Search FCW


Subscribe Now!
Table of Contents
Sprint
Business
BPM
CXOs
Columns
Columnists
Defense
E-Government
Elections 2008
Enterprise Architecture
Funding
Homeland Security
Health IT
IPv6
LOB
Management
Procurement
Privacy
Policy
Program Management
State and Local
Security
Technology
Telework
Training and Certification
Workforce

More Topics
resourcecenter
Home
Letters to the Editor
Current Issue/Download
Print/Online Archives
Editorial Calendar
researchstore
resourcecenter
Communications for Continuity Operations

Oracle Resource Center
NEW! Transforming Data Center
Managed Services
Service Oriented Architecture
Training & Simulation
Networking Communications
Security Directives and Compliance
Data Center Virtualization
Air Force ELSG Contract Guide

More >>


FCW.com BLOG

Latest News
ADVERTISEMENT





 
The Lectern:

The Lectern: Google, Goldman and government

By Steve Kelman
Published on September 9, 2007 - 02:03 PM

Comment

Click here to comment on this blog


Newsletters

You might also be interested in these FCW newsletters:

Daily
Management

To learn more, click here.


In a recent Business Week, there was a fascinating feature called “The Future of Work.” At the beginning of the feature were results on various questions regarding work that were asked in a nationwide poll. Tne fascinating question that caught my eye was, “Which of these places would you most like to work?” The four choices were “the place I’m working now,” Google, the government and Goldman Sachs. Half of the respondents said the place they were working for now. What was most interesting was how the rest divided up: 29 percent for Google, 6 percent for Goldman Sachs, and 15 percent for the government -– lower than Google, but higher than Goldman. Don’t you think that’s a really high -– gratifyingly high -- number for the government? I do. The poll doesn’t divide this up among demographic or educational groups, so we don’t know to whom it is that government service appeals. But this says to me that government has a large potential reservoir of employees, if we are smart enough in our hiring practices, and above all in offering attractive workplaces, to get them. By the way, there was another interesting poll question in the same feature that asked people whether they thought that in a decade employees would be more motivated by self-fulfillment or by fear. More than 80 percent said “self-fulfillment” – a number that inspired a column I just wrote for Federal Computer Week on how inspectors general, the media, and so-called watchdogs try to manage the government by fear. I have titled the column “The Washington Fear Industry,” although authors have no control over article titles, so I have no idea whether FCW will usethat title. But look for it -- it should be out shortly.
View Comments

Steve - while the interest in Government is good news I would want to know a bit more about the attributes of the population. Using Myers-Briggs as a reference, does the population interested have a inclination toward stability, order, rules and security or some attributes suggestive of more adaptable attitudes. As a Government manager I found it interesting that the younger FERS-based employees frequently expressed views that mirrored the more traditional views of Government employees. The opportunities available under FERS to explore seemed not to attract their attention.

As to the rule of fear: I think people want it to be self-fulfillment but, at this time,fear rules the roost in many cases. Are there exceptions - of course, but current circumstances seemed to have done more than empower the fear industry, it has sanctified it. To be a member of the industry is to be presumptively right. The very industry that bemoans the lack of competition and transparency is itself guilty of hi-jacking honest dialogue and making the discussion of different opinions blasphemous.

Posted by: Mike Del-Colle at September 14, 2007 01:59 PM

Posted by jsmeditor on September 28, 2007 - 10:02 AM

I suggest careful consideration about attempting make any assumptions using the Meyer's Briggs as a predictive model. The model lacks both reliability and validity and is a self reporting "preference" tool. From a scientific point of view, these two items are very important measures for any psychometric tool. Both measures indicate a tools ability to reliably report what is measured and how consistent the tool is at reporting what is measured—unfortunately MB scores low in both. There are tools that can measure emotional intelligence (Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test.), behavioral factors measurements such as DiSC, and others. I am wondering if you are seeking to understand how people respond (behaviors towards) in a situation, or attempting to measure their perception of fear, control, etc in a situation. Bearing in mind that an individual’s response has a lot to do with context and perceived consequences.

Posted by: Kevin Cabral at September 17, 2007 01:10 PM

Posted by jsmeditor on September 28, 2007 - 10:06 AM


Post a Comment

To post a comment, you must be a registered user of FCW.com and be logged in. Use one of the forms below to login or register for FREE to FCW.com. To protect your privacy, you can use an alias as your username.

Login to FCW.com

E-mail Address:
Password:
Forgot your password?
Register and Post Comment

* First Name:
* Last Name:
* E-mail Address:
* Password:
* Retype Password:
* Blog Username:
* Comments:


E-mail me when new comments are posted in this thread?


upcoming event

Green Computing Summit, Ronald Reagan Building, Washington, DC
December 2 - December 3, 2008

Trusted Internet Connection and the Comprehensive National Cyber Security Initiative, The Willard Intercontinental Hotel, Washington, DC
December 4, 2008


 

head
fcw
issue
First Name State
Last Name Zip
Title Email