Building the Enterprise - Booz Allen Hamilton

ing principles, we would constructa set of common policies and practicesthat are so fundamental thatthey, too, should cover every federalagency, regardless of mission or circumstance—forexample, a commonbut modernized job classificationsystem to ensure generally equal payfor equal work across agencies anda common, market-based compensationregime tied to that classificationstructure to ensure parity withthe U.S. labor market. A commonsenior executive corps—today thereas many as seven—would foster interagencymobility and the developmentand deployment of the cadreof leaders so critical to enterprisegovernment.The enterprise civil service systemwe propose is not rigid. There istoo much variety—in statutory base,size and scope, mission, constituencyand budget—across the federalenterprise to force lockstep uniformity.Instead, it would balance commonalityat the core with built-inagency flexibility. Thus, agencieswould be given considerable discretion—moreso than today’s rules allow—totailor elements of the commonstructure to meet their ownunique needs so long as they staytrue to the system’s foundational elementsand parameters.For example, we would permitagencies to customize salary ratesfor mission-critical occupations,promotion and career patterns, performancemanagement policies anda host of other workplace practices.Consistent with today’s demonstrationauthority, we would affordagencies the authority to customizeeven components that are intendedto be common across the enterprise,subject to collective bargainingwhere required. An agency wouldearn approval to operate a customizedsystem by demonstrating highmission performance, includingemployee engagement and high internalintegrity, as well as by showingthat it has the human capital andleadership capacity necessary to operateresponsibly outside the lines.This autonomy would have to be periodicallyreexamined and renewed.Such a civil service systemwould improve the ability of theenterprise to recruit and retain ournation’s best and brightest talent.Nonetheless, much would dependon the substance of the human capitalpolicies. And if there is one lessonwe have learned over the decades“The civil service today reflectsthe needs and characteristics ofthe last century’s governmentwork and workforce, not thoserequired for today’s complex,interagency challenges.since the last time the civil servicesystem was modernized, it is the importanceof strategic human capitalplanning.Thus, OPM should devise anenterprise strategic human capitalplan with consultation from enterprisegoal leaders and ratified by thePMC. The plan would have two primarypurposes. First, it would lookinto the near- and medium-term futureto address critical, cross-cuttinghuman capital challenges affectingmost agencies—for example, recruitingand retaining talent in cybersecurityand science, technology, engineeringand math.The second purpose would be tocontinuously assess the enterpriseefficacy of human capital policiesand strategies. This rarely is donetoday.OPM evaluates individual departmentsand agencies, mostly froma compliance standpoint. But it hasnot stepped back to evaluate froma whole-of-government perspectiveregarding how well the GeneralSchedule classification systemstacks up against state-of-the-artprivate-sector practices, the effectsof pay freezes on retention or thevalue of tuition loan repayment onrecruiting talent. Such comparisonslargely have been left to the GAO orthe Merit Systems Protection Board.Both do a credible job, but their studiesrarely translate into action.This would change under anenterprise strategic human capitalplanning process that regularlyconsiders such issues, assesses theirimpact on the ability of agencies andenterprise goal leaders to recruitand retain talent, and proposes andputs into effect medium- and longtermsteps to address human capitalneeds. •”22 PARTNERSHIP FOR PUBLIC SERVICE | BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON