"gives them the resources and authority they require to turns things around"
They probably could have given the same resources and authority to the existing staff and they might have turned things around too. It really annoys me that in so many cases the existing guys know what's wrong but are not allowed by management to do anything about it. Then management hires new people, gives them authority, and suddenly these guys are heroes and the existing people look like idiots.
There seems to be this tendency to think that existent workers are all idiots and the only way to do better is to hire new people (preferably young and from ivy league schools). In reality it's a leadership problem because they have set up dysfunctional environments that don't allow people to perform.
Disclosure: I'm an engineer at USDS and these are my own opinions.
We are very proud to be working along side the existing agency and contracting staff. You are right that many times, they do know how to fix it and need some help from us getting management to let them do it. Some times they are skeptical, sometimes there is friction - that's all completely understandable.
Ultimately, my time in government has opened my eyes to the talented folks inside government right now and I'm proud to be working along side them. I hope you didn't get a poor impression of us and the work that is happening.
I didn't mean to offend you at all. USDS is great. I just see this dismissive attitude of existing staff by management. But in reality it's management that messed things up, not staff.
Thanks. I appreciate that. I think you actually have a keen eye for the issues.
Since my time in government, I've become more sympathetic to agency employees, contractors, management - pretty much everyone. The entire environment is really challenging to do the right thing.
As an executive, the typical tools you have at your disposal, budget and HR, are circumscribed by congressional appropriations and federal hiring guidelines. Your ability to promote and demote and reorganize are limited by laws and unions and you definitely can't grant stock options. The metrics that you typically use to measure success are much fuzzier because there isn't a PNL but it's really easy for the press to find a single case where your org does a poor job.
I still maintain hope that good things can be done - I have seen it - and good management makes a huge difference.
Disclosure: I'm an engineer at USDS and these are my own opinions.
They probably could have given the same resources and authority to the existing staff and they might have turned things around too. It really annoys me that in so many cases the existing guys know what's wrong but are not allowed by management to do anything about it. Then management hires new people, gives them authority, and suddenly these guys are heroes and the existing people look like idiots.
There seems to be this tendency to think that existent workers are all idiots and the only way to do better is to hire new people (preferably young and from ivy league schools). In reality it's a leadership problem because they have set up dysfunctional environments that don't allow people to perform.