The federal government looks like it is taking a page out of Silicon Valley’s playbook.
The US Office of Personnel Management issued a memo on June 17 announcing sweeping reforms to performance management in the federal government. And the move to cut low performers looks a lot like what’s been happening at major tech companies.
The memo is another step in the Trump administration’s effort to transform the federal workforce. In this case, it’s meant to address “poor performers” while also rewarding those who demonstrate success above and beyond their track records. The memo sets guidelines for employee ratings, addresses poor performance, and trains supervisors to hold their teams accountable.
The new government workforce protocol reflects a broader trend, exemplified in the tech industry with Mark Zuckerberg’s 2023 “year of efficiency.” Tech companies, coming down from pandemic-era growth, began shifting toward leaner workforces. Now, with the rise of AI-driven productivity and rising global uncertainty, many organizations are doubling down on the approach.
In February, Meta laid off some 4,000 employees to “move out low-performers” and to ensure “the best people on our teams.”
Microsoft also cut nearly 2,000 employees, whom it said were underperformers, earlier this year.
But what’s popular in the private sector can have mixed results in government
“I like the idea of the government trying to learn from successful private sector business processes, which I think could very frequently help the government do a better job,” Steven J. Kelman, professor of public management at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, told BI.
Related stories
Business Insider tells the innovative stories you want to know
Business Insider tells the innovative stories you want to know
However, Montgomery Van Wart, a professor of public administration at California State University, San Bernardino, told BI that compared to a company focused on profit, the public sector requires “far greater” transparency, accountability, equity, and procedural due process, which come at the expense of some degree of efficiency.
“The trick for policymakers is to decide when public sector options are best, and when they need to change significantly and find the best ways to do so,” said Wart.
A changing federal workforce
This latest memo is part of a long string of changes made to the federal workforce, which employs over 3 million people nationwide.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who has adopted a “hardcore” work attitude at X and Tesla, was part of the White House DOGE office’s attempts to slim down the government and brought a lot of this approach to the federal government. Though the tech billionaire has since departed the White House (and had a public falling out with Trump), the ethos has remained.
While federal workforce initiatives over the last few months were made to boost efficiency and performance, the drastic and chaotic nature of the changes has resulted in a loss of morale for some.
The White House also sent out a separate memo in April demanding that federal agencies adopt AI strategies “to help shape the future of government operations” and enhance efficiency.
Wart told BI that he thinks some of Trump’s changes may be appropriate if “done well,” such as an orderly reduction of some federal workers, like when President Bill Clinton downsized the government by a quarter million employees over seven years.
However, he said he is “highly critical” of Trump’s implementation strategies and processes.
“His overall ‘shock-and-awe’ approach means that timeliness is all and detailed planning is tossed aside,” said Wart. “The rehiring of swaths of employees after they have been fired is an example of shocking sloppiness.”
Kelman said the view that the government can and should operate like a private business is often mixed with the bashing and belittling of the federal workforce, which he disagrees with.
Debra Andrews, founder and president of consulting company Marketri, told BI that organization-wide memos, be it AI adoption or a drive for more efficiency, shouldn’t be written to sound as if it is a threat.
“You’re asking people to get used to an awful lot of change in a short amount of time, and it doesn’t seem kind,” said Andrews. “And I can only hope that there is something behind these memos, that there are things going on behind the scenes, and that people are being counseled, trained, worked with, and given every chance to succeed.”
