TOPICS
TOPICS
OMB to use workplace rankings in 2011 budget process
A nonprofit's biennial rankings of the best federal workplaces could inspire some agencies to shape up their performance, the head of the Office of Management and Budget said.
OMB Director Peter R. Orszag said he would ask agencies that scored poorly on the Partnership for Public Service's 2009 Best Places to Work Rankings, released on Wednesday, to submit improvement plans. The ratings will play a role in determining agency funding in the fiscal 2011 budget, he added.
"We should not just let this be a one-day news story," Orszag said. "It needs to be built into the way we run government."
The rankings are particularly important given the hiring challenges agencies face and the need to revitalize government's image, Orszag noted. Max Stier, president of the Partnership, said he hoped the marks would call attention to government performance at a time when agencies are looking for solutions, much as American Idol has reinvigorated the music industry.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on to its spot as the best large agency for the second survey in a row. NRC was followed by the Government Accountability Office, NASA, the intelligence agencies and the State Department. The five highest-ranked small agencies were the Surface Transportation Board, Overseas Private Investment Corporation, Congressional Budget Office, OMB, and the National Science Foundation.
Governmentwide, employee satisfaction scores increased 2 percent from 2007 to 2009, from an average score of 61.8 out of 100 possible points to 63.3. Seventy-one percent of participating agencies saw their scores rise in that same time period. Some individual agencies made substantial improvements. The Small Business Administration's marks rose 30 percent from 43.4 to 56.5 and the Office of Personnel Management's score increased 14 percent, from 54.9 to 62.7.
The rankings are based on OPM's biennial Federal Human Capital Survey. The 2008 survey included 210,000 employees from 83 agencies. Stier said the Partnership was working with private sector organizations and nonprofits to develop employee satisfaction measures similar to those used in OPM's survey, which federal agencies could use as benchmarks to measure their performance.
Bob Tobias, an adjunct professor at American University who is part of the team reviewing the Defense Department's National Security Personnel System, said the Partnership's rankings gave agencies incentives to improve their policies.
"I believe without this survey, we would not have the increases that were reported today," Tobias said. "And the results are pretty dramatic. Who in this room would not want a 20 percent increase without investing $1 in additional technology or additional skill training?"
COMMENTS
- Ergo, the DoD won't get funded at its requested level? Uh yah, right...keep smokin' it, yall. BeauxEau Posted June 3, 2009 12:29 PM
- In today's Washington Post there is an interesting article that discredits the validity of such surveys. At OPM, I recall that a week before we were scheduled for the survey, we had a series of 'employee appreciation days' where we were provided pie, coffee mugs, and issued rah-rah stickers to wear on our clothing. Two days before the survey, our director held a series of forums touting the strategic goals our agency had accomplished (OPM had accomplished 100% of the strategic goals it had set for itself, leading to the question that perhaps we had not set challenging enough goals). As we walked out of the auditorium, I noted to a colleague that the surveys must be just around the corner. Two days later, bingo. The conclusion, at least at OPM, is that senior management believes it can game the results by giving out token gifts and talking up a storm. What is really needed is teaching, requiring, and rewarding leadership in our senior managers, and breaking the paradigm where the expectation is that "satisfactory" will be evaluated as "exceeds fully successful." There are talented leaders at my agency, but they don't seem to stay here very long... Bamboozled Posted June 1, 2009 1:26 PM
- I guess there's something deep with The Western Psyche to rank everything. Many Europeans, for example, are amused by our penchant for baseball data which is mostly meaningless (unless hunting for Hall of Famers and the like). Surveys are taken by human beings, who most likely first remember the worst things they've encountered. [There's a marketing maxim stating that a dissatisfied customer can tell up to 10-20 people of their dissatisfaction with a business; satisfied customers tell 3-4 others.] I think this is a slippery slope, and sounds all too familiar, given the problems encountered for OTHER pay for performance systems (ahem, NSPS here). Good that Mr. Orszag is trying to improve OMB; the carrot-and-stick approach seems wholly inappropriate to anything other than corporate bullies armed with P&L bibles. Jackson Richards Posted May 28, 2009 11:27 AM
PROMO RIGHT: GBC
Advancing the business of government through analysis, insight and the sharing of best practices.
SPONSORED RESEARCH
Achieving a Greener Federal Government IBM
Federal Cybersecurity: Securing the Nation's Information IBM
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: New Requirements for Tracking and Reporting Federal Workforce Data Kronos
Managing the Stimulus: A Candid Survey of Federal Program Managers Accenture and Microsoft
Improving Collaboration and Productivity in 21st Century Government: The Role of Communication for Government Executives Cisco
