Government Executive - Authors - John Salamone

Breaking the Cycle of Constant Action Planning

John Salamone — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 09:00:00 -0400

Last week, the Government Accountability Office presented testimony during an employee engagement hearing before the House Subcommittee on Government Operations. GAO suggested that the short cycle time between one annual Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey and the next compresses the action planning process, which may actually inhibit the ability to produce the results necessary for organizational change.

GAO’s finding raises the specter that we may be reaching a critical juncture where the importance of action planning is supplanted by the benefits of a steady, focused and longer cycle of implementation.

To get to the root of this issue, senior government officials should ask one simple question: Does it seem like your agency is stuck in a perpetual cycle of action planning, leaving little or no time to implement employee engagement programs?

If the answer is no, please feel free to stop reading because your agency is one of the lucky ones. If the answer is yes, please continue on.

An affirmative answer to the first question, then begs a second. What steps is your agency taking to instill confidence that FEVS will be used to make improvements in the workplace?

Unfortunately, the survey does not yield positive results in this category. In 2011, 45 percent of employees believed the survey results would be used to make their agency a better place to work. In 2014, that number dropped to 38 percent, making it one of the lowest rated survey items.

One apparent reason may be the fact that employee engagement activities take time to mature. Therefore, the benefits of these programs and activities may not be readily apparent to the employees.

To combat the delayed reaction on the realized rate of return, agencies should consider the following actions:

Move to a two-year implementation cycle. Instead of getting caught in a closed loop of action planning every year, agencies should consider institutionalizing a biennial implementation cycle. Shifting the focus from action planning to implementation will allow the agency to concentrate on delivering results, not drafting plans. The Office of Management and Budget’s memorandum dated April 6, 2015, outlines the two-year process for developing agency priority goals in the twilight of the current administration. Moving forward, agencies could leverage this two-year planning cycle as the framework for establishing their FEVS implementation activities.

Track results quarterly and validate goals at the end of the one-year mark. Designing a longer implementation cycle should be accompanied by a rigorous and regular reporting process. Agencies should thus utilize their quarterly data driven review sessions to track and report progress against key employee engagement related success indicators. At the mid-point of the two-year cycle, agencies could revisit and revalidate their engagement related activities and accomplishments. Based on emerging trends from the updated employee viewpoint survey, new goals could be established at the mid-point, while others are either removed or remain in place. Using the quarterly data driven review cycle coupled with a mid-point revalidation process has the added benefit of allowing key constituencies including agency leaders, employees, Congress, the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Personnel Management and GAO to gauge momentum on a recurring basis.

Identify and analyze other compelling engagement related data. In their testimony, GAO noted the importance of supplementing FEVS information with other data to drive human capital results. In 2012, Richard Hartman and I co-authored an article on a similar topic for Nextgov. While our assessment was written on the eve of sequestration and through the lens of measuring programmatic performance, the commentary is consistent with GAO’s suggestion of using a wide variety of data to inform and drive decisions. In short, employee engagement programs can be measured by a wealth of other data elements beyond the FEVS. Examining attrition, employee and organizational performance, workload, and internal and external customer service data can provide a more comprehensive picture of employee engagement.

Regularly communicate results, successes, and even setbacks. An agency’s FEVS action plan should also be accompanied by a targeted and tailored communication and change management strategy. This strategy document must outline an actionable process for (1) identifying target audiences and (2) developing and delivering clear, concise and consistent messages to the appropriate stakeholders. Sharing engagement related successes with key constituencies, including employees, on a regular and recurring basis will re-affirm the agency’s commitment to its workforce. In addition, acknowledging where an agency is falling short can be a difficult, yet empowering, prospect. It takes a courageous and skilled communicator to articulate setbacks in a positive and constructive manner. But the transparency can be refreshing and will present unique opportunities to galvanize support and ultimately inject higher levels of accountability into the organization.

If enough agencies adopt a two-year implementation cycle and are able to demonstrate its value, the next administration could institutionalize the approach by aligning it with the four-year strategic planning process outlined in the 2010 modernization of the Government Performance and Results Act.

Specifically, an incoming administration could require agencies to align their FEVS action planning in conjunction with the development of new strategic plans. Engagement-related progress could be captured quarterly and goals updated during the middle of the president’s term. Then another implementation cycle would commence with the last quarterly results reported near the end of administration.

Setting the forthcoming transition aside, establishing a two-year implementation cycle driven by quarterly reviews would give current leaders more time to implement important engagement activities. Maybe then, employees would feel that the results from the survey are making their agencies a better place to work.

John Salamone, a vice president at Federal Management Partners Inc., a fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration, and a SAGE with the Partnership for Public Service, served in the federal government for 16 years and was executive director of the Chief Human Capital Officers Council.

(Image via Phase4Studios/Shutterstock.com)

]]>

The People Equation

John Salamone and Ellen Tunstall, Federal Management Partners — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 02:00:00 -0400

Here are five suggestions to strengthen the integration of workforce projections and budgeting, and address the administration’s goal of reducing discretionary spending by 5 percent in 2014 while building workforce capacity.

Analyze workforce data and address skills gaps. Identify and strategically use data about mission-critical and nonmission-critical occupations to forecast future requirements. What are the current and projected vacancy rates for these positions? What are the retirement projections? What are the skills gaps? Which of these occupations are hard to fill? Determine whether the agency can redeploy employees from nonmission-critical jobs to fill mission-critical vacancies. And ask whether there is an associated cost for relocations or other scenarios. Important questions like these will allow agencies to use data consistently to model alternatives and make strategic workforce decisions with budgetary factors in mind.

Integrate workforce and strategic performance planning. The 2010 Government Performance and Results Modernization Act requires agencies to describe how they will meet their strategic and annual goals. By asking agencies to consider the skills, training and human capital requirements for meeting their objectives, the GPRA modernization reaffirms the links between human capital and budget planning. To break organizational silos successfully, a strong chief operating officer should foster close collaboration among the agency’s chief executives -- human capital, financial, acquisition, information and performance improvement. This would generate mission-focused performance goals that address program and policy challenges, such as improving customer access with a leaner budget, assessing the cost and benefits of regulations, and building a culture of continuous improvement.

Commit to learning and development activities. Historically, when agencies are forced to make cuts, funding for learning and development becomes the first sacrifice. But, not all training activities have to cost a lot of money. Formal and informal mentoring programs, rotational assignments, blogs, e-training and brown bag lunches with senior leaders can be effective ways to foster a learning environment while maximizing resources. Programs like HR University allow agencies to draw on existing, and sometimes free, training resources from other federal organizations. Determine how to develop, implement or leverage shared service opportunities across government to maximize resources. Find out what no-cost or low-cost developmental activities are available. Ignore learning and development at your own risk.

Use the new Pathways Program. Recent evidence suggests an uptick in retirement claims, which could indicate agencies are reaching that allusive tsunami so many have been predicting. Executives and technical experts retiring from government service create skills gaps that can be difficult to address. Recent graduates and other Pathways applicants might not provide immediate relief, but they are the future. Hiring and developing their talents today builds capacity. Leadership and technical development programs are often a cost-effective way to train and motivate employees to contribute to an agency’s mission in meaningful and productive ways. The difference in basic salary between a GS-9 and a GS-12 is almost $19,000. Can you hire the GS-9 and use the salary difference for training? Think about Pathways as a cost-effective way to buy contemporary skills by hiring recent graduates. Develop them to be government’s future leaders.

Reevaluate progress regularly. Successful workforce and budget planning and execution must include robust and ongoing evaluation to achieve intended results and to make course corrections. In a tight budget environment, agencies must make a concerted effort to understand how the workforce planning and budget processes affect employee engagement, morale and performance. The Office of Personnel Management’s 2012 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey provides agencies unprecedented amounts of information about their organizations. What can you do to make sure your employees are engaged and aligned with mission objectives? Think about how to use this data along with other critical workforce and budget information to make sound programmatic decisions.

As Winston Churchill once said: “A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.” The Office of Management and Budget’s fiscal 2014 guidance signals difficult times ahead, but good workforce planning combined with effective budget estimation can create opportunities for agencies and employees. The Pathways Program is just one example of how agencies can use creativity and innovation coupled with data-driven decisions and strong leadership to develop the workforce the nation needs -- today and tomorrow.

John Salamone, former executive director of the Chief Human Capital Officers Council, is a managing consultant at Federal Management Partners. Ellen Tunstall, a former executive at the Defense Department and the Office of Personnel Management, is a senior adviser at FMP.

]]>

Talking Telework

John Salamone and Crystal Irish Rogall — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 00:00:00 -0400

Chief human capital officers and newly designated telework managing officers must make a concerted effort to implement the necessary tools, strategies and policies in a practical manner to improve telework practices. This workplace flexibility can help agencies retain top talent during tight budgets.

Fortunately, the 2010 Telework Enhancement Act could serve as a tipping point for changing the culture, perception and practices of working remotely that have perplexed executives, managers and employees alike.

Based on the law's requirements, employees should know by now whether they are eligible to work from home or a satellite office. As the weeks unfold, employees and their supervisors should discuss the structure of telework arrangements by asking the following:

How much teleworking is appropriate?

Even if an employee, or a position, is deemed "telework eligible," the approach might not be a good fit for everyone. Managers should determine the personal preferences of their teams by asking employees how they view telework. Would they be happy and productive working remotely? Employee satisfaction is directly related to retention and performance. It is in the agency's best interest to determine the right frequency of teleworking for each employee.

Do offices have a framework for performance?

If teleworking is the right option, then managers and employees must discuss ways to ensure productivity. The law requires a written agreement between them before a new telework arrangement can begin. Setting clear objectives and reviewing performance on a regular basis can foster a trusting environment and assure managers that employees can be productive working off-site.

To help managers and employees navigate the steps to establishing a positive work arrangement, the agency's telework managing officer should provide guidance and training, especially on how to write clear performance objectives. How can teleworkers mitigate potential morale issues?

As telework agreements become widespread, agency leaders must understand the impact on morale, especially in offices where only some employees are eligible to telework. Managers should guard against dividing the workforce into a subculture of "haves" versus "have-nots." Sensitivity to these dynamics can ensure there is no major impact on morale or performance.

To help ease any potential tension, employees who work remotely should consider how their new work arrangements could affect their colleagues. Teleworkers should discuss their new schedule with co-workers and make every effort to facilitate the transition. If one person is off-site, then other team members must adjust their working styles and use new technology. Employees who telework should understand this and be responsive and flexible to the needs of their colleagues.

With the right framework and focus, a telework program can produce dramatic results. But the long-term impact of teleworking should not be based solely on the number of employees participating. Instead, agency leaders should watch survey results and performance trends to understand the benefits this workplace flexibility is having on morale, engagement and mission accomplishment.

John Salamone, former executive director of the Chief Human Capital Officers Council, is managing consultant at Federal Management Partners Inc. Crystal Irish Rogall is a consultant at FMP specializing in strategic planning and performance management.

]]>

Metrics That Matter

John Salamone and Stacy Cook — Wed, 06 Apr 2011 00:00:00 -0400

Two of the lowest opinions in the Office of Personnel Management's 2010 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey dealt with performance and pay. Only 30.8 percent of respondents answered "positive" to the statement: "In my work unit, steps are taken to deal with a poor performer who cannot or will not improve." Even fewer, 26.3 percent, responded "positive" to the following: "Pay raises depend on how well employees perform their jobs."

The council's recommendations for improving the performance management system will no doubt interest a variety of stakeholders, including the Obama administration, Congress, and management and employee organizations. But wholesale changes will be difficult to implement. The council must strike a delicate balance by identifying progressive solutions framed by the practical reality of aligning multiple priorities.

One way to address this complex issue is to peel back the layers of the onion one at a time. That involves a phased implementation strategy containing short, medium and long-range objectives. The recommendations should range from simple guidance and training for managers and employees to legislative and regulatory updates required for broad, systemic change.

In the near term, the council should establish a set of guiding principles outlining the way performance standards are defined, tracked and reported. These principles would help managers, supervisors and employees develop metrics for quality, quantity, time and cost.

Here are a few lessons from both the private and public sectors that can provide a starting point:

Involve both supervisors and their staff. Employees are intimately familiar with their jobs and can identify the most important measures of success. At the same time, supervisors use their broad perspectives to make sure the work an employee is doing is aligned with the organization's goals and is consistent with the expectations of other employees. Both sides of the coin are absolutely critical to effective performance management.
Measure what matters. Setting too many metrics can cause distraction, but setting too few can cause ambiguity. Supervisors and employees should identify only the top three or four metrics for each performance objective. This can focus employees' attention on the most critical parts of their jobs while avoiding the administrative burden of tracking a multitude of meaningless data.
Include both measures and targets. Measures are the mechanism by which a supervisor knows something was done. Targets establish the supervisor's expectation for that measure. Both are necessary to fully define and track expectations. Take the administration's new hiring guidelines, for example. An agency's human resources director could expect the new process to reduce the hiring time by five to 10 days (the target) and then compare last year's cycle times against the current year (the measure) to determine that progress was made.
Don't reinvent the wheel. Established operating procedures and policies can provide excellent qualitative measures. Instead of rewriting exact targets from these documents into performance standards, cite the document itself. That way, when something changes with the policy, the performance standards are still valid.

The best metrics alone won't automatically create a high-performance culture. Supervisors and managers also must be leaders who create a vision for their employees, have meaningful dialogues about the quality of their work throughout the year, take time to recognize high achievement, and have the difficult conversations that are necessary to address poor performance.

These simple, yet critical, principles provide the foundation for broad, long-term performance management reform across government. It will take time, energy, and creativity from the Chief Human Capital Officers Council to outline a bold strategy grounded in reality.

John Salamone, former executive director of the Chief Human Capital Officers Council, is managing consultant at Federal Management Partners Inc. Stacy Cook is a senior consultant at FMP who specializes in performance management and adult learning.

]]>

Analysis: Goodbye to a workforce champion

John Salamone and Andrew Richardson — Tue, 04 Jan 2011 00:00:00 -0500

Long before his time in the U.S. Senate, Ohio Republican George Voinovich was committed to career civil servants and improving the rules and conditions under which they work. As governor of Ohio, he instituted a progressive program to inspire and empower state employees. Known as Quality Service Through Partnership (QStP), this program was built on the foundation of solid partnerships between labor and management. In fact, during his time as Ohio's chief executive, QStP provided training to nearly 90 percent of the state's workforce in courses dedicated to team building and problem-solving.

When he was elected to the Senate in 1998, Voinovich embarked on a systematic, sustained and inquisitive effort to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the federal government. Through his tireless efforts and a unique partnership with Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, federal workforce issues were elevated in Congress to levels not experienced since the passage of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act.

Under his leadership, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce and the District of Columbia held more than 50 hearings on federal human capital and management initiatives. But the senator was never interested in hosting hearings with little or no outcome. His goal was to understand a particular issue and leverage his experience and expertise to develop practical solutions to some of government's most perplexing management challenges.

To this end, Voinovich introduced nearly 20 human capital and management proposals, many of which became law. Perhaps the most consequential was the establishment of a chief human capital officer position in departments and agencies to elevate personnel management across government and to give HR professionals a seat at the head table. The senator's efforts also led to the formation of the Chief Human Capital Officers Council to facilitate cross-agency collaboration on personnel issues and promote sharing of best practices.

But his oversight and legislative efforts weren't focused solely on personnel management. Voinovich also launched a comprehensive analysis of long-standing issues on the Government Accountability Office's High-Risk List. Specifically, his review of the Social Security disability benefits process led to the hiring of more administrative law judges to help break the backlog of claims. The senator's evaluation of security clearance procedures led to legal requirements that would dramatically decrease the time it takes to investigate and adjudicate clearances. And to remedy long-standing management challenges at the Defense and Homeland Security departments, Voinovich championed the concept of a deputy secretary for management position to take on the mundane but vital backroom functions at these agencies.

With only 53,000 federal employees out of a total population of 11.5 million in the Buckeye State, Voinovich did not stand to score many political points pushing federal reforms. And yet he did so year after year. The time he dedicated to these issues illustrates his care and commitment to improving the day-to-day operations of government so citizens can receive the best value for their tax dollars.

During more than 40 years in public service, Voinovich was a beacon for bipartisan solutions to everyday challenges. His leadership and dedication to the federal community will be missed by many and forgotten by none.

Andrew Richardson was staff director and John Salamone was a staff member for the Senate Subcommittee on the Oversight of Government Management under George Voinovich.

]]>

Analysis: Batten Down the Hatches

John Salamone — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:00 -0500

John Berry suggested the impending retirement tsunami might not be as catastrophic as projected. This insight presents an opportunity for OPM and agencies to rethink workforce planning and focus on mission-critical occupations and emerging skills.

For more than a decade, members of Congress, including Sens. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, and Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, have collaborated to provide agencies additional personnel flexibilities to address workforce shortages. The Government Accountability Office added strategic human capital management to its high-risk list in 2001 because "human capital shortfalls were eroding the ability of many agencies -- and threatening the ability of others -- to effectively, efficiently and economically perform their missions."

Berry makes a compelling case that a retirement tsunami is not imminent -- at least not yet. According to a March 2008 OPM study, on average, employees continued working for Uncle Sam for four years after reaching retirement eligibility. About 25 percent stayed on board for up to nine years after they became eligible to leave federal service. OPM calculated that only 37 percent of those eligible for retirement in 2016 actually will leave then.

But agencies shouldn't be lulled into thinking the worst-case scenario won't occur. The workforce challenges associated with GAO's high-risk list still are evident. The wave of those reaching retirement eligibility will grow 5 percent to 7 percent each year, compounding the impact an exodus could have on government. Using the current 1.8 million-person workforce as a baseline, OPM projected 31 percent of employees would reach retirement eligibility by the end of 2010. By September 2012, nearing the end of the Obama administration's term, 45 percent will become eligible. Forecasting ahead to September 2016, the total jumps to 60.8 percent.

Looking at the big picture, agencies must take timely steps to address a potentially significant loss of talent and institutional knowledge, especially in critical occupations. The importance of comprehensive strategic workforce planning can't be underestimated when there still is time to predict rather than react.

As agencies recalibrate their workforce plans under the leadership and guidance of the Obama administration, these guidelines could prevent them from being caught off guard if retirement trends shift.

Link strategic workforce planning initiative to the mission. Developing a clear line of sight between the two will communicate and reinforce how an agency is addressing its workforce challenges.
Pay attention to the numbers and trends. Agencies should ask: Do our retirement numbers reflect OPM projections? What are the competency gaps and retirement projections for mission-critical occupations? How are we going to develop existing employees to fill potential voids? What strategies can we employ to capture the institutional memory of senior-level experts? What are our internal and external recruiting sources?
Create a system to capture and convey critical human resources data. Establishing a management dashboard containing relevant financial and human resources information can help shape and drive the workforce planning process. Managers also should have demographic information readily available. Adding competency gap analysis and retirement eligibility to demographic trends can give agencies a good picture of current and future needs.
Collaborate across the organization to develop and implement a comprehensive plan for all components of the multisector workforce. Chief human capital officers were created to address, manage and oversee progress on workforce challenges. Teaming up with other agency officials, including the chief financial officer, chief information officer and chief acquisition officer, as well as managers and employee groups, the CHCO should serve as a conduit to ensure the workforce process is integrated with all management systems.
Execute the plan and evaluate progress. The most successful workforce plans begin and end with an evaluation based on clear definitions of success and rigorous measures. Critical questions during this phase include: Were our retirement and staffing projections correct? What other unforeseen issues emerged during the year? What impact are external requirements from entities such as OPM, the Office of Management and Budget, and Congress having on the agency and the workforce? Did our programs make a difference? What are the emerging priorities for the coming year?

Taking the appropriate steps to develop and implement a strategic workforce plan will protect executives, managers and employees from a retirement wave, regardless of its velocity.

John Salamone is a senior consultant at Federal Management Partners Inc. He worked in the legislative and executive branches of government for 17 years. Most recently, he served as executive director of the Chief Human Capital Officers Council.

]]>

Analysis: Making Government Cool Again

John Salamone — Fri, 01 May 2009 00:00:00 -0400

John Salamone, a senior consultant at Federal Management Partners Inc., worked in federal government for 16 years and was executive director of the Chief Human Capital Officers Council. ]]>