GovernmentExecutive.com

Rigid pay systems and leadership skills gaps are among the challenges agencies will face as they seek to offset a talent shortage expected over the next decade, top government officials and an outside observer said Tuesday.

At a breakfast sponsored by the Georgetown University Public Policy Institute and the management and consulting firm Accenture, representatives from three agencies and a nonprofit group agreed that federal officials should immediately begin planning for how they will address such challenges.

If that doesn't happen, "rather than getting the best of the brightest, we're going to end up with the best of the desperate," said John Palguta, vice president for policy and research at the nonprofit Partnership for Public Service.

Palguta said the keys to preventing a potential talent drain include replacing the decades-old General Schedule pay system, reforming the hiring system and ensuring managers have the right skills. "If you put all of that together, the government will be very successful," he said. "If we don't pay attention to all those things, we're going to have some problems."

Michael Dominguez, principal deputy undersecretary of Defense for personnel and readiness, said the government would have difficulty meeting the challenge. "I anticipate some problems," he said. "I can't say with high confidence that we're poised for success."

Still, all panelists agreed that the General Schedule is too rigid and needs to be replaced with a more performance-based, market-sensitive pay system. "Any system that's based on tenure is not going to produce the kind of results that are really going to move an organization forward," said Kevin Mahoney, associate director of the Office of Personnel Management.

Dominguez touted pay reforms under the National Security Personnel System at the Defense Department, noting that one key to building a successful compensation system is top officials emphasizing exactly what they want to achieve. "It's about realigning your organization around observable outcomes," he said. "That's a leader thing, not a civilian personnel manager thing."

Dominguez said Defense has a problem with pay for high-ranking officials. "Our executive compensation schedule for senior executives is way underpriced for the value we get from those people," he said. "We need to jack that up."

Sallyanne Harper, chief financial officer and chief administrative officer at the Government Accountability Office, noted that in addition to implementing a pay-for-performance system, intern programs and student loan repayments are a major boost to recruiting for GAO. She also recommended that the government work out an accommodation to allow retirees to return to federal service on a part-time basis.

Compensation and other human resources initiatives are worthless unless accompanied with solid leadership, Palguta said. Panelists agreed that in addition to more flexible pay systems, agencies must have dedicated managers who can ensure employees have clear performance expectations and goals aligned with missions.

"I think we have a growing consensus ... that in government, you can have the best technology, all the infrastructure and even the budget, and none of it works unless you have the right people in place," Palguta said. "I think leaders are starting to understand that."

COMMENTS

• Grace, a few months is not enough time to judge/prove a system will work. From what I understand of the NSPS pay band you could be an outstanding worker and still not receive your performance pay. DoD wants to tie performance to the President's Cost of Living raise. Why does the President and Congress plan the Cost of Living if one man can do away with it and go against the President and Congress? The Cost of Living increase should not be even considered in the NSPS because it's to bring the salaries closer to the rising cost of living and has nothing to do with performance. Another issue is workers under NSPS will be capped on earnings yet more will be given to upper SES management. Civilian Worker Posted November 1, 2007 9:29 AM
• Bryon, whether its new blood/old blood, or the good "old" boys, there will always be favortism, it's human nature. A civilian worker told me she plans to retire early because the people in her office were already sucking up to the supervisors and all she could see were the soles of their shoes. What kind of atmosphere is this creating? Hostile? Buddy, Buddy? How many times during your career have you seen reorganizations? Too many times to count! All they do is cause confusion. You will have slackers in every field, they will always figure ways around the system. How many times have you worked for a Supervisor with a personality difference/clash? Under the General Schedule there were avenues which the worker could tap for assistance but under the NSPS those negotations will be gone, all under the guise of Security. Dominguez said Defense has a problem with pay for high-ranking officials. "Our executive compensation schedule for senior executives is way underpriced for the value we get from those people," he said. "We need to jack that up." Wow, give the civilian workforce the shaft while the executives get more money. Sounds like corporate America with the outrageous CEO salaries and benefit packages. Changing the General Schedule is like rewriting the Constitution. Look out America, that will be next because the young blood will consider it outdated and antiquated. Look how the Civilian Servant Retirement System (CSRS) was done away with to be pushed into the Social Security Retirement System, which is being raided by every other cause and maybe more so by the illegal aliens. Leave the General Schedule in place and get rid of the NSPS, most gov workers do not want MAXHR/NSPS anyway and it you don't believe that just look at the negative comments this article has generated. Ann Posted November 1, 2007 9:18 AM
• Quite possibly the most ridiculous aspect of NSPS is this...they have made the focal point of the system...pay. But pay is the one area that is repeatedly and almost proudly asserted as an area we simply cannot and never will be able to compete with private sector. This then is the foundation of our new personnel system? Are you kidding me? Jim Posted October 30, 2007 10:04 PM