Tag Archive: executive


ARCHIVES

Marc Ambinder, an erstwhile colleague here at Atlantic Media (parent company of Government Executive), has a post on GQ.com  reflecting on what he’s learned in a decade of covering politics and policy in Washington. (He’s off to Los Angeles.) One item on his list stuck out to me:

I am not the first person to notice the huge gap between what we think government does and what it actually does. But it seems to be enormous today, and its absence is noticed everywhere in the city. The theory is that we have no idea where our tax money goes; it is so widely distributed, or distributed to other people that we many of us perceive government to be off doing something else, probably something wasteful. We only notice government when it inhibits us; when a small business confronts a new regulation. Most of us don’t notice (because it’s invisible) when government programs allow us to sleep well at night. We never really worry that airplanes are going to crash, or that trucks with hazardous materials that trundle by each morning are going to explode; or whether the electricity is going to be on today, or whether the Internet is going to be “on,” or whether the breakfast food we eat is going to poison us, or whether a bridge is going to collapse as we drive to work, or whether, if we have a heart attack and no health insurance, the ER doc isn’t going to give us an ECG. Obviously, sometimes these things happen, and maybe the private sector can play a larger role than it does. But they would happen all the time if the silent machinery of government weren’t working pretty well.

This squares with something I’ve long thought: that when trust in government was high, it was because government was actively engaged in high-profile projects — winning world wars, building interstate highways, landing on the moon, etc. Now government’s role tends to be more restricted to preventing bad things from happening — plane crashes, acts of terrorism, abject poverty on a large scale. Those things are simply much easier to take for granted.

Tom Shoop is vice president and editor in chief at Government Executive Media Group, where he oversees both print and online editorial operations. He started as associate editor of Government Executive magazine in 1989; launched the company’s flagship website, GovExec.com, in 1996; and was named editor in chief in 2007.

Want to contribute to this story? Share your addition in comments.

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

The Justice Department has been pressured for much of President Obama’s tenure to more aggressively prosecute Wall Street executives for crimes that helped create the 2008 financial crisis. So after two major publications in May unveiled findings of historically low numbers of prosecutions in the field as well as an absence of official data, the department on Monday defended itself.

In a May 6 article for Newsweek/The Daily Beast, authors Peter J. Boyer and Peter Schweizer reported that federal financial fraud prosecutions are at 20-year lows, according to data from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University. They said the task force for investigating risky mortgage lenders that Obama highlighted during his January State of the Union address, “is badly understaffed and has yet to produce any discernible progress.”

On Monday, The Wall Street Journal reported that Justice, in a March exchange of letters with Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said it had not kept data on the number of executives convicted of criminal misconduct during the meltdown that preceded Obama’s inauguration. The absence of data is of concern to many legal analysts.

Grassley said the department’s response “substantiates my suspicion” that it “isn’t going after the big banks, big financial institutions or their executives” and instead is “hiding behind a bunch of mortgage fraud prosecutions.”

Allison Price, a Justice spokeswoman, on Monday emailed Government Executive to say that the department “has and will continue to aggressively investigate financial fraud wherever it occurs. When we find sufficient evidence of criminal conduct we will not hesitate to bring charges.”

Since fiscal 2009, Justice has seen a 92 percent increase in mortgage fraud cases, she said. In fiscal 2010 and 2011, it charged more than 2,100 defendants nationwide with mortgage fraud-related crimes. And since fiscal 2009, “all financial fraud cases, including securities fraud, corporate fraud, investment fraud and commodities fraud, increased by 12.5 percent,” Price said.

Work on the special financial crimes unit continues apace, she said. “Moving forward, in order to strengthen our efforts at combating fraud, in fiscal 2013, the department proposed a $55 million initiative for financial and mortgage fraud enforcement efforts. This increase will support additional FBI agents, criminal prosecutors, civil litigators, in-house investigators, forensic accountants, paralegals and other support positions to ultimately strengthen the department’s ongoing efforts to investigate and prosecute allegations of financial fraud.”

Acting Budget Director Jeffrey Zients on Friday instructed all agency heads to step up efforts to economize through more selective employee travel and conference planning, as well as through improved management of vehicle fleets and disposal of unneeded federal properties.

In a memo, Zients directed agencies to build on cost-containment strategies in the works since President Obama’s Nov. 9, 2011, executive order on efficient spending. Zients noted the president’s 2013 budget identifies $8 billion in reduced costs as a result of that order.

“From his first days in office, President Obama has led a concerted and aggressive effort to streamline government and cut wasteful and inefficient spending wherever it exists so that we can focus our resources on serving the American people,” Zients wrote in an accompanying blog post. “From slowing the uncontrolled growth of federal contracting to getting rid of excess real estate held by agencies and reining in spending on federal employee travel, this administration has already cut billions in inefficient spending across the federal government.”

He added, “these efforts and others have already produced more than $280 million in reduced costs in the first quarter of fiscal 2012 compared to the same period in fiscal 2010.” In the area of travel, every agency is to spend at least 30 percent less in fiscal 2013 and maintain that level through 2016.

On conferences, the memo requires deputy secretaries to review any such event if it could cost an agency more than $100,000. It requires department secretaries to personally sign a waiver for conferences costing more than $500,000. It also requires agencies to post publicly each January on the prior year’s conference spending, including descriptions of agency conferences that cost more than $100,000.

On fleets, agencies will use existing General Services Administration fleet services, or initiate a replacement and renewal schedule that is consistent with requirements spelled out in a May 2011 presidential memorandum and the Federal Management Regulation.

On property ownership, agencies are barred, as of Friday, from increasing the size of their civilian real estate inventory, except under specified conditions.

How to Talk With People

ARCHIVES

This is one of those titles that when you read it, you might be saying, “Really?” Yes, really. There’s a big difference between talking to people and talking with people. If you’re the designated leader in your organization, that difference has a multiplier effect that can cut in either direction.

In a post a few weeks ago, I asked if you were a transmitter or a receiver. Transmitters talk to people. Receivers talk with people. Transmitters take the teaching stance. Receivers take the learning stance.

When you’re the leader, you end up leading a lot of conversations in which multiple people participate. Sometimes you need to transmit to get a point across. That’s talking to people. Most of the time, though, you’re going to want to set things up so you learn from people and they learn from each other. That requires talking with people.

As the leader, you’ll set the tone as to whether it’s a talking to or talking with conversation.

Here are three ways to improve your communication skills by talking with people when you’re the leader.

  • Ask open-ended questions. Yes or no questions put people on the defensive and shut down options. Ask open ended questions. The best ones start with the word, what.
  • Give your opinion last. If you go first, everyone else is likely to conform their input to yours.
  • Talk half as much. Remember that we have two ears and one mouth for a reason.

What are your favorite tips for having a talking with instead of a talking to conversation?

Executive coach Scott Eblin’s goal is to help you succeed at the next level of leadership. Throughout the week, he’ll offer his take on the leadership lessons in the news and his advice on your most pressing leadership questions. A former government executive, Scott is a graduate of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and is the author of The Next Level: What Insiders Know About Executive Success.

Want to contribute to this story? Share your addition in comments.

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

The House of Representatives has passed a motion by voice vote to cut $1 million from the Justice Department’s general administration fund until officials fully answers the Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s questions regarding the infamous Fast and Furious gunrunning operation that lasted from 2006 to 2011.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., introduced the amendment to cut the salaries of top Justice officials, including Attorney General Eric Holder, whom the Oversight Committee has sought to hold in contempt of Congress for withholding information. Justice’s general administration fund encompasses four units, including department leadership, public affairs and the Office of Professional Responsibility. It supports the salaries of low-level staff members’ as well as senior executives’.

A spokesman for Gowdy’s office said the cut is aimed at senior-level officials.

“Rep. Gowdy does not hold low-level employees accountable and is not going after their salaries. The Justice Department must administer the cut, and if DOJ chooses to punish the low-level staff, that is a DOJ decision,” the spokesman wrote in an email to Government Executive.

The $1 million would reroute to Congress’ Spending Reduction Account, which works to pay down the national debt, according to Gowdy’s spokesman.

“This is not about politics to me,” Gowdy said during his floor speech Monday for the amendment. “It’s about respect for the rule of law. It’s about answers, it’s about accountability, it’s about acceptance of responsibility.”

During his floor speech, Gowdy listed five questions he seeks answers for regarding Fast and Furious, including who approved the operation and why the department sent a letter to Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, denying it. The program allowed more than a thousand guns to end up in the wrong hands along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Justice did not respond to requests for comment.

The House of Representatives has passed a motion by voice vote to cut $1 million from the Justice Department’s general administration fund until officials fully answers the Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s questions regarding the infamous Fast and Furious gunrunning operation that lasted from 2006 to 2011.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., introduced the amendment to cut the salaries of top Justice officials, including Attorney General Eric Holder, whom the Oversight Committee has sought to hold in contempt of Congress for withholding information. Justice’s general administration fund encompasses four units, including department leadership, public affairs and the Office of Professional Responsibility. It supports the salaries of low-level staff members’ as well as senior executives’.

A spokesman for Gowdy’s office said the cut is aimed at senior-level officials.

“Rep. Gowdy does not hold low-level employees accountable and is not going after their salaries. The Justice Department must administer the cut, and if DOJ chooses to punish the low-level staff, that is a DOJ decision,” the spokesman wrote in an email to Government Executive.

The $1 million would reroute to Congress’ Spending Reduction Account, which works to pay down the national debt, according to Gowdy’s spokesman.

“This is not about politics to me,” Gowdy said during his floor speech Monday for the amendment. “It’s about respect for the rule of law. It’s about answers, it’s about accountability, it’s about acceptance of responsibility.”

During his floor speech, Gowdy listed five questions he seeks answers for regarding Fast and Furious, including who approved the operation and why the department sent a letter to Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, denying it. The program allowed more than a thousand guns to end up in the wrong hands along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Justice did not respond to requests for comment.

A Spam-Braving Fed

ARCHIVES

At a small business contracting conference on Monday, one senior federal executive demonstrated some bona fides.

During a session called a “Smackdown” put on by the American Council for Technology-Industry Advisory Council, in which industry representatives were permitted to vent, question and challenge a panel of federal small business contracting supervisors, some in the audience complained that government bureaucracy was opaque and unresponsive to their efforts to win business for their small firms.

The federal officials, in turn, explained that many contractors fail to do their homework before inquiring about their prospects to qualify for work and don’t follow agency announcements in the Federal Register.

Bridget Bean, district director of the Washington Metropolitan District Office for the Small Business Administration and acting regional administrator, instructed the audience to put their complaints in writing and copy her on an email. She gave her full email address.

“You are the government and we are the government,” she told the business people. “We need to work together.”

Charlie Clark joined Government Executive in the fall of 2009. He has been on staff at The Washington Post, Congressional Quarterly, National Journal, Time-Life Books, Tax Analysts, the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges, and the National Center on Education and the Economy. He has written or edited online news, daily news stories, long features, wire copy, magazines, books and organizational media strategies.

Want to contribute to this story? Share your addition in comments.

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

Young people aren’t necessarily clamoring to work in the public sector these days, and the clues to why might be found by looking at those who have chosen a federal career path.

Emerging Leaders panelists during Monday’s Excellence in Government conference, presented by Government Executive Media Group, pointed to federal bureaucracy and a slowness to adapt to the changing workforce landscape as reasons young people could be reluctant to become government employees.

Brandon Friedman, director of online communications for the Veterans Affairs Department, pointed to the government’s inefficient hiring and firing speed as a primary turn-off for young people.

“It’s sort of inefficient by design. That’s the way the system was built,” Friedman said.

“Did anyone in here get a job just by applying randomly on USAJobs?” he asked. Two of the five panelists raised their hands. “OK, good. The system is not totally broken,” he said.

Older federal employees and senior executives have preconceived ideas about how young people interact that often are untrue, said Erica Navarro, director of Strategic Planning and Performance Management at the U.S. Agency for International Development.

“I do think that there is this overtendency to generalize [about young] folks and say they don’t want structure,” Navarro said, pointing to her own agency’s restructuring of physical office space as an example. “We just went through a space reconfiguration in my bureau where there are no cubes anymore and people hate it. The younger generation hates it.”

Communication barriers among agencies are another major hurdle to progress. Bridget Roddy, the program manager for the State Department’s Virtual Student Foreign Service, said she had been trying to share the details of a pilot program she had started at State with other agencies to discuss cross-implementation, but it wasn’t until she was interviewed for a Government Executive article that other departments reached out to her.

“An outside publication actually wrote about what we’re doing. Then other agencies took notice,” Roddy said.

Though some of the panelists said they had always envisioned themselves working for the government, others came over from the private sector, to their own surprise. Roddy had studied graphic design in college and did not anticipate a career in the federal service. Dave Uejio, the lead for talent acquisition at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, joined government from Silicon Valley, though he said he views his 10-month-old agency as a “startup.”

The private sector, particularly Silicon Valley, has displaced public service as the realm where America’s best and brightest want to see themselves, as outlined in a recent analysis by The Atlantic.

Friedman and Uejio both anticipate they will move on to the private sector at some point. In Uejio’s case, he said he would leave government if he finds that’s where his work will have the most impact. In Friedman’s case, he sees himself doing it anyway.

“It’s probably just my personality. I don’t think I can do something for more than a few years,” Friedman said, though he added he could see himself returning to the government years later with private sector experiences. He said the federal workplace has “a tendency to value experience over talent . . . One of the best ways to get ahead in government is to get old.”

And some who are sticking around say they aren’t being groomed properly. “In the United States today we no longer have this emphasis on training leaders,” said Jaqi Ross, associate director in the Internal Revenue Service recruitment office. She added most talented people at the IRS routinely leave for the private sector.

Career ladder promotions, which have spiked by 75 percent over the past three years, are poison for retaining young, ambitious minds, according to Navarro.

“I think this idea that you get to sit in your current role for five to 10 years and then you get to progress to [Senior Executive Service] level, I just think it kills the government,” she said.

As the November elections draw nearer, the budget debate will not be about whether to cut government spending, but how, Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., told an audience of federal workers on Monday. While Democrats tend to focus on how to make the government more efficient, most Republicans seek ways to dismantle it, he said, imploring employees to “help tell the story” and “carry forward the great cause of providing service to the American people.”

Speaking to the Excellence in Government conference put on by Government Executive Media Group under the theme: “Innovation: More Mission for the Money,” the ranking member of the House Budget Committee said, “Every day I meet hard-working federal employees who give you a sense of pride, so it burns me up when Republican colleagues try to gain political points by talking down federal employees. It’s so easy for those who want to cut spending to talk about faceless bureaucrats.”

Van Hollen, whose suburban Maryland district is home to numerous major agencies, said when “a small handful of employees betray the federal trust,” as happened recently with “a small part” of the General Services Administration, “it makes it that much harder for those who believe in government [to counter those] who cynically use the events not to improve government but to dismantle it.”

That’s a reason employees must maintain the highest ethical standards, he added.

Noting the House Budget Committee is preparing to alter the 2011 Budget Control Act and pave the way for further cuts in domestic spending, Van Hollen said that law already mandates $900 billion in discretionary spending cuts over 10 years, which will take agency budgets “down to the lowest percentage of the economy since the Eisenhower years.” He called that sufficient.

He touted the Democrats’ alternative, “a balanced approach” that combines new revenues with spending cuts, but held his party open to tax reform and some cuts “on the mandatory side,” such as direct farm subsidies. The Republicans, he said, have signed a pledge saying “not one penny” in new revenues for deficit reduction as part of a long-term plan to “strangle government in the bathtub.”

Their math is simple, said Van Hollen, whose parents both worked at the State Department. “If there’s no new revenue, we can whack programs,” he said, mentioning the Medicare “guarantee” and food and nutrition programs as examples. The current proposal for a hike in federal workers’ pension contributions, he added, is a 5 percent cut in federal pay. “Everyone knows the impact will make it more difficult to hire and retain federal employees,” he said, and managers will “face a vicious circle” in which fewer services are delivered, which in turn will prompt calls for more cuts.

He implored agencies to “be creative and innovative in doing more with less,” but said: “There comes a point when it simply means fewer services, less research at the National Institutes for Health and fewer FBI law enforcement personnel. We can’t tell the American people we can continue to provide services while decimating the budget.”

Danny Werfel, the U.S. controller, likened the current budget stalemate to the crisis the government faced in February 2009 when hustling to implement the Recovery Act. The new Obama administration was “presented with an enormously daunting challenge of implementation — a Mount Everest — with lots of money to distribute and extreme pressure to distribute it quickly and efficiently to help state and local economies,” but few checks against waste and fraud, Werfel said.

The response, with “a clarity” of priorities from the president and Cabinet, was an unprecedented partnership among senior officials and other stakeholders who “wore their agency hats and their governmentwide hats” to brainstorm sessions. With no time to put out proposals and receive public comment, they used conference calls and tapped technology to build the Recovery.gov website, “the most multidimensional public website ever created,” Werfel said.

What he called a “seminal moment” occurred when a citizen in South Florida called the new Recovery Board’s hot line and reported that one of the recipients of stimulus money, according to the website, was a private home on the waterfront in her neighborhood. That led Washington-based analysts, without “leaving their chairs” and spending money on flights and hotels, to compile data and discover that numerous corporations receiving federal money were using that same address. A proper investigation then ensued.

This story of “using the stress of the situation to collaborate” contains “some of the ingredients of how we need to innovate,” Werfel said. “Government is learning to manage risks and deploy resources better” as “the federal family” modernizes for the 21st century.

He reviewed some advances through the Campaign to Cut Government Waste, such as reducing improper payments and saving money on travel through greater use of videoconferencing. Agency leaders are better defining program goals, which helps to organize resources, and they are committing to greater transparency, Werfel said. “It’s an exciting time to be a federal employee. I don’t want to come to work every day and have a lazy day — I want to be challenged,” he added.

“I’ve seen government meet the challenge, and I believe we will meet it again,” Werfel said.

Dave Wennergren, assistant deputy chief management officer at the Defense Department, offered 10 observations on how the Pentagon — particularly in information technology — is creating a sense of urgency for change to reflect the digital revolution and the up-and-coming workforce. At a time of “financial challenges, it gets tough and people tend to hunker down so that the first things that fall off the bus are the new things,” he said. “Some of the Pentagon business systems are old, but they have constituencies and they love their babies,” he said. “We have to let some people know their babies are ugly.”

Wennergren stressed the need for data-based decision-making, noting Wal-Mart knows, when hurricane season approaches, exactly which products to stock up on. Data scientists, he said, were just named by The Economist magazine as “the sexiest job.”

But technology is only part of the picture for agency managers challenged with becoming a “lightning rod for change,” he said. The most important element is people, who sometimes are slowed by mistrust, Wennergren added, but most of whom are “change-neutral.”

The workforce of the future will be “radically different,” he said. “They grew up digital, are not willing to work for the same company for 40 years, and have a need to contribute and innovate.”

Federal employees are eligible to enroll in the Thrift Savings Plan’s Roth 401(k) offering Monday, marking the first time a Roth-style investment option has been available to them.

TSP’s Roth offering allows participants to invest money that already has been taxed so it cannot be taxed again upon withdrawal. The option will be similar to those in the private sector, but unlike a traditional Roth IRA, there will be no income limits.

Employees now can invest pretax or after-tax dollars in any of TSP’s funds as long as their total annual contributions are within Internal Revenue Service limits. The IRS increased the cap on individual retirement contributions in 2012 to $17,000 from $16,500, due to a change in the cost-of-living index. Employees 50 and older can contribute an additional $5,500.

Although Monday is the official launch date for the Roth option, as a practical matter it will not be available to many employees until at least the end of the year. The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board has acknowledged that payroll systems at many agencies are unprepared to begin enrolling employees.

The Washington Post has reported that up to three-fifths of federal works will face delays.

The Defense Finance and Accounting Service, for example, won’t be ready to offer the option on time. It will be available to civilian and Defense Department employees and service members this summer or early fall, and TSP has said military service members are among those most likely to benefit from the Roth option. DFAS’ payroll systems serve 1.2 million of the 2.1 million executive branch federal employees, not counting postal employees, according to the Post. DFAS spokesman Tom LaRock has told Government Executive that the service’s more complicated payroll systems caused the delay.

For young service members who might receive an annual allowance of $20,000 to $25,000, the Roth option would ensure they are taxed on those earnings rather than their presumably higher income when they reach retirement age.

The Veterans Affairs Department will be ready to offer the Roth option to its civilians in July, and the Army, Navy and Air Force will offer it to service members by October.

Powered by WordPress and Motion by 85ideas.