SECNAV to Implement Sweeping Changes

[squorch2]

So, if that guy at Google who just loves to code but doesn't want a C suite office is not helping move the ball forward than he goes.

This is wrong and not applicable to the civilian sector. (Thanks, up or out!)

Source: currently working for a top tier IT services company.

 

[hscs]

This is wrong and not applicable to the civilian sector. (Thanks, up or out!)

Source: currently working for a top tier IT services company.

Could you elaborate? My experience with friends and family is that if you aren't helping the company move the ball forward you won't be with said company for long.

 

[Hair Warrior]

Could you elaborate? My experience with friends and family is that if you aren't helping the company move the ball forward you won't be with said company for long.

The private sector is far too varied to make sweeping generalizations. That said, there are countless firms that do follow an up-or-out model. Mine's one of them. As long as you meet your billability targets, there is no incentive for the firm to let you go. You're profitable. The age range at our Associate level (9k staff members, or about 40% of the firm) probably spans ages 25-70. If you want to get promoted, you'll have to do much more... but as long as you're content and billable, you can just keep on truckin with a steady 40-hour work week at your same level til you retire (no business development or managerial responsibilities, either).

Other industries that often don't follow an up-or-out model:
- Teaching (pre-K through college)
- Retail (Target, Walmart, Lowe's, Home Depot, Macy's, 7-11)
- Janitorial/custodial services
- Plumbing/electrician
- Forestry/paper/minerals
- Manufacturing
- Fast food
- Hospitality/cuisine
- Law firms (some)
- Accounting firms (some)
- Money managers/ wealth management (some)
- Federal/state/local/tribal government administration

 

[hscs]

As long as you meet your billability targets, there is no incentive for the firm to let you go. You're profitable.

This is my point. The question now becomes how does DOD go to a system like this?

Your firm can measure billable hours. How do you do that in DOD without ending up with people you can't let go when they don't perform?

 

[Hair Warrior]

This is my point. The question now becomes how does DOD go to a system like this?

Your firm can measure billable hours. How do you do that in DOD without ending up with people you can't let go when they don't perform?

Without opening a massive can o worms, I don't think billable hours is the right approach for a military. It's not even that great for us. I still see a lot of waste, rework, and redundant efforts.

The DoD already has some pay-for-performance measures. If you're deployed, you get hazard pay/ sea pay. If you have a special skill, you get a little extra.

The DoD used to have civilian pay-for-performance in NSPS, which wasn't perfect. But the current administration repealed NSPS.

If you're looking for solutions, check out Partnership For Public Service. Their stuff is a bit bland and incremental (as opposed to transformational), but they have some ideas that move the "bloated government" ball generally in the right direction. Another great resource is the annual Wastebook by Senators Coburn and Flake, although that document usually highlights more problems than it does solutions.

 

[Flash]

The DoD used to have civilian pay-for-performance in NSPS, which wasn't perfect. But the current administration repealed NSPS.

That was a disaster, I am more than happy it is largely gone.

 

[Hair Warrior]

This is my point. The question now becomes how does DOD go to a system like this?

Your firm can measure billable hours. How do you do that in DOD without ending up with people you can't let go when they don't perform?

Okay, to revisit your original question. If you reaaaaaaaaally wanted to pursue this, here is how you'd go about it...

Every commander gets a pot of money. This pot of money should be less than or equal to the value that the American people place on the unit achieving its mission. So assign someone to figure that number out. The mission is written down fairly plainly in a statement, but there is a bit of wiggle room. Now, every sailor in the unit has an hourly billable dollar rate equal to ((salary + BAH) / 1,920) * multiple, where your "multiple" is whatever overhead you want to add for all the Navy training, equipment, health care, office space, oversight/management, insurance to cover stuff this person might later break/destroy, etc. Pick a number between 2 and 10. Sailors can have different multiples, depending on care/feeding/training, so maybe assign someone to figure that out. Then, each year, the unit commander can hire whatever mix of sailors at whatever staffing arrangement he/she wants to perform the mission. Maybe the commander wants to have 1 LCDR and 20 PO3's do the job. Maybe the commander just wants 8 really sharp, motivated LTs. The only constraints are that the commander has to meet the mission on time, and below cost ("meeting the mission" also includes all your standard ethics, core values, national defense, team player, joint-ness type stuff). Maybe you bring in a LCDR for a couple months to plan out the work, and then that LCDR goes off to another mission, and you finish the job with junior enlisted. If a sailor is not picked by the commander to do the mission, that sailor is free to find another commander in another unit with another mission. Caution: This becomes kind of a free-for-all, with lots of "butt hurt" for personnel. Any sailor without a mission is considered "on the bench" and the Navy/taxpayer doesn't get any ROI for carrying that sailor's costs. If a sailor is "on the bench" long enough because no commander wants to hire him/her, the Navy can invol sep that sailor.

Here's the kicker: Every year the commander has to find a mission and persuade the American taxpayers that it's a worthy mission... maybe 2% worthier than it was last year. If it's a great deal worthier mission, and you can persuade the resources to rise with the mission importance, then next year you have a bigger budget when staffing your force to meet that mission. Oh, and pretty regularly, the USAF, USMC, USCG, Army, NASA, CIA, DIA, and maybe even the USPS or IRS will come along and try to persuade the American people that they can do your mission faster, better, or cheaper than you can. Good luck keeping all of your SUPPOs when GSA comes along and undercuts your costs by 50% because they have a far lower "multiple" - remember you chose this earlier, and now you have to live/die by it.

/end awkward allegory to a management consulting firm

Again, this would be a terrible, no-good structure. Not recommended for any military service... or really any life-or-death organization (firefighters, rescue squad, etc.)

 

[magnetfreezer]

Okay, to revisit your original question. If you reaaaaaaaaally wanted to pursue this, here is how you'd go about it...

Every commander gets a pot of money. This pot of money should be less than or equal to the value that the American people place on the unit achieving its mission. So assign someone to figure that number out. The mission is written down fairly plainly in a statement, but there is a bit of wiggle room. Now, every sailor in the unit has an hourly billable dollar rate equal to ((salary + BAH) / 1,920) * multiple, where your "multiple" is whatever overhead you want to add for all the Navy training, equipment, health care, office space, oversight/management, insurance to cover stuff this person might later break/destroy, etc. Pick a number between 2 and 10. Sailors can have different multiples, depending on care/feeding/training, so maybe assign someone to figure that out. Then, each year, the unit commander can hire whatever mix of sailors at whatever staffing arrangement he/she wants to perform the mission. Maybe the commander wants to have 1 LCDR and 20 PO3's do the job. Maybe the commander just wants 8 really sharp, motivated LTs. The only constraints are that the commander has to meet the mission on time, and below cost ("meeting the mission" also includes all your standard ethics, core values, national defense, team player, joint-ness type stuff). Maybe you bring in a LCDR for a couple months to plan out the work, and then that LCDR goes off to another mission, and you finish the job with junior enlisted. If a sailor is not picked by the commander to do the mission, that sailor is free to find another commander in another unit with another mission. Caution: This becomes kind of a free-for-all, with lots of "butt hurt" for personnel. Any sailor without a mission is considered "on the bench" and the Navy/taxpayer doesn't get any ROI for carrying that sailor's costs. If a sailor is "on the bench" long enough because no commander wants to hire him/her, the Navy can invol sep that sailor.

Here's the kicker: Every year the commander has to find a mission and persuade the American taxpayers that it's a worthy mission... maybe 2% worthier than it was last year. If it's a great deal worthier mission, and you can persuade the resources to rise with the mission importance, then next year you have a bigger budget when staffing your force to meet that mission. Oh, and pretty regularly, the USAF, USMC, USCG, Army, NASA, CIA, DIA, and maybe even the USPS or IRS will come along and try to persuade the American people that they can do your mission faster, better, or cheaper than you can. Good luck keeping all of your SUPPOs when GSA comes along and undercuts your costs by 50% because they have a far lower "multiple" - remember you chose this earlier, and now you have to live/die by it.

/end awkward allegory to a management consulting firm

Again, this would be a terrible, no-good structure. Not recommended for any military service... or really any life-or-death organization (firefighters, rescue squad, etc.)

Good allegory - to whom do we bill time spent on human trafficking CBTs and mass formations at 0700 Saturday when someone screws up?

 

[Hair Warrior]

Good allegory - to whom do we bill time spent on human trafficking CBTs and mass formations at 0700 Saturday when someone screws up?

Lol. Actually we have a separate charge number for mandatory recurring training like that. It technically comes out of profit, but that's what your multiple is for. Also, if you're on a firm fixed price "mission," you just ask your team to work slightly longer weeks (without paying them overtime) to make up the hours. That's what our company does anyway.

 

[xj220]

A lot of interesting points and info in here. I'd comment, but a lot of it is over my head and this:

 

[rotorhead1871]

I'll use myself as an example. By the time I leave my current orders, I'll have been on sea duty for 12 years straight (all flying tours), and I've been deployed for almost 6 of those years (not counting workups, conus dets, etc). If I had been required to go to a boat for the "traditional" disassociated, I would've gotten out of the Navy.

Sea duty isn't the problem as I see it for a lot of guys, it's the expectations of having to be the best at what you do in the cockpit and then getting yanked out to do some non-relevant job under the guise that it will enhance one's career, when, at least in the helo community, it hasn't been.

you will probably have no problem hitting your 12 year gate for ACIP.

great job!