In classic DHS fashion, employees hear about the abysmal results of the morale survey NOT from leadership, but from the media! This is one of the systemic issues with the department--disregard for employees ESPECIALLY by leadership and non-career employees (read political appointees).
Other, less dysfunctional, organizations would figure out how to tell staff about the bad news in the survey, AND might have a set of solutions prepared to address ongoing--5 YEARS!--issues. Yeah, it's a hard thing to make a monster like DHS work but the solution is not simply to stop calling us human cattle or to bring us in the same buildings on the campus of a mental institution. IBM has 300K employees spread throughout the globe and client sites and they can figure out how to make a decent place to work. What are the specific efforts of the Dept to fix these ongoing issues?
And who is Elaine C. Duke? I don't see her listed as leadership in the department. Is she some poor person that the real "leaders" put out front to take the the heat from this troubling survey. Classic for the guys in the front office to hide behind the skirt of a lower-level fed(?).
Also, looks like the survey didn't have any comments or qualitative section so the "whys" of the problems remain hidden. I hope that this comment gets published and others' too so the big guns can get a bit of flavour (I didn't get to take the survey--I tried many times, called the helpdesk, etc., but never got a login so I don't know how it was structured firsthand).
Real leaders take the lumps for their missteps and problems. They build a bridge to the future. They value their staff and respect their expertise. Maybe it's not too late for this group, I do think that there are some real actions that can be implemented even in the short time some of them have left. They can start by doing a better job treating employees like grown ups and engaging us in the work of building a decent place to work.
Your survey said 91% of us (including me) are committed to the DHS mission, now that's a basis for success!
April 18, 2008 7:20 AM
Anonymous said...
With bosses and policies like these...
"Morale at Homeland Security Still Shaky After Five Years
By Stephen Barr Washington Post, Friday, April 18, 2008; Page D04
"55 percent of respondents said they did not agree that pay raises depend on job performance, 45 percent did not think promotions are based on merit, and 42 percent did not believe creativity and innovation are rewarded."
"when asked whether "pay raises depend on how well employees do their jobs," nearly 60 percent of those surveyed at Customs and Border Protection responded with what the report labeled "negative" views. The question also drew negative responses at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (54.6 percent), the Secret Service (52.5 percent) and the Transportation Security Administration (54.9 percent)."
April 18, 2008 1:54 PM
Dennis said...
This stuff is unbelievable......
April 19, 2008 7:56 PM
Anonymous said...
Hmmm,doesn't look good for the home team. Perhaps they will do better next year.
April 20, 2008 9:07 PM
Anonymous said...
At the highest levels of my agency, I think the leaders do care. The communication channels get very shaky at the port levels and the lack of infrastructure and accountability at that level, and between ports and regional management are surprising in this age of fairly widespread knowledge about what makes for good management. I am appalled and saddend at the deficiences within my own agency. We could easily do so much better.
April 22, 2008 12:06 PM
Christine said...
I could not imagine working for DHS..handling their caseloads,responsibilities, accountablity, and their dedication. The employees should be compensated well for their performances and efforts!
May 4, 2008 10:30 AM
Anonymous said...
The numbers don't even add up or maybe like the surveys given in regards to the WTC 9/11 NYC compared to Dallas, TX by the EPA when 10,000 surveys were to be g iven and got to 512 and stopped because the result were so bad; and 140,000 surveys were given, only 65,000 ? responded or responded in accordance with the survey monitoring cop just like the journal jurisdiction but then 208,000 are the number of employees in DHS then why not 208,000 surveys to all employees and I am quite sure those responding to the surveys were either new interns, outstanding scholors or management because DHS had a problem with vacancies getting filled in accordance with GAO reports and low morale was another GAO report but surveys can be statistically biased for the outcome to be favored; all depends where the numbers go, what numbers are used; outcome as false positive, positive, false negative, and etc. so again what ever you want to be the outcome testing can be mathematically fixed and that's why a lot of drug testing is not used as factually and submitted as evidence because there are too many false man handled factors for the desired outcome rather biased discrimatory in the best interest to DHS? And that a fact; never received either survey WTC 9/11 or your swayed statistics
May 5, 2008 4:25 AM
[Photo] We conducted our own all employee survey in the fall of 2007. Just like the Office of Personnel Management’s 2006 Federal Human Capital Survey, DHS wanted to measure employee job satisfaction and agency performance.
The results of the survey reflect improvement over the 2006 survey in two of the four Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework indices: Leadership & Knowledge Management, from 46% to 48% positive responsesResults-Oriented Performance Culture, from 42% to 44% positive responsesTalent Management, remains at 49% positive responsesJob Satisfaction, remains at 58% positive responsesThe survey results provide insight into our employee’s experiences and perceptions, and I am encouraged by the positive progress in areas addressed by a number of recent initiatives and programs such as the Performance Management and Leadership Development and Training. This is especially heartening given the length of time it can take to effect change in such a large and diverse organization such as DHS. It’s important to recognize that it takes time to turn around a battleship. Ours is still a young department – the newest in the federal government – and as we mature and continue to resolve some natural growing pains, I expect employee morale and satisfaction will improve accordingly.
Through the survey results, managers and employees alike delivered an unambiguous message that leadership has heard loud and clear. I find it gratifying to note the percentage of survey respondents who would recommend DHS as a place to work rose from 51% in 2006 to 54% in 2007.
When evaluating these figures, we must take an honest look at our current situation. For example, instead of a central headquarters location that promotes unity and makes simple things like meetings easier, we have incongruent offices spread out across the National Capital Region. Many of our employees have gone through a number of reorganizations since the Department stood up, the most recent of which was last year. While these are not excuses for low morale, as a DHS employee, I can honestly say I see the challenges first-hand.
More than 140,000 employees were surveyed and more than 65,000 responded; representing all levels of the workforce across components. In addition, 91% of survey respondents believe that the work that they do is important, and 80% indicated that they understand how the work relates to the agency’s goals and priorities; an increase from 76 percent in 2006.
The bottom line is that our 208,000 employees are the backbone of this Department and their service is invaluable in keeping our country secure. They deserve the best we have to offer; and as we continue to make our own improvements, I encourage Journal readers to avoid a quick rush to judgment. Instead, assess our performance based on what we have accomplished in five short years.
7 Comments
Close this window Jump to comment formIn classic DHS fashion, employees hear about the abysmal results of the morale survey NOT from leadership, but from the media! This is one of the systemic issues with the department--disregard for employees ESPECIALLY by leadership and non-career employees (read political appointees).
Other, less dysfunctional, organizations would figure out how to tell staff about the bad news in the survey, AND might have a set of solutions prepared to address ongoing--5 YEARS!--issues. Yeah, it's a hard thing to make a monster like DHS work but the solution is not simply to stop calling us human cattle or to bring us in the same buildings on the campus of a mental institution. IBM has 300K employees spread throughout the globe and client sites and they can figure out how to make a decent place to work. What are the specific efforts of the Dept to fix these ongoing issues?
And who is Elaine C. Duke? I don't see her listed as leadership in the department. Is she some poor person that the real "leaders" put out front to take the the heat from this troubling survey. Classic for the guys in the front office to hide behind the skirt of a lower-level fed(?).
Also, looks like the survey didn't have any comments or qualitative section so the "whys" of the problems remain hidden. I hope that this comment gets published and others' too so the big guns can get a bit of flavour (I didn't get to take the survey--I tried many times, called the helpdesk, etc., but never got a login so I don't know how it was structured firsthand).
Real leaders take the lumps for their missteps and problems. They build a bridge to the future. They value their staff and respect their expertise. Maybe it's not too late for this group, I do think that there are some real actions that can be implemented even in the short time some of them have left. They can start by doing a better job treating employees like grown ups and engaging us in the work of building a decent place to work.
Your survey said 91% of us (including me) are committed to the DHS mission, now that's a basis for success!
April 18, 2008 7:20 AM
With bosses and policies like these...
"Morale at Homeland Security Still Shaky After Five Years
By Stephen Barr
Washington Post, Friday, April 18, 2008; Page D04
"55 percent of respondents said they did not agree that pay raises depend on job performance, 45 percent did not think promotions are based on merit, and 42 percent did not believe creativity and innovation are rewarded."
"when asked whether "pay raises depend on how well employees do their jobs," nearly 60 percent of those surveyed at Customs and Border Protection responded with what the report labeled "negative" views. The question also drew negative responses at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (54.6 percent), the Secret Service (52.5 percent) and the Transportation Security Administration (54.9 percent)."
April 18, 2008 1:54 PM
This stuff is unbelievable......
April 19, 2008 7:56 PM
Hmmm,doesn't look good for the home team. Perhaps they will do better next year.
April 20, 2008 9:07 PM
At the highest levels of my agency, I think the leaders do care. The communication channels get very shaky at the port levels and the lack of infrastructure and accountability at that level, and between ports and regional management are surprising in this age of fairly widespread knowledge about what makes for good management. I am appalled and saddend at the deficiences within my own agency. We could easily do so much better.
April 22, 2008 12:06 PM
I could not imagine working for DHS..handling their caseloads,responsibilities, accountablity, and their dedication. The employees should be compensated well for their performances and efforts!
May 4, 2008 10:30 AM
The numbers don't even add up or maybe like the surveys given in regards to the WTC 9/11 NYC compared to Dallas, TX by the EPA when 10,000 surveys were to be g iven and got to 512 and stopped because the result were so bad; and 140,000 surveys were given, only 65,000 ? responded or responded in accordance with the survey monitoring cop just like the journal jurisdiction but then 208,000 are the number of employees in DHS then why not 208,000 surveys to all employees and I am quite sure those responding to the surveys were either new interns, outstanding scholors or management because DHS had a problem with vacancies getting filled in accordance with GAO reports and low morale was another GAO report but surveys can be statistically biased for the outcome to be favored; all depends where the numbers go, what numbers are used; outcome as false positive, positive, false negative, and etc. so again what ever you want to be the outcome testing can be mathematically fixed and that's why a lot of drug testing is not used as factually and submitted as evidence because there are too many false man handled factors for the desired outcome rather biased discrimatory in the best interest to DHS? And that a fact; never received either survey WTC 9/11 or your swayed statistics
May 5, 2008 4:25 AM