reforms in decades, and chief human capital officers are on the spot to make them a success. The Defense Department is finalizing regulations governing the shift to a pay-forperformance system. The Homeland Security Department is doing the same, though a judge recently dealt a blow by declaring a set of proposed rules illegal.

This setback hasn't discouraged the Bush administration from pushing other civilian agencies to shed the General Schedule.

CHCOs must win employees' trust and support for the changes. They also must convince skeptical lawmakers to give them the resources necessary to train managers properly on fresh performance evaluation systems. And they must appease union leaders concerned that the reforms signal an attempt to curtail collective bargaining. The tasks require exceptional communication and unwavering attention.

This is expected of executives who also hold broad responsibility for attracting top talent to government service, making the hiring process more efficient, retaining employees, leading emergency preparedness and succession-planning efforts, and anticipating and filling upcoming skills gaps. Some CHCOs carry multiple titles, adding to their duties. Lawmakers have expressed concern that chiefs holding multiple titles might be stretched too thin.

Congress created the Chief Human Capital Officer position as part of the 2002 Homeland Security Act, and required the heads of 24 agencies to select career executives or political appointees to fill it. CHCOs bring much-needed focus and attention to personnel issues, former Office of Personnel Management Director Kay Coles James told a House Government Reform subcommittee in May 2004. "Having a conduit at the very highest levels in these agencies . . . where these issues are being addressed and talked about, is critical," she said.

If CHCOs fail to perform, the consequences will be dire, said Rep. Danny Davis, D-Ill., at that hearing. "The best part of the federal government is the thousands of dedicated men and women who work on behalf of taxpayers each and every day," he said. "All the services Americans rely upon their government to provide, from protecting our homeland to regulating our markets, will be severely threatened unless we improve the way government manages its most important asset - its workers."

COMMENTS

• GOVEXEC: Thanks for the laugh !! I needed it this morning, as I have every morning since the creation of this DHS farce. So the creation of DHS is responsible for these "new" positions. How convenient, go figure. As for appointments; betcha my badge (el cheapo now) and bullets, except the ones "I" buy, the new CHCOs, or whatever, will be another 24 "Brownies", as in FEMA appointments, that have no clue about being a dedicated civil servant. Then those 24 Brownies will bring on a host of other Brownies as underlings, and the result will be loyal support for MAXHR and DOD NSPS. Face it folks, Bushwhacker is out to A-76 all of us, or place you all in another form of slavery. Take or leave it, as ole "senior management" will say. As if they don't already. God save this country from the Bush/Cheney "family". Thankfully, I only have a couple years to weather this BS corruption. And to the young AF lady glad to see these new systems encourage the old timers to retire; you deserve everything you will be left with. The old timers fought for what we have and what you currently have. Can't wait to read your post in five or ten years !!! Old Grunt Posted September 21, 2005 9:35 AM
• If those selected are responsible for leading emergency preparedness, then what happened to New Orleans? If CHC0's are responsible to recruit the "most talented", is that saying BUSH'S Cronyism in appointing BROWN as FEMA director was a failure? The whole system of "pay for performance" and creating CHCO's is nothing but a system designed to destroy the government workforce and add more layers of fat to a republican administration that is already incompetent in the eyes of most americans. Charlie Posted September 17, 2005 10:05 PM
• "Congress created the Chief Human Capital Officer position as part of the 2002 Homeland Security Act, and required the heads of 24 agencies to select career executives or political appointees to fill it." Bet they use political appointees! This is proof that the entire move to "pay-for-performance" is politically motivated. It is not based on better performance in the sense of doing the work and achieving the results in the least cost manner. It is performance based on the will of the political appointees and not the good of the country. This government already is corrupt and this move will make the employees fall in line and foster greater corruption in government. Stop this move courts because you are the only line of defense left! The Congress has set this up to change civil service to political service. The administration has set this up so that the rank and file will follow political wims or not get paid! taxpayer Posted September 16, 2005 6:36 AM