Could placing appointees in positions they are not experienced or knowledgeable in be doing more harm than good?
The survey revealed skepticism about the ability of current political appointees to improve agency performance. One respondent said, "The role [of senior leadership] has increased, but the effectiveness, skill and knowledge has dramatically decreased."
Obama officials lack functional and agency-specific knowledge, according to survey respondents. Nearly 60 percent of respondents gave Obama appointees a grade of C or lower for their functional expertise, with less than 37 percent giving them A or B grades. Many believe appointees don't understand human resources and procurement rules, saying they presume the "institution is there as an obstruction" and attempt to "break organizations."
Appointees have "unbelievably poor communication with career employees," one respondent commented. Almost 40 percent of managers gave appointees Ds or Fs on collaboration and communication with their staffs. Some "have a divide-and-conquer strategy, and there are way too many industry fingers allowed in decision-making," a respondent noted. At another agency, a manager said the result has been "politicization of normal agency functions
*note, this survey doesn't seem to have great responses from any administration, the question really has more to do with people doing these jobs that don't know how to do the job in the first place.
Maybe this is the problem.
Answer by Carpy at 2:57 PM on May. 31, 2011
Answer by CHarlan at 1:49 PM on May. 31, 2011
Answer by yourspecialkid at 3:27 PM on May. 31, 2011
Answer by scout_mom at 5:42 PM on May. 31, 2011
Answer by NotPanicking at 6:03 PM on May. 31, 2011
Answer by CHarlan at 2:09 PM on May. 31, 2011
Answer by tnmomofive at 3:22 PM on May. 31, 2011
Answer by Carpy at 3:48 PM on May. 31, 2011
Answer by jesse123456 at 5:06 PM on May. 31, 2011
Answer by DSamuels at 7:39 PM on May. 31, 2011