Too many federal executives think issuance of a memo changing a workplace policy will change the workplace. Policy memos or statements are wish lists unless there’s an implementation plan and follow-through. Management professor and former union president Bob Tobias joins the Federal Drive with Tom Temin with his perspective.

Interview transcript: 

Tom Temin I know this is something that’s been on your mind, great ideas kind of sit there if nobody implements them. And you saw a particular case where this has been happening.

Bob Tobias  I have, Tom. Once again, you know, the idea that public policy creation automatically leads to public policy implementation is just false. I mean, it’s just false. And, you know, there are some people who just intently focus on public policy creation, and then they get the documents signed, the legislation is passed, the policies, so forth. And then they, you know, break their arm, patting themselves on the back of how insightful and creative they are. And then they move on to the next issue, and fail to do the hard work of public policy implementation, and as you suggest, we saw this just recently at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. In 2020, their IG issued a report that found the FDIC had not created an adequate sexual harassment prevention program. So the FDIC did great work looking over the report, creating new policy about preventing sexual harassment in the workplace. Issued a plan. The IG approved it. The IG closed the case. Fast forward four years, the IG comes back, and what the IG finds is no behavior change in the workplace, they found that, quote, the FDIC failed to sustain OIG recommendations in short. In short, the FDIC failed to implement the sexual harassment prevention plans. It failed to recognize that effective public policy implementation requires changed behavior starting at the top.

Tom Temin  Well, in the FDIC case, it did not start at the top. Bad behavior, maybe not sexual harassment, but harassment and intimidation of employees continued at the top. And the chairman even said, well, I’ll resign after you confirm somebody new, which means I’m not going anywhere, because you know how long it takes, it’ll be the next administration. That’s a particularly egregious example of where, in many ways, the attitude emanated from the top.

Bob Tobias  Yes, it did. Leaders have to model the behavior they see, Tom, or the followers’ behavior doesn’t change. You know, as you suggested at the top, public policy creation is the issuance of a piece of paper. It’s a wish list. It’s a start. It’s a leader’s statement of the need for behavior change, but that has to be followed up with the identification of specific goals for change. For all those who are in the organization, including the leader, you have to provide support for the people who are struggling to change. You have to provide consequences for those who refuse to change. None of that happened at the FDIC.

Tom Temin  And beyond simply modeling good behavior, which many leaders do, that doesn’t ensure or guarantee that that behavior will be followed, but that’s a good place to start. But then again, when you have that policy, how do you go about creating a plan? You have to have some kind of a mechanism and consequences, I think, too, for when something doesn’t follow the policy.

Bob Tobias  Exactly. The irony here is, FDIC had the plan. They had the plan, but failed to implement it. So that’s the issue. That’s the rub. You know, we’re all aging in the workplace, and changing our behavior is not easy. You know, I can say, Tom, you ought to change your behavior, and you say, okay, Bob, I’ll do that. And then, of course, ignore me. So changing people’s behavior, particularly in an area like sexual harassment prevention, is really difficult. It requires increased awareness that I’m behaving in a bad way. It requires, and as you suggest, consequences, that didn’t happen at the FDIC.

Tom Temin  Yes, it’s almost like the doctor, when you say it hurts when I do this, and the doctor says, well, don’t do that. But that doesn’t really get to the cure of the problem. So a policy that says we shall not have sexual harassment, or we shall do this, whatever it might be, without the real follow through the cure, then you don’t have it. So as someone who has been in federal workplaces and adjudicated over federal workforces, how do you get a plan to become reality? How do you change behavior after you’ve stated what the model should be?

Bob Tobias  If I’m the leader, Tom I have to say, and you know, the FDIC leader might have said that when the FDIC IG report came out, he would say, I’m really embarrassed by what I see in this report. I’m terribly embarrassed about this, and I don’t want it to happen. I didn’t know it was happening. I wanted to stop. And I’m going to be paying attention. I’m going to be paying attention to the people that I lead, and I’m going to hold those they lead accountable for putting a stop to this. I’m going to encourage people to file sexual harassment complaints. I’m going to provide protection to those who file those complaints. Now, that would be a start, Tom, for federal employees, FDIC employees taking it all seriously. They’re inundated with change initiatives. All federal employees are. They don’t pay attention to all of them unless there’s specific follow up by the leader.

Tom Temin  Right. And there’s so much turnover of leadership sometimes that people feel, well, alright, we’ll see what the next person says that’s on top.

Bob Tobias  Exactly, Tom. I’ll wait this guy out. He’ll be leaving soon. You know, you know, he’s a dope. And when he goes, we’ll go right back to the status quo. So don’t worry about that.  And when the agency is thinking about policies that affect the public, for example, agencies are now under a mandate from the White House to improve customer experience. That’s another area where some federal employees are absolute. Most of them really are dedicated to giving good service to the public they encounter, but you get some that, for whatever reason, either their bad attitudes or simply the systems conspire to prevent them from doing what they would like to do. I think that’s more often the case than people deliberately not wanting to help the public. So don’t you also then need to build the systems and processes around what you want to happen so that you can enable people to make it happen? Exactly, Tom. I mean, the frontline employees, you know, the front facing employees need systems that support them, you know. So, for example, the IRS did not have the technology necessary to provide customer service. So the IRS employee who now speaks to a taxpayer who’s been waiting on the phone for an hour to get their simple question answered is not in a good mood, Tom. They’re impatient, they’re angry. And so who takes the hit on that? The employee who wants to provide service. And the same is true at Social Security, all of those front facing employees, where the staff has been cut over the last few years, and they’re unable to really timely process and meet with employees who have problems. And, you know, also, there are some small number of people who shouldn’t be in that kind of a job, and there should be consequences for that behavior. But as you suggest, the vast number of people want to do a good job. That’s why they came to the federal government, but they need the technical support to provide it.

Tom Temin  Yes, recently, Bloomberg has been reporting that a update to its financial system at NOAA, at the Commerce Department, National Oceanic, doesn’t work, and bills could not be paid, it would produce errors, really, a panoply of problems, prompting thousands of complaints, not from the vendors and suppliers who were not paid, but by the employees who wanted to get them paid and trying to deal with the system. Thousands and thousands of complaints by people who wanted to get people paid on time that were serving the government.

Bob Tobias  Well, that’s a perfect example of public employees trying to do their job and being thwarted by systems that are not supportive. And another way the systems are not supportive, Tom, is that leaders need to be in constant contact with the people who are providing that service so they really understand the problems that these public facing employees are facing, so that they can be fixed promptly.

Tom Temin  Bob Tobias is a former federal union president, also a public administration professor. As always, thanks so much.

Bob Tobias  It’s a pleasure to be with you, Tom. Thank you.

Tom Temin  We’ll post this interview with federalnewsnetwork.com/federaldrive. Hear the Federal Drive on demand. Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.

Copyright © 2024 Federal News Network. All rights reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.