GOVERNMENT LEADERSHIP & MANAGEMENT

GMAP Washington:

Government Management Accountability and Performance

Program

Office of Management Consulting & Training

2006 Management Note

Since their initial meeting in 1908 to discuss interstate water problems, the governors have worked through the National Governors Association to deal collectively with issues of public policy and governance. The associa-tion’s ongoing mission is to support the work of the governors by providing a bipartisan forum to help shape and implement national policy and to solve state problems.

The members of the National Governors Association (NGA) are the governors of the fifty states; the territories of American Samoa, Guam, and the Virgin Islands; and the commonwealths of the Northern Mariana Islands and Puerto Rico. The association has a nine-member Executive Committee and three standing committees—on Economic Development and Commerce, Human Resources, and Natural Resources. Through NGA’s commit-tees, governors examine and develop policy and address key state and national issues. Special task forces often are created to focus gubernatorial attention on federal legislation or on state-level issues.

The association works closely with the administration and Congress on state-federal policy issues through its offices in the Hall of the States in Washington, D.C. The association serves as a vehicle for sharing knowledge of innovative programs among the states and provides technical assistance and consultant services to governors on a wide range of management and policy issues.

The Center for Best Practices is a vehicle for sharing knowledge about innovative state activities, exploring the impact of federal initiatives on state government, and providing technical assistance to states. The center works in a number of policy fields, including agriculture and rural development, economic development, education, energy and environment, health, social services, technology, trade, transportation, and workforce development.

NGA’s Office of Management Consulting & Training serves as management consultant to governors and their offices and as NGA’s primary liaison to governors’ chiefs of staff. The office helps governors lead and manage state government and assists staff in organizing and operating the governor’s office. The unit provides these ser-vices as part of a state’s membership in NGA.

Copyright 2006 National Governors Association 444 North Capitol Street, Suite 267 Washington, D.C. 20001-1512 All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Visit the NGA Web site at www.nga.org

Contents

Acknowledgements Executive Summary

INTRODUCTION 1 Background 1 Purpose of This Management Note 1

GETTING STARTED 3 The Washington State Context 3 Creating a Management Framework 3 Executive Order 05-02 3

WHAT IS GMAP? 5 The Governor’s GMAP Forums 5 The Governor’s Role 7 GMAP at the Agency Level 7 Staffing the Process 8 The Importance of Logistics 9 Communicating to the Public 9

ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND LESSONS LEARNED 11 Accomplishments 11 Lessons Learned and Key Success Factors 11

CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS 13 Appendix A: Exhibits

Acknowledgements

This management note was made possible through the active support and cooperation of the State of Washington. It draws heavily on written materials prepared by the Governor’s Of-fice of Government Management Accountability and Performance and interviews with their staff, the Office of Financial Management, the governor’s personal staff, and a number of state department and agency heads. In addition, the author was able to participate in the governor’s briefing on preparing for a GMAP forum, a GMAP forum conducted by the gov-ernor, and another GMAP forum conducted by an agency.

Special thanks go to Washington Governor Christine Gregoire; Fred Olson, Deputy Chief of Staff to Governor Gregoire; Larisa Benson, Bruce Botka and Robin Campbell of the Gover-nor’s GMAP office; Wolfgang Opitz and Lynne McGuire of the Office of Financial Management; Laurie Dolan of the Governor’s Policy Office; Gary Weeks of the Department of Labor and Industries; Gary Robinson of the Department of Information Services; Steve Hill and Barbara Burgener of the Health Care Authority; Cindi Holmstrom of the De-partment of Revenue; and Joel Sacks of the Department of Employment Security.

This management note was written by Barry Van Lare, director of the National Governors Association’s Office of Management Consulting and Training.

Management notes are published by the Office of Management Consulting & Training, the staff office in the National Governors Association (NGA) that provides direct management assistance to governors, chiefs of staff, and key members and units of governors’ offices. For further information about this and other management notes or other management services, please contact the NGA Office of Management Consulting & Training at (202) 624-7895.

Executive Summary

Improving performance has become the new mantra for government executives at all levels. Executives are urged to define a limited number of goals and objectives, identify measures of success and regularly monitor progress. Often the collection and reporting of performance data alone appears to produce significant progress toward the goals, at least in the short term. However, long term success usually depends on a more systemic process of performance management, which combines measurement with extensive analysis and targeted action plans to generate lasting changes. A number of governors are taking the lead in developing exciting new approaches to developing performance management systems to ensure the ef-fective implementation of their priorities and improve the capacity of state government to deliver the services that their constituents demand more effectively.

The Government Management Accountability and Performance program, initiated by Gov-ernor Christine Gregoire in the State of Washington, is one example of such an approach. This management note provides a description of that program and identifies some of the key success factors and lessons learned over the past year as Washington has implemented GMAP at the gubernatorial and departmental level.

Upon taking office, Governor Gregoire developed and promulgated a management frame-work to help managers understand her expectations for excellent performance and focus attention on the process and tools that would be needed to ensure results:

Create a Strategic Plan

Allocate Resources

Manage People

Analyze Data and Monitor Progress

Respond: Make Decisions and Take Action

Improve Results

Communicate Results and Listen

Governor Gregoire also issued a formal executive order creating the Government Manage-ment, Accountability and Performance (GMAP) program. According to the executive order each state agency reporting to the Governor is required to:

develop clear, relevant and easy-to-understand measures that show whether or not programs are successful;

demonstrate how programs contribute to the priorities that are important to citizens;

gather, monitor and analyze program data;

evaluate the effectiveness of programs;

hold regular problem-solving sessions with the agency to improve performance;

allocate resources based on strategies that work; and

regularly report to the Governor on their performance.

The governor personally conducts GMAP reviews quarterly around a set of priorities she has established for her administration. At these sessions agency leaders present performance data, analyze problems, and develop specific action plans to address those problems. Key members of the governor’s staff and the leaders of central staff offices such as personnel and information technology also participate in these reviews and often are tasked with support-ing elements of any action plans that are developed.

The governor created the Governor’s Office of Government Management Accountability and Performance to staff the review process and prepare detailed guidelines and assist depart-ments and agencies implementing the executive order.

While departments and agencies are given considerable flexibility in the format of their presentations, they are encouraged to develop simple graphics that combine information on key performance measures with and analysis of the performance data and specific action plans for improving performance. They also are encouraged to use a logic model in develop-ing their action plans in order to understand and demonstrate how specific activities will contribute to the ultimate outcome.

The GMAP sessions are interactive and focus on action items such as discussing identified barriers and resources needed to accomplish goals. The sessions serve to analyze the submit-ted data, engage in problem-solving, and find ways to provide assistance and achieve improved results. The approach is positive, focusing on finding solutions rather than assess-ing blame.

The GMAP process is replicated at the department and agency level where it is being used to focus attention on desired results in a growing number of agency level programs and priori-ties.

In evaluating its progress to date, Washington has identified a number of key success factors:

Goals and measures must relate to priorities.

A clear logic model is necessary.

The process is more important than the initial data.

Progress requires a great deal of time and effort.

Leadership commitment is critical.

Continuity enhances learning.

Follow-up is essential.

A growing body of experience at all levels of government can help in evaluating and design-ing management approaches that will reflect the governor’s style and the state’s management culture. A clear focus on results and recognition of shared accountability can create a sense of common mission and teamwork approach.

However, the successful implementation of a performance based management initiative re-quires a significant commitment of time on behalf of the governor, the governor’s staff, and department and agency officials. Without this commitment and the active involvement and personal interest of the governor, the initiative becomes yet another management fad—one of many that have pervaded state government over the past few decades—and likely will have little continuing impact on state government.

Introduction

Background Many governors come to office having ar-ticulated a clear set of priorities or goals during their campaigns. Others will de-velop their priorities and goals as they work through their transition into office. Some governors’ goals and objectives re-main constant during their term in office. The goals and objectives of others will change with circumstances and as they be-come more familiar with the problems and opportunities they confront.

As a leader, a governor is expected to be able to formulate and articulate these pri-orities and goals clearly and mobilize the necessary public and legislative support for the legislation, resources, and policies. However, these efforts generally will be for naught unless the needed programs and policies are effectively implemented. Equally important, the ability to mobilize support and resources for new initiatives may be hampered by what the public sees as management and service delivery issues in other government programs and agen-cies.

It is for these reasons many governors are devoting time and resources to ensuring their administrations have the personnel and management capacities needed to implement programs effectively and effi-ciently. That process begins with the

selection of department and agency heads and their key deputies. While political con-siderations may require the consideration of individuals with little experience in the management of government, it is critical the selection process includes a careful as-sessment of the combination of skills needed and the final team combines the needed political and management compe-tencies. It is also important this team understands and supports the governor’s priorities and goals.

Many governors continue their involve-ment in the management of departments and agencies by formally or informally monitoring the progress in implementing priority programs or initiatives. Some do this through regular meetings with their department and agency heads. Others may use more formal reporting devices, includ-ing various forms of executive agreements or contracts. Other governors may create special task forces to manage major initia-tives or assign their personal staff to oversee the work of departments and agen-cies.

In a number of states, governors are mov-ing beyond these more traditional approaches to create more comprehensive programs to ensure better management of state government. Increasingly those programs focus greater attention on per-

Introduction 1

formance measures and outcomes. They include initiatives such as governors’ management agendas, comprehensive management scorecards, and programs to reward administrative and management improvements at the agency level.

Each of these approaches has merit, but they often are staff led and rely heavily on the initiative and skills of the departments and agencies themselves. While governors may play an important role in defining pri-orities and objectives and monitoring performance, they often are not active players in defining problems and crafting or evaluating specific solutions to those problems.

In a growing number of states governors are developing and implementing new management approaches and tools designed to give themselves and their staffs a much more intensive role in ensuring their pri-orities are being addressed through the periodic assessment of performance data and the development of specific action plans in cooperation with the leadership of their departments and agencies. In most cases these initiatives also are being used to provide voters and key stakeholders with information that will help them assess gov-ernment performance. This more active

gubernatorial role in management is being mirrored in similar efforts by department and agency heads. The objective is to im-prove performance across the whole of state government.

Once such approach is Washington State’s Government Management Accountability and Performance initiative (GMAP).

Purpose of This Management Note This management note will provide an overview of Governor Gregoire’s Govern-ment Management Accountability and Performance initiative as well as more de-tailed information on the process itself. Equally important, it will try to identify the specific factors that appear critical to the success of the GMAP program in Washington State.

All too often, efforts to transfer promising practices fail. By understanding the key success factors in Washington, other gov-ernors should be better able to determine whether they are in a position to make the personal and staff commitments needed to ensure success should they implement a similar program in their states.

2 Introduction

Getting Started

The Washington State Context Washington State has a long history of ini-tiatives designed to improve government performance. Recent efforts include Total Quality Management and Priorities of Gov-ernment. These earlier initiatives have provided a useful foundation and continue to operate within state government. How-ever, not all managers were initially able to understand the relationship of these pro-grams and some were concerned with duplication and overlap as well as the state’s long term commitment to a consis-tent management improvement program. As a result, GMAP has devoted consider-able time and effort to demonstrate how these historical efforts relate to and support this new initiative.

In addition, as attorney general, Governor Gregoire had used the GMAP approach in running her office. As a result she came to this issue with a clear understanding of the commitment needed to ensure its success.

Creating a Management Framework Upon taking office, Governor Gregoire de-veloped and promulgated a management framework (Exhibit 1) to help managers understand her expectations for excellent performance and focus attention on the

processes and tools needed to ensure re-sults:

Create a Strategic Plan

Allocate Resources

Manage People

Analyze Data and Monitor Progress

Respond: Make Decisions and Take Action

Improve Results

Communicate Results and Listen

Executive Order 05-02 On February 21, 2005 Governor Gregoire issued Executive Order 05-02 (Exhibit 2), which directs “state agencies to take the next steps to build public confidence in government by adopting a comprehensive government management, accountability and performance system (GMAP).”

The decision to establish GMAP was made very early in the new administration. The development process included an in-depth review of the COMPSTAT method that led to a series of principles to guide the new system. That process was followed by “think sessions” to get feedback from agen-cies. These sessions were structured as facilitated conversations with a cross sec-tion of agency deputy directors who would eventually provide the locus of authority

Getting Started 3

and organizational know-how that became the lynchpin for making GMAP work well.

According to the governor, “GMAP will give the public a clear, concise view of how government programs are working and whether citizens are receiving value for their dollars. GMAP will give citizens a way to judge the effectiveness of gov-ernment programs and allow agency leaders to shine a spotlight on problems and make decisions with greater clarity and accuracy. At the same time it will give agency managers new tools to solve problems and improve services.”

“GMAP calls upon the governor and other agency leaders to:

take personal responsibility and hold the agency and its management ac-countable for results;

use strategies that work, and make corrections when they don’t;

base decisions not on guesswork or preferences but on accurate, up-to-date information;

make decisions in a timely manner;

follow up to make sure there’s im-plementation after a decision has been made;

take risks and learn from mistakes; and

communicate clearly to citizens about results.”

According to the executive order, “GMAP will require each agency to:

develop clear, relevant and easy-to-understand measures that show whether or not programs are suc-cessful;

demonstrate how programs contrib-ute to the priorities that are important to citizens;

gather, monitor and analyze pro-gram data;

evaluate the effectiveness of pro-grams;

hold regular problem-solving ses-sions with the agency to improve performance;

allocate resources based on strate-gies that work; and

regularly report to the Governor on their performance.”

The governor created the Governor’s Office of Government Management Accountabil-ity and Performance to lead the effort and prepare detailed guidelines on implement-ing the executive order.

4 Getting Started

What Is GMAP?

Government Management, Accountability and Performance (GMAP) is a performance management program used by the governor to hold state agencies directly account-able for achieving results and focusing on priorities important to citizens. The cen-terpiece of GMAP consists of performance review sessions at both the agency and “en-terprise” level in order for senior leaders, managers, and supervisors, as well as staff at all levels to set and follow clear per-formance expectations, identify ways to improve decision-making, and better focus their own personal work contributions to achieve agency goals. At the “enterprise” level the performance review sessions are chaired by the governor. At these sessions, managers report in person, reports are data-driven, dialogue is honest, questions are direct and challenging, and leaders and managers hold each other accountable by following-up.

In the initial “Guidelines for Agencies,” the Governor’s Office of Management Ac-countability and Performance described GMAP as follows.

“GMAP is INFORMATION that is SHARED for the purpose of ACHIEVING results.

“At its core, GMAP is simply a meeting where managers report in person to the leadership team. The purpose of the meet-ing is to share information that will help

the agency achieve results. A GMAP meet-ing is similar to a regular staff meeting, except that reports are more data driven and the questions are more direct and chal-lenging. The leader and managers hold each other accountable by following up at the next meeting until problems are re-solved and results are improved.”

Washington notes that its GMAP concept is based on the COMPSTAT model developed by the New York City police department and on CitiStat in the City of Baltimore.

The Governor’s GMAP Forums The governor selected seven priority areas that she would focus on personally during the GMAP process: vulnerable children, economic vitality, government efficiency, safety, health care, and transportation.

A GMAP forum is convened to address each of these issues on a quarterly basis. Since the GMAP sessions focus on priority areas of government, not specific agencies, each session typically includes participation by multiple agencies.

GMAP sessions are chaired by the governor and are attended by all of her senior staff, including the chief of staff, deputy chief of staff, GMAP director, policy director, direc-tor of the Office of Financial Management, and director of legislative relations.

What Is GMAP? 5

Appropriate policy and GMAP staff mem-bers also attend along with the directors of the Department of Personnel and the De-partment of Information Services and the director of risk management.

Sessions are open to the public, recorded, and made available for broadcast.

Preparations prior to the GMAP sessions with Governor Gregoire include the fol-lowing steps:

agencies conduct work sessions to draft measures based on the agency’s strategic plan, budget activity, and benchmarks in other states;

a measurement team identifies a few key measures for discussion at the GMAP session, which can involve multiple agencies;

agencies submit a draft report which is reviewed by GMAP analysts to provide clarity on potential questions and areas of discussion during the session; and

the final report by the agency/agencies is submitted, and a briefing is given to the governor prior to the GMAP sessions.

While departments and agencies are given considerable flexibility in the format of their presentations, they are encouraged to develop simple graphics that combine in-formation on key performance measures with and analysis of the performance data and specific action plans for improving per-formance. (Exhibit 3)

Departments and agencies are encouraged to use a logic model in developing their ac-tion plans in order to understand and

demonstrate how specific activities will contribute to the ultimate outcome. (Ex-hibit 4)

The GMAP sessions are interactive and fo-cus on action items such as discussing identified barriers and resources needed to accomplish goals. The sessions serve to ana-lyze the submitted data, engage in problem solving, and find ways to provide assistance and achieve improved results. The ap-proach is positive, focusing on finding solutions not on assessing blame.

The GMAP process ensures persistent fol-low up. Every governor’s forum includes responses to unanswered questions from previous sessions, action plans for im-provements when problems are identified, and current information on personnel and budget performance, which is updated quarterly.

In addition, after every forum GMAP ana-lysts send follow-up memos to identify unresolved issues and begin to plan for the next session.

An overview of the process for the gover-nor’s GMAP sessions providing more detail on how the process works can be found in Exhibit 5.

Based on these performance review ses-sions, Governor Gregoire issues regular reports to the public on the status of agency operations and performance, with particu-lar attention to service measures most valuable to citizens.

6 What Is GMAP?

The Governor’s Role The governor personally chairs each GMAP session. Sessions generally take place twice each month and usually last an hour.

The governor receives a copy of the agency presentation approximately one day in ad-vance of the meeting and will review that presentation with her deputy chief of staff and GMAP director prior to the session to identify questions or issues she wants to discuss.

Governor Gregoire uses these sessions to focus on the quality of the agency’s presen-tation and review the adequacy of the analysis and the proposed action plans. The governor often will suggest new insights and additional strategies that deserve de-velopment. She also will take steps to ensure the responsible agencies are getting the support they need from central staff functions and related agencies.

She also will use these sessions to ensure agencies are following up on action plans agreed upon at previous sessions.

The governor also will focus attention on the need to develop measures that commu-nicate effectively with the legislature and the public. She is increasingly concerned that there are common measures used and reported on consistently and is working to eliminate duplicative or inconsistent re-porting.

GMAP at the Agency Level While public attention has focused on the GMAP forums chaired by the governor, the process is being used aggressively across all the departments and agencies that report to the governor. The governor sought agency

leaders who shared her commitment to re-sults-based management, and they are moving aggressively to instill a similar commitment on the part of their staffs.

As directed in Executive Order 05-02, each agency has created its own GMAP process that addresses agency priorities. As in the case of the governor’s priorities, many of these involve cross unit efforts. Department and agency heads have designated key staff to manage the GMAP process and regularly convene internal forums.

While not all agencies have proceeded at the same rate, the GMAP process is begin-ning to have a real impact on the way agencies conduct their business. It also has led to a number of changes that focus on real results:

Analyzing traffic deaths zeroes in on motorcycle accidents.

Responding faster to traffic problems reduces highway congestion.

Increased safety inspections in targeted industries reduces workplace injuries.

The concept appears also to be affecting the way agencies interact with their customers and key interest groups:

Replacing random business tax audits with audits of industries with high error rates reduces overall error rates.

“Plain Talk” improves services and reduces taxpayer headaches.

Regional innovations double job placement rates in four months.

What Is GMAP? 7

Increased use of E-filing helps reduce error rates.

The Office of Financial Management is working with GMAP and the agencies to integrate GMAP with the existing POG process and the biennial budget process. This is expected to reinforce the impor-tance of GMAP and simplify agency reporting.

Staffing the Process In order to ensure the success of GMAP, the governor created a GMAP Office to provide guidance and oversight for the im-plementation of the project. The director of that office served previously as director of the Executive MPA program at the Evans’ School of Public Policy at the University of Washington. She began operations with a staff of three and currently is expanding that staff. Staff is assigned in a matrix with dual responsibilities for specific policy areas and selected management tools such as program evaluation, process improvement, and strategic planning.

At one level, GMAP staff support the gov-ernor, meeting with her to review agency presentations and ensuring that needed fol-low up is taking place. At the same time, the GMAP staff also works with depart-ments and agencies to develop internal capacity and improve their internal GMAP processes.

The staff developed “GMAP Washington: Guidelines for Agencies” (Exhibit 6) and have conducted a series of training pro-grams for agency staff. They provide technical assistance for problem solving, business process redesign, and other ser-vices to help improve results. Two state

agencies provide additional assistance. The Department of Personnel works with the GMAP Office to develop and deliver train-ing to support GMAP. A number of courses currently are available on a recurring basis:

But We Can’t Measure What We Do!

Collecting Data

Using Charts and Graphs to Communicate about Performance

Data Analysis for Decision Makers

Leading for Results: Using GMAP to Drive Performance

Linking Resources to Results

Using Data & Statistical Tools to Analyze and & Improve Performance

Using Math to Tell Your Story

Writing Documents in Plain Talk

In addition, the Department of Information Services helps develop tools and technology needed to implement GMAP in the state agencies.

Staff from the Office of Financial Manage-ment and a number of the governor’s senior staff members also play a key role in supporting and reinforcing the GMAP process. As outlined by GMAP staff, the role of the governor’s leadership team is to clarify expectations; learn why certain out-comes have resulted; identify and remove barriers to achieving results; and make de-cisions, take action, and relentlessly follow up to see whether it is working

Deputies from all agencies also meet on a monthly basis. The topics of discussion in-clude GMAP, statewide human resources, financial and information system develop-

8 What Is GMAP?

ment and other issues of enterprise-wide interest. Agendas and handouts from each meeting are posted by meeting date. Depu-ties are the focal point for implementing any management agenda. Their positions in the agencies blend leadership and opera-tional responsibilities.

At the agency level the GMAP process is led by the director and assisted by his or her own leadership team. In most cases a specific staff member has been assigned to making certain the GMAP process is ad-hered to. In addition, staff members are given support responsibilities.

The GMAP office also maintains a Web site with explanatory and training materials.

The Importance of Logistics Washington, like New York City and Bal-timore, has created a stable environment for its GMAP forums. The room includes a standardized setting (Exhibit 7) that em-phasizes the nature of the leadership team. It includes up-to-date audio-visual equip-

ment and equipment for videotaping the presentations and discussions. Space is pro-vided for members of the public and other parties.

Communicating to the Public One of the key objectives of GMAP was to communicate with the public more effec-tively about what was being accomplished with taxpayer dollars. This process begins with the selection of performance measures important to and understood by the public and key stakeholders. GMAP sessions are open to the public, videotaped, and made available to interested parties. Increasingly the governor and department and agency staff use the GMAP process to share infor-mation on improved performance and outcomes with the legislature, media, and public.

In addition, GMAP has begun to provide a framework for more productive discussions with customers and with business and labor organizations.

What Is GMAP? 9

Accomplishments and Lessons Learned

Accomplishments Washington State points to numerous ex-amples where the GMAP process is leading to improved performance and enhanced outcomes. One example relates to the gov-ernor’s priority for improving services to vulnerable children and adults. Based on early GMAP analysis, she set two ambitious goals relating to the timeliness in which hospitals were seeing children in emergent and non-emergent situations. GMAP data demonstrates the percent of children in emergent referrals seen or attempted within 24 hours has increased from 69 per-cent in January of 2005 to more than 90 percent. Similarly the percent of children in non-emergent referrals seen or at-tempted within 72 hours has increased from 21 percent to better than 85 percent. (Exhibit 8).

Similar improvements can be seen in GMAP reports across the governor’s priori-ties and at the department and agency level.

Lessons Learned and Key Success Factors The Washington State experience, along with similar experience in states such as Iowa and Virginia, demonstrate an invest-ment in a structured approach to managing performance can improve the likelihood

governors will be successful in accom-plishing their own priorities and restoring a greater degree of public confidence that they are receiving the desired results from the expenditure of their tax dollars.

In evaluating its progress to date, Washing-ton has identified a number of key success factors:

Goals and measures must relate to priorities.

A clear logic model is necessary.

The process is more important than the initial data.

Progress requires a great deal of time and effort.

Leadership commitment is critical.

Continuity enhances learning.

Follow-up is essential.

The GMAP team also has noted a number of observations that may help other states better understand factors that may be criti-cal to success. These include:

Myths and Realities

If you build it they will come: It’s not enough to simply create a new performance measurement system.

Outcomes are more important than outputs: Managers must understand

Accomplishments and Lessons Learned 11

broad organizational goals, but they need detailed information to make day-to-day decisions.

What gets measured gets done: Leaders must be committed to take action immediately and follow up relentlessly to ensure results.

What Have We Learned So Far

Performance measurement is like a foreign language, you must use it or lose it.

It’s very hard work.

It takes courage.

Persistent follow-up makes it happen.

You can’t measure everything.

GMAP reports and forums are only the beginning of the conversation.

The Leader’s Role—In ight from GMAP s

Create and maintain atmosphere of open honest dialogue.

Ask critical questions and give straight answers.

Set expectations of behaviors and model them.

Recognize accomplishments.

Bring issues into focus.

12 Accomplishments and Lessons Learned

Conclusions and Next Steps

Greater gubernatorial attention to the management of state government—the im-plementation of new priorities and new initiatives and the more effective and effi-cient accomplishments of key government missions—can pay dividends in terms of better outcomes and a more positive view of state government.

A growing body of experience at all levels of government can help in evaluating and designing management approaches that will reflect the governor’s style and the state’s management culture. A clear focus on results and recognition of shared ac-

countability can create a sense of common mission and teamwork approach.

However, the successful implementation of a performance-based management initia-tive requires a significant commitment of time on behalf of the governor, the gover-nor’s staff and department and agency officials. Without this commitment and the active involvement and personal interest of the governor, the initiative becomes yet another management fad—one of many that have pervaded state government over the past few decades—and likely will have little continuing impact on state govern-ment.

Conclusions and Next Steps 13

Appendix A

Exhibits

Exhibit 1: Management Framework

Exhibit 2: Executive Order 05-02

Exhibit 3: Suggested Slide Format

Exhibit 4: Logic Model Example

Exhibit 5: “How GMAP Process Works”

Exhibit 6: GMAP Washington–Guidelines for Agencies

Exhibit 7: Meeting Room Layout

Exhibit 8: Children’s Administration

Exhibit 9: Additional Resources

Appendix A