1 Developing New Leaders

Department of Transportation, Office of the Inspector General

The more than 70 Offices of Inspector General (OIG) in the federal government all have a similar mission: to conduct independent audits and investigations for their respective department’s programs and operations to promote economy, effectiveness, and efficiency and to prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse. OIGs keep Congress, department heads, and the American taxpayer fully informed about deficiencies related to the administration of programs and operations and offer corrective actions that help protect and strengthen departmental results. In short, they are agency watchdogs and stewards of taxpayer dollars.

Late in 2006, Calvin L. Scovel III became the sixth Inspector General (IG) at the Department of Transportation (DOT). By all measures, the DOT OIG was a successful organization when Cal arrived. It had earned the respect of Congress, the department, and the IG community. But Cal soon recognized that to sustain this level of performance, the office needed to do more. Cal’s 29 years of service in the U.S. Marine Corps, where he retired as Brigadier General, helped influence his vision.

Cal describes his vision for leadership at OIG this way: “A common Marine Corps slogan is ‘Mission First; People Always.’ To achieve our mission, we needed to continually develop a high-performing group of people. It was the people part of the slogan I felt we needed to focus on at OIG. I am a firm believer that if senior leaders pay more attention to staff, mission performance will be elevated. I often refer to the three T’s: training, tools, and time. Staff need training to perform and grow, tools to perform efficiently, and time to apply the training and tools effectively. I knew we had a lot of work ahead, but we also needed to show patience to allow our actions to have effect.”

A critical indicator of OIG’s organizational culture was the federal human capital survey (now the federal employee viewpoint survey), which measures employees’ perceptions of conditions characterizing successful organizations and which the Partnership for Public Service uses to calculate its index of best places to work. Dissatisfied with OIG’s 2006 survey scores, Cal made it a visible priority for his leadership team to address the issues highlighted by the survey, specifically leadership, performance culture, and employee satisfaction. By 2011, OIG had improved its scores dramatically, with trends continuing in 2012. The office landed in the top 25 percent on the best places to work index, making it the second most improved subcomponent organization in the federal government. Figure 1-1 highlights the transformation.

FIGURE 1-1 DOT OIG Employee Viewpoint Survey Trends

The story of how OIG accomplished these results abounds with useful best practices and strategies for change.

Focus on Developing Leaders

While Cal didn’t have a step-by-step plan to achieve his vision for change, he knew where he wanted to end up and he was comfortable with figuring out the route along the way. To help plot this route, Cal enlisted Ilona Birenbaum as a consultant in 2007. “One of the reasons this worked,” according to Ilona, “was that Cal was so flexible. Nothing was locked in but the end vision. He would try something, learn from that, improve it, and try again. Cal had a humble approach, and I think that demonstrated a lot of integrity to the staff. He showed a clear determination to change things, and he invited everyone to help him get there.”

Cal started with his immediate team of senior executives. Ilona describes their approach and success factors:

Coaching was the central element of each executive’s development plan. “We really emphasized coaching,” Ilona says. “Our coaching model focused almost entirely on the results of the 360. If one executive needed to work on communication, that was the coach’s focus. If another needed to delegate and empower, we worked on that. Our method as coaches was to develop a relationship with the executive, set clear and measurable coaching goals, and through regular meetings, work to leverage their leadership strengths and address their gaps. We assigned executives homework, which included reflection, practice, and reading to create opportunities to strengthen the skills they actively were working on. For example, executives who struggled with difficult conversations were asked to hold these conversations and reflect on what went well and what didn’t go well. Then the next coaching session would focus on that experience.”

OIG began to see immediate impacts of the assessment and coaching. Internal survey scores began to go up and coaching participants relayed extremely positive feedback on the coaching experience.

The emphasis on strengthening leadership continued with the arrival of Ann Calvaresi Barr in 2009. Ann, who is currently the Deputy Inspector General, spearheaded many new initiatives aimed at enhancing OIG’s work processes and motivating its workforce. Ann describes the beginnings of culture change at OIG:

After the initial 360 assessment and coaching, OIG initiated a number of specific efforts:

• Training. The 360 assessments identified consistent learning needs across OIG’s leadership and management team. To augment the coaching, OIG developed a three-part supervisor training series. Supervision I focuses on human resource management, performance management, and providing feedback. Supervision II focuses on conflict management, team development, and collaboration. Supervision III focuses on emotional intelligence, vision, leading change, and managing stress. OIG began offering this training in 2010 to all managers and supervisors in the organization. In addition, OIG offered targeted training focused on self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management. Myers-Briggs Type Indicator^® (MBTI^®) workshops were also offered to help teams understand individual differences and improve communication, teamwork, and collaboration.

  Ann describes the momentum generated by these activities:

  Once we got rolling, the ideas for various types of training and workshops just exploded. With Cal’s full support, we started a speaker series and organized communities of practice, where staff share knowledge and lessons learned to broaden perspectives and encourage greater coordination and partnering on OIG’s work. We also started monthly leadership brownbags that bring OIG managers and executives together to focus on topics of mutual interest. Topics have included managing diversity and inclusivity, traits of an effective leader, performance management, and motivating and engaging staff. What I love about the brownbags is that they allow me to connect with all the managers in the organization, to hear how they see things and what they struggle with. We’ve had strong participation in the leadership brownbags. In fact, they became so popular that staff asked us to do something similar for employees at all levels of the organization, which we called leadership development exchanges. Since October 2011, we have held leadership development exchanges on topics such as adaptability and communication strategies, cultivating trust, managing conflict, and leading across organizational units.

  Other opportunities for training came in the form of organizational self-assessment. Calling on best practices from his military days, Cal instituted the “hot wash,” a type of learning debrief where Cal meets with teams immediately after a congressional hearing and other major work accomplishments to discuss what worked, what didn’t, what they learned, and what they would change. We also instituted return on investment meetings, led by Lou Dixon, Principal Assistant Inspector General for Auditing and Evaluation, to look critically at the returns we were able to achieve through a particular audit or evaluation.

  The enthusiasm for learning is pretty strong around here. When staff see that self-assessment and learning are important to the leadership, they find dozens of ways to accomplish them.

• Mentoring. OIG began a comprehensive employee mentoring program to create a one-of-a-kind opportunity for individual or group collaboration, goal achievement, and problem-solving. Consistent with OIG’s motto, “Mission First, People Always,” the mentoring program provides staff with a developmental partnership where knowledge, skills, information, and perspectives are shared to foster personal and professional growth. All employees are eligible to participate, and many do. Mentors serve as role models or coaches as they share career information and insight from their own work and life experience. Mentees take a brief survey to help match them with an appropriate mentor. Both mentors and mentees receive training to help them structure the process and clarify expectations.

• Leadership planning and collaboration. One of Cal’s first steps as IG was to engage his senior staff in a discussion on how to achieve his vision. OPM’s viewpoint survey and other data informed this discussion. A human capital council was formed to identify critical people needs and issues OIG faced and what was needed to further strengthen its capabilities. Senior staff were empowered to monitor their progress toward Cal’s leadership vision and to identify the need for changes in the plans and tactics for getting there. The leadership team also came together to develop a comprehensive strategic plan for OIG; that plan has since been updated, with a focus on clearly defining the results it is seeking to accomplish and developing clear measures of its success in achieving those results. Leaders work together to develop and continually reevaluate tactical plans for how OIG’s audits and investigations will achieve its broader strategic objectives to identify deficiencies in DOT programs and operations and to examine allegations of fraud, waste, and abuse.

• Performance culture. Performance management quickly emerged as a critical area where change was warranted. Traditionally, line managers had developed performance plans for each employee. There was little consistency or integration across the plans or alignment with the strategic goals of the organization. As the leadership team began to clarify and define strategic goals through its strategic planning activities, OIG built on that strategic framework to define performance expectations for critical occupations and roles. Performance plans were developed with clear, measurable objectives for auditors, investigators, analysts, and mission support staff.
  
  Recently, OIG updated position descriptions and standards, and enhanced metrics to hold staff accountable. OIG also rolled out training for managers on how to have critical conversations with staff on performance expectations, how to address poor performance, how to provide effective feedback, and how to help their workforce with career planning.
  
  In addition, OIG implemented “skip-level” feedback sessions, which are discussions between a supervisor’s boss and the supervisor’s direct report—without the supervisor present. These sessions proved extremely useful in assessing the performance of supervisors and helped OIG’s leadership understand broad performance challenges across the organization. Most important, they were consistent with Cal’s determination to have senior staff understand the impact of their leadership behavior and actions, as well as his focus on accountability.¹

• Communication. A key element of Cal’s vision was open and honest communication. He wanted the entire workforce to be connected and to understand where they were going as an organization, how they were performing, and where they needed to improve. Cal notes, “One thing I learned early in my career is that if you want good information flowing to you as a leader, then you never shoot the messenger. My door is always open. I really need to hear and learn from my staff.”
  
  One of the first actions Cal took was to hold all-hands meetings every six months, with webcasting to all OIG offices. The goal of these meetings, and Cal’s approach in general, is to be as transparent as possible to staff about the challenges OIG faces, what is being done to respond to those challenges, and what employees can expect, with ample time allotted for questions. For example, during a time of governmentwide budget constraints, Cal was forthright in communicating possible budget scenarios and how employees might be affected. He sent regular emails to staff whenever new situations developed or important information needed to be communicated. OIG also started a weekly newsletter, The Inspector, which provides timely reports on congressional hearings, audit and investigative work, external recognition and awards, speakers, and a forum for staff to get to know one another better.
  
  Cal holds regular meetings with his key executives. He includes his leaders in decision-making whenever possible and, if he needs to make decisions independently, he fully communicates why those decisions were necessary and works with his leaders to implement them effectively. Finally, Cal and other executives routinely meet with staff on their work. These activities have become a part of how the OIG leadership does business.

A Harder Look

In addition to these development and communication initiatives, OIG conducted a number of organizational assessments that looked at the performance, organization, and culture of specific organizational components within OIG. These assessments provided a deeper, richer understanding of the issues and led to initiatives to improve processes and clarify roles. For example, the processes OIG uses to develop and review audit reports were streamlined to encourage collaboration throughout the design and writing stages. Senior reviewers were encouraged to provide constructive feedback that focused on higher level messaging and problem-solving. OIG developed templates, guidelines, and other standardized tools to assist staff with the new processes. Through these initiatives, the quality and timeliness of the audit reports have improved. Similarly, new priorities and protocols established under the leadership of Tim Barry, Principal Assistant Inspector General for Investigations, have helped ensure that OIG’s investigative case work has the greatest impact on the department’s primary mission to ensure safety as well as deter and eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse.

But the most important lesson that came out of the organizational assessments was that OIG needed to continue to shine a bright light on leadership. Ilona notes that Cal didn’t simply provide training for his leaders and declare the job done:

Cal shares his perspective:

Ilona adds her thoughts:

Internal Leadership and Support

OIG also realized that change is continual and it is hard work. Change requires time and resources, and it can’t be allowed to slip down on the priority list. As the scope and magnitude of the changes became apparent to OIG, it also became clear that the office needed a strong support staff to help plan the change strategy, manage the many initiatives that were being launched, support communications, and monitor the data and the effectiveness of the initiatives.

Cal relied on Susan Dailey, Assistant Inspector General for Administration, to lead the business operations group, which includes human resources, budget and finance, contracting, and information technology. Susan had worked as an auditor in OIG, so she understood the organization well and what business support was needed to be effective. She also believed in Cal’s vision and was enthusiastic about moving it forward.

Susan describes the changed mindset in her group:

Susan’s team took the lead in implementing specific organizational initiatives, including training, surveys, and coaching. “In the beginning, I felt I was driving things forward with my team,” says Susan. “I would come up with the ideas, lay out goals and plans, and try to get all my people to understand what they needed to do to successfully implement those plans. But now it’s completely different. Now they tell me what needs to be done. They’ve taken this process over and are driving it themselves. That, more than anything else, is a testament to the quality and talent of the people we’ve brought into operations. It’s a phenomenal team.”

Another key lesson was that the responsibility for change can’t be delegated. Cal says, “Once things were going in the right direction, I thought I could step back from the changes we were trying to make, but I quickly learned that my involvement and attention were still essential. People needed to know that I still cared about this. That was an important lesson for me. I couldn’t just check it off my to-do list and move on to other things. It had to become a part of my daily life, in much the same way I was asking everyone else to make it part of their daily lives.”

What Has Changed

The federal employee viewpoint survey scores were a key catalyst that helped OIG realize it had to change, and they are one of the best indicators of the positive effects the change efforts have had on the organization. But there are other strong indicators of progress as well:

• Return on investment. OIG calculates the return on investment (ROI) for every taxpayer dollar it spends on audits and investigations. Cal says, “In 2008, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported on all OIGs’ monetary accomplishments as stated in its semiannual reports to Congress for fiscal year 2007. DOT OIG’s overall return was $15 for every $1 spent—the third best in the government. But I believed our efforts to improve our organization and culture would benefit our ROI. While GAO hasn’t done another study, we track our own ROI. In 2012, our ROI was $23 to $1. We’ve stepped up our focus on ‘Mission First,’ but the ‘People Always’ part is what allowed us to do that. The team here is extremely high-performing.”

• Workforce retention. Historically, the rate of attrition in OIG was running between 8 and 14 percent. In 2012, attrition slowed to 4 percent. A slow economy may have had something to do with that change, but surveys indicated that OIG has also created an organization that people like being a part of. OIG has created a climate that attracts and retains the very best talent in government.

• Organizational climate. Life at OIG has changed in ways that are not easily measured but are nevertheless palpable. OIG leaders and managers comment on the impact of these changes:

  “We’ve absorbed some significant budget cuts each of the past two years but remain highly productive. I can’t imagine the impact those budget cuts would’ve had if we hadn’t turned around our organizational culture.”

  “Employees give us good feedback. They love the training. They love the communication mechanisms we’ve set up. People are saying good things.”

  “There’s accountability now—positive accountability. People aren’t blaming each other when things go wrong; they’re looking at themselves to figure out what they can do to deliver the results we need. It’s self-accountability.”

  “We’re working together more effectively. We broke down many of the silos, and staff now look for opportunities to work on cross-organizational initiatives. There’s less competition and more collaboration.”

Why It Worked

OIG leaders did just about everything they could do to change things and to keep the momentum of change moving forward. As Ilona Birenbaum noted, the 360 assessment and coaching were incredibly powerful, but if the office had done only that, the results would likely have been minor. They didn’t stop there. They rolled out a complete leadership development program. They worked on OIG’s performance culture. They worked on communication. They rethought their business processes. They built an operational infrastructure to support the changes they pursued. One of the most important ingredients in their success was their willingness to attack on all fronts. They didn’t see the challenge as one problem with one solution, but as many problems with many solutions. As a result, OIG was able to implement and reap the rewards of profound, significant change. Ilona says, “I think the most important thing they did was make tough decisions about leaders. They didn’t merely talk about problems, they took action. They secured the right leaders and they held everyone accountable.”

Susan shares her thoughts for what led to OIG’s success: “Cal gave it time. That was the most important thing to me. He didn’t have a 90-day plan or a 180-day plan; there wasn’t a timeline. He had a firm vision and a rock-solid commitment to achieve that vision, no matter how long it took. That’s why it worked.”

Ann adds, “I think this worked because we listened well. We were able to get a good read on the organization and track how we were progressing. We continually played back what we were seeing and hearing and got validation from the workforce on what was going on. People were engaged. Continual listening, validating, and responding with process and operations improvements that address root causes of concerns is time-consuming but absolutely essential for our success, or any organization’s success.”

And finally, Cal himself says, “We have an incredible group of leaders in place. Each and every one of them has been critical to our success. To ensure we are meeting our mission while operating at peak efficiency, I rely on my senior executives: Ann, my deputy; Susan, who stays on top of our operations; Lou Dixon, who heads up our audits; Tim Barry, who leads our investigative work; and Brian Dettelbach, our Assistant Inspector General for Legal, Legislative, and External Affairs. This team and our senior leaders have put in place key initiatives to strengthen our work with a focus on continual improvement.”

NOTE

1  While skip-level feedback worked well for OIG and has been documented to work well for many other organizations, it can backfire if not managed skillfully. Other organizations that may be interested in this approach should proceed cautiously by ensuring that the purpose of the skip levels is clearly understood within the organizations and that facilitators of the process remain neutral and do not advocate for any specific outcomes.