Archive for category Change
Create Yourself: 2 Choices to Functionality in the Workplace
Posted by Kristina Marzullo in Attitude, Change, Direction, Employee Engagement, Employee Passion, Engagement, Government, Leadership, Leadership Development on May 30, 2012
I’m following a series of blog posts by Pat Fiorenza on GovLoop that focus on how to break down silos in government. This week’s post is about what skills the next generation of government leaders need to have in order to be successful. Pat includes the following traits that every government leader should possess.
- Skilled Collaborators
- Risk Taking
- Accepts Failure
Risk taking is one trait that many of us may struggle with because it’s, well, risky. Fiorenza says, “Future leaders will be successful if they are not afraid to try something new, break the mold and test out new ideas.” If we as leaders never think outside the box, we’ll just continue to do the same things and get the same results.
Check out this video clip featuring Dr. Drea Zigarmi, Founder and Researcher at The Ken Blanchard Companies. Drea states that you have two choices to functionality. You can be comfortably dysfunctional or uncomfortably functional. Which choice are you making when it comes to how you lead yourself or your direct reports?
Want to hear more from Dr. Zigarmi? Register for his upcoming webinar, Beyond Engagement: Key Strategies for Government Leaders on Wednesday, June 6th at 12:00pm EST. Join Drea as he discusses how Employee Work Passion creates a positive emotional state of mind, which results in desired attitudes and behavior including a willingness to apply discretionary effort, long-term commitment to the agency, peak performance, and job satisfaction.
Nine Strategies for Implementing Change
Posted by Kristina Marzullo in Buy-in, Change, Communication, Government, Leadership, Morale, Motivation, Results on March 28, 2012
The first amendment allows Americans the right to free speech, an establishment of religion, to peaceably assemble,
and to petition the Government. In the past, petitioning the government was somewhat of a daunting task. In order for more Americans to be heard on topics that are near and dear to them, the Obama administration created We the People, a platform that allows Americans to create and sign petitions that, if enough signatures are collected, has the chance to be reviewed by the White House staff and receive an official response. The overall purpose of the platform is for government to address important topics the American people would like to see changed.
Lately, the platform has been getting unfavorable reviews regarding the lack of response to the petitions that have been accumulating on the site since its inception in September 2011. Originally, the Obama Administration promised that any posted petition to receive 5,000 signatures would be reviewed and an official response would be issued. After an overwhelming response, the signature requirement was increased to 25,000 back in October 2011. There are currently approximately one-third of the petitions that date back to the first two weeks of the site launch that are still waiting for a promised response from the White House.
Many companies have open forums or launch surveys to gain feedback from their employees about the state of their business or impending changes. Implementing a way for employees to make their voice heard gets individuals involved in shaping the organization and any changes that may incur. This involvement helps raise morale and motivation for employees to adopt those changes. Subject matter experts on leading change, Pat Zigarmi and Judd Hoekstra, developed a change model to help leaders successfully overcome a typically complicated process. This change model promotes nine strategies and outcomes when dealing with change:
- Expand Involvement and Influence
- Select and Align the Leadership Team
- Explain the Business Case for Change
- Envision the Future
- Experiment to Ensure Alignment
- Enable and Encourage
- Execute and Endorse
- Embed and Extend
- Explore Possibilities
As I was learning about these strategies, I felt that the Obama Administration hit a bump in the road when it came to Stage 7, Execute and Encourage. This stage is for impact and collaboration concerns. One reason change initiatives fail is because those leading the change are not credible, they under-communicate, and give mixed messages. Execution on what the Administration promised back in September last year is critical. Without it, the petitions that Americans are posting on We the People just falls on deaf ears.
Learn more about the nine change strategies and the reasons why change efforts typically fail.
Mobile Management – A Good Strategy or Just Disruptive?
Posted by Kristina Marzullo in Attitude, Change, Conflict, Federal Agency, Government, Management, Morale, Motivation, Productivity on February 8, 2012
Today’s post was written by guest blogger, Jim Atwood, Director of Government Solutions at The Ken Blanchard Companies. Jim also presented on last week’s webinar, A Situational Approach to Leadership.
Last week’s webinar on taking a situational approach to leadership created a lot of discussion around the concept of mobile management. Several participants related to the idea and shared their experiences with mobile management within their agencies. I am most familiar with this type of management as it relates to the military… where a leader is usually only in a particular position for 18 months to 3 years. However, following the webinar, I received several comments about how it also is a significant issue in other government agencies as well. It was particularly evident with leaders who are in direct political appointee positions or those who report to political appointees.
For me, mobile management is the planned periodic rotation of managers. I know there are a great number of positive elements that can result from a well executed mobile management plan…unfortunately I have seen very few that were either well planned or well executed. My experience has primarily been with individuals who, knowing that their position is short-term, have made immediate large-scale organizational changes to be able to “make their mark” on the organization. Unfortunately, it appears that often the change was only for the sake of change…to be able to say that things were different from the previous manager. The results of many of the changes I observed were rarely to enhance mission capability for the organization as a whole and often had a negative effect. I recall one such individual who believed in this kind of change and said, “I like to really shake things up when I arrive…change everything. I believe that dust settles at a higher level.” He definitely shook things up but had a negative effect on morale and commitment to the command and its mission.
I really am hoping that my experiences are not common…that I just had the bad luck of interacting with inefficient leaders initiating ineffective change. But are my experiences the anomaly?
What have been your experiences with mobile management? How big of an issue is mobile management within the government? What positive experiences have others had…and what were the resulting effects on the organization?
If you missed the webinar on taking a situational approach to leadership, you can still listen to the recording and hear more about how to lessen the negative impact of mobile management.
A Resolution Worth Making…and Keeping
Posted by Kristina Marzullo in Change, Commitment, Federal Agency, Government, Ken Blanchard, Leadership, Leadership Development, Motivation, Performance, Productivity, Training on January 4, 2012
When the New Year rolls around, most people have good intentions and make resolutions to kick-off the year; unfortunately, most people break their resolutions less than a month into the year. However, some don’t wait until the clock strikes midnight to make a positive change and continue working on and improving those changes well into the New Year. The Department of Veterans Affairs is one of the government agencies that set a resolution to retain their employees. The government agency has helped many of its employees improve their skills and has provided them opportunities to grow within the agency. Despite budget cuts and pay freezes, the agency created the VA Learning University (VALU) to offer employees an outlet to improve development, leadership skills, and personal growth while aligning to the agency’s mission and goals. This initiative has helped the VA save $200 million in turnover expenses in 2011. For 2012, the agency has made a goal to support the Obama administration’s drive to add more veterans into the civilian federal workforce. They plan on increasing the amounts of veterans they have on staff to 40 percent in 2012, up from 32 percent currently.
Perhaps the VA is on to something. A survey recently conducted by Federal News Radio to 49 chief human capital officers (CHCO) showed that most CHCOs are concerned with recruiting and retaining employees due to tight budgets and limited resources. VALU is proof that not all incentives to recruit and retain are monetary. The ability to grow professionally and personally is a coveted benefit at any agency. The Ken Blanchard Companies believes that individual learning is a key element to a high performing agency and is essential to self-leadership. Agencies that do not encourage people to learn are less likely to be high performing, because the skills of an agency are no greater than the skills of its people. When individuals learn, the agency learns. High performing agencies use formal training, mentoring, and on-the-job support to develop the skills and competencies of their people.
As a leader, why not help your direct reports make the most out of their learning experience. Learn the six keys on how to ENGAGE your staff so they can apply what the learned in real-life work scenarios.
Workforce Restructuring = Options For Government Employees
Posted by Kristina Marzullo in Budgets, Change, Government, Leadership on November 30, 2011
I recently wrote an article about how agencies can do more with less and still keep employees happy. In that blog post, I listed 8 strategies that leaders found effective when they were faced with budget cuts back in the 90’s. What we don’t know is whether or not the employees that were impacted by those strategies were given the opportunity to be a part of the decisions that were mandatory for those agencies to survive at the time. Many of those agencies are once again faced with significant budget cuts; however, things are a bit different this time around.
The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) sent a memo from Director John Berry to agencies’ chief human capital officers that provided direction on buyouts, early retirement packages, and reassignments. The memo states, “The Federal Government is experiencing restructuring and downsizing in an increasing number of agencies. As a result, some Federal employees may ultimately find themselves in a position of having to transition to a new job.” Change is never easy for an organization. Involving employees in certain decisions that are influenced by change lessens the overall impact it could have on an individual and the organization. That is exactly what several agencies are doing in order to implement the instruction to plan a budget that is 5 percent below their spending levels in 2011. Government employees are being offered buyouts and early outs as a way to avoid potential layoffs and furloughs. In several cases, employees are given the option to be reassigned to another agency in order to continue their career with the government.
When change occurs, people initially focus on what they have to give up. Their first reaction to a suggested change often tends to be a personal sense of loss. This includes, among other things, the loss of control, time, order, resources, coworkers, competency, and prestige. To help people move forward, leaders need to assist them in dealing with this sense of loss. Helping employees get in touch with what they think they will be losing from the change will help them accept some of the benefits.
Check out this short video about how change needs to be a course of actions you do with people, not to them.
Doing More With Less: Can the Federal Government Make it Work and Keep Employees Happy?
Posted by Kristina Marzullo in Budgets, Change, Direction, Government, Innovation, Leadership on October 5, 2011
Budget cuts are being implemented government-wide. Agency leaders are currently faced with continuing to manage the day-to-day functions of maintaining a successful organization while upholding the morale and motivation of their employees. Change can be a significant struggle, especially when dealing with less and expecting more. The Partnership for Public Service along with Booz Allen Hamilton published a study that focuses on how government agency leaders can continue to guide employees and maintain a functional workforce while having to cope with large budget cuts. Over 30 senior-level federal employees were interviewed for the study. Those individuals shared eight strategies that were successful for the agencies they worked for back in the 1990s, when they were faced with major budget cuts and reductions in the number of federal employees, yet were expected to do more with less.
The eight strategies that were shared could not be successful without four conditions; requirement of top-level leaders to make difficult decisions and share the vision with employees, ability to plan ahead and be prepared with how to respond to inquiries, experience to decide how to best apply the strategies for the agency, and apply a functional change-strategy that would minimize the adverse implications of the reductions. Those eight strategies include:
- Across-the-board cuts – decrease programs or functions equally
- Programmatic cuts – reductions based on importance or efficiency
- Decreasing administrative costs – cut overhead without weakening workforce
- Personnel reductions – cost-savings through attrition and/or forced layoffs
- Consolidating or centralizing functions – hope for greater efficiency
- Reengineering – improve service quality with awareness of upfront resources required
- Investing in information technology (IT) – increase productivity and efficiency
- Outsourcing – assign functions to external organizations at a lower cost
Constant change is a way of life in organizations today. Like it or not, in the dynamic society surrounding today’s organizations, the question of whether change will occur is no longer relevant. Change will occur, budgets will be cut, and resources will be limited. How do leaders cope with the barrage of changes that confront them daily as they attempt to keep their organizations adaptive and viable? Developing strategies to listen in on the conversations in the agency so that they can surface and resolve people’s concerns about change is a great place to start. They have to strategize hard to lead change in a way that leverages everyone’s creativity and ultimate commitment to working in an organization that’s resilient in the face of change.
With the recent budget cuts, how is your organization dealing with the impactful changes?
Read the full report from Partnership for Public Service, Making Smart Cuts.
Transforming American Governance
Posted by Kristina Marzullo in Change, Collaboration, Culture, Direction, Government, Leadership on August 2, 2011
Today’s post was written by guest blogger, Alan P. Balutis. Alan is the Senior Director and Distinguished Fellow for Cisco’s Internet Business Solutions Group.
Our nation faces a large – and growing – long-term fiscal imbalance driven by an aging population, which will dramatically increase health care and retirement costs. A report by the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Office of Management and Budget, with the assistance of the Government Accountability Office, stated that “Unless action is taken to bring program costs in line with available resources, the coming surge of entitlement spending will end in a fiscal train wreck. . .”
The nation certainly faces other challenges: the continuing war on terror, increasing economic competition from emerging world powers like China and India, rising energy costs, environmental concerns, and other new and unknown problems and threats. Any one of the challenges would be a large enough agenda for a President and Congress. Their convergence creates an atmosphere of unparalleled complication for government management.
The nation, then, has no shortage of problems to solve. The question is whether it will adapt new approaches to the management of government to meet the challenges it faces. Facing these challenges will require a “changed” government, a 21st-century government transformed to operate on demand. Eighty percent of people in the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll described themselves as either “angry” or “dissatisfied” with the way Washington works – the highest that number has been in nearly 20 years. With confidence in government at a historic low, the time for action is now.
What characteristics would a transformed “21st-century government have? Although the outline of such a government is becoming clearer, the literature has yet to describe a real model or even its key characteristics. Transforming American Governance: Rebooting the Public Square is designed to help public management practitioners, thought leaders, theorists, and researchers to ask the right questions as we move forward in this uncharted territory. The book, just out from M.E. Sharpe, was edited by Terry Buss, Dwight Ink, and Alan Balutis. We have assembled a prominent cast of experts to envision the future of government and governance on a broad scale, covering social policy, managing and regulating the economy, federalism and the states, and the new international order.
Our experts have come at this issue from different perspectives. Our contributors view the question from the perspective of public administration theory and the administrative state. They discuss it within the framework of such current policy challenges as the nation’s fiscal crisis and our ongoing war on terrorism. They debate it as it affects state and local governance and ponder the question, “Whither American Federalism?” They speculate about exactly how government will respond, while some assert that the answers already exist in the past – or current and emerging – changes and reform models. And they ponder the future – as a new Millennial generation enters public service, powerful 2.0 social networking, collaborative technologies become more prevalent, and new models of citizen engagement, and even co-production, change the very nature of government itself and/or government management.
These trends will dramatically affect what it is like to work in the public sector. New forms of coordination and control will evolve. Governments will place a premium on the skills of orchestration and facilitation and the ability to recognize the credibility and authority of sources of policy insights and advice outside the formal structures of the public sector. New accountability methods will be developed to match the radically dispersed and collaborative nature of public purpose work. Governments will need to make their own workplaces flatter, more connected, and less hierarchical, more in tune with the values and behavior of the talented people who need to be attracted to public service. Scott Blanchard, Drea Zigarmi and their colleagues at The Ken Blanchard Companies have contributed an intriguing chapter on the Leadership Purpose Chain in Governmental Organizations. There is certainly the need in governments today to answer the questions these authors pose, such as how to build leadership capabilities, what can leaders do to increase organizational performance, and so on.
You can read more about how to approach this transformation or the Leadership Purpose Chain by ordering a copy of Transforming American Governance: Rebooting the Public Square .








