SCANS GOVERNMENT AS A HIGH PERFORMANCE EMPLOYER * * * * * A SCANS REPORT FOR AMERICA 2000 THE SECRETARY'S COMMISSION ON ACHIEVING NECESSARY SKILLS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR [1992] GOVERNMENT AS A HIGH PERFORMANCE EMPLOYER INTRODUCTION In recent years, much attention has been given to efforts in the private sector to create high performance work organizations through the implementation of Total Quality Management (TQM), Total Quality Control, Continuous Improvement, and other manage- ment and work process techniques. Books and articles about high performance success stories at companies such as Xerox, Motorola, IBM, and Federal Express are commonplace. Unfortunately, similar attention has not been paid to high performance efforts in the public sector. When it comes to discussions about high perfor- mance organizations, the public sector is often ignored for several reasons: * Conceptually, high performance is easier to understand in a manufacturing context than in the service sector: * Competitiveness, often the motivating factor for imple- menting high performance reforms in the private sector, is not a great consideration in government -government is mission-driven rather than profit-driven; * Government is viewed by many as the archetypical inflexi- ble, hierarchical structure, and, therefore, incapable of change; * Traditional high performance outcomes (i.e. decreased production costs, increased market share, increased profit- ability) are difficult to measure in the service sector as a whole. Yet, as the single largest employer in the nation with 18.3 million employees in 1991, it is vital that more attention be paid to the efforts of Federal, state, local government organiza- tions to develop and implement models of high performance. The Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS) represents an important step in the movement towards high performance. In its first report, What Work Requires of Schools, the Commission identified a generic set of skills that workers need to succeed in a high performance workplace (listed in Appendix A). These skills, defined as workplace know-how, lie at the heart of effective job performance in both the public and the private sectors. However, in order for these skills to be mean- ingful, employers must create high performance workplaces in which the SCANS skills are valued and encouraged, and workers are empowered to use them. If high performance does not take hold in the workplace, barriers to the success of the SCANS effort will be nearly insurmountable. As members of the SCANS Government-As- Employer Task Force, we believe it is imperative that the public sector embrace the SCANS message and encourage the development of high performance organizations. As a step in this direction, this report will examine the concept of high performance as it applies to government at all levels -- local, state, and Federal. [l] Gains in quality have been and continue to be realized by application of high perfor- mance principles at all levels of government. Many segments of government have made a long-term commitment to high performance, in fields such as health care, administrative management, mainte- nance, training, investigations, scientific research, and logis- tics. While these efforts are encouraging, there is still much to be done. Rather than simply looking at where government is today, this report will sketch out a vision of where government needs to be in the future, and what steps need to be taken to get there. In doing so, several important questions will be addressed, including: What does the term "high performance" mean? Why should government embark on a quest for high performance? What barriers exist to the implementation of high performance in the public sector? What kinds of high performance activities are currently going on in government? Finally, the paper will conclude by discussing how SCANS fits into the process of creating high performance government organizations. WHAT IS HIGH PERFORMANCE? The concept of high performance is not easy to define. A number of people -- most notably W. Edwards Deming, J.M. Juran, and Philip Crosby -- have spent most of their lives exploring this intricate concept. Some say that it is a constant focus on the needs of the customer. Others insist that it has to do with increasing productivity through the use of sophisticated statis- tical methods and advanced technology. In a sense, both defini- tions are correct. For the purposes of this report, high perfor- mance as it pertains to government is defined as a comprehensive. customer-driven system that aligns all of the activities in an organization with the common focus of customer satisfaction through continuous improvement in the quality of goods and services. High Performance in the Private Sector In the private sector, high performance is regarded as the route to increased international competitiveness. Compelled by the realities of the global marketplace, competitive businesses are abandoning the principles of "Scientific Management" advanced by Frederick Taylor over 80 years ago which called for a hierar- chical style of management, standardization, a rigid sense of time management, and narrowly defined and simplified job descrip- tions. High performance firms are replacing Taylor's approach with one that utilizes decentralized and trimmed management structures, relying on workers who can analyze and act on new situations quickly and effectively. They place a premium on moving decisions closer to the front lines, treating their workforce as an investment to be developed, not a cost to be controlled. Japanese firms adapted the principles of high perfor- mance to their own business culture in the early 1950s, and are now widely recognized for producing quality products in a number of areas, including automobiles, televisions, VCRs, and advanced electronics. High Performance in Government A system of high performance in government works in many of the same ways as in the private sector. After all, government provides many products and services for the American people. Like the private sector model, high performance in the public sector revolves around three basic principles. An organization must (1) focus on achieving customer satisfaction, (2) seek continuous and long term improvement in all of the organization's processes and outputs, and (3) take steps to ensure the full involvement of the entire workforce in improving quality. Taken together, these three operating principles form the core of any high performance operation. In practice, the notion of high performance in government translates into a system that consists of a number of key operat- ing practices [2]: Leadership and support from top levels of management. This is the most critical element in the high performance pro- cess. It is imperative that top managers are actively com- mitted to implementing a system of high performance and are involved in creating a work climate where risk-taking and innovation are encouraged and rewarded. Management and workers jointly develop a shared vision of what the organi- zation can become. Management must then demonstrate the fortitude to withstand the numerous mistakes and setbacks that will undoubtedly occur along the way. Top managers assure that channels of communication are open and effective throughout the entire organization, among all levels of employees. They ensure that practical suggestions for remov- ing procedural barriers that prevent workers from meeting customer (however this is defined) and quality expectations in a timely manner will be accepted at any time from all employees. Union leadership is also important in any high performance effort. More than one-third (36 percent) of all state and local government employees are union members in collective bargaining units. The process of implementing a high performance system is a long and complicated one that will, in many cases, be met with resistance by some managers and workers at every level. Without the continuing support of top level management and union leaders, this resistance will likely succeed in halting even the best high perfor- mance efforts. Strategic planning. Strategic planning drives an organization' s high performance efforts. Through the stra- tegic planning process, achieving quality improvement be- comes a part of the day-to-day management of an organiza- tion. One of the most important objectives is to create an organizational culture that encourages the pursuit of excel- lence on behalf of customers, promotes innovation and risk-taking, and empowers employees to participate actively in an ongoing effort to improve continually the organization's work processes. The goal of the strategic plan is to map out a long-term strategy to bring about this cultural change. The plan is updated on a regular basis, and every member of the organization participates in and con- tributes ideas to its design and re-design. An ongoing commitment to training and development for all employees. No effort to improve organizational processes can succeed without a sustained and ongoing commitment to the training and development of all employees -- frontline, supervisory, and management. Too often organizations concen- trate the bulk of their training resources on mid-to-upper level managers, virtually ignoring frontline employees. Worse yet, funding levels for training activities are often slashed when an organization faces tight budgetary times. High performance organizations view training as vital to the continued success of the organization and exempt from all but the most severe budget-cutting exercises. Every employ- ee, from the agency head to the entry-level clerk, is en- couraged and assisted to participate in adequate training (both classroom and on-the-job) that imparts the kinds of skills that SCANS has identified. Specific training subjects include interpersonal communication, teamwork, problem-solving skills, and methods for collecting and analyzing data using basic statistical tools. A focus on the customer. High performance organizations are not satisfied by simply meeting customer expectations. Instead, they make a continuous effort to exceed those expectations. However, a strategy based solely on an organization's perception of its customers' needs is not likely to measure accurately what customers really want and what they think of current services. Therefore, a high performance organization is constantly obtaining and analyz- ing customer feedback through the use of surveys, inter- views, focus groups, and follow up on customer complaints. In fact, a true customer focus can best be achieved by involving the customer in the actual design of a program or initiative. Additionally, customers should be able to expect quick and effective resolution of the majority of their concerns and complaints at the frontline level. When, for example, a high performance government organization is prohibited by law or regulation from responding to a custom- er request, it goes to great lengths to work with that customer to explain those restraints and find an acceptable alternative. One often overlooked aspect of this customer service focus is the fact that, in a high performance orga- nization, it applies to both external and internal customers. Work is usually organized so that the product of one worker is passed on (or up) to another before a final product or service is produced. Under a high performance system, any worker who delivers a product or service to a co-worker sees that person as a customer and makes every effort to meet his or her needs and requirements in order to improve the quali- ty of the final product or service. A focus on quality. Like the focus on customer service, a high performance organization has a continuous focus on assuring quality in all aspects of the organization. Work processes that produce products and services are designed to prevent problems and errors from occurring in the first place. In order to accomplish an acceptable level of quality assurance, a high performance system focuses on the product or service at the front end of the process, rather than the traditional method of controlling and inspecting products at the end of operations after errors have already been made. Work processes are designed to detect and correct errors as they occur. Employees are trained to analyze supplies as they come in. Suppliers are asked to ensure and improve their products and services. In the end, the organization's goal is to ensure continuous improvement in the quality of all products and services. Empowering frontline employees and an emphasis on teamwork. Employee involvement, empowerment, teamwork, and labor-management cooperation are the engines that drive the entire system of high performance. Without them, the princi- ples and practices outlined in this paper are worthless. Improving work processes and procedures will not be fully successful unless all employees are involved in making it happen. When the intelligence and energies of the entire workforce are engaged in the pursuit of high performance goals, the potential for successful and quality results is virtually limitless. It makes sense -- the workers that have to deal with the problems every day usually have the best solutions, and they have a vested interest in solving those problems to make their work easier. The first step in achieving meaningful employee empowerment is to involve workers systematically in identifying and solving problems. Employee problem-solving teams are assembled and given the opportunity and the authority to identify and correct pro- cess problems on the spot. When frontline workers are trust- ed to take such action, and when their decisions are sup- ported by top management, they will be motivated to make continuing and lasting improvements to the work they do. Teams of employees should be recognized and rewarded for outstanding efforts -- the focus is not on individual glory, but instead on group success. The key is empowering employ- ees to make real and lasting changes in their work environ- ment. Finally, knowledge and information must be freely-shared among all employees. In a high performance organization, every worker has "a need to know". Developing measures of progress. High performance organiza- tions put systems in place that allow the organization to determine the degree to which services and products please customers. Data are collected on such features of customer satisfaction as ease of access, reliability, and responsive- ness. When these data indicate a problem with customer satisfaction, the organization is better able to isolate the problem and quickly improve the processes in question. Measurement systems are also in place that measure internal process improvement. Data are collected on a continuing basis in order to make sure that processes are continuously being improved. Particular attention is focused on variation in processes. Variations are examined to determine whether they result from special circumstances or from variation inherent in the system. The objectives of this measurement and analysis are to cut down on waste and cycle-time of work and to gain a better understanding of how well customer satisfaction is being realized. The practices outlined above are based on the criteria for the President's Award for Quality (discussed in Appendix B) which is given to government agencies displaying excellence in high performance. They are similar to those for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award in the private sector. Taken together, these practices represent more than simply a set of management techniques and tools. They represent a strategic and holistic management philosophy that seeks to involve all employees in improving organizational performance. A VISION OF THE HIGH PERFORMANCE ORGANIZATION The model high performance government organization would have successfully adopted all of the practices summarized above. But what would it look like? On the following page, Table 1 illustrates some of the characteristics of the model high perfor- mance government organization. For purposes of comparison, this model is contrasted with a model of the traditional government organization.[3] Table 1 should be viewed as a continuum rather than a static picture of organizational behavior. Organizations wishing to adopt high performance work systems should move toward the behaviors and characteristics described in the right-hand column of Table 1, labeled "High Performance Government Organiza- tion". The characteristics in the left hand column of Table 1, labeled "Traditional Government Organization", should be avoided or at least minimized. In reality, most government organizations operate at points somewhere between these two columns. [Editor's note: columns shown sequentially rather than side by side as in the original.] TRADITIONAL GOVERNMENT ORGANI- ZATION The organization is hierarchi- cal and has rigid lines of authority and responsibility Focus is on maintaining the status quo Workers see supervisors as bosses or cops The focus of employee efforts is on individual effort; work- ers view themselves as competi- tors Management sees training and development activities as costs to be controlled and minimized The vast majority of scarce training funds go toward train- ing activities for managers and executives Management determines what quality is and whether it is being provided Short term planning is the norm _____________________________ HIGH PERFORMANCE GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION The organization's structure is flatter, more flexible, and less hierarchical Focus shifts to continuous im- provement in all systems and processes, even when they are working well Workers see supervisors as coaches and facilitators. The focus of employee efforts shifts to team effort; workers see themselves as teammates Management perceives develop- ment activities as the future training and an investment in the future Adequate funds are made avail- able for all employees to re- ceive training and development on an ongoing basis The organization asks custom- ers, both internal and exter- nal, to define quality, and develops measures to determine if customers' requirements are being met Strategic, long term planning drives the organization's ef- forts BARRIERS TO HIGH PERFORMANCE IN GOVERNMENT Despite the tremendous potential that the concept of high performance presents, there are many barriers to setting up high performance government organizations on a large scale: (1) In government, it is often difficult to define the cus- tomer accurately. Government organizations provide a complex set of services and products to a large number of people. Identifying specific customers is a much more difficult task in government than it is in the business world, and it requires government organizations to think about the people whom they serve in a different way than they normally do. (2) Quality customer service can mean vastly different things to different government constituents. For example, to an industry group, quality service may mean the speedy reduction of government emission regulations that are cost- ing them money. On the other hand, to environmentalists, quality might mean quickly passing more stringent emission regulations. Government organizations must deal with divi- sive and often volatile policy questions that are not easily answered by simply polling customer opinions. If high per- formance is going to have any long-term success in the public sector, it will have to adapt the traditional notions of customer service that exist in the private sector. (3) The Congressional appropriations process frequently results in short time horizons for management decisions. The very nature of the budgetary process forces most spending priorities to focus on short-term projects and goals. Pro- grams that are not successful in the short-term are prime targets for the budget-cutting knife. Additionally, this process builds in rigidity -- once budget numbers are locked in, offices and agencies have little room for adjustments. As a result, introducing a high performance initiative which may take time to show results is made exceptionally diffi- cult, if not impossible in many cases. (4) The short tenure of political appointees makes insti- tuting a long-term commitment to high performance difficult. Because of the limited nature of political appointments, incoming political appointees are naturally eager to make their mark on the agency or organization. There is little incentive to institute changes that will cost money, slow things down and result in some missteps in the short run, and which may not bear fruit until their successor's term of office. It is not uncommon to see new agency-wide initia- tives every three or four years. This process of constant turnover at the top levels of management makes serious, long-term commitments to high performance difficult, despite the best efforts of the career government workers. (5) The public sector devotes inadequate funds to training and development activities. Government spends, on average, less than 1 percent of its payroll on employee training and development, compared to 1.5 percent in the private sector as a whole and 3 percent in the better managed firms.[4] This trend will have to be reversed before high performance can become a reality in the public sector. (6) Numerous layers of management exist in many government organizations. Work products frequently must be cleared at multiple levels of authority. In many cases, field offices are separated from headquarters by five or more organiza- tional layers.[5] (7) Government operates under a complex job classification system that divides civilian employees into hundreds of distinct and intricately defined occupations. Detailed position descriptions are used to classify positions to determine the grade level at which employees will be paid. This focus on narrow job classifications leads to rigidity and cumbersome procedures which make the system slow to respond to changing needs. A recent National Academy of Public Administration study of the Federal Classification System found that, as a result of these problems, overgrading is frequently used to work around the system and increase pay for employees, managers do not have the flexi- bility to focus on the current needs of the agency, and internal pay inequities result from the inability to recog- nize differences in jobs and qualifications.[6] At the Federal level, the Office of Personnel Management is cur- rently looking at reforming the Federal classification system, but significant reform will be difficult. The system is complex, and has functioned for more than 40 years with- out a major overhaul. WHY HIGH PERFORMANCE? These barriers represent a significant challenge to high performance in the public sector. Given this, what incentives do government organizations have to continue to adopt high perfor- mance models of organization? Government has several important incentives. First, the Federal Government is laboring under a $300 billion dollar deficit, and state and local governments are facing budget gaps totaling $40 billion dollars more [7] (in spite of the fact that most states are required by state law to have balanced budgets!). Budget deficits at all levels of govern- ment are causing vital social programs to be slashed, and govern- ment jobs to be cut. High performance government organizations, with their focus on efficiency and quality, may be one of the best ways to compensate for budgetary shortfalls -- by delivering better services more cost-effectively. But far more than money is at stake. An equally pressing reason for embracing high performance is that government has alienated its customers -- the general public. Public confidence in government is low. The goal of high performance is to increase customer confidence and satisfaction, and in government that means increasing public confidence in government. The alternative -- continuing taxpayer dissatisfac- tion leading to further cuts in government jobs and funding levels -- is hardly worth considering. Finally, by moving to a high performance model of organiza- tion, government will be better able to attract and keep quality workers. Currently, it is estimated that one in three Federal workers is likely to leave the government within five years.[8] High performance workplaces offer employees a number of benefits that the traditional government workplace does not. These bene- fits, combined with existing advantages such as job security and a sense of purpose and mission, provide an effective incentive for quality workers to stay in government. Government is an enormous undertaking, operating under rules, regulations, and management practices that are often inflexible and outdated. Attempts to institute high performance in this environment must continue to break down these barriers and devise ways to utilize the energies and creativity of the government workforce in order to meet the tremendous challenges that face our Nation. HOW TO GET THERE FROM HERE Government organizations have already taken a number of steps to break down barriers to high performance in the public sector. Appendix B lists a number of innovative state, local, and Federal government operations that have begun to implement high performance changes. However, while it is true that many govern- ment organizations have begun to think about and act on high performance goals and principles, the fact remains that the vast majority of government agencies and offices have not. Many have dismissed notions of high performance as fads that will wither away -- if they have thought about high performance at all. Adopting this attitude is a mistake, and a costly one. While the buzzwords and phrases may someday disappear ("Total Quality Management", "Statistical Process Control", etc.), the concept of high performance is a notion that is here to stay. High perfor- mance principles and practices are revolutionizing the way in which American companies do business, with such industry giants as XEROX, Motorola, Federal Express, and Wal-Mart leading the charge. As the examples listed in Appendix B make clear, high performance is also revolutionizing the way a number of govern- ment organizations do business. However, in both the public and the private sector, these efforts are few and far between. It is estimated that only 5% of private sector organizations have moved toward high performance, and the percentage of government organi- zations is likely to be equally as low. In an effort to encourage the movement toward high perfor- mance in government, the members of the Government as Employer Task Force offer two sets of recommendations. The first set is general in nature, and deals with broad reforms that must take place in the public sector if high performance government organi- zations are to become the norm rather than the exception. The second set of recommendations is more specific. It looks at how SCANS relates to high performance initiatives in government. Hopefully, government workers, managers, and unions will work as partners in the design and implementation of all of the Task Force recommendations. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS In the public sector, a number of steps should be taken that would pave the way for high performance reforms on a Governmentwide basis: RECOMMENDATION I: Employee unions should be approached to join in a cooperative effort to implement high performance reforms. As of 1990, 60% of non-postal Federal civilian employees were represented by a union. This figure rises to 89% if supervi- sors and managers are excluded. Numbers for unionized state and local employees vary from state to state, but the figures are still significant. By involving unions from the beginning, agencies can begin to foster cooperative attitudes that are highly beneficial in any high performance effort. Joint management-union efforts are already underway in the public sector (see Appendix B), but much more needs to be done. High performance initiatives involve employees in new situations and give them greater responsibilities. The initial resistance of some workers is a natural part of the high performance process, risking an increase in employee grievances brought to the union. With the support, cooperation, and participation of employee unions from the start, an organization greatly increases the likelihood of success in its quality efforts. RECOMMENDATION II: Pay reform should be enacted at all levels of government. Pay reform efforts are already underway at the Federal level, but state and local governments must also get into the act. High performance organizations use innovative techniques to recognize and reward exceptional teams of workers (i.e. bonuses as a reward for productivity gains, rewards for teams of workers that offer innovative solutions to process problems). The flexi- bility to use pay incentives to motivate teams of workers, which is an important part of high performance efforts in the private sector, is difficult to come by in the public sector. Laws and regulations are needed that would give government organizations more autonomy and more resources in matters relating to pay. RECOMMENDATION III: Organizational structures should be flat- tened. High performance organizations utilize a flattened hierarchy of jobs, with a thin layer of upper management and a larger, more generalized layer of jobs below. Workers are able to perform a wide variety of tasks, and mobility between jobs is high. As this paper points out, the Federal government has already begun to look at possible reforms. This effort should be supported and replicated at the state and local levels. As an important step in this direction, governments needs to redefine and overhaul largely outdated systems of job classification, replacing them with a model that defines occupations in a more generalized manner and focus on the work of the organization rather than on the work of individuals (pay banding is one possible approach). Similarly, systems such as procurement and personnel must also be revamped according to high performance principles if the organi- zation is going to see significant change. RECOMMENDATION IV: Investment in training and development should be made a top priority, largely immune to budgetary cutbacks. An ongoing commitment must be made to training the govern- ment workforce, especially the frontlines. Training and develop- ment must be viewed as an investment in higher productivity and quality, not as a cost to be controlled. Accurate return on investment models that identify the value that training and development add in monetary terms are desperately needed in the public sector if human resource development is going to be given the priority that it deserves. As one possible option, govern- ments at all levels should explore the formation of education and training partnerships with universities and community colleges for the training and retraining of personnel. RECOMMENDATION V: Performance assessments should be reconsidered to ensure that individual achievement is not emphasized to the exclusion of team performance and success. The idea of merit-rating systems is alluring -- conjuring up images of fairness and motivation. Unfortunately, these systems often have the opposite effect of what the words promise. Workers must depend on others to get their work done. Individual merit-ratings often neglect this fact. By their very nature, they may encourage people to pursue their own best interests at the expense of the organization. High performance systems rely on teamwork and group effort to get the job done. Individual perfor- mance assessments that rely exclusively on individual achievement can be counterproductive in this environment. However, it is also clear that something in American values and culture prizes individualism and individual achievement. This may help to explain why most employees in the public and private sector have real problems with the idea of getting rid of merit-rating systems. Perhaps the best solution might be for organizations to use multiple forms of assessment -- both team-based and individu- alized -- to rate and reward their workers. RECOMMENDATION VI: State and local governments should take steps to create "Quality Institutes" that promote the concepts of high performance. State and local government Quality Institutes could be modelled after the Federal Quality Institute (FQI) in both their function and their mission: To promote and facilitate the imple- mentation of high performance management throughout government in order to improve the quality, timeliness, and efficiency of government services (see Appendix B for more on FQI). Like FQI, these organizations could act as statewide, citywide, or countywide clearinghouses of information on high performance, providing training coordination and technical assistance to all interested government organizations. These organizations could link their computer databases with FQI's, thus providing a truly nationwide clearinghouse on high performance in government. SCANS Recommendations The drive for high performance and the SCANS effort are both part of a larger national movement toward regaining America's lost prosperity. The skills that SCANS identified in its June 1991 report represent a vital step in this movement -- they are the skills that are needed in the high performance workplace. Government bodies need to look closely at the SCANS effort and begin to assess where the skills that it identified relate to government high performance initiatives. In particular, there are several actions that government should take: RECOMMENDATION VII: At the Federal level, the Department of Labor should work with the Office of Personnel Management to ensure that SCANS skills are included in future OPM selection, classifi- cation, training and development, and performance management policies. OPM is the central Federal Government agency responsible for training policy and oversight. OPM has both the legal responsi- bility and the authority to act on a wide range of matters regarding the management of the Federal government's human resources. It is the logical place for the process of high performance development to begin to be implemented on a governmentwide basis, and the SCANS skills provide a starting place for such an effort. Currently, there is a joint effort by the Department of Labor, OPM, and the Department of Education to investigate the predictive validity of the SCANS skills and to develop assessment instruments that incorporate the SCANS skills. This effort, as well as similar efforts in the areas of training and development, program management, and classification reform should be encouraged. RECOMMENDATION VIII: Government at all levels should check the skills identified by SCANS against the needs of their own workforce. SCANS has developed a survey/interview instrument that enables organizations to check the SCANS skills against the needs of their workers. Government organizations at all levels should follow the lead of the MOSAIC effort outlined in Appendix B of this report and begin to identify the high performance skills that are vital to their efforts in all major job categories. It is likely that most, if not all, of the skills that are identi- fied will be similar to the SCANS skills. Once these vital skills have been identified, efforts to develop the skills among all government workers can begin in earnest. RECOMMENDATION IX: Government at all levels should communicate their skill needs to our nation's schools and work with schools to ensure that the future workforce is prepared to work in a high performance environment. As the nation's largest employer, government can have a tremendous impact on the skills that are being taught in our nation's schools. Government should communicate to educators the kinds of high performance skills that are vital to their efforts in all major occupations and work with school systems to develop those skills. Already, many government organizations are working with local high schools through stay-in-school, mentoring, internship, and other programs. These efforts are admirable and should be encouraged, but they need to be expanded by opening up a dialogue on the types of high performance skills discussed in this report. RECOMMENDATION X: The skills that SCANS has identified should be fully integrated in the Federal Government's Skill Clinic initia- tive. The Federal Government's Skill Clinic Initiative (outlined in Appendix B of this report) should make an effort to integrate SCANS skills in its assessment, counseling, and training efforts. Additionally, state and local governments should make an effort to replicate this process in their own high performance efforts. RECOMMENDATION XI: OPM should link its Career Path training requirements and suggestions for all Federal employees to the specific high performance skills that SCANS has identified. OPM's Career Path Initiative (described in Appendix B) is an important step in promoting a high performance Federal workforce -- it is the first time that specific levels of training and development have been identified and encouraged at points throughout an employee's career. The SCANS competencies and foundations, which identify the skills that all employees need to succeed in a high performance environment, are a natural next step in the Career Path effort. The specific types of training that the Career Path calls for at various stages in an employees' career should be organized around relevant SCANS skill areas. By incorporating the SCANS skills, this document could go a long way in assuring that all Federal workers will have the skills that they need to succeed in high performance organizations. RECOMMENDATION XII: Government at all levels should use its recruitment and hiring systems to promote the SCANS skills -- to the extent that is legally allowable under current Civil Rights Laws. As the nation's largest employer, Federal, state and local governments could play an important role in promoting the SCANS skills. Once the SCANS skills have been identified as essential to government work, they should become part of the recruitment process and used: (1) in all advertising campaigns where skills are stressed; (2) in recruiter interviews, where skills are looked for; (3) in the ranking process, where skills are consid- ered in ranking candidates; and (4) in the interview process, where skills are identified. CONCLUSION The challenge that the public sector faces in the 1990s is to continue to create high performance organizations at all levels of government. Current efforts in this direction are encouraging, but much more is needed if government is to experi- ence truly systemic reform. High performance reform is not a one-time effort. It will require consistent, ongoing commitment from public managers, elected leaders, unions, and frontline workers if it is to succeed. While the task is daunting, the examples of high performance in government outlined in this report suggest that the public sector is up to the challenge. APPENDIX: A: THE SCANS COMPETENCIES AND FOUNDATIONS THE COMPETENCIES: RESOURCES Allocates Time Allocates Money Allocates Material and Facility Resources Allocates Human Resources INTERPERSONAL Participates as a Member of a Team Teaches Others Serves Clients/Customers Exercises Leadership Negotiates Works with Cultural Diversity INFORMATION Acquires and Evaluates Information Organizes and Maintains Information Interprets and Communicates Information Uses Computers to Process Information SYSTEMS Understands Systems Monitors and Corrects Performance Improves and Designs Systems TECHNOLOGY Selects Technology Applies Technology to Task Maintains and Troubleshoots Technology BASIC SKILLS Reading Writing Arithmetic Mathematics Listening Speaking THINKING SKILLS Creative Thinking Decision Making Problem Solving Seeing Things in the Mind's Eye Knowing How to Learn Reasoning PERSONAL SKILLS Responsibility Self-Esteem Sociability Self-Management Integri- ty/Honesty APPENDIX B: EXAMPLES OF HIGH PERFORMANCE EFFORTS IN GOVERNMENT A number of government organizations have taken steps to embrace and implement models of high performance despite the barriers outlined in the report. Although the "ideal" high performance government organization does not yet exist (it probably does not exist in the private sector either), a number of essential pieces are being put into place. This appendix outlines a few of these pieces. I. GOVERNMENT HIGH PERFORMANCE LEADERSHIP Over the past five years, government has taken a number of positive steps to provide leadership in the area of high perfor- mance. The SCANS effort is one of these steps, but seven addi- tional examples stand out: The creation of the Federal Quality Institute in 1988; The International City Management Association; OPM's Human Resource Development Group, established in 1990; Colorado's NEW DIRECTIONS emphasis organized by the state's Department of Personnel; Delaware's MAX program; the Governor's Excelsior Award in New York; and OPM's Workforce Quality Assess- ment Program. The Federal Quality Institute. The Federal Government formalized its commitment to high performance by establishing the Federal Quality Institute in 1988. The institute's mission is to promote and facilitate the implementation of high performance management throughout the Federal Government in order to "improve the quality, timeliness, and efficiency of Federal services to the American people." [9] To accomplish this mission, FQI serves as a catalyst for high performance in government, providing services in five major areas: coordination; training; technical assistance; information, resources, and referrals; and model projects. FQI works closely with the Office of Personnel Manage- ment (OPM), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the President's Council on Management Improvement towards the common goal of establishing high performance on a governmentwide basis. In an effort to reward agencies that are moving toward high performance, FQI helps identify agencies that can serve as models of high performance in the Federal Government. Each year, the Quality Improvement Prototype Award is given in recognition of excellence in implementing high performance and achieving quality improvement results. Winners are chosen by panels of public and private sector examiners and are based on results in eight critical categories: Top Management Leadership and Support; Strategic Planning; Focus on the Customer; Employee Training and Recognition; Employee Empowerment and Teamwork; Measurement and Analysis; Quality Assurance; and Quality and Productivity Im- provement.[10] Winning agencies serve as models for the rest of government and are asked to prepare case studies and videos that FQI disseminates throughout the government, and present workshops about their organizations to interested agencies. A similar award, the President's Award for Quality, is also made to recog- nize a Federal agency that has demonstrated exemplary quality improvements. For more information on the Federal Quality Institute, call (202) 376-3747 The International City Management Association. Founded in 1914, the International City Management Association (ICMA) is the professional and educational organization for more than 7,500 appointed administrators and assistant administrators serving cities, counties, regions, and other local governments. ICMA members serve local governments in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and other countries. For the past 78 years, ICMA's mission has been to enhance the quality of local government through professional management and to support and assist local government administrators as they strive for high performance in government. Since 1934, ICMA has provided local government managers and their staffs with continuing education and professional develop- ment programs and publications to improve critical skills, increase knowledge of local government management solutions, and strengthen employee commitment to the ethics, values, and ideals of public service. Each year, ICMA recognizes outstanding local government training programs. The Award for Career Development is presented to a member who has made a significant and measurable contribution to the development of new talent in professional local government management. The In-Service Training Award is presented to a member who has developed and implemented a highly effective in-service training program for local government employees. These training awards are a part of a larger process of recognizing excellence in local government. ICMA also provides local government managers and their staffs with training resourc- es, such as their Citizen as Customer training package (which trains users in providing quality customer service, public contact skill building, and managing customer service operations and personnel), and Excellence in Local Government Management (which trains users in understanding excellence, assessing organizational excellence, and action planning for excellence). ICMA has also made strides in identifying the skills and competencies needed for high performance work in local govern- ment. In 1990, ICMA established a task force on continuing education and professional development to identify the skills and competencies required be effective local government managers. Based on this study, ICMA developed a leadership assessment training package that measures current and desired levels of proficiency in 16 critical management skill areas. Finally, ICMA has one of the largest reference centers available on local government management issues, called the Management Information Service (MIS), which is similar in purpose and design to the Federal Quality Institute. For more information on ICMA, call (202) 289-4262 The Human Resources Development Group. On October 1, 1990, OPM pulled together its various training and development offices and programs into a new group, the Human Resources Development Group (HRDG). Its primary focus is to provide policy leadership and technical assistance to Federal agencies. Undergirding all of HRDG's efforts are a number of beliefs that clearly support high performance goals, including beliefs that:"the employee has inherent value and must be treated as such by the government employer"; "attention must be paid to providing training and development programs for employees at all levels"; "employee development must reflect opportunities along a continuum during the employees career"; and "management at top levels must make a commitment to training and development". [11] In the short year since its inception, HRDG has taken a number of steps to promote high performance-related activities in the Federal government, including the introduction of a frontline employee training policy initiative, an initiative to devise an accurate return on (training) investment model for use by government agencies, and the creation of a career path approach to Federal human resources development (summarized later in this paper). For more information on the Human Resources Development Group. contact Tom Dausch at (202) 606-1592 NEW DIRECTIONS. High performance is beginning to spread to all areas of Colorado state government since its Department of Personnel (DOP) began its NEW DIRECTIONS initiative in 1990. The DOP has outlined five principles of high performance for state agencies: Team work, customer focus, work-systems improvement, data-base decision making along with continuous improvement, and long-range thinking. State agencies interested in adopting a high performance program must first follow a series of steps developed by DOP. As a first step, when an agency begins the high perfor- mance process, DOP staff members give the agency a briefing. The agency must then select a management council to oversee the effort and identify a project area and project team to begin the implementation of high performance. A two-day team-building retreat follows, which is conducted by DOP. At this point, the DOP may provide additional training, or it may begin working directly with the agency team on its project. This initiative has produced a number of high performance successes, including vastly improved services in agencies as diverse as Water Resources, Child Support, and Central Collections.[12] For more information on NEW DIRECTIONS contact the Technical and Consulting Services Division at (303) 866-2438 MAX. Early in 1991, the state of Delaware began the Governor's Maximization Program -- MAX for short -- as a reaction to tight budgetary times. MAX focuses on improving efficiency and service effectiveness in state government. Its primary mission is to give the people of Delaware the best service possible. State officials decided that this mission could best be accomplished by implementing a system of high performance throughout state government. As a first step, the project targeted a major state work process, rather than an agency or office, as a pilot. The process chosen was the Accounting Document Process, in which an agency or school identifies a need for specific goods or servic- es, creates a purchase order, acquires the goods or services, pays for them, and updates the accounting system accordingly. A team of managers and workers was appointed to undertake the pilot project. After receiving training in high performance methods, the team began to examine and redesign the work process- es involved in the accounting document process. The team decided to follow a series of nine high performance steps in an effort to improve the work processes: Identify Output; Identify Customers and Their Requirements; Translate Customer Requirements into Specifications; Identify Steps in the Work Process; Select Measurements; Identify and Prioritize Improvement Opportunities; Plan and Implement Improvements; Evaluate Improvements; and Maintain the Gains in Quality. Currently, the team has completed the first six of the nine steps, and it is hoped that eventually this process can be duplicated for all vital government work processes. [13] For more information on MAX contact Joe Hickey at (302) 577-3956 The Governor's EXCELSIOR AWARD. In January, 1991, New York Governor Mario Cuomo announced THE EXCELSIOR AWARD. The award recognizes high quality performance in the public, private, and education sectors. Its purpose is to ensure "Quality at Work" in New York State by incorporating the components of quality achievement, quality management, and a quality workforce built upon the foundation of a partnership between employers and employees. To win the award, businesses, government organiza- tions, and educational institutions must demonstrate a commitment to quality products and services, a quality workforce, and cooperative labor-management relations. Responsibility for this award is assigned to the Governor's Statewide Labor-Management Committee. This group, chaired by the Lt. Governor, brings together the leaders of six state agencies, the president of the New York State AFL-CIO, and the president of The Business Council of New York State, Inc. The New York State Department of Labor has responsibility for coordinating the activities associated with this award, and in this effort works in partnership with the Department of Economic Development. The award was designed to set standards of excellence for product, service, and workforce quality built around a coopera- tive framework and improve the perception of public service at the local, county, and State levels. For more information on the EXCELSIOR AWARD contact Ambrose Bittner at (202) 535-0545 The Workforce Quality Assessment Program. As early drafts of the Hudson Institute report "Civil Service 2000" began arriving at OPM in 1989, executives and managers began asking if any data were available against which the report's projections could be measured. Of particular interest were the projections that the workforce of the future would have less education and work experience, which would have a negative impact on overall workforce quality. No hard data were available to answer these questions. In response, OPM's Career Entry Group designed the Quality Assessment Program. This program encompasses a continuing series of studies to collect hard data from applicants and employees. Questionnaires are used to collect data directly from job appli- cants and current employees. Studies are focused on particular occupations. These studies will be repeated at intervals, in order to assess changes in the applicant and incumbent popula- tions. Also, particular cohort groups will be tracked in order to compare the quality of the workforce the Federal Government is able to attract, hire, and retain over time. In addition to the studies of individual quality, the program has been expanded to look at the quality of services provided to the public, and the impact of organizational factors on quality. OPM will also develop questionnaires and other methods for use by agencies to assess the effectiveness of their own organizational units. One goal of the program is to provide a single source of useful evaluation data to OPM and agency policy developers and program managers to avoid costly "reinventions of the wheel". OPM will also provide data to agencies to support studies of specific occupations or programs. The first reports from studies in this program were issued in 1990, including a comparison of quality factors for 8500 employees in Professional and Administrative occupations, a report of education and experience levels of applicants for clerical occupations, and a summary of Governmentwide activities in quality assessment. A pilot study to collect quality data from the private sector for comparison purposes is underway, and such noted companies as TRW, Federal Express, and Walt Disney World have agreed to participate. For more information on the Workforce Quality Assessment Program contact Marilyn Gowing at (202) 606-0820 II. EMPHASIS ON HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT NEEDS A commitment to human resource development needs is one of the cornerstones of high performance organizations. Here too, the public sector has taken a number of steps to promote training and development activities. Several of these steps -- America 2000's skill clinic initiative, Illinois' career counseling program, OPM's Career Path Approach, the National Association of Govern- ment Training and Development Directors' efforts, the MOSAIC project, and the PACER SHARE initiative -- are summarized here. Skill Clinics. As a part of President Bush's America 2000 education strategy, OPM has been tasked with promoting and encouraging Governmentwide skill upgrading and career growth by establishing Skill Clinics in all Federal agencies. Skill Clinics are defined as a place or process through which the skills of workers at all levels of the agency are assessed, and appropriate career-specific counseling and training opportunities are provid- ed. Workers will be able to find out how their skills compare with those they need for a particular job or career, and where they can go to acquire the skills that they still need. OPM surveyed Federal agencies to obtain feedback on what is currently being done in this area, and will share its findings sometime in the near future. If properly developed, Skill Clinics offer a promising source of assessment and career development for the Federal workforce. They would undoubtedly be a tremendous help to any organization that is trying to shift to a high performance system, offering one-stop assessment and skill upgrading in vital high performance skills such as teamwork and interpersonal communication. For more information on Skill Clinics. contact Sarah Adams at (202) 632-0532 Career Counseling for State Workers in Illinois. In 1989, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Council 31 leaders and state government representatives negotiated a unique contract provision calling for the creation of a career development program for over 40,000 state workers in Illinois that the union represents. This program provides state workers with career counseling linked to tuition reimbursement for training in skill areas needed for career advancement. A joint labor-management committee identified a group of about 50 job titles that would be included in the career development program. Educational requirements for each job title were out- lined so that state employees would know what courses they would need to compete for that job. Every participant in the program receives career counseling that outlines job alternatives and helps define possible career paths. The state pays all tuition costs for training up front, and workers who complete the re- quired coursework are placed at the top of the list in competing for job vacancies in job title they want.[14] For more information on Illinois' Career Counseling Program contact the AFL-CIO Public Employee Department at (202) 393-2820 Career Path Approach. In December 1990, OPM Director Con- stance Newman issued a set of proposed governmentwide training and development policies for discussion. These policies, drafted by the newly-created Human Resources Development Group, outlined a systematic approach to training and development of Federal workers, starting with an employee's initial appointment to a career position and carrying through levels of supervision and management all the way to the Senior Executive Service (SES). After extensive discussion within the Federal community, OPM recently proposed a series of regulations and guidelines to enforce these proposals, titled Development of Human Resources: A Career Path Approach. The career path represents an important step towards the creation of a high performance Federal workforce. For the first time, specific levels and types of training would be required by regulation or strongly suggested through guidance in the Federal Personnel Manual. More important- ly, these policies are targeted at all Federal employees, not limited to managers. For more information on the Career Path. contact Robert Agresta at (202) 632-6803 The National Association of Government Training and Develop- ment Directors. While not an official government organization per se, NAGTADD is an important force in sharing high performance training and development information among training directors in all 50 states. Membership is open to training and development professionals working in state, city, and county government and in state-supported universities. NAGTADD's mission is to provide leadership in the training and development of public sector employees. The group accomplishes its mission by offering members a wide array of professional development opportunities, providing research and technical assistance in support of public sector training and development, and by creating a network of informa- tion on public sector training and development innovations and techniques that is available to policy makers at all levels of government. For more information on NAGTADD. contact Sharon Hirsch at (606! 231-1868 MOSAIC. MOSAIC -- Multipurpose Occupational Systems Analysis Inventory Close-end -- is a major effort by the Office of Person- nel Management to link the high performance skills identified by SCANS to an analysis of necessary competencies for all major Federal Government occupations. To begin the project, government occupations were broken down into four broad occupational groups: Managers and Executives, Professionals, Administrative, and Technical. The project then proceeded with a study of the impor- tant competencies for managers and executives. Eventually, after all four occupational group-studies have been completed, OPM hopes to identify a set of core competencies that are needed across all government occupations covering all job levels -- from entry level to executive. This will allow OPM to provide training and development models and products that are consistent and interrelated, and will help prepare government workers for high performance employment at all stages of their careers. For more information on MOSAIC contact Marilyn Gowing at (202? 606-0820 PACER SHARE. PACER SHARE is a five-year experimental person- nel management and pay system project developed jointly by management at the Sacramento Air Logistics Center and the Ameri- can Federation of Government Employees (AFGE). The project, which began in 1988, is taking place in the Distribution Directorate of the Logistics Center and involves almost 2000 employees. The purpose of the project is to test whether a flatter and more flexible personnel system, combined with gainsharing, could produce a more productive workforce. The union participated fully with management at all levels in developing and implementing the program. A labor-management council consisting of all division chiefs, the comptroller, and union representatives meets weekly to formulate planning strategies, discuss project issues, develop regulations and procedures, and resolve any problems. The council makes decisions by consensus. The first changes in the personnel system included: (1) Pay Banding. The standard Federal system of 15 separate pay grades was reduced to four broad pay bands. In addition, the pay differential between the lowest and the highest band was increased from 30% to 60%. As a result, 900 employees received substantial pay increases, and the number of mid-level managers was reduced to 35%. (2) Consolidation of Job Titles. Eighty different job clas- sifications were consolidated into three broad job descrip- tions. Workers have been trained to perform a number of jobs, so that if the work is slow in one area, they are expected to work in an area of heavier demand. This applies to supervisors as well as to front-line employees. (3) Performance Appraisals. All performance appraisals were abolished. Labor and management agreed that the performance appraisal process was counterproductive to the larger goal of team-building to enhance productivity. With these changes in place, the project implemented its most radical innovation, a gainsharing pay scheme. All productivity savings are now divided equally between the work force and the Air Force base. Since its inception, the project has achieved operating improvements resulting in total measured productivity savings of nearly $5 million. Employees have received more than $1,450 each as their share of productivity savings. In addition, the distri- bution center has surpassed all other Air Force logistics centers on standard quality measures, labor management relations have improved, fewer grievances have been filed, and sick leave and absenteeism are down. For more information on PACER SHARE. contact Ambrose Bittner at (202! 535-0545 II. NEW BEGINNINGS: HIGH PERFORMANCE INITIATIVES Leadership in these high performance areas is important, but in the end it is the organizations that are actually implementing and creating models of high performance that are crucial. Fortu- nately, a number of government entities have dared to break the mold and attempted to create truly high performance organiza- tions. This section examines three such pioneers -- the Internal Revenue Service's Ogden Service Center, the Motor Equipment Division of Madison, Wisconsin, and the 1926th Communications-Computer Systems Group. The Ogden Service Center. During a normal filing season, over 6000 employees at the Ogden Service Center open, extract, sort, batch, stamp, edit, check, enter, double check, and triple check over 30 million tax documents from 14 states. Aside from processing tax returns, the center also corrects errors, answers taxpayer correspondence, and ensures compliance to ever-changing tax regulations. In 1986, the center tired of the usual philoso- phy of "cut cost at any cost", which usually meant sacrificing quality customer service in the process. Instead of business-as-usual, the center executives launched an aggressive program aimed at changing the culture of the organization and providing a permanent structure for quality improvement. Quality Councils, made up of top management and executives, were formed to provide leadership and guidance from the top. The councils met weekly, and formulated overall quality policies and goals for the center. Quality Improvement Process Teams, made up of workers at all levels, were formed in each department to identify chronic problems, find root causes of those problems, and recommend and/or implement solutions. Systems were also put into place to train and support all team members, track the effectiveness of solutions, and recognize team efforts. In 1987, the IRS and the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) estab- lished joint goals on quality improvement, thus bringing the union in as a partner in the process in the early stages. Eventu- ally, a Quality Assurance Branch was formed. This office spends all of its time identifying systematic problems, providing in-depth analysis of problems, and offering solutions. The center's achievements have been impressive. Improvements suggested by Quality Improvement Process Teams have resulted in a reduction of more than 40,000 misapplied payments. Over $3.5 million were saved in the center's first year under the new system, and even greater savings have resulted since. More important, the center has begun to experience a cultural revolu- tion and a new sense of pride.[15] For more information on the Ogden Service Center. contact the Federal Quality Institute at (202) 376-3747 The Madison Motor Equipment Division. The Madison (Wisconsin) Motor Equipment Division provides a good example of union-management cooperation to create a high performance workplace. In 1983, an audit disclosed problems at the Division garage where workers repair and maintain city motor vehicles and other equipment. The major problem was long back-ups in vehicle and equipment repairs. The audit discovered that vehicles spent, on average, nine days in the garage. Unfortunately, it gave no reason for the delays. Union and management representatives got together and instituted a high performance pilot project to resolve the issue. A team of mechanics and managers was formed to find a solution to the problem. The team was empowered to examine the current operating system and identify and implement solutions to the problem. Their examinations led them to suggest and implement a new purchasing policy for the entire city of Madison. The new policy reduced a complex and bureaucratic 24-step purchasing policy process into three simple steps. Additional labor-manage- ment teams were created to look into problems in other city departments. Eventually, the success of the Motor Equipment Division pilot project led to the creation of a city-wide steering commit- tee on quality and productivity and the hiring of a full time quality and productivity administrator -- the first such public sector position in the country. The steering committee, made up of top managers, union representatives, middle managers, and frontline workers, issued a mission statement that called for employee involvement, customer input, continuous improvement, and innovation. In just two years, city departments were running over 20 quality improvement programs, five entire agencies were in high performance transformation, and the city was giving quality training to every municipal employee.[16] For more information on the Madison Motor Equipment Division contact the AFL-CIO Public Employee Department at (202) 393-2820 The 1926th Communications-Computer Systems Group, Warner Robins Air Logistics Center, Department of the Air Force. The basic mission of the Group is to meet the communications and information systems needs of Robins Air Force Base. Timeliness of product delivery and on-line computer support are the Group's two most important functions. In early 1988, the Group adopted a high performance initiative called QP4 -- Quality focusing on People, Process, Performance, and Product. To make the transition re- quired, the Group developed a three-pronged strategy called the Transformation Triad that clearly articulates basic goals. The first prong is Management, the transformation of function manag- ers into quality leaders and process managers. The second prong is Methodology, the use of statistical process control to improve internal processes. The final prong is People, the transformation of the workforce into an empowered team performing at its full potential. To implement their quality plan, Process Action Teams made up of workers, suppliers, and customers use a highly struc- tured 14-step sequence of improvement actions: Step 1 provides specific high performance training for all workers; Step 2 calls for the development of macro and micro work-flow charts for all key processes, focusing on non-value-added steps; Step 3 divides key processes into subprocesses for ease of analysis and management; Step 4 applies quality methodology to the subprocesses; Step 5 uses the process action teams to analyze and improve the flow of work; Step 6 has the teams perform the analysis to identify pro- cess problems and weaknesses; Step 7 requires teams to develop meaningful indicators to monitor and review the process (these indicators will be constantly refined); Step 8 establishes a system of reviews of the entire pro- cess; Step 9 focuses on the team's development and implementation of process improvements; Step 10 has teams continue to monitor work processes using statistical process control; Step 11 emphasizes that quality methodology must be continu- ally improved; Step 12 has as its goal continuous process refinement and improvement; Step 13 calls for an ongoing effort of rigorous self-assessment of how well the group is managing for quali- ty; Finally, in Step 14, the entire process is certified as success- ful, and the entire 14 steps begin again. Through the use of this approach to quality, results in productivity and quality of service have exceeded all expectations. Cost savings have reached nearly $10 million, and customer satisfaction is at an all time high. [17] For more information on the 1926th Communications-Computer Systems Group contact the Federal Quality Institute at (202) 376-3747 _____________________________________________________________ [Footnotes:] [1] NOTE TO READERS: In order to limit our study of the broad topic of high performance in government, this report will not deal with the issue of high performance in our nation's schools. As one of the government's largest and most important endeavors, high performance as it relates to education has been the subject of numerous articles and studies. For information on high perfor- mance in education as it relates to SCANS, please refer to the SCANS final report, due to be published in the spring of 1992. [2] These practices are summarized from Introduction to Total Quality Management In the Federal Government, United States Office of Personnel Management, Federal Quality Institute May, 1991 pp. 2-17. [3] Ibid, pp 16-17. [4] Federal Quality Institute, p. 33. [5] Ibid [6] Cayer, Joseph N. "Classification in the Federal Service: New Looks at Alternative Approaches" Public Administration Review, March/April 1992, vol 52 No. 2, pp.217-218. [7] Farrell and Borrus, p. 133 [8] "Workers with an Attitude", Government Executive March, 1992 p. 6. [9] Hamson, Ned "The FQI Story: Today and Tomorrow" in The Journal for Quality and Participation, July/August 1990, p. 47. [10] Ibid, p. 49. [11] Wolf, Dona "Revitalizing Federal Training and Development" in The Bureaucrat Summer, 1991 p. 20. [12] The National Association of State Training and Development Services, "TQM offers Colorado better service", in State Training & Development Quarterly. Volume 4, No. 2, May 1991, page 2. [13] Taken from a State of Delaware Department of Finance Draft Memorandum, December 27, 1991. [14] AFL-CIO Draft Report, pp 41-42. [15] Taken from a "Quality Improvement Prototype" case study on the Ogden Service Center, Office of Management and Budget, 1989. [16] AFL-CIO Draft Report, pp 9-12. [17] Taken from a "Quality Improvement Prototype" done by the Federal Quality Institute in 1991. [This document was scanned and edited by Tom Glenn, SysOp, The TQM BBS (301-585-1164). I omitted the table of contents because the page numbers will be different when printed from this ascii text. I also omitted the several pages that listed the names of contributors. In addition, I moved the endnotes to the end of the text to avoid formatting troubles. All remarks in brackets, except footnote numbers, are my additions to the text.]