So far, I have only skimmed parts of the reform proposal.
Reorganizations in the private sector have demonstrated that without efficient and effective implementation, even well-conceived reorganizations may fail to achieve the intended benefits. To ensure effective implementation, the President’s Management Agenda highlighted three areas (see figure to the right) which help drive effective organization transformation:
• Information Technology Modernization.
• Data, Accountability, and Transparency.
• People and the Workforce of the Future.
It is a very serious document, which you would not have expected if you only followed this Administration through tweets and media reports.
Of course, I would have liked to see something more sweeping, along the lines that I proposed six years ago. From an organization-chart perspective, the President has over 150 direct reports, and I would have reduced it to eight.
The proposal is remarkable not only for its seriousness but its modest approach to identifying a limited number of modular initiatives that combine high priority items and obvious, relatively non-controversial, low-hanging, doable-fixes for which there may be a possibility of bipartisan support. By ignoring tar pits like DOD and the federal health programs, this document avoids death upon arrival at Congress. On the other hand, controversial, high priority items like the student loan programs are badly broken and there is no way to avoid addressing them. Something must be done now. Some of the items are already basically done. For example, the document includes DOD-VA electronic health records. All that is required here is Congress not derailing a path forward that has already been put in place. VA signed a contract with Cerner Corp. on May 17 to replace its decades-old Veterans Integrated System Technology Architecture (VistA) health-care records technology over the next 10 years with the same Cerner system that is in the pilot phase at the DOD. On background investigations, DOD essentially oversees OPM anyway given that it audits OPMs charges. In general busting up a lot of stale organizational cultures is likely to produce a lot of retirements and thus opportunity to both introduce payroll management and gain a less resistant bureaucracy which reason enough alone to support the plan. The reality of the current situation is that agency payrolls are not managed in any real sense but rather set on funding auto pilot. This is all the more reason to not move OMB out of the Executive Office of the President as you suggest but to keep it close to the President where hopefully Mulvaney and others will see fit to better incorporate personnel policy into budgeting, with the emphasis on the latter, so as to control grade creep, eliminate redundancies in organizational structures, and measure and track and reward productive cost-cutting. Overall, I’d give Mulvaney an A+ on this document.
From the descriptions I have read, it sounds good, but I doubt any part of it ever happens- if it involves Congress at all, it probably is dead on arrival. If it truly focuses on what can be done within the executive branch itself without Congressional approval, then possibly can be implemented.
TBH, this probably the best document the administration has put together although I suspect Trump had little to do with it.
1) The organization of labor and education makes a lot of sense as right now it appears:
1a) Workers are too educationally signaling.
1b) Vocational training is not very robust.
1b) Companies are having trouble hiring the right workers with limitations on labor supply with Baby Boomers retiring and lower birth rates 20 years ago.
I do believe the 1950s had better systems to training more working class positions but with more local economies the private sector worked better with local schools and military.
Otherwise, I would like to see the Trump administration do something similar on power electric companies.
“TBH, this probably the best document the administration has put together although I suspect Trump had little to do with it.”
Actually, I can tell you from personal experience that this is pretty typical. Everyone has become obsessed with the misleading book cover, not the book.
No modern President can take any credit for these kinds of things, except for the extremely important matter of selecting the right people with the right attitudes to craft such documents. Half the Heritage Foundation was brought out of mothballs to help run the administration, and they have a decent pool of real talent. There has also been a lot of borrowing from GOP Congressional staff, and detailing up from the redder parts of the civil service.
Unfortunately, there are a million things which make good sense, but also a million reasons you can’t ever get Congress to do them. Oh well.
No modern President can take any credit for these kinds of things, except for the extremely important matter of selecting the right people with the right attitudes to craft such documents.
Isn’t this one of the hardest things of a President though? TBH, I made a snide remark about Trump here but he hired the right people and gave good direction on the goals. I remember when conservatives were giving everybody but Obama any credit for the Bin Laden kill. Of course, Obama did not participate in the raid or worked out 80% of the details. That is not what a Prez is for. However, his administration did show more direction than Bush and had make some tough calls. And Presidents are held accountable for many things beyond their control so it is to take credit when it makes sense. Is it fair to blame Trump for rising oil prices. For the most part not really but he will have trouble with that one if they start hitting $90/barrel.
There is a lot of good ideas here and maybe Congress needs baby steps on small changes.
‘I would have reduced it to eight.’
Isn’t that an old army rule, Sergeant?
Yes- you should literally have no more than 8 direct reports. When I worked, it is difficult to directly manage the activities of even 4 people unless that is all you do all day long- 4 was the most I ever managed during my career as a research chemist- so I would even lower than 8 for the president of the United States.