Accompanying Report of the National Performance Review
Office of the Vice President
Washington, DC
September 1993
Over the past decade, the General Accounting Office has examined the management of most major federal departments and agencies. Two findings are consistent: good management requires stable leadership in key positions, and most government institutions fall short of that mark.(1)
In the Jacksonian era of the 1830's, it was believed that anyone could fill a government job.(2) However, with its immense size, budget, and complexity, the executive branch today requires a tremendous amount of executive talent to lead and manage it. A combination of political appointees and career executives provides this leadership and management.
The President relies on about 3,000 political appointees to promote his policies, make policy decisions on his behalf, and ensure that the President's policies are carried out by the entire civil service. The President also depends on about 8,000 career executives to provide the continuity, knowledge, and institutional memory needed to implement his policies.
The career executives are members of the Senior Executive Service (SES). Political appointees include Presidential Appointments with Senate Confirmation (PAS) who hold very high-level positions such as Cabinet secretaries; Presidential Appointments (PA) who generally hold positions on boards and commissions; non-career SES; and Schedule C's, who often hold mid-level positions and serve in policyrelated positions or as confidential assistants to other political appointees.(3) Generally speaking, the number of political appointments has increased over the past three decades while the number of civil servants has remained about the same.(4)
Political appointees have relatively short stints in government--most leave before two years are completed--and are often referred to as "in-and-outers," as illustrated in figure 1.(5)
This lack of continuity has been decried by GAO, which sees continual turnover in top positions as one of the root causes of management problems in the federal government.(6) There are several options. For example, a career SES member can receive a political appointment and retain the right to revert to his or her career status after serving in the political appointment slot.(7) While this authority is not widely used, the flexibility built into the existing personnel system permits the use of career employees as a source of qualified leadership.(8) This is one way of providing needed continuity. Other options include finding ways to improve the process to speed the appointment of political appointees, or to find ways of getting a commitment from nominees to stay in place for longer periods of time.
There are not enough qualified leaders in place for long enough periods of time to effectively manage our complex government.(9) The root of this problem is the selection, placement, training, and development of both career and non-career appointments. In addition, the relationship between these two corps of senior managers plays a crucial role in managing the executive branch effectively.
When a new Administration comes to office, it must quickly deal with numerous critical issues--not the least of which is filling vacancies in political positions throughout the government. The political appointment process is vital to the success or failure of a presidency. It is an arduous process of selection, clearance, and confirmation. According to Laurence Thompson, Assistant Comptroller General, "No modern administration has yet fully succeeded in developing a set of initial staffing procedures that are comprehensive, timely, or adequately related to the new president's immediate policy objectives."(10)
In the time I have been in Washington the vetting, and in some respects, harassing and humiliating of people about to enter the public service have become increasingly detailed, comprehensive and intrusive, often unfair and equally irrelevant to their suitability for the job.(15)
The President's Commission on the Federal Appointment Process addressed the issue of the complexity of the forms that political appointees must fill out: the financial disclosure form (SF-278), the Personal Data Statement (White House), the FBI personal history form (SF-86) and forms required by Senate committees.(16) The purpose of the vetting process is to set standards for the political appointees and to make them publicly accountable.(17) However, the current process also impedes the timely placement of appointees, which in turn has appreciable management consequences. Figure 2 shows that the amount of time required to complete the appointment process has been steadily increasing.
Long-standing vacancies in top positions seriously disrupt the smooth operations of the government and make management improvement exceedingly difficult, if not impossible.(18) Private companies would never leave major leadership and management positions vacant for months or years, but such longstanding vacancies have become all too common in the federal government. Figure 3 on the next page illustrates the void that occurs during a change of administration. Clearly, however, these vacancies are not solely tied to the change of administration.
The White House Presidential Personnel Office, in coordination with departments and agencies, and with the assistance of the Office of Personnel Management, should create a written statement of the standard duties and recommended experience requirements for each PAS and other key leadership and management positions, similar to those in the "Prune Book" published by the Council for Excellence in Government. This can be used as a tool to expedite the determination of requirements and duties of critical political appointments. This should not be considered an inflexible checklist of qualifications required of each candidate for a political appointment, but rather as a resource for each new administration.
2. Provide adequate orientation and ongoing management training to all political appointees and their career SES counterparts. (1,2)
The White House Presidential Personnel Office, OPM, and agencies should ensure that all political appointees receive an adequate orientation to acclimate them to the federal government and allow the administration to convey its policies and priorities. A handbook should be published for both career and political leaders to supplement this education process.(22)
Management education, where needed, should be available to politically appointed executives and managers to provide them with the management techniques suited to the unique needs of the federal government and the priorities of the President.(23)
Career and political executives should attend orientation and other programs together whenever possible to open dialogue between these two groups. Conferences held in the mid-1980's for career and noncareer political appointees were considered very successful.(24) The Clinton administration has begun conducting orientations for PAS appointees, career and non-career SES members, and Schedule C appointees. This should be institutionalized.
Reinventing Human Resource Management, HRM11: Strengthen the Senior Executive Service So That It Becomes a Key Element in the Governmentwide Culture Change Effort.
Mission-Driven, Results-Oriented Budgeting, BGT01: Develop Performance Agreements with Senior Political Leadership that Reflect Organizational and Policy Goals.
Executive Office of the President, EOP11: Improve the Presidential Transition Process.
In a landmark 1992 study, the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) stated:
The relationship between Congress and the executive branch lies at the heart of the successes and failures of the U.S. Government. Neither branch acts alone at any stage of the policy process. But the view is widely expressed that the congressional-executive relationship and the institutional capabilities of both branches are in trouble--that the national performance has suffered as a result. The sense of frustration and distrust in both branches and among the public is very real and very high.(1)
The NAPA study, testimony before the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress, and other recent studies all highlight problems of gridlock, distrust, and a lack of interest in managementrelated issues. The studies all point to the need for both branches to adjust.(2)
Gridlock has been a major theme in American national politics for the past few years. Both voters and public officials have expressed frustration with a system that has become increasingly bogged down in partisan and interbranch squabbles--and sometimes competition between the two houses of Congress.
Some observers have attributed the problem to a dozen years of divided government. But the problem is deeper than that; it can be seen in the institutional structures. For example, multiple congressional committees claim jurisdiction over an issue and some executive branch agency heads find themselves repeatedly called before committees to repeat the same thing over and over.
Distrust stems from poor communication, and often executive branch agencies pay a heavy price. Some call it "micromanagement," but there is often blame enough for both sides. For example, in 1984, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was slow and unfocused in the implementation of the 1976 Resource and Recovery Act and ignored important technological information. As a result, Congress specified, in statute, deadlines and very specific levels of environmental protection. The initial result of these actions was positive--EPA met the deadlines. However, the deadlines were blamed for thwarting the development of an adequate, cost-effective implementation framework.(3)
Another example of distrust is the number of congressionally mandated reports. The are nearly 5,000 congressionally mandated reports; of these, more than 400 are for the Defense Department alone.
Part of the problem also lies with a long-standing lack of interest in long-term management issues. As one Congressional Research Service analyst put it, Congress and the Executive Branch have adopted the "fire alarm" approach--managing in an ad hoc, reactive, and narrowly focused way--in contrast to the "police patrol" approach--involving preventive, systematic oversight.(4)
Congress often sees the executive branch as neglecting the management function, which leads to its involvement. This is especially evident when the public media identifies "horror stories."
Managing to exceptions and anomalies identified by the media is expensive. The costs of a system intolerant to acceptable margins of error, or without a process to appropriately respond, far outweigh the benefits to the public. Government's current tendency is to react to bad press by enacting a new law or regulation to show the American public that it is responsive. It is this approach that has led to 889 procurement laws governing Pentagon purchases. This approach costs taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars annually because of the extra staff and higher costs contractors have to charge to comply with federal requirements--with little benefit.
The public has become increasingly dissatisfied and distrustful of government. The public feels 48 cents of every tax dollar is wasted, and only 20 percent of Americans believe the federal government does the right thing most of the time. Much of this stems from the perception of gridlock the public sees between Congress and the executive branch--and the public's frustration over its inability to hold either accountable.
Also, many other NPR recommendations that are targeted to improving the long-term management environment--reducing congressionally mandated reports, biennial budgeting, developing performance measures, and streamlining the procurement and civil service systems- -are dependent on improving comity and trust between Congress and the executive branch. As a result, the need for improvement is imperative.
It is essential that the legislative and executive branches engage in developing a partnership for the future--a partnership that preserves constitutional separations of power and ensures accountability for achieving results.
Establish a bipartisan, bicameral workgroup, including executive and legislative branch representatives, to serve as a forum for identifying and resolving issues of mutual concern. (2)
A bridging or linking mechanism is needed to provide continuing attention to legislative-executive relations. It could be patterned after the Administrative Conference of the United States or the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. It could serve as a forum to:
Create effective oversight processes in Congress by, for example, clarifying which committees have oversight responsibilities for specific agencies;
Develop a system to coordinate executive officials' testimony before congressional committees;
Establish regular staff working groups to facilitate interbranch communications during policy development and implementation;
Encourage committees and agencies to develop systematic, regular, and comprehensive oversight of programs and policies;
Orient oversight hearings away from a preoccupation with the use of inputs and control for a constructive focus that creates an emphasis on outcomes and capacity building in executive agencies;
Sponsor staff exchange programs and forums; and
Identify opportunities to reduce congressionally mandated reports and facilitate the sharing of executive branch information.
This forum should periodically report its agenda and progress to both the President and bipartisan congressional leaders.
Streamlining Management Control, SMC06: Reduce the Burden of Congressionally Mandated Reports.
Improving Regulatory Systems, REG09: Improve Agency and Congressional Relationships.
Each action item has been categorized by focus of implementation, as follows:
(1) Agency heads can do themselves
QUAL03.1 Establish qualification guidance for selected senior political appointee positions.
QUAL03.2 Provide adequate orientation and ongoing training to all political appointees and their career SES counterparts.
(2) President, Executive Office of the President, or Office of Management and Budget can do
QUAL01.1 Provide governmentwide leadership, direction, and commitment for effective management of the executive branch.
QUAL01.2 Direct department and agency heads to designate chief operating officers.
QUAL01.3 Establish a President's Management Council.
QUAL01.4 Update and refocus the Executive Order establishing the President's Council on Management Improvement.
QUAL01.5 Conduct periodic performance reviews to provide ongoing improvement and renewal in the executive branch.
QUAL01.6 Redefine the Federal Quality Institute as an organization to support the President, Vice-President, Cabinet, and PMC in the implementation of strategic and quality management throughout the federal government.
QUAL02.1 All department and agency heads should lead and manage in accordance with the criteria in the Presidential Award for Quality.
QUAL02.2 All executive branch employees should attend appropriate educational sessions on strategic and quality management, to include the criteria for the Presidential Award for Quality.
QUAL02.3 Each department and agency head should establish a toplevel "quality council" to lead that organization's culture change.
QUAL02.4 Propose a category within the Malcolm Baldrige Award for quality in the federal government.
QUAL03.1 Establish qualification guidance for selected senior political appointee positions.
QUAL03.2 Provide adequate orientation and ongoing training to all political appointees and their career SES counterparts.
QUAL04.0 Establish a bipartisan, bicameral workgroup, including executive and legislative branch representatives, to serve as a forum for identifying and resolving issues of mutual concern.
Governmental Systems Abbr. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Creating Quality Leadership and Management QUAL
Streamlining Management Control SMC
Transforming Organizational Structures ORG
Improving Customer Service ICS
Mission-Driven, Results-Oriented Budgeting BGT
Improving Financial Management FM
Reinventing Human Resource Management HRM
Reinventing Federal Procurement PROC
Reinventing Support Services SUP
Reengineering Through Information Technology IT
Rethinking Program Design DES
Strengthening the Partnership in
Intergovernmental Service Delivery FSL
Reinventing Environmental Management ENV
Improving Regulatory Systems REG
Agencies and Departments Abbr. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Agency for International Development AID
Department of Agriculture USDA
Department of Commerce DOC
Department of Defense DOD
Department of Education ED
Department of Energy DOE
Environmental Protection Agency EPA
Executive Office of the President EOP
Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA
General Services Administration GSA
Department of Health and Human Services HHS
Department of Housing and Urban Development HUD
Intelligence Community INTEL
Department of the Interior DOI
Department of Justice DOJ
Department of Labor DOL
National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA
National Science Foundation/Office of Science and Technology Policy NSF
Office of Personnel Management OPM
Small Business Administration SBA
Department of State/ U.S. Information Agency DOS
Department of Transportation DOT
Department of the Treasury/ Resolution Trust Corporation TRE
Department of Veterans Affairs DVA