Can a championship run teach us something about government?

Growing up in Detroit, there were certain things you just didn’t do. You didn’t root for Ohio State. You didn’t feel sorry for Chicago sports fans. And you certainly didn’t spend much time cheering for New York teams.

So it feels a little strange to admit that the New York Knicks’ 2026 championship run got me thinking about government.

But looking back on the Knicks’ journey to the NBA Finals, I kept returning to a single idea: The most meaningful progress rarely looks like progress while it’s happening.

Federal agencies, like sports franchises, move forward through setbacks, false starts, leadership changes, and periods of genuine doubt. The arc is long. The line is crooked. And yet, for those who stay committed to the mission, the destination is worth it.

At a moment when it may be hardest to believe, there is a strong case for optimism in federal performance management today.

A 30-year journey

In 1993, Congress passed the Government Performance and Results Act, better known as GPRA. The idea was simple: The federal government should set goals, measure progress, and use that information to improve results for the American people.

It was a good idea then, and it remains a good idea today.

Over the next three decades, generations of public servants worked to make the federal government more focused on results. Strategic plans became commonplace. Agencies learned to use data more effectively. Leaders began asking harder questions about outcomes rather than activities.

The progress was real.

But the journey was rarely smooth.

New frameworks arrived. New management approaches emerged. New technologies promised transformation. Today, artificial intelligence is generating excitement much like performance dashboards, balanced scorecards, and evidence-based management did in earlier eras.

Each innovation brought genuine value.

But over time I learned an important lesson. Tools and technological advances, by themselves, don’t create success. People do.

Some of the best-performing organizations I’ve encountered in public service were not necessarily the ones with the most sophisticated metrics. They were the ones where people understood the mission, understood their role in achieving it, and were committed to getting a little better every day.

During my time at the Department of Veterans Affairs, the most meaningful conversations were never about the metric itself.

The metric was just a signal.

The real question was whether veterans were receiving better care, getting benefits faster, or having a better experience with the department.

That’s the difference between measuring performance and improving performance.

One tracks progress.

The other changes lives.

Why it is hard to feel optimistic right now, and why we should anyway

These are genuinely difficult times for public servants and for those who believe in effective government.

Budget pressures are real. Unjustified cuts to the federal workforce are real. Institutional disruption is real. The policy debates about the size and role of government are as sharp as they have been in a generation.

That frustration is legitimate. It deserves to be acknowledged, not dismissed.

Over the course of my federal government career, I have seen periods of expansion and periods of contraction. I have seen reorganizations, leadership transitions, hiring freezes, budget crises, and a global pandemic. And in every case, dedicated public servants adapted and kept moving forward.

That experience shapes my optimism today.

Not because the challenges are small. (They aren’t.)

Not because progress is guaranteed.  (It isn’t.)

But because I have seen firsthand how resilient institutions can be when people remain focused on mission.

There are three reasons for confidence.

First, the infrastructure of performance management is more durable than it appears. The analytical capabilities, data systems, and culture of outcome-focus that three decades of practitioners built do not disappear when political winds shift. The core legislation for performance management is still in place. Agencies like the VA continue to use performance information to inform service delivery. Achieving results for the American people remains a big part of the conversation on the future of government. They become embedded in agencies, career workforces, and institutional memory. They can be neglected. They are not easily erased.

Second, mission-driven people keep showing up. Across government, public servants continue doing the difficult work of serving veterans, responding to disasters, protecting public health, supporting national security, and delivering countless other services Americans depend upon every day.

Third, the problems that gave rise to performance management have not gone away. Veterans still need care. Disasters still happen. Taxpayer dollars still need to be managed wisely. The need for thoughtful, evidence-based management will reassert itself, as it always has, because the alternative is failure at scale.

The best chapters may still lie ahead

The Knicks didn’t reach the top of the basketball world because they found a shortcut; they reached the top because leadership, culture, accountability, and talent finally came together over many years.

For those committed to good government, the parallel holds.

The work of strengthening our institutions was never meant to be completed in a single administration, a single Congress, or a single generation. The public servants who stay on focusing on mission during the hard stretches make the better stretches possible.

The work of cultivating a performance management culture must continue.  And those of us no longer serving in government must continue to advocate for it with Congress and our other elected officials.  If we stay committed to the mission, keep building, and refuse to lose faith in the value of public service, the best chapters may still lie ahead.  As a former Detroit kid who never imagined drawing inspiration from a New York basketball team, that’s a lesson worth celebrating.

Gene Lockwood-Shabat is an independent consultant advising organizations on outcome-based planning, federal budget strategy, and risk management. From 2022 to 2025 he served as associate deputy assistant secretary for Planning and Performance Management at the Department of Veterans Affairs and VA’s Performance Improvement Officer.