HUMAN RESOURCES TASK FORCE NOTES AND THOUGHTS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 18
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 9, 2011
• Sequence Number: 18
• Publication Date: May 7, 1986
• Content Type: MEMO

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
e(OUTING AND TRANSMITTAL SUP
Date ,
21 MAY 1986
gligirialnirnitotof41 ocentyytypbolos,oroom number,.
EXO/DDA
Initials Date
2. ADDA
22 MAY 1986
& DDA
DA/MS
)2 MAY 198$
DDA REGISTRY
'Action
File
Note and Return
Approval
For Clearance
Per Conversation
As Requested
Circulate
For Correction
PrePars Reply
For Your Information
See Me
pomment
Investigate
Signature
Coordination
REMARKS
Justify
OMS WILL BE GIVING THE DDA A BRIEFING
RE HUMAN RESOURCES TASK FORCE ON WEDNESDAY,
28 MAY AT 0900.
DO NOT Use this form as a RECORD of approvals, concurrences, disposals.
clearances, and similar actions
FROM (Nam% org. symbol, Agency/Post)
QMS/PSD
706 C of C
Room No.?Bldg.
Phone No.
5041-102 OPTIONAL FORM 41 (Rev. 7-76)
Prescrlbed_W GSA
nnn - ? nn n _ ,C1_[,(1 (1119 FPUR (41 ctie 101-11.206
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
7 May 1986
Human Resources Task Force
Notes and Thoughts
Throughout the Human Resources Task Force's recent discussions with
Agency employees, several ideas have emerged as "universals". One is
that we are continuing to draw extremely competent and dedicated
people despite the cultural changes the country is experiencing. It
seems logical to expect that we can continue to attract such people,
though the "complexification" of our screening process affects the
percentage we ultimately EOD. Another "universal" is that Agency
management is deplorable. It has been allowed to evolve without any
conscious thought or direction, the result of a system that rewards
individual accomplishment by promotion to management without
consideration of the individual's interpersonal skills or management
training/experience. It is, if you will, the dark side of
"excellence", the natural fallout from our can-do attitude. "A good
man" (used as a generic, not a sexist term) is presumed to be able to
do any task he is assigned; he doesn't complain, ask for help, or
require training. (One can accept training in substantive matters,
but everybody is expected to know how to deal with people.)
Although there is a tendency for people to ascribe the "management
problem" to the level above them, there is a qualitative difference
among the three usual managerial "clumpings": Branch and Division
chiefs have more supervisory than managerial responsibility and have
little power to change things; "Upper Management" (aka The 7th Floor)
is more often accused of capriciousness than mis-use (or non-use) of
power. It is the middle level--that of the Office Director--that
represents the focus of Agency frustration about "the way things are
done". According to Office of Personnel representatives, most of the
things people complained about are things with which Office Directors
already have the power to deal.
It strikes me that the usual perceptions of future human resource
problems (i.e., changed societal values, self-centeredness, less
mobility, dual career families, more emphasis on non-career
activities, more women in the workplace, etc.) are indicators of
recent cultural trends, not necessarily givens for the longer term and
should not become the object of our focus. Placed in the larger
context of the Agency's mission, our response to each of these issues
will depend upon our understanding of their impact on our ability to
perform our mission; it is the mission that must remain inviolate, not
the methods we have customarily employed to achieve that mission.
Just as we require flexibility of our people, the organization must
exhibit an equal flexibility. People who are products of a
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
fast-changing and often disrupted society are frequently eager to
"bond" with an organization with which they can identify emotionally,
intellectually, and ideologically. Being wedded to mission, not
methodology, can be an attractive selling feature for them. People
are more likely to follow a few clearly defined rules than a welter of
arbitrary and often conflicting edicts. Question: will people who
need to bond with the organization be as emotionally strong as we need
them to be?
One of our current problems arises from the high percentage of
newcomers to seasoned veterans, particularly in the DI. We worry
about being able to assimilate these people into the Agency culture,
and so we concentrate on tightening our screening mechanisms. Perhaps
we should be less stringent initially, concentrating on such qualities
as intelligence, flexibility, loyalty, curiosity, and judgment, and
look to a systematic acculturation process (complete with assignment
of a sponsor or "big brother/sister" and appropriate formal training)
to instill the values that will complete the transformation of the
newcomer into a confirmed Agency person. Our mission and authorities
allow us to be unique only so long as we maintain an appropriate
self-image.
As for management development, it is imperative that we identify
likely candidates for managerial roles fairly early in their careers.
This must not be a once-and-for-always selection, however, but must be
periodically revalidated to allow for changes that result from life
and work experiences. The focus must be on the process, which is
on-going. Now we tend to think of "arriving at the management level"
as if it were an absolute: once you are one you only change by
getting bigger! As Mr. Gates noted, selection is more vital than
training, but appropriate training (on a case by case basis) will
enhance skills.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
17 May 1986
Notes from 13-15 May Human Resources Seminar
1. The seminar opened with a few words from D/PERS, who related
the Task Force's concerns to comments made at the recent OP Conference
by an IBM representative. The real message, although the speaker did
not do a good job of communicating it, was "IBM is the best". OP is
trying to communicate the message that "CIA is the best" both to
insiders and to outsiders. We won't attract people on the basis of
benefits alone; we get people who want to buy into our culture, who
share our values. It is particularly important to reinforce that
culture for those who seldom see the product--the "bottom line"-- of
what we accomplish. He stressed the concept of "uniqueness" and
raised the query of why Scranage, Chin, and Howard betrayed us. He
lauded the concept of having a quotable credo, but compared ours
(mandated from the top, though with input from all levels) to such
memorable mottos as "Be Prepared" and "Duty, Honor, Country". His
final caution was to remember we are part of the U.S. Government and
there is a price tag on everything. We need to learn to work smarter,
given the limitations on funding.
2. then provided a Task Force update. Directing our
attention to the problems of recruitment and retention (the latter
being in some ways the most critical), he mused about the population
from which we are drawing our people, with increasing emphasis on
materialistic values and a focus on personal development, health, and
wellbeing. Fortunately we are able to attract people who wouldn't
otherwise want to work for the government, but who are we? To what
are we asking them to dedicate themselves? Are we a family? Should
we be? The new generation wants more from its employer--quicker
progression, more "stroking". Once inside, they complain about a
negative orientation, a punitive, prohibitive atmosphere. We protect
against failure by becoming overly conservative. Authority is too
diffuse. We penalize risk-taking. Fast-trackers are faced with
limited further opportunity. Our "here and now" orientation defeats
strategic planning. Despite these complaints, we are still seeing
pride and enthusiasm in what are universally recognized as excellent
people. They still feel we serve an important mission. A very
important focus for us in the future is the development and nurturing
of our culture, the articulation of what it is and how it serves us,
and the understanding of how we can modify it to serve us better.
3. Our first invited guest was Alice Sargent, independent
consultant and author of The Androgynous Manager. She noted the trend
from productivity to people-management and suggested building a
competency model and judging managers on their managerial competencies
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
as part of their performance appraisal. Her model includes competence
in: technical areas, analytical skills, self-awareness, interpersonal
skills, team-effectiveness, entrepreneurial skills, and leadership.
She quoted Yankelovich's studies that posit a cultural change in
motivation in the American workplace from CONTROL to QUALITY. Some of
her main points were: The traditional workplace was not viewed as a
democracy. Women are more likely to be changed by an organization
than to change it. We are seeing a transformation from independence
to interdependence. The social contract is changing from exploitation
to trust. Meaningful work is a scarce commodity in our culture.
Americans are focusing more on process and less on outcomes, and we
are becoming more concerned with the quality of life within an
organization than with the mission.
4. The group reacted fairly hotly to this theme, stating that
this orientation reflects the values of the 70's, not necessarily of
the 80's, and that we didn't select such people then and won't in the
future. She made many references to the private sector's infatuation
with the Japanese industrial system, noting that NBC recently
presented a White Paper on this phenomenon. We felt that comparisons
with the Japanese may often be a waste of time; she felt they may be
reflecting a sense of doubt about American know-how. She spoke of
management of scarce resources and assumed that was people; we felt it
was only certain categories of people, and that the scarcest resource
of all is time, because it cannot be compressed or increased. She
noted our preoccupation with increasing technical expertise (adding
political skills, knowledge of the Hill, budget, MIS, etc.) and
reminded us that (according to her model) the technical area still
represents only 1/7 of the competencies a manager should possess. We
ended with a discussion of managerial training, which was termed
"sheep dip" training because of the "one-size-fits-all",
"ticket-punching" approach to training so often demonstrated in
organizations.
5. The afternoon session began with an amusing and informative
presentation by James Colvard of OPM. He recounted some of his Navy
experiences, particularly mentioning China Lake, and shared some of
his thinking about management and management training. He believes it
all begins with self-management, and that early experience of success
with something tangible establishes self-confidence which, combined
with humility, gives one the courage to act with the realization that
you can never know if you are right. He believes in a combination of
personal experience (achieved through rotational assignments) and
intellectual abstraction (learning from the experience of others). It
seems everyone is looking for a formula that will solve the problem of
management. He mentioned the case study method (Harvard), but finds
management simulation exercises more effective teaching devices,
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
STAT
STAT
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
though even they are not totally realistic. Private industry tends to
follow the collegiate/intellectual world and/or popular trends ("pop
management" books proliferate). They pay more time, attention, and
money to people development than does government. IBM, for example,
involves their top managers in the training exercises, using insider
experience and expertise. He called McNamara's whiz kids
"deterministic theoreticians with no practical experience". On the
other hand, those who come up through the ranks have to get rid of the
baggage they bring with them or run the risk of micromanagement.
6. He said managers need to demonstrate competence, the courage
to take risks, concern, integrity, and imagination. He urged us to
think of development rather than training and reminded us that the
ability to abstract enables us to capture the past and project the
future. The hardest part, he said, is providing the feedback to let
people know when they are not doing well. We will all make mistakes.
Human subjective judgment is what management is about. He mentioned
the Banding bill and said the focus should be on managing money, not
billets, and that Meese and OMB are beginning to think in these terms.
Some of his other comments: OPM is going to become more supportive of
management, be less a policeman, delegate more powers to the agencies,
and farm out jobs like issuance of retirement cheques. He is a member
of NAPA and he has contacted fellow NAPA members like Inman and
Carlucci about setting up a public forum to air concerns and still the
negative public rhetoric about government. They are looking at a dual
track for SIS members.
e next speaker was Jac Fitz-Enz
(a consulting firm in California of which he is
Presi ent). He is a
human resources consultant and assumed his audience consisted almost
exclusively of HR people. His thesis is that human resources
departments need to shed their outdated staff mentality and take on a
new self-concept: they must cease to think of themselves as expense
centers and consider themselves profit centers in their own right. He
feels we (the employees) have lost the identity we used to have from
family, church, and community and are looking to the job to recapture
our identity, thus demanding more of our jobs than we used to. He
suggests HR professionals must move from the tactical (bureaucratic)
mode to a more innovative and strategic stance. They must think of
themselves as organizational consultants, focus on the bottom line,
and invest their skills for optimal return, since their functions
could be returned to line management at any time if they are unable to
deliver. He identified nine major concerns: (1) What is our business?
(2) What is our operating philosophy? (3) What are our working
values? (4) What phases of organizational life development are we in?
(5) What are the stakeholders' expectations? (6) What is the force
the
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
analysis? (7) What are the critical success factors? (8) What
strategy is being employed? (9) What are the strategic alternatives?
A major area of concern should be how to measure HR effectiveness.
8. (DI Representative to the Task Force) led an
evening round table discussion on "System Strengths and Weaknesses:
Agency Perceptions". Mentioned as strengths were our sense of
mission, our "can-do" spirit, the organizational nurturing of high
performers, resource flexability to meet changing needs, high quality
people, and a commitment to pass on our culture to those who come in
behind us. On the down side, we have heard perceptions that the
system exploits people; that our Directorate-specific and short-term
focus keep us from Agency-wide, strategic thinking; that we are too
product oriented; that managers continue to do too much substantive
work; that you innovate at your own risk; that we can never say "no"
to new obligations; that non-production job holders feel like second
class citizens; that we are "anti-perk"; that we fear failure to such
an extent that we have become too conservative; that people at all
levels lack authority--there is over-tight control. People we
interviewed raised the question: If we're such high quality people,
so carefully screened, why are we treated as if we were presumed
guilty until we prove our innocence? There is a sense of being let
down by the organization and indications of a growing lack of
confidence. One ironic note: recent success in broadcasting to
employees what OP has done for them has added to their sense of
insecurity. Somehow we expect the Agency to protect us from the
vicissitudes of life, the changes, the uncertainty of how the ebb and
flow of business on the Hill will affect our lives. All these
newsletters seem to alert us to the fragility of it all rather than
reassure us that we are being protected! [This session became a
nearly 3-hour give-and-take that effectively defied note-taking!]
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
17 May 1986
Notes from 13-15 May Human Resources Seminar
Day Two
1. We spent the morning of 14 May with Robert Marshak of Marshak
Associates. This was a fascinating exercise and I recommend we bring
him back for another go. He had read some of our promotional
literature and, from that exposure, designed a ficticious company, The
Central News Service, that was eerily like our own Agency. It was a
bit frightening what he could discover about our organization and our
mentality by flipping through a couple of brochures!
2. He began with a statement that we need to look for mechanisms
by which we can move from tactical to strategic thinking. He sketched
out the interplay between Charter and Context, thusly:
Charter: Context:
1. Purposes focus 1 Societal
Internat'l 1 Technological
focus 1 Economic
Using a thinly-veiled private sector example, he spoke of the
functional elements of growth and development: differentiation and
specialization:
Manufacturing R&D Marketing/Sales Finance/Admin
(read: DO S&T DI DA)
We must be able to work together despite differentiated mission/goals.
Each has a different view of self, time, turf, power, and resource
struggles. The key is the ability of the organization (and the
individuals in it) to integrate the differences among the elements.
Conflict is bound to increase with increased growth and
differentiation; we don't want to get rid of conflict, merely to
manage it.
3. Our Charter has changed over time. Is our structure still the
most effective? We need to take another look at our goals and
objectives--our purposes. Clarity of goals and commonality of purpose
are vital; they must also be clearly articulated We establish rules,
plans, programs, schedules (SOP) as integrating elements. The
management hierarchy also holds things together. So does common
training--both technical training and the passing on of common values.
An appropriate question is Who are the managers? What (and how
effective) are their skills in this transitional stage?
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
4. Mr. Marshak compared our booklet Acme of Skill with typical
stockholders' reports from private companies. Ours showed a
preoccupation with the past and a consistent theme of apology, while
the private reports stress accomplishments and visions of the future.
We need to work on image-building. We should mention, but not dwell
on legitimization.
5. He mentioned some strategies. One set of strategies decrease
integration: (1) find out what can be allowed to fall through the
cracks (slack resources); and (2) create self-contained tasks (do
things in-house). Another set increases integration: (1) improve
vertical information; and (2) improve lateral relations (networking;
colocating; liaison roles; creation of task forces, committees, teams;
project managers; matrix forms of organization).
GREAT TRUTHS: (1) Anything in a box is easier to handle than
anything across boxes. (2) Problems occur between/across boxes.
REMEDIES: (1) Put your problems in a box (reorganize; same
physical location, education, values, etc.; create common
goals/culture). (2) Regulate interactions across boxes (contracts,
plans, schedules, budgets, meetings, fighting fair). (3) Disengage
the boxes (reconceptualize the mission; divorce the units). One must
then budget for the new concepts, provide training for new
duties/responsibilities/orientation, there must be changes in the
focus of performance appraisals and changes in rewards and
recognition. Finally, one must learn to deal with the remaining
power. (Q: How can we reward cooperative, mutually supportive
behavior?)
6. We need to look for harmony and congruence in the 7 S's:
Strategy, Structure, Systems, Staff, Skills, Style, and Shared Values.
Who do we take our aggression out on? We must work for
self-reinforcement and non-distraction by negative images. In a time
of change and transition, we undergo much the same process as with
death and dying (as pointed out by Elisabeth Kubler-Ross): denial,
anger (including Kill the Messenger), bargaining, acceptance
(mourning), and problem-solving. Change requires perception of pain,
visions of the possible, and the taking of the first steps to get
there (we must get moving, even if the first movement is backward).
Though our mission may not have changed, how we operate certainly has,
as have our customers and their demands. This underscores our need to
move from a tactical to a strategic focus.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
8. The next session consisted of a round table discussion on The
STAT Agency Manager of the Future, led by of OTE. He mentioned
that surveys of training needs had been conducted for the DO, DI, and
DS&T; I'll check with him to see if anything has been done for the DA.
He remarked that (1) management training in the Agency is deplorable,
(2) the Agency does not appear to value good management, (3)
Management training should not be left to OTE but must involve the
line managers, and (4) senior management must be committed. He
suggested we seek ways to identify the comers and make some overall
plan for their development. All we presently have is the CT program,
the Mid-Career Course, and the Advanced Intelligence Seminar. He
spoke of the Executive Training Task Force and said it recommended we
look at assessment centers to both screen for management and provide
feedback to individuals about their potential for management. It also
recommended that all supervisors take two training courses within six
months of their selection as supervisors: a "how to" in the Agency
and something to measure and polish their interpersonal skills. These
will be followed by a series of spin-off seminars. Executive
development is still a fledgling operation in the Agency; we now have
something called the Executive Leadership Forum (ELF), with some core
training courses and a variety of spin-off seminars supposedly based
on executive competencies. He does not feel the Forum is very
effective. One reason is that "the wrong people" often are involved:
he said fully 70% of the SIS people enter those ranks on the basis of
long and faithful service and/or their technical skills, leaving only
30% selected for managerial potential. If we could identify some
annuitants who demonstrated superior managerial competence, we might
do well to bring them back as management consultants, since we seem
unable to provide effective formal training and no one has time to
assist new managers.
STAT
9. The evening session was another marathon, with at
the flipchart taking notes. Ed has the output from this free-for-all
discussion of what we had learned so far.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
19 May 1986
Notes from 13-15 May Human Resources Seminar
Day Three
1. Most of the morning was spent with William Jaffe, of TPF&C,
and Michael Sullivan, of Hay Associates, with as the
moderator. They discussed pay and benefits, noting that government
pay is now 19% below the private sector equivalent (though that is
often difficult to calculate). Many private corporations are getting
"back to basics", responding to the changing values of the workplace,
placing renewed emphasis on productivity. Employment opportunities
are shrinking and employers are adopting a "get tough" attitude. The
following Trends in Pay Systems were cited:
Reward and recognition systems must reinforce corporate values and
individual behavior;
Pay systems must motivate and be flexible;
Jobs are being reevaluated;
Pay for performance;
Salary adjustments modest in size, limited COLA/general increases,
less frequent, and no guarantees;
Incentive pay increasing, reaching deeper into the organization,
and including group incentives;
Special recognition pay increasing--spot awards, supervisor
controlled, modest value with high impact.
Recommendation: Agency should continue its private sector
orientation, enhance its pay program, change the present mind-set
about pay and benefits, be innovative and flexible.
2. Someone suggested it sounded like a return to piecework, as if
that necessarily were evil. As one who has done piecework (I spent 15
years as a professional translator, where you get paid so much per
1,000 words), I feel that doing piecework may have been a prime
contributer to our highly vaunted "work ethic", and a return to
piecework, perhaps on a group basis, mightn't be a bad idea for a new
generation that is moving away from old values. There was a
reiteration of the role of training in preparing an organization for
change: training of top managers and of "focus groups", to get
commitment from the top and from critical points within the system.
The importance of communication (up, down, and lateral) was also
stressed.
3. At 1100 the DDCI spoke to us of his "Seven Trends" (which have
become 7 + 1 at this point). Briefly, they are:
(1) Diversity of requirements (the USSR and, to a lesser
extent, China and other old-line communist countries used to absort
nearly all our effort; now it gets only 50%, with equal attention to
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Third World issues, economics, terrorism, chemical/biological
proliferation, etc.);
(2) Growing diversity of customers (even some state governors
receive our analyses);
(3) Increasingly driving the policy process (i.e., in
narcotics, arms control, tech transfer, terrorism);
(4) Intelligence is increasingly future-oriented--about the
only government agency that is;
(5) Move toward offensive intelligence (active vs. passive
role; publishing less on terrorism and tech transfer and using our
knowledge/resources to act against them);
(6) More covert action;
(7) Major cultural change in the Agency--closer
cooperation/integration of DD areas, especially DO and DI;
(8) Recruitment/Retention will become more difficult;
retention will require greater effort. The pool of eligibles is
diminishing due to changing lifestyles: DO/CT gets only one out of
every 100 cases put in process. We need to reexamine our standards
and determine their relevance. Civil Service has become an
unattractive career due to negative rhetoric and actions by
leadership, while the private sector economy is booming. We need to
examine how we can impart a sense of mission to our lower grade
employees. Do we remain career oriented? Movement to more of a
flow-through of employees would create security problems, structural
problems, and a loss of institutional memory. That's a bad enough
problem now, with 2/3 of all supergrades in the DO eligible to retire.
He feels that people will take all kinds of abuse if they feel their
work is important, that there is opportunity to advance, and if they
are listened to (but that is no reason to continue to abuse them). As
for executive/managerial training, he stated that you can't change
basic nature through training but only enhance basic skills.
Management selection is more important than management training.
4. Bottom line measurement is difficult when you can't quantify
results. The impact of the recent build-up of our workforce hasn't
been felt yet. Our present increases in output are ADP-related. The
new case officers and analysts are not yet fully trained, but the
impact of their production should be felt in the next few years.
However, we need to maintain a surge capacity. The DI professional
staff attrition is 4%; fewer than 50% have more than five years of
experience. He is against over-formulation of regulations and
procedures and feels that our bureaucracy has more flexibility because
it doesn't formalize procedures, codes, and other mechanisms.
5. Mr. Gates suggested the Task Force provide:
A general discussion of the trends/phenomena we have
observed;
Identify concrete, specific problems;
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Make specific suggestions about what to do;
Recommend which should be most attended to and whether the
DCI has the necessary authority to deal with the issues;
THE LESS ABSTRACT, THE BETTER.
6. The afternoon consisted of sessions by Nelson Heyer of IBM and
Roy Yamahiro of Federal Express. Mr. Heyer tries valiently to talk
about Human Resources planning, but we bombarded him with questions
about dozens of other aspects of HR, somewhat to his annoyance! He
began with the statement that IBM's HR organization tries to take a
proactive stance--to put the support structure in place before the
line manager is required to act. IBM's "motto" includes three basic
beliefs they have held since 1914: (1) Respect for the individual (by
which he meant treating people with dignity); (2) Best possible
customer service; and (3) Pursuit of excellence (he took considerable
pride that this was IBM's motto long before the current fashion).
Their goals for the 80's appear generic enough to serve for the 90's
as well:
Grow with the industry;
Exhibit product leadership;
Be the most efficient in everything we do:
* low-cost producer
* low-cost seller
Sustain our profitability which funds our growth.
7. IBM has a tradition of full employment. They believe in good
communication of company beliefs and goals. They practice Management
by Objectives--rigorously worked out and applied. Their first level
managers are selected on task performance, then sent to centralized
schooling after 30 days (for two weeks). On an annual basis, the
corporation must answer to the lowest level of employment. They have
yearly and bi-yearly opinion surveys, and the slightest dip in morale
prompts immediate action by management. HR planning requires
understanding of the business, support of the processes, anticipation
of skill/employee imbalances.
8. Something called "environmental scanning" gives a picture of
the near future of the business. Their 1985-1995 trends scane shows:
Demographics:
fewer people
more women
shortages of engineers, computer people
migration
Advances in Technology:
job, job content, skill
working conditions
education, retraining
Values and Attitudes:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
baby-boomers represent 1/3 of the US population
Special Interest Groups
Regulatory Actions
Competitive Pressures
Escalating health care costs Today's kids are eager to work, but
more committed to professionalism than to the company. They want to
do their thing--we need to build an environment in which they can do
it. IBM has a 26% overall attrition rate and find a higher turnover
to be more manageable than a low one. The IBM 2001 forecase suggests
manufacturing will be obsolete.
9. Mr. Yamahiro spoke of employee commitment and showed a video
tape of Federal Express's 10th anniversary--faces of its people and
their comments about what it is like to work there. The esprit and
sense of mission are fantastic! It may have begun with commitment to
delivering the product, but commitment to the employees quickly became
priority #1, as it must be, or people will not work for excellence for
you. FE believes in "total communication": they post a package count
every day and list service problems and errors for all to see. The
average salary of an FE courier (most of whom are college graduates)
is $32,000. They run in the performance of their jobs! Those vans
have computers in them, with which they pick up orders beamed in via
satellite, so it is not as mindless a job as one might think! They
wear "pompous, pilot-type" uniforms for status. The pilots, by the
way, average $175,000 per year, though in the first couple of years
the pilots often had to buy gasoline with their personal credit cards
because no airport would extend credit to FE. It is an article of
faith at FE that everyone will do his best, though it is hard to teach
management to trust their people to do their best. Pay for
performance is being instituted, but it will be group-based. They
also have current and deferred profit-sharing. The point is they are
totally team- and institution-oriented, with an ethic that says
everyone will work all-out to meet the institution's goals. Those
goals are very easily measured, which may make it easier to get people
revved up and pulling hard: each day is a new challenge. They like
people who are nearly pathological in their obsessive thinking (as do
we!) Management stays close to the employees--they know more about
what needs to be done and how best to do it.
10. We ended the day with a brief round-up by We are
going to have a series of what he calls "focus sessions" to discuss
specific topics, and each of us will pull together our contributions
to the overall project within the next couple of weeks.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
19 May 1986
Human Resources Task Force Seminar:
Summary of Activities
1. The HR Task Force and Advisory Committee members met 13-15 May
with a variety of invited guests from public and private organizations to
discuss HR trends and challenges for the future. The first two days (and
STAT evenings) were third day was at Tyson's Corner. Attached
are a copy of the Agenda and rather detailed notes of the three days of
meetings, of which this is a very brief summary.
STAT
2. D/Pers' introduction stressed our uniqueness and the need to so
indoctrinate our new employees that they will strive to be the best and
not betray our culture.
3.
how to ge
motivated).
provided a wide-ranging Task Force update centering on
people we want and how to keep them (and keep them
4. Alice Sargent (author of The Androgynous Manager) suggested a
competency model for managers and quoted Daniel Yankelovich's studies at
length. She triggered a discussion on the appeal of Japanese management
in the private sector and thoughts about managerial training in general.
5. James Colvard of OPM (formerly of China Lake) was relaxed and
humorous but extremely pertenent. He presented his view that management
training must include a mix of intellectual abstraction and hands-on
experience, involve top management, and provide demonstrated competence
on the part of existing managers.
6. Consultant Jac Fitz-Enz urged that HR departments strive to make
themselves seen as profit centers instead of expense centers if they are
to remain relevant. As organizational consultants, they must become
strategic thinkers instead of functioning in a tactical mode.
7. The first evening's session was a round table discussion of
Agency perceptions of system strengths and weaknesses. Our sense of
mission and "can do" spirit are great, but there are many perceptions of
lack of trust and fear of risk-taking and concern that new employees are
not fully integrated into our culture.
8. Consultant Robert Marshak devised a fictional Central News
Service that so nearly perfectly parallels our organization as to be a
bit frightening--and based his information solely on informational
handouts he had been provided through OP. His analysis of us based on
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Acme of Skill, for example, showed us to be defensive and living in the
past. Growth brings internecine conflict; well articulated goals, the
management hierarchy, rules and regulations, and common training are all
things that hold the different parts together. He provided some
strategies for dealing with growth, change, and transition, and suggested
that transition requires coping skills similar to those employed in the
handling of grief.
10. (OTE) led a round table discussion of The Agency
Manager of the Future. Training needs surveys have been done for DO, DI,
and DS&T and for some DA offices; the full DA survey is scheduled for
this Fall. His basic thesis was that the Agency does not appear to value
management and has little commitment to proper selection and/or
appropriate training; he stated that top level management commitment is
vital to achieving an effective managerial training program.
11. Another evening marathon session attempting to integrate our
learnings ended Day Two.
12. Thursday began with William Jaffe of TPF&C and Michael Sullivan
of Hay Associates on pay and benefits. Their bottom line recommendation
was that we enhance our pay programs, change the way we think about
compensation, and be innovative and flexible.
13. They were followed by the DDCI, who talked on his "Seven Trends"
plus the issue of recruitment and retention. He raised a number of the
issues that pose tomorrow's challenges and offered some specific advice
to the Task Force about our product at the end of this process of
information gathering and synthesis.
14. Nelson Heyer of IBM demonstrated the rigidity of that culture
and likened as how most folks at IBM get along ok by going along with the
rules, though there are occasional "wild ducks". After fielding our
questions for nearly an hour he must have known he had a whole roomful of
wild ducks to contend with!
15. Roy Yamahiro of Federal Express provided the contrast of a new
company with high morale and can-do spirit. They trust their people,
treat them well, pay them well, and let them do their thing--and they do!
They seem to be closest to the Agency's culture; one wonders how they'll
manage when they, too, experience growth and complexity.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
16. In his wrap-up, called for suggestions for a series of
"focus sessions" and submissions of drafts of what we have prepared so
far. I intend to have a draft on my portion (focusing on demographics)
within the next two weeks.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1
R
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Denied
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/06/09: CIA-RDP88G01332R000100010018-1