DUAL TRACK SYSTEM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 8
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 27, 2012
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: April 15, 1988
• Content Type: MEMO

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
STAT
STAT
STAT
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Central Intelligence Agency
Washington, D. C.20505
15 April 1988
National Academy of Public Administration
SUBJECT: Dual Track System
Attached is information on a dual track system for the Agency.
If you have any questions, please contact me a
Chie , arming an omponent
Support Division
Office of Personnel
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
it 1-1pU 19 8s"
DUAL TRACK /
PI
OVERVIEW
The "gray book" proposal for a dual track system (i.e., the opportunity
for employees in certain occupations to advance beyond the full-performance
level without assuming managerial responsibilities) won overwhelming
endorsement from the Agency populace. The only negatives were directed toward
the proposed Manager/Expert Incentive Program (IP) which called for higher
bonuses and up to 120 hours of annual leave carryover for managers and experts'
and was seen to create yet another special class. While one might expect a
dual track system to elicit a positive response, some of the outpouring of
support may have stemmed from a misunderstanding of the number of positions
likely to be available for experts. Employees may have assumed that virtually
everyone who did a good job could expect to get beyond the journeyman or
operating level of their occupation--if not as a manager, then as an expert.
That simply is not so: most jobs will be worth the midpoint of journeyman pay
rate. Nonetheless, in adopting a formal statement encouraging dual
track--beyond what currently exists in the Agency--one would expect to see a
significant increase in the ratio of expert positions to manager positions.
BACKGROUND: A BRIEF HISTORY OF DUAL TRACK IN THE AGENCY
Currently the Agency has a limited dual track system (i.e., opportunity
for employees in certain occupations to advance beyond full-performance level
witnout assuming managerial responsibilities). Two formal, Directorate
"expert" programs exist--in the DSEIT and the DI. A less formal program exists
in the DO for certain operations officers with unique knowledge and skills.
In addition to these programs which were established to accommodate GS-15
and SIS-1/2 level officers, several Offices (FBIS, OSO, NPIC and OTS in the
DSO', and OIA and OCR in the DI) have identified certain positions primarily
at the GS-14 level which are considered senior officers, but may or may not be
designated as "expert" or "SOP" (Senior Officer Program) positions. Some
positions have been classified one grade higher than full performance based on
substantive job requirements without an "SOP" designation. Others carry the
"SOP" suffix on official personnel records.
DI: The Senior Intelligence Analyst Program (SIAP) was created in
February 1980 to "provide a parallel advancement ladder for
substantive all-source analysts through the GS-15 and SIS-1/2 ranks
without regard to 'r manageri esponsibilities." Initially, the
25X1 program called for positions at the SIS-1/2 level and at the
GS-15 level) to be filed during a wo- to three-year period. In
25X1 November 1981, the number of SIS-1/2 positions was doubled, raisin
the total number of SIAP positions to There are currentl
positions designated as SIAP in the DI. As positions are identified
for the program, the positions are moved from the sponsoring office's
Tb O to the 0/DDI. When they are no longer required, the positions are
returned to the Tb O or Staffing Complement of the sponsoring office.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
SECRET
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27 : CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
4" DSO': The Senior Scientist and Engineer Program (SSEP) began in 1982
and was intended to provide non-managerial advancement opportunities
for scientists and engineers who had demonstrated exceptional
technical expertise and creativity in advancing the technological
capabilities of the Intelligence Community, and whose contributions
merited advancement without entry into the managerial ranks. The SSEP
25X1 began with positions (--]at the GS-15 level and at the
25X1 level). In December 198S1 the total complement was raised to
25X1 at the GS-15 level and at the SIS-1/2 level). In January
GS-15 analyst positions--primarily from NPIC and FBIS--were added to
the program and it was retitled the Senior Scientist, Engineer and
25X1 Analyst Program (SSEAP). In January 1988, the DSO' increased the
number of SSEAP positions by aising the total from One
percent of SU careerists) t (1.8 percent of SU careerists).
0 The DO has no formal dual track program but does through its
evaluation panel system permit a small number of operations officers
to advance to the SIS level without holding management
responsibilities.
When the DI and DSU programs began, the Office of Personnel's Position
Management and Compensation Division (OP/PMD) and the Deputy Directors agreed
that the sponsoring offices could use GS-14 positions to offset the GS-15
senior officers and GS-14 positions to offset an SIS senior officer, unless
new SIS ceiling was approved for a particular position; OP/PCD and the
Directorates would provide points when it was not possible to identify
existing points to accommodate the program; when the requirement for the
expert or senior officer was deemed obsolete, the position would revert to the
original grade level and original Office, Division, or Branch at the previous
grade level.
ISSUES
The dual track concept involves two elements: experts and managers.
EXPERT TRACK:.
o The Agency traditionally draws its managers from among those who are
substantive experts. That process has worked well for us. Where we
have gone wrong is in.creating organizational structures to allow
experts to advance only as managers. In so doing, we sometimes put a
square peg into a rot?Tan hole: we create a poor manager at the same
time we deprive the Agency of critically needed expertise. Viable
dual ladders would encourage both pure experts and manager-experts to
concentrate on work where they are most productive.
o Experts are drawn to organizations having dual career tracks;
establishing such a system here will help our recruitment efforts and
provide career opportunities to persons in both tracks who might
otherwise become discouraged and feel forced to seek employment
elsewhere for continued advancement and fulfillment.
O Over the past 10 years, the number of professionals in our workforce
has continued to grow. Not all our professionals have the ability,
inclination or opportunity to become managers. We need new ways to
reward them and keep them with us during their most productive years.
SECRET
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
SECREI
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
Although the concept of expert ladders is not new to the Agency, existing
programs need to be revamped because of:
O Problems of prestige: We need to ensure that our new or revised
expert programs neither are, nor are perceived to be, dumping grounds,
but rather a legitimate, prestigious career development option.
O Structural flaws: These result from a lack of detail in the original
design. The designated experts flounder, uncertain of their duties,
organizational roles, and career requirements and prospects.
O Scope: Current formal programs are designed only for the GS-15 and
SIS-1/2 levels. There are no criteria for designating people or
positions below the GS-15 level. Furthermore, there are currently
GS-15 positions which should probably be incorporated into a dual
track program since they are above the full performance level but are
typically handled separately if the desired grade level could be
justified on substantive job requirements.
MANAGER TRACK:
O While the Agency has little experience with or interest in generic
managers, there are generic managment skills which need to be fostered
and developed.
O Much of Agency population's reluctance to implement the more extensive
changes proposed by the Task Force stemmed from a feeling that Agency
managers would not manage human resources within budget limits, make
fair decisions about incentive pay, or play an active and informed
role in counseling and coaching employees and giving them honest
feedback.
O Plans to decentralize awards and job classification authority mark the
beginning of a trend which, if it is to continue, will require more
attention to how we define, identify, groom, and assign managers, to
how we reward them and hold them accountable. This can be done more
systematically by defining a management ladder and linking it to other
forecasting, career development and evaluation tools.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST CHANGE
O Will create inequities because not all occupations will call for a
dual track, and experts can never be equal to managers in terms of
rewards.
O Our current dual track programs'are adequate; why raise expectations.
O Dual track systems sound fine but they have not proven to be a panacea
in private industry.
O Our managers are in fact substantive experts; we don't see a need to
develop generic management skills. At minimum, we need to ensure
there are no artificial barriers to movement between tracks.
SECRET
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
SECRET
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
DECISION POINTS FOR DUAL TRACK
If the Agency is to expand the dual track concept, the following decisions
are needed:
O Will there be a single dual track program for the entire Agency or a
series of dual track programs geared to directorate/office needs?
O Where will the control rest to establish dual tracks? Will authority
rest with the DDs, to be redelegated to Office Directors as
appropriate?
O Who will maintain records on dual track positions and personnel,
costs, position descriptions, effectiveness measures, trends? How do
we ensure fairness while permitting directorate/office variations?
O What will be OP's role? Fostering dual track programs? Publishing
reports? Validating position descriptions for jobs above the full
performance level? Developing guidance on common elements or
particular issues that must be addressed in designing any given dual
track program?
O Is senior Agency management committed to dual ladders, with selection
procedures, etc., for both experts and managers?
O if botn, how do we define "expert" and "manager" for purposes of a
dual track? Will there be some minimum grade or is anyone who
progresses beyond the full performance level of any occupation
automatically either an expert or manager in that occupation?
O How will we get this information? Convene occ panels for those
occupations having a dual track? Leave it up to the DUs to decide how
to collect the info for occupations under their purview. Convene
special panels to define the management occupation and any occupations
which have dual tracks but cross directorate'lines (e.g, computer
systems analyst/programmer)?
O Must all non-management positions beyond the full performance level be
designated part of a dual track program or may some remain
independent, i.e., justified on their own merits?
O How do we handle the transition phase for those who are neither
experts nor managers but are already above the full performance level
for their occupation? Do we grandfather them in and risk
"contaminating" the prestige attaching to the program? Do we leave
them outside the program but with salary retention?
O What happens to the expert whose field is no longer of priority
interest to management? What happens to this expert in terms of
salary, perks, slotting?
O To whom do experts report? Do they report to the local manager even
if they outrank him/her?
SECRET
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
O Do we develop a "management" occupational handbook?
O Should the Individual Career Development Plan (ICDP) be adopted as a
means of counseling employees who seek advancement as either an expert
or manager.
STRATEGY
Our approach to dual track is predicated on the following assumptions:
O It is unrealistic given our separate career services and their
different needs to develop a single set of rules for how expert tracks
will be defined and administered. There are certain common points,
however, which need to be addressed.
O Establishment of dual tracks should be a matter of joint agreement
between OP and each directorate.
O We need to adopt an Agency-wide approach to identifying and developing
managers that goes well beyond our current "required training."
IMPLEMENTATION
O Develop a common format or outline for submitting dual track proposals
to ensure key elements are addressed, e.g:
Name of program
Expected benefits of program/problems program is designed to
correct.
Approximate number of participants.
Estimated costs.
Otner programs which this subsumes; transition procedures.
Locus of control:. Role of occ panels, career service boards,
office directors, DD's.
Designated point of contact for program at Directorate staff level.
How participants will be identified, approved and tracked.
How positions/slots will be identified, approved and tracked.
Relationship to promotion.
Advertising of positions.
SECRET
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
Roles and duties of program participants.
Perks and privileges for program participants.
Requirement that each expert have a clear and detailed job
description in the form of a Memorandum of Understanding,
Performance Plan, etc. to be drawn up annually between the expert
and his/her line manager and reviewed by the office director.
Plans for use of ICDPs.
Movement out of the program.
Movement between expert and manager positions.
Career guidance for junior personnel.
Sources of information on program, e.g., training programs, occ
handbooks, etc.
PROPOSAL
That the Executive Committee (EXCOM) issue the following policy statement
endorsing dual track programs and setting forth guiding principles.
---PROPOSED EXCOM STATEMENT---
It is official Agency policy to encourage dual career track
opportunities. This means that we recognize that in certain occupations, the
Agency expects .to have a real and continuing need for both managers and
experts. To ensure we have the experts and managers we need, we favor a
significant change in the Agency's career pathing structure that would offer
employees a choice between a career as a manager and a career as a substantive
expert. Each path would offer challenge, success and its own unique set of
experiential opportunities and rewards.'
The following principles will guide the Agency's approach to dual track:
Agency managers tend to have first earned their stripes as
substantive officers. That practice has served us well, and we
expect it to continue. What will change is the tendency to create
extra layers of management as a device to provide promotion
headroom for those who can make a greater contribution and whose
personal inclinations would be better served by becoming or
remaining experts. With dual tracks, "the distinguishing thing
should not be whether a person works alone or manages others, but
whether his or her principal interest is becoming a better manager
or becoming a better state-of-the-art technologist."
SECRET
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2
O Not all occupations will have a,dual track. Some occupations will
by the nature of their work end at what is variously called the
"full performance," "journeyman," or "fully operating" level.
Other occupations may call for work beyond full performance, but.
only for those who enter management.
O Whether tnere is to be a dual track for a given occupation is a.
resource, not a "morale" issue. The justification for a dual
track is tnat this is a better way to use human resources to
accomplish our mission. Ultimately, it is a management decision
whether experts are needed in an occupation and if so, how many;
how high the expert track will go; and what perks will be
offered. It is our expectation, however, that the number of
senior positions open to experts will grow substantially over the
next few years. Since for the most part someone designated expert
will stay an expert for the remainder of his or her career, it
becomes a question of tradeoffs and shaping future options, a
question of long-range resource strategy. So, for example, while
an office may have some sense that it wants to allocate a certain
percent of its positions for an expert track, it may elect to
phase that in rather than allocate the full number to begin with
and either prematurely fill the available complement or leave many
positions vacant until we can hire or grow persons who meet the
test of expert credentials and reputation.
0 Not all dual track programs will look the same. Experience with
dual track programs tells us there are certain common issues that
need to be addressed, e.g.:
-Definitions of manager and expert
-Availability of career track information and counseling.
-Job descriptions for expert positions.
-Application procedures.
-Selection procedures.
-Recognition or rewards systems.
-Evaluation and promotion procedures.
-Procedures for the orderly removal of experts if their area
of specialization is no longer needed.
-A metnod to evaluate the cost and benefits of the program and
to implement required changes.
0 How those issues are answered will be a matter of joint agreement
between OP and each directorate. Some dual tracks may be both
occupation-specific and office-specific; other dual tracks may be
occupation-specific but the occupation crosses office lines; still
other dual tracks may encompass several occupations 'which are
unique to an office or directorate. Although there will be
certain differences between programs, a key concern will be to
maintain intra- and interdirectorate equity.
---END OF POLICY STATEMENT?
SECRET
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00530R000400820001-2