Volume IV, Number 3 & 4, 1998

Issue Topic: Learning Organizations

Questions & Answers

Interview With Patricia McGinnis

Patricia McGinnis, President and CEO of the Council for Excellence in Government, discusses the potential of and constraints to public sector organizational learning in the current climate of accountability.

Substantial changes have taken place in the public sector recently. One of the most important has been the focus on results-based accountability. At the federal level, accountability has been codified in the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993, which requires federal agencies to develop strategic plans and report annually on their performance. At the same time that accountability systems are being firmly set in place, interest in the notion of “organizational learning” in the public sector has grown. Learning organizations seek to improve outcomes through a dynamic process that enables them to collect, utilize, and act on data in an organizational climate that supports and fosters change. Organizational learning, like accountability, has the potential to improve policy and program decision making. We asked Patricia McGinnis, President and CEO of the Council for Excellence in Government, to discuss the potential of and constraints to public sector organizational learning in the current climate of accountability.

What does organizational learning mean in the context of public organizations?

The concept of organizational learning is not terribly different in the public and private sectors. It means building upon what works and exhibiting a willingness to change, probably continuously, in order to be more effective. Operationally, organizational learning in both sectors has the same components, although the components may look a little different, but there is, to some extent, a greater complexity in the public sector in the area of measurement and even in the area of setting goals. For organizational learning to occur, the organization needs to have very clear goals, priorities, and measures. You need to have an alignment of goals and measures for people, for budgeting and financial management, and for assessing organizational results. You also need—and this is tremendously important—clear communication among people working in the organization and with stakeholders, partners, and customers. In the case of the public sector, this means not just customers, but the citizens you are serving, whether they are direct customers or not.

Alignment of goals is extremely important. In many public organizations, I’ve noticed that the personnel system, the budget system, the financial management system, and now the GPRA strategic planning system, are operating on separate tracks. There is no consistency among the goals and measures for each of these systems, and alignment of these is essential for organizational success. For example, people in teams need to have specific goals and measures that are consistent with the larger organizational goals and strategic planning; their role in meeting an organization’s ultimate goals needs to be very clear.

When it is very clear what you are trying to accomplish, then people can be very smart and creative about how to organize themselves to accomplish well-understood goals. This means more than just the work of teams within an organizational structure; it means thinking about how to reach out to those outside the organization and make them part of the team. In this sense, the public is very important. The public is not involved enough now, and we see the consequences of that in the lack of public confidence and trust in government. I think there is a communications gap between the government and the broader public. It is hard for organizations to deal with the public; it is easier for them to work with their direct stakeholders, those organizations really interested in what they are doing and the customers they are directly serving. But if organizations look at what the public is saying about the things they care about, they can learn and perhaps reach out to involve the public more effectively. This year in the Innovations in American Government awards, we saw several examples of organizations that were really engaging the public in setting priorities and implementing their programs. Their work was improved because of this, and I think they were getting more support from the public and legislatures.

Are accountability and organizational learning at odds?

They are very compatible, but not the same. Accountability can be seen as measuring results against clearly stated goals. Organizational learning involves goals and measurements, but as you look at what is happening, you are open to changing the goals and priorities and adjusting them, based on what you are learning and the information you are seeing. Hopefully, accountability encompasses organizational learning but I do not think, at this point, that the flexibility implied by organizational learning is often included in the concept of accountability.

It is very important in a system like GPRA to create a greater understanding and trust between managers in the government agencies and in the Congress so that there is an interest in learning about both what is working and what is not working and to avoid a “gotcha” mentality. We need to build upon what works and try to adapt or change what is not working. I think this is happening in some cases, such as in the transportation area. The Department of Transportation is using the strategic planning process to try to bring the various transportation modes together and to focus on specific goals and measures. The authorizing committee is working very constructively with the Department to learn from this information and to use it to improve the design of these programs. This process has worked because of leadership and trust between the Department and the Congressional committee. But it is also important to recognize that in transportation, safety is a very clear goal for which there are some fairly good measures, even though measurement can still be improved. It is also a goal that is very compelling to the public. Thus, transportation has the ingredients to be successful. In some organizations, where the outcomes are not so easily measured and not so clear or compelling, it is a little more difficult. It is useful, however, to have models that do work, and we should focus on agencies like the Department of Transportation to get the process right and learn from that.

To do this right requires more than just smart planning; it requires creating a team spirit around priorities and goals. Right now, a lot of agencies are worried that Congress will punish them in the appropriations process, so they are not necessarily willing to put everything out on the table in the way that they would if there were a real partnership. I think we have a long way to go on that, and I am not sure how it is going to work out in GPRA, but it has the right components and the right players, with the Congress having a major role. The opportunity is there.

What is necessary for public organizations to be accountable and to be learning organizations?

I think that in terms of organizational dynamics, there must be teamwork, communication, and trust. People are coming from different perspectives, and they need to build a certain trust that they are working on the same agenda. You need clear goals. A lot of goals that I see are not clear; they are very process oriented. You need goals that focus on the end results and on the results that are important to the public interest. Then, you need measures that really do measure effectiveness.

You need leadership that communicates and motivates. When you see a successful organization, you generally see that kind of leadership. In terms of information management, you need to give managers and teams data about what is working, in a very useable and accessible way. Technology, particularly the Internet, is making that easier. It is also making what is going on a lot more transparent, not only to managers but also to the people being served and others. It is very important to recognize and celebrate success, particularly of teams and whole organizations. I tend to think that a strong focus on individual incentives, in terms of bonuses and other financial incentives, can be counterproductive. It is best not to focus on an individual who is trying to show that he or she has done something spectacular. You want individuals who work effectively as members of teams and whose goals are not individual goals but organizational ones.

I believe that if you have a good system of measurement and have defined the right results, you can trade flexibility for accountability using those measures. It is important not to micromanage and not to second guess how teams are operating, but rather to allow them to be creative. In fact, it is important to encourage them to take some risks—and even to fail, and to learn from their failure. It is really encouraging that this subject is being discussed so widely and is becoming a fundamental part of the process of planning and management. I am very encouraged by the passage of GPRA, even though we do not yet know how well it will work. There is a lot of potential, and the fact that the public is really demanding results helps. If legislators, managers, and front-line deliverers of services can all focus on results, then I think we will see much greater value given to organizational learning.

Jessica Chapel, Editorial Assistant, HFRP

Karen Horsch, Research Associate, HFRP