NSPS An Integrated Perspective Agenda

1
NSPS- An Integrated PerspectiveAgenda

• Introduction of Panel Members
• Acting Deputy Assistant, G-1,CP
• Overview of NSPS from a Programmatic
  Perspective
• Mr. Dean Pfoltzer, Deputy Director-PAED, DCS G-8
• Roadmap to Implementation and Lessons-Learned
• Mr. Steve Bagby, DASA, FMC-Cost and Economics
• Automated Tools- The Enhanced Workbench
• QA

2
National Security Personnel System Lessons
Learned Deputy Assistant G-1 for Civilian
Personnel 28 May 2008
3
BLUF

• Army successfully completed its first large
  rating cycle under NSPS
• 39,591 employees 404 pay pools
• Lessons learned solicited from commands
• Automated support tool (PAA) biggest issue

4
Rating Distribution
5
Army and DoD Rating Distributions
6
Shares Distribution
7
Army and DoD Shares Distributions
8
Feedback Common Themes

• Rating officials and pay pool panels did a good
  job at distinguishing levels of performance
• The shift in mindset from being rated top block
  to being rated at level 3 is a difficult one
• Job objectives and assessments need improvement
• Contributing factors are difficult
• Pay pool administrators need training and
  better-organized information

9
Automated Tools and Information

• Many comments received pertaining to performance
  management automated tools
• Performance Appraisal Application cited
  consistently as being very difficult and
  time-consuming
• New version being released Aug 2008 for next pay
  pool cycle
• Compensation Workbench was well-received
• Many suggestions for improvement received
• Army NSPS website on Civilian Personnel Online
  (CPOL) was commended as good source of
  information
• Many suggestions were received to make it more
  useful and efficient
• NSPS PMO is examining these suggestions and
  making changes accordingly

10
Business Rules

• Many organizations planning on making changes to
  business rules
• More consideration of salary progression
• More consistency between pay pools in the same
  command or organization
• Share distribution for level 3
• Salary/Bonus distribution

11
Other Leadership Concerns

• Pay pool officials should be able to change
  appraisals
• Currently only rating official can make changes
  seen as inefficient
• Need relief from 5 limitation of salary
  increases for in-band reassignments
• Causing inequities in compensation and bad press
• Consider splitting pay band 2
• Need relief from Priority Placement Program (PPP)
  requirement to clear entire pay band
• Large increase in matches
• DoD has agreed to change this
• Unknown date for Bargaining Unit entry into NSPS
  
• NDAA 08 allows national-level bargaining (never
  been done)

12
NSPS REDUCTION IN FORCE CHANGES

• FY 2008 National Defense Authorization Act
  eliminated NSPS Workforce
  Shaping
• 5 CFR 351.402(b) stipulates that a competitive
  area is solely defined by organizational unit and
  geographic location
• DoD froze all RIFs/transfer of functions
  involving a mix of General Schedule/Federal Wage
  System/NSPS employees
• 15 April 2008 Federal Register (FR) proposes
  competitive area change
• Army RIF guidance developed subject to
  coordination with Commands, leadership and union
  collaboration.

13
NSPS Program Evaluation

• Evaluate NSPS within Army to
• Assure compliance with law and regulation
• Assess NSPS internal controls
• Identify areas which may require further review
• Three tiered approach
• Ongoing data analysis
• Onsite in Progress Reviews
• Special Studies

14
Questions
15

• Backup Slides

16
NSPS Pay Actions
17
NSPS Pay Actions by Rating
18
NSPS Payout Amounts by Rating

• Does not include
• Rate Range Adjustments (1.5)
• Local Market Supplements (average 1)

19
G-8 NSPS Implementation After-Action Review Mr.
Dean Pfoltzer Deputy Director Program
Analysis and Evaluation, DCS G-8
20
Agenda

• A Leadership Initiative, HQDA FMC/G-8 Roadmap
• Pay Pool Structure Options
• G-8 Pay Pool Architecture
• Pay Pool Funding
• G-8 Ratings Distribution
• G-8 Shares Awarded Distribution
• Implementation Challenges
• Lessons Learned
• Compensation Management

21
NSPS is a Leadership Initiative

• Leadership - Planning
• Formation of joint HQDA FMC/G-8 Executive
  Steering Group (ESG)
• Explored uncharted territory
• Identified key individuals to develop
  organizational knowledge and lead working groups
• Created 4 working groups to explore, learn, and
  provide recommendations
• Pay Pool Management/Business Rules
• Staffing and Employment
• Pay Setting
• Performance Objectives/Organizational Goals and
  Objectives
• Functioned as the decision making team for NSPS

22
NSPS is a Leadership Initiative

• Leadership Communication and Training
• Socialized NSPS concepts
• Town Halls conducted with all employees
• Institutionalized meaning of a valued performer
• Transition Managers monitored, tracked, confirmed
  all employees were trained
• Leadership Decisioning via the ESG
• Reviewed findings and recommendations from 4
  working groups
• Identified Pay Pool Managers and Panel Members
• Finalized pay pool architecture
• Finalized and published business rules
• Reviewed results of mock pay pools
• Defined pay pool funding levels

23
Pay Pool Structure Options

• Along organizational lines
• Mission/Mission Support
• By function
• Career Groups
• Pay Bands
• Occupation
• By geographic location
• By workforce
• Pay Pool Size Range 50 to 150

MACOM Decides
Directorate Pay Pool
Sub-Panel Div -B
Sub-Panel Div -C
Sub-Pan Div - A
Sub-Panel Engineers
-Panel Contracting
Sub-Panel Admin
Montana
24
HQDA G-8 Pay Pool Structure Composition
PAY POOL PANEL 2
PAY POOL PANEL 3
PAY POOL PANEL 1
PAY POOL PANEL 4
Total 234
Pay Pool Panel Manager Civilian Panel
Members DIG - COL QDR - COL FO - LTC ASPMO -
Civilian
Pay Pool Panel Manager Civilian Panel
Members PDD - COL PDD - Civilian PBDMD -
Civilian CIPAD - COL CIPAD - Civilian MAFPAD -
COL MAFPAD - Civilian ASPAD - COL ASPAD -
Civilian
Pay Pool Panel Manager Civilian Panel
Members FDZ - COL FDT - Civilian DOR -
Civilian DOI - Civilian DOM - Civilian
Pay Pool Panel Manager Military Panel
Members CAA 3 Military-COL CAA 7 Civilian

25
Pay Pool Funding 2008 GPI
2008 GPI 3.5 Locality
1.0 Remaining Funding Rate Range
Adj. 1.5 (60 of 2.5) Pay Pool Element
2 1.0 (40 of 2.5) 2.5
NSPS Employee under standards for 90 days
Note All employees received the rate range
adjustment and locality pay. The remaining 40
of the general pay increase was applied to base
pay funding in the pay pools and distributed
based on performance.
FOUO
26
HQDA G-8 Ratings Distribution
FOUO
27
HQDA G-8 Shares Awarded Distribution
As the number of shares increases, the share
value is diluted.
FOUO
28
Implementation Challenges

• Time Intensive
• Panels met twice- scheduling challenges
• Panel members required to attend all meetings-no
  exceptions
• Full-time effort for data administrators
• Executive level meetings bi-monthly
• System and Automated Tools
• Learning curve on automated tools
• Inadequate software
• PAA not user-friendly
• Cumbersome linkage between automated tools
• Need flexibility to accommodate real-time changes
  during panel deliberations
• Software problems became identified with NSPS
  hindered acceptance of change
• Guidance
• Guidance changed frequently
• Eligibility issues
• GPI split
• Work-arounds for automated tools

29
Lessons Learned

• Writing Appraisals
• Managers and employees need to build writing
  skills
• Effectiveness is critical - describe the impact
  on the organization/mission of an action
• OSD recommends 3-4 objectives - maximum of 5
  avoid equal weighting
• OSD recommends no more than two contributing
  factors
• PAA
• Draft objectives and reviews in MS Word, cut and
  paste into the PAA
• Use word count and spell check
• System and Automated Tools
• PAA is cumbersome, not user-friendly Plan time
  to navigate this tool
• CWB does not provide flexibility to accommodate
  varying compensation logic
• Conducting Pay Pool Panel Meetings
• Panel members need to come to meetings trained
  and prepared
• All panel members must attend all meetings- no
  exceptions
• Ensure that business rules have been established
  ahead of time

30
Compensation Management

• Find the right balance.
• Effectiveness vs. Efficiency
• No new dollars
• Monitor and understand your civilian pay
  execution it will be reflected in your future
  CivPay rates.
• Pay Pool Funding
• Base/Bonus split
• Reassignments and Promotions
• Institutionalize guidelines to prevent
  cannibalization and unplanned base salary growth
• Develop common scope and complexity definitions
  and guidelines

31
Compensation Management

• Hiring Decisions
• Business Rules regarding authority levels
• Starting salaries commensurate with scope and
  complexity
• Reflective of effectiveness vs. efficiency
  trade-off
• Total R (remuneration)
• Direct Cash
• Benefits and Incentives
• Intrinsic Rewards
• Develop Compensation Management Knowledge-Long
  Term
• Resources
• Consider having a dedicated resource for the
  organizations compensation needs
• Partner with HR Advisory Compensation Analyst
  (job classification for this advisory capability
  is underway at OSD)
• Training
• Compensation training offered by OSD-CPMS will
  become available
• Build compensation management training into
  Resource Managers professional development
  curriculum

32
Backup
33
Command Level Leadership

• Delegation Authority
• Accommodates skip year of performance awards
• Communicates with competing Commands to minimize
  cannibalization
• Identifies pay pool structure appropriate to the
  organization
• Identifies pay pool panel members managers
• Develops Metrics
• monitor pay costs
• affordability analysis
• Identifies hiring strategies
• interns vice journeymen
• hot skills
• retention issues
• Mandates affordability review of hiring and
  promotion actions
• Determines hiring and salary negotiation policy
  and levels of authority
• Establishes pay band control points
• Ensures internal and external equity across the
  organization opportunity to realign based on
  scope and complexity of jobs
• Determines job classification and salary
  stratification within pay bands (delegated to the
  Commands by AG-1 CP)

34
Sample Business Rules for Pay Setting

• Setting Initial Pay
• Hiring Authority may recommend up to 3 increase
  above current salary
• PPM may approve up to 5
• PRA must approve above 5
• Reassignment
• Hiring Authority may recommend up to 3
• PPM must approve 3-5
• Promotions
• Hiring Authority may recommend up to 6
• PPM must approve between 6-12
• PRA must approve above 12

35
Basis for Civilian Pay Rate Development

• CTYPE (type of employee)
• 101- GS
• 102- Wage Grade
• 105- Koreans
• 110- Other Direct hire Foreign Nationals
• 121- SES
• 124/125- Miltechs
• 130- HQDA Interns
• 305- Students
• 202- German Nationals
• 204- Korean Service Corp.
• 205- Japanese Master Labor Contract
• 206- Other Indirect Hire Foreign Nationals

• Rate Group (type of work)
• 1) AMHA
• 2) BaseOps, AFHO
• 3) all other
• 4) RDTE- Mission
• 5) MCA- Mission
• 6) AWCF- Mission
• ROC (location)
• 1) Resource Organization Code

36
Enhanced Workbench (EWB) Mr. Steve Bagby
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army, Cost and
Economics
37
Enhanced Workbench (EWB)Our Primary Focus for
NSPS

• Increase Productivity
• Provide incentives for superior work
• Larger financial rewards
• Larger and faster raises
• Larger bonuses
• Ability to advance more quickly
• Flexibility in assigning work
• Fairness
• Judge employees performance objectively
• Reward employees objectively
• Same situation same reward

38
Enhanced Workbench (EWB)2 Shares (66.4
receiving 2 Shares or less)
39
Enhanced Workbench (EWB)Popular Methods

• Default Payout Split
• Everyone receives the same percentage of
  performance award to base pay increases
• Share Basis Option
• Assign a percentage of the award to go to base
  pay increases based on the number of shares
  awarded
• Merit Matrix Option
• Divides the pay range into subdivisions and
  assigns a base pay increase percentage based on
  where the employees falls in the pay range and
  shares awarded
• Enhanced Workbench (EWB)
• Similar to Merit Matrix, but it takes into
  account the rating distribution, applies business
  rules related to minimum increases, and has
  functions to automatically redistribute as
  necessary to meet funding floor

40
Enhanced Workbench (EWB)Method Comparison for
Base Pay Allocation
Which method promotes meaningful recognition?
41
Enhanced Workbench (EWB)Summary

• Biggest driver of performance awards are the NSPS
  rating and associated shares
• Must ensure objectives are clear and the employee
  has control over accomplishment of objectives
• Enhanced Workbench (EWB) provided a baseline
  payout split that ensured employees compensation
  was fair, equitable, and based on objective
  criteria
• http//www.asafm.army.mil/secretariat/nsps/autotoo
  l/autotool.asp

42
Questions