 |
|
|
|
Government Leader home > news stories
01/08/07
Study finds major obstacles to human capital management reform
By Stephen Barr
Special to Government Leader
One of the most difficult tasks facing federal managers is how to gain a perspective or overview on the numerous personnel recommendations flowing from the Bush administration and the Congress in the post-9/11 era.
A recently released report, a joint project by a university and a consulting firm, leaves little doubt that “human capital management” has become a challenging endeavor, with implementation “often a reactive and fragmented process.”
The report, from public policy experts at the George Washington University Center for Innovation in Public Service and at BearingPoint Inc., the management and technology consulting firm, essentially walks federal managers through key human capital management issues and underscores which ones must be addressed to achieve success in the federal workplace.
“Our report provides direction and practical advice to government organizations to successfully develop their people,” Kathryn Newcomer, director of the GW center, said.
The stakes are substantial. Numerous agencies fear they could face a talent loss, starting in 2008 and 2009 when federal retirements peak, when they can least afford to lose experienced hands needed to reorient programs for homeland security goals.
Most agencies also expect to encounter stiff competition from the private sector for talent, and some contend they are saddled with outdated pay systems that make it more difficult for them to recruit scientists, engineers, lawyers and mid-career professionals.
Although many federal workers resent being called “human capital,” executive and legislative branch policymakers use the term in an attempt to show that they believe an agency’s people are its most important asset. Human capital management seeks to align the work of employees with organizational goals and to improve the performance of employees and their agencies.
Key parts of the report are drawn from interviews with federal employees in the Government Accountability Office, the Army’s program executive office for enterprise information systems and the Washington field office of the FBI.
The GW and BearingPoint researchers found several obstacles to implementing human capital reform: - Workplace tensions, particularly between core and support employees, mid-level managers and recently hired entry-level professionals, and high priority and low priority teams.
- Far-reaching lack of confidence in the civil service hiring system and a sense that bringing new hires on board takes too long and is too complicated.
- Widespread perceptions that budget constraints, not personnel management, drive decisions.
- An abundance of skepticism as to whether human capital reform efforts will endure, leading agency managers and employees to question whether they should put much effort into understanding and overhauling personnel rules.
- Managerial perceptions that human capital practices force “people versus mission” choices and tradeoffs. In other words, reform is a great idea, but managers would rather do their job first and worry about workplace change later.
- Widely held beliefs that the extent and timing of civil service reform, including conversion to pay for performance systems, are unrealistic. While this is one area where changes in performance management are underway, researchers found that some participants are critical of the evaluation criteria being used to rate job performance and link the rating to pay raises.
- Negative perceptions about the term human capital. Some people object to being equated with a material asset that can depreciate in value. Others see conflict in orienting the government toward business principles that do not directly correspond to a civil service goal of safeguarding the public trust.
The report also explored a theme that emerged in interviews — the conflicting needs of individual employees and those of their organization.
“Hiring freezes in the previous decade and general budget constraints in more recent times have left organizations with minimal staffing in many cases and, in some instances, significantly diminished ability to meet mission requirements with current staff,” the report said.
As a result, employee training appears to have suffered. “In many cases, managers and leaders were forced to choose between leaving a position vacant while allowing an individual to attend a training seminar or meeting staffing needs while denying training to employees,” the report noted. Often, this “double bind” undercuts employee confidence in management’s ability to meet their needs, the report said.
To help managers overcome problems identified in the report, the GW and BearingPoint experts have designed a strategic framework to help define mission objectives and performance, improve recruitment and hiring and to better integrate human capital needs into short- and long-term priorities of agencies.
“This framework gives decision-makers the tools to be more effective managers and build people-centric organizations that will improve the federal workforce over time,” said Wendy Carr, a managing director at BearingPoint.
The report, “A Strategic Framework for Implementation of Human Capital Management in the Federal Government,” is available at www.bearingpoint.com/hcmreport.
Stephen Barr writes the Federal Diary column at The Washington Post and hosts a weekly online program discussion on washingtonpost.com.
|
|
|
![Government Leader[valor]](/images/govleader_smlogo.gif "Government Leader [valor]"){kind=small}
