OFFICE OF PERSONNEL SURVEY REPORT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 76
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 16, 2002
• Sequence Number: 4
• Publication Date: June 22, 1976
• Content Type: MF

17e -.87/3
. Approved For Release 2002/11,u-, : -RDP79-0000300090004-5-----,
I\
OGC HAS REVIEWED.
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Administration
FROM : Inspector General
SUBJECT Office of Personnel Survey Report
REFERENCE Memo for IG from D/PERS dated 28 May 1976, Subject:
Response to the Inspector General's Report of Survey
of the Office of Personnel (March 1976)
1. Thank you for the serious and extensive reply to the subject
survey, which was prepared by the Director of Personnel and forwarded
through your Office to me. I am gratified that we have no important
differences about the first six of the ten recommendations in the survey
report. Our comments on the apparent differences with regard to the
other four recommendations follow.
2. Recommendation Nos. 7, 8 and 9 deal with the position, manage-
ment and compensation function of the Office of Personnel. The Director
of Personnel obviously disagrees with these recommendations and has
proposed an alternative solution. His lengthy critique of the text
dealing with this subject indicates the existence of semantic problems
and our failure, in efforts to obtain brevity, to get our meaning across.
For example, the comments deal in depth with the adverse outcomes of
"decentralized" position management and compensation experiments by
other agencies in the evident belief that we had proposed such systems
for CIA. I believe the examples cited refer to cases in which essentially
the entire function and the means to carry it out were assigned to
various major organizations within departments or agencies. We have not
recommended such a change but stated, "...we doubt that decentralization,
in the sense of assigning classifiers to Directorates, would be desirable
in this Agency....We believe his [the Director of Personnel's] central
control of Agency position classification experts is essential to the
provision of uniform classification standards and to monitoring the
application of those standards within the Directorates..." Further,
our Recommendation No. 8 states, "That the Director of Personnel monitor
Directorate and DCI area adherence to their allocations [of staff man-
power ceilings, senior slots and average grade] and to job/pay equity
25X1
Approved For Release 2002/11/04V n: CI,A-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
SIE
In
, Approved For Release 2002/4 g IRDP79-00498A000300090004-5
and recommend appropriate DCI action in cases where he cannot resolve
differences with the Deputy Director concerned." Moreover, the changes
in PMCD activities proposed in Conclusion G-3 through G-5 and recommended
for adoption in Recommendation No. 9 do not involve controversial
differences in how PMCD personnel perform their position evaluation
functions, except those relating to the frequency of periodic surveys
and the inclusion in those surveys of judgments on organization and manage-
ment in cases where such considerations are not dominant in evaluation
of position grades. We do not, therefore, believe that our recommenda-
tions involve "decentralization" of the degree or type that has been
demonstrated to be ineffective when tried in other organizations.
3. We are apparently in agreement that a change is needed in the
position management and compensation system in addition to the steps
now underway to improve and expand PMCD staffing, develop and implement
a Factor/Benchmark position evaluation system and improve PMCD's ability
to service component needs promptly. The change involves use of a more
effective decision mechanism to settle unresolved disagreements about
position grades. In the case of both proposals that decision authority
would be the DCI, the DDCI, or the EAG, depending on the Director's
wishes. In both cases efforts to resolve disagreements would first
involve discussions between the Director of Personnel and a Deputy
Director (or his representative). The major difference between the proce-
dures that would be followed under our different proposals is whether
these discussions would be initiated by a Deputy Director in order to
obtain authentication of a new Staffing Complement, or by the Director
of Personnel when, in his view, a Staffing Complement approved by a
Deputy Director conflicts with job/pay equity or causes the Directorate
to exceed its allocation of staff manpower ceilings, senior slots, or
average grade. We do not believe that the difference, assuming energetic
enforcement by the Director of Personnel in either case, necessarily
involves a different outcome in terms of grade-creep or job/pay equity.
The difference really involves the less tangible but perhaps important
effects of the transfer of initiative implicit in the transfer of
Staffing Complement authentication authority.
4. The Office of Personnel proposal really involves little or no
change from authorities that already exist--and have rarely been used.
The Director of Personnel notes that Staffing Complements are not (and
under present regulations cannot be) changed without the concurrence of
the Operating Component. A Deputy Director thus retains the option of
avoiding undesired changes by deferring resolution of issues and meeting
his needs through the use of his assignment authority and multiple
slotting or PRA adjustments. This continues the practice of maintaining
actual organizations that differ in many cases from their official
Staffing Complement and tends to degrade the use of these documents by
top management as a basis for "recruitment, assignment, retention and
promotion of the work force." It may also generate pressure, such as
2
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
SECRET,
SECRET
, Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
that referred to on page 3 of the Director of Personnel's memo, for
separate manning tables for individual Offices. Since the leadership
of three of the four Directorates has recently changed, their attitudes
might change spontaneously or be changed by clear policy guidance from
the DCI or DDCI. Considerable resistance to such a change would exist,
however, since it would be perceived as giving more "clout" to PMCD
recommendations. Our survey indicated very widespread managerial dis-
satisfaction with such recommendations--in many cases more than that to
be expected from the adversary aspects inherent in PMCD's role. Forth-
coming changes--use of the Factor/Benchmark position evaluations, greater
component involvement in position evaluations and more Directorate
personnel on rotational assignments.to PMCD will probably help to
improve these attitudes, but considerable time and experience will be
needed.
5. The transfer of Staffing Complement authentication authority
to the Deputy Director would probably be perceived by managers as reducing
PMCD's "clout". Whether it actually would have that effect would depend
on the energy and effectiveness with which the Director of Personnel's
monitoring functions were carried out. At least initially, however,
managerial reaction to the change could be more favorable, perhaps
generating a less defensive and more cooperative attitude in their
dealings with PMCD. Directorate procrastination would still be possible,
but the initiative in bringing disagreements to decision would pass to
the Director of Personnel. Ambiguities that may now exist as to
responsibilities for holding average grade, senior slots and supergrades
within Directorate allocations would be clarified, and all, rather than
part, of the means to carry out these responsibilities would be available
to the Deputy Directors, subject to monitoring by the Director of
Personnel. On the debit side is the fact that the Director of Personnel
would be placed in the position of challenging decisions already made,
rather than simply withholding approval, and might be inclined to allow
too many minor violations rather than burden the DDCI (or other appeal
authority) with a flood of minor disputes.
6. On balance we remain persuaded that both proposals are worth
consideration by higher authority. If you agree that the key issues have
been properly identified, I suggest that we review the question together
with Hank Knoche before preparing papers for a DCI decision.
7. The remaining sticky questions deal with the frequency and
content of periodic PMCD surveys. Since we both agree that such surveys
should not interfere with prompt and rapid service of reorganization or
other more immediate needs for PMCD assistance, the frequency will be
governed by resources available and need not be an issue between us.
Similarly, although we differ on the need for PMCD recommendations
regarding the organization and management of component personnel, the
difference is apparently one of degree. As long as PMCD recommendations
3
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 200 / : CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
on such subjects are presented as non-binding suggestions (except when
they dominate position evaluation findings), we will withdraw active
opposition to the practice, although we remain unconvinced that it is
universally necessary or useful.
8. The last two parts of the Director of Personnel's alternative
approach (paragraph d. and e., page 17 of the Director of Personnel's
response) are not at issue. We believe partial rotational manning could
be useful (although two-year tours might be a little short), and would
expect PMCD subjects to be included in the course we recommended in
Recommendation No. 10. Similarly, the length of time required for that
course could be varied from five to three days if you believe the
necessary material can be covered in that time. We feel strongly that
Office level managers and deputies, who are most directly involved in
matters involving general CIA personnel policy, should attend the course.
Division chiefs would also benefit, but we are less convinced that
mandatory attendance should include Branch chiefs. We would be interested
in the Director of Personnel's reasons for proposing this alteration,
which is likely to make the course more costly and burdensome on components.
9. We appreciate the corrections and comments on the text of our
report furnished as Tab C in the Director of Personnel's response. We
will make these comments a part of our permanent file on this survey.
We are gratified at the actions taken (or that were earlier underway)
relating to our suggestions. We are also pleased to learn that the
Office of Personnel activity in developing innovations in Agency personnel
management has been even more extensive than we noted during the inspec-
tion.
Donald F. Chamberlain
Inspector General
cc: Director of Personnel
DDA Distribution:
Orig - D/Pers (for comment)
DDA Subject
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/11/044: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
SECRET
App
EN? - WILL , .. 8
' '.:
? s_ 0-
'.
? = ?TTO
. . P? .1:r .
1113
OFFICIAL ROUTING SLIP
TO
NAME AND ADDRESS
DATE
IN,FIALS
1
/ DDA
.--
411
2
3
. \
9/A-4-Anr
e
4

5
-
6
ACTION
DIRECT REPLY
PREPARE REPLY
APPROVAL
DISPATCH
RECOMMENDATION
COMMENT
FILE
RETURN
CONCURRENCE
INFORMATION
SIGNATURE
,
Remarks:
,
heaLs--
/ i-ve2-t_dez ra?-C.42-kfisvle-e-te
)
/? 14'7 S2-I-1-7 e)
f
FOLD HERE TO RETURN TO SENDER
/13E
FROM: NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NO.
-
, v - ? e, 7'4. ? . erA. ? ? 1
I 'NM. !IV VI Id
-5
App -5
FOSS MO. 237 Use previous editions
1-67
(40)
Approved For Release 2002?gFCTIA-RDP79-00498A0P0a00;40(4- 141-X3.-
1-D/A RegistrY
RANDUM POR: Inspector General
FROM
VIA
F. W. M. Janney
Director of Personnel
Deputy Director for Administration
1975
011,111 Pirtistry
file
SUBJECT Response to the Inspector General's Report of
Survey of the Office of Personnel (March 1976)
REFERENCE ?
. Nemo for DD/A fr IG dtd 30 Mix 76, snbj: Office
of Personnel Survey Report
1. We have completed our review of the Report of Survey of the
Office of Personnel and wish to commend the members of the Inspection
Staff team for their conscientious effort and the overall affirmative
tone and many constructive suggestions and recommendations contained
in the report itself.
2. As indicated in the Inspector General's report, the team
initiated its survey effort by conducting interviews with "users,"
Including senior- and middle-level supervisors, of services provided
by the Office of Personnel and related many of their observations and
findings in the report to customer perceptions of the role they ascribed
to the Office of Personnel. Many of these customer perceptions -
particularly as regards Agency personnel management - are not consistent
with the realities of the Office of Personnel's responsibilities vis-a-
vis those within the scope of the Agency's senior component managers.
This important aspect of the IG report has clearly pointed out the
need for particular emphasis in clarification of respective roles and
responsibilities through improved communications and formal orientation
sessions.
3. We consider those portions of the Inspector General's survey
that pertain to the Office of Personnel's position management and
classification functions as most significant in terms of impact on the
welfare of the Agency at large, and have prepared a special response
to this aspect of the report and have included certain recommendations
alternative to those suggested by the Inspection team.
ApproVedForRelease200441M44.91A-RDP79-00498A000
300090004-5
25X1
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
VIET
3. We have addressed our specific responses to the Inspector
General's report in three parts:
a. Tab A - Review and Comments on Recommendations
Contained in IG Survey (less those pertaining
to PMCD functions).
b. Tab B - Response to the Inspector General Survey
Report as Related to the Position Management
and Classification Function of the Office of
Personnel.
c. Tab C - Review and Comments of the Narrative Conclusions
Contained in the IG Survey of the Office of
Personnel.
S217,7,71
? .
F. W. NL Janney
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
RrP.1171.
%rot. 4i;
1279-00494A004.300490004-5-
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 : CIA-RDP79-00498A 00090004-5 ' -1
0-0X03
30 ?..111,kluG
1;NUANOU:4 FOR: Deputy Director for Administration
SUBJECT : Office of Per,onnel Survey Report
-1. Two copies of the subject report are attached; one for your
information and another for forwarding to the Director of Personnel.
have also attached copies of my me;f:orandum to the DCI about this
report.
2. I would appreciate receiving within 60 days your coMments on
this report and word of your concurrence?or reasons for non-concurrence--
with its recolcaondations.
25X1A -
P:onald F. Chamberlain
Inspector General
. Attachmonts:
As Stated
Approved For Release 2002111104: CIA-RD
?.'"* ?
25X1
? T
-
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Review and Comments on Recommendations
Contained in IG Survey of the Office of Personnel
1. Recommendation No. I gab A - Page A-12)
"That the Office of Personnel implement a means by
which the condition of active Official Personnel
Folders can be assessed in terms of the presence
of misfiled or unauthorized documents and the
absence of documents that should be included. If
widespread serious inadequacies are found to exist,
review and correction of all active folders should
be undertaken."
Comment:
The Office of Personnel has long had procedures for continuous
sampling of the Official Personnel Folders to identify the presence of
misfiled or unauthorized documents. On the basis of the statements
and recommendation of the Inspector General, we will develop and
institute additional surveys by inviting an appropriate number of
employees from various components to personally review their own Official
Personnel Folders to determine the presence (and extent) of misfiled or
unauthorized documents and the absence of documents that should be
included in accord with Agency policy. The results of this survey will
be studied to determine the need for a review and correction of all
active Folders. The Office of Personnel Central File Room receives and
files Some 112,000 documents in an average year. Under improved pro-
cedures instituted in March 1975 and the addition of two part-time
employees in January 1976, filing backlogs were eliminated. All docu-
ments received in a current week are filed in the OPF prior to the end
of the following week.
2. Recommendation No. 2 gab A - Page A-15)
"That the Director of Personnel assume custody and
responsibility for all Official Personnel Records on
contract employees."
Comment:
The Office of Personnel supports this recommendation. We
propose that the IG should recommend to the DCI that he issue instructions
to the Deputy Directors that this program will be implemented. There
are space and manpower problems, however, which must be resolved in
Approved fp elease 2,002/41/04.:'CIA--RDP79-0,04940031$0090004-5
;
rtj47
STATI NTL
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
order to do so. At present there are approximately active contract
employee files for full-time permanent, part-time and intermittent
employees, requiring 41 cubic feet of storage space. At least twice that
amount of space will be required to accommodate the records which make
up official personnel files. This would include the redesign of the
files with dividers and the inclusion of new material such as PHS forms
and Fitness Reports which will soon be required for all contract employees
in any case. The establishment of these official files and the day to
day maintenance thereafter will require the services of additional file
clerks.
3. Recommendation No. 3 (Tab B - Page B-16)
"That the Director of Personnel, working with the
Director of OJCS, review the priorities for PERSIGN
II in terms of manpower assigned and the physical
arrangements allotted to staffs."
Comment:
We concur with this recommendation. The DDA has recently
established a MAPS Review Committee, made up of representatives from
each of the primary user offices who are meeting to reaffirm the relative
priorities of all of the MAPS related projects to assure adequate OJCS
manpower coverage on first priority tasks. The number of OJCS personnel
reported as "assigned" to PERSIGN tended to create impressions of fuller
coverage than was in fact the case. Other priorities imposed on OJCS
continuously tended to drain manpower resources from PERSIGN and other
related MAPS projects. Maintenance of PERSIGN I, the RCA 501 system
and the PERCON program, the enlargement of the data base to permit inter-
face of PERSIGN with CENBAD, CENCO, the PAYROLL system, etc. have all
contributed to the staffing problems. The physical work space of the OP
staff (i.e., ADRS) analysts had been very poor in the Headquarters
location but is much improved in their new location with OJCS STATINTL
Building but still leaves something to be desired in terms of"quiet'
areas necessary to further design of specifications for the PERSIGN II
system.
4. Recommendation No. 4 (Tab B - Page B-16)
"That the Director of Personnel, working with other
Offices concerned with the MAPS program, review the
elements of PERSIGN II and assign subsidiary priorities
to those which do not represent key elements of personnel
data urgently needed for managerial decisions or for
provisions of personnel services."
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
ri.?1 y
Vca.1
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Comment:
This is a valid recommendation. Priorities, emphasis, statu-
tory requirements and Agency policies have and will continue to change
as PERSIGN II is developed, requiring continuous updating of the system
to assure its future responsiveness to Agency requirements when fully
implemented. Basically, the elements in PERSIGN II are those appearing
on the Notification of Personnel Action which conform with Civil Service
standards and Payroll system requirements plus a certain amount of
Fitness Report and overseas service data for CIARDS. Some items peculiar
to the Agency were added, such as PRA, development complement and sub-
category data, but these are necessary to service reporting requirements
levied by Agency regulation on the Director of Personnel to support
Heads of Career Services and operating components. Questionnaires were
sent to all users of reports several years ago requesting suggestions
for changes and additions. Some of the suggested additions were included
in the design of PERSIGN II but most were rejected as being too specialized
or inapplicable to the Agency as a whole; for example, health problems
of wife or children, projected rotational assignments or training, special
work related skills, etc. It has always been envisioned that PERSIGN II
would provide the basic personnel data for subsidiary systems which could
be tailored to meet individual Office and Career Service specialized
requirements.
5. Recommendation No. 5 (Tab B - Page B-16)
"That the Director of Personnel request that the
Director, OJCS obtain his concurrence before under-
taking personnel-related jobs for other organizations
that are likely to impact unfavorably on early com-
pletion of PERSIGN II."
Comment:
We concur. There is a mutual understanding that OJCS will not
undertake personnel-related projects without the approval of the
Director of Personnel but this point should be reemphasized because
pressure is building up again for individual manning tables for all of
the Offices in the DDO. Many of the Agency's component managers are not
fully appreciative of the current state of development of the MAPS
systems and the limited resources that OJCS has available to bring up
the primary project (PERSIGN II). Diversion of OJCS resources
immediately creates slippage in progress toward completion of PERSIGN II.
6. Recoiunendation No. 6 (Tab D - Page D-8)
"That the Director of Personnel find means as soon
as possible of conveying to component managers a more
accurate view of the capabilities and achievements of
RAD's outplacement assistance program."
Approved For Release 2002/11/a : CIA-RPP79-00A9MD044340090004-5
- u
ljElwf,
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Comment:
We support this recommendation and will take the following
actions to effect accomplishment:
a. Include appropriate information on the official bulletin
boards under the category "Did You Know."
b. Prepare an article on this subject for the DDA publi-
cation, "The Exchange."
c. Consider the issuance of a Headquarters Notice.
d. Have C/RAD contact the various Career Services and
offer a briefing to their staffs concerning the
services of RAD.
e. Insure that OP officials in addressing various groups
include continents regarding outplacement activities.
7. Recommendation No. 10 Crab H - Page H-9)
"That the Director of Personnel, in collaboration
with the Director of Training, develop a one-week
training course for Office-level managers and their
deputies on CIA Personnel Administration and Manage-
ment and that the Director of Personnel join with
the Inspector General in recommending to the Manage-
ment Committee that all Washington-area Office-level
managers and their deputies be required to attend a
running of this course within a year of its initiation."
Comment:
In our comments relative to the IG's Recommendation No. 7,
we included the proposal that the Office of Personnel establish a
position management and classification orientation program to educate
Agency managers on the objectives and responsibilities of these
managerial elements. In addition to that proposal, we concur with the
intent of Recommendation No. 10 and will explore the matter with the
Director of Training. We propose, however, the following alternative
recommendations:
a. That required attendance at this course be directed
at all current Division and Branch-level managers
and in the future, all newly assigned officers at
these levels within three months of their assignments.
Approved For Release 2002/11/0i: CIA-RDP79-,Q949844900300090004-5
131
t ;
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
b. That the Inspector General recommend to the DCI that
he issue implementing instructions to the Deputy
Directors stressing mandatory attendance at this
course by their appropriate level managers.
c. That pertinent subject material be covered in a three-
day course rather than a full week-long program.
The Office of Personnel presently has an hour at the TWA, an
hour, plus an evening session shared with EEO and the Office of Security,
at the Midcareer, and two hours at the Management Seminar to cover
certain aspects of the Agency's personnel management system. The time
allotted in these courses is barely sufficient to cover the specific
topic and allows no time to review the functions and the responsibilities
of OP as a whole. We have been discussing within OP the need for a
greater segment of time in these courses to permit a "whole picture"
presentation, and will be taking the matter up with the Director of
Training. We feel that understanding and comprehension of OP's role
in the Agency's management system is essential for supervisors and
managers at all levels, and believe, in addition to the course for
"Office-level managers," improvement can be made by expanding the cur-
rent presentations.
Approved PorROlbager2Obliiii64,: dIA:14DPY91+60479r"' i6b090004-5
"
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Response to the Inspector General
Survey Report as Related to the Position
Management and Classification Functions
of the Office of Personnel
1. Introduction
a. The Agency's position management and classification
function is sufficiently important to warrant a separate response and
specific recommendations by the Office of Personnel.
b. The position management and classification function of
CIA, other Federal agencies and organizations in private industry is
acknowledged by managerial "experts" as one of the most vital and
significant elements of any large and complex organization's personnel
function that permits top management of an organization to translate
raw personnel ceiling and manpower budgetary allocations into organi-
zational and graded position structures as a basis for the recruitment,
assignment, retention, and promotion of the workforce to accomplish
the missions of the Agency. Inherent in the position management and
classification program is the need to maintain pay equity for comparable
positions throughout the total organization, reasonable comparability
with similar jobs outside the organization (to assure competitive status
in the recruitment of qualified applicants and the retention of the
onboard workforce), permit Agency control over average grade levels
and preclude unjustifiable upward creep in payroll costs. It is essential
that a centralized control mechanism be maintained overseeing and ful-
filling Agency position management and classification functions so as to
provide the Director with an effective means to carry out his responsi-
bilities in this vital area of Agency management.
c. We believe that the Inspector General team was seriously
limited in terms of the time available to research fully such a techni-
cally complicated professional function and, therefore, based many of
their conclusions on "customer" reactions, some quite valid but many
quite superficial and parochial. Nevertheless, the IG team did explore
the PMCD function and developed a number of conclusions and recommenda-
tions worthy of consideration and action.
2.. Background
a. One of the dynamic factors central to the evolving scope
and structure of the Federal Compensation System has been the changing
nature of the workforce needed by the Federal Government to perfoim its
mission. The growing complexity of the Federal mission has led to a
parallel growth in the variety of skills required in the Federal work-
force, as reflected in the great number of distinct occupations and
jobs found today in the Federal Government. It is the task of the
classification and pay system to keep pace with these developments in
order to establish fair and equitable salary distinctions among the
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
SECRET
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
-myriad occupations and jobs in the Federal service_ The need to estab-
lish and maintain this apprcpriate internal alignment of pay rates within
the Federal service has been a continuing problem for Congress and the
Executive Branch.
b. Over the years, the Federal compensation system has
developed from a simple, almost ad hoc, process to the current highly
structured and intricate system. According to legislation passed by
Congress in 1795, agency heads could use their own discretion to deter-
mine how many clerks to hire and how much to pay them, provided that
the agencies did not exceed either their appropriations for salaries
or the maximum salaries established by Congress. From 1818 to 1830,
Congress used what came to be called the "Statutory Role" system of
appropriating money for Federal salaries. A specific number of clerks
was allocated to each agency, and a ceiling was placed on salaries paid
to "principal clerks." Such wide discretion on the part of agency heads
to manipulate salaries was the seed of inequity in Federal salaries, not,
only ,among but within agencies. With the growth of Federal service and
proliferation of agencies, Federal employees began voicing concern
about the lack of systematic internal alignment in the Federal service.
For almost a hundred years, Congress recognized the need for some means
of attaining this goal but it was not until the Classification Act of
1923 that Congress established a formal policy of systematic internal
alignment. Such a policy was expressed in that Act as requiring "equal
pay for equal work" for all employees subject to the Act. This policy
was reaffirmed in the Classification Act of 1949 which created the -
present General Schedule (GS) system. Although CIA was exempted from
the Classification Act of 1949, the Agency is on record that it would
follow the basic philosophy and principles of the Act.
c. During the past eighteen months there have been voiced
a number of additional concerns regarding the rising costs of Federal
compensation and particular concern over the escalation of position
grade levels. Emphasis toward curbing this escalation is focusing an
increased centralization of responsibility with top Agency management.
In early 1975, President Ford expressed his concern over rising personnel
costs and asked the help of heads of Departments and Agencies in slowing
the upward trend. CIA's support for these efforts was reaffirmed in
May 1975 in a letter from Director William E. Colby to the Director of
OMB in which the Agency's scheduled position management and classifi-
cation surveys were listed as a significant means of insuring maximum
efficiency and economy in the use of personnel. The Civil Service
Commission, in its "Report to the President on Cost Reduction Initiatives
in Personnel Management" in November 1975, listed position management
and classification as one of the areas offering significant cost reduc-
tion opportunities. Additionally, the Comptroller General submitted
a "Report to Congress" in December 1975 expressing in the strongest
terms that the classification of Federal white-collar jobs should be
better controlled. Specifically, the report stated that "Maintaining
the integrity of the classification system is agency management's direct
responsibility. But some manager's attitudes are not conducive to
Approved For Release 2002/11/26.:nc*FDP79
2
-00498A000300090004-5
Ulna. i
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
making the classification process work: managers have inflated position
descriptions, pressured classifiers to overgrade positions and have
been reluctant to downgrade overgraded positions," and "because of some
agencies' weak controls and pressures exerted on classification, the
problem warrants considerably more management attention." Finally, the
recent institution of a new Senate Oversight Committee on Intelligence
makes it imperative that the Director be supported and protected by a
strong personnel management system assuring maximum effectiveness in the
manpower resources area.
3. General
a. The IG Report identified many of the problems encountered
in the current operation of PMCD's position management and classification
program. As noted in the IG Report, PMCD has recognized these problems
and has been taking a number of corrective measures to improve PMCD
staffing and develop clearer, more precise position standards and
evaluation systems. Unfortunately, the IG Report contained what we
consider to be a number of misconceptions concerning the operations,
methodology, and goals of PMCD's position management and classification
program. The Report relies heavily on Agency component customer reaction
and interpretation of PMCD's program, and it is possible that this
factor led to many of the apparent inconsistencies and misunderstandings
which we find in the Report. The lack of a clear definition of authori-
ties and an appeal and enforcement system identified in the Report are
certainly valid and critical elements relating to the improvement of
performance of the program. However, the recommendations and conclusions
made by the IG in its Report do not fully address the resolution of
these problem areas within the context of job/pay equality.
b. As cited in the IG Report, there is a fundamental require-
ment to establish and maintain an Agency job/pay equality system, and
PMCD is now the heart of the Agency system which represents to OMB and
CSC an active, demonstrable effort to enforce CIA's policy of general
conformance to the concepts and principles of the Classification Act of
1949. PMCD performs these functions through a program which includes
a combination of periodic entire component surveys; surveys and reviews
of component partial reorganizations as required; and individual position
reviews requested by components. All of these methods involve similar
elements of evaluation such as comparisons with established CSC and
Agency standards, comparisons with other organizations and positions
within the Agency, and comparisons with organizations and positions
in other Government agencies and, in some cases, private industry.
Since the Agency is committed to follow the basic philosophy and prin-
ciples of the Classification Act of 1949, any departure from these
norms would make the Agency vulnerable to external questions concerning
the validity and equity of its position and pay structure.
c. Although CSC position standards are utilized as, an inte-
gral part of the Agency classification system, PMCD has long recognized
that these standards cannot be applied rigidly in evaluating Agency
positions. The mission of the Agency and the environment in which it
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: 6IA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
operates necessitate the consideration of unique functions in many CIA
positions that are not found in positions elsewhere in Government.
Because of this, PMCD has used the CSC standards only as general guide-
lines in evaluating occupations and positions according to such factors
as the skills, knugledges, and responsibilities incorporated at various
grade levels and as a basis from which to evaluate the additional
unique functions found in many Agency positions. In addition to these
general guidelines, position audits are conducted to clarify the specific
responsibilities, functions and peculiarities of the positions being
reviewed, as well as the incuMbent's involvement in the component's
programs. Position evaluations based on comparisons without detailed
knowledge of the functions, responsibilities, and program involvement
would result in a superficial and unacceptable allocation by title
and pattern.
d. The classification of positions cannot involve merely
the review of the specific position in question without some under-
standing of its relation to other positions within the organization in
which it functions. Many organizations can effectively utilize the
traditional hierarchial structure, while others can more effectively
utilize a less structured or team concept. The type, level, and
fluctuations of workload requirements must be considered to insure
that the position allocations not only meet the principles of proper
job/pay equality, but are also responsive to the needs of the organiza-
tion concerned. Because the methodology of PMCD's position management
and classification program incorporates all of these factors in the
allocation process, it is difficult to understand the IG comment that
"PMCD considers only hierarchial organizational structures, makes
position comparisons by title and grade rather than by specific factors
and responsibilities, and does not consider workloads when recommending
professional-to-clerical ratios." It is precisely the manager's constant
need to restructure his resources and adapt positions to the talents of
available personnel that underlies the basic function of position manage-
ment and classification as performed by PMCD. For these reasons, the
role of PMCD has for several years included not only classifying, or
pricing positions, but also the function of position management which
incorporates considerations of organizational structure and position
relationships.
e. An important part of PMCD's position management and
classification program is the periodic survey program instituted
approximately five years ago. This program was designed to include a
complete organizational and position review of each Agency component
by PMCD once every three years. It was instituted to address many of
the areas in which the IG noted component criticisms and does in fact
provide feedback to component management concerning the overall structure
and organization of the component. This feedback usually involves com-
ments regarding under-utilized manpower, duplication of work effort,
unclear supervisory channels and other related items. It is provided
with the full recognition that it is the manager's prerogative to accept
or reject the organizational and management related recommendations.
4
Approved For Release 2002/11/,04,.: cIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
'T
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Such recommendations, however, are based on total component survey
audits in which the employees themselves have provided much of the
information concerning the problem arbas. The conduct of these surveys,
either in terms of evaluating position levels and structures or in
terms of providing feedback to management concerning apparent organiza-
tional anomalies, is entirely within the capabilities of a professionally
trained GS-12 or GS-13 Position Management Officer who functions as a
specialist in evaluating positions and position structures.
f. Criticisms relating to the delays in obtaining and com-
pleting PMCD reviews are valid in many cases. In terms of workload,
the Position Management Officers in PMCD are presently responsible for
approximately three tines the nuMber of positions handled by classifiers
in most other Government organizations. This workload has been further
compounded by the need to allocate considerable time and resources to
develop an Agency variation of the new Federal Factor Evaluation system.
Additionally the unexpected and extensive revisions of the Federal
guidelines and rules for implementation of the Fair Labor Standards Act
imposed severe workload pressures on the Division. To meet these prob-
lems, PMCD has increased its staffing through the recent assignment of
several trainees and is attempting to retailor its component survey
program to reduce the nuMber of surveys to those in particularly critical
areas.
g. In addition to these suggested areas of possible improve-
ment in the current position management and classification program in
the Agency, the IG Report has validly identified several fundamental
issues which greatly impact on the effectiveness of the program. The
issues of unclear control authorities, and the need for an effective
formal appeal and enforcement system, have a direct bearing on PMCD's
effectiveness, and therefore on the Agency's position management and
classification program. However, the IG recommendation that these
issues be resolved by delegating to Deputy Directors the authority to
establish positions and to hear and decide classification appeals would
likely result in a large sacrifice of position/grade equality and overall
program quality. In addition to a loss of equity, experience has shown
that a decentralized system usually requires greater manpower to accom-
plish the same tasks than would a centralized system. Decentralized
classification systems have already been tried in the State Department
and other Governmental organizations with distressing results. The
State Department's experiment with decentralized classification is
particularly worth noting, as summarized in a Department of State
Newsletter (May 73):
"The Department is implementing recommendations that
resulted from a worldwide classification study of all
Foreign Service officer positions.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: IA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
20 pig
? ,
:
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
This study, which is the outgrowth of Management Reform
Recommendations and work of Task Force 1 in September-
October 1970, has sought to establish a valid position
classification structure for the Foreign Service,
All officer positions regardless of their location
(U.S. or abroad) and pay plan (FSO, FSR, FSRU, FSSO),
were individually reviewed by a professional staff
of classification analysts to determine their appro-
priate level.
To recount briefly the reasons for this study, it
will be recalled that from June 1962 until February
1971 position classification authority was delegated
to major organizations of the Department.
A general escalation of grade/class levels took
place during this period. This is attributable to
several causes, primarily (a) pressures by manage-
ment within the bureaus, (b) in some cases, the
inexperience of the personnel technician responsible
for position classification, (c) a tendency to pro-
ject future programs or shifts in program emphasis
which later failed to materialize, and/or (d) the
competition between the bureaus to Obtain and retain
the best qualified officers which sometimes involved
placing artifidally higher grades on positions to
induce an officer to take an assignment."
"The following illustrates the overall changes
resulting from this study:
FSO - 1 and 2 Reduced by 23%
FSO - 3 Reduced by 6%"
To insure that the Agency is not subject to such criticism, the principle
of equal pay for equal work must be assured. Such equity must be main-
tained not only within individual components, but also within the
Agency as a whole with an additional relationship to Government-wide
pay patterns. Unfortunately, experiments with decentralized classifi-
cation have demonstrated that managers are much too close to their
programs and their personnel to maintain an objective approach to
classification. The results generally have been the creation of dis-
parities and a massive escalation in grade levels followed by a return
to a centralized classification system in those cases where position
classification systems were subsequently audited by an authoritative
and objective body. The damage is not easily or quickly corrected,
however. Nevertheless, there is indeed a critical need for more direct
participation and substantive contributions by operating component
6
Approved For Release 2002/11/044,CWRDP79-00498A000300090004-5
'
A
. Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
representatives, clearly defined authorities, and the institution of a
definitive appeal and enforcement system in the Agency.. Although it
has been stated that appeal mechanisms outside the Directorate involved
would be unworkable because of the lack of subject expertise of the
appeal body, such a system under the Executive Director was successful
in the 1960's and similar mechanisms are broadly and satisfactorily
applied in other areas of our society such as those involving judges
and arbitrators where the prime requirement is the weighing of the
presentations of opposing substantive experts There is no reason to
believe that it could not again work in Agency classification.
4. Specific Response to IG Introductory Remarks Concerning
PMCD (Tab G)
a. Page G-3, para 4d.
'PMCD's contributions toward establishing and
monitoring job/pay equity are relatively ineffec-
tive at grades GS-14 and above . . its down-
grading recommendations sometimes restrict future
headroom but have little effect in the sense of
causing transfers or demotions of incumbents.
As one senior manager puts it, the outcome
depends on how well the Office 'snows' PMCD."
Comment:
Concern for establishing appropriate and equitable
position grade levels must be a joint responsibility of component managers
and PMCD. It is not PMCD's intent to cause a demotion nor require the
transfer of incumbents when positions are downgraded_ The flexibility
of the Agency's staffing system (flexible positions, PRA's etc.) could
easily preclude such results in any event. The PMCD objective is to
properly grade each position; in terms of managing the Agency's
resources, there is reason to expect that managers should have the same
objective. The phrase "how well the Office 'snows' PMCD" implies that
managers do not want positions properly graded.
b. Page G-4, para 5.
. . . it is important to note that upward grade
creep in CIA is not significantly different from
that experienced in most other Federal agencies."
Comment:
A more dramatic and costly increase in the position grade
pattern of the Agency has not been experienced only as a result of con-
tinuous and positive monitoring by the Office of Personnel whereby
7
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RpP79-00498A000300090004-5
. Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
unjustifiable increases in position grades have not been authorized.
In recent months, the President, the Director of ONB and the Comptroller
General of the United States have expressed concern over the need for
Agency top management to institute measures to reduce the escalation
of manpower costs and can be expected to take direct action if the
upward grade creep is not contained. Some time ago the Secretary of
the Navy decentralized authority to Navy and Marine connmnds for position
classification of civilian positions at the grade GS-l5 level. In
July 1975, Navy withdrew this delegation of authority because of the
unjustified continual increase in the number of positions graded at the
GS-15 level. In 1973, the Department of State discontinued its decen-
tralized classification system when internal audits confirmed massive
escalation in the number of FS0-1 and FSO-2 positions. From June 74 to
June 75, the Agency's position average grade increased from 10.53 to
10.58, an increase of 1/20 of a grade point,
c. Pages G-5 through G-7, paras 6, 7 and 9.
"Agency managers . . . allege that PMCD personnel
do not understand Agency functions and positions,
much less their importance and uniqueness, and
insist on using Civil Service standards of position
classification which many think are not applicable
to the Agency."
"CIA follows the Civil Service wage and grade struc-
ture, but the dynamic nature of the Agency's unique
role has resulted in management innovations which
are not typical of the Civil Service tradition."
"In reviewing a number of PMCD surveys, we find
some validity to the frequently voiced assertion
that PMCD bases its judgment too closely on Civil
Service precepts . . . It goes to some lengths to
correlate CIA positions (which are frequently
unique to CIA) with positions elsewhere in the
Government, e.g., an NSA journeyman computer pro-
grammer is a GS-12; therefore, a CIA programmer,
who may in actuality work with a much more complex
system and set of problems, should be comparably
graded_ We find many examples where PMCD used
comparisons which we judge to be invalid, e.g.,
we do not think a DCD contact officer should be
compared with a DDO case officer to establish
grade equity."
8
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
25X9
.?
. Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Comment:
While we recognize the need to continuously strive to
improve our knowledge and understanding, we do not agree with the
allegation that PMCD does not understand Agency functions and positions.
Regardless of the classifier's level of experience or the extent of
prior knowledge of a component, he can call upon the knowledge and
experience of a number of other PMCD officers who have previously sur-
veyed the component, and he also has at his disposal a wealth of pre-
viously acquired mission and function data together with specific
position information which is maintained by PMCD relative to the particu-
lar component. There is little chance that the PMCD officer, in con-
ducting a complete component survey, will not have a clear understanding
of the component's mission and functions.
PMCD does not rely on CSC standards for allocating positions.
Although PMCD utilizes CSC standards and external comparisons as applicable,
grade allocations in general are made on the basis of comparisons with
other positions within the CIA. If, in fact, PMCD evaluated positions
strictly by CSC standards, many of the Agency's positions would be found
to be overgraded by one to three grades. By the same token, it is
doubtful that GAO auditors would accept the view that standards which
apply t nearly2 million civil employees have little or no application
to the employees in CIA. While there are positions and functions
in the Agency which are unique to the Federal structure, the uniqueness
is not all-encompassing of all positions and functions.
The Office of Personnel recognizes the value and need
for greater substantive participation by representatives for the operating
components in the position classification function and strongly recom-
mends formal representation, both as rotating members of the PMCD team
organization and within the component under classification survey. The
validity of judgments in position grade adjudication actions can only be
enhanced by such direct participation.
d. Page G-7, para 8.
'There is an inherent incompatibility between PMCD's
preoccupation with fixed, unchanging positions and
managers' preoccupations with adjusting positions
to fit changing people."
Comment:
The inherent nature of the PMCD function precludes pre-
occupation with fixed, unchanging positions. Indeed, one of the primary
objectives in conducting position management and classification surveys
is that of determining whether position duties and responsibilities have
changed and making any necessary adjustments in the position grades (upward
or downward) to maintain grade equity within the Agency.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: 61A-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
?
Approved For Release 2002/11/04.:'' IA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
e. Page G-8, para 10.
"We feel there is some confusion in PMCD as to its
appropriate role, i.e., whether to ensure job/pay
equity or to control the rise in average grade and
the like."
Comment:
The primary orientation of PMCD in its classification
role is to objectively evaluate positions so as to establish proper
position/grade structures and levels throughout the Agency. The Agency's
average position grade limitations, like authorized ceiling, is a
reality externally imposed by OMB and must be considered in the classi-
fication process. We do not feel that job/pay equity and control of
average grade are contradictory concepts.
25X1A f. Page G-10, para 14.
. . . Prior to the initiation of the OIG survey,
aretired employee, was given a
CUHL1L LU ct a study of PMCD and to make
reconmendations designed to improve position
management and classification in CIA. The
Inspection Team found study of
considerable value in its own deliberations."
25X1A
25X1A
25X1A
Comment:
Prior to the recent Inspector General survey, the Agency's
position management and classification function, historically a cen-
tralized responsibility and authority of the Director of Personnel, had
been the subject of an extensive and in-depth study (Report of Survey by
dated September 1975). The primary purpose of this study
was to determine the feasibility of some decentralization of responsi-
bility and authority for these important and essential functions to the
Deputy Directors. The IG's statement as presented could lead to the
impression that the conclusions and reconmendations contained in the
r paralleled those put forward by the Inspector General.
Nothing could be further from fact. Entirely opposite conclusions on
centralization were reached in the two surveys.
g. Pages G-11 and G-12, para 17.
"We suggest that the [PMCD] permanent staff be
given periodic personnel officer rotational
assignments to other Agency components (perhaps
two or three during a career) to obtain a dif-
ferent perspective and to gain more experience
with the problems of other components."
Approved For Release 2002/11/040 CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
. Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Comment:
Approximately 70% of the current WCD staff has served
in other Agency components for one or more tours and more than one-
third have served tours overseas. The Office of Personnel (as stated
before) strongly recommends augmentation of the regular PMCD staff by
rotations of substantive career officers form each of the Directorates,
h. Pages G-12 and G-13, paras 18 and 19,
"Some managers argue for decentralized position
management and classification. They suggest that
professional job classifiers be assigned to Director-
ates, or even to large components, and that job
classification be done wholly within such units..
They feel that existing constraints on numbers of
positions, senior slots and average grade are ade-
quate to prevent empire building and that, within
these constraints, they are best able to decide
how to organize their components and assign grade
values to positions."
"Such a decentralized system is in effect at the
Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA)
and it reportedly works effectively. However ERDA
uses a standardized system for evaluating its
relatively homogeneous positions and managers have
been trained in and are involved in the application
of this system, thus ensuring a certain amount of
job/pay equity within ERDA. From this and other
examples, it appears that a decentralized system can
work satisfactorily in some organizations if system-
atic position standards have been developed and
managers understand those standards and are willing
to devote time to their application."
Comment:
As noted earlier, the results of decentralization in other
agencies have ranged from unsatisfactory to disastrous in terms of main-
taining agency-wide grade equity and controlling grade escalation. With
reference to ERDA, it is correct that their classification system is
decentralized and utilizes a Benchmark/Factor Evaluation and Standards
program in their position classification process. ERDA's system was
last revised in 1958, does not include benchmarks for all occupations
and is considered by their management to need updating, At this time
Benchmark/Factor Evaluation and Standards systems are valuable in
facilitating the classification process and assure participation by
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 :18IA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
tr. PI- 77
fl.11.0S:0'
. Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
substantive component officials in their formulation and application.
The system by itself, however, by no means assures job/pay equity
within an agency at large and requires a formal oversight mechanism to
monitor its proper application in all elements of an organization.
ERDA does not have such an oversight control element and no certainty
that internal grade equity prevails. Although supervisors classify
their own positions, there is no formalized manager training in
classification. ERDA is currently planning to develop a five-day
course for supervisors which will be administered by a training team
visiting the field offices. The effectiveness of the ERDA system in
terms of job/pay equity for comparable positions within the organization
is questionable. We do not share the IC's view that "From this and other
examples, it appears that a decentralized system can work satisfactorily."
We are not cognizant of the "other examples" that they are referring
to. We do agree, however, that the establishment of valid standards and
management participation are necessary.
i. Pages G-13 and G-14, paras 20 and 21
"The Civil Service Commission is developing a
position classification methodology called the
Factor Ranking/Benchmark System . . Those who
are familiar with the system are enthusiastic over
its potential and cite as its advantages that it
is easy to understand (and) . . . is a more accurate
way to grade positions . . . PMCD has established a
separate Branch to develop this system for Agency
use."
"The Inspection Team was impressed with the potential
of this system and urges the early development and
use of an Agency version to improve both position
classification and commnication on that subject
between PMCD and components."
Comment:
As noted, PMCD has already realigned its organization
and staff assignments to develop the Federal Factor Ranking/Benchmark
System for application within the Agency. The Civil Service Commission
is charged with developing the primary guidance for this Government-
wide system through the Job Evaluation Policy Act of 1970. In this
statute it is stated that "Title II - Statement of Policy, Sec 201:
It is the sense of Congress that -
"(1) the executive branch shall, in the interest
of equity, efficiency, and good administration, operate under a coordi-
nated job evaluation and ranking system for all civilian positions, to
the greatest extent practicable;
12
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
rH-.!
;
p
oL
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
"(2) the system shall be designed so as to utilize
such methods of job evaluation and ranking as are appropriate for use in
the executive branch, taking into account the various occupational cate-
gories of positions therein; and
"(3) the United States Civil Service Commission shall
be authorized to exercise general supervision and control over such a
system."
We support the IG's views that our efforts on this
system be continued.
j. Page G-14, page 14.
"Although most authority in CIA is delegated to the
Deputy Directors who supervise the four semi-
autonomous Directorates, the Agency must operate
as a single organization in its relations with the
rest of Government, including its conformance with
manning and staffing rules and restrictions. These
require that job/pay equity be maintained and
monitored throughout the Agency, not just within
the Directorates . . . We question, however, whether
the Director of Personnel needs to retain authenti-
cation control of official Staffing Complements."
Comment:
The "authentication control" of the Director of Personnel
is synonymous with final approving authority for an action. The
monitoring function to assure that job/pay equity is maintained through-
out the Agency would require some form of final "authentication"
authority if it is to be meaningful.
k. Page G-17, para 25.
. . We also question the infallibility of PMCD's
judgment. This is not intended as criticism of
PMCD or its personnel. They are not and cannot be
specialists in all the organizations or position
fields they are analyzing; therefore, they will
make errors in judgment and their decisions should
be subject to review and; if necessary, reversal."
Comment:
PMCD has never claimed infallibility in its judgments.
They are, however, professionally accountable in terms of developing
the best possible data on which they render judgments. More participation
13
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
and input by knowledgeable substantive officials is essential and
necessary in the position adjudication effort- A formal appeal mecha-
nism for final review and decision of unresolved disagreements should
be installed.
1. Pages G-18 through G-21, paras 27, 29 and 31.
"The main problem with the Director of Personnel/
DDA appeal route lies in the number and complexities
of the disputes. Effective and equitable resolution
of them all would require amounts of job knowledge,
position classification knowledge and study time
that are simply not available to those with the high
level of authority and respect needed to impose an
undesired solution on a Deputy Director. Creation
of an appeal authority outside the four Directorates
. . . would face the same set of problems."
"We conclude that there are only two solutions
available. The present system, lacking real enforce-
ment authority, can be continued and probably be
improved . . . but . . *most of the fundamental pro-
blems would remain. The other choice is . . . to
make the Deputy Directors the appeal and decision
authority, while preserving the Director of Personnel's
capability and responsibility for monitoring their
actions."
"No proof can be offered that the outcome of the
shift in authority described above will be good,
bad or indifferent. We are pursuaded, however,
that the risks of serious degradation are not
great . . . and return to the present system
should bepossible if we are proven wrong."
Comment:
In the course of any given year, several hundreds of
positions are surveyed and adjudicated without serious disagreement
between PMCD and the operating officials concerned. There are nonethe-
less,some honest differences of opinion which cannot easily be resolved.
Many such "issues" originate from the operating manager's view that
PMCD is intruding in his area of authority and has no "right" to render
opinions let alone judgments on these matters. These managers are
strong advocates of decentralization of classification authority to
their jurisdiction.,
Approved For Release 2002/11/04,:10A-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
,
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
The IG maintains that "creation of an appeal authority
outside the four Directorates" would not resolve the inherent problems,
and concludes that "there are only two solutions available." It is
worth noting that the Executive Director in the 1960's acted as just
such an outside appeal authority and decided on solutions to any problems
with great success. In any case, the Office of Personnel believes a
"third" alternative must be established that will assure maximum
objectivity for the Agency's position management and classification
function; provide for more extensive substantive office participation
in arriving at judgments, and finally, provide a formal and impartial
appeal mechanism to resolve differences.
Organizations that have experimented with decentralization
of the position classification function have experienced serious problems
as regards deteriorating job/pay equity and grade escalation. .A return
to the present system does not easily or quickly correct the damage done.
m. Pages G-21 and G-22, paras 32, 34, and 35.
"Headquarters Notice 7 January 1972,
established the Position Survey Program with the
aim of scheduling and conducting position and
manpower utilization surveys in all components
with the objective of achieving complete coverage
of the Agency each three years. PMCD is Charged
with conducting the Position Survey Program."
"Most component managers are extremely critical
of the PMCD periodic survey program, however."
"One often-mentioned problem is that PMCD's man-
ning and priority system does not permit an early
response to a request for a reorganization-
generated survey, or rapid accomplishment of the
survey after it starts."
Comment:
25X1
The criticism cited by the IG are valid in terms of
early response or rapid accomplishment of the surveys after they have
been started. PMCD staffing authorization simply has been inadequate
in terms of the scope of requirements imposed. Additional allowances
have been reallocated within the Office of Personnel's limited ceiling
to permit additional staffing in PMCD. Augmentation from the Directorate
would further assist to remedy this and other concerns.
n. Pages G-24 and G-25, para 38a.
"Unresolved differences with. PMCD periodic survey
findings are sometimes never formally settled .
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: 6PA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
. Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Therefore, we believe the expenditure of three-six
months of component and ETD efforts at three year
intervals for periodic position surveys to be
excessive when compared with the specific end
results achieved."
"We believe that static organizations should be
subject to . . . reviews . . . but at intervals
considerably longer than three years."
Comment:
It is true that unresolved differences are sometimes
never settled. Here again, a formal appeals mechanism would eliminate
unresolved differences. Nevertheless, in almost every survey the large
majority of existing grade allocations are reaffirmed by PMCD. This,
to a considerable degree, insures that position grade equity is being
maintained throughout the Agency. We agree, however, that certain
organizations need not be surveyed as frequently as others.
5. Specific Response to 1G Conclusions (Tab G, Pages G-26
through G-30)
The conclusions (Conclusions G-1 through G-7) are incorporated
in the IG's Recommendations Nos. 7, 8 and 9. Our comments will be
addressed to the recommendations.
6. Recomendation No. 7 (Tab G - Page G-30)
"That the DCI delegate to the Deputy Directors
authority to authenticate staffing complements,
requiring them to consider PMCD recommendations
on position grades before effecting changes and
to exercise this authority within their alloca-
tions of staff manpower ceilings, senior slots
and average grade."
-Comment:
In their survey of the PMCD function, the Inspection Team
25X1A reached a conclusion that only two viable solutions are available -
reaffirmation of the current system (with continued effort to improve
effectiveness) - an option which they reject as lacking real enforcement
authority, and the option contained in this specific recommendation that
the authority to approve position structures and grade levels be
delegated to the Deputy Directors within only the constraints of their
manpower ceilings, senior slots and average grade. It is worth noting
that Mr. after an extensive and in-depth study of
16
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: clAzRDP79-00498A000300090004-5
? , 4
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
the PMCD role and function, arrived at quite different conclusions
and recommendations. (See attached copy of the summary of this report
submitted by in September 1975 - Attachment #1)
We believe that reaffirmation of the present system, as
currently constituted - even with some improvement - is not the solution
in meeting the needs of the Agency in today's environment but we also
foresee different but comparable problems were the Agency to adopt the
IG's preferred option cited in their Recommendation No. 7. We have
strong convictions that the needs and best interests of the Agency at
large would be best served in a third alternative approach and propose
the following recomendations:
a. That the Director of Personnel continue to retain
responsibility for conducting the position management
and classification function and basic authentication
authority for staffing complements.
b. That the Deputy Directors and Heads of Independent
Offices, or a designated senior officer within their
components, meet with and jointly review and discuss
with the Director of Personnel any unresolved differences
pertinent to PMCD findings and/or recommendations prior
to final authentication of those portions of the staffing
complements involved.
c. That any unresolved differences between a Deputy Director
or Head of Independent Office and the Director of Personnel
be fully documented and referred by the Director of
Personnel, together with all pertinent documents, to the
Deputy Director of Central Intelligence for final decision.
d. That the regular staff of PMCD be augmented with the
rotation of an officer, grade GS-13/14 level, selected
by each of the four Deputy Directors and a representative
from the DCI Group, for a two-year tour with PMCD to
participate in position management and classification
surveys of components within his parent Directorate.
e. That the Director of Personnel establish an Agency
position management and classification orientation
program to educate management at all levels as to the
objectives and responsibilities of this essential
element of personnel management. (NOTE: This is in
addition to our concurrence relative to the IG's
Recommendation No. 10.)
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: 6A-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
1
. 4
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
7. Recommendation No. 8 (Tab G - Page G-31)
"That the Director of Personnel monitor Directorate
and DCI Area adherence to their allocations and to
job/pay equity and recommend appropriate DCI action
in cases where he cannot resolve differences with
the Deputy Director concerned."
Comment:
We agree that the Director of Personnel retain monitoring
responsibility but in the context of the alternative recommendations we
have made in our response to Recommendation No. 7.
8. Recommendation No. 9 (Tab C - Page G-31)
"That the Director of Personnel revise PMCD procedures,
position surveys, scheduling, and manpower as indicated
in Conclusions G-3 through G-7 above."
a. Conclusion G-3:
In the area of position grade evaluations, PMCD should:
(a) Develop and maintain standards for position
evaluation use.
(b) Participate in and advise on all position
evaluation use.
(c) Insure that unresolved differences with component
managers over position evaluations are brought
to the responsible Deputy Directors for decision.
(d) Inform the Director of Personnel in cases when,
in the opinion of PMCD, decisions made by Deputy
Directors conflict significantly with equal pay
for equal work principles or established pay
policies, e.g., pay scales for senior secretaries.
Comment:
Conclusions (a), (b) and (d) are consistent with current
responsibilities of PMCD. As regards G-3(c), the recommendations pro-
posed by the Director of Personnel in response to the IG's Recohmendation
No. 7 would insure that the Deputy Directors had the opportunity to
discuss unresolved differences directly with the Director of Personnel
and the institution of formal appeal to the DDCI for final decisions
if necessary.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 :8A-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
_?
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
b. Conclusion G-4:
With regard to staffing complements, PMCD, in collabora-
tion with other Office of Personnel components, should:
(a) Establish staffing complement formats.
(b) Compile, produce and disseminate staffing
complements authenticated by the Deputy Directors
and produce and disseminate related management
information reports.
(c) Report to the Deputy Director concerned and to
the Director of Personnel any non-trivial con-
tinuing instances when the totals of a
Directorate's staffing complements exceed that
Directorate's allocations of manning, senior
slots or average grade.
Conuitent:
These conclusions essentially reflect current responsibility
and procedures with the exception that staffing complements are not
authenticated nor implemented without the prior approval of the
component concerned.
C. Conclusion G-5:
PMCD's responsiblity for conducting periodic position
surveys should be modified. In this area:
(a) PMCD should conduct periodic position surveys
in components that have received little attention
in conjunction with reorganizations for a period
of about five years.
(b) The Director of Personnel should initiate special
MACD position surveys in other cases where he
has reason to believe that position classifications
need revision.
(c) Neither periodic nor special position surveys
should be allowed to interfere with prompt and
rapid service or reorganization or other more
immediate needs for PMCD assistance.
(d) During all surveys, PMCD should restrict its recom-
mendations regarding the organization and management
19
Approved For Release 2002/11/04,:tIA4DP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
of component personnel to cases where organization
or management is the dominant consideration in
evaluating position grades.
(e) PMCD should be permitted on its own initiative
to audit positions in any component in order to
obtain data needed to establish, maintain or
improve position evaluation standards.
Comment:
We agree with conclusions (b), (c) and (e). As regards con-
clusion (a), retention of the current three year survey cycle is pre-
ferred over a five year cycle in terns of more timely recognition of the
need for adjustments to the position structures, etc. The continuing press
of ad hoc and priority special surveys and the need to address other
priorities with a limited number of staffers in PMCD may temporarily
require adaptation of the five year cycle as proposed by the IG. We are
not in agreement with concluson (d). In their surveys, PMCD's observa-
tions and recommendations relative to the organization and management
within a component are directed at manpower resource considerations such
as effective utilization of personnel, skill mix, duplication of work
effort, clarification of supervisory Channels, internal communications,
and the like. This information is provided to component managers as
"feedback" for his consideration in carrying out his managerial responsi-
bilities. Feedback from the majority of managers of surveyed components
last year indicated affirmative attitudes toward the usefulness of this
type of information.
d. Conclusion G-6:
PMCD should accelerate the development and trial imple-
mentation of improved position evaluation standards and methods similar
to the Factor/Benchmark system now being developed by CSC for Government-
wide implementation by 1980. Full CSC development of its system should
not be a prerequisite to development and trial implementation of an
Agency version.
Comment:
We are in full agreement with this conclusion.
e. Conclusion G-7:
The Director of Personnel should review and alter the
organization of and manpower authorized for PMCD as necessary to meet
its revised mission.
20
Approved For Release 2002/11/OVZIA.-FiDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
(a) It is important to note that PMCD manning must
permit prompt and rapid service of component
needs.
(b) A program of rotating Office of Personnel people
with experience as component support officers
through 3-5 year PMCD tours, and of rotating
PMCD professionals through component support
officer tours, would provide a valuable experi-
ence base.
(c) Rotating personnel from other Agency components
through PMCD tours would contribute more specific
component knowledge and would be useful if the
tours can be long enough for the rotating personnel
to develop and use job classification expertise.
Comment:
We agree that PMCD manning must permit prompt and rapid
service. With respect to the rotation of Office of Personnel people in
and out of PMCD, this practice is already being followed to some extent.
The rotation of officers from other Agency components is strongly
supported by the Office of Personnel.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 : 11A-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
v?7-.7t
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
24 September 1975
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Personnel
SUBJECT Survey of Position Management and Compensation
Division, OP
In keeping with our understanding, submitted under separate
cover is my report of survey of PMCD. As discussed with you and
your Deputy, and as noted briefly to the DD/A, the study outline
initially provided was used as a guide in the survey. Certain
suggested areas of "exploration" in that outline were not pursued
because in light of the currency of documentation in PMCD, including
studies of the Civil Service Commission in some of which PMCD par-
ticipated quite actively, such "exploration" would have been, in
my opinion, nonproductive or duplicative.
_ The report will have to speak for itself, but there are one or
two general points I would like to make here. First, in PMCD I
believe you have a dedicated, experienced and competent staff, well
equipped to discharge its mission. This is not to say that PMCD is
without fault or problems, but the base is good and faults can be
corrected and problems solved. Second, while this survey will not,
in all probability, contain any "new and startling" insights, it may
reinforce some management concerns and the need for early and decisive
corrective action, it may bring to mind some forgotten, or ignored,
principles of position management and classification, and it will
provide some concrete, practical recommendations which, if implemented
and supported by all concerned, will, hopefully, lead to significant
improvement in the Agency's management of manpower resources. These
recounendations are set forth at appropriate points throughout the
report. However, it might be helpful if I were to stunmarize here
the most significant ones together with a brief note on the defi-
ciencies they are designed to correct or the problems which they
might be helpful in solving. I would also add that where recommenda-
tions call for regulatory amendments, or the promulgation of policy
statements or other documentation, suggested drafts of such material
are included in the body of the report.
A. Mission:
In order to ensure that all concerned are fully aware
of the importance of, and need for, position management and grade
control in the management of manpower resources and that the role of ?
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
-
? Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
the Director of Personnel exercised through PD in these areas is
understood, accepted and supported, it is recommended that:
1. That the DCI issue as an Employee Bulletin or a
Headquarters Notice, or both, a policy statement outlining his man-
power resource management concerns and proposed actions to ensure better
management in this area.
2.1 !be amended to establish, by regulation,
the responsibility of the Director of Personnel to administer position
STATINTL management and grade controls and related areas of manpower resource
management.
STATI NTL
STATI NTL
STATI NTL
STATI NTL
STATI NTL
3.1 lbe amended to define, with some degree of
precision, the totality of the Director of Personnel's/PMCD's mission .
for position management, classification and compensation and the nature
of surveys which must be conducted to "audit" the continuing validity
of organizational structures and position classifications.
B. Responsibility and Authority:
In order to clarify manpower resource management responsi-
b-ilities and authorities, to avoid duplication of effort and to focus
on the need for the coordination or collaboration of diverse elements
in the Agency in certain areas of manpower resource management, it is
recommended that:
1. J amended to include the Director
of Personnel as a channel througn which proposed organizational changes
must flow to the DCI.
2. Add tol I a now subparagraph, (j), which
would give to the Director of Personnel, by regulation, the authority
he already has by memorandum from the DCI to approve, subject to the
Comptroller's concurrence, requests for increases in average grade
and upper level ceiling.
3.
would no longer
subparagraph (j
renumbering of
Delete from
, subparagraph (b), which
light of the above noted addition. of
. (This deletion would require the
d and e) to (lb, c and d).
4. Amen(' (a and c) to provide for Comptroller
and Director of Personnel collaboration in reviewing proposals: for
significant manpower allocation or structure changes, for recommenda-
tions to the Director in these and related areas and for ensuring con-
tinuing review of manpower levels and allocations.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
2
STAT
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
a new subparagraph (d), (this will require renumnering Tne existing
(d, e, f and g) to e, f, g and h), to require the Audit Staff to coordi-
nate with the Director of Personnel on all audit findings and recom--
mendations relating to position management and manpower utilization.
C. PMCD - Organization and Staffing:
In order that PMCD may discharge the totality of its
responsibilities, provide necessary position documentation, as well
as the establishment, maintenance, and continuing update of standards,
and develop and exercise the creativity essential to both the viability
and currency of any position management and classification activities,
it is recommended that:
1. The staff of PMCD be increased; the number (which
to some degree be influenced by the degree to which recommendations
in this report are approved and implemented) to be determined by the
Director of Personnel.
2. A definitive plan for PMCD staffing be devised to
ensure: (a) the continued existence of a core of "professional"
classifiers or PMCD "careerists" and (b) a regular rotation of "other"
careerists through PMCD (a tour of four years is recommended), a
greater emphasis on "management" or "system analysis" orientation
and/or such training for personnel assigned to PMCD.
3. The initiation on an immediate and urgent basis -
even at the expense of a diminution or temporary cessation of cyclic
surveys - of a program designed to provide "meaningful standards" for
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: C62k-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
as many positions as possible. It is also suggested that this program
utilize not only the work currently being done by PMCD on the new
factor-ranking/benchmark system of the Civil Service Commission, but also
the modular evaluation system used so successfully by PD with respect
to certain positions in the Office of Communications. This suggestion
is offered for several reasons including the fact that the modular
system requires input from the operators and does away with the need
for a multiplicity of job descriptions. One further thought - initial
application to show what the system can do might be made in Division D,
EDO; in the Information Services Group, CRS, DDI; with respect to
scientific positions in DDSW, and the Office of Joint Computer Support
in DDA.
4. The recreation of a Standards Branch.
D. PMCD - Its Modus Operandi and Relationships with the
Operators:
Even the critics admit the need for PMCD, its objectivity
in discharging its responsibilities and the validity of surveys -
though not necessarily on the current cyclic basis - which PNCD must
conduct. Those same critics - with agreement from PMCD in many cases
and disagteement in as many more - point up what, to them, are signifi-
cant problems they encounter in dealing with PMCD. Rather than attempt
any general recommendations in this area, it is suggested that you and
your staff review the PMCD "poll" included in this report to determine
those areas in which you think corrective internal action might be
desirable and those in which the need for "operator education and
support" are the primary requisite.
E. PMD - Its Place in the Agency Hierarchy:
A question sometime discussed is whether or not PMCD can
really do an effective job given its "remoteness" from top management
and the multiplicity of channels through which its findings and recom-
mendations must flow before, in many cases, decisions for actions can
be made. Though a case could be made to move PMCD to a higher, more
independent level of Agency management, in order to give it a more
positive "say" in the management of manpower resources, it is recom-
mended that so such relocation be effected. First, PMCD related activi-
ties are for the most part elements under the Director of Personnel or
his counterpart the Deputy Director General of the Foreign
Service who is also the Director of Personnel in State, the Director
of Civilian Manpower Management (ECM) in Navy] throughout Govelment
and industry. Second, in the Agency the interrelationship of PMCD's
functions with other policy and control responsibilities of the Office
of Personnel dictate the need for the Director of Personnel to have
these related activities under his direct control. However, it must
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 : Clt-RDP79=00498A0003.0090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
be recognized that these policy and control responsibilities might
more properly be described as "staff" functions and different from
what might be termed the "line" functions of personnel services or
personnel administration activities such as recruitment, placement,
etc. Further, that these "staff" responsibilities require, as was
true under the Executive Director-Comptroller modus operandi, a dif-
ferent access to, direction from, and support of the highest level of
Agency management. Thus, while it is recommended that RED remain
where it is, that is, in the Office of Personnel, it is also suggested
that consideration be given to clarifying the distinction - if there
is indeed one to be made - between the staff and line responsibilities
of the Director of Personnel and defining the mechanisms or channels
by or through which these differing responsibilities can best be dis-
charged.
F. Centralization vs Decentralization:
It is my opinion, shared by almost all interviewed in
the course of the PMCD "poll", as well as many others with whom the
point was discussed in the course of this survey, that decentralization
of PMCD's functions - except to the degree used in the application of
the modular evaluation system in the Office of Communications, is
neither necessary nor desirable. However, if for any reason manage-
ment would still wish to consider decentralization, it is recommended
that no action to decentralize any of PMCD's functions be undertaken
at this time. There are at least two reasons for this recommendation.
First of all, the totality of PMCD's mission and responsibilities is
neither understood nor accepted by the line managers to whom such
decentralization would have to be effected and hence the need to get
the basis for a centralized system clearly established before any
thought can be given to any delegation of classification or other
PMCD function or authority. Second, the position documentation and
mutually understood job standards essential to any management system,
especially one that is decentralized, simply do not exist to the degree
necessary and must be developed to put the current centralized program
on the desired firm footing. Only after these deficiencies are cor-
rected could or should any consideration be given to decentralization
because only then could a valid determination be made as to what
function or functions of PMCD might be decentralized and to what level
and with what constraints.
G. Administration of Supergrade and SPS Positions:
To meet the need for better administration of supergrade
and SPS positions, it is recommended that:
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: gIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
1. A joint, concerted effort be made by the Office of
Personnel and the "operators" to develop more realistic job descriptions
for supergrade and SPS positions.
2. PMD using a combination of both the upcoming factor-
ranking/benchmark system and factor analysis criteria of the Executive
Evaluation System developed earlier (by a management consultant firm
under contract to the Civil Service Conudssion) as part of the Federal
Executive Program, undertake to construct a more objective method for
the creation of standards for the evaluation of supergrade and SPS
positions.
3. To help ensure a greater uniformity in the development
and application of these processes, the Director of Personnel consider
making one classifier in PMCD responsible for these and related phases
of the administration of supergrade and SPS positions. This officer
would, in effect, become the Office of Personnel specialist on super-
grade/SPS problems, whether they be problems of promotion, ceiling,
standards, position evaluation, the utilization of positions or person-
nel, or any regular, annual or other reviews of manpower resource
management as they impacted on these executive levels.
4. In recognizing the requirement for invOlvement of the
Director in matters of supergrade and SPS personnel, and in the absence
of the Executive Director-Comptroller, the Director delegate to the
DDCI, or such other senior officer he might choose, responsibility for
final decision making authority on actions relating to such supergrade/
SPS personnel and/or positions. It might also be noted that such a
delegation might properly go to the Director for Management if the
Rockefeller Conlinission's proposal for the establishment of that posi-
tion is approved and implemented.
5. Looking to the future when hopefully the current
salary "freeze" will be lifted, and recognizing the significant salary
levels which would then be applied to supergrade and SPS positions,
consideration be given to the establishment of upper/lower "salary
limits" as opposed to "GS grades" for executive level positions. (A
not entirely new idea.) Such a system, which might put a more realistic
"value" on positions and provide a greater flexibility in "executive"
level assignments is described in more detail in the body of this
report. If found feasible "in principle," it might be initiated on a
trial basis with respect to overseas stations.
Obviously these recommendations, if approved, will require the
effort and cooperation of a host of individuals and components through-
out the Agency; but whether or not they are approved or others and
better ones substituted for them, it must be made absolutely clear to
Approved For Release 2002/11/046CIA-RDP79-00498A0,00300090004-5
STATI NTL
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
all that the requirement to manage manpower resources is a real fact
of life in Government today - more real than even before - and all
must do their part to see that Agency management is as good as, or
better than, the rest of Government.
One last note - but a most important one. Let me acknowledge,
with thanks to vou for their detail, the able and unstinting efforts
in this study. I'll take the blame
for any shortfalls - but credit for any contribution this study makes
to better management of manpower resources is due in no small part
to the hard work and professionalism of these fine officers.
Atts.
u/s/c
STATI NTL
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79=00490W0300090004-5
- .
STATI NTL
STATI NTL
2 December 1975
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
STATI NTL
Office of Personnel Comments on
I
Report of Survey of PMCD
(September 1975)
1. General Comment
has developed a professional and thorough report
of survey of PAX. He has focused on the primary aspects and issues of
this function. We consider his findings to be objective and logical.
Our comments, therefore, are directed at the recommendations contained
in Tab F "Specific Findings - Conclusions - Recommendations."
2. Specific Comments
Recommendation #1
That the cyclic survey program, which is a main contributor
to PMCD's heavy workload and of questionable value in the minds of many,
be reexamined with a view toward its elimination in favor of a "maintenance"
program, or its reduction in frequency and scope.
Recommend that any "personnel savings" resulting be channeled
into standards program activities.
Comment: As noted byl in his "findings," PMCD is
faced with a continuously heav ich requires continuous adjust-
ments in priorities to meet requirements. "Less effective" activities
are difficult to identify in that the array of requirements handled .by PMCD
are of almost equal importance. The cyclical survey program, ad hoc
special surveys and position classification requests, reviews of appeals
to classification judgments, statutory compensation changes, requests for
non-standard work schedules and FLSA implementation impose an extremely
heavy load on a limited working staff. The cyclical survey program imposes
the heaviest load on PMCD but is the essential core program for the fulfill-
ment of the Director of Personnel's Agency position management, effective
manpower utilization, position classification and component personnel
management evaluation responsibility. The cyclical survey program assures
regular scheduled audit of the validity and appropriateness of component
organizational structures and functions vis-a-vis their missions and
Functions, the command structure and authorities, manpower utilization
and validation of position distribution and their grades. A "maintenance"
program is also necessary (i.e., between scheduled surveys) in order to
effect changes that require current attention. Prior to adoption of the
cyclical program it was not unusual for some components to go for 5-8
yers without a complete overview survey. Position management classification
and manpower utilization problems can grow to serious proportions in such
situations and are extremely difficult to correct. While it is true that
some past surveys have been of marginal value from a "results" standpoint,
the increasing number of requests for surveys from various components
as well as the tone of feedback regarding our efforts suggests that the
Approved,ForRelease 2002/11/04 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000100090004-5
? Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
PMCD survey is becoming one of the Agency's best management tools. More-
over, current survey inputs will be absolutely essential for standards
and benchmark development, monitoring compliance with FLSA, and other
position management activity.
The answer, of course, is to maintain both a quality standards
program and a survey program without sacrificing one for the other
To do this would probably require an increase in PMCD's staff
If an increase in staff is not possible, then the number of su y
must be reduced (without eliminating the cyclic program) in favor of
greater effort on standards and benchmark development.
Recommendation #2
That as many as possible of PMCD's current staff be assigned
to a "crash" standards development program.
Recommend that coincidental with, or at the conclusion of,
this program the standards branch be reestablished.
STATI NTL
Comment: We agree that a carefully planned standards effort is
necessary to clearly define evaluation criteria which is understandable to,
and accepted by, management. In fact, PMCD had already begun this effort
prior to the survey of PMCD. However, a quality product will require a
substantial manpower commitment over a long period of time, and several
internal assignments within PMCD have already been made for this purpose.
Recommendation #3
That PMCD continue its work leading to the adoption of the.
principles of the new Civil Service Commission's Factor-Ranking/Benchmark
System which will provide a desired "uniform" base that can be readily
understood by operator and classifier alike. Further recommend in the
interest of ensuring greater operator participation that the modular
evaluation technique used so successfully by PMCD in certain Office of
Communications positions (and which would seem to have similar application
in places such as Div D, DDO, ISS in CRS/DDI, scientific positions in DDS&T
and finance positions in DDA) be used as extensively as possible.
Comment: We agree that PMCD should continue its work leading to the
installation of the "Factor-Ranking/Benchmark" methodology. The modular
system (which uses work examples rather than basic job factors that are
the real basis for position evaluation) can be used in certain activities
such as OC but would not be pertinent in most situations. We believe,
therefore, that our objective, insofar as possible, should be the development
of only one system for application on an Agency-wide basis.
Recommendation #4
Recommend (in addition to DCI Policy Statement on subject of
Position Management) that (1) a position classification training program
be developed for the purpose of "educating" component personnel officers
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 :2CIA-RDP79-00490A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
and operating officials involved in classification activities. (Such a
program isn't incorporated in existing supervisory/management training
courses.) (2) Publish a position management "flyer" for line managers.
Comment: Agree with conclusion. PMCD presently offers two sessions
per year of theirtraining program for OP careerists. This is about all
PMCD can handle with present staff and workload. One hour presentations
should be incorporated in OTR courses such as the Mid-Career, Basic
Supervision and the Management Seminar. The present briefing paper
provided component heads prior to scheduled surveys should be reviewed for
possible improvement.
Recommendation #5
. _ _
In the absence of an Executive Director-Comptroller or the
delegation of final classification authority to a senior officer of
the Director's choice,a formal appeal policy and procedural mechanism
be established. This mechanism should provide for appeal by the operator,
position incumbent, and - when such is necessary to maintain equity - by
PMCD.
Comment: A clear delegation of position classification authority
(all grade levels) should be made by the DCI to the Director of Personnel.
Recommendation #6
That general controls be adopted to stop grade creep and the
increase in supergrade positions and people.
Comment: An increase in average position grade is not unusual in any
organization that has experienced sizeable reductions in overall ceiling
over a period of a relatively few years. Nonetheless, grade creep is costly
and usually requires strict control measures if it is to be halted. The
Agency's supergrade allowances are allocated by OMB and must be justified
for retention and/or increase to OMB. We can expect close scrutiny by OMB
of our supergrade ceiling in the near future.
Recommendation #7
That control of average grade and of position management be monitored:
by DCI review in a manner similar to the APP on the people management side.
Comment: We agree that more emphasis should be placed on operating
component managerial responsibilities as regards their role in more effective
positicn .:7,anagement and position grade control. However, from a practical
standpoint, any specific proposals regarding a monitoring function must
necessarily relate to the extent of changes in authorities, policies, and
procedures which result from the total recommendations in this report. Initially'
at least, we believe that the recommendations regarding D/Pers responsibilities
as given elsewhere in the report will provide for any monitoring necessary.
Approved For Rase 2002/11/04: dIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
?
,)
' Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Recommendation #8
Amend the Regulations to include position structure in the gross
personnel ceilings at the time of allocations. Presently a Comptroller function
(from a staff standpoint) the combination would be a joint Director of
Personnel (PMCD) and Comptroller responsibility to the DCI with D/Pers
responsible for review and monitoring.
Comment: We disagree. By including position and grade structure
in the gross personnel ceilings at the time of allocations unnecessary delays
would be created. In "allotting" the numbers of positions at each grade
level (GS-15, 14, 13, etc.) a ceiling at each level would thereby be
established which components could cite as a basis for maintaining the
number of positions "authorized" at each level. New ceiling allocations
(including supergrade allowances) should flow from a review and justifi-
cation of the activity and the development of a basic organization and
position structure.
Recommendation #9
Define the position management function at the Agency level
and place it upon the Director of Personnel as the other part of the
position evaluation function. The objective would be to assure that
the entire Agency understood that position management and classification
are staff and coordinating functions of the Director of Personnel.
Comment: We agree that the delegations of authority to the
Director of Personnel and PMCD's charter as regards position management
and position evaluation and classification should be more succinctly
spelled out in the regulations. At the present time these responsibilities
STATINTLar e expressed in) and a Headquarters
Notice.
Recommendation plo
Examine the competitvie promotion policy and the CSGA. Perhaps
with the reduced complement and the average grade of incumbent approaching
the position average grade, the CSGA should be based on position require-
ments not on established positions and the actual advancement of an
approved candidate for promotion, particularly at upper and supergrade
levels should await the opening up of a position at the appropriate grade.
Comment: The Career Service competitive evaluation, ranking and
promotion system is based on the "rank-in-the-man" principle of evaluation
and promotability of individuals in competition with other individuals in
the competitive "group." The CSGA is an integral element of this competitive
system and must be based on the actual graded position structure (i.e.,
not on position requirements). However, the question as to whether this
approach is valid today should perhaps be studied.
4
Approved For. Release 2002/11/04 : CIA-RDP79700498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Recommendation Yll
Develop a more sophisticated basis to evaluate supergrade
positions. The format and factor analysis developed by the Civil
Service Commission under that portion of the Coordinated Job Evaluation
Plan applicable to the Executive Evaluation System (EES) would appear to
provide an excellent base under which PMCD and "Agency executives" could
build the necessary documentation for better supergrade position evaluation.
A copy of the EES "factors" is attached.
Comment: We agree, although the Executive Evaluation System (EES)
is not necessarily the answer. It is possible that an extension of the
basic Factor-Ranking/Benchmark System currently under review for evaluating
GS-1 through GS-15 positions might then be the most appropriate basis for
evaluating supergrade positions.
Recommendation #12
Establish a periodic review and report by the Director of
Personnel to the DCI on the management and utilization of supergrade
positions as they become vacant.
Comment: See comments to Recommendation #16.
Recommendation #13
In the case of impasse between the Director of Personnel and
the Directorates on the classification of supergrade positions - impasse
formerly resolved by the Ex Dir-Compt, the DDCI, or other designee of the
DCI, would make the decision. This appeal channel is suggested not only
to remove the Deputies and/or their Associate Deputies from the awkward
position of ruling on their own supergrade structure, but also to reinforce
the Director's immediate responsibility for decisions relative to supergrade
positions and personnel.
Comment: See comments to Recommendation #16
Recommendation #14
The Director of Personnel should report to the Deputy Director
concerned at the completion of two years of a SG PRA assignment and
seek instructions on ending the PRA. The same procedure should be
followed with respect to the reverse situation, namely the non-supergrade
indi\dual blocking a supergrade slot.
Comment: See comments to Recommendation #16.
Recommendation #15
Quite apart from other reporting, the Director of Personnel
should report once a year to the DCI on the number of supergrade personnel
PRA'd, and the number of non-SG personnel occupying SG positions. Report
Approved Fdr kelease 2002/11/04 : ak-RDP791-;0049.8A0 0300090004-5
STATI NTL
STATI NTL
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
to be by 'Iajor directorate, to show length of time of assignment and the
Director of Personnel's recommendation for resolving "problem assignments"
which have extended beyond a reasonable period.
Comment: See comments to Recommendation #16.
Recommendation #16
The new responsibilities of the D/Pers should be reflected in
amendments to Management of SG Personnel as cross referenced in
Suggested revisions are attached.
Comment: The Office of Personnel with the collaboration of the
Office of the Comptroller is preparing a paper on the management of
supergrade positions and allowances which addresses these points.
STATINTL Recommendation #17
Rework Personnel Administration to reflect the change
of focus from service to control on personnel planning and control.
Include the Director of Personnel responsibilities for position management,
average grade control in this general statement of policies. The policy
STATINTL
followed should be one of centralized planning and control of positions, but
with people management, including assignment, promotion, utilization
decentralized as at present subject to D/Pers review.
Comment: We agree that as well as other related regu-
lations should be thoroughly reviewed and reworked, in relation to such
changes in authorities and responsibilities as result from the recommenda-
STATINTL tions contained in this report.
Recommendation #18
Approval and review, including periodic surveys as provided for
in of position structure and the classification of positions
should remain a responsibility of the Director of Personnel through PMCD/OP.
Comment: We agree.
Recommendation #19
Good organization communication is based on confidence and is largely
an aspect of leadership, to be achieved in part in the case of position
management by the formal steps, announcement of intention, and regulatory
and other policy/procedural amendments as discussed elsewhere in this report.
Technical aids to good communication would include the develop-
ment, with operator participation, the promulgation of position standards,
Lhe inclusion of position management and classification in the training
curriculum for supervisory and management training, the publication of a
flyer, such as the Navy Dept's, on position management. [A "first-cut"
draft of such a pamphlet based on the Navy "flyer" is included in this
report.]
6
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A0P030C1090004-5
? Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Make grade and position management an evaluation factor in
the performance evaluation of every line supervisor, branch chief,
division chief, Office Head, Career Service Head. Make all levels of
supervisors which originate or propose official statements of duties and
responsibilities understand that they are certifying what is in effect
a pay-roll document; and that while the Director of Personnel through
PMCD, OP has the staff and coordinating responsibility, final responsibility
rests with line management.
Comment: No disagreement.
Approved EorRelease 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
25X1A
? Approved For Release 2002/4410 :CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Review and Comments of the Narrative
Conclusions Contained in the IG Survey
of the Office of Personnel
1. Reference: Office of Personnel
(IG Report Summary - Page 1, para 1)
"The Office of Personnel is one of the Agency's
largest organizations though only about two-thirds
of its careerists work in the central office
itself."
Coinment:
2. Reference: Outplacement
(IG Report Summary - Page 15, para 27)
"Outplacement is a key element among those services
designed to reduce the uncertainties, income inter-
ruptions, and other financial and emotional dis-
turbances associated with leaving Agency employment.
It is useful as a service for retirees, but could
have greater value as a means of encouraging and
expediting the departure of those employees who are
no longer needed by the Agency because of manning
reductions, less than complete suitability for
available positions, irreparable stagnation in
place, or combinations of these factors."
Comment:
We cannot agree that outplacement as such would or could
serve much of a role in encouraging and expediting the departure of
employees no longer needed by the Agency. We suspect there is little
in the way of a substitute for management making strong decisive
decisions and telling surplus or unneeded personnel that they are
not carrying their share or that their particular skills are no longer
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
?,Srdi
' Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
required. Persons so alerted will then get busy on what outplacement
has to offer. It must be remembered that outplacement's success depends,
to a great degree, on the economy and the external job market. There is
certainly no assurance that a healthful climate in this area would
always coincide with planned reductions.
3. Reference: Outplacement
(IG Report Summary - Page 16, para. 29)
"We found disturbing remarks by Office of Personnel
officials suggesting that the function of outplacement
might be the first effort cut if Office resources are
curtailed further."
Comment.
The remarks of the Office of Personnel officials were not
intended to reflect a lack of support or interest in the outplacement
activity but rather an acceptance of the facts of life. The Office
of Personnel has a number of statutory functions it must provide, and if
further reductions in resources are required, would have to consider for
elimination those that are nice to have but are not mandatory. The IG
and the Agency can be assured that as long as we can continue this
function, we will do so in a manner that will insure its meaningful use.
4. Reference: Recruitment and Applicant Processing
(IG Report Summary - Page 17, para. 33)
"All personnel, both in the field and at Headquarters,
who are involved in recruitment and applicant processing,
were keenly aware of the inordinate amount of time that
it takes for an applicant to enter on duty. Some of
this time is irreducible; some, however, is of questionable
necessity. We believe that requirements for field admini-
stration of the Professional Aptitude Test Battery (PATB)
is a principal cause of processing delays."
Comment
We believe that the requirement for field administration of the
Professional Aptitude Test Battery (PATB) is only a contributing cause to
processing delays.
5. Reference: Applicant Files
(Tab A - Page A-4, para. 7)
"The permanent retention of a very large number of
applicant files is within the letter but not the
implications of CIA's stated file retention practice.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 2CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
' Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
. . . The Inspector General will bring the risks
of adverse publicity inherent in the ISG/DDO
retention of applicant files to the attention of
the DDO and request a more specific examination
of the current usefulness of the practice. The
Inspector General's recommendation concerning
continuation or termination of the practice will
be made after consideration of the DDO response."
Comment:
Based on the review by the IG, the DDO has agreed that applicant
files need no longer be sent to ISG. SPD is working with ISG to purge
records not conforming with the two-year retention schedule under System 30.
(Files and records over two years old will be destroyed as soon as the
moratorium is lifted.) As of now, applicant files on candidates not
accepted for employment are being retained in GARB for two months and sent
25X1C directly to the Records Center for two years. At the end of two years,
the files and all records pertaining to them will be destroyed.
7. Reference: Agency Personnel Actions
(Tab B - Page B-5, para. 9)
"However, Chief, TRB faces a rather continual problem
of monitoring errors."
Comment:
Chief, TRB was referring to a recent pattern of inaccuracies
in researching data required in the preparation of transcripts within
her Branch and a relatively high pattern of errors in the Personnel
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 : 1A-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Actions prepared and submitted by Agency components to TRB for inputting
to the computer. Actions to remedy these problem areas cited by the
Inspectors had been initiated prior to the IG interview. Specifically,
a reassignment of an employee was effected with the replacement officer
? correcting the "transcript" problem, A reduction in errors in component-
initiated personnel actions is being realized by conducting retraining
sessions for the responsible individuals.
8. Reference: Agency Personnel Actions
(Tab B - Page G-6, para 10)
"The TRB Staff consists almost entirely of low-graded
clerks, some of whom are cast-offs from other offices,"
Comment:
We consider this observation by the IG to be inappropriate and
inaccurate in the use of the term "cast-offs from other offices," TRB
augments its limited permanent personnel staff by utilizing personnel
from other components of the Agency who are temporarily detailed to the
Office of Personnel while awaiting further assignment or other action_
9. Reference: Qualification Files
(Tab B - Pages B-8 and B-9, para 16)
"The (Qualifications) file is maintained in accordance
with criteria established by the Civil Service Com-
mission."
Comment:
We wish to correct a minor misconception that the Agency's
Qualification File system is maintained in accordance with the criteria
established by the Civil Service Commission. The CSC guidelines pertain
to a system not applicable to our Agency. The Agency's Qualification
File system was developed to meet. internal Agency needs and requirements.
10. . Reference: Computer Program Development
(Tab B - Page B-21, para 37)
"Nevertheless, there is still much misunderstanding
of what API' is all. about and the publicity given it
has been inadequate to the need. Moreover, the
Office of Personnel has contributed to poor accep-
tance of the report through inadequacies in its
early presentations of the plan to senior manage-
ment, with excessively complicated preparation
4
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
7
4?, A
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
guidelines, belated modifications of instructions
and failures to provide adequate briefing to the
middle and lower-level line managers who must
fill in the forms."
Comment:
We agree that there is a need for a broader and deeper under-
standing of the APP and its place in the "new approaches" to Agency
personnel management as instituted by Mr. Colby in FY 1973. Mx. Colby
launched the APP at the Management Committee level and clearly hoped for
active support and utilization of the APP as a meaningful personnel manage-
ment mechanism. Not all senior managers have shared Mr. Colby's enthusiasm
for the APP but nonetheless complied with the reporting requirements. By
and large, the Directorate APP's have been prepared by Administrative and
Personnel Officers assigned to the operating components and not the middle
and lower-level line managers. In advance of sending out the final
FY 1976 APP formats, however, all Administrative and Personnel Officers
who actually fill out the report were invited to a briefing at the
Headquarters Building, three hours of the meeting being allotted for a
discussion and review of the entire format and for instruction on com-
pletion of the report. At that meeting all attendees were advised that
members of the OP Review Staff would be available to meet with Career
Service or Subgroup personnel separately to further explain the philosophy
and techniques of the APP. In light of some complaints of directions
being insufficient in FY 1975, the instructions for the FY 1976 APP were
spelled out in greater detail than in prior years. Subsequently only the
DDI and DDA Career Services requested meetings of their representatives
with the OP Review Staff for further discussion and guidance.
The Review Staff is presently working with representatives at
the Directorate level in an effort to modify the substantive content,
simplify the format of the APP for the coming Fiscal Year, and improve
the instructions on the use and preparation of the reports.
11. Reference: Computer Program Development
(Tab B - Page B-22, para 39)
"We found the detailed analysis done on the current.
APP for the Director unnecessarily prolix and com-
plicated."
Comment:
At no time did Director Colby, who had requested the detailed
analysis, comment nor indicate that he thought it was "unnecessarily
prolix and complicated." Indeed, the analysis followed the instructions
and wishes he personally communicated to the Director of Personnel.
5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
;
, .
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
12. Reference: Computer Program Development
(Tab B - Page B-22, para. 39)
"Moreover, we perceive a view of line management,
in our discussions with Chief, Review Staff, that
is not conducive to solving the conmunication
problem -- namely, her view that line managers are
unnecesarily sloppy, lack logic, and indifference,
all of which works against the program's success."
Comment:
Apparently the Investigator misunderstood the Chief, Review
Staff's comments. The individuals referred to were not the line managers
but the staff personnel (in some cases clerical level) who prepared the
data on the APP submissions. A review of the APP's as initially submitted
revealed an extensive number of obvious errors and omissions that required
research and correction by the Review Staff prior to submission of the
reports to the DCI.
13. Reference: Computer Program Development
(Tab B - Page B-22, para. 39)
"We think a more positive approach to the conmunications
problems would come from a recognition that line
managers are often overworked and beset with a plethora
of current deadlines. They are best prepared for
innovation if it is made quite clear how it will help
make their activity become more effective (and easier
to manage)."
Comment:
The Report expressed concern for the line manager being unduly
involved in complicated and detailed OP-oriented projects that he or she
could not identify as being relevant to their situation. This would
indeed be a concern if that were intended to be a part of APP. The APP,
however, is not designed to function that way. At best the line manager
will have physical input to only one-third of the report, granted that
the input should be based on analysis of the other two-thirds. The
statistical work for that analysis, if not the analysis itself, should
have been done by the personnel or administrative staff before reaching
the line manager. It is even probable that "line managers" below the
Office and Division Head level would not have input to the APP at all.
In many instances the new goal input can be made by senior Personnel or
Administrative Officers under the close direction and review of their
respective Office or Division Head or Deputy Director.
6
Approved For Release 2002 1 y94 ? CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
C
? Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
The goals and trends SQt forth in the APP are Office and
Division goals and trends, and should be approved or amended as they
support or conflict with Career Service goals and directions, The APP
is not intended to be a working document that would help the line manager
solve his daily working problems. It is not designed to solve day by day
problems except as they relate to the broad picture of personnel manage-
ment, The APP is a yearly planning paper which, if followed, assures
adequate and properly distributed headroom for promotion; a well-planned
mix of clerical, technical and professional employees; continued and proper
use of rotational assignments; a minimum number of PRAs; adequate training,
etc. Granted there are communication problems associated with the APP,
and we see the primary lines that require strengthening as follows:
a. Deputy Directors with Sub-Career Service Group
and Office Heads.
b. Deputy Directors with their Directorate-level Chiefs
of Personnel and Administrative Officers.
c. Sub-Career Service Group and Office Heads with their
senior Personnel and Administrative Officers,
d. Sub-Career Service Group and Office Heads with their
mid and lower-level. managers.
The Office of Personnel also must strive to increase better understanding
of the .APP through expanding our communications with the Deputy Directors,
Sub-Career Service Groups and Office Heads and senior Personnel. Officers.
The IG Report is correct in stating that the APP and to a
lesser degree the PDP have not been fully accepted in the Agency. In
discussing these topics with Agency personnel, members of the Review Staff
find three major causes for the complaints:
a. Misunderstanding the purpose of the report by viewing
it as a requirement for data to be used by the Office
of Personnel,
b. Understanding the intent and purposes of the report
but failing to get Office and Career Service input
or interest in the reports.
c. Receiving no feedback below the Deputy Director level
regarding submissions.
A central theme in many complaints is the complexity of the APP.
We note, however, the IG investigators do not find the APP as complicated
as many make it out to be. Other complaints or problems have arisen
7
Approved For Release 2002/11104 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
? Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
from failure to relate data on one chart to the substance of another,
failure to copy numbers correctly, and failure in simple arithmetic. We
believe a better comprehension of the intent and purpose of the report,
i.e., advance personnel planning and evaluation of goals, would relieve
some of the tension created by the resistance to the reporting require-
ment. To help build acceptance of the system, we continually review
the format and content of the APP with a view to restructuring for
simplicity of reporting. For FY 77 the computer reports which provide
the past year data have been redesigned to match more closely the chart
for formatting in the report.
We fully agree that continued communication on the purposes of
the APP and PDP is needed and hope that better understanding and compre-
hension will stimulate better receptivity and action. While the guidances
for the APP each year have stressed the importance of feedback by the
Career Services of their analysis of their own APP's to their Sub-
groups, there has been little evidence that this has been done.
It is pertinent to note the APP analysis on an Agency-wide
basis has lead to a number of personnel management improvements, or
attempts to improve, but unfortunately without attribution to APP data
base - perhaps another lack of communication in that the action officers
don't relate the two activities or sets of facts.
14. Reference: Internal Placement and Movement
(Tab C - Pages C-5 and C-7, paras 9 and 11)
"During 1975 fewer than 120 employees sought out or
were referred to PPB for job counselling. PPB suc-
ceeded in placing only about 10% of these problem
cases, an unsurprising outcome considering that PPB
amounted to a court of last resort after efforts by
the component and Directorate failed to solve the
problem."
"A more ambitious program by PPB would tend to inter-
fere with management's responsibility; be more costly
to operate and become overburdened by employees
curious about opportunities elsewhere but not to the
extent that they would be likely to transfer. We
believe, therefore, that the prime responsibility
and action must remain with management, including the
Career Services, and that the Office of Personnel
activity is about as it should be. This does not mean
that the problem does not remain a serious one. It
8
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 ; CJA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
only indicates that there is relatively little
the Office of Personnel can do about it beyond
the efforts, especially by the Career Comnittee,
now being pursued."
Comment:
The IG's recognition of the limits on how much SPD can do in
the reassignment of personnel is appreciated, but we hope to improve on
our record. The new careers occupational handbook under the aegis of
the Careers Committee should facilitate the work, as will, we hope a
new publication titled "Employees Available for Reassignment." This
notice, the opposite of the Vacancy Notice, will advertise the qualifi-
cations of those personnel interested in a new assignment. It will be
distributed to all offices to insure that individuals' qualifications
are not overlooked.
15. Reference: Outplacement
Crab D - Page D-6, para 11a)
"The capabilities of the counselors to find job
possibilities outside the Washington area is very
limited at present, according to C/RAD. We believe
this might be imnroved by making more use of our
16. Reference: Recruitment and Applicant Processing
(Tab E - Pages E-1 and E-2, para 2)
"The recruiters seemed knowledgeable enough about
the Agency in generalities, but there is no question
that recruiters without reasonably extensive experience
elsewhere in the Agency are limited to their ability
to convey the flavor of Agency employment to some
applicants. We found evidence of this during our field
visits. We would suggest that all new recruiters
assigned to the field possess somewhat more Agency
experience."
Approved For Release 2002/11/04;,01A7RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
STAT
? Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Comment:
We agree with the comment that new recruiters assigned to the
field should possess somewhat more Agency experience. For some time our
plan has been that new recruiters would come from inside the Agency
unless peculiar circumstances should dictate to the contrary. Certainly
a recruiter from outside the Agency should be the exception, not the
rule. Our intention, now being implemented, is to rotate Personnel
Officers into recruitment assignments of approximately five years duration.
17. Reference: Recruitment and Applicant Processing
gab E - Page E-2, para 2)
"It is also suggested that during their slack season,
usually the summers, present recruiters be brought to
Headquarters and. assigned to and work with the components
for which they recruit. It is felt that this would give
them a better appreciation for the needs of the components
than, for instance, attending or monitoring courses at
Headquarters."
Comment:
This suggestion presents somewhat of a problem, for under
present operating procedures there is no particular "slack season." While
it is true that during the summer the academic recruiting schedule is
reduced, recently new emphasis has been placed on using this period for
the development of non-academic sources. Furthermore, field recruiters
work against requirements for all elements of the Agency rather than
just a few components. Given the short duration of time that would
be available, such training/work assignments would necessarily be super-
ficial, devolving into a familiarization experience rather than an
in-depth learning one.
18. Reference: Recruitment and Applicant Processing
(Tab E - Pages E-4 and E-5, paras 6, 7 and 8)
. . . the inspection concluded that the Staff
Personnel Division is doing everything possible at
Headquarters to get applicant cases into the hands
of the customers as quickly as possible. Much of
the criticism about the amount of time that it
takes to process an application was centered
around the administration of the PAU . . . and
the time that it takes a customer to decide
whether or not to put a case in process."
10
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
"We question whether the value of early admini-
stration of the PATB is sufficient in most-cases,
to justify the loss of good applicants probably
generated by the delay entailed? Offices might
find that administration and prompt evaluation of
the test during an applicant's Headquarters visit
would satisfy their need.: Decisions on this matter
must be reserved to the Operating Components who
best understand their personnel needs and the
reasons for particular selection criteria, We
believe they should be fully aware of the costs of
present. PATB practices in terms of lost applicants,
extra recruiting efforts, and simply the dollar
expended for administering the test in many
localities, however. We suggest that this subject
be included in the course for component managers
"other major cause of delay is the time taken by
components to reach decisions about putting applicants
in process? . We suggest ? that statistics and
horrible examples be assembled and presented to managers
at the course mentioned above in the hope of increasing
their awareness of the problem,"
Conunent:
While the IG's statement that SPD is doing everything at
Headquarters to get applicant cases into the hands of the customers as
quickly as possible is appreciated, we recognize a need to continue in
our efforts to make the system work better, For example, although many
offices are doing a better job of making their recruitment guides more
specific, we need to get all offices to do this.
Preliminary statistics show that we are moving towards reducing
the decision-making time from 60 to 50 days. However, we will not meet
this MBO objective unless we can somehow get the CT Program to review
files faster. We would hope that the IG will assist this effort when they
review OTR. We have recently established a new system for the review of
Hispanic-American applicants. If successful, we might be able to adapt
the system to the review of files of Black applicants -- the other area
besides CTP which takes far too long. Our list of delinquent files
remains too long, We have decided to be more aggressive in retrieving
these files and will do so at higher levels, Delinquent files means
delinquent correspondence, In addition to retrieving files, we are
tightening up on our procedures to see that applicants receive corre-
spondence about every 30 days, We agree with the IG comments concerning
11
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
tr;,""?
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
19, Reference: Recruitment and Applicant Processing
(Tab E - Page E-6 and E-7, para 9)
"Our investigations from the. Office of Personnel
perspective supported the view that the CTP recruit-
ment program indeed looks like a "massive overskill"
(sic), The Office of Personnel activities are
governed in many cases by personnel requirements
specified by other components, however, and the pro-
gram as a whole is managed by OTR. Therefore, this
matter will be further reviewed during an OIG survey
of OTR scheduled to start within two or three months.
Recommendations for corrective action, if still
indicated, will be included in the report of that
survey."
Comment:
We would be most interested in the conclusion drawn by the IG
Inspection Team which is scheduled to do an OTR survey in the near future.
In the meantime, we will continue to provide as precise guidelines as we
can to our field recruiters on the profile of a prospective CT applicant.
The closer we can get to the mark, the fewer applicant cases need be sub-
mitted.
20. Reference: Recruitment and Applicant Processing
(Tab E - Page E-7, para 10)
"Shortages of clerical personnel were often cited by
customers as reason for dissatisfaction with Office
of Personnel recruiting efforts. Our examination of
these efforts failed to suggest any dramatic new
means of increasing the flow of new clerical
employees,"
Comment:
The history of the Agency shows that we never seem to have the
proper number of clericals in process. We studied this for several
months and believe that we now have Eine-tuned our requirements.
12
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
,dolo
25X1
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Recruiters now understand that clerical applicant input must he maintained
on a steady, year-round basis, and that we cannot rely on June high school
graduates to meet OUT requirements on a year-round basis. In order to
keep our clerical requirements filled, it may be necessary to exceed our
clerical ceiling in the summer months using the difference between OUT
professional on-duty strength and ceiling to absorb clerical overages.
21, Reference: Customer Perceptions of Agency Personnel
Policy Development
(Tab H - Page H-1, para 2)
"Initiatives in personnel management are often taken
in CIA by people other than the Director of Personnel.
An outstanding example are those inspired by the then
DCI that led, through recommendations of a Personnel
Advisory Study Group (PASG) report, to an effort
still underway called "New Approaches to Personnel
Mhnagement."
Comment:
The Personnel Approaches Study Group (PASG) was the result of
a suggestion made by the Director of Personnel to prevent a fragmented
approach to changing the personnel management system in the Agency.
The Office of Personnel was already involved in a low-key study to make
some needed changes. The backing of top management, especially Mir. Colby,
resulted in a much more comprehensive revamping than would have been
possible otherwise.
During late 1972 and early 1973 the Office of Personnel was
actively involved in reviewing current personnel management policies
and procedures in the Agency. Staff proposals were written on fitness
reports, employee mobility, executive development, counseling, etc.
Mr. Colby, then Executive Director-Comptroller, was sounded out on some
of these proposals and was most encouraging inhis support. He made it
clear that he had a personal interest in personnel management and would
be receptive to other proposals on needed changes.
About the same time, others were taking a look at some of the
same problems and submitting reports to the Director:
MAG, "Career Services: Need for Change: (7 May 73)
IG, "Agency Career Services" (Apr 73)
, "Personnel Management in CIA"
(13 Mar 73)
On 1 June 1973 the CIA Management Committee met and spent almost the entire
meeting discussing personnel management issues raised by these papers.
The Director of Personnel advised the Committee that the points raised
13
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
r
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
should not be considered independently of other aspects of personnel
management and that he should he allowed to develop an integrated approach.
The Committee agreed and directed the Director of Personnel to set up a
study group to make specific recommendations on changes in the personnel
management system.
Each Deputy Director appointed a representative to the study
group and it became known as the Personnel Approaches Study Group (PASG),
The Office of Personnel/Plans Staff provided the staff support for the
PASG Report and has continued to work with the Directorates in implementing
the new approaches,
22. Reference: Customer Perceptions of Agency Personnel
Policy Development
(Tab H - Page H-4, para 7)
"(The Careers Committee will meet periodically) .
to assign study projects. The first such are directed
at realizing the PASG objective of more inter-Directorate
transfers as well as providing better job counselling
and career guidance."
Comment:
The Careers Conuittee was established for the primary purpose
of serving as a mechanism to facilitate the exchange of information among
Career Services. Career Service Heads were not given to understand that
the Commit tee would be working on career patterns that would involve
inter-Directorate personnel movements. It can be said that the Committee
intends to promote greater willingness among Agency managers to consider
and recognize the transferrability of skills between more occupational
groups than is the case at the moment. The Committee through this
approach of studying and analyzing the facts of movements .of personnel
between occupational groups expects to broaden the career prospects for
those able employees caught by lack of growth opportunity in their own
component. Developmental Profiles prepared as part of a PDP requirement
serve as reference and point of discussion in searching out and addressing
various career management issues. Likewise, the role and responsibilities
of Agency career counselors will be an area of focus for the Coumdttee.
No doubt one of the unannounced. objectives of the Committee is to do
what it can to minimize the bias which currently impedes intra-Agency
personnel movements of talented and valuable employees,
14
Approved For Release 2002/11/94fICJA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
tr e
?
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
A
STATI NTL
Ap
ND ILL C. % ,.. IFI ATI ? N TOP AND BOTTOM
-
) ? . ; . ?1, - 1:41L.,- iv i . o J crrtri pi- - I I A -;
OFFICIAL ROUTING SLIP
r,11
TO
''NAME AN ei .ADDFV4S
DATE
INITIALS
.
1
ADD/Ail
a JUN 1976
2
DDA ; V
a JuN iwc
7
s ',
'
4
5
6
,
ACTION
DIRECT REPLY
PREPARE REPLY
APPROVAL
DISPATCH
RECOMMENDATION
COMMENT
FILE
RETURN
CONCURRENCE
INFORMATION
SIGNATURE
Remarks:
ill,li,,,4447 76.A...1 0,..e ...40..Ze..--,--L.,,,...0_,?{ 77-1-1-e-7-74-
i
"17441-A47 914-61 /A". l'it if).(-1-"t. ,"'-e
1)-T' ,i---/-64.4,a ?.-0 4444,e,a- ,-
ERE TO RETURN TO SE
ADDRESS AND PHONE NO.
DATE
-i
2 JUN 1c,./'
-, ?. -,:"
i.. : ,, :: -
I _ ; .. I
mr6r. 237 Use previous editions
(40)
4-5
4-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Mr. Blake,
Here's the package on
the IG Survey of OP.
I have attached as the
first paper, a document
which OP furnished Mr.
Malanick last week of
extracts from the 1964
Survey of OP. This was
forwarded as background
for a future EAG item.
Del/17 August
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
STATI NTL
Ap
Ap
my
dituRgitplwioiecNe *Pi- LFVATIP11572Y! ft
00614boo9o?
UNCLASSIFIED I I CONFIDENTIAL
SECRET
:
OFFICIAL ROUTING SLIP
TO
NAPAF Aran ArHIRFRR
DATE
ITIALS
1
....
1 0
AUG 1976
2
3
Pc-Is).9 / R? - ii
AUG 1976
4
-- r\....Q...,
e.,...1
_
6
....."--
ACTION
DIRECT REPLY
PREPARE REPLY
APPROVAL
DISPATCH
RECOMMENDATION
COMMENT
FILE
RETURN
CONCURRENCE
INFORMATION
SIGNATURE
Remarks:
iv-
i rkv-41
FOLD HERE TO RETURN TO SENDER
FROM: NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE NO.
DATE
aw 0
la ?
- - II a A ? i - ? - ? s a A ,41,: i
UNCLASSIFIED CONFIDENTIAL
t
Aida*: a a a -f;.
S CRET
FORM NO. 237 Use previous editions
1-67
(40)
04-5
04-5
Approved For Release 2002/11104: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Ult
MEMORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director of Central Intelligence
StJBJECT : Inspector General's Survey of the
OffIce of Personnel
1. Attached is our survey of the Office of Personnel. In the
courage of this survey we interviewed 95 percent of the people in
that Office, visited five field recruiting offices, talked to 10
recruiters and observed interviews with members of the graduating
classes at three universities. Despite criticism of CIA in the
press and elsewhere, at the time of this survey we can report that
the Agency's reputation as a prospective employer is excellent.
There are many more able young people interested in working for
CIA than can be hired under current.ceiling limitations.
Z. We believe it is important to make the point that the
Director of Personnel is in an equivocal position in relation to the
individual Career Services, as well as the top management of the
Agency. While he has the title, most of the real power and decial
making authority for the Agency's personnel program lie in the
directorates and heads of independent offices.
Approved
?
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
e
Approved For Release 2002/iltaCQA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
.ivoktts 17,--.3114itiered CiAe p-ossib-le ,.14 re ?ocaiing the
n ?i...)ther cllanges iA status hich would ake it
f?Lrr the ector of Personnel to epeali with a
g*r
4.1.AStan that a* an -intelligence ? aizatAxj Vae
AA.ency eelui7ea a id-agree f tonyvoitl-tin its Irzlajor Con-
a h possik*Iso efficiencies to be gained i -organizing
,17t.tr p-orsonnel administration are outwei0ed 1fy the aI. st certain
disadvantages. We have, therefore, roads no r. ri,-trlfzendations ?3n
tt.le
4. Most a Qi.lr reconn ;eredatione are designed to trethen
the hand f").f the Director of Person al in Carrying o4 hia review
and- evattisti " responsibilities. "i'-;e b.11ee theite re, % *need
actions- will contrilmte to the teng-standing goal of helping this
Agency maks better %lie a it* people, develop hette supervisors
and executives, weed oat substandard empee, awl reduce its
pers net to Other proposals are designed t prvida more ?
inforrnatior, about the Agency's personnel program anti
its rr prohie . witot ting the re-oponsibilitles and
authorities of heaes
akso "!Uts to note exctIlePt cz?staeratiott received
from r." - lice 01 tu duriflg the i thl,s survey.
T_.,....,? ft UP
J. 3. 7-:-?arl:nan
heRcowt F.,,or,le 2992)011/04 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
.3 I; CRET
until they re '11 a crisis stage. The Director of Personnel
anould be encouraged to take greater in1ttativ aovia
leadership in organizing an attack on nese problems.
There are persistent areas of high professional nttri.
tion --- especially in the: DD/I. CIA loses too many of its
young professionals, and to little is being done about thls.
The Director of Personnel and office heads should collabora.e
on anrogram of reducing attrition where possible.
The cost of processing new personnel is hi. ?Lee
costs are imreased by high attrition in sone areas. We
believe hese are problem areas. -which nerit :eurther atten-
tion; they are the subject of four specific recommendations
addressed to the Director of Personnel.
The Director of Personnel is in some cases frustrated
because of the autonomy of heads of offices and Career
Services. When 4 serious problem is identified and agree-
t cannot be reached between the Director of Personnel
and the Deputy Director concerned, it should be brought 't-4
the attention of the Executive Director or the WI for
resolution.
There are about 100 1;..ay jobs requiringiertIfI, 'tet.
Al al or other tivecialist which are difficult to
- 5 -
Approved For Release 2002/11)/61-4' FdiAiRSP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
SECRET
development of such individuals, including their training, assign
ment, rotation and advancement". In addition, the Office of
Security, the Office of Training and the Vedical Staff have impor-
tant responsibilities in the personnel field.
In practice the management philosophy of CIA has to a
great extent relegated the Director of Personnel and the Office
of Personnel to roles of personnel technicians whose functions
are to "support and assist" heads of offices and Career Services.
Under this system, the Director of Personnel has not been encour-
aged in his "review and evaluation" function. Some of the probleme
which we have identified in this report result from too much inde-
pendence on the part of offices end Career Services in personnel
administration and from too little central revieerand evaluation
of their performance. We do not advocate major organizational
changes, or basic obanges In CIA's management policies of decen-
tralization. We believe, howeVer? that the Director of Personnel
should be encouraged :to take greater initiatives in exercising
hia review and evaluation flanction, that his organization should
be atrengthemed to perform, this function more effectively, and -
most important - he should have encouragement to bring personnel
problems which cannot be resolved at the Deputy Director level to
the attention of the Deputy Director of Central Intelligence with
- 9 -
Approved For Release 2002/11/64? dleeRtP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
OECRET
7:eoommendations for appropriate resolution.
We have several recommendations bearing on these matters.
The principal recomendation in point ia No. 10 on Ipetae 38.
- 10 -
SECRE T
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
25X1A
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
3. 3alary and Wae Division
:.A.Id8eted
1. This Division of
25X9
ha a a charter to develop Ana intain "
Agency-wide program of position classification and 1.:rap. adminis-
tration." Position classification, review of staffing patterns
and review of proposed grade chan8es account for about one-half-
of the Division's work. Special studies of a wide range of
personnel ratters account for most of the other half. The latter
a study of a proposal to abolish the National Intelligence Survey
research branches of OCI; the personnel organization of the Credit
Union; staffing patterns of various CIA components for the
Executive Director-Comptrollr; and the use of contract personnel
by a European field station. The manpower control officer of the
=ice of Budget, Program Analysis and Manpower is very complimen-
tary of the work the Division has done for his office. Denands on
the Division for special studies are increasing. The actual work
of the Division is rore diversified than its rather narrowly stated
charter.
2. This Division is the component of the Office of
Personnsl which has the nost day-to-day access to and infor ation
- 36 -
L;ECRET
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
SECRET
about workload, job resuirements, job qualifications and personnel
practices and problems of other CIA offices. It is the only Agency
comcnent which is in a position to review the Terformance of the
Career Services in any systematic way. Although most of the officers
in the Division have specialized in position classification during
their professional careers, they have been exposed to a variety of
other personnel matters. Three have served with the Clandestine
Services and two have had overseas service.
3. We believe this Division should be given a broader
charter and a more broadly qualified staff to examine all aspects
of personnel management of the Career Services including the
kinds of problems outlined in this. report. This is essential if
the Director of Personnel is to discharge- his review and evaluaw
tion. function. The Division is not now equipped to do this. It
is understrength? and the Division is frank to admit that it has
to react to day-to-day problems and requests rather than plan its
coverage of major problem areas systematically. It has a budget
of only $4,200 for travel for FY 1964. Ninety percent of CIA's
overseas installations have never been surveyed. Some Headquarters
components have never been surveyed as a unit.
4. We have given consideration to a. proposal that the
Division be transferred to the Executive Director-Comptroller,
- 37 -
SECR T
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
SECRET
and given an across-the-board management review function similar
to that of the former Nanagement Staff. Although there are merits
to such a oroeosal, we believe 7,hat this would eeriously weaken
the Office of Personnel at a time when it needs strengthening. We
believe that the Division should remain in the Office of Personnel,
be renamed the Personnel Management Division, and given sufficient
staff and backing to undertake the expanded activities outlined
above.
It is recommended that,:
The Director of Personnel:
No. 10
a. Redesignate the Salary and Wage Division as the
Personnel Management Division;
b. Broaden the charter of the Division to include:
e review of personnel management policies and practices
offices and Career Services and manpower utilization;
ILLEGIB
c. Extend the review function of the Division to
elude: salary and wage structure, promotion practices,
tirement programs and insurance benefits of CIA pro-
ietaries;
d. Identify personnel problems resulting from this
review and evaluation which are not possible to resolve
with heads of offices and Career Services and bring them
to the attention of the Executive Director or the MCI
with recommendations for action;
e. Provide the Division with sufficient qualified
People, funds and eupport to accomplish its broadened
mission;
I'. Collaborate closely with the Director of leideet?
..ogeam Analysis and Manpower in carrying out this miesion.
- Do
E C H1?1 T
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
C
Approved For Release 2002 '1h3 IA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
Page 30 of z--..ort)
Mri.x-tor of rtraotr,w212
Betlesignabe the cJslary onit!481 Division as the Porsonnel
na6ement Division;
b. ':-.00n&.rt the charter of the Division to inclIgiez
? mel J:x Ugie3and nraetioes off.4-9
Ands magpmer utilisetteni
c. 1;sztend the review?' function of the Division to ineludet
mlary end 'uses 7,stmettala, -nraltation yractioes) xetireaamt .twogrersts
instu"nuce lx.mefits of CIA proprietaries;
4 Ti1ent,S4ty personnel 'oxidant:is- reoultim fr.= tbi evi? and
cl,,alalation.latada ri,27e not, possible to raaolve 'with hcaal oille
Casirmr az=zvices and bring them to the attention of the ivo
Dirrurtor or the vith -reeccraen4attipete for actIon;
e. 7a..?:ykrias the 'DI1ris:4V With r="fitriczt walla pool?
su7?yort to acecoplifill braadt)MantSigltAtt;
Col../.2a)orate ciogitebt trith the DI reel= of alkke t 'PM; MX
A2d ower in marrying oat this tasslon.
AG.,..ee in principle* 77,to =heavies of this propoeal is to
rcatlentberespOnetbilitica or MID to include ormxlizationsa xvviesr
nna mamma*Iti1tthG,reNriew or provrietex7 jsynterts, and to
rococo" and ad,luatztento and starring and bor.t to panalt
to amperage of the inomaxied responsibilities.
Clofte marl be required between WTI itue zemormel
Operat1on:13 Mvialon =I between t.1117 and the Plane land :z.eviesr fitett
el-,711ozdAcet, overlappin&uxie.ozellot :In =Plying cut the
n-nriow and Maroaelbtittles of the Atrector of2icroponeel.
th-to reedon, the, mew ttmettone of:0 victad require oweika
c74:Iftnitiem And 34 perhve expo-x.12watt Zor title 170fArlittlig
oTf1eXt'latiortratapo to reach the moot erreotive 1197r:dna
Nkrineart otbang those three eltregnits.
parcgra e. above* -4.:2" believe. thl3t',.7tOre .1..Inen
VerrXittc..41'.1 12.71.tb -the:3e3-,,trty DI.ret or for .',311:7.nort, Vrio Chief, 13A ,Stettj,
Dlroctor-Ccrtptrt.?.11.er limit the. f':-;r4eirtt, to11f:a tbto
c:).2 ,Drraolairtel- would pa.rtieitioto ..5,..*.be zit.3.m.taigtam,tion
9,r11571
Approved For Release 2002/11/4t1A-RDP79-00498A00030009000
GRUJP
itetv4ed frgm auton ic
?-? caw:ragiag a34
tf:cless!:iC3thig
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 :,C1A-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
-rxiai,11.V.4on 10 (cod-Um:oil)
17itTard1ng pailal4m0h e. Above, tile Tio rer M)11.as been in= wad
three In anticipation of an eNpousion or itiit reopcnsibilities Arid
ceretua geIttetIons are being made to iaatitity TAalUted officer* fdr
aaal4noento4
1114*0-4.Arling the prop000a new:UMW l!or this Divizionl
".!aragamont ravioAon4 la perbmpts too bromd and acre &scrtrtive of
4-:vne total 4opon5ibi1Ities of the lazwtor Ptrmknnel.
4,
Approved For Release 2002/11/04rVIA-RDP79-00498A000300090004-5
? 1
aVet