See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/237446431

Leadership in the Public Sector

Article  in  Review of Public Personnel Administration · June 2004

DOI: 10.1177/0734371X04263323

CITATIONS READS
12 1,246

2 authors, including:

Patricia Wallace Ingraham

Binghamton University
72 PUBLICATIONS   1,585 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Government Performance Project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Patricia Wallace Ingraham on 03 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ARTICLES
10.1177/0734371X04263323
REVIEW OF PUBLIC PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION / June 2004
Ingraham, Getha-Taylor / LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT

Leadership in the Public Sector:

Models and Assumptions for Leadership Development
in the Federal Government

PATRICIA WALLACE INGRAHAM

HEATHER GETHA-TAYLOR
Syracuse University

To fill the need for leaders and change agents throughout all levels of federal agen-
cies, public sector human resource managers are now called on to develop innova-
tive leadership development programs. Developing leaders for the 21st century
requires attention to workforce trends as well as flexibility and creativity. Federal
government leadership development programs need to address special leadership
concerns of public agency managers, including creative thinking, collaboration,
cross-organizational team building, and leading for results. This research pro-
vides overviews of federal leadership development programs and includes average
and exemplary models. Lessons learned from this research offer a new set of lead-
ership development assumptions for the public sector. Data were gathered from
document analysis, preliminary network interviews, and in-depth personal
interviews with program designers and participants.

Keywords: leadership development programs; strategic human resource man-

agement; training innovation

E ffective leadership is integral to organizational effectiveness. Effective

leaders create positive organizational cultures, strengthen motivation,
clarify mission and organizational objectives, and steer organizations to more
productive and high performing outcomes. Recent evidence of the impor-
tance of leadership and its absence or limited presence in some public organi-
zations is plentiful. A 2003 study conducted by the Partnership for Public Ser-
vice, for example, analyzed the U.S. Office of Personnel Management’s 2002
Federal Human Capital Survey (FHCS) to determine the “best places to
work” in the federal government (Partnership for Public Service, 2003).
Although the Partnership’s Best Places to Work analysis of FHCS data indi-
cated that leadership was a key driver in workplace satisfaction, the FHCS

Review of Public Personnel Administration, Vol. 24, No. 2 June 2004 95-112
DOI: 10.1177/0734371X04263323
© 2004 Sage Publications

95
96 REVIEW OF PUBLIC PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION / June 2004

overall did not indicate that satisfaction with leadership was high in the fed-
eral government. Rather, it indicated that more than half of the federal
employees surveyed found leadership to be deficient. This finding is obvi-
ously alarming (U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 2002).
Because leadership plays a crucial role in the other two factors believed to
drive employee satisfaction—utilizing employee skills and teamwork—
developing and sustaining effective leaders for the government of the 21st
century is clearly fundamental. As further evidence, a recent analysis of the
organizational transformation at the Internal Revenue Service concluded
that effective and committed leadership was a critical factor in the success of
that organization’s change (Thompson & Rainey, 2003). Finally, in an anal-
ysis of management capacity and the “potential for performance” in federal
agencies and state and local governments, Ingraham, Joyce, and Donahue
(2003) reported that, in each case where strong management capacity was
developed, strong leadership was also present.
The concern for finding and keeping effective leaders is a priority not
only for the public sector but for the private sector as well. In private sector
organizations, the role and authority of leadership is clearly identified and
often heralded; indeed, private sector nostrums such as Lee Iaccoca’s “Lead,
follow, or get out the way!” are often echoed in public leaders’ charges.
Comptroller General David Walker’s 2003 address to the National Press
Club included a call to action: Government leaders, he said “need to recog-
nize the leadership and stewardship obligations that we have to our chil-
dren, grandchildren, and future generations” (Walker, 2003, n.p.).
Exercising leadership in public sector organizations, however, is different
from leading private organizations. One of the most significant is the bifur-
cated administrative model created by placing elected and appointed offi-
cials, as well as senior leaders from the career bureaucracy at the top of many
public organizations. This pattern is most notable in the federal govern-
ment (Ingraham, 1995) but has important parallels in state and local gov-
ernment as well. Split leadership, combined with democratic accountabil-
ity, oversight procedures created by courts and legislatures, and intense
media attention, creates an environment for public sector leaders that is
constrained in many complex ways.
This is not to suggest that public organizations should not worry about
leadership because it is so hard. Rather, the point is that leadership is critical
to effective organizational adaptation to change as well as to more general
organizational performance (Ingraham, Sowa, & Moynihan, 2004;
Thompson & Rainey, 2003). For public organizations, the need to perform
 Ingraham, Getha-Taylor / LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 97

well—probably with more limited resources—is heightened by state bud-

getary crises, immense new concerns such as those flowing from September
11, and the need to manage and lead public employees in more flexible and
performance-oriented management systems. The Department of Home-
land Security and Department of Defense provide clear federal examples.
Although the need to develop public sector leaders is increasingly appar-
ent, how this task is accomplished is not nearly so obvious. Virtually all
major agencies in the federal government support leadership development
programs at some level; most of these programs operate with a leadership
template or model. That model is most often based on a set of commonly
accepted competencies. Since 1978, for example, the Senior Executive Ser-
vice (SES) has been a primary vehicle for leadership development in the fed-
eral government. SES candidate development programs are omnipresent in
federal leadership development efforts. These programs educate candidates
in five SES core competency areas: leading change, leading people, being
results driven, employing business acumen, and building coalitions/com-
munications. SES development programs are generally 18 to 24 months in
duration and are open to employees who are level GS 14/15, as well as to
some external hires. These SES candidate development programs have been
frequently analyzed (National Academy of Public Administration [NAPA],
2003). Here, we focus our attention on several kinds of leadership programs
throughout the federal government.

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT:
MULTIPLE IDEAS, MULTIPLE MODELS

Leadership development activities in all three sectors demonstrate one

fundamental point: There is not a “best way” to develop leaders that is
applicable to all organizational settings. There are, of course, trends. Recent
trends in the private sector include 360-degree feedback from supervisors,
peers, and subordinates; distance learning programs, off-site training pro-
grams, and temporary rotational work assignments (London, 2002). Most
of these are found in public sector activities as well, with no clear pattern of
preference.
There are also common dilemmas. One of these is “growing” versus
“buying” leaders. Organizations often look outside for the incorporation of
new ideas, relevant leadership experience, and fresh approaches—they seek
to “buy” leaders. In contrast, a growing leaders’ perspective involves devel-
98 REVIEW OF PUBLIC PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION / June 2004

oping the skills and range of experience of an organization’s employees over

time, promoting individuals to positions of ever-increasing responsibility
and skills, and eventually to leadership positions. Byham, Paese, and Smith
(2002) emphasized that this method of developing leaders is most effec-
tively done in such a way as to develop groups or cohorts within an organi-
zation—through comprehensive and planned leadership programs.

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT:
CHOOSING APPROACHES TO LEADERSHIP

Leader attraction, development, and retention efforts are changing in

public and private sectors. Heroic, charismatic, solitary leadership,
although still important for some organizations and for some kinds of orga-
nizational action, is being replaced by a more team-oriented style and per-
spective. Although advocated for some time in theory and popular lead-
ership literature, the reality of creating team-based leadership in a still
hierarchical and rigid organization is a challenging one. The importance of
creating the ability to cut across internal obstacles to create a broad-based
view of organizational performance and effectiveness is again demonstrated
by the organizational changes at the Internal Revenue Service since its
restructuring act in 1998. A key part of the flexibilities granted Commis-
sioner Rossoti was special pay authority to hire critical top members of the
agency’s leadership team (Rainey, 2002). This demonstrates the idea of
integrative leadership, that is, of leadership that necessarily creates and uti-
lizes an institutional base that is more encompassing and longer term than
the single leader model can provide (Ingraham, Sowa, & Moynihan, 2004).
Entrepreneurial leadership models are also beginning to mark the public
sector. Numerous scholars have noted that there is increasing evidence of
innovative or entrepreneurial leadership behavior by employees located at
all levels of public organizations—and this phenomenon has been linked to
enhanced public sector effectiveness (Borins, 2000; Sanders, 1998;
Thompson, 1998). Entrepreneurial leaders have a strong motivation to
“make a difference” and work to do so with determination and optimism
(Doig & Hargrove, 1990). These individuals look for opportunities to
forge their own direction, despite strong central organizational control.
Forging their own way, said Rainey (1997), impels these individuals to con-
nect with broader political and social trends.
 Ingraham, Getha-Taylor / LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 99

LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS:

FITTING IN WITH AGENCY DIRECTIVES?

Governmental leadership development programs also increasingly focus

on the need to create the conditions necessary for entrepreneurial leader-
ship to emerge or be brought into the organization. For example, in Results-
Based Leadership, Ulrich, Zenger, and Smallwood (1999) argued that mobi-
lizing human capital through leadership development will contribute to the
development of organizational capital. These researchers believe that suc-
cessful leadership development programs can identify star performers and
invest in their future success as leaders; however, their training must be
closely tied to organizational results. Projected outcomes for the organiza-
tion must be balanced with outcomes for the individual, and there must be
a feedback loop that tailors leadership development sessions to meet the
needs of the organization and the individual as employees become increas-
ingly empowered to initiate productive actions in their work. Although the
pure private-sector entrepreneurial leader model requires some tailoring to
fit with public sector risk and accountability expectations, the attractiveness
of the ability to create new opportunities, to adapt to change, and to shape a
more change oriented culture in public organizations is already reflected in
basic core competencies for federal executives.

CORE COMPETENCIES
AND LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has identified five execu-

tive core qualifications (ECQ) for executives government-wide: leading
change, leading people, results driven, business acumen, and building
coalitions/communications. According to OPM, successful performance
in the highest level of the civil service (SES) requires competence in each
ECQ. These competencies are supplemented by a list of 27 specific skills
and abilities intended for the executive feeder group, that is, managers and
supervisors. To supplement core competencies for the Senior Executive Ser-
vice and its feeder groups, most agencies have identified organization-
specific core competencies.
Public sector definitions of competence are strongly influenced by pri-
vate sector experience and theory. McClelland’s (1982) work underpins
much of this thought. McClelland maintained that it was possible to iden-
tify dimensions of personality that could predict effectiveness in job per-
100 REVIEW OF PUBLIC PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION / June 2004

formance and/or success in life in general. Companies such as General

Electric, IBM, Microsoft, and Monster.com are frequent referents for pub-
lic sector organizations pursuing competency-based leadership strategies. A
2002 report from Hewitt Associates (2002), for example, surveyed the top
20 companies for leadership models and concluded: “A significant correla-
tion exists between a company’s average return on sales and defined leader-
ship competencies. That is, those companies with defined leadership com-
petencies tend to have a higher return on sales than those companies
without defined leadership competencies” (p. 1).
Current thinking about leadership competencies has moved away from
broad competencies relevant across organizations to a focus on specific
management and leadership contexts and environments. It is now well
accepted that competencies are generally job or context based; incorporate
motives, traits, skills, aspects of self-image or social roles; and focus on a spe-
cific body of knowledge (Robotham & Jubb, 1996). Vague, overarch-
ing, government-wide competencies are consistently supplemented with
agency- and mission-specific characteristics in most successful leadership
development programs in the private and public sector.

RESEARCH INTENT

The intent of this research was to begin to describe the scope of leader-
ship development programs in federal agencies. All programs selected for
study were located in the Washington, D.C. area. Agencies with recognized
leadership development abilities were included, as were agencies about
which little was known. An extensive Web search provided an overview of
more than 30 agencies; 13 were selected for more intensive analysis and
interviews. Funding for the research was provided by the Partnership for
Public Service. Minicases based on this research are posted on the Partner-
ship Solutions Center Web site at www.ourpublicservice.org/info-url3904/
info-url.htm.

METHOD

The research reported here employed qualitative research techniques,

including document review, phone interviews, and in-depth personal inter-
views with leadership development program designers and participants.
When possible, key agency or department leaders were interviewed as well.
 Ingraham, Getha-Taylor / LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 101

Findings were compiled and overviews drafted for 13 public sector leader-
ship programs. The findings reported here are from a more limited set—
eight of the agencies analyzed. The goal of providing these overviews is to
help improve understanding of the range and scope of public-sector leader-
ship development efforts that extend beyond well-known models such as
the Senior Executive Service Candidate Development Program. From the
data collected, general themes were extracted as “new assumptions” for
leadership development in the federal government.

FEDERAL AGENCY LEADERSHIP

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM PROFILES

Developing Up And Across

The Department of Agriculture, The Aspiring Leader. The U.S. Depart-

ment of Agriculture’s (USDA) mission includes enhancing the quality of
life for the American people by supporting production of agriculture,
ensuring a safe/affordable/nutritious/accessible food supply, caring for agri-
cultural/forest/range lands, supporting development of rural communities,
providing economic opportunities for farm and rural residents, expanding
global markets for agricultural and forest products, and working to reduce
hunger in America and throughout the world. To meet these diverse goals
and agendas that span research areas as well as geographic expanses, the
USDA’s leadership development program, The Aspiring Leader, is notable
for its decidedly representative nature. Individuals from all USDA offices
are included in the development program. As a result, the program is more
inclusive than similar programs found in other agencies. The program
includes employees at various levels of the organization as well—not just
the top management employees. The Aspiring Leader program is housed in
the USDA’s Graduate School, which was created in 1921 by the secretary of
agriculture so that employees could continue their education while retain-
ing their employment. Over the years, the school has evolved to meet the
changing needs of the agency and its employees—including the develop-
ment of the Aspiring Leader program.
The Aspiring Leader program is aimed at developing leaders in salary
grades 5 to 7. Employees are nominated by their respective agency branches
to participate in the three, 5-day residential training sessions (total of 15
days) that are conducted over a 6-month period. The cost of the program
is $2,495 per participant and focuses on all five SES ECQs. Successful
102 REVIEW OF PUBLIC PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION / June 2004

completion of the Aspiring Leader program generally results in promotion

to positions of leadership within the USDA.
The Environmental Protection Agency, Candidate Development Program.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was established in 1970 in
response to the growing public demand for cleaner water, air, and land. The
EPA provides leadership in the nation’s environmental science, research,
education, and assessment efforts and works closely with other federal agen-
cies, state and local governments, industries, and Indian tribes to develop
and enforce regulations under existing environmental laws. The EPA’s flag-
ship leadership development program is designed to develop candidates for
positions in the SES. Although other agencies offer similar candidate devel-
opment programs, the EPA’s program is unique in its strong emphasis on
mentoring and coaching for employees at the GS 14/15 level. This program
is a phoenix of sorts, rising from the ashes after over a 10-year absence. The
EPA reinvented its leadership development program after discontinuing it
in 1989. The agency’s commitment to growing leaders within the organiza-
tion is evident in their effort to revive this program at the annual cost of
$300,000. The program is monitored and managed by the EPA’s Office of
Administration and Resources Management. Interested employees must
apply through this office for selection in the program. The time needed to
complete this leadership program is 15 to 18 months. Participants engage
in activities to develop all five OPM core competency areas. This program is
especially concerned with developing evaluation methods and gathering
feedback from participants. There has recently been a restructuring in the
program content in response to feedback gathered from participants. As a
result, special focus has been given to developing skills in the area of busi-
ness acumen. Although participants hope to be selected for inclusion in the
SES, there is no guarantee of placement following completion of the pro-
gram. Rather, participants are guaranteed an experience that will enhance
existing leadership skills and develop new ones.

Linking Up Leaders

The Department of Housing and Urban Development, Public and Indian

Housing, Leadership Development Program. The Office of Public and Indian
Housing (PIH), a unit of the Department of Housing and Urban Develop-
ment, exists to ensure safe, decent, and affordable housing for Native Amer-
icans; create opportunities for residents’ self-sufficiency and economic in-
dependence; and ensure fiscal integrity by all program participants. Under
 Ingraham, Getha-Taylor / LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 103

the jurisdiction of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937, PIH provides affordable
housing to more than 1.3 million households nationwide. Because the
housing needs are geographically dispersed, so are the employees of PIH.
The leadership development program offered by PIH emphasizes core
competency development for employees who are assigned to field offices.
Reinforcement and evaluation are offered throughout the course by men-
tors and program directors. This program is unique in that along with
developing core competencies, it also encourages participants to be lifelong
learners and develop relationships with other employees in PIH field
offices. This supportive and networking-oriented atmosphere includes
mentoring opportunities, scheduled conference calls, “leadership buddies,”
a learning journal, and a class listserv to keep participants connected to one
another despite the geographical distances between them. The 6-month
program includes group activities, assigned readings, and a group leader-
ship project that applies to participants’ current work goals. Over the 6
months, participants are expected to devote 16 hours per month to leader-
ship development activities by following the monthly flow chart of struc-
ture, support, and activities. The supportive, and very structured, format of
this program qualifies it as one of the most ambitious leadership
development programs in the federal government.
The Department of Defense, Defense Leadership and Management Program
(DLAMP). The Defense Leadership and Management Program (DLAMP)
is a department-wide program for growing future Department of Defense
(DOD) civilian leaders through a program of training, education, and
development. DLAMP serves as the framework for achieving the objective
of the Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces to ensure a
DOD civilian leadership community capable of leading in a joint environ-
ment. This program meets an important public sector goal: nurturing a
shared understanding and sense of mission between civilian and military
leaders. Participants in the DLAMP program are typically GS grades 13,
14, or 15. Participation in the DLAMP program prepares civilian leaders to
assume broader responsibility, expand their knowledge of the national secu-
rity mission, and strengthen their understanding of complex policy and
operational challenges. The DOD hopes that this program will equip their
civilian leaders with a solid grasp of national security issues and prepare
them to meet difficult challenges. Employees are nominated for participa-
tion in the DLAMP program. Participants and their DLAMP mentors
complete an extensive assessment tool that identifies the educational and
developmental needs of the participant—and this assessment is mapped
104 REVIEW OF PUBLIC PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION / June 2004

alongside the OPM ECQ. DLAMP requires five core courses that are each
2 weeks in length and are offered year-round. Class sizes are kept small at 25
participants per class. This small class size allows for more individualized
attention and a higher level of participation. At the end of the course, pro-
gram participants receive extensive feedback on their performance. This
feedback loop helps fill out the participant’s individual development plan,
which is intended to identify strengths and areas for improvement.

Linking Individual
and Organizational Change

The Department of Health and Human Services, Indian Health Service,

Executive Leadership Development Program (ELDP). The Indian Health Ser-
vice (IHS) was established in 1955 as a part of the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services. Its mission is to raise the physical, mental,
social, and spiritual health of American Indian and Alaska Natives as well as
ensure that they have access to comprehensive and culturally acceptable
public health services. Members of the more than 560 federally recognized
Indian tribes and their descendants are eligible for services provided by the
IHS. The IHS leadership development program is designed for current and
future leaders in the IHS and is administered by the Clinical Support Cen-
ter of IHS. The program grows leaders by offering interactive curriculum
that is transmitted to participants via exercises, case studies, and team pro-
jects. Participants in the program are identified through competitive selec-
tion. The program is presented in three, 4-day sessions over the course of 1
year. The goal of the program is to reduce barriers, increase innovation,
ensure a better flow of information and ideas, and lead change within the
IHS. Participants not only develop their leadership skills but network with
other IHS directors and can earn education credits. The course costs
$1,100 per session, however scholarships are available. Successful com-
pletion results in a certificate of completion from the IHS. Although this
program emphasizes traditional leadership skills such as problem solving,
conflict resolution, and ethics, it balances this content with some non-
traditional leadership skills such as stress management, self-awareness,
and developing a personal vision. This holistic approach to leadership
development is comprehensive and consistent with the department’s focus
on raising the physical, mental, social, and spiritual health of its target
constituents.
 Ingraham, Getha-Taylor / LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 105

Linking the Present to the Future

The Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Leadership Develop-

ment Program. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS), a branch of the Depart-
ment of Treasury, deals directly with more Americans than any other federal
institution. The IRS is undergoing changes in the biggest reorganization
and modernization efforts undertaken in almost 50 years, following the
passage of the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998. In the wake of
that law, the IRS developed a leadership framework that promotes continu-
ous learning at all levels of the organization. This framework gives special
attention to the IRS’s new value-based leadership philosophy and compe-
tency framework for all managers: front-line, senior, and executive. By
developing leaders throughout the organization, the IRS will be better able
to promote the goals of the Reform Act—namely, improved customer and
employee satisfaction as well as business results. The IRS believes that lead-
ership development is the critical component of modernization and has
developed an explicit leadership theory and leadership values to guide the
modernization efforts. The IRS crafted its leadership framework and lead-
ership competencies from interviews conducted with IRS executives. The
framework and the target competencies are now linked to managers’ annual
performance agreement. In this way, the framework not only guides leader-
ship development in the organization but also serves as a means of charting
individual employee progress. This helps link results-based performance
commitments with competency-based behaviors among agency managers.
Managers at all levels receive instruction on leadership theory, practice,
application, and reflection. New and seasoned managers at each level re-
ceive specialized development instruction in the form of classroom and
electronic education, planned developmental assignments, coaching and
mentoring, business-related challenges, and leadership simulations. This
tiered approach to leadership development indicates a commitment to
growing leaders from within the organization: Career paths and avenues for
advancement are clearly established. In addition, this tiered approach serves
as a means for effective succession planning.

Making Mentors Matter

Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration, Leader-

ship Enhancement and Development Program (LEAD). The Veterans Bene-
fits Administration’s Leadership Enhancement and Development Program
106 REVIEW OF PUBLIC PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION / June 2004

(LEAD) emphasizes relationship building between those who are already in

leadership positions with those who aspire to be. Those who are selected
participate in the program free of charge. Class sizes are kept small to allow
for maximum attention and participation. Each participant develops his or
her leadership skills through a mix of classroom training, individual and
group projects, and shadowing assignments. Assessment tools and
mentoring are fundamental aspects of the program and are used to monitor
participant progress. The LEAD program includes 11 mandatory activities
and assignments, including 3 weeks of training, touring different areas of
the VA, developing a mentoring relationship, developing an individual
development plan, developing team-building skills, completing two shad-
owing assignments, participating in individual leadership assignments,
conducting presentations, conducting interviews, undergoing assessment,
and engaging in self-study projects. LEAD program participants make spe-
cial note of the fact that following their participation in the program, they
feel more connected to the organization and committed to Veterans Bene-
fits Administration (VBA) goals. The mentoring relationships often con-
tinue long after the program is completed, as do informal relationships with
peers who were fellow classmates in the program. These networks also help
foster a sense of community and agency commitment. By developing these
ties early, the VBA is countering an upcoming need for large-scale succes-
sion planning. Most of these young leaders express a desire to stay with the
VBA for the duration of their careers. Prior to participating in the
leadership development program, many were uncertain of their “place” in
the organization.

Building Core Values

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Agency-wide Leader-

ship and Management Development Program. The National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA) was established in 1958 to begin working on
options for human space flight. NASA’s mission is to understand and pro-
tect our home planet, to explore the universe and search for life, and to
inspire the next generation of explorers. NASA’s headquarters are located in
Washington, D.C., and extend to 15 field facilities. As a result of this decen-
tralized organizational structure, NASA’s leadership development pro-
grams are quite extensive. In addition to a well-developed SES candidate
development program, NASA offers agency-wide leadership and manage-
ment development programs through its headquarters. Agency-wide lead-
 Ingraham, Getha-Taylor / LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 107

ership development programs include Management Education Program,

Global Leadership Program, Development Program for Deputies, Manag-
ing the Influence Process, The Human Element, Business Education Pro-
gram, and the Strategic Business Management Program. According to
NASA, these programs seek to train managers to motivate their employees,
manage change, and develop as the future leaders of the organization. The
2- to 10-day residential programs are conducted at NASA’s Management
Education Center in Virginia and offer a variety of instructional activities
such as small group exercises, taped discussions, and lectures. Each leader-
ship development program is unique in its audience and topics covered,
although all are part of the leadership model developed by NASA that
emphasizes civil-service core competency development. Employees are
matched with a leadership development program that addresses different
topical areas such as NASA history, leadership presentations, personality
assessment, teamwork, decision making, and communication. Some
NASA employees participate in the leadership program referred to as “The
Human Element”. This nontraditional course emphasizes such concepts as
truth, choice, inclusion, control, openness, significance, likeability, self-
esteem, and the mind-body connection for health and illness. NASA’s com-
mitment to providing a variety of traditional and experimental leadership
development programs for employees at all levels of the organization sets it
apart as a comprehensive program that is committed to growing leaders
through the ranks of the organization as well as addressing holistic life issues
that relate to effective leadership.

Individual Growth and Development

National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Goddard Space Flight

Center, Leadership Alchemy. The Goddard Space Flight Center imple-
mented a very contemporary approach to leadership development with the
Leadership Alchemy program. This program requires each participant to
create a personal leadership vision and identify ways to achieve that vision.
The program uses a visual logo that is imaginative and representative of the
program goals. The program emphasizes leadership as a capacity that can be
learned and developed in every employee. This sense of inclusiveness adds
to the program’s appeal. The program is 9 months long and does not come
with a guarantee for promotion or other reward following completion.
However, there is evidence that many program participants are promoted
on completion. During Phase 1, participants gain personal insight and
108 REVIEW OF PUBLIC PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION / June 2004

leadership mastery. During the second phase, participants create a desired

organizational future. Last, participants transform knowledge and skill into
“wisdom and action.” Following completion, participants are granted
“Master Wizard” status and are encouraged to share what they have learned
with other Goddard employees. This program signals a truly new approach
to leadership development that demonstrates that leadership development
can be productive and entertaining at the same time.

Buying Leaders

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, HHS Emerging Leaders

Program. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) offers a
unique leadership development program unlike any of the other programs
previously profiled. The Emerging Leaders Program is designed to attract
or buy college graduates from outside the organization. Individuals who
were exceptional college students (3.0 GPA or higher) or graduate students
(must have a master’s level degree from an accredited university) are eligible
to apply for this 2-year leadership program. Candidates are selected via a
competitive application and interview process. After acceptance into the
program, the candidates receive exposure to various aspects of the agency
through three to five rotational assignments that range in length from 2 to 3
months each. Assessment and evaluation is ongoing throughout the 2-year
period, and mentoring is a prime component of the leadership develop-
ment program. In addition to developing skills that focus on the OPM core
competencies, program participants receive developmental instruction on
work-life issues, interpersonal issues, and visionary/entrepreneurial issues.
Following the completion of the rotations, participants are funneled into
one of five distinct career paths, depending on their background and experi-
ence. This program hires all majors, and selection is based on need per
career path: administrative, information technology, social science, sci-
entific and public health. After successful completion of the program,
graduates advance to a GS-11 or GS-12 position within their assigned divi-
sion of HHS.

Lessons Learned—New Assumptions

for Leadership Development

Personal initiative and top-level support are necessary. Most often, poten-
tial participants have expressed desire to participate in the leadership devel-
 Ingraham, Getha-Taylor / LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 109

opment program. Their personal initiative, in addition to their leadership

potential, is often noted by supervisors, who then recommend them for
participation. The support of the participant’s supervisor is crucial for the
participant to succeed in terms of completing their leadership tasks and
maintaining their regular work-related responsibilities.
Ongoing monitoring and continued mentoring are important. Successful
leadership development programs include a strong component of monitor-
ing. Participants are asked to maintain an individual development plan,
which they update regularly to indicate goals accomplished and changing
future goals. The mentor relationship continues for many of the partici-
pants after the end of the program, and it is a relationship that is highly val-
ued. In addition to a continued mentoring relationship, the program
designers often keep in touch with participants, and participants tend to
keep in touch with each other through informal networks.
There should be a mix of developmental activities. Nearly every leadership
program profiled incorporated multiple forms of activity in their leadership
development programs. In addition to providing classroom-type training
and lectures, there was often a component of team activities, individual pro-
jects, and mentor correspondence. This mix of activities helps participants
develop interpersonal and networking skills as well as an ability to work
independently.
Teaching leadership skills includes teaching life skills. The majority of the
leadership development programs profiled demonstrated some aspect of
life management in addition to the traditional leadership development
skills that are set forth by the OPM. Be it managing stress or assessing per-
sonality, these programs made an effort to connect leadership skills and life
skills. The assertion can be made that program designers want leaders who
are able to balance successful work lives with healthy personal lives.
Leadership development includes individual long-term career planning and
organizational succession planning. Our findings indicate that participants
in leadership development programs feel a stronger connection with the
organization after completing the program. They noted that the leadership
development program helped them feel like they “belonged” to the organi-
zation and that they were excited to be helping the organization meet its
goals in the long term. These program participants expressed the view that
they would be more likely to stay with the organization for the duration of
their professional careers after completing the programs.
110 REVIEW OF PUBLIC PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION / June 2004

Growing leaders is the rule, buying is the exception. All profiled programs—
except one—place an emphasis on growing leaders from within the organi-
zation rather than bringing them in from outside. For the most part, indi-
viduals who are selected to participate in leadership programs that grow
leaders are those who have already demonstrated commitment to the orga-
nization’s goals. In addition, they have already proven to have leadership
potential before even beginning the leadership development program.
Leadership development = attention to core competencies. Each leadership
development program paid attention to core competencies in one form or
another. Although some of the programs did not exactly copy the OPM’s
ECQ, they did adapt the five core areas (leading change, leading people,
results driven, business acumen, and building coalitions/communications)
to meet their own organizational needs. Core competencies served as a guide
for program design as well as a tool to evaluate progress in the program.
Leadership development is needed at all levels. It is clear that leadership
development is necessary throughout public organizations. Leaders are
needed at all levels to champion change and serve as tomorrow’s top execu-
tives. Not only does tiered leadership development help with succession
planning, it also solidifies an organization’s commitment to developing
individuals who can think and act independently and responsibly at all
levels of the organization.
It depends on the organization. Leadership is not “one size fits all.” The
program’s design and goals will depend on the organization’s goals. The
organization must determine its own needs to custom fit a leadership de-
velopment program that will be successful—for participants and for the
organization at large. One interesting finding in terms of organizational
differences is that private and public sector approaches to leadership devel-
opment are more similar than different. Program designers often utilized
private sector applications and were hopeful that their public sector ap-
proaches would be utilized by the private sector as well.

CONCLUSION

It is clear from even this limited review that many leadership develop-
ment programs in the federal government have made a serious effort to
incorporate leading ideas and concepts about leadership development—as
well as about agency specific needs and demands—into their leadership
development programs. They are expending financial and human capital
 Ingraham, Getha-Taylor / LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT 111

resources to address current and future leadership needs. This is an encour-

aging conclusion. Top-notch leadership and expertise are needed to con-
front the challenges ahead in health, space, defense, homeland security, and
many other public policy areas. Although many policy area experts and
leaders are already resident in government, ready to confront these chal-
lenges, many others still need to be found. People are a major government
resource—one that must be carefully developed and sustained. Downsizing
efforts and the aging of the workforce are significant threats to the govern-
ment workforce that are looming near. Counteractive measures must be
developed to fill a large leadership gap coming in the very near future.
If they have not done so already, organizations must begin to think about
succession planning by grooming leaders who can continue the organiza-
tion’s mission—especially in times of uncertainty. The new and unpredict-
able tasks facing public sector organizations in the 21st century require
leaders who can plan effectively, think creatively, and act quickly. The
research reported here serves as a guide, not only for understanding the state
of existing leadership development programs in the public sector but also
for framing important perspectives on how to develop and keep excellent
leaders. Such information must be shared for real progress to take place.
The public sector needs to get serious about leadership. Leadership acquisi-
tion and development requires a thoughtful strategy, careful candidate
selection, appropriate reward, attentive mentoring, and an ongoing and
sustained commitment from potential leaders and their respective organi-
zations. The programs reviewed here indicate that work is under way to
meet the leadership challenges facing many federal agencies. Sadly, the
OPM survey demonstrates that the full challenge has not yet been met.

REFERENCES
Borins, S. (2000). Loose cannons and rule breakers, or enterprising leaders? Some evidence
about innovative public managers. Public Administration Review, 60, 498-509.
Byham, W., Paese, M., & Smith, A. (2002). Grow your own leaders. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Doig, J. W., & Hargrove, E. C. (1990). Leadership and innovation: Entrepreneurs in govern-
ment. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Hewitt Associates LLC. (2002). How companies grow great leaders (Research Highlights on
Data from Top Companies for Leaders 2003 - US Study). Retrieved February 1, 2003,
from was4.hewitt.com/hewitt/resource/rptspubs/subrptspubs/top20.pdf
Ingraham, P. W. (1995). The foundation of merit: Public service in American democracy. Balti-
more: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Ingraham, P. W., Joyce, P. G., & Donahue, A. K. (2003). Government performance: Why
management matters. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
 112 REVIEW OF PUBLIC PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION / June 2004

Ingraham, P. W., Sowa, J. E., & Moynihan, D. P. (in press). Effective government: Analyz-
ing management and administration from a governance perspective. In L. E. Lynn, Jr. &
P. W. Ingraham (Eds.), The art of governance: Analyzing management and administration.
Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
London, M. (2002). Leadership development: Paths to self-insight and professional growth.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
McClelland, D. C. (1982). Leadership motive pattern and long-term success in manage-
ment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 737-744.
National Academy of Public Administration. (2003). Final report of the panel on the history
of the Senior Executive Service. Washington, DC: Author.
Partnership for Public Service. (2003). The best places to work in the federal government.
Retrieved January 8, 2004, from www.bestplacestowork.org.
Rainey, H. G. (1997). Understanding and managing public organizations (2nd ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Rainey, H. G. (2002). A weapon in the war for talent: Using special hiring authorities to
recruit crucial personnel. In M. A. Abramson & N. W. Gardner (Eds.), Human capital
2002 (pp. 59-110). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Robotham, D., & Jubb, R. (1996). Competences: Measuring the unmeasurable. Manage-
ment Development Review, 9(5), 25-29.
Sanders, R. P. (1998). Heroes of the revolution: Characteristics and strategies of
reinvention leaders. In P. W. Ingraham, J. R. Thompson, & R. P. Sanders (Eds.), Trans-
forming government: Lessons from the reinvention laboratories (pp. 29-57). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Thompson, J., & Rainey, H. G. (2003). Modernizing human resource management in the
federal government: The IRS model. Human capital series. Arlington, VA: IBM Endow-
ment for the Business of Government.
Thompson, J. R. (1998). Ferment on the front lines: Devising new modes of organizing. In
P. W. Ingraham, J. R. Thompson, & R. P. Sanders (Eds.), Transforming government: Les-
sons from the reinvention laboratories (pp. 5-28). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ulrich, D., Zenger, J., & Smallwood, N. (1999). Results-based leadership. Boston: Harvard
Business School Press.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Office of Workforce Information. (2002). Central
personnel data file, 2002. Washington, DC: Author.
Walker, D. M. (2003, September 17). Truth & transparency: The federal government’s financial
condition and fiscal outlook (Address by The Comptroller General of the United States
before the National Press Club). Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.

PATRICIA W. INGRAHAM is Distinguished Professor of Public Administration and Political

Science at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University. Her
research interests include diffusion of management reform and policy learning, and leadership in
public organizations.

HEATHER GETHA-TAYLOR is a Ph.D. student in the Department of Public Administra-

tion, Syracuse University. Her current areas of interest and research include leadership develop-
ment, human resource management, and health systems management.

View publication stats