John Kamensky

Within OMB, there is an active effort to catalyze agencies to develop and undertake a series of evidence and evaluation initiatives in ways that they can learn from each other and so they can quickly leverage promising practices.

A recent GAO report on the executive branch’s approach to new requirements in the Government Performance and Results Act recommends that “OMB improve the implementation of the act.” But a sub-theme in the report describes how agencies are actually building a long-term, solid foundation for a performance-driven government.

OMB’s guidance to agencies on the development of their FY 2015 budgets promises that “OMB will issue a separate memo at a later date that encourages the increased use of evidence and evaluation, including rigorous testing of innovative strategies to build new knowledge of what works.” This encouragement comes on top of a foundation already under development in many agencies. 

While the federal government is undertaking a number of evidence-based program initiatives, the “moneyball government” movement is broader, encompassing initiatives at the state, local, and even international levels.

Examples of State-Level Efforts

Some non-profits and foundations are advocates for the use of evidence-based decision-making in different policy arenas, while others advocate use of different tools or techniques for program evaluation.

One former senior level political appointee, Linda Springer, recently observed that a common set of successful characteristics private sector – being decisive, directive, and a risk taker – could actually undermine success in the public sector.  So what works best in the public sector?

Here’s my list of seven characteristics I see as the foundation for a personal commitment to being an effective public sector leader. These characteristics hold true for effective managers, as well:

How can governments at all levels engage their citizens in ways that are more meaningful – and fun -- to both the citizens and their community? A series of pioneering initiatives hold new promise that this now can be done on a much wider scale.

Leading Can Be Lonely.  Senior leaders can feel lonely when they have significant responsibilities and oftentimes little authority or control over a situation, and they have no one they can turn to.  I’ve seen several approaches to addressing this. 

But in reality, the success of a leader depends on the context, or environment, in which they work – the deck they’ve been dealt. Even the heroes. 

But as the context – the workplace, the workers, and the work – change (because we are in more of a knowledge-based economy) -- a different type of leader tends to be more successful, especially when the challenge is cross-agency and/or cross-sector. The “lone hero” isn’t always the most effective leader in this new world.  In fact, the best leaders tend to share leadership in any large-scale change effort.  For example: 

Government managers, however, can use these new approaches to dramatically improve the performance of their programs, if done right.