BUSINESS

Home > Business > A new mandate to perform for public sector employees

A new mandate to perform for public sector employees

May 23, 2008

Just how important is accountability and performance management to public sector employees? There's no better person to ask than Clay Johnson.

Johnson is the Deputy Director for Management at the Office of Management and Budget in the United States. In this role, he provides government-wide leadership to Executive Branch agencies to improve agency and program performance. Prior to this he was the Assistant to the President for Presidential Personnel, responsible for the organization that identifies and recruits approximately 4000 senior officials, middle management personnel and part-time board and commission members.

Here, he joins Cognos Senior Writer, Kelsey Howarth, to explain why performance management is important and why "working on it" just isn't enough.

"We want the government to work better"

KH: What is the mandate of the Office of Management and Budget?

CJ: "There's a budget component that helps the federal government develop a budget that is consistent with the President's goals and priorities, and then works to get as much of that enacted by Congress as possible.

"The management part of the Office of Management and Budget exists to make the federal government more effective. We might be working on a certain policy, concept, or initiative but the summary goal is we want the government to work better. We want them to get more for the taxpayer's money.

"We are actively involved in holding agencies accountable for adopting and basing their operations on those policies, and creating the right culture and behaviors for those policies to thrive."

Low expectations a big barrier

KH: What would you consider the top barriers to better performance in government?

CJ: "Federal employees want to perform well. They want their agencies to be as effective as possible and, truthfully, they have never been held accountable for doing that.

"The performance expectations for the federal government are low. Congress places a low priority on performance. They like to zero in on things that are egregiously wrong.

"In the performance evaluation process, outstanding employees and unacceptable employees get the same salary increase. There's just not much formal or informal accountability for performing better every year.

"I think that general history and that general environment is the primary barrier that we face."

"Employees do not mind being held accountable"

KH: Within that sort of history, are employees resistant to new or different performance measures?

CJ: "Employees do not mind being held accountable. They want the goals to be clear and fair, and to understand their impact on them. They want involvement in setting goals, but they don't mind being held accountable.

"Employees are changing. There is a tremendous amount of natural energy flowing in the direction of performance management because it's good for them and the agencies they serve.

"It makes agencies more effective and, as such, better places to work."

The need for measurable goals

KH: I just finished a book called The Three Signs Of A Miserable Job by Patrick Lencioni. One of the signs he states is immeasurability – a lack of goals and an inability to gauge progress against them.

CJ: "I couldn't agree more. A phrase I really dislike is, 'I'm working on it'.

"People say things like 'this project has problems but I'm working on it'. What that generally means is that as long as I am doing things that apply to what my agency or program is all about, that's okay.

"'I'm working on it' suggests that there aren't specific goals that need to be accomplished in a specific timeframe.

Building the performance management culture

KH: You're a strong proponent of the need to implement and institutionalize performance improvement initiatives in government. How is the OMB institutionalizing performance management?"

CJ: "We make sure every agency has very clear, transparent, and public goals, and that people are held accountable for them.

"The thing that causes behavior to change, or performance to change, is if there's a really clear outcome-oriented goal. We're performing at this level. We want to be at this new level by a certain timeframe.

"When you have a clear plan for getting there that everybody believes has a reasonably good chance of being successful, good things start to happen.

"I saw a performance plan once for the Department of Defense that stated a goal and timeframe of August 2008 with the entire Army responsible for meeting this deadline.

Well, if that doesn't happen who do I call in the Army to complain? Or if it does happen earlier than August who do I call to in the Army to congratulate?

"Clear accountability is the key.

"It's also got to be clear that this is important. The language for the Presidency and the head of the agencies need to constantly reinforce this. One of the things that we've done is try to ensure that this focus remains under the future administrations.

"Every program and every financial management practice needs a really clear set of goals, a clear action plan, clear accountability, and the commitment from every agency to meet quarterly to make this happen."

"There are signs this is taking hold"

KH: What has the response been to this new accountability?

CJ: "There are several signs that this is taking hold – that performance management is something good for federal employees and for the federal government.

"Federal employees are wrapping their arms around it. Career employees are involved in implementing new performance management measures and the energy and high level of involvement is really quite impressive.

"Another example is that companies like IBM are buying companies like Cognos. They see the future of performance management in the public and private sectors.

"In addition, the media wants in on the act. I recently met with some reporters from the Washington Post and they too want to do a better job of covering and reporting on performance goals, and accountability.

"The fact that the Washington Post is trying to cover it better, IBM is behind companies like Cognos, and federal employees are embracing this tells me the time is right for performance management."