Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 29
Page 1 of 4

« Previous | Next »

A Modest Proposal For Improving Federal Supervision

Supervision

Mr. McFeebee
Treetops
Mon May 18, 2009 6:58 AM

Post Reply

Lots to say. Not enough characters to do so.

1. There should be a formalized training program for supervisors to be. Not after they become supervisors.
2. If top management expects 1st liners to be good performance mangers they need to set the example. Far too often top managers asks subordinates to write their reviews for them.
3. It's far easier for a good leader to be recognized on the field of battle where innovation opportunities frequently exist. The Fed system stifles leadership, even at times discourages it.
4. Supervisors need to be paid more and be made to earn that pay. They should be 24/7 employees in return for that higher pay, not 80 hours per pay period with earned comp time when they exceed 80 hours.
5. Far too often I have seen employees who do not really want to supervise jump into supervision to get a higher pay grade and then look for a reassignment out of supervison at the same pay grade. This happens all the ........ran out of of charcters.....drat.

Re: Supervision

Specialist
Federal
Mon May 18, 2009 10:06 AM
I agree with your tenets however the last thing we need is for our middle managers to be paid more! They are already drawing far more money than the job they are doing is worth. Every middle manager should have a 360 evaluation once a year at a minimum and that should represent 50% of their evaluation when their annual comes up. If the employees are so-so the 360 will be too but for those whose strong work ethic makes them the unrecognized "support of the office" the 360 will be honest which should trigger evaluator conversations of greater depth.

Incompetent leadership

Compliance officer
Dept. of Labor
Mon May 18, 2009 8:24 AM

Post Reply

After working at OFCCP, Midwest Region, it became clear that incompetent and arrogant leadership was not just ignored, but rewarded. If the leadership there was ever evaluated on criteria such as ability to develop and train employees, retain and promote competent staff, make timely and consistent policy directions, then they would be fired ia long time ago. But instead, supervision by intimidation, harassment, and unethical treatment of employees, making arbitary and capricious decisions, inability to provide sound policy and decision making, appear to be what is acceptable and rewarded. Hopefully, Hilda Solis will not find this style of management acceptable and clean house. Hold managers accountable.

Re: Incompetent leadership

STAFF
VA
Mon May 18, 2009 4:15 PM
Hey, here's a thought---how about basing a supervisors abilities on their ABILITIES (i.e working their work, leading the way, giving encouragement to ALL lower level staff, not just the one's they want to see get aheead, etc.) as opposed to what the majority of our Supervisor's supervisors do---give the bonuses, promotions and kudo's to the supes that sit in their (upper mgmt) office and bull**** and brown-nose.

What a concept that would be, huh????

Improving Supervision

Program Specialist
FAA
Mon May 18, 2009 8:27 AM

Post Reply

1. A paradigm shift is required away from the traditional hierachical mind set to one of servant leadership.

2. Top management cannot and therefore should not evaluate a middle manager's performance as a supervisor without soliciting feedback from the employees they are supervising.

3. Top management should do everything they can do to remove fear as the middle manager's basis for decision making. Decisions, or lack thereof, based on fear must be recognized as self interest job preservers and not what's best for the staff employee or organization.

4. Include staff level employees in meetings where project decisions are made.

5. Supervisors should put instructions and explanations in writing so they can be held accountable and not so easily cover up their failings and/or pass off blame.

6. And most important of all, management should be forced to read these type communication features!

Above article

HR Specialist
OPM
Mon May 18, 2009 8:31 AM

Post Reply

The points in the article are cogent and persuasive, but, unfortunately, they represent an unrealsitic assessment of supervisory skills of most incumbents, based on research as well as personal, empirical observation, i.e., that most current first line supervisors in particular are capable of carrying through on the recommendations it contains. It goes back, inevitbly, to the long standing problem of supervisory selection, an issue which many researchers, including MSPB in studies going back at leat to 1989, have decried as jejune and simplistic. Despite all the caveats to the contrary, most agencies still use as their primary criterion for selections to first line supervisory jobs the technical competence factor, on the erroneous supposition that a good widget maker will no doubt be an even better supervisory widget maker. NOT. However, our hierarchical classification structure incentivizes the Peter Principle as an operative reality, as the ill-equipped move into management.

Re: Above article

Robbie Kunreuther
Author
Mon May 18, 2009 9:43 AM
I am disturbed by this comment more than others because it comes from someone in OPM. I don't know the specialist who posted it, but question her/his agency's willingness to lead us in "Personnel Management" with this kind of perspective.

Supervisors all over America and beyond are selected more for their technical abilities than their supervisory talents -- public and private sector alike. Given that, why is it "...an unrealsitic assessment of supervisory skills of most incumbents..." to require quarterly reviews and a diary in exchange for higher performance ratings?

These appraisal criteria don't ask for inspirational skills. Just better work habits. They are habits you and I can acquire over time.

Please don't indict and give up on supervision at OPM!! If we are ever going to improve management, rather than despair, it will require folks in OPM to lead us. Raising the white flag isn't an option.

Director Berry -- take note! Carpe Diem

Re: Above article

Karl
Nervous Hospital
Mon May 18, 2009 12:38 PM
Careful Robbie,

That poster may not really be from OPM. After all many people here make comments but aren't really who they say they are. I need to stay away from the coffee. Coffee makes me nervous when I drink it.

Re: Above article

worker
Fed
Wed May 27, 2009 9:11 AM
To Robbie K
You ask why it is not reasonable to ask for quarterly reviews and a diary for higher pay. You comment that
supervisors are selected more for their technical ability.
I agree that supervisors should keep their job for more than technical ability. They need people skills which is the ability to work with their subordinates and others in a positive way rather than in a negative way. In order to do this they need technical skills as well as people skills.
Writing evaluations every quarter as opposed to every half year will not accomplish these goals. They will instead provide the supervisors with more unnecessary work.

Great Article

Water Resources
Bureau of Reclamation
Mon May 18, 2009 8:34 AM

Post Reply

Thanks for the great article! I too have seen people go for managment just to get the grade increase. We lose some excellent technical folks because they are maxed out in their grade levels, and want more money. Too often, a problem or poor employee is promoted into supervision just to get rid of him/her. Yet the question persists - why is moral bad in the agency? This article points to a lot of it.

A great start

Director
USDA
Mon May 18, 2009 9:06 AM

Post Reply

This article is a great start to something better. I hope it doesn't turn into a manager-bashing article, based on the comments that are left.

I agree with Mr. McFeebee on his 5 points and wish he had more characters to write more.

I was hired from the private sector and had management experience - proven. My superiors loved that however the way I do business with my staff is stiffled. Why did the Gov't want me in a management position again?

Supervisory improvement

secretary
USACE
Mon May 18, 2009 9:19 AM

Post Reply

Notes and reviews will not provide a stick to keep employees in line; let's not put the horse in front of the carriage. To supervise one must have authority; our supervisors have none! These things must come first:
1. Direct hire of qualified people, not shuffle off rejects from other departments.
2. Updated job requirements customized for that job.
3. Clear instructions to new hires re: requirements of
job, probationary period, etc. along with a solid
knowledge that unsatisfactory performance will
lead to dismissal at any time.
4. Drop allowing the propagation of appeals for
persons fired for good solid reason and don't
let unions dictate treatment of employees they
don't cover the payroll for.
4.

Total Comments: 29
Page 1 of 4

« Previous | Next »

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.