Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
Federal Times
September 15, 2008
Pg. 4
By Stephen Losey
The Defense Department doesn’t have a plan to turn around its employees’ increasingly negative feelings toward its new pay-for-performance system, and the Government Accountability Office is worried that growing discontent among Defense civilian employees could lead to the system’s failure.
GAO said in a report released last week that Defense’s surveys of the first employees under the National Security Personnel System show that the longer they are under the system, the more they dislike it. In May 2006, 67 percent of those employees said their appraisal fairly reflected their performance. A year later, that number fell to 52 percent. In November 2006, 44 percent of surveyed employees said NSPS was worse than their previous system; by May 2007, the figure rose to 50 percent.
The program executive office in charge of NSPS told GAO that it wanted to let employees have more time under the system before making changes. But GAO said that not making changes to NSPS could hinder employees’ acceptance and jeopardize its chances of success.
GAO said the Pentagon should have a third party analyze and review ratings before they are finalized to make sure they aren’t discriminating against members of various groups. The report also said that transparency should be increased by requiring commands to publish overall ratings results. And GAO said that NSPS materials should not tell managers that most employees should be rated as a 3 on a 5-level system, which could make some managers hesitant to issue other ratings.
"Until DoD effectively implements these three safeguards, employees will not have assurance that NSPS is fair, equitable and credible, which ultimately could undermine employees' confidence and result in failure of the system," Brenda Farrell, director of Defense capabilities and management at GAO, wrote in the report.
In a letter responding to the GAO's findings, NSPS program executive officer Brad Bunn said that analyzing results before they are finalized could prompt managers to skew ratings to distribute them according to demographics, and not by how well employees performed.
GAO also held focus groups with NSPS employees and supervisors at 12 unnamed installations. They said NSPS was bringing down motivation and morale, was not transparent, and was implemented too quickly and without enough training.
Supervisors also complained that the performance management process took up too much of their time and got in the way of their other responsibilities. Employees and supervisors also feared that employees' evaluations depend too much on their supervisors' writing skills, and that someone whose boss is a weak writer is at a disadvantage.
September 15, 2008
Pg. 4
By Stephen Losey
The Defense Department doesn’t have a plan to turn around its employees’ increasingly negative feelings toward its new pay-for-performance system, and the Government Accountability Office is worried that growing discontent among Defense civilian employees could lead to the system’s failure.
GAO said in a report released last week that Defense’s surveys of the first employees under the National Security Personnel System show that the longer they are under the system, the more they dislike it. In May 2006, 67 percent of those employees said their appraisal fairly reflected their performance. A year later, that number fell to 52 percent. In November 2006, 44 percent of surveyed employees said NSPS was worse than their previous system; by May 2007, the figure rose to 50 percent.
The program executive office in charge of NSPS told GAO that it wanted to let employees have more time under the system before making changes. But GAO said that not making changes to NSPS could hinder employees’ acceptance and jeopardize its chances of success.
GAO said the Pentagon should have a third party analyze and review ratings before they are finalized to make sure they aren’t discriminating against members of various groups. The report also said that transparency should be increased by requiring commands to publish overall ratings results. And GAO said that NSPS materials should not tell managers that most employees should be rated as a 3 on a 5-level system, which could make some managers hesitant to issue other ratings.
"Until DoD effectively implements these three safeguards, employees will not have assurance that NSPS is fair, equitable and credible, which ultimately could undermine employees' confidence and result in failure of the system," Brenda Farrell, director of Defense capabilities and management at GAO, wrote in the report.
In a letter responding to the GAO's findings, NSPS program executive officer Brad Bunn said that analyzing results before they are finalized could prompt managers to skew ratings to distribute them according to demographics, and not by how well employees performed.
GAO also held focus groups with NSPS employees and supervisors at 12 unnamed installations. They said NSPS was bringing down motivation and morale, was not transparent, and was implemented too quickly and without enough training.
Supervisors also complained that the performance management process took up too much of their time and got in the way of their other responsibilities. Employees and supervisors also feared that employees' evaluations depend too much on their supervisors' writing skills, and that someone whose boss is a weak writer is at a disadvantage.