Restore the Human Touch

he huge institutions of American government are often depicted as populated by nameless, faceless bureaucrats. The problem is that there's truth in this characterization-largely as a result of hoary policies that have depersonalized the civil service. These policies have not been good for civil servants, nor for the public they serve, and it is time to cast them aside.

The civil service system was depersonalized at its inception when rank was based on position rather than the employee. For more than 100 years, classifiers have ruled the human resource domain of the civil service. Decisions about status and pay were made by someone employees didn't even work for and were based on an impersonal standard. In such a system, employees have status only as long as they occupy the position that rates the status. This is in contrast with the military and the Foreign Service, where rank is carried by the individual.

In the civil service system, professional development is predominantly left up to the individual, whereas in career systems, such as the military, the institution assumes responsibility for developing in people the skills they will need. Thus, the federal system was developed as a "job" system rather than a "career" system. The intent may have been objective decision-making and fairness, but the result was depersonalization.

Torn Apart by Technology

Modern technology, which gives us such tools as voice mail and e-mail, further isolates employees and depersonalizes organizations. It is possible today to interact with an organization and never talk to a live human. Even when interacting with a human, people mostly deal with impersonal messages on modern machines. The sense of individual accountability and responsibility is lost in such an environment. Meetings now can be conducted by phone or video-conferencing.
While this is more efficient, it is less personal and perhaps less effective. Also, technology today allows significant telecommuting that can estrange individuals in the same organization.

At the turn of the century, work in this country was dominated by farming. People who farmed worked in isolation all week and congregated for social purposes on the weekend. This led to the popularity of Saturday night at the movies, church picnics and other social functions. Modern employment, starting with factories, created a situation in which people worked together all week and fled each other on the weekend. This has led to the popularity of RVs and going to the beach or other places where families can be alone. As we turn the century, modern technology may re-create the isolation we had at the beginning of the century.

Mismanagement Practices

Modern management practices involving matrix management, integrated teams and contracting out, may well add to the problem. The concept of matrix management is to make special talent available for more than one task. This creates a situation where the talented individual has more than one boss. The task manager worries about the short term, and the supervisor worries about the long term. The employee is caught in the middle. Reporting to more than one person not only creates tension, but also reduces personal association.

Integrated teams, the current rage, are matrix management writ large. These teams apply an employee's expertise to problems that are removed from the individual's core work unit. This objectifies the employee and diminishes the human association of an integral unit. Further, integrated teams reduce the sense of accountability and responsibility for outcomes. This in turn reduces motivation by making the employee feel more an object of expertise than a person.

The rapid movement to contract out government functions has made government employees and contract employees indistinguishable. This reduces the sense of uniqueness and association among federal employees. While federal employees have always dealt with lower pay than their private-sector counterparts and negative public opinion, they share a sense of camaraderie and devotion to public service. This blurring of lines between public and private service further reduces the sense of belonging within the civil service.

Results Rut

A major manifestation of the depersonalization trend is the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act. The law is intended to get agencies to define their goals and objectives in a long-term and strategic manner, but in reality it will become a budget control mechanism that further abstracts and depersonalizes operations. It will have the same effect on strategic thinking that position classification had on human resource management. It will become a simple objective abstraction for a complex and subjective process.

The problem is not unique to government. One indicator in society at large is free agents in sports. In the past, local sports teams would develop young players through their farm systems, and fans would become familiar with them as their careers developed. The fans would agonize over their failures and delight in their achievements. Now with free agency, players simply market themselves as a capability. Fans literally need a reference guide to know the players. Further, fans are much less tolerant of failure because they don't see players as individuals but rather as high-priced talent that is supposed to produce-period.

Another societal symptom of depersonalization is road rage. The anonymity that an automobile provides allows behavior that most people would not exhibit if they were recognized and accountable for their actions. The frustration of highway congestion fosters this behavior, and it is becoming the social norm for all too many people.

Meeting the Challenge

Government's management problems trace their origins back to Frederick Taylor's scientific management concept, which is based on the premise that all actions can be quantified and thus everything becomes objective. Humans do not react well to being treated as objects. The challenge within government is to take human institutions that are supposed to serve the needs of other humans-the citizens of the nation-and re-personalize them to make them more effective. Technology compounds the situation and has its own imperative. Future managers must learn to utilize modern technology but give it a human touch. There are no simple answers or quick solutions, but some things can be done.

Organizations should take more responsibility for developing their employees. Their approach must comprise more than supporting employee wishes for training and development opportunities. Agencies must provide employees guidance on what types of career development are consistent with the organization's needs. The agency's commitment must be balanced by employee commitment-a mutual association that further personalizes the organization.

Another initiative would be to replace the current classification system with the Navy-proven broad-banding approach. This system strengthens the relationship between employees and managers by giving the manager more control over the employee's status and pay. This forces a direct personal relationship between the two. While this may not initially be easy for managers who have grown accustomed to hiding behind the depersonalized classification system, experience has shown that it results in better morale and improved working relationships.

Along with broad-banding, competency-based pay should be the basis for raises and promotions. Competency-based pay focuses on employees' skills and abilities rather than the requirements of their positions. An employee may be in a position that merits certain pay and status but not be capable of performing in that position. Once it is established that an individual has the capabilities the organization needs, it is up to the agency to assign the employee tasks that require those skills. But this concept requires agencies to develop new ways of determining employee competency. Such techniques as using assessment centers and promotion boards to evaluate employee records and performance are examples of the tools available.

General management approaches must move away from the hierarchy-based concept with its emphasis on positions rather than individuals. The world of management has changed, and the federal government is going to a new place. But it must develop new leaders to take it to the right place.

James Colvard spent 30 years in research and development for the Navy and was deputy director of the Office of Personnel Management during the Reagan administration. After leaving government, he became associate director of the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, and he now teaches at Indiana University.