The Post's Stephen Barr is the author of The Federal Diary, which runs Sunday through Friday in the Metro section. Steve has been a reporter and editor at The Post since 1979, including stints as Federal Page editor, congressional editor and a staff writer covering the federal bureaucracy. He takes the column live to answer your questions Wednesdays at noon ET.
The transcript follows.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
_____________
Stephen Barr: Welcome all! Washington today is full of what I call "concept talk" on how to improve government performance. From my perspective, most of this talk occurs in the abstract, with few examples taken from the concrete of the everday workplace. I dipped into this world this morning with a column on "robust organizations." If you would, I'd like some feedback today--do you think you work in a robust organization, and how do you define robust? With that, on to the questions.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
My office is one of first to go under new pay system in DOD. That is what happens when you work for OSD. When are the pay bands scheduled to be published?
Stephen Barr: Good question. There's no official date, but I suspect it will take several months for the Pentagon to design and implement the pay band system. One of the wild cards is what stance that unions take and whether they will actively seek to be a part of the design process.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
So now that a few agencies like Homeland Security and DOD are going to the merit based system what do you believe the likelihood is that the reset of tee government will do so?
Stephen Barr: Based on comments by some key senators and House members, I do not think there will be a rush to expand the DHS/DoD model to the rest of the government. But OMB plans to submit legislation calling for that, and, who knows, the White House might get some traction. For the moment, I would bet that Congress wants to see how all this unfolds at the two departments before giving leeway to other agencies.
_______________________
Philadelphia, PA:
I read the article about Robust Organizations. My agency is scheduled to die in the FY 2006 budget cuts. I agree change can be positive or negative. But what about the crisis in confidence that occurs between employees and the senior executive team when the CEO puts the agency on the chopping block, even if the agency's performance has been noted as exemplary in the PART? The trust is lost.
washingtonpost.com: The Four Factors That Distinguish 'Robust Organizations' (Post, March 30)
Stephen Barr: An excellent point. Much of RAND's research has looked at private sector organizations, nonprofits and non-federal levels of government. Given the revolving door of short-term political appointees and the ups and downs of budget cycles, you are right to suggest that it's difficult to think robust when there's not enough trust left to go around the room. Thanks for your insight.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
Does Paul Light suggest strategies to help organizations become "more robust?" What are they?
Stephen Barr: It does, drawing on the experiences of organizations that brought in RAND to help reshape policies. For example, Light points out the importance of training, contending that most organizations do not provide enough training to keep their employees competitive with the rest of the world.
_______________________
Derry, Pa.:
How does Stephen Barr's thesis differ from Systems Thinking as defined by Dr. Peter M. Senge of MIT?
Stephen Barr: Well, nobody has ever accused my thinking (and writing) of having a system!
If I understand the concept, systems thinking encourages you to look at the big picture rather than get bogged down in details. While valuable for journalists, I frankly prefer writing about the small stuff--what you can see with your eyes--and sometime attempt to link it back up to bigger issues.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
I read the article about organizations that respond. Did the author describe specific civilian agencies that met his criteria?
Stephen Barr: There are some descriptions of civilian agencies, such as the Customs Service, Food and Drug Administration and Veterans Health Administration. Much of RAND's work has been focused on the military.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Robustness comes also from the Congressional oversight committee's willingness to allow the executive agency managers to do their jobs without micromanagement. Unlike in corporations, we in the civil service have at least two (and sometimes three) "management" types overlooking our work - the Office of the President and his politicals, and the Congress (which includes GAO).
Stephen Barr: True enough. Thanks for making that point.
_______________________
Fairfax, Va.:
One area where DoD is not robust is in moving people and money where it needs to be, especially in acquisitions, because hundreds of millions and billions of dollars are spent on research and development for a new weapons system and it is obsolete or needs more R&D investment to shift its mission to serve today's purpose. Thus, all the debate over the F/A-22 Raptor and Virginia class submarines.
Stephen Barr: Good point. Paul Light thinks Defense is hoping that its new personnel system will help with the movement of people. He argues that large organizations need to constantly looked at the future, and I suspect that is a hard trick. For example, I can barely plan 24 hours in advance some weeks.
_______________________
Corpus Christi, Tex.:
Mr. Barr,
Can you tell us the current status of the the Union's law suit lodged against the NSPS?
Thanks
Stephen Barr: Unions have filed suits against DoD and DHS, and they are pending before a federal court in Washington.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
I work for the Administration for Children and Families within the Department of Health and Human Services. Once again, we have recieved word of another "competitive sourcing" initiative. I have two questions: First, is it in fact cheaper to use contractors in place of federal employees, and if so, by how much? Second, are the Democrats as anxious to reduce the number of federal employees as are the Republicans? Thanks.
Stephen Barr: The White House runs these competitions in order to find out if one side or the other is less expensive and can produce cost savings. In recent months, federal employees have won 90 percent of the competitions although it often comes at the cost of downsizing their organization.
As for your second query, I don't think the Bush administration is as hung up on the number of federal employees as the Clinton administration was. In fact, Bush has increased federal employment since taking office. I suspect the contract workforce is growing, but OMB does not track that number.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Why is the Federal government not hiring FTEs?
My agency is full of contrators.
Stephen Barr: Hiring permanent employees obligates an agency for more than payroll, such as health insurance and retirement benefits. The private sector has increasingly turned to contract workers as a way to control costs, especially when the jobs are project oriented. I suppose there are budget considerations here that I do not fully understand, but which make it easier for agencies to hire temporary employees or under a contract.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
I am in the process of being offered a two year temp position with a federal agencey with the understanding that the permanent position will be open to the public in 6-12 months. What are my chances of getting this permanent position? And is it common for federal agencies to bring in new employees this way since the temp position was not advertised?
Stephen Barr: My assumption is that you will have a good shot at landing the permanent position if you perform well as the temporary. I also assume the agency is under an obligation to publish the vacancy in order for it to be filled permanently. As for your last question, I do not have any data that shows whether this is a common practice now.
_______________________
Germantown, Md.:
I work for DOE Germantown and regard my agency as a robust and worker friendly if you work for an enlightened manager who are very few but in my 25 years I have had a few.
Most managers are not. If they were like our former Seretary and now governor Richardson DOE could be a robust agency with such high level of technical competence among workers. We are hopeful though in Secretary Dr. Bodman who is also highly technical.
Stephen Barr: Good point. DoD and DHS acknowledge that improved training for managers will be a priority in the launch of their new personnel systems.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Since the creation of the Dept. of Homeland Security, I assume business transformation initiatives have been a huge undertaking. Do you know how well this is going (i.e., whether they are moving quickly or having trouble). I imagine with such large-scale change, merging the various legacy systems and integrating personnel would be difficult. Not to mention streamlining and standardizing policies and procedures.
Stephen Barr: According to the experts, DHS has made huge progress in merging 22 agencies. It also has a long ways to go. Officials are struggling to bring financial management systems in sync, for example. Testimony on Capitol Hill indicates that large-scale transformations take up to 8 years to pull off; others note that the Pentagon spent decades trying to align its various components after the creation of the modern Defense Department.
_______________________
Lake Oswego, Ore.:
Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist -- excuse me, I just dropped my tin-foil hat -- but couldn't a more nimble and responsive civil service also provide a way to get us back to a de facto spoils system where political appointees get driven deeper and deeper into the system? And where considerations like party loyalty win out over merit?
Stephen Barr: That is a danger. But the layers of political appointees have dramatically increased under the current system, so I'm not sure it's so much a "system" issue as one of people using common sense and doing the right thing. Leadership is what it's all about, at the end of the day.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
Several months wont work. We are scheduled to under new pay system on July 1, 2005. No if ands or buts. 91 days and counting.
Stephen Barr: True, but the first pay raise under the system will be at least a year away. In theory, there will be a shake-down cruise of the new performance management standards and an evaluation to make sure that the changes are getting off on the right foot. I certainly see your point about being uncertain this close to when a new system launches, though. I guess it's always possible the July start date could slip, too.
_______________________
Robust:
I believe my agency has potential to be robust. However, the particular part of the agency in which I work is just plain 'bust.' The only thing we seem to respond to are the whims of our ever changing executive leadership, which seems to only have enough forward-thinking-ability to count the days till retirement. One of my coworkers said the other day "we have one person to do the work and 10 people to write a report about it." He is absolutely right about that.
Stephen Barr: I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Thanks for the reality take from "bust" land.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
Arlington get it in writing regarding the perm position. They wont do it. Do not believe the line they are feeding you. I know many in similar positions who are in terms now for 5 years with no promoise of the perm. The perm position will be open to all comers with your agency or all sources. They can not put you in a perm position without any competition.
A DOD adjudicator
Stephen Barr: Good to know. Thanks.
_______________________
Washington DC:
Stephen: You're either hopelessly naive or working for the forces of darkness. Contracting is the favored path for the Bushites because that's where there's serious money to be made for administration cronies. You receive Federal rates for the work. Then you get the actual work done at McJob wages and (non)benefits. And you pocket the difference!;
Stephen Barr: Put me down as naive. I'm always in favor of sunshine.
_______________________
Clarkston, Mich.:
Mr Barr,
Is there a concerted effort by this administration to weaken or possibly break up the Federal unions and groups that deal with the administartion on public employment matters? The unions certainly think so.
Thank You
Stephen Barr: That is the union viewpoint. The administration says it is not into union busting. But I think you just have to watch with your own eyes and make up your own mind. As the regulations are being written at DoD and under implementation at DHS, I think it is reasonable to say that unions will be weaker.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Stephen,
I am working on an MPA (Masters of Public Administration) and was wondering if you could comment on the prospective value or "marketability" of this degree in the Federal Workplace.
Thanks for your columns, several of our group papers for MPA classes have referenced your column.
Sincerely,
Learning in Washington
Stephen Barr: A good, and difficult, question. I would wager that the government will need more MPAs in the future because the trend seems to be toward more contracting out and more cross-government partnering, networking, etc. Someone has to oversee such changes in how work gets down.
Still, some people think that MPAs and MBAs are over-rated, and others contend that agencies don't know how to properly assign and rotate MPAs through the various offices to give them broad overviews of how the agency really works.
Perhaps you should find some Presidential Management Fellows and seek their views?
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
I used to work for the Federal Government, but now I work in the private sector. Every year, my boss decides on my raise and my bonus. That's the way that it is in my company and in private sector companies all across the country.
Why is it that employees in the Federal Government all seem to think that every manager is going to distribute raises based on favoritism and this isn't an issue in the private sector. I'm sure that favoritism exists in the private sector, but having your boss decide on your raise is the way that business is done and there's not the widespread concern about favoritism like there is in the Federal Government.
Stephen Barr: Good point. But there are distinctions to remember--companies work off their bottom lines and employees accept the implicit deal that lean times mean lean raises. Companies can shed work, drop product lines, etc. Federal employees are expected to provide uniform, consistent services to the public, provide them to the public in a fair and impartial manner and get the best deal for the taxpayer. Congress often gives agencies more work, rather than less, and sometimes sets out goals that conflict.
I tend to think the leadership issue is the most important difference. Companies usually have a long-serving management team (and some are even bad), in contrast to the
political cycles that govern agencies.
_______________________
Washington, DC:
E-government is one of the key factors of the President's Management Agenda and many organizations have been working hard to comply with the associated Public Laws. I work for an agency that has made e-learning a priority and has invested a lot of time and resources into the professional development of it's employees. Since e-learning is relatively new to the government (from my experience), I assume some non-governmental agencies may have implemented it sooner. Do you know of any corporations or government agencies that achieved significant benefits from e-learning initiatives?
Stephen Barr: I'm no expert here, but numerous companies have relied on "distance learning" to educate their employees. My sense is that e-learning is usually focused on specific issues--such as codes of conduct, fiscal responsibilities, compliance issues, etc. I also think it is an emerging field, in many ways.
Any experts out there want to tackle this?
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
A few years ago, I worked at a small-ish agency division (about 60 people)where the boss found we had leftover budget money. Since we didn't have to spend it on huge quantities of ink pens just to get the money the next year, she decided that she could equally divide the money among all the employees and give them a kind of a bonus/pat on the back/ atta boy/girl, that would amount to about $100 per person. So, not a whole lot, but a significant amount for an unexpected gift. There were actually people who went to the boss and said, "How come I can't get more? I do more/better work than the others" and related statements. Of course, after that, the bonuses stopped. Most of us were grateful and thought it was nice that the boss thought of rewarding everybody equally, rather than base it on a salary percentage/seniority rank. Needless to say, once pay for performance starts, this kind of whining will be non-stop. If people can be this bad over something they weren't even entitled to to begin with, what about something they should be getting?
Stephen Barr: Excellent point. Your example points up why it is going to be so crucial that agencies train the managers and the managers/supervisors then engage in two-way conversations with each and every employee. It's natural to think we're all the best at what we do, and hard to get the word that someone else is just a tad better.
_______________________
Temp to perm:
In my agency this is common. Part of the reason is because it is exceptionally difficult to get rid of an underperforming employee once the initial probationary period (which is short) is over. thus, a temp worker on a 1-2 year contract can be assessed for long enough to tell if they would make a good permanent worker.
Stephen Barr: Thanks. A good point.
_______________________
Bethesda, Md.:
Hiring permanent employees obligates an agency for more than payroll, such as health insurance and retirement benefits. The private sector has increasingly turned to contract workers as a way to control costs,
Which begs the question: if "no one" has health care (increasingly the case) then the costs get shifted elsewhere and they go UP anyway. Has Congress/White House given much real attention to that? Believe me, we ALL know how well covered THEY are!
Stephen Barr: A good macro issue--are we saving money with such practices or just shifting costs around?
_______________________
Re: e-learning:
Basically, it's a pipe dream that doesn't work for anything but very limited issues. Humans just don't learn that way. Never have, never will.
Stephen Barr: As I said, I'm no expert. And I'm biased--toward reading newspapers and books.
_______________________
Bethesda, Md.:
What are the rules for getting both social security and a pension? HR said I will get both. Others have cautioned me to find out the facts. I have earned all my quarters for social security and now I am a fulltime teacher with teacher pension benefits. I worked in the DCPS school system as an WAE full time teacher paying social security taxes and getting no benefits for 14 years and then in 2002 I was elevated to a full time teacher position with pension, healthcare benefits. I am 55 and cannot -- per HR -- buy back those 14 years, but will have 10 years in the pension system by the time I am 62, with a pension of 20 percent of my average of my last 3 years of salary.
Where can I get more info about this hybrid of social security and pension benefits?
Stephen Barr: Two ideas. Go to the Social Security web site (www.ssa.gov) and check out their material on the Windfall Elimination Provision and the Government Pension Offset. Then consult with a representative of SSA and the National Education Association, which is active in trying to modify these two laws.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
A follow-up comment on the $100 equal bonuses. This practice highlights exactly the problem with the current GS system. When a manager views equally giving bonuses to every employee, regardless of performance, of course there will be those (the ones who are outperforming others) who complain (and rightly so!). It's nice to receive a bonus, but I'd like to believe that when the bonuses are handed out, they're a reward for doing excellent work, not just for showing up and punching the clock.
Stephen Barr: In a nutshell, that does describe what DoD and DHS want to accomplish with some of these personnel system changes. The trick, of course, is being able to make such distinctions in performance--and do it in a way that the employees consider to be fair.
Well, as this discussion today indicates, we are living in interesting times. Thanks for the questions and feedback. I've run out of time, so we'll see you back here at noon next Wednesday.
_______________________
