Comment Number: OL-10500305
Received: 2/16/2005 10:26:44 AM
Subject: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment
Title: National Security Personnel System
CFR Citation: 5 CFR Chapter XCIX and Part 9901
No Attachments

Comments:

Thanks for the opportunity to comment. Here you go: Page 7555, Under Leadership and "Option Development Process", why not explore private industry best practices? Look at recent winners of the Malcolm Baldridge award. Some of the key Performance Parameters reflect key principles out of Baldridge, these winners may be a good place to find processes that work, have been evaluated by an independent board of experts, and are embraced by employees. Might be good to copy vice reinventing the wheel. General - in modification of the classification process and other administratively burdened processes associated with hiring and firing, why not use the principles of Lean and Six Sigma to modify. These are great change management engines in that they involve working level employees in the change process. NAVSEA 00 (Admiral Balisle) is currently transforming his business practices with the use of these techniques and is training 100's of employees to use them as I write this. Pages 7585 section 9901.406 - para. (d) (1) Need to add, "Wherever possible performance targets should be based on objective data of employee performance. Targets should be set realistically based on historical performance of the work group. Superlative performance (and vice versa) is any performance that exceeds the average of an employee's peers within the same or similar work groups". This will help eliminate purely subjective and unrealistic goals thereby keeping the system fair regardless of the manager. Pages 7585 section 9901.406 - A good measure of leadership is employee feedback, if all of the employees in your work group hate you, your work group won't get anything done and it's a good bet your a failure at leadership. Paragraph (c) add new sentence. "Supervisor and manager performance expectations shall also include measurement on the ability to lead based on employee feedback and mission accomplishment." The "Gallop 12" process that Norfolk Naval Shipyard tried had some good questions to pull from concerning a managers performance that can be used generate a short feedback form to solicit input from employees. Page 7585 section 9901.405 Paragraph (b) (2) Add the following sentence, "Performance reviews should be 360 degrees in nature and cover both the employees performance and that of his/her supervisor". We implemented a "Win-Win" perfomance appraisal system (based on Franklin R. Covey model) with management which sets performance goals (wins) for both the employee and the manager, in addition it sets "personal wins" for the employee on issues such as flexible work hours for family time, Leave on short notice for personal time, etc. This feature as well as those specified above may quell some of the negative feedback that has been generated to date by labor. 7587 section 9901.511 - There are too many chef's in the kitchen for this to be a truly effective and efficient system. In order for me to hire I have to clear PPP at the regional HR (1 day), I have to announce the position via OPM (two-three weeks), they have to issue a certificate of eligibility (2-4 weeks after close of announcement). This is after I receive approval to hire in the first place from the Command. All of this adds 6 weeks to the time I can get an offer in someones hands. By this time the good recruits have gone to work for someone else. For college hires, where we can verify eligibility based on their accredited college transcripts, what's the point? I should be able to interview a group within the degree discipline I'm interested in, pick the best and send them an offer contingent on them producing a transcript.....all of this with maybe 2 reviews by HR, one before (for PPP and Vet status) and one after the fact (transcript review).