DRAFT -- June 23, 2000

Ben Lesser, USEPA

202-260-5692

"Consulting Futurist" David Pearce Snyder warned a June gathering of public administrators that the near future will bring massive change. "In the next 10 -15 years we will have reinvented America, " Snyder predicted. In essence, his message was: "Hang onto your hat!"

Snyder was the dinner speaker at the third annual Performance Conference of the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA), held June 13 - 15, 2000 on the campus of Gallaudet University in the District of Columbia. Snyder makes a living analyzing historic trends, seeking out cutting-edge developments, and prognosticating future scenarios in the context of strategic planning. He told the federal, state and local government program managers in attendance that the United States had at last embarked upon the third and final phase of the Information Revolution, and would soon reap benefits promised for decades, including the vaunted "paperless office" and personal digital assistants (PDAs) even more ubiquitous, and capable, than they are today. Snyder, who spent 11 years in the Internal Revenue Service and was its first Chief of Information Systems, said the rise of computers has followed a cyclic pattern typical of historical technological development: beginning with 25 years of evolution from the original house-sized "ENIAC" to the desk-friendly personal computer, moving into a second, 25-year phase of counterproductive misunderstanding and misuse of the new technology, and finally, in the mid-1990s, beginning the current and final 25-year period, or "Digital Age," driven by information technology and marked by "hyper-productivity."

Snyder was one of 78 presenters and panelists at the 2-1/2 day conference, staged by NAPA’s Center for Improving Government Performance. The conference theme, Leading Performance in the Year 2000, focused on implementation of the seven-year-old Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), which directs federal departments and agencies to set strategic and tactical goals and to report on progress.

Federal leaders attending quickly learned they would need to hang on to more than their hats and trusty PCs to face a performance-oriented future, as luncheon keynote speaker Senator Fred Thompson soberly proclaimed, "We need to get the federal government into the 21^st Century even if we have to drag it there kicking and screaming." Thompson, who chairs the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, told conferees whose jobs include implementing government performance measures, "What you are doing is making a difference. Keep it up!" But the Chairman also cited a list of federal problems reported by the General Accounting Office and various Inspectors General during the past 10 years, which he said has been little diminished. His prescription to avoid government waste, fraud and abuse included improved use of information technology, hiring people with the right skills, and avoiding bad or evasive business practices. Thompson predicts a string of Congressional oversight hearings during Summer, 2000, fueled by performance summaries his committee has provided to committee chairmen.

NAPA president Robert O’Neill, Jr. raised some practical questions about the future, including whether the current structure of government can withstand the predicted sustained, rapid change. O’Neill, who has a distinguished 16-year record as a municipal innovator, is County Executive of Fairfax County, Virginia, one of the wealthiest and most populous in the United States. He noted the accelerating effect of information technology on customer expectations, and he questioned how, in an age of 18-month product life-cycles, government can sustain public support for "products" such as programs and regulations whose development and life cycles are measured in decades. Nonetheless, O’Neill saw a continuing need for government services where no other institutions will step in. He exhorted the group to acknowledge the fact that some government goals will always be influenced by factors beyond government control, and to "get over" their discomfort in dealing with external forces that affect their performance measurements. O’Neill called on government leaders to help restore public trust in government by linking programs to strategic objectives and avoiding short term policies that merely pander to popular fears.

O’Neill had his own predictions relating to government accountability, saying "report cards," such as the recent comparison by the George Mason University’s Mercatus Center of 1999 federal Performance Reports may not always be ideal, or even valid, but they will continue. He said U.S. government leaders must prepare to see their performance compared to those of other governments around the world!

One chief executive who has gotten used to comparisons sounded a similar note. District of Columbia Mayor Anthony A. Williams entertained a luncheon audience with tales of pothole repair dramas and surprise "reinvention" setbacks during his bumpy, 17-month tenure. Williams, himself a former federal Chief Financial Officer, said his work is "about restoring faith in government" through setting ambitious goals and tracking progress. "If we can track sports scores, we can track government data," Wilson asserted, going on to embrace independent verification of government performance data to support credibility. Wilson said he looks to city stakeholders to help set and achieve goals. Businesses, non-governmental organizations, and the District’s strong religious community all commit to specific actions and performance.

Clinton Administration executives Janice R. LaChance, head of the Office of Personnel Management and Sally Katzen, of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), congratulated federal colleagues on their performance focus. LaChance announced a new presidential memorandum which, she said, would spur agencies engaged with the private sector in a "war for talent" to assess their workforces, and plan to retain top performers and improve customer service, with help from her agency.

Katzen observed that, from her work in six President’s Budget reviews during two Democratic Administrations, she sees high-level decisions being increasingly influenced by performance management considerations. She noted that both Vice President Gore and his presumed opponent, Governor George W. Bush, have offered public support for GPRA so, she said, "you should expect at least another four years" of attention to performance management.

In addition to 11 plenary sessions, conferees chose from among 25 separate breakout sessions with topics ranging from "GPRA Basics Tutorials" to the more esoteric "Data Verification and Validation" and "Using IT to Streamline GPRA."

A wrap-up round table discussion on the final conference day engaged senior leaders from more than 20 departments, agencies and Congressional offices. Among issues discussed was the political reality that appointees are seldom recognized for performance management, but rather for their policy achievements. One panelist noted that political appointees with private sector experience seem to have embraced GPRA more readily, integrating into their agencies both organizational performance principles and policy advancements. One panelist said GPRA’s power as a communication and policy making tool has already helped reorient some federal departments, and he called GPRA-linked federal progress a "wonderful baton for one Administration to pass to another."

Chris Wye, Director of NAPA’s Center for Improving Government Performance, summed up the 2-1/2 days of discussions by reminding conferees of the high calling and public trust responsibilities of civil service. He urged them to keep that trust always in mind, together with its implicit responsibility to extract the full measure of performance from the government organizations charged with carrying out the public’s business.