GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Stronger training urged for front-line supervisors

• 70422
  

  Stronger training is necessary. OSHA training is one of the types of e-learning that has really taken off. A person may receive their OSHA 10 or 30 hour training card by taking their online OSHA 10 hour training and 30 hour training courses at sites like osha10hourtraining.com or at osha30hourtraining.com . They receive quality training accepted by OSHA for online delivery, and receive the same exact OSHA wallet card as if they took the course live. This has really opened the door for many companies who could not justify an on site class due to cost or logistical challenges, and has really helped out individuals who wanted the OSHA training just for themselves. Very economical when compared to on site OSHA training, too.

  OSHAPro Posted February 28, 2009 4:01 PM
• 27326
  

  All good comments, especially from the former FAA employee. It is simply a matter of how managers are selected in the federal government. When you read the announcements for supervisory anything it is weighted heavily for techncial competence. The OPM ECQs are even more so.

  Technical competence doesn't translate into personnel management competence-- notice I refuse to use the term human capital which was designed by very competent CFOs to describe human beings.

  If supervisory skills are to be developed in the federal sector than you have to return HR to the professionals and you have to make Personnel management the single most important criteria for selecting managers and supervisors. I can only dream-- it can't happen today because the analytical CFO's control the administrative functions in the federal government-- just see the background of most of the CHCOs in government.

  I've seen too many HR senior managers who are uncomfortable dealing with people issues and whose workstyle wipes out a performance culture. And this is HR-- can you imagine an agency filled with these people. Or an entire civil service.

  I recommend the book the Peter Principal from the 1960s if you wish to see how the managerial dysfunction in the federal government came about and suggestions on how to fix it.

  HR Specialist

  HR Specialist Posted July 3, 2007 7:58 AM
• 27111
  

  If we (civil service) are to compete with the private sector, then we need to take their skill sets into consideration. Most first line supervisors/managers have 4-year degrees. Most second and above level carry graduate degrees. Granted we can't force people to go back to school, but we should reward those who choose to. For most of my career (FAA, DOD, 14 years) I have worked for bosses that didn't have anything higher than an Associates Degree in Management. People wonder why we have disgruntled workers in civil service; our current management doesn't have the education or the skills to truly deal with situations and resolve them intelligently. I applaud the idea of teaching individuals management concepts, but if those individuals lack the all important groundwork what good does it do? I say put people in place that have the correct skills already, and by skills I don't mean longevity, I mean education and experience.

  Current Fed Worker Posted June 29, 2007 3:11 PM
• 26996
  

  It's a little scary that FAA is one of the models for training programs for front-line supervisors. I worked for the FAA for several years and never had the privilege of a good supervisor. I had a one-foot-out-the-door retiree with no supervisory training or experience, one who had been trained but who was assigned too much technical work to have time for "people" issues, and a micro-manager with superb technical knowledge but zero leadership skills who was assigned to our unit as punishment for personal indiscretions in his former position. If these are the front-line supervisors produced by a "model" training program, I'm frightened to think what is going on in agencies without a model program.

  Former Fed Posted June 28, 2007 1:07 PM
• 26988
  

  If you are going to improve government performance, you need competent managers all the way up the chain of command, and not just at the line level.

  For example, I am a government accountant with my 4-year accounting degree who has been complaining about our government-wide accounting and financial software standards as well as EPA's gross accounting deficiencies for the past 17-years. While your article discusses the techncial skills of our managers, I do not think that you will find too many people (whistleblowers) agreeing that our managers are technically competent. For example, I would welcome anyone's input on how I address the government's accounting and system deficiencies with my management team. My immdediate GM 14 "accountant" supervisor has her higch school GED, her GM 15 "accountant" supervisor has no degree in any field. Another member of the management "accouning" team also has no degree in any field. These technically deficient manaagers are at all levels all the way up to and including the EPA CFO. Consider that you, the taxpayer, are paying 6-figure salaries for people with no ability to address our government's "technical" accounting and systems problems These individuals are not accountant supervisors but thugs who eliminate all levels of dissent. I am the last of eleven 4-year degreed accountants remaining and am currently fighting for my job (with an action before the MSPB).

  If you want to improve government, you need competent managers, at all levels. Also, it is foolhardy to discuss government reform without real whistleblower protection and real penalties for the supervisors who are rewarded for hiding all levels of gross incompetence and corruption.

  Larry Fisher Posted June 28, 2007 11:59 AM
• 26918
  

  Glenna hit the nail on the head, leadership training VS regulations. The arrangement that currently exists civilian personnel system and regs defeat the premise of leadership. You act like your union employees therefore you get treated as such. I've seen GS 13's measuring the size of their office with a tape measure and counting the number of people passing by the door, because he had to relocate and was unhappy with his surroundings and wanted to file a complaint. Simply put there are too many babies in Civil Service and you need babysitters not leaders

  dan ketter Posted June 27, 2007 1:14 PM
• 26915
  

  Training is just a piece of the puzzle. The bigger piece is having the behaviors learned in trainng actully put to use. This takes a committment from the upper levels to believe in the training objectives,to set expectations that behaviors will change, and to have the guts to take the steps needed if the supervisor doesn't change. I've worked in both private and public sectors. Private companies have the same issues, the grass is not greener.

  ankle Posted June 27, 2007 12:43 PM
• 26907
  

  As an alumus of the Presidential Management Fellowship Program, I have had the rare opportunity to work with and for genuine leaders and genuine managers in some of the truly finest federal organizations. My 30+ year career has spanned four major depts. And it was highly diverse, including 12+ years as a journeyman tradesman in the shipyard indusry. In any event, it is clear that many of the posters are obviously DoD staff. DoD is without question the most preposterously insular and hyper inbred organization in the entire federal governemnt bar none. 'Leadership' as it is functionally defined within DoD is oftentimes linked at the hip to another commonly used DoD descriptor: so-called 'team players.' So-called 'leaders' and 'team players' within DOD are typically onea gecny careerist organizational sycophants, toadies, and go-along-to get-along types. In DoD if you don't 'rock the boat,' don't challenge the status quo, even for reasons that would benefit the organization and the taxpayer, you too can become a 'leader.' Please! Most (but not all) staff in DoD don't have a clue about what constitutes genuine management, mucb less leadership. And no, such skills and rare traits do not appear just because someone attends a government paid for class during business hours.

  Michael J. Smith, M.P.A. Posted June 27, 2007 11:51 AM
• 26905
  

  Although I've seen some front-line supervisors that could use the training, it is more likely that higher level supervisors are the ones guilty of dictatorial tactics, especially in the DOD. As long as there are things such as unreasonable suspenses for ridiculous training (e.g. Protection of the President)on computer systems (ADLS) that are nearly impossible to use, the situation on the "front line" will never improve due to employee frustration, apathy and ultimate hostility toward the system. Change the unreasonalble rules and regulations first before worrying about the supervisors; then train the upper-level supervisors who are the main cause of frustration and hostility.

  nathan wolfson Posted June 27, 2007 11:41 AM
• 26904
  

  What I was hoping, but failed, to see in this article was any mention of the type or quality of training for supervisors. In my opinion poor training is worse than no training. Training must go further than catchphrases, such as "I hear what you're saying..." etc. There are management techniques and approaches that are axiomatic in the private sector that are totally alien to the Federal government. To simply rush into a training curriculum haphazardly would be a costly and long-lasting mistake.

  David Lyons Posted June 27, 2007 11:30 AM
• 26900
  

  This is a tremendous initiative and certainly not a concept unknown to us in the training industry. The effect of law will do a lot to ensure this effort is accomplished. Meanwhile, our environments have sustained big hits against our populations which has robbed us of our most important resource - time to implement a strategy which effectively supports our operational missions. I see that in terms of delivery, the option of using contracts to accomplish direct delivery of training is very necessary, given that training staffs have been drastically reduced; now training functions must shift from direct-delivery of training to becoming managers of training resources. However, we have administrative burdens that no longer have committed support and effectively drain time needed for supervisors and journeymen to plan and think creatively. We need the administrative support back in our organizations. Budgets is how organizations manifest what is important, and of priority, to them. I've not seen how budgets will support this effort. Unless fences can be erected to protect training money from O&MN raids to support operational missions, there will be support problems down the line in many organizations; this situation is self-defeating. Major problem in our organizations, as found also in the report, is a lack of trust. We simply must create cultures of trust, at all levels else we'll never reap the full benefit of our collective intelligences and collaborative efforts.

  Verrano A. Fenwick Posted June 27, 2007 11:18 AM
• 26899
  

  To use a familiar phrase, "what a breath of fresh air!" The 'shoot from the hip' style supervisors that pervade government agencies today need to be quickly rooted out and retrained. And previous military service as a 'Drill Sargeant' or even as a mid-level officer should not qualify a person to step right in to civilian management without some kind of indoctrination. From czar-like mini-dictators to knee-jerk bigots, it is rare to encounter an actual skilled, principled, and schooled leader who isn't self-serving or simply power hungry. A uniformed certification of all government supervisors would instill the kinds of core values many of us sought when we became federal employees: a culture of fairness without bigotry of any kind; a place to work that embraces diversity, instills pride and a sense of duty, and that values, recognizes, and rewards individuals for their efforts.

  Charles E Posted June 27, 2007 11:01 AM
• 26898
  

  True leadership is an inherent quality of the individual. Training provides tools and knowledge to enhance the leader's effectiveness. In 30 years, i've been a worker, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd line supervisor and have come across few leaders, particularly as front-line supervisors. Stronger training in team building, and the HR regulations and tools can make dramatic improvement in the supervisory skills of a large proportion of the front-line supervisors. If those up the chain focus on supervision in their evaluations or better yet, select leaders for supervisory positions not subject matter experts, action officers, or "yes" men. Maybe in addition to training, upper management should take a hard look at the selected 1st line supervisor during the year probationary period and have the strength of character to weed out those who obvious lack the leadership quality and supervisory skills.

  True leaders may be the missing links in our chains of command. I believe our military place much more focus on identifying and developing leaders, The civilian side has not got the message.

  Tom G Posted June 27, 2007 10:45 AM
• 26884
  

  I have notice the Managers/Employees here in my facility FFD are really having difficulty entering data into the system to enter NSPS The usually can't get into to the system that's been set-up. Sometime it takes days, and you must keep trying to contact the persons responsible for re-setting you up in the system designed for this purpose NSPS. Then there is always a "dedline" with a system that is not working properly to enter the NSPS data here in FFD.

  Peggy Jackson Posted June 27, 2007 9:38 AM
• 26882
  

  How is it typically handled in the private sector?

  Newbie Posted June 27, 2007 9:31 AM
• 26878
  

  Over my 18 years with the government I have worked with many talented technical people who have also been supervisors or recently promoted to a supervisory position.They technical abilities have not carried over to their roles as supervisors.They have little or no training and are unfamiliar with Gov. rules and regulations.

  I had a personnel problem with another employee and when I went to my supervisor for direction he refused to get involved.

  On my past three annaul evaluations he never discusses the rating with me and he hasnt filled out any comments and on the last two he hasnt signed it or given me a final grade. One supervisor who Ive had for four years never once provided me with any negative or positive feedback. We had two staff meetings with him over three years.

  Front line supervisors must receive valid training and must dedicate the time to dealing with employees both in regards to positive and negative performance.

  Walter B. Armstrong Posted June 27, 2007 8:56 AM
• 26865
  

  The biggest obstacle to management in the Federal system is politics. How politically correct an individual is, is more important than how hard or well he produces. Just the opposite in the private sector.

  Rick Isserman Posted June 27, 2007 8:29 AM
• 26852
  

  Having been involved in this area of training first line supervisors on the most basic HR issues for many years I just love these articles and statements by people who state the obvious.

  The push back I've gotten for years is the lack of time and resources which I really appreciate having been a federal HR manager. Without an agency wide culture to do this it won't be possible to implement.

  Of course we want leaders trained in the soft skills but classroom training isn't enough--OJT, Mentoring by senior experienced managers, and the internal strength to just take the actions necessary is much more important than 15 hours of how to be a leader class-- The first time I walk a newbee manager through the PIP process I'm always humored by their amazement that it is possible to remove employees for poor performance-- and than they come to do it again.

  HR Specialist Posted June 27, 2007 7:52 AM
• 26839
  

  A better certification program for front line managers has been disparately needed for decades. But, the bureaucrats have fought it tooth and nail. They know that the better front line supervisors get at doing their jobs, the more obvious it becomes that many of the mid and upper level bosses are doing little and are often impeding productivity. It's one of those big, management "secrets" that everyone knows about.

  The old adage still applies: Nothing motivates a worker more than to see their boss put in an honest day's work.

  Robert M. Posted June 27, 2007 6:40 AM
• 26838
  

  If front-line supervisors are so important, why are the SESers receiving so much in bonuses?

  Diana Hayman Posted June 27, 2007 6:29 AM
• 26837
  

  It's about time. I've had so many horrible supervisors during my 32-year career with the Federal Government. And that includes the Army folks at the Pentagon. My former GS-15 supervisor never supervised employees before she became a GS-15. She didn't know squat about the civilian personnel system and she didn't bother to read the regulations.

  Glenna Collins Posted June 27, 2007 5:02 AM