This report describes the similarities and differences between 5 U.S.C. par. 4303, and 7513, the two sections of the law that authorize an agency to take an adverse action against a Federal employee for poor performance. In that context, the report addresses the limited ability of the law to address the underlying challenges of a performance-based action. Poor performers are a serious concern for the Federal workforce, and one that the Government has historically had difficulties addressing. However, as this report explains, the biggest obstacle to addressing poor performers in the Federal Government is not created by a statute, but rather is simply a question of how supervisors manage the performance of their employees. Illustrations.

Examines the effectiveness of Fed. first-level supervisors and how well agencies select, develop, and manage them. First-line supervisors, as the nexus between gov¿t. policy and action, are critical to productivity, employee engagement, and workplace fairness. Supervisory positions -- even at the first level -- have distinctive responsibilities and skill requirements. Therefore, it is essential that agencies have valid selection criteria and processes, comprehensive training programs, good communication and support networks, and sound accountability mechanisms for their first-level supervisors. In addition, this report recommends specific measures to improve supervisors management and performance. Charts and tables.

Focuses on how leaders can drive employee engagement and increase high performance mgmt.; i.e., the actions leaders from first-line supervisors to exec. can take to facilitate the motivation and commitment of their employees. The effort leaders invest in managing their workforce pays off in substantially higher levels of employee engagement and performance. The recommendations it offers for increasing both engagement and performance can be characterized in three words: communication, connection, and courage. These are the foundation of performance mgmt. -- communicating openly and honestly with employees, connecting with them as people to build good working relationships, and demonstrating the courage to address and resolve problems. Illus.

Federal Government agencies are moving to better align pay with performance & create organizational cultures that emphasize performance rather than tenure. However, agencies must invest time, money, & effort in the design of their pay for performance compensation systems in order to succeed. To help agencies understand the critical prerequisites to success & key decision points, a review was conducted of professional & academic writings on the topic of pay for performance. This user-friendly guide summarizes the research findings. Contents: a summary of pay for performance; benefits & risks associated with pay for performance; pay for performance decision points; conclusions & recommendations; & bibliography. Illustrations.

This report identifies how the U.S. government can improve its ability to recruit and hire entry-level professional and administrative employees. To prepare for a potential retirement wave, Federal agencies will likely increase their entry-level hiring to rebuild the pipeline from entry-level positions through the journey-level and beyond. Given this context, it is important to assess how well the Federal hiring process is working, particularly in terms of the Government¿s ability to recruit entry-level new hires from all segments of society and select employees on the basis of merit after fair and open competition. The recommendations in this report focus on how to improve entry-level hiring efforts while also protecting merit. Illustrations.

The U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) launched a re-examination of the prevalence of prohibited personnel practices (PPP) within the Federal Government. This report highlights what the MSPB has learned from past studies in which they examined PPP. It focuses on the PPP because occurrences of these particular behaviors can have an exceptionally negative impact on the morale and productivity of any Federal office. This report identifies 12 PPP, such as discrimination, retaliation, nepotism, deceit or obstruction, coercing political activity, violating veterans¿ preference requirements, or taking or failing to take any personnel action that violates any law, rule, or regulation directly concerning the merit system principles. Illustrations.