Summary: Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey

Data Collection Methods

In 2017, top-level management asked all federal employees to participate in the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey. From the results of that survey, the WRO management team compared their scores with those of other federal agencies, the Department of Defense, and the Defense Contract Audit Agency. The results specific to the WRO suggest that employees are experiencing lower levels of employee motivation in comparison to the other offices examined. To determine why employee motivation was low, the WRO management team created a follow-up survey and distributed the survey to employees and management at the WRO. The questions that were asked in the follow-up survey were measured on a 5-point scale ranging from very dissatisfied

to very satisfied. Management focused on 10 questions that spanned a wide variety of topics in order to pinpoint the root causes for the problem of low employee motivation. From the 30 employees at the WRO, management received 25 responses. Our consulting firm will use the focused results of this follow-up survey in synthesizing the root causes of low employee motivation. Our firm will also look to secondary research from credible sources to supplement the WRO survey and provide context surrounding issues and solutions.
Data Analysis
To fest the hypothesized problem of low employee motivation at the WRO, our firm concludes that the best measurement to analyze is the employee satisfaction score, better known as the net promoter score (NPS). To calculate the NPS of an organization from a survey, we quantified respondents’ answers between the ranges of zero to ten. We classified any respondents whose scores fall between zero and six as detractors, any respondents whose scores are between seven and eight as passives, and any respondents whose scores are between nine and ten as promoters. Typically, we define the NPS score by the number of promoters less the number of detractors. However, our firm, in search of quantifying employee satisfaction, weighted the detractors’, passives’, and promoters’, scores to find that the overall satisfaction of employees at the WRO is at about 82%, meaning that 82% of respondents to the survey distributed by the WRO are satisfied in their current role, given their current resources.
From the survey conducted at the WRO, we found that the three lowest-scored questions directly explained the root causes that we hypothesized earlier. The first question, “In my office, differences in performance are recognized in a meaningful way,” suggests that reward offerings are a cause of lowered employee satisfaction. The second question, “I’m given the opportunity to demonstrate my leadership skills,” suggests that a lack of participation by employees in making decisions has lead the WRO to a decrease in employee satisfaction. Finally, the question, “I am given a real opportunity to improve my skills in my office,” suggests that a lack of perceived growth opportunities is leading to lower employee satisfaction levels.
From initial examination of these figures, one may feel that 82% satisfaction is a decent score.

However, we suspect that the 18% of dissatisfied employees may fall within your critical 20%. John C. Maxwell discusses this critical 20% in his popular book “Developing the Leader in You.” Maxell applies the Pareto Principle to business practicality by stating that 20% of your workforce will produce 80% of your results (citation). Given that our analysis of rewards, participation and growth opportunities appear to be adversely affecting high performers the most, we must suspect that the dissatisfied 18% may be comprised mostly of our top 20%ers. Given that they are responsible for 80% of the organizations output this impact is much greater than it may appear on the

surface.
Recommendations
DCAA, and the WRO, already offer incentives including telecommuting, flextime, and other alternative work arrangements to motivate employees. However, these incentives do not address the root causes of low employee motivation at the WRO. We recommend the implementation and expansion of extrinsic and intrinsic reward programs, increasing auditor solicitation when distributing assignments, and look for cross-training opportunities to increase employee development to address low motivation through fixing the root causes.
Reward Offerings
The correlation between motivation and rewards provides an opportunity to increase motivation among the WRO employees. We recognize our limitations to completely rewiring employee perceptions regarding distributive injustice in reward allocation. Congress creates, governs, and approves any changes to federal employee pay structure and we cannot redesign the pay structure to a variable, pay-for performance, program. However, improvements are possible.
First, to address low reward offerings, we recommend the WRO use an intrinsic reward to expand the current employee of the month recognition and award process to include another recognition award for employee of the quarter. Robbins and Judge reference that employee recognition programs are beneficial because they found through employee surveying, that recognition is a strong workplace motivator. To mix in an extrinsic reward, the employee of the quarter will receive an 8-hour time off award. By adding this intrinsic reward, management will abide by Expectancy Theory and increase motivation.
Furthermore, we recommend that supervisors provide team members On the Spot (OTS) cash and time off awards as an extrinsic reward. Through discussion with the WRO management, cash funds are limited but time off awards are not. Supervisors should provide OTS cash awards for exceptional performance and time off awards as audit efforts merits such. By providing extrinsic and intrinsic rewards, the WRO management will create a balance between employee’s performance and expected outcomes. In effect, management will fix distributive injustice created by standardized policies such as the pay scale.
Low Employee Participation in Decision Making
We recommend that Participative Work Team (PWT) meetings include time where management solicits auditor input in distribution of audit assignments. The WRO currently holds PWT meetings monthly to keep auditors abreast of organizational news. In these meetings, management discusses agency guidance, workload, quality standards, and current findings. Judge and Robbins explore the benefits of using employee involvement and participation to motivate employees. They stated, “If workers are engaged in decisions that increase their autonomy and control over their work lives, they will become more motivated, committed to the organization, productive, and satisfied with their jobs.”
Using PWT meetings to solicit auditor input will allow front line workers, who are most familiar with the challenges and opportunities surrounding audits, to share their observations and make suggestions. This may include process improvement suggestions, the offering of data to assist in forecasting, and assignment recommendations based on their in depth understanding of individual auditor’s workload and ability levels. We believe increased auditor input will engage SDT in employees, and motivation to accomplish work will increase.
Opportunity for Employee Development
We recommend that the WRO management also use PWT meetings as a forum to identify and discuss cross-training opportunities for auditors.

Having your employees actively participate in their career planning and enrichment gives them the sense that they do have control over their futures. By using participative management, the WRO can potentially unleash benefits such as lower turnover rates and higher labor productivity while increasing employee productivity, motivation, and job satisfaction (Robbins & Judge, 2014.) Most often individuals tend to be more motivated in areas of their lives that they feel they have some control in their development. By creating cross-training opportunities, the WRO management will create team cohesion because everyone is learning from each other. Additionally, cross training will give auditors the knowledge, skills, and abilities they need to prosper in future management capacities within the agency.

Action Plan

We have summarized our recommendations for WRO management in the form of an action plan management should implement over the next two months. The action items address what we have identified as the three main root causes of low employee motivation within the WRO. Implementation of these action items will neutralize the root causes, therefore decreasing the occurrence of their related symptoms, and will drastically improve the overall problem of low employee motivation.

Reward

Offerings
Goal: Expand both extrinsic and intrinsic reward programs
Action Items:
• Management will implement a new Employee of the Quarter award where candidates. Management will nominate and select employees for the award based on quarterly performance. Management should select the first Employee of the Quarter by May 1, 2018 and the winner will receive 8 hours paid leave and a plaque.
• On the spot cash and time off awards will be handed out as an incentive beginning June 1, 2018 when management observes an employee go above and beyond performance standards.
Tasks:
• Receive approval from leadership to offer PTO for Employee of the Quarter and on the spot rewards
• Submit request form for cash rewards and plaques
• Request nominations from management and schedule time in management meeting to vote on winner
• Present winner in May PWT meeting
Measurement of Success:
• Was a deserving candidate for 2018 first quarter nominated, selected, and awarded with Employee of the Quarter at the May PWT meeting, in addition to being awarded 8 hours paid vacation and a plaque?
Employee Participation in Decision Making
Goal: Encourage auditors to play a role in decision-making
Action Items:
• Solicit auditor input when distributing assignments effective 5/1/2018
• Use Participative Work Team meetings as a forum for auditor feedback and idea sharing, effective June 2018
Tasks:
• Create an effective process for fielding auditor and considering auditor input regarding assignments and use this process for any assignments given 5/1/18 or later.
• Consult with leadership on extending PWT meeting times to allow for a forum type setting
Measurement of Success:
• Assignments are given based on management insight and input from auditors
• Employees are openly participating in forum type discussions during PWT meetings
Opportunity for Employee Development
Goal: Facilitate and encourage cross-training opportunities
Action Items:
• Use Participative Work Team meetings as a forum to discuss and reveal cross-training opportunities, effective June 2018
• Actively create time allotments for cross-training
Tasks:
• Consult with leadership on extending PWT meeting times to allow for cross-training discussions
• Prioritize cross-training and adjust workloads to allow for cross-training time allotments
Measurement of Success:
• Employees discussing cross training opportunities in PWT meetings, and then actively pursuing these opportunities.
We recommend management set quarterly meetings to discuss the impact our recommended changes are having on employee motivation.