TOPICS

Pay-for-performance prospects dim, OMB official says

The Bush administration is committed to improving systems for rating employee performance, its management chief said Wednesday, but doesn't expect Democrats in Congress to go along with efforts to tie employees' pay more closely to their ratings in such systems.


RELATED STORIES

Winning approval for a governmentwide pay-for-performance system will be "almost impossible to do with a Democratic-led Congress," Office of Management and Budget Deputy Director Clay Johnson said during an appearance at a Government Executive Leadership Breakfast. "I expect very little movement on that in the next couple of years."

Other parts of the Bush administration's management agenda are more bipartisan, Johnson said. On management issues in general, he said, "I don't believe there's going to be a sea change with the change of leadership in Congress."

To the extent the administration's objectives ever run into opposition on Capitol Hill, Johnson said, it usually comes from congressional staffers rather than members themselves. For example, he said, efforts to restrict the use of the administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool at the Labor and Health and Human Services department and other agencies are the work of a single employee.

"It's one staff member who has a thing about PART, and we know where he lives," Johnson quipped.

Similarly, an effort to include language in legislation that would limit the Bush administration's e-government initiatives was the work of a lone staffer with an interest in the issue, according to Johnson. "I bet his boss doesn't even have a clue that's in there," he said.

Johnson noted that he meets with President Bush once a year to update him on agencies' grades on the administration's traffic-light-style management score card. Last year, he said, Bush asked, "When everybody gets to green, then what?"

Green grades mean agencies have the ability to do well, Johnson said, but don't necessarily mean that they are. Agencies need to be able to translate their grades into real-world results. "They might be all green," he said, "but if they can't put it in plain English and dollars and cents, they have not in fact caused their agency to work better."

COMMENTS

  • When I entered the GS system, I had no idea what it was or how it worked. Entered as a GS-5 even though I have a BA degree and have worked since I was 18 years old and am now 51 years old. After a year and 1/2, I have not been able to move because of the rules about being in the next grade down. Well, I thought that NSPS would take care of that, but no. Now, I am being told that you can only advance 5% a year which is not much more than a step. The supervisors do not know the rules of how to help someone to advance, so those who have supervisors with a little more sauvey than others benefit while those of us who work for supervisors who feel that it is more effort to learn how to help their employees than it is worth to them feel stuck. Finding another job doesn't help much since you are told that you can only advance 5%. So, if you started out too low in the GS system, you are still doomed to stay there with the NSPS.
  • I first thought NSPS would make it easier to motivate and reward folks. But now I see it is a dangerous instrument in the wrong hands and bad ideas like bad fruit don't get better with time. This idea was rotten to the core from the start. No matter how you peel it, layer for layer, it’s meant to stifle the individual and create blind obedience instead of individual initiative. This is not how we should define success. Even the SES's have complained about how the pay pool was managed. The system requires all raises to be placed it in a pot. But guess what, the pot was always gone by the time it got to those just a few rungs down the ladder. Those at the top received excellent bonuses though. NSPS was created to satisfy someone's ego and has nothing to do with security of out nation.
  • May I say it? "Woohoo!!" Now the question is: Will sanity reign supreme, or is this just another lull in the storm? Oops, now you got my hopes up again. Tip off.