Notes
Ron Olsen
How is human capital (HC) viewed?
In the late 1990's, the federal government downsized. This
was a period in which there was no recruitment. The result
for USAID was that the Agency on a whole was reduced in
size. The administration discovered that due to the downsizing,
they were left with a shortage of qualified employees. With
every cycle, there were an increasing number of vacancies.
The result was a greater demand for skilled, knowledgeable
employees, and not enough human capital to satisfy the need.
As program money greatly increased, the human capital shortage
worsened. With defense, diplomacy, and development defining
U.S. foreign policy, it is increasing important to address
the human capital crisis. Administrator Natsios is dedicated
to rectifying the increasing problem of human capital. USAID
is striving to solve the HC problem through the development
of a Joint Strategic Plan, the President’s Management
Agenda, and Business Transformation.
The HC strategic plan was compiled by the Office of Human
Resources (M/HR) and the Bureau for Policy and Program Coordination
(PPC). The main goal of the HC strategy is to get the right
people in the right place, doing the right work, at the
right time (with the right knowledge, skills and experience)
to fulfill USAID’s mission. This plan is a joint endeavor
between the State Department and USAID. The partnership
is a natural one, since USAID and the State Department share
specified areas of common interest upon which to collaborate,
such as employee training and joint licensing, cross assignments,
employment concerns, human resource systems and information
technology applications, overseas employment, and performance
evaluations.
The President’s Management Agenda deals with the
issues of workforce planning, the development readiness
initiative (DRI) and other recruitment, the Overseas Template
and HQ Re-alignment, as well as, an OMB/OPM scorecard for
human capital. The goal is to achieve sufficient working
programs by the 2nd quarter of 2005. The main objective
is to increase the overall workforce contingent upon an
increase in OE funds.The goal is more cumbersome, in that
it makes allowances for differing, age groups, sexes, and
races, in order to achieve a diversified, increased workforce.
The DRI is seeking to aid in this endeavor by planning to
increase the FSN by twenty percent, bringing in an estimated
250 new officers, from 2004-2006. Congress has recently
made progress by passing FS85, allotting appropriations
for 85 employees, to be brought back into the Agency under
temporary status, over the next three years.
The Business Model will be addressed by Dave Eckerson next
week.
Susan Wallace
Knowledge
is a crucial resource. It is very important for the Agency
to come up with an adequate means for managing our knowledge.
The main problem of the human capital crisis is that the
Agency is losing too many mature, knowledgeable employees,
while at the same time they are gaining many new young employees.
There are no people left to share the knowledge that they
have garnered through their years of service. The question
is how we are going to be able to gather all of the knowledge
on its way out the door, and then share it throughout the
Agency.
With many of the USAID employees scattered throughout the
field, it is very difficult to retain much of the knowledge
that does exist. What needs to occur is continued access
to employees, even after retirement, which will enable accessibility
to the valuable information they posses. In order to achieve
this, the focus must be shifted from the field— USAID’s
“public face”—to the strategic and operational
“faces” of USAID. These faces provide the governments
view of the HC crisis, as well as, the administrative organizations
and processes, which provide an invaluable support function
the Agency. In effect, all facets of the Agency must be
equally tapped for the information that they possess. An
in-depth look at the strategic objectives that define the
Human Capital Strategic Plan, addresses the need, and was
in which the differing areas of the Agency can be utilized.
Knowledge for Development plays an important role in the
HC crisis, in that it provides many viable solutions. One
can look to the USAID Portal as one example of a way in
which technology can provide a gateway for information to
be accessed and shared. The development of collaborative
software will also aid in achieving the goal of knowledge
accessibility. The development of an Agency “yellow
pages,” to be used an engine to locate specified expertise
within the Agency, and its retirees. The end result is that
we hope to achieve increased, accessible channels of communication,
through which knowledge is inevitably attainable.
Question and Answer Session
You have shown the OE levels as straight, but you
were talking about increasing staff levels. How were you
going to pay for that?
- The advantage is the partnership with PPC is key. PPC
is talking to the appropriators, we’re expecting an
increase in OMB—rather, we're hoping for an increase
in our OMB. This will make an increase in new staff levels
affordable.
- Our immediate short-term, stop-gap measure is the program-funded
85. This provides us with the staff that is needed most
urgently. On the long-term, additional funds are required.
- Choices must be made in the budget. Perhaps there will
be trade-offs, such as cuts to IT. Regardless, the Agency
is committed to the overall increase in our personnel levels.
What is an increase in OE funds contingent upon?
If there is an increase in OE funds, how will that impact
the “little” people? Who will benefit? In the
past there seems to have been a loss in administrative and
program staff vs. the technical. If there is an increase,
will it only benefit the technical?
- Care needs to be taken when forecasting an OE increase.
The key lies in the choices that the Agency makes, and where
it invests the money appropriated.
- We are all hoping for an increase in the OE. As the budget
is constructed and the needs of the Agency are developing,
the Agency will have to determine where it places its resources/interests.
- As for who is to benefit from an OE increase, it must
be said that our technical capacity/expertise is one of
the backbones of the Agency. Our ability to project our
needs in the field makes us a very unique and capable agency.
- There is no plan to grow at the expense of the technical
expertise. Our requirement by backstop is a developing question
of what we need and where we need to hire people is a question
that remains to be answered.
Very interesting that the two strategies meet so
nicely (Human Capital and KfD) around the point of the right
skills and the right knowledge to people at the right time.
What are the challenges around the new cadre of folks coming
in? Are they going to have the right skills and the right
knowledge because of the work going on? What’s going
to look different about that?
- The visibility must be moved away from the field. We are
trying to come up with tools to move quicker and faster
in order to place emphasis on the knowledge side, and other
less supported “faces.” This is only providing
access to the knowledge. It is not improving or looking
to the future of the workforce.
There seems to be a disconnect between retirees
and new hires (IDIDs/NEPs/etc.). However, the Agency seems
to have a good transition program for retirees (orientation/resume
help/networking…). While you are trying to capture
knowledge from all the experienced people (in term of lessons
learned) leaving, nothing is being done to provide incentives
to senior management (program officers/office directors),
who were/are in the field, to stay. There are a lot of people
who want to do more, if given adequate motivators. Some
of these employees want to retire, while others enjoy working
in their fields. Why not pair the old with the new in the
fields? Stars will always come out of stars! What can be
done to garner this knowledge?
- Everything comes
down to the Congress. We don’t have the money. We
have to continue regardless.
- We have a lot of old people leaving. We have a crisis.
We are doing workforce planning.
- The biggest personnel problem 15 years ago was the secretaries.
We got wise and got computers, now we have a problem with
all the supervisors not wanting to do administrative work.
There is not support, so we are forced to contract out for
the admin work. Now we have no independent workforce.
- We have to figure out mechanisms to support our workforce.
We need managers, not just PhD economists. We’re starting
to get resolve with the new flock of NEPs and IDIs.
- Always comes down to the issue of money. There is never
enough, so program costs get cut.
- The current Administrator is taking actions to rectify
the situation, by providing training to bridge HC with KfD.
However, the new NEPs aren’t able to take full advantage
of the middle-level management and old folks; because the
experienced folks think they know everything already and
don't go to the training provided.
- The new trainees are bringing in innovative ideas on management
and strategic objectives, especially with their knowledge
of IT.
There are old folks who are trying to be 21st century-oriented.
On the flip side, there are new hires going out into the
field, in high level positions, and do not posses the skills
to navigate with host country counterparts.
- There are many people who are IT-phobic. The new hires
are not.
- We have a new mentor site, which will allow those who
are retiring to post comments and give advice. We are also
trying to get the portal up and running that will allow
greater access to all employees, old and new.
- We can’t help out on the incentives to stay up front,
but we can help with sharing of knowledge.
There has been talk of the cross-over between USAID
and the State Department. There were five offices mentioned.
Please elaborate on the rationale behind the crossover,
as well as, what level the offices are.
- The rationale is pretty straightforward. The more we know
about State the better we are able to interface with them,
as we look towards the future and our programming is increasing
a collaborative matter.
- The new trend in the field is to integrate the USAID missions
with State, as opposed to stand alone missions.
- State must also be sensitive to our corporate culture.
Professional growth involvement must also be protected.
Are there also civil service slots?
- There
is a program for civil service conversions to the Foreign
Service.
Are there plans to have civil service at USAID
and State swap jobs?
- Not that I have heard yet.
The focus has been on Foreign Service assignments.
- This is increasingly difficult since the Foreign Service
assignments are competitive as is.
- The reason why we are at these committees: the State/USAID
joint strategic plan has set up two councils, the policy
council and the management council. These were set up at
the insistence of State. The councils were not well received
by USAID. However, we wanted to take advantage of the notion
that issues such as eye casts, training, and the workforce
were going to be seen by senior/mid-level management at
State. Now we have our issues addressed four times a year.
We are making progress.
- Sounds as though the exchange is occurring at the senior
management level, which is good, because this is where the
impact will be felt. The cultural exchange is good, although
change will only occur at the senior level.
Back
to USAID 
