CGAS MAGID NOMINEE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80B01495R000900030006-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 14
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 17, 2005
• Sequence Number: 6
• Publication Date: July 25, 1974
• Content Type: MEMO

Approved For Release 2005/11/23 : CIA-RDP80BO1495R000900030006-7
Approved For Release 2005/11/23 : CIA-RDP80BO1495R000900030006-7
 Approved For Relea,,2005/1 IPII1R~~(1495R0009OS 030006-7
INTERNAL USE ONLY
9 July 1974
NOTE TO: Chief, DDI Management Staff
SUBJECT: Informal Comments on the Draft DDI
Personnel Handbook
Though the time available for reaction was
very short, several MAGID members have taken the
opportunity to provide comments regarding your
draft DDI Personnel Handbook. These should be
taken as individual comments, not necessarily
reflecting the consensus of the entire group. On
the other hand, MAGID earlier had provided comments
on Section V (Vacancy Notices), and we provided
the original drafts of Sections VI (Counseling)
and VII (Grievances). We have discussed these
matters in some depth, and the comments provided
here take this into account.
for MAGID
cc: O/DDI
Approved For Release 2005hVqNRIq- P.1 P01495R000900030006-7
 Approved For Relge 200R/fff j 1 J f B01495R0( 00030006-7
INTERNAL USE ONLY
General Comments
- A quick reading of the handbook indicates that it-will
be a useful reference document for both new and old
employees who have questions about DDI policy.
-- The handbook shows that it has been written by a variety
of people.
-- The Counseling and Grievance sections are more thought-out,
detailed, and, useful than other sections. The employee
knows what the policy is, where he or she stands, and
what he or she can do about it.
None of the sections indicate or suggest responsibility
of the DDT management to apprise employees of DDI
decisions taken, or policy changes made, that affect
him or her. What communication channels are open?
Nothing is included in the handbook re:
(a) MAGID
(b) the Coordinator for Academic Relations, etc.
(c) Management ' Staff responsibilities (other than..,
noting certain positions given the Chief)
(d). the Advanced.Opportunity Program (though this
is mentioned without explanation in the
Vacancy Notice section)
These topics also should be dealt with some place in the
handbook.
Assuming that the handbook is in loose-leaf form, why
couldn't certain key DDI notices be included in an
appendix at the end of the book? The notice regarding
the purpose of MAGID and. listing the current members
could be included in this way.
The greatest [potential] benefit of the handbook is that---
IF it is read by ALL employees, it may lead to more
questioning of both policies and implementation by those
concerned.
-- The handbook is well done; it should be a positive addition
to management and to employee morale.
Approved For Release 2005/11/23 : CIA-RDP80B01495R000900030006-7
 Approved For ReleW200A ~Ux
Y495 R0009900030006-7
IWAVII
Section 1: Directorate Personnel Policies
The Personnel Handbook is an ideal. Policy, as outlined
in Section I, is seemingly precise, moralistic, and fair.
But how much of it is put into practice? Is DDI policy
in fact filtered down to the-lower-level managers who
are in constant contact. with. the bulk of employees? We
all know. of either real or rumored abuses of promotion,
vacancy notice, and training policies, for example.
Yet the system doesn't seem able to correct itself.
Most supervisors are evaluated not on how they implement
DDI policy but whether they get the job done.
Approved For Release 2005/11/23 : CIA-RDP80BO1495R000900030006-7
 Approved For Rele 2005Y Ill 2.NQfi1,L1-Rbl2B da'495R00 ,00030006-7
Section II: Structure of the Career Service
Section II on the structure of the Career Service is
nebulous governmentese. Even after reading it, the
employee is not told what a career service board or
panel is, and most importantly, how it operates and
where it fits into the decision-making process governing
personnel actions.
It is unclear why there is need for both a Directorate
Career Service Board and a Senior Personnel Resources
Board; many of their functions are clearly overlapping.
Why not have one Board called the Career Service and
Personnel Resources Board. If the question of chairman
is important, it would seem obvious that the DDI would
chair any meetings he attends, but that he need not
attend meetings when the agenda does not interest him.
Thus, a reasonable division of labor between the DDI
and ADDI (and office chief and deputy office chief)
would. still be accomplished.
The Boards described include heads of offices and
services. What services. are included? Is the Collection
Guidance and Assessments Staff considered a service;.is
it represented? Who champions CGAS candidates fore
positions at senior schools, etc?
Approved For Release 2005/114 rT, A-WP~9,RP1495R000900030006-7
 Approved For Releasve 2005/11/2~,Ji JRE~P PB8 9 iR000900030006-7
Now
Section III: Personnel Evaluation
There is no mention of how the employee can participate
in the evaluation process. The section does not explain
what should be an employee's right--tor.ead the comments
of evaluating and reviewing officials. There is no
mention of any recourses available to the employee if
he or she disagrees with a. specific or overall rating.
In Part D, there is little mention of the criteria
applied to career service panel grading.
Subsection D on Competitive Evaluation needs to be
expanded. This is a most important concern to DDI
employees, and it is. dealt with in a cursory fashion
in a page and a half.
It should be made explicit whether an employee has a
right or not to see the ranking list prepared by his
Career Panel.
Will people categorized as a lst rank (promotion or
higher graded position) be notified?
Individuals ranked in the lowest three percent of each
DDI panel should be notified within a specified time
Approved For Release 2005/111jql11R1L,,495R000900030006-7
INTERNAL USE ONLY
 iB81 5ROOQ90D030006-7
? Approved For Rele se.-2005/11/23At : AAL-RDP80
' u r
Section IV: Promotions
We have difficulty understanding the efficacy of the
headroom policy outlined in Section IV, Part D. When
headroom is determined for individual grade rather than
for the office as a whole-, it puts the deserving
employee entirely at the mercy of things over which he
has no control, such as past hiring practices that may
have overloaded a particular grade level, or previous
"easy" promotion actions that may have been, for
example, the.result of a historical period of critical
intelligence needs that elicited promotion.-warranting:
job performance but that also stacked employees in
certain grades.
Approved For Release 2005/11/23 NI -RRAT V 495R000900030006-7
INTERNAL USE. ONLY
 Approved For ReleW 200511AS : I~~~8 Q1495R0009 0030006-7
INTERNAL USE ONLY
Section V: Vacancy Notices
MAGID reviewed the Vacancy Notice section before and
some of our recommendations were accepted.
There is some feeling in MAGID that vacancy notices
should be circulated even when the component has a
qualified candidate in mind, although this should be
indicated at the bottom of the sheet. In this way,
the office would have broader choice to select from
and might turn up someone better suited for the job.
(Problem: This might cause some hard feelings within
the component, although if a.general practice, it
would-give everyone a'greater range of opportunities.)
It should be made clear that a candidate for a job has
the right (but not the obligation) to submit a memo
with the application explaining why he thinks he should
get the advertised job.
Approved For Release 2005/11123TMq- ,1$?ff495R000900030006-7
INTERNAL USE ONLY
 Approved For Relea,,X20051'/2hlAL-RPh$OLJ95R00(0030006-7
Section VI: Employee Counseling
MAGID would prefer that it be specified that it is a
"principal duty" of the designated officer to be a
counselor. We would prefer that the counseling tasks
be specified as career counseling rather than job-
related counseling. Our language is intended to give
greater weight to career development planning.
Counseling of the "lowest three percent" should be
mandatory, rather than just an expectation.
Approved For Release 2005/11VD3 i GIV&M R$ 1I495R000900030006-7
INTERNAL USE ONLY
 Approved For Relea 2005/11 ~2 fEFBBA9f R00a 0 0030006-7
Section VII: Employee Grievances
MAGID had suggested counselors not tied to offices. If
it is preferred that each office have a designated
grievance counselor, then it should be made clear that
a person with a complaint or a grievance or potential
grievance has the option of exploring the matter with
a counselor other than the one designated from within
his office (e.g., from the DDI Management Staff). The
notion is-that the counselors be seen as something
other than tools of management, and that the complaintant
feel free to explore his problems even before he makes
any determination about whether to institute a formal
.grievance or complaint.
It is unclear how the various grievance counselors
would be picked. As noted above, ideally the counselor
should be someone not closely associated with line
management.
A list of grievance counselors should be published.
In Subsection E of Section VII (re Grievance Panels), it
is asserted that a complaintant has the right to a
hearing before a panel. But then the procedures get
rather murky. He requests a hearing through one of
the grievance counselors. Not necessarily the counselor
for his office/service? Then does the counselor auto-
matically call a panel session? The Chief of the
Management Staff convenes the panel, but why are there
three options for requesting meetings? What is the
criteria for panel selection?
The second paragraph of Subsection F would be better
worded: "If there is any apparent attempt by a supervisor
to retaliate against an employee as a result of the
latter's efforts . . . ." At a minimum, remove the
word "solely".
As MAGID stated previously: "It might be noted somewhere
that irrespective of a personal grievance every employee
has the right and responsibility to bring to management's
attention any obvious failing in the system that
detracts from efficient intelligence production or the
effective use of personnel. One possible channel for
such suggestions/complaints is the DDI Management Staff;
another could be MAGID, which in any event, ought to be
identified and described somewhere in the handbook."
Approved For Release 2005/11N? C>Q~Q1495R000900030006-7
DM_ INTERNAL USE ONLY
 Approved For Relegse. 200511,11~4civCAI14-RDP8QW+495R00 9 0030006-7
Section VIII: Awards
Unlike the rules of engagement employed elsewhere in
this manual, Section VIII describes Agency policies/
programs.
There is no mention of suggestion awards. Certainly,
honor and monetary awards outlined in this section are
open only to a select few, and are often a function of
being in the right place at the right time. Suggestion
awards are within the realm of possibility for all
employees, however, and should be promoted as a way
employees can get useful ideas across to management.
The section provides very little assistance and advice
as to who in the DDI under what kinds of circumstances
should be considered for an award.
Approved For Release 2005/1A1 pl1R~8j( Q1495R000900030006-7
INTERNAL USB ONLY
 Approved For Rele 2005/1 1/23J1',4tIA-RB BOP495R00Q D0030006-7
INThRNAL USE ONLY',
Section IX:
Training
"Courses and briefings designed-to familiarize personnel
with Agency, DDI, and Office functions and operations
are available." MAGID has been informed that the IWA
and DDI Orientation courses will be required. This
should be clearly stated.
"Agency management takes the initiative in providing
employees with the training it considers necessary to
do the job." But see the earlier section on responsibil-
ities. There are at least some ambiguities regarding'
who is responsible for what.
Subsection B says that the DDI himself approves requests
for management training. 'We assume that this is not
true, particularly in terms of the basic management and
supervisory courses.
Subsection I re Foreign Travel does not.provide for all
the kinds of travel potentially useful to the DDI. It
should be appropriately amended. Travel should be
encouraged when it fosters specific Agency purposes.
regarding the utility of intelligence guidance and the
efficiency and'effectiveness of field collection and
reporting. Similarly, travel in support of USIB or
IRAC working group or committee sutides or projects
should be permitted and encouraged.
Approved For Release 2005/11/23 : CIA-RDP80BO1495R000900030006-7
ADMINISTRATIVE
INTERNAL USE, ONLY
 Approved For Relea 2005/1111(A3,,, t9IkLR[ PIQ l~ 5ROOQ 0030006-7
.Section X: Rotational Assignments and Transfers
The first part of the section obviously overlaps material
found elsewhere in the handbook, including the last
subsection of the preceding chapter/section. At a
minimum, there should be some cross-referencing.
Dealing with rotational assignments and transfers in
the same section raises some problems. In both cases
the employee wants to get away from his current job .
and to enjoy different experiences, but the motivation
and the probable career pattern frequently is quite
different. People who are good and who are growing
often seek to rotate.' People who are stuck (and perhaps
in trouble) often want to transfer. Rotation is training;
transfer m be escape.
Approved For Release 2005/1 MAL 6U1495R000900030006-7
IN ERUSE ONLY
 Approved For Release 2005/1 44:tp R > 0 > 5R00 0030006-7
Section XI: Surplus Personnel
A footnote correctly emphasizes that employees are
surplus when there are reduced ceilings or reduced
requirements for certain skills. "Performance on the
job is a factor in this process only if a particular
skill area is being reduced in which case the relative
ranking of employees with the same skills may be used
as a guide." This distinction is sufficiently important
and complex that it probably should be elaborated upon
and included in the textual discussion. Too often
real: or hypothetical need for slot cuts is used as a
devise to remove employees whose performance is judged
to be unsatisfactory without the employee or the super-
visor ever dealing directly with the performance question.
Approved For Release 2005/1A1 ?,~ IRP Q1495R000900030006-7
INTERNAL USE, ONLY