Intelligence community defends pay-for-performance expansion

The intelligence community is urging the Obama administration to allow the continued expansion of its pay-for-performance system after a group of Democratic lawmakers last week asked the Office of Management and Budget to suspend the implementation of such programs.

"We've tried to make the case to the Hill and also to OMB that with particular respect to the intelligence community…we are fundamentally different than the workforce covered by the National Security Personnel System [now suspended pending a review]," said Ronald Sanders, chief human capital officer at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, during a Thursday conference call with reporters. "Our system is based on the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency's system, 10 years of experience and in my view, one of the most successful and least known pay-for-performance systems."

Sanders said that discussions with OMB were still under way, and he was unsure when a decision about the future expansion of federal pay-for-performance systems would be reached. Eight Democratic lawmakers wrote to OMB Director Peter R. Orszag on April 3 to argue that a governmentwide review of pay-for-performance systems was necessary because some systems had resulted in discrimination and low employee morale.

But Sanders pointed to data from the Intelligence Community's 2008 Employee Climate Survey to make the case for expanding pay for performance across the 16 intelligence agencies. Twenty-nine percent of respondents to the 2008 survey said pay raises at their agency were linked to performance, up 1 percent from 2007. The number of respondents and results from individual agencies is classified, but Sanders said the majority of employees who participated in the survey do not work under pay-for-performance systems. At NGIA, where pay for performance is well-established, positive responses to the pay raise question were "double-digit better," said Sanders.

On other performance management-related questions, Sanders said the results were "not nearly good enough." Forty percent of survey respondents said performance differences in their work unit were recognized in a meaningful way, and 42 percent said promotions were merit-based.

In a more promising sign for performance management, 75 percent of intelligence community employees said that their front-line supervisors were doing a good job, a measurement Sanders said he was proud of because, "traditionally, [immediate supervisors are] often thought of as a weak link."

Respondents showed less faith in higher-ranking officials, with 48 percent reporting they were satisfied with the policies and practices of their agency leaders. Sanders said he thought that the implementation of 360-degree evaluations, in which supervisors and leaders get feedback from the employees they oversee, their colleagues and their own supervisors, would make managers and leaders more responsive.

Sanders said he had briefed agency leaders on Tuesday on the survey results, and Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair was considering the results as he reviewed the improvement plans from intelligence agency heads.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
FROM OUR SPONSORS
JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Close [ x ] More from GovExec
 
 

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from GovExec.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

    Download
  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

    Download
  • Federal IT Applications: Assessing Government's Core Drivers

    In order to better understand the current state of external and internal-facing agency workplace applications, Government Business Council (GBC) and Riverbed undertook an in-depth research study of federal employees. Overall, survey findings indicate that federal IT applications still face a gamut of challenges with regard to quality, reliability, and performance management.

    Download
  • PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

    This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

    Download
  • Toward A More Innovative Government

    This research study aims to understand how state and local leaders regard their agency’s innovation efforts and what they are doing to overcome the challenges they face in successfully implementing these efforts.

    Download
  • From Volume to Value: UK’s NHS Digital Provides U.S. Healthcare Agencies A Roadmap For Value-Based Payment Models

    The U.S. healthcare industry is rapidly moving away from traditional fee-for-service models and towards value-based purchasing that reimburses physicians for quality of care in place of frequency of care.

    Download
  • GBC Flash Poll: Is Your Agency Safe?

    Federal leaders weigh in on the state of information security

    Download

When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.