Government Executive - Authors - G. Edward DeSeve

VA is leading the way to restoring trust in government

G. Edward DeSeve and Srikant Sastry — Tue, 28 Nov 2023 06:00:00 -0500

If you saw the report on “60 Minutes” highlighting the Social Security Administration’s effort to claw back improper disability payments made based on its own errors, you probably seethed. SSA calculated benefits improperly, overpaid thousands of disabled people, and is now demanding they pay it back.

As practitioners dedicated to restoring trust in government, we think this goes in exactly the wrong direction. Making the neediest of our citizens repay based on the government’s mistake doesn’t just erode trust, it demolishes it. And SSA’s decision to cancel the claw back order for these three cases – after they were featured on “60 Minutes” -- makes it even worse.

Among the pillars in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s framework for assessing drivers of trust in government institutions is one directly related to customer experience. The relevant pillar in the OECD framework judges the extent to which government institutions “[p]rovide efficient, quality, affordable, timely and citizen-centered public services that are coordinated across levels of government and satisfy users.” SSA fails this test in this instance, but what about other areas of government?

It turns out, veterans are getting the benefit of a laser focus on customer experience. We recently spoke with Barbara Morton, deputy chief veterans experience officer for the Veterans Affairs Department. She won the Partnership for Public Service’s 2022 Samuel J. Heyman Service to America Award for Management for her work transforming the veteran experience.

Not so long ago, VA was, itself, the source of negative news stories about the quality and timeliness of care it provided veterans. Congress enacted the Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act to improve the quality of service VA provided veterans and their families. It was around that time Morton began her work marshaling the resources of the government and her expertise in customer experience to fix what was broken.

As Morton demonstrates, VA has been on a sustained journey to transform the veteran experience by integrating human-centered design, leveraging data, and focusing on robust measures of customer experience. Human-centered design is the cornerstone of the department’s strategy: designing services and solutions with the veteran as the focal point. By asking Veterans about their needs, challenges, and experiences, VA creates more effective and accessible services. This method includes direct veteran involvement throughout the process.

Collecting and using customer experience data is also crucial. By collecting and analyzing extensive customer experience data, VA gains insights into the effectiveness of its services and identifies areas in need of improvement. The department and its practitioners get a comprehensive view of veterans' experiences, preferences, and pain points, enabling the VA to tailor its services to meet their specific needs. It enables overall agile performance and management practices in the agency.

The VA's approach to measuring customer experience is encapsulated in what it calls the three E's: ease, effectiveness, and emotion:

Ease: how simple it is for veterans to access and navigate the VA's services. The goal is to streamline interactions, making them as effortless as possible.
Effectiveness: how well are VA's services meeting the needs of Veterans. This includes the outcomes of service delivery, such as the timeliness and accuracy of benefits processing, the quality of healthcare services, and the impact of support programs.
Emotion: Though subjective, this metric is equally important. It gauges Veterans' emotional responses to their interactions with the VA and whether they feel sufficiently honored and valued.

The department's quarterly report on the veterans experience provides a comprehensive analysis of these metrics, showcasing progress, identifying challenges, and setting future priorities. The report is not only a testament to the VA's commitment to continuous improvement but also a transparent communication tool that keeps Veterans informed about the efforts made on their behalf.

And what does it show? Veteran’s trust in VA increased from 55% in 2015 to almost 80% today. Because of significant, sustained commitment by Morton and the dedicated professionals at VA, this deserving community is regaining its confidence in the institution it turns to for care.

OECD’s framework suggests the hard work of improving customer experience can restore faith and trust in government institutions. VA has shown this to be the case. By continuously refining its approach based on direct feedback and measurable outcomes, the VA is setting a standard for government agencies aiming to put their clients' needs and experiences at the heart of their mission.

Beyond VA, the Biden administration is making significant strides transforming Americans’ experience with multiple government agencies when they are impacted by significant life events: retirement, financial shock, recovering from a disaster, having a child, and transitioning to civilian life. According to the OECD, getting these right is an important ingredient in restoring trust in government. The latest American Customer Satisfaction Index scores for government show measurable improvement. With trust in government at an all time low, we should all hope the administration’s efforts succeed.

G. Edward DeSeve is the coordinator of the Agile Government Center at the National Academy of Public Administration and executive fellow at the IBM Center for the Business of Government. Srikant Sastry is managing partner of advisory services at Cherry Bekaert.

]]>

Trust in the federal government is in a tailspin. Here’s how agencies can rebuild it.

G. Edward DeSeve and Srikant Sastry — Wed, 12 Jul 2023 06:00:00 -0400

On May 25, 1961, President John F. Kennedy made a bold statement. “I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth," he said in a joint address to Congress.

Today, people might not put much faith in such a promise. At the time, however, polling from the Pew Research Center showed that more than 70% of Americans believed the federal government would do the right thing “just about always.” Such trust made it possible to muster the resources and talent to achieve the president’s pledge.

Government needs this same level of trust now to cope with global pandemics, supply chain crises, opioid epidemics, rising food and gas prices, and a host of difficult cultural challenges. Alas, the same poll shows that trust in government to do what is right always or most of the time has fallen off a cliff, dropping to around 20% in 2022.

The Trust Barometer, produced by global communications firm Edelman, confirms this trend. “The United States and United Kingdom …. have done nothing to improve their trust standing and will need to take more proactive measures if their current administrations want to be more confident about surviving the next election cycle,” a summary of the 2022 findings states.

The first step in addressing this problem is acknowledging its significance. Although it may appear daunting, with numerous external factors affecting Americans' trust in the government, there are strategies within the reach of executive branch agencies that can help reverse this decline. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, an international policy forum dedicated to improving market economies and trade, has created a valuable framework for strengthening trust in government. Two crucial components are competence and support for values such as transparency.

Competence involves ensuring that governments are responsive and reliable. Responsive governments should provide efficient, high-quality, affordable, timely and citizen-centered public services. Reliable governments should anticipate needs and respond effectively to evolving challenges. Values such as openness, integrity and fairness are also instrumental in fostering higher trust in government. Emphasizing these drivers can guide our approach to addressing the decline in trust.

One way the federal government can demonstrate competence is by giving Americans a better experience when they interact with executive branch agencies. The Biden administration is investing significant time and resources into transforming service delivery, particularly during significant life events when individuals need government assistance the most. It is crucial for the entire government, both the executive and legislative branches, to commit to these initiatives and measure their impact not only on specific customer experiences but also on overall trust in government.

The government can also show that it is competent and reliable by developing policies based on rigorous evidence of what works. A 2018 law called the Foundations for Evidence-based Policymaking Act required federal agencies to make plans to gather more data to help evaluate programs and inform potential changes. Now, it is imperative to use the evidence collected through this process effectively.

The extent of fraud in government programs also reflects poorly on agencies’ integrity and competence. Although the federal government has made significant progress in measuring the extent of improper payments to program beneficiaries, the problem seems to be worsening. The federal government made an estimated $247 billion in improper payments in fiscal 2022, totaling nearly $2.4 trillion in improper payments over the past 20 years, the Government Accountability Office found. The government should redouble its efforts to address this clear waste, immediately.

Another issue is that, unfortunately, many programs fail to reach the people or communities that need them the most. This undermines confidence that the government allocates benefits fairly, particularly among traditionally underserved communities. The response to the COVID-19 pandemic serves as one example. The Paycheck Protection Program to provide financial relief favored businesses with existing banking relationships, leaving many minority-owned firms struggling to access support. To rebuild trust, the government must ensure that all programs, including disaster relief and education initiatives, are accessible to everyone, especially those in traditionally underserved communities.

Transparency in government operations is a final, crucial component of fostering trust. The federal government already shares a vast amount of information about its activities publicly. For instance, USASpending.gov provides transparency on all government financial transactions, and agency performance and accountability reports track how programs are doing annually, or sometimes even more frequently.

Information the government shares should continue to reinforce openness and honesty. Moving forward, the government should keep focusing on meaningful transparency that conveys information about performance in accessible and useful ways. It should also seek to engage the public in understanding the importance of this information. Government should tell the story and make it easier for the media to report tangible progress, not simply the latest political dust-up.

We encourage those working to improve government to prioritize efforts focused on enhancing efficiency, reliability, transparency and communication. By doing so, we can not only transform government operations but also move toward rebuilding trust. We are committed to this cause and invite others to join us.

G. Edward DeSeve is the coordinator of the Agile Government Center at the National Academy of Public Administration and an executive fellow at the IBM Center for the Business of Government. Srikant Sastry is managing partner of advisory services at Cherry Bekaert.

]]>

We All Should Be Rooting for the Infrastructure Implementation Task Force

G. Edward DeSeve — Mon, 29 Nov 2021 14:42:47 -0500

Earlier this month, President Biden signed an executive order establishing the Infrastructure Implementation Task Force. It will be co-chaired by Brian Deese, head of the National Economic Council, and Mitch Landrieu, Infrastructure Implementation Coordinator. This is a great first step toward implementing the very clear mission of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).

What struck me most in the Executive Order was this paragraph:

“This Task Force will be committed to break down barriers and drive implementation of infrastructure investments across all levels of government to realize the President’s vision of rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure and positioning the U.S. to compete and win in the 21st century.”

This charge is a great first step toward addressing a significant intergovernmental challenge.

I have previously written in Government Executive about the need for horizontal and vertical coordination to achieve successful implementation—not just of the IIJA but also of agency base funding as well as funds administered through the CARES Act and the American Rescue Plan. The new Infrastructure Implementation Task Force should immediately define the people and places that have been left behind and create SWAT teams to bring available federal resources to them. Recent remarks by Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg before the National League of Cities were an excellent first step in this direction.

Another step in the identification process would be to use the 10/20/30 Persistent Poverty Formula advocated by U.S. Congressman Jim Clyburn of South Carolina. This suggests that at least 10% of the funds should go to places where more than 20% of the population has lived below the poverty rate for at least 30 years. One place to start would be to work with the National Academy of Public Administration’s newly created Center for Intergovernmental Partnerships, on which I serve, to work with its constituent groups to help identify where the Clyburn criteria exist. For example, Congressman Clyburn has said that there are more than 400 counties that meet his criteria. The Task Force could meet with Congressman Clyburn and his staff to verify this estimate and determine what other areas might qualify.

But the issues don’t stop with identification. The new Implementation Task Force should actively work to see that state, local, tribal and territorial governments are adequately organized to receive and account for funds. This means examining where initiatives already exist and where bottlenecks, such as reporting requirements and other administrative matters, may make application for funds difficult. Speed should be emphasized with clear deadlines for submission of funding applications. This should allow for rapid funding for those who are prepared in areas like broadband and technical assistance for those who need it so they can apply in subsequent funding cycles.

The Task Force can also help to shape the Build Back Better Act so that its implementation in areas such as wildfire management can proceed in tandem with other infrastructure initiatives.

The President and his team have experience successfully managing large programs such as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). The selection of Director Deese and Coordinator Landrieu and the issuance of the executive order creating the Infrastructure Investment Task Force are strong positive steps toward successful implementation.

One area where the IIJA could use improvement is in the need for an independent oversight agency like the Recovery and Transparency Board under ARRA to guard spending integrity. A strong relationship should be initiated with the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee, which is currently in place and has used agile government techniques in identifying and warning against waste, fraud and abuse.

Much remains to be done, but these initial actions are a great start at successfully implementing the bipartisan Infrastructure Act.

G. Edward DeSeve, former Special Advisor to President Obama for Recovery Implementation, is a Fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration, the Coordinator of the Academy’s Agile Government Center and a Visiting Fellow of the IBM Center for the Business of Government.

]]>

Organizing for Recovery

G. Edward DeSeve and Mark Pisano — Wed, 17 Feb 2021 13:25:17 -0500

President Joe Biden is no stranger to managing recovery. As vice president, he personally led the implementation of the $800 billion 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and effectively achieved its goals—including job creation—with minimal waste or fraud.

The challenge President Biden faces now is even greater.

The incredibly ambitious scope of the Biden administration’s “American Rescue Plan” and the outlines of the expected subsequent phase, “Build Back Better,” raise both extraordinary organizational and management challenges and opportunities for the administration. While the legislative language is still forthcoming, the available summary suggests that the proposed scope will include aid to veterans, hospitals, small businesses, elementary and secondary schools, public universities and community colleges, renters and their landlords, the homeless, restaurants, child-care providers and workers, public transit, tribal governments, and federal information technology.

Unlike ARRA, a number of the targeted initiatives lack existing federal programs to serve as conduits for funding. Both the American Rescue Plan and Build Back Better will focus on economic recovery and will require new regulations and practices to integrate all of the levels of government and their private and non-profit partners.

Typically, federal investments occur in organizational silos. This vertical approach does not align naturally with the horizontal funding strategies necessary for local economic development. This mismatch between a vertical siloed approach from the federal government and a more coordinated horizontal approach between local and regional governments begs for an entity that can coordinate across agencies, programs and levels of government to create a more inclusive, cooperative approach that can optimize resources and achieve better results.

The White House has many entities, such as the Domestic Policy Council and the National Security Council, that coordinate policy. They do not, however, coordinate in-depth policy implementation. The ARRA experience suggests cross-agency coordination must be planned for and executed as an essential element in effective implementation of complex policies.

To ensure the success of these new investment programs, the president should immediately establish a National Investment Board by executive order that will focus on bringing needed relief to people and places that have been left behind and spur growth in the overall economy. The NIB should be chaired by the president and include all members of the cabinet and such other agency heads and staff as the president designates. The chief operating officer of the NIB should be the vice president, who would be charged with convening and coordinating its activities. The NIB would listen to the leaders of governments throughout the country and act on this input to design the program implementation for national assistance.

The NIB would have two primary functions:

Coordinate across all agencies and programs to assure collaborative approaches to achieve the objectives of the recovery statutes. This coordination would develop implementation plans for identifying, deploying and monitoring all funds, including those in base budgets, that might be used for recovery.
Develop outreach and cooperation mechanisms for working with each of the public, non-profit and private sector organizations that will receive these funds to ensure that they are deployed and spent with the greatest care and impact.

The organization of the NIB should place a premium on organizational agility and accountability. Agility suggests that the mission as stated in the legislation effectuating the recovery must be crystal clear. Speed should be a hallmark of the legislation, and the language should clearly establish deadlines for allocating and spending funds. Cross-functional teams at the federal and inter-governmental level should be empowered to find innovative flexible solutions and should persistently apply these to produce the results specified in the legislation. Accountability requires evidence that metrics have been achieved and that they provide a positive change in the lives of Americans. At the same time, results should be achieved with a minimum of waste or fraud.

Recovery needs differ across regions of the country. Using the organizational principles outlined above, the NIB can flexibly address these various needs, develop strategies that best invest resources to resolve them, and accelerate economic activity across them through new partnerships and arrangements with local, state and tribal governments. The NIB can establish partnership and coordination networks as the default response across the federal government and with the recipients of funds. It can apply and enhance available program tools and encourage recipients, particularly state, local and tribal governments to continue to develop their horizontal approaches to maximize impact.

President Biden has laid out an ambitious vision for the country’s recovery from both the coronavirus itself and the economic devastation left in its wake. An equally ambitious management structure will be required to address these challenges and create new job opportunities. The creation of a National Investment Board is essential to that vision, to ensure the effective application of relief funds.

G. Edward DeSeve, former Special Advisor to President Obama for Recovery Implementation, is the Coordinator of the Agile Government Center, a Fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration and a Visiting Fellow of the IBM Center for the Business of Government. Mark Pisano, Professor of Practice at the University of Southern California, is co-chair of the Intergovernmental System Standing Panel at the National Academy of Public Administration.

]]>

Striving for Excellence in Federal Management

G. Edward DeSeve and David Chu — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 07:00:00 -0400

In less than four months, the Presidential campaigns will end and speculation will immediately focus on who will staff the new Administration. But management issues? They’re unlikely to get much attention. That is, until they bite, as every Administration discovers, to its distress. To amend a phrase often employed, policy without good management is an invitation to political disaster and the reversal of the very policy objectives the Administration prizes.

The National Academy of Public Administration (of which we’re Fellows) is devoted to confronting the challenges of public management and how best to solve them. Academy Fellows span a wide range of experience at the federal, state and local levels, and include academic leaders who have extensively researched best practices.

Energized by the recurring management problems of the past, the Academy polled its Fellows on which management issues the new President’s team ought to give early attention. The Academy’s insights and recommendations are summarized in its new report, Transition 2016: Equipping the Government for Success in 2016 and Beyond. Four distinct areas emerged:

Look beyond immediate problems to set longer-term objectives and anticipate issues. Each candidate has a long-term agenda and aspirations for the legacy with which he or she hopes to leave office. Strategic foresight offers a disciplined approach to identifying and analyzing scenarios that have the potential to either put policy objectives at risk or create opportunities for more effective action. Our recommendations include the President-elect establishing a 100-day governmentwide Foresight Test Taskforce to identify five to 10 future challenges to the President’s key priorities; systematically integrating foresight into policy development; and helping agencies develop and use foresight in decision-making.

Base decisions on evidence, as opposed to the emotions of the moment. As W. Edwards Deming famously remarked, “In God we trust; all others bring data.” But his principle is not observed in government policy-making to the extent it should be. With each new Presidential administration, new initiatives are launched, old ones are tossed, and much of the progress gained in the past is lost. To address that, we recommend strengthening the use of data, evidence, evaluation, and innovation by government leaders, managers, front-line employees, those involved in service delivery, and other stakeholders in the allocation of resources and management of programs.

Persuade federal agencies to cooperate effectively and collaborate with all those involved in implementing any policy decision. One does not have to look far back to see the consequences of failing to collaborate across intra- and inter-governmental boundaries. The response to Hurricane Katrina and the botched Obamacare rollout—situations in which proper collaboration was not established—are prime examples of incidents that can derail a president’s agenda or tarnish an administration’s legacy. For the government to successfully collaborate across boundaries, it needs to invest early in building strong alliances. Spend the necessary time and resources to clarify expectations of roles and responsibilities in advance. Subsequent investments in relationship-building, laying a foundation of trust, and finding ways to celebrate individual and collective achievements early on will almost certainly pay off with improved policy implementation and government performance.

Mobilize the human capital so essential to success. People drive organizational success. To meet mission critical strategic goals and objectives, federal departments and agencies must recruit, develop, engage, and retain top talent. For example, selecting the right candidate with the appropriate qualifications required for a particular appointment can make the difference between early success and failure for the incoming Administration. Given the political constraints on compensation, the post-government employment restrictions and the lengthy appointment process for those subject to Senate confirmation, the new Administration will need to take a highly innovative approach to the recruitment and management of key personnel.

We do not pretend to have a monopoly on wisdom. Rather, we would like to start a dialogue now with the campaigns, so that management issues are part of the immediate agenda post-election.

Our hope is straightforward: That we not repeat the mistakes of the past. The federal government has demonstrated management excellence in the past—as was seen in building the Panama Canal, constructing the interstate highway system and putting a man on the moon. While each of these was informed by a compelling policy vision, the fulfillment of those visions required superb management.

If we can realize that hope, the American public will be much the better for it, and perhaps regain some of the faith they have lost in a government that over the long reach of history has made our society so successful.

David Chu and Edward DeSeve are the Co-Chairs of the Transition 2016 initiative at the National Academy of Public Administration.

]]>

Your Guide to a Presidential Appointment in the Next Administration

Paul R. Lawrence, Mark A. Abramson, G. Edward DeSeve, and Daniel Griffith — Tue, 28 Jun 2016 09:03:44 -0400

In a recent article (“Thousands of Federal Jobs Are About to Come Open, but You’re Probably Not Going to Get One”), we pointed out that the number of political appointees can be misleading. You often hear 3,000, 6,000, and even 8,000 positions on occasion. For those seeking a presidential appointment, numbers can indeed be deceiving. Many of the jobs listed in the “Plum Book” (officially known as United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions) go to career senior executives in government and thus are “off the table” for political appointees.

In this article, we focus on the PAS positions (Presidential Appointment with Senate Confirmation) and delve deeply into the 1,217 positions listed in the 2012 Prune Book. Since then, over 100 jobs have been reclassified to PA positions (Presidential Appointment without Senate Confirmation) bringing the total down to over 1,100. Other positions have been reorganized or eliminated, making it difficult to have a precise current number until the 2016 Plum Book is published later this year. Based on research conducted by the National Academy of Public Administration and the EY Initiative on Leadership, we can now dig deeper into the 1,100 PAS positions to gain a better understanding of the components of that number. Based on our extensive review, the 1,100 PAS position break down into the following types of positions, each of which are discussed below:

Management positions (289 positions)
Ambassadorial positions (190 positions)
Commission and Board positions (145 positions)
Policy positions (121 positions)
Part-time trustee positions (109 positions)
C-suite positions, (94 positions)
United States Attorneys (93 positions)
United States Marshals (94 positions)

For those seeking a PAS position, the numbers of jobs are fairly limited and require specialized skills and experience.

Management positions (25 percent). These include cabinet secretaries, deputy secretaries, and agency heads. Many require (or should require) extensive management and substantive experience in leading large organizations. When managing agencies such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and the Veterans Health Administration, there is no place for amateurs. Relevant managerial experience is required.

Ambassadorial positions (17 percent). There are many surprises when one looks closely at ambassadorial positions. The first is that they are the second biggest category of PAS positions. The second is that nearly 70 percent go to career Foreign Service Officers in the State Department. Based on figures prepared by the American Foreign Service Association, the third surprise is that of the 30 percent non-State department appointees, only about one-third of those positions (23 appointees in 2016) went to individuals who had been fundraisers for the Obama campaigns. While fundraisers are indeed sent to good places (such as France, Morocco, New Zealand, Spain and the United Kingdom), their numbers are not as large as commonly perceived.

Commission and board positions (13 percent). Walking around Washington, one frequently comes across buildings that house such entities as the Securities and Exchange Commission, Federal Communications Commission, Equal Opportunity Employment Commission, and so forth. Each of these bodies have between five and seven members. Interestingly, legislation creating these agencies requires that a minority of each commission consist of members of the opposition party (during the Obama Administration many Commissions have three Democrats and two Republicans—if all slots have been confirmed). Thus, all PAS positions do not go to individuals who belong to the party that won the election. These boards require highly specialized knowledge and experience. Again, amateurs need not apply.

Policy positions (11 percent). It is fair to say that these are the dream jobs for the policy wonks who inhabit think tanks all across Washington (and throughout the nation). The Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation in the Department of Health and Human Services is an example of this type position, which has been held by a variety of academics and think tankers over the years. There are, however, few of these positions and competition is intense.

Part-time trustee positions (10 percent). Another surprise from our analysis is the large number of part-time trustee positions available to a president. There are more than 30 trustees positions for the Kennedy Center, as well numerous positions on the Council of the National Endowment of the Arts and Humanities. Nearly all are part-time positions requiring just several council meetings throughout the year. Those looking for full-time employment in government need not apply.

C-Suite positions (8 percent). Just as in major corporations, government today has an extensive c-suite, consisting of positions such as chief financial officer, chief information officer, general counsel, and legislative affairs officer. Appropriate specialized knowledge and experience is clearly needed in each of these positions. Managing the nation’s spending and accounting is no place for beginners.

U. S. Attorneys (8 percent). U.S. Attorneys represent the federal government in U.S. district courts and the U.S. court of appeals. There are 93 U.S. Attorneys stationed through the United States and territories. Each is appointed by the president for a term of four years with Senate confirmation (as with all PAS positions) and can continue to serve in office until a successor is appointed and confirmed. No recent law school graduates need apply. Experience is required.

U.S. Marshals (8 percent). Yes, there are still U.S. Marshals. While they may no longer wear cowboy hats and gun holsters, 94 marshals are selected for each of the 94 judicial districts. Each is traditionally appointed from a list of qualified law enforcement personnel for a district or state, with each state having at least one district. Today, U.S. Marshals are responsible for fugitive operations, prisoner transport, and protection of officers of the court. While a PAS position, these appointments are non-political in nature and require substantial law enforcement experience.

Over the coming months, much of Washington will engage in a kind of parlor game about who will receive the spoils of victory, but it is important to remember that the size of the “spoils” has been substantially reduced over the years. The goal of the famous Pendleton Act of 1883 was to create a large career civil service and much smaller cadre of political appointees. Those interested in seeking an appointment to one of these highly specialized positions should understand, as our analysis demonstrates, how few positions are really available, and the long odds of actually receiving a presidential appointment.

Mark A. Abramson is President, Leadership Inc. His email: mark.abramson@thoughtleadershipinc.com. G. Edward DeSeve is Executive in Residence, Brookings Executive Education Program and Chair of the National Academy of Public Administration’s Transition 16 (T16) effort. His e-mail: gedeseve@gmail.com. Daniel Griffith is an intern at the National Academy of Public Administration. His e-mail:dgriffith@napawash.org. Paul R. Lawrence is a Principal in the Government and Public Sector practice of Ernst & Young LLP. His e-mail:paul.lawrence@ey.com.

]]>

Thousands of Federal Jobs Are About to Come Open, But You're Probably Not Going to Get One

Mark A. Abramson and G. Edward DeSeve — Fri, 08 Apr 2016 12:12:40 -0400

Get ready for the most popular new website in Washington. In December, the Government Publishing Office will release two versions of the quadrennial United States Policy and Supporting Positions, more popularly known as the “Plum Book.” GPO will release a digital version of the book on their website, as well as a print version.

The Plum Book was first published in 1952 when incoming President Dwight Eisenhower sought information on how many political appointments he could fill after 20 years of Democratic administrations. With the exception of 1956, the book has been published every four years since then. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee alternate in compiling the book, with the latter producing this year’s version. The most recent edition was published by GPO in December of 2012. Always looking to sell books, GPO used a brilliant shade of plum to color the cover.

The book contains listings of jobs by department, the type of appointment for each position, names of current incumbents in many of the positions, and salary levels. One of the interesting things about the book is that experts disagree on the exact number of “plum” positions available to a new administration. The definitions of “Positions Subject to Non-Competitive Appointment” include the following categories:

PAS: Position subject to presidential appointment with Senate confirmation
PA: Positions subject to presidential appointment without Senate confirmation
GEN: Positions designated as Senior Executive Service “general” (These positions can be used to select either career or noncareer individuals.)
NA: Senior Executive Service general positions filled by noncareer appointment (General SES positions which were used by the Obama Administration to appoint noncareer individuals.)
TA: Senior Executive Service positions filled by limited emergency or limited term appointment
SC: Positions filled by Schedule C excepted appointment
XS: Positions subject to statutory excepted appointment

Aspirants to a presidential appointment in 2017 should now begin work on memorizing the above acronyms to use in their conversations with the next transition team or the Office of Presidential Personnel (after January 20, 2017). However, not all of these positions are truly plums. By that, we mean that they are not all available to be filled by the new administration. People seeking a job in the administration need to realize that there are two types of SES positions. The first is the general type position that is referred to above. The second is the career reserved position available only to career civil servants. Each group totals about 4,000 jobs (out of about 8,000 total SES). The general positions can be filled by either a career or non-career person. In 2012, there were about 3,800 career general SES members and about 680 noncareer SES members. The Civil Service Act of 1978 stipulates that no more than 10 percent of the total SES population can be noncareer appointees.

The true plums, including general noncareer SES, total about 3,600 positions. These include both full time jobs and part time board and commission positions. Salaries range from PAS 1 (cabinet secretaries and their equivalent) to administrative assistants in the Schedule C category who may be at a GS-7 or GS-9 level. In December 2012, the numbers were:

Presidential Appointments with Senate Confirmation (PAS): 1,217
Presidential Appointments without Senate Confirmation (PA): 364
Non-Career Senior Executive Service (TA): 680
Schedule C (SC): 1,392
Total: 3,653

Two offices work with departments and agencies to fill the jobs. One is the Office of Presidential Personnel in the White House, which approves specific individuals for specific jobs. A candidate for a job can be proposed by a department or agency but they must be approved by OPP. Often, OPP will refer candidates to departments and agencies and require that individuals are given a good look before the department’s favored candidates are considered. The second key office is the Office of Personnel Management, which approves all SES allocations (career reserve and general) and makes sure that the general noncareer slots do not exceed 10 percent of the total SES positions as noted above.

The process can move reasonably quickly once an individual is selected for a position. He or she must be vetted by lawyers assigned to work with OPP who will ask hard questions and request completion of myriad forms, many requiring detailed financial information. One onerous part of Senate confirmation is that a different set of forms have to be filled out for confirming committees. Many experts have proposed the standardization of these forms but they have not yet succeeded. Background checks of selected appointees also include FBI review of individuals, which can include full field investigations or phone investigations by FBI agents.

You can put GPO's next edition of the Plum Book on your Christmas list, but that may be too late. After each party’s nominating conventions in July, resumes will begin to flow. After the election, the transition teams will begin formally allocating these resumes to potential slots in departments and agencies. John Gardner, former secretary of the former Department of Health, Education and Welfare (now the Health and Human Services and Education departments), characterizes this period like this: “So now we have a new administration. The venal and obsequious gather round. But fortunately, so do some very able people. And sometimes, of course, they are indistinguishable.”

The job of the transition team and of the Office of Presidential Personnel is to pick the real plums from among those who gather around.

Edward DeSeve is Executive in Residence, Brookings Executive Education Program and Chair of the National Academy of Public Administration’s Transition 16 (T16) effort. He served in both the Clinton and Obama administrations. His e-mail: gedeseve@gmail.com.

Mark A. Abramson is President, Leadership Inc. He is co-author (with Paul R. Lawrence) of the forthcoming Succeeding as a Political Executive: 50 Insights from Experience. His e-mail:mark.abramson@thoughtleadershipinc.com.

]]>

Listen and Learn

G. Edward DeSeve — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 00:00:00 -0500

Here are six critical competencies the new political appointees will need to succeed.

The U.S. model of federal management espouses the idea of presidential appointees who are "citizen soldiers." Like minutemen, these managers who arrive with a new administration must lead effectively at a moment's notice. They must take responsibility for a vast bureaucracy and a policymaking process that has significant legislative implications.

By definition, these appointees are highly competent, or they wouldn't have gotten this far. They also made it through the gantlet of character tests required by the vetting process.

Some appointees have government management experience, but it is unlikely they served their entire career in federal service. Others might not have served in the federal government at all. Either way, most will need to polish up at least some of their knowledge, skills and abilities in the context of their new position.

Six competencies are especially important for these top-level policy developers and managers. They are based on frameworks developed for public and private organizations, and the Office of Personnel Management has validated them for use by senior federal executives. Similar models are in use among the military services.

1. Leading for Results

Appointees should create an accountability environment with metrics that matter from the "shop floor and to the top floor," connecting operational data to overall agency and administration goals. This environment should foster strategic thinking about the organization's vision and positioning to achieve its goals. It should promote entrepreneurship that invokes Franklin Delano Roosevelt's call for "bold, persistent experimentation."

2. Managing Change

The primary theme of Barack Obama's presidential campaign was change. Harvard Business School professor John Kotter developed an eight-step formula for managing change that extends from creating a sense of urgency through communication of a vision to institutionalizing new approaches. To be an effective leader of change, an appointee must have intuition and maintain optimism in the face of adversity and malicious compliance.

3. Speaking the Same Language

Financial, human capital, procurement and technology management can be tricky business in the federal government. There are many pitfalls in the legislative and regulatory processes that have to be navigated. While appointees will come to their jobs with high levels of technical ability, they might need tutoring in the specialized knowledge required in federal circles.

4. Leading Others

A presidential appointment is always about leadership. And leadership is about attracting and motivating followers. Author Antoine de Saint-Exupéry said, "If you want people to build a ship, teach them to long for the endless immensity of the sea." An appointee should build networks of career employees, stakeholders, members of Congress, Capitol Hill staffers and private citizens-and then inspire them to launch the ship of presidential goals.

5. Leading Yourself

It is easy to skip over this exercise, but an honest self-evaluation at the start of a new enterprise is an important first step.

To ensure success, appointees should examine their motivation for public service, reflect on their ability to inspire and build trust, and review their emotional intelligence.

6. Thinking Globally

Virtually every political appointee will have to monitor the global scene constantly to anticipate the effects of actions and trends on their own work. The impact of factors such as technology, cultural change, trade patterns and capital flows are all at the forefront of an appointee's job.

Training on these and other critical competencies must be provided for appointees throughout their tenure, as well as for their counterparts in career positions: members of the Senior Executive Service, admirals, generals and others.

The best advice of all might be: Carry on. Get something done. Again in the words of FDR: "It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all try something."

G. Edward DeSeve, senior lecturer at the University of Pennsylvania's Fels Institute for Government and senior fellow at the James MacGregor Burns Academy of Leadership at the University of Maryland School of Public Policy, is author of The Presidential Appointee's Handbook (Brookings Institution Press, December 2008).

]]>