GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Pentagon officials collect employee input on personnel overhaul

• 11529
  

  Worthless, worthless, worthless. That's what I think about this survey and NSPS' "so called" attempts to get employee input. If they really cared, they would have had a comment section, at a minimum. Not that any constructive criticism from the previous NSPS comment period did any good. I provided well-thought out, constructive input during NSPS's comment period and never received any follow up.

  GovExec.com reader Posted August 10, 2005 5:44 PM
• 11432
  

  I was one of those who took the survey, so I guess now they can say they had employee participation. I hoped to find meaningful questions, but every one was so generic they could be applied equally well to any job at any level. Basically there were "how important is it to know how to do you job or how important is it to play nice with the other children." No meaningfull distinction here.

  GovExec.com reader Posted August 5, 2005 1:53 PM
• 11402
  

  Survey? Survey? What survey?

  HQDA Administrator Posted August 4, 2005 8:18 AM
• 11401
  

  As I've said and written many times-- if you don't like NSPS, or Max HR at DHS you can always vote with your feet. If enough DoD and DHS employees transfer to Domestic Departments and Agencies that would certainly be a real good indication of the viability of HR Reform in these two Departments, especially if they can't recruit replacements.

  HR Specialist

  GovExec.com reader Posted August 4, 2005 8:13 AM
• 11375
  

  All we hear is the big threat about NSPS, seems like a great system, RIGHT! "This is going to be in your PMP". "If not it will be in your PMP". If you don't perform it will be in reflected in your PMP. "You will all be held accountable if you don't meet cost & schedule". "Your pay will be affected by your PMP". We are to embrace the new NSPS system when management is threatening to retaliate on us?

  Truth is often we don't have enough personnel for work assigned (vacant unfilled positions); we constantly get new tasks, but are expected to meet all schedules on cost (undermanned). I doubt moral trend line will be on an increase in the near term and will reach all time lows when into NSPS. We don't have free time to worry about new NSPS system because all our free time is spent on in-depth self assessments, producing piles of metrics, endless graphs, and bean counting to the next level, vice concentrating on getting production work done. Do they expect we have extra staff just dedicated to these metrics?

  Is this the way to get the most out your production personnel, best way to manage your resources, and get more work done? Is this really what NSPS was designed to deliver management?

  This is not what they preach in all the government training I received. Ethics, equal pay for equal work, fair, honest, and trust doesn't seem like the theme they have planned. Initially seems like we are entering a threatening hostile work environment.

  Is this really what the government needs to do? I agree we need to and can be more efficient. Also we should not waste tax dollars. We need to be accountable for our performance but the big threat technique is a step backwards. We don't get rich working for the government but are loyal to our work. We need to be respected for the fine work for the nation vice threatened every day with "do it or else" looming overhead and behind your back. That technique is one you use on children vice the finest work force in the nation.

  Not sure when things will change for the better, if ever, but the new NSPS system rollout seems like a bumpy road we are about to take. It will drive some good people out of government service and frustrate the heck out of most of us.

  GovExec.com reader Posted August 3, 2005 6:17 AM
• 11368
  

  I "participated" in the survey. Had nothing to do with the real problems with the National Shaft the Personnel System. The entity that created the survey made the assumption that we accept NSPS as it is, WRONG. Some of us can see NSPS for what it is, a way to destroy civil service, and return to a suck up system. Of course we will never see the results they will be kept behind closed doors. If you look back you will realize that 8 years of Bill, were better then less then 5 years of George.

  dave Posted August 2, 2005 9:16 AM
• 11357
  

  The guys who wrote this survey were from the old Seinfeld show - it was a survey about nothing! The DoD is laughing all the way to the bank!!!!

  GovExec.com reader Posted August 2, 2005 6:02 AM
• 11350
  

  I guess that if you hear something over and over again you begin to accept it at least if it's reasonable. NSPS is not reasonable otherwise more would be known about it and USC would not have to be set aside for it. Instead of it being progressive it is regessive. It takes away rights of the employee when the playing field already is against them. DoD has called the present system out dated and cumbersome but at least it is somewhat fair. Employees should not be treated fairly or even as human beings rather according to NSPS as "Mobile Assets". NSPS is suppose to be based on performance but DoD does not comply with the performance system now so how will they make this one work? This same question was asked of them and the only response was training. If nothing is known of the requirements then how can you train someone on it? Further, DoD won't even allow for third party review or judgement and even under the few exceptions reserves the right to reject it. If the system is so good then why? NSPS really allows for more favoritism; the good ole boys club; and subjective performance based upon characteristics not production or performance.

  GovExec.com reader Posted August 1, 2005 5:34 PM
• 11344
  

  DHS had a similar survey. The response from ICE was less than 6 per cent, so they extended the time you could take the survey. No comments allowed, just choose one of the responses already thoughtfully provided for you. No initiative or contrary viewpoints allowed, please! Many of us still ignored it, because nothing we say will make any difference in MAXHR. The proof of that can be found in the thousands of public comments made to the proposed new pay system, which were overwhelmingly negative. Management ignored all but the few favorable ones they liked, even though many of the others offered thoughful, reasoned responses and suggestions. So much for employee input!

  GovExec.com reader Posted August 1, 2005 4:04 PM
• 11340
  

  The survey model contained a common error which is potentially fatal in yielding a valid result: It did not distinguish between "the way things are" and "the way things ought to be" relative to the employee's perception of his/her working environment. The resulting ambiguity will lead to one of the following from the respondent:

  (i) An attempt to objectively assess the actual culture, whether that culture is effective and efficient, or not.

  (ii) An attempt to pro-actively assess the true needs of the job in a broader professional context.

  (iii) A confused approach which mingles (i) and (ii) - a likely approach of the majority of respondents.

  Unless these distinctions are made, the value of the resulting data will be speculative only.

  GovExec.com reader Posted August 1, 2005 1:01 PM
• 11339
  

  "voluntary and confidential"?

  In order to participate in the survey, you have to enter your SSN, as well as your CAC card- how confidential is that? Refuse to participate? Watch out- that will be held against you on your next performance review. Say anything bad about the "system"? It goes on and on. At least they should give you the opportunity to really say how bad the system sucks instead of blowing this proverbial self-acclaimed sunshine up our behinds!

  GovExec.com reader Posted August 1, 2005 1:00 PM
• 11335
  

  I had the opportunity to participate in a survey, and if this was they same survey they are collecting employee input from, which I suspect it is, what they are collecting is certainly not valid employee contribution.

  There was no input allowed for comments, and basically the survey was asking if basic issues were "important".

  This was a very limited, very poor and one sided survey. I don't see how they could even call it a survey since they basically already had their "blanks" already filled in.

  GovExec.com reader Posted August 1, 2005 9:55 AM
• 11333
  

  As I do not recall ever hearing about this "Pentagon Survey" I would like to know how the survey was publicized, how many received the notification, who was to relay it to the true working force, ie non-management level employees, and where was this located - website, etc.

  I would like to see/read the survey, even if it is apparantly too late to participate in it.

  Penelope Payne Posted August 1, 2005 9:26 AM
• 11332
  

  I received an electronic survey. It was in my opinion worthless in asking me what I thought or in inproving or objecting to the system. Questions were such that it would lead to believe that federal employees supported.

  Federal Manager Posted August 1, 2005 9:08 AM
• 11323
  

  This simply is another check the box exercise so they can say they had employee input. This is smoke! Why doesn't England ask if they want the system at all? The answer would be no!

  Why doesn't DoD apply this system to the military? They screew things up that we have to fix and they get promoted based on time anyway. At most they might be delayed a year or two for the promotion. I have had many years at the same grade with no rewards but keep getting asked to do more and more. The military just keeps moving ahead as they put in their time.

  civilian Posted August 1, 2005 6:35 AM
• 11322
  

  "The survey was voluntary and individual information is confidential."

  I have seen that statement before regarding previous surveys about what I did for a living and what I needed to my job ect. ect. YET, any derogatory remarks that are made about the management's fitness for duty seem to get back to said management and they seem to know who said it.

  So, just how "confidential" is this survey???????

  Why don't many of the DOD employees participate in the survey? I believe that it is pretty obvious.

  If the Pentagon wants DOD employees to accept a new personnel system, they had better start with some radical changes in how things are managed and by whom.

  Robert M. Posted July 31, 2005 8:19 PM
• 11317
  

  517,000 DOD employees eligible to complete the survey and we worry about a measley 2 billion dollar shortfall in the VA budget? What do these people do all day long and the Defense Department is still a mess?

  Charlie Posted July 30, 2005 5:40 PM
• 11316
  

  Let's see... The GAO report expressing concerning concerns about employee input about NSPS implementation was published on or about about July 14.

  So it took the Pentagon less than two weeks to develop a survey, disseminate it to 500,000 DOD employees, receive and compile more than 70,000 surveys returned, and identify from these survey results the critical elements of the pay-for-performance.

  Rather than come right out and express any low confidence I may have in the survey and the findings, let's just say, in literary jargon, I will "suspend my disbelief" for the time being.

  Fred Hall Posted July 30, 2005 8:37 AM