Promising Practices Promising PracticesPromising Practices
A forum for government's best ideas and most innovative leaders.

Employees Who Love Telework Are Right: It’s More Productive

Working from home is a concept that gladdens some hearts and makes others sink. Businesses feel the same, and make different choices. Some, like global campaigning group Avaaz or airline company JetBlue, embrace working from home. Others—most famously Yahoo—ban it.

Of course, the internet made instant mass communication, and scaleable home businesses, possible long ago, but some remote-working tools, like online hangouts, video conferencing and group work platforms, have only recently become good enough to function really well for large scattered teams.

So you’re one of those people who’s tempted to work from home. But does that mean it’s right for you and your employer? Here are some pros and cons to consider.

1.) Seeing more of your loved ones (but not too much)

Having children is one big reason to work from home, and some “family-friendly” policies are designed to allow employees to weave together work and home life. Parents who work from home can have breakfast with their kids rather than rushing for a train, and be there when children arrive home from school. A 2010 study found that family-friendly policies make people happier. They also make firms more successful, but only when ...

Customer Centricity and the Future of Human Services

  • By William D. Eggers and Tiffany Dovey Fishman
  • January 30, 2015
  • Leave a comment

Everyone may be equal in the eyes of government, but that does not mean everyone is the same. One of the great weaknesses in human services over the past century is that they have operated with a mass-production, one-size-fits-all approach. In many circumstances that is no longer necessary or appropriate.

This recognition is giving rise to a new wave of experimentation across human services programs rooted in the premise that customized program design and delivery, based on a deeper understanding of the customers being served, will lead to better outcomes.

Forward-thinking government leaders are adapting practices from the commercial world—from customer segmentation and geospatial mapping to advanced customer analytics—to customize the design and delivery of human services.

Tailoring programs and services: Innovative government officials are redesigning social programs to take into account the diverse spectrum of customers they serve, delivering tailored services that better meet the needs of different customer segments. The overarching goal is to get more individuals and families out of the system—not by redefining eligibility or cutting services but by applying the right mix of services and benefits to help them become self-sufficient.

Washington, D.C.’s redesign of its Temporary Assistance for Needy ...

Getting Credit for What You Know

College wasn’t right for Daniel Gamez when he first tried it as a recent high school graduate nearly two decades ago. The Texas economy was booming; he was in a hurry to start working. He couldn’t see how the things he was learning in college would help him get a job, and he dropped out before the end of his first semester.

It’s an all too common story. The overwhelming majority of American high school students say they expect to go to college, and about 70 percent of graduates end up in a college classroom within two years. But for many, higher education is the equivalent of the Bermuda Triangle—they never come out, at least not with diplomas. Many students give up in the first year: about a quarter of those attending four-year schools and half of those who start community college. And the attrition continues until graduation day. The end result: Just 32 percent of Americans 25 and older have four-year diplomas, and just 10 percent have associate’s degrees. Meanwhile, nearly a fourth of the country’s workforce—more than 36 million adults—fall into the category "some college, no degree."

Now in his ...

Why Bad Bosses Sabotage Their Teams

Bosses who crave power but fear they might lose it can undermine their teams’ productivity.

The dreaded bad boss comes in many varieties. There are the incompetent ones, the lazy or defensive ones, the ones who claim your work as their own, or those who prefer to rule through intimidation.

Jon Maner, a professor of management and organizations at Kellogg School of Management, has studied a specific breed of bad boss—those who intentionally sabotage their teams’ cohesion in order to protect their own status as leader.

Maner’s research shows that leaders will intentionally sideline high-performing team members, limit communication and social bonding among team members, or compile ill-matched teams if they think it will help ensure their own place at the top.

The danger of this type of bad boss is significant.

“It can cause the group to fall apart at a basic level,” Maner says. “If you have people who don’t like each other and aren’t allowed to communicate effectively with one another, then really, you don’t have a group at all anymore.”

Maner and collaborator Charleen Case, a doctoral student at the Kellogg School, found that leaders who were driven by a desire ...

When the Executive Core Qualifications Aren’t Enough

What skills do Senior Executive Service aspirants need to succeed in federal sector management positions? Are they developed to elicit employee engagement? Do the executive core qualifications defined by the Officer of Personnel Management create a hurdle high enough to ensure success as an SES leader?

The short answer seems to be no. Meeting the ECQs does not guarantee that a leader will be successful.

The most objective measure of SES capacity can be found in four questions in OPM’s Federal Employee Viewpoint survey, according to the Partnership for Public Service. They are the most critical to creating employee engagement and increasing agency productivity.

From 2011 to 2014, positive answers to the following questions have been trending down:

  • Q 53: “In my organization, senior leaders generate high levels of motivation and commitment in the workforce.”  (down 15 percent, from 45 to 38 points)
  • Q 54: “My organization’s senior leaders maintain high standards of honesty and integrity.” (down 12 percent)
  • Q 61: “I have a high level of respect for my organization’s senior leaders.” (down 12 percent)
  • Q 64: “How satisfied are you with the information you receive from management on what’s going on in your organization ...