Winter is Coming

By Robyn Bage

In the wake of the East Coast’s Hurricane Irene, nonprofit administrators are faced with many dilemmas to resolve:  Managing building and equipment damage, maintaining normal operations, and addressing a surge of new client and community needs, to name a few. The ethical dilemmas that have arisen are among the most difficult to sort out. One in particular reminds me of a similar dilemma brought about by a more common (and upcoming!) occurrence in the North East—snow storms: Balancing the needs of our clients with the needs of the staff who serve them.

Snow storms in the northeast can behave in unpredictable ways.  You  may end up shoveling feet when inches were predicted. Similarly, you might expect a blizzard and celebrate just a dusting in the driveway.  The hype is contagious. “It’s going to be a big one!” echoes through the hallways. Employees speculate, often days in advance, if we are going to close. Or open late. Or end the business day early. You can almost hear them whisper in agitation, “Isn’t SOMETHING going to happen?”

A veteran of nonprofit operations, I firmly believe we have an obligation to remain open. Our clients and our communities rely on us to be there for them. It is a sacred trust. We also have contractual and legal commitments to uphold. On the other hand, I also firmly believe we have an obligation to our employees.  Asking them to get to work in bad weather conditions seems uncaring and perhaps imprudent. Hence the ethical dilemma:  In the face of bad weather do we close and ask folks to brave the weather and come to work, or do we remain open to serve clients?

Typical decision-making perspectives, as usual, do not provide easy ways to resolve this quandary.  F or example, from a legal/justice perspective, as long as we meet our contractual obligations it’s a coin toss. The utilitarian perspective (“the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few”) leaves someone in jeopardy. The “every man for himself” standpoint of the individualism approach is no way to successfully run a business. (Imagine the difficulty operating if you have no idea who will come to work—or if anyone will come!) It can also leave employees without guidance or support.

In the final analysis it comes down to making sound, defendable decisions that you can live with, decisions that don’t make you queasy in hindsight. For me, it means that when the roads are impassable and the danger is clear and pervasive for staff and clients, the business is closed. Otherwise, I put my faith in my employees. If individual employees believe they cannot make it safely to work, they can choose to stay home and use their benefit time. (We offer generous benefit time for this and other reasons.) I find that this trust empowers employees to make decisions in their best interest while assuring that clients are served— even in 24-hr programs.

I wonder, what guides your inclement weather decisions?

My wish for you is that you and yours weathered the recent storm in good spirits and good health, or better yet, avoided Irene altogether.  Let us take this opportunity to  plan for events that we will all face in upcoming seasons of inclement weather. After all, with due respect to George R.R. Martin, “winter is coming.”

Ms. Bage is a nonprofit CEO and Assistant Professor in a Community College.

ASPA Approves Policy on Strategic Federal Pay

 ASPA’s National Council has approved a policy paper on strategic federal pay. Moving Towards a More Strategic Federal Pay Comparability Policy proposes two recommendations to increase efficiency and effectiveness in compensation systems.

 The first recommendation suggests that the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) propose to the Administration and Congress that the current practice of allowing for one pay adjustment to the General Schedule system be amended to allow for multiple pay adjustments by grade level. This revision would be theoretically in-line with existing locality pay adjustments and specialty pay rate plans for GS employees. The second recommendation suggests that OPM propose adjustments to the current GS system to increase the salary range within grade levels. Increasing the salary range within the existing system would have the benefit of easing pay compression for highly skilled positions and addressing pay comparability at higher grade levels, while avoiding many of the shortcomings traditionally associated with pay-banding.

Given the role of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) as the federal government’s lead human resources management agency, the policy paper is intended to serve as a resource for OPM by critically assessing existing mechanisms for setting General Schedule (GS) pay rates and providing specific policy recommendations on how these mechanisms can be restructured in light of growing calls for more efficient and effective compensation systems. To review the paper in its entirety, please click here.

A Time to be Thankful

The current federal unemployment rate is nearly 10%. In my region of CT, the unemployment rate is slightly higher. As with other places around the country, the costs of, well of EVERYTHING are skyrocketing. Just last week, for example, you could buy a gallon of gas for about $2.90. Today, the same gas stations are selling it for over $3.00/gallon. It is hardly surprising that some managers, in this time of economic and organizational stress, are overheard mumbling (and in some unfortunate cases, shouting) that challenging employees “should thankful they have jobs.” 

Uh oh. Bloggers and management gurus around the country are shouting “Foul! Unfair advantage! Poor leadership! Inadequate motivational strategies!” But are they right to be so very offended at the sentiment?   How could we, the leaders of our organizations, believe that our employees should feel lucky, privileged to have a job? Afterall, is it not our responsibility, as leaders, to create environments that promote engagement and encourage innovation? Aren’t we supposed to take steps to ensure that our employees are happy?

As a 25 veteran public administrator, I offer a resounding Yes….

And no.

It is absolutely true that one responsibility of leadership is to create and ensure an environment where people feel valued and empowered.  To create a place where employees know their work matters and that the work has meaning above and beyond the daily grind. Leaders must ensure that creativity and innovation are possible and rewarded. Employee satisfaction should be at the top of our priority list.  

On the other hand, employees must also come to work prepared to uphold their end of the bargain.It is reasonable to expect that employees have a basic work ethic which includes a desire to be productive, an internal motivation to honest and forthright, and a willingness to learn and grow. It is not irrational to believe that in this climate a person should be happy to be employed, and that he or she would want to contribute to the organization that provides them a means to maintain self-sufficiency.

If the above is true, the quest is for balance between hiring and nurturing employees who appreciate that just wanting a paycheck is not enough AND hiring and nurturing leadership who understand that at the end of the day just giving someone  a paycheck is not enough either.  How wonderful and amazing our workplaces would be if those of us who are employed take time every day to thank some body (God, our lucky stars, the powers that be, our patient children) for our jobs, and those who employ us thank their lucky stars for us, too.

Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours.

Robyn-Jay Bage, M.P.A. is a nonprofit CEO and community college Assistant Professor

e-Governance and public administration system approach

By Rajesh Kumar Shakya, Ph.D. Student (DPA)

The debate on e-government for public administration mostly revolves around focusing on its functions of service delivery, information management, and use of technology.  But public administration extends far beyond that. Public administrators need a broader public administration system approach towards e-government that surpasses the technocratic emphasis, and blend seamlessly for the full benefits of e-government in all areas of public administration. Public administration system approach helps the governments to escape from the technology dilemma that currently dominates e-government. E-government is a necessity for the countries aiming for better governance. Governance extends beyond government enclave, to civil society and the private enterprises. It applies to all entities from individual family to the state. So the e-governance should embrace the potential of exercising political, social, economic, and administrative processes and govern the whole matters.

E-government should be used in both the functionaries and governance aspects of the public administration transforming into cross-cutting e-Administration, which broadens the values of public administration. We should enrich public administration through e-government exploiting the immense possibilities it offers. Also, if we stick the use of e-government only for the information management, it will challenge the fundamental essence of public administration. Under the public administration system approach, e-government requires public agencies to harmonize their vision, resources and infrastructure, to integrate governance processes and interoperate in sync for the operation of government machinery, and providing services to its beneficiaries.  

In particular, the integration potential offered by the e-government allows the possibility to transform government machinery, operation processes and improve the quality of government services – improve the managerial effectiveness, promotion of democratic mechanisms, and operational efficiency of public services. It helps to transform the traditional siloed operation, and processes to interconnected, interoperable, participative, and synchronized governance processes. Embracing the e-government paradigm by the governments is possible only if it treats the e-government as a holistic government transformation, not a technical adaptation; and challenges the traditional legacy, perceptions, and values.

[Rajesh  Kumar Shakya is the practitioner e-Government and e-Government Procurement Consultant for different governments in Asia, Europe, and Africa. More issues, aspects, and  practices in e-government around the world will be discussed in his future posts.]

E-Government and the Developing World

By Rajesh Kumar Shakya, Ph.D. Student (DPA)

Poverty in numerous communities is significantly related to a lack of education, information, knowledge as well as of good governance.  Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) is a powerful tool to address these root issues.  Economic impoverishment is often related to market inefficiencies associated with poor market information, while poor governance is often related to low levels of community awareness of government activities – all these are information related, as are the skills to act on information itself.  The focus on the ICTs partly represents recognition that these demands on today’s public sectors cannot realistically be resolved by traditional service delivery mechanisms of developing countries.  

It seems that the ICTs, within the context of developing countries, are not just another economic infrastructure.  The role of ICTs in development and especially in poor rural and regional areas has been accepted by the governments around the world as being particularly significant.  Indeed these technologies possibly represent the only realistic option for delivering meaningful outcomes to much of the population within a foreseeable timeframe.   

National and local governments around the world are embracing e-government – are putting services and information online, automating inefficient processes and interacting electronically with their citizens.  The ICTs are able to inexpensively bring services to communities that currently have inadequate services or none at all.  The option is often therefore, not between a human face and a computer; it is more likely between a computer and little or nothing at all. 

This understanding forms the foundation for the vision of e-government.  However, visioning in this area has become extensive and has far outreached implementation.     

One of the principal lessons of e-government implementation worldwide is that the implementation roadmap for e-government must, on the one hand learn from international experience but must also be a home grown product.  Thus any country implementing e-government can learn from the experiences of Singapore, Malaysia, Korea, Australia, India and others as well as the less successful strategies, but must also contextualize a strategy for specific to their countries.  A strategy that is simply imported from another jurisdiction represents the ‘black box’ approach and is almost guaranteed to lead to a loss of understanding, ownership and probably commitment, as well as engendering a culture of dependency.

Issues and Challenges

E-government is not a pre-packaged solution for participation and good governance, efficiency or clean government.  Instead e-government entails deep public sector reform that must be evolutionary.  E-government is about transformation where technology is a catalyst and a tool.  Yet, if e-government is an isolated process and not part of a larger program for improvement then it is unlikely to deliver its potential or expected benefits.  Success in e-government ultimately requires changes in how government manages information, and how civil servants undertake their jobs and interact with the community.  E-government transformation like any major public sector reform also presents costs and risks, both financial and political.

These risks are usually significant. There are already several examples of failures in different countries because of insufficient understanding, loose ownership and uncoordinated implementation approach. Such failures not only waste opportunities and resources, but also challenge the public trust on e-government, and innovative programs initiated by the governments. Particularly the governments in developing world need to start with such dimensions of e-government, where chances of success is high, citizen support and participation is more likely, and also value-for-money is clearly visible and value-for-service can be appreciated. The first success may then bring the snow-ball effect on the implementation of other areas of e-government. Early failure may hold back the reform process and correcting the mistakes politically and financially may cost a lot. Simply using computer hardware and software, and automating the same old red tapes are not e-government. Public agencies need to identify the objectives for reform and then consider how technology can assist.  Properly applied technology is a tool to enable and facilitate government reform, improperly applied technology is a waste of money.  Moreover, e-government in the developing world mostly hindered by different socio-political, and need based challenges like volatile government leadership, lack of resource commitment, lack of access to technology, inadequate physical, legal and other supporting infrastructure, corruption, and many other cultural factors.

E-government cannot be implemented simply by issuing an order from political leaders or a central authority – this would be a futile expectation. E-government requires that officials change the perceptions and actions, and the way they exchange information between government departments (G2G), with the community/Citizens (G2C), and with business (G2B). 

[Rajesh  Kumar Shakya is the practitioner e-Government and e-Government Procurement Consultant for different governments in Asia, Europe, and Africa. More issues, aspects, and  practices in e-government around the world will be discussed in his future posts.]

A Completed Strategic Plan is an Oxymoron

The art and science of strategic planning has come a long way. In the early days of my career in management, a strategic plan was something the boss created. If you were lucky, he shared it with you. If you were luckier, he pointed out how the plan took you and your work into consideration.  Moreover, the organization was fortunate if either of you remembered it a year or two down the line.

Today’s strategic planning process looks much different. Or at least it should. Organizational leadership today recognizes that stakeholders throughout the hierarchy have insights and information essential to the success of the business and finds ways to elicit input from every person. While this is not always easy to do, it results in a rich and effective planning process. In addition, leaders and managers who want the strategic plan to comprise the fabric of the organization make sure that progress towards goals is routinely communicated to all stakeholders.

Which brings me to my final, crucial point: Although strategic plans cover a long-term vision for the firm, a strong and relevant strategic plan is a working plan, not a document to be developed and archived for 3-5 years. It should be reviewed and evaluated at least annually. Progress towards goals should be assessed frequently and routinely, and the objectives and strategies amended if goals are not being achieved. The strategic planning process is never completed. It navigates and documents and organization’s journey. It is both the map towards the organization’s future and the guiding beacon that leads the way.

What’s a Pracademic?

It’s been years since I first heard the term “pracademic” and I’m still no closer to understanding the term.  Is it someone who works, or has worked, in academia and government?  Is it someone who works in government and occasionally teaches as an adjunct?  Is it a professor who also consults for, or serves on, the board of a nonprofit organization?  None of the above?

Multiple members and leaders of ASPA have suggested that ASPA consider specific programming for this segment of our membership. But before we do, it’s important to identify who we are talking about. For that matter, is it a demographic classification or an area of interest?

If you are a self-styled pracademic, please take a moment and let us know what type of programming and services appeal to you.  Is it something we are already doing, not doing at all, or need to be doing better? 

Please respond to this post, or if you prefer, contact me directly at mrankin@aspanet.org.

Best,

Matt Rankin
ASPA Deputy Director

Government Knowledge Gaps: Can public agencies begin to fill them?

Throughout my previous posts I have mused about the changes in the American information environment (primarily newspapers, general media, and reductions in civics curricula in schools)  and how these changes probably affect what citizens know and understand about what their governments do each day. My concern lies in the basic relationship between awareness, understanding, and the ability of citizens to make informed choices about what they do and do not want provided as public goods.  To me, a basic understanding of what we pay for and value in government services is fundamental to dealing with budget shortfalls as well as incorporating the sentiments of our anti-government neighbors into meaningful policy discussions.  Tea Party activists need to be able to tell others exactly what they do not want to pay for (or use) and why and those who support the preservation of services need to be ready to argue for the need for those services.

The media environment is fragmented and since it is now more challenging than ever to find the information we need about government all in one place, I have posted questions to ASPA readers about the roles of their public affairs and communication offers. One response suggested that agencies may no longer staff these positions – if they ever staffed them – and the scholarly literature is silent on their effectiveness.

What does all of this mean for public servants who deal with citizens every day? Might public agencies begin by taking advantage of the citizen contact that is part of ordinary service delivery to inform and explain more about what it is they do and why? Would it make sense for a licensing clerk to explain to the irate citizen who has been handed a new form to complete that the form is intended to assure more efficient data processing so that their license is received 3-5 days earlier than usual rather than simply “the new form is required”? I realize that many of my colleagues over the years have indeed taken the time to do this type of informing in their public work, but how intentional are agencies in this task?  Can it become a priority for all service delivery?

Of course government informing cannot become advocacy and communication cannot become propaganda.  But in an age where the sources of government and civics information are fragmented at best and completely misleading at worst, might agencies begin by filling small gaps in knowledge as a part of direct service? In education, these are called “teachable moments”.  Perhaps it can work in citizen interaction as well.

- Anita Larson, Public Administration Doctoral Student, St. Paul, MN

ASPA is on the Move

I’m writing this post as the 70^th Annual Conference of ASPA comes to a close. The conference has been a most rewarding and exceptional experience. The commitment and participation of our members, sister organizations, and other stakeholders have made this conference rich in content.  Also, during the conference I sensed the strengthening of ASPA’s “community”. We were especially ‘spirited”!  I felt a sense of community, which was vibrant and infectious!  I have a renewed commitment to do what I can to capture and sustain this momentum. As our new ASPA President Meredith Newman expresses it —  ASPA is on the Move…….          

For me, there were many memorable experiences during the conference. However, a few stand out. For example, during the National Council meeting our new Student Director Jose Irizarry was reticent, wanting to listen and learn. However, with encouragement, he spoke – and when he did, he expertly articulated his plans for fulfilling this new role for ASPA. I sat amazed, and thought that the future of ASPA will be in great hands if we only remember to nurture the Joses within ASPA.

Another highlight for me was the Stone Lecture presentation by Richard Stillman, our PAR Editor. He took us on an intellectual journey that was a thoughtful reflection of PAR at 70. He passionately explained why PAR mattered yesterday, as it promulgated generalist administrative ideas; why PAR matters today, as it sustains our generalist profession in today’s niche-oriented landscape; and lastly, why PAR matters for the future, as the platform in the field of public administration for the expression of  “ideas”, both academic and practitioner in focus. In hearing this presentation, PAR became not just a publication, but a living legacy to honor and uphold.              

The Social Equity Luncheon provided another special experience for me. The recognition of Alvin Brooks, and his decades of public service, was inspiring. Each year I find the Social Equity Lunch (as well as all our recognition programs) speaks to me emotionally. This is because hearing about the sacrifice and achievements of those who toil each day in the service of others brings the “why” factor to our intellectual pursuits.             

Finally, I participated in Meredith Newman’s leadership meeting. The participants of this meeting were those volunteers who will serve ASPA during her term. What amazed and inspired me, was this  -  Meredith asked for those in the room to stand, as she listed various volunteer positions they held, for example chapter president, national council member, section chair, etc. I was bowled over by the number of people who stood multiple times – four or five times!!  For me, this was such a demonstrative expression of the dedication and commitment our members have to ASPA. They serve continuously, and always respond when asked to do more. And so, for 2010/11, here they were again – ready to give back to ASPA, and the field we love!

So, for me the conference was a reaffirmation, an inspiration, and a rededication to serve with vigor, and the force needed to continue to move ASPA forward!          

Toni Samuel

ASPA Executive Director

Final Thoughts on the 2010 ASPA Annual Conference

I know I’m supposed to say this, but what a great conference! Packed plenary sessions for John Berry, Paul Volcker, and Richard Stillman. Inspiring guest speakers and awardees. Last night at the receptions, I asked a few first-time attendees why they came this year. More often than not, they said that they heard about how good last year’s conference was in Miami. I think that bodes well for 2011 in Baltimore. That, and the fact that we had 1,000 attendees in San Jose – a 10% increase from last year. I can’t wait to see what the 2011 conference chairs and committee will cook-up for Baltimore. I’m getting ahead of myself…we still have a closing plenary to look forward to this morning.

Personal highlights for this year’s conference include the welcome reception at the Tech Center, the IOUSA Solutions documentary (recommended), and our staff who rose to the challenge before and during the event.

Matt Rankin

ASPA Deputy Director