Introduction
Definitions and Standards for HRM Accountability
Systems
HRM Measurement Categories
References and Links
In January 2001 Civil Service Rule X, Agency
Accountability Systems, was created by Executive
Order 13197. This rule gives the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
authority to require agencies to establish HRM accountability systems.
Section 10.2 of Rule X reads as follows:
The Director of the
Office of Personnel Management may require an agency to establish and
maintain a system of accountability for merit system principles that (1)
sets standards for applying the merit system principles, (2) measures
the agency’s effectiveness in meeting these standards, and (3)
corrects any deficiencies in meeting these standards. (5 CFR 10.2)
This document has a two-fold purpose -1)
to set standards for agencies government-wide for establishing and
maintaining the internal HRM accountability systems required under Civil
Service Rule X, and 2) to give OPM a framework for reviewing or assessing
these systems. It is vital that expectations regarding agency internal HRM
accountability systems be clear and consistent across Government. The
standards are the primary vehicle for conveying those expectations.
The scope of the standards is broad,
extending to all the activities of the HR staff and the line organization to
manage people in accordance with the merit system principles (5 U.S.C. 2301)
while avoiding prohibited personnel practices (5 U.S.C. 2302), and in
support of mission accomplishment. The coverage is very broad as
well, applying to all Executive agencies subject to the merit principles,
regardless of the specific legal authorities under which their HR systems
operate.
This document was developed by an interagency
HRM Accountability System Standards Task Force, made up of members of the
Human Resources Management Council Accountability Committee. Thirteen
agencies including OPM participated in the effort. In developing the
standards, the Task Force tried to provide agencies with maximum flexibility
while clearly articulating a few core requirements. This objective dictated
that the standards be kept to the minimum necessary. Agencies can always add
to these base standards in their own accountability systems. For the same
reason, the Task Force resisted the temptation to add guidance that would
only distract readers and ultimately detract from the focus and clarity of
the document. However, there is a "References and Links" section
at the end to help agencies find guidance for implementing the standards.
Back to the Top
DEFINITIONS
AND STANDARDS FOR HUMAN RESOURCES
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS
Definitions
-
Human resources management (HRM) accountability is the responsibility
shared by top agency management, line managers, and HR officials
for ensuring that people are managed efficiently and effectively
in support of agency mission accomplishment in accordance with the
merit system principles.
-
A human resources management accountability
system is a process for ensuring that HRM accountability is
established and maintained over time.
Standards
- The system should determine whether the
agency has established and is executing effective human capital
strategies, including but not necessarily limited to those delineated in
the OPM Human Capital Scorecard (e.g., getting and keeping
necessary talent, establishing and sustaining a culture of high
performance, promoting effective leadership, etc.), in support of its
mission and goals. It should also determine whether the HR function is
adequately organized and equipped to support these strategies.
-
The HRM accountability system must
enable the agency to identify and resolve significant problems.
It must be sufficiently targeted and comprehensive to enable the
organization to identify problems or less than successful results in a
timely and systematic way, especially those that pose a high risk to
organizational integrity and effectiveness. The system must also enable the
organization to take prompt actions to correct problems or improve
sub-standard results.
- Kinds of problems or issues to be
addressed include HRM practices that 1) result in failure to meet
organizational mission goals, 2) increase the organization’s financial
or legal vulnerability, 3) give rise to systemic violations of employee
protections or veterans preference, or 4) lead to loss of integrity in the
eyes of the public or otherwise undermine the integrity of the
organization.
-
The HRM accountability system must
provide for balanced measurement of agency human resources management. Balance
is achieved by including measures in each measurement category, as defined
below. The measures chosen for use must, in the aggregate, provide a
reasonable overall assessment of agency HRM -- including 1) success
incarrying out agency human capital strategies, 2) effectiveness of HRM
programs, 3) efficiency of HR processes, and 4) compliance with legal
requirements.
- The measures regarding human capital
strategies must include those identified in the OPM Human Capital
Scorecard. Overall, measurement data will typically be drawn from a
variety of sources, such as the Central Personnel Data File (CPDF) or
other databases of workforce demographics, surveys of customer or employee
perceptions, cost or financial data, and information from systematic
internal and external reviews of records and operations.
-
The HRM accountability system
itself and the results of its application must be documented. The
system’s objectives, methods, measures, processes, and results must be
documented and information generated by the system disseminated sufficiently
to allow for informed review and action by appropriate officials.
- Documentation should typically
include 1) a description of the system and its purposes and processes, 2)
results of the system’s ongoing determination of HRM results, 3) recommendations for dealing with
deficiencies identified, and 4) actions taken in response to
recommendations.
Back to the Top
HRM
MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES
Below are four broad categories within which
measures must be developed and utilized by the agency. For each category
there are examples of measures that might be used. The examples are intended
only to aid in understanding the categories, and are not intended to direct
or limit in any way an agency’s choice of measures.
1. Strategic Alignment - Measures
in this category address the extent to which HR goals and programs are
aligned with and support the agency mission. These measures must include
those identified in the OPM Human
Capital Scorecard.
Examples: the degree to which targeted competency gap reductions in
agency restructuring plans are met, agency staff possesses competencies
needed for mission-critical activities, the effectiveness of the agency’s
strategy for managing employee performance, or the extent to which
employees understand how their jobs fit in and contribute to fulfilling
the agency mission.
2. HRM
Program Effectiveness - Measures in this category address the
extent to which HR programs achieve their desired outcomes, as well as the
capacity of the HR staff and line managers to support effective HRM
programs.
Examples: retention rates, the level of employee satisfaction with
agency HRM programs, the extent and effectiveness of training and
development activities, the level of diversity in the workforce relative
to the population at large, or data on the competencies of the HR
workforce.
3. HR Operational
Efficiency – Measures in this category address the degree of
efficiency of HR service delivery and the capability of the human
resources and other staff to support it.
Examples: accuracy and timeliness of personnel processes, including
time to hire; effective use of human resources information technology
including the accuracy of the HRIS data base; total cost of HR per
serviced employee; or cost of a given HRM activity such as staffing,
benchmarked against other agencies’ data or tracked internally over
time.
4. Measures of Legal Compliance - Measures
in this category address the extent to which HRM activities are carried
out in accordance with the merit system principles and other pertinent
laws and regulations. Measures should address the HRM-related actions of
line managers as well as the HR staff’s adherence to procedural
requirements.
Examples: level of compliance with veterans preference or
whistleblower provisions, managers’ knowledge of the merit principles,
findings from internal or external HRM reviews, or results of quality
control checks of CPDF data, employee files, or personnel actions.
Back to the Top
Back to the Top
The accountability page of the OPM
web site is also home to the HRM
Accountability Clearinghouse, a compendium of promising agency practices
in accountability.
Go Back
|