REINVENTING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: THE PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE EXPERIENCE

SPAEF

REINVENTING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: THE PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE EXPERIENCEAuthor(s): VALERIE RICHARDSONSource: Public Administration Quarterly, Vol. 26, No. 1/2 (SPRING 2002-SUMMER 2002), pp.127-146Published by: SPAEFStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41288166 .

Accessed: 10/06/2014 22:34

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

SPAEF is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Public AdministrationQuarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.185 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 22:34:47 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=spaef

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41288166?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Reinventing Government, Part 2

REINVENTING FEDERAL

GOVERNMENT: THE PATENT AND

TRADEMARK OFFICE EXPERIENCE

VALERIE RICHARDSON National Academy of Public Administration

INTRODUCTION

Every so many years, a new method for managing government operations emerges and, when this occurs, managers either embrace it, are forced to adopt it or try to outlive it. Similar to other changes in financial and management practices in the federal public sector that have come before it (Zero-Base Budgeting, Planning-Programming- Budgeting System (PPRS), Managing by Objectives (MBO), and Total Quality Management (TQM), reinvent-

ing government efforts initially received a lukewarm reception as well.

However, unlike previous changes in management philosophy, reinvention efforts have advocacy grounded in law. Recently enacted laws include the Chief Financial Officer's (CFO) Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-576); the Govern- ment Performance Act (GPRA) of 1993, now referred to as the "Results Act" (P.L. 103-62); the Federal Streamline Acquisition Act (FASA) of 1994 (P.L. 103-355); the Government Management Reform Act (GMRA) of 1994; and the Information Technology Management Reform Act (ITMRA) of 1996 (P.L. 104-106).

Today, most managers in the public sector would agree with Koskinen, Deputy Director, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), that "more legislation has passed in the last three years (1993-1996) affecting federal sector management than in recent administrations" (Sperry, 1996:65).



(128) PAQ SUMMER 2002

It is this litany of new laws that is providing the theoretical framework needed for reinventing government and which is now so prevalent throughout the public sector. Many of these new laws have been conducive to the numerous

change efforts occurring throughout the Patent and Trade- mark Office (PTO), all of which have been eagerly adopted and enthusiastically embraced.

The PTO is one of the government's pathfinders in

vying to become one of the federal government's first performance-based organizations. The idea of setting the PTP free from bureaucratic standards has been viewed as con- troversial as some argue that, because the PTO's core

government function is found in the Constitution (Article 1, Section 8), the agency should not seek the freedom which would provide it full autonomy from bureaucratic guide- lines. Nevertheless, the "PTO set its sights on this goal more than a decade ago" (Sanders and Thompson, 1997:

46).

This article will review one federal agency's efforts to reinvent itself. The agency background section of this article gives a general discussion of the PTO's character and an introduction to the early migration of the PTO towards an entrepreneurial philosophy of improving customer service and product delivery. Section three will

provide some insight into why the agency was compelled to choose this path. Section four gives a general background on the two public laws that provide the foundation for

many of PTO's change efforts. Section five provides an enhanced discussion of PTO's experiences as a GPRA pilot and its efforts to reengineer its budget and planning processes. The conclusion entails a discussion of how change can occur in the federal sector despite inherent bureaucratic barriers.



PAQ SUMMER 2002 (129)

AGENCY BACKGROUND

Small in size, huge in impact, the PTO is the steward for the nation's patent and trademark system. Two hundred and eight years old, the PTO has maintained its basic role and focus of providing protection for one of the nation's most treasured and unique resources - intellectual property which encompasses the ideas and inventions developed in the minds of the individuals that, when taken to market, enhance and improve the lives of those who benefit from these creations. Those benefits are derived either directly or indirectly. For example, the holder of a patent grant or trademark registration receives direct benefit via ownership and, respectively, patent or trademark protection. Many holders of patent grants or trademark registrations also derive wealth from their ideas and inventions. Those who use and prosper from new ideas and inventions, taken to the marketplace, benefit indirectly.

The agency's operating budget is projected to reach over $700 million in fiscal year 1998 and over $1 billion by the turn of the century. The PTO employs approximately 5,200 employees and is centrally located in Arlington, Virginia. In addition to its central location, it has 80 patent and trademark depository libraries throughout the United States where patent and trademark information can be easily accessed. The agency occupies 1.6 million square feet of space and has three major business lines (Patents, Trade- marks, and Information Dissemination). Eighty percent of its employees are devoted to the processing of patent and trademark applications for intellectual property protection. The remaining 20 percent are devoted to support functions such as patent and trademark information, information technology, human resources, and financial management. For fiscal year 1998, the PTO has projected requests from




applicants seeking federal intellectual property protection to reach 232,000 for patent applications and 250,000 for trademark applications.

THE CHOSEN PATH

After two centuries except for the automation of manual

processes, the examination processes of patent and trademark applications have remained relatively the same. However, over the past ten to twelve years, the PTO has

undergone tremendous and significant change in process operations and management practices due to fluctuations in workload, dramatic changes in technology, computerization of basic communication methods, complexity of examination requests, and customer demand.

"According to several experts, an organization's decision to change its culture is generally triggered by a

specific event or situation such as a change in the world

situation, international competition, or a severe event or situation" (GAO/NSIAD, 1992:92). Further, "experts generally agree that a culture is a long-term effort that takes at least five to ten years to complete" (Ibid.) and the PTO, in fact, began its efforts over a decade ago and has now arrived at a point where its cultural paradigm has swung from bureaucratic to entrepreneurial.

At the PTO, the need for change can be attributed to a number of factors: (1) greater emphasis on customer and stakeholder interest and improved delivery of PTO

products and services which began in the early 1980s; (2) fiscal year 1990 change in funding status which gradually converted the agency from a taxpayer-funded agency to a

fully-funded agency; and (3) the litany of new laws enacted to enhance financial decision-making and management practices within the federal government.




Major efforts to reinvent the PTO began in the early 1980s. During that period, the agency implemented and

adopted many new practices and processes to change its over 200-year-old character. As a forerunner in the devel-

opment of performance measurement indicators in the public sector, in 1982 the agency developed its first focused set of measures for gauging agency performance in

achieving two major goals: reduce the time for processing of patent and trademark applications and automate its operations. These measures were used as a method for enhancing performance delivery to its customers in the areas of timeliness and quality.

In 1993, the PTO was one of the first set of agencies selected to develop financial statements under the auspices of the CFO Act and received a rare first audit unqualified opinion from the Department of Commerce Inspector General in 1994. Participation in the GPRA pilot projects was a natural evolution from past experiences, therefore, in late 1993, the agency volunteered to participate in a three- year pilot project, testing various components of GPRA. In 1995, the PTO began focusing on its financial management practices and reengineered its planning, budgeting, and evaluation processes.

The agency has encountered various challenges while attempting to "reinvent" itself. Issues such as the human element, changing internal culture, and working within traditional bureaucratic paradigms have presented unique challenges. However, despite the typical obstacles federal agencies and organizations face when attempting to break free of bureaucratic barriers, within the last five years the PTO has developed and implemented many innovative methods to transform and improve the products and services delivered to its customers, stakeholders, and the




public. The PTO has received many awards for its efforts to

improve quality and service delivery, including the Federal

Quality Improvement Prototype Award (federal equivalent to the Baldridge award in private industry) and the National

Partnership for Reinventing Government Hammer Award.1

IMPACT AND INFLUENCE

The two major laws that have had an influential impact on PTO operations were the CFO Act and GPRA. The CFO Act compelled the agency to focus more closely on its financial management practices and procedures and the GPRA placed emphasis on program performance and

delivery. However, it was GPRA, in particular, which

appealed to the PTO and its current efforts and led the

agency to nominate itself as a participant in the GPRA Pilot

Program to build upon its decade-long experience in

tracking program performance.

Chief Financial Officers ' Act

The CFO Act was designed to establish higher standards for financial management and accountability in the federal

government. Through the use of clearer financial data and consistent systems and reporting, financial decision-making by Congress would be made easier. The development of financial statements in the public sector would be in sharp contrast to data contained in traditional budget requests as

many associated with federal budget request process have

reported federal budgetary data as difficult to understand, repetitive in presentation, and lacking long-term strategy.

In an effort to instill integrity in federal financial systems and reporting, the act requires audited financial statements. Specifically, as it applies to financial management,




the CFO Act assigns responsibility for developing and

maintaining an integrated agency accounting and financial

management system, with financial reporting and internal controls, to agency managers. Subsequent to the CFO Act, accountability did not reside at this level.

Government Performance and Results Act

The basic concept of GPRA is actually very simple: planning, effective budgeting, and evaluation. In the most

logical sense, what good manager would not have good and solid plans for action to effectively run his or her organization? What effective manager would not want to get the most "bang" for his or her buck? Finally, how would one know if he or she had been successful without some form of measurement and evaluation to determine if the criteria have been met and operations are improving?

GPRA requires each federal agency to (1) develop a strategic plan beginning in fiscal year 1997; (2) prepare annual performance plans for each budget submission

beginning in fiscal year 1999; and (3) report annually on actual performance compared to goals with the first report due in March 2000.

In connection with the performance plans, each agency must, among other things, establish performance indicators to be used in measuring or assessing the relevant outputs, service levels, outcomes of each program activity, and provide a basis for comparing actual program results with the established performance goals. GPRA also has two other components: managerial accountability and flexi- bililty waivers and performance budgeting.

GPRA does not present anything new in the form of management but, rather, provides another management tool to assist good managers in managing better. The objective




of this act is to encourage the federal manager to manage better by combining a variety of management tools that have proven successful in the past. What sets GPRA apart from previous management initiatives is that, although many of GPRA's components are extracted from or are variations of successful management initiatives which came before it - customer service standards (TQM), strategic planning (MBO), performance budgeting (PPBS), and

accountability (Total Quality Leadership or TQL),GPRA is a philosophical paradigm shift in how the federal government historically operates.

CHANGE EFFORTS

GPRA Pilots and Projects

In January 1994, PTO was selected to participate in the GPRA pilot program to test pilot performance planning, reporting, and sought and received preliminary permission to participate in the managerial flexibility and accounta-

bility waivers pilot to gain experience in performance planning and reporting. Participation as a pilot project also allowed the agency to begin early development of intermediate "outcome-oriented or results-oriented" performance goals and indicators. As one of the first set of pilot projects under the GPRA program, the PTO was a part of the Department of Commerce's Information Dissemination Annual Performance Plan pilot for fiscal year 1994. Along with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and Bureau of the Census, the PTO constructed its first annual performance plan.

Bringing together knowledge and process experts from

throughout the agency as a matrix team, the PTO engaged in a number of meetings to brainstorm the contents and



FAQ SUMMER 2002 (135)

level of detail for its first annual performance plan. As with

many federal agencies engaged in trying to develop results- oriented performance data, the PTO was unable to develop any meaningful end outcome-oriented performance goals or indicators for its first annual performance plan due, in fact, to the restrictive nature of the first pilot (information dissemination), data were not available, and inexperience with results-oriented performance measurement development.

In the second and third year of the pilot project, the PTO withdrew from the cluster planning effort and determined that it would expand its annual performance plan to encom- pass the entire agency instead of focusing only on information dissemination. The agency met its obligation to the OMB to submit annual performance reports providing detailed information on its success in reaching its performance goals three months after the end of each fiscal year for which the annual plan was submitted.

Building on experience gained as a performance pilot, in the final quarter of fiscal year 1995, the Office of the Comptroller and Deputy Chief Financial Officer embarked upon an aggressive effort to implement a comprehensive performance measurement system which would focus on the development, validation, and evaluation of end outcome-oriented goals: intermediate outcome effective- ness, efficiency, productivity, quantity (inputs/outputs), quality (product and process), customer and employee satisfaction, and innovation performance goals and measurements. Emphasis was placed on major program business area performance goals and measurement that co- joined with the PTO vision, mission, and strategic goals (extracted from the PTO 1996-2000 Strategic Plan).

The Office of the Comptroller and Deputy Chief Finan- cial Officer established a cross-matrix core team in April




1995 to begin preliminary activities that would allow the PTO to successfully implement GPRA in October 1997. The team began with 15 members from throughout the

agency and expanded to 23 active members working in concert to prepare for full implementation. Emphasis on end outcome-oriented performance goals and measures

ignited a basic, yet fundamental discussion with the PTO Executive Council of why the agency does what it does and how well it does it.2 During these meetings, the Council debated where the role of a federal agency begins and ends and at what point should a federal entity be held account- able for end outcomes and results beyond its control.

The GPRA Core Team also provided in-house GPRA and performance measurement training to over 190 PTO staff and line employees, facilitated working meetings with the senior- and middle-level managers from each of the three business lines to develop macro-level business-

specific performance goals and measurements and met with

representatives from the OMB, National Partnership for

Reinventing Government (previously National Performance

Review) (NPR), General Accounting Office (GAO), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

(NOAA) Office of Policy and Strategic Planning to discuss PTO's GPRA and performance measurement strategies and

preliminary intermediate-outcome, macro-level goals and measurements.

As a result of the discovery that adequate data were not available to develop truly reflective and outcome-oriented

performance goals and indicators, the PTO decided it would take a dual-path approach to validate and determine the feasibility of all recently developed goals and measurements proposed. The first path would be the reporting, monitoring, and evaluating of traditional business

performance measurements where data, data collection, and




evaluation systems were already in place. The second path would be to conduct an in-depth, one-year study of the value of a trademark or patent to the owner, the economy, and the nation and validate or dispel the findings from the

preliminary literature review that offered insufficient information to support the development of any meaningful end- outcome or results-oriented goals and measurements.

The study will include the use of customer focus group sessions and the partnership with colleges and universities as well as partnering with area public policy tanks and

specific industry sectors in the study of the intrinsic value of a trademark or patent. The desired result of the study was to have enough data and supporting documentation to

develop a composite index of peiformance goals and indicators that will assist the PTO in determining the level of influence the patent and trademark system has upon the nation and its citizens.

Reengineered Planning, Budgeting, and Evaluation

In October 1994, the PTO made the decision to reengineer its budget formulation process. This decision was made for a number of reasons: (1) those outside the budget formulation process did not fully understand the process yet were expected to be good financial managers and make sound financial decisions; (2) the process was labor intensive; and (3) planning for resource uses often occurred in a vacuum and outside the operational planning process. Originating in the Office of the Budget, the former director tasked the Office of Business Process Reengineering (OBPR) to redesign the budget formulation process. In addition to developing a more effective budget formulation process, the reengineering of the process was to also provide a vehicle to more effectively use performance




measurement as a management tool. As with the GPRA project, the OBPR pulled together a

matrix team of PTO employees to work on the redesign. In addition to staff from OBPR, knowledge and process expert individuals were pulled from the Offices of Budget, Finance, Planning and Evaluation, and the Chief Informa- tion Officer as well as from two of the three major business lines (Patents and Trademarks) to reengineer the budget formulation process.

The reengineering process took well over eight months to complete. Eight-hour meetings were conducted two to three days per week and facilitated by a contractor from the

management consulting firm of Price Washington. The

process began with decomposing the "as-is" process and concluded with a "to-be" map and design, Concept of

Operations, Economic Analysis, and an Incremental Tran- sitional Plan. "As-is" and "to-be" models were developed by using the Integrated Definition Method (IDEF model-

ing). Using this method of modeling and diagramming technique, the team focused on process and data using an linear analysis approach. The philosophy was process first, then data.

The concept of the new budget formulation process was

using the planning and budgeting process and this union to

plan effectively for optimal use of current and future resources both human and fiscal. The planning process would occur in a fully participative environment and business lines. Input would be included from customers, stakeholders (Department of Commerce, Office of Manage- ment and Budget, and Congress [via Congressional Con-

sulations]), and employees alike via a part of internal and external environmental scanning. In the "to-be" environ-

ment, conceptually, there were four overriding principles for the planning, budgeting, and evaluation process (PBE):




(1) government corporation concept; (2) instant access to information; (3) planning drives the budget process; and (4) the PBE process be simple to understand.

The seamless integrated planning, budgeting, and evalu-

ating process created through the reengineering effort is an excellent concept in theory; however, in practice, the

concept has been difficult to implement. Although over the

past three fiscal years, the agency had begun incremental

implementation of the new planning, budgeting, and evaluation (PBE) process, sponsors and the transition effort have encountered difficulty in maintaining commitment to allow the strategic planning process to drive resource requests and program allocations. Obstacles that developed subse-

quent to the creation of the initial "to-be" design were rooted in issues of organizational culture, employee resistance to change, and funding constraints.

Difficulty in a smooth transition from the previous "as- is" environment to the "to-be" environment can also be attributed to a few major miscalculations that have become valuable lessons learned. What the agency learned during its efforts to implement the "to-be" PBE process was arti- culated by Kotter (1996:9):

Major change is usually unworkable unless most employees are willing to help. Even if unhappy with the status quo, unless employees think the potential benefits of change are attractive and unless they really believe that a transforma- tion is possible, employees will not be supportive. Without credible communication, and a lot of it, employees' hearts and minds are never captured.

Capturing the hearts and minds of the PTO employees did not occur early in the process as the concept, vision, philosophy, and benefit were not shared early on. However, components of the PBE transition plan did include modules to address massive communication and cultural change.




Lack of a massive communication effort to circumvent the

predicted resistance to change, prior to the first phase of

implementation of the PBE process hampered the development of imperative support and buy-in necessary for ease of transition and the first phase of the implementation clearly violated the golden rule of "communicate, communicate, communicate."

Miscalculations of implementing the PBE can be direct-

ly assigned to the failure to address: (1) communicating the new process; (2) new process marketing; (3) organizational culture; (4) employee resistance to change; and (5) the

upskilling and reskilling of employees being affected by the

change. Strebel (1996:86) states that "while management looks

for enthusiasm, acceptance, and commitment, they often will get something less when communication breaks down, implementation plans miss their mark, and results fall short." There were four barriers to the new environment:

funding constraints, elimination of stovepipe mentality. Insensitivity to abolishing offices, and instant access to information. Two of these barriers to transitioning to the new environment were found in the philosophical mind-set

throughout the agency. Funding Constraints: In the beginning of the planning

sessions, priorities were ranked according to importance and aligned with available resources. After resources had been depleted, those initiatives that fell below the line could not be funded. At this point in the planning process, the concern with the costs of operational issues prevented busi-nesses from fully engaging in needed discussions that were required for true strategic planning. External influences such as major funding reductions (i.e., unexpected congres-sional cuts) led discussions to quickly revert to "what-to-fund" sessions - in other words, sessions




to the "as-is" budget formulation process (budgeting dri-

ving planning). It became clear that shifting to a strategic planning activity from a "planning-of-resources" activity would be a slow process. The alteration of the "what does it cost" mentality of the old-line decision-makers to one of "what do we need to achieve" would take time and pa- tience.

Elimination of Stovepipe Mentality: Shifting the current mind-set stovepipe operations to a common focus was another impediment to a successful first-year PBE implementation. The three business lines were not ready to

immediately remove the invisible, yet solid, wall of inde- pendence and autonomy. Kettl et al. (1996:359) write that "caught in the crossfire of great expectations and shrinking resources, change has created a culture shock for federal agencies, staffs, and management systems which are rooted in assumptions of stability and permanence." PTO and its employees were no exception to move from the "as-is" to the "to-be" PBE environment.

The willingness of the businesses to plan as an agency versus separate and distinct businesses did not immediately occur. The perception of the lack of equal representation occurred during the first participative planning session by which agency-wide initiatives were ranked using automated tools (GroupWare). There were many in attendance who felt that they were not adequately represented and, therefore, their specific issues were not addressed. This perception was due, in part, to the overwhelming number of patent participants and the independent nature of the three business lines. While the patent business representation was relative to its size (68% of the agency), this proved to be an error in the initial participant selection process as feelings of under-representation by the non-patent representatives created adversarial relationships among the




planning participants. Human Element - Insensitivity to Abolishing an

Office. True reengineering of the planning and budget formulation processes called for the streamlining of the Office of Planning and Evaluation and the Office of Budget as well as the delegation of many planning and budgeting activities to the three PTO business lines. Decentralization of the budget and planning and evaluation offices would entail delegation of many of the current functions to the business lines resulting in one area downsizing and the other rightsizing, presenting a number of questions: (1) were the businesses ready or equipped to receive staff from the planning and evaluation and budget offices? (2) would the remaining planning and evaluation and budget staffs be

willing to merge into one office and reassign personnel? and (3) could planning truly dominate and lead a financial

process? Neither the Office of Budget nor the Office of Planning

and Evaluation were truly prepared to merge because both offices viewed their functions to be separate and distinct

except for the planning and budgeting formulation activities. Therefore, the seamless planning, budgeting, and evaluation process would, in essence, consist of two offices

coming together to work as a team primarily during the three annual budget cycles and functioning as separate offices at all other times.

Instant Access to Information. One of the central and most vital component of the "to-be" design was that the

process be fully automated. Development and deployment of automated systems unfortunately were not in sync with

the incremental deployment of the PBE process and, therefore did not provide the necessary tools to immediately

support the new process. Alignment of systems and demand have been slow to evolve due to several funding




cuts that were not projected at the time of the PBE design and, therefore, valuable information for decision-makers were not available to use as management and decision-

making tools. Tools that were envisioned to be available, such as an automated activity-based cost accounting system, and Executive Information System (EIS), and performance measurement goals and indicators tied to resources requested on-line module were under development but were not in place - all of which contributed to the transition missing its mark.

Despite the set-backs in incremental implementation of the PBE process, the eight-month effort resulted in a "to- be" design of the former process that now contains provi- sions that include strategic planning, performance planning, and program evaluation. Inclusion of these elements in the planning and budgeting process reinforces PTO's commitment not only to comply with the Results Act but also to elevate performance, accountability, and operational and financial management throughout the agency. Incremental changes in the planning and budget formulation processes, which began with the fiscal year 1997 planning and budget cycles, will continue to be incrementally implemented, improved, and communicated until full roll-out of the "to- be" design is complete.

CONCLUSION

Undeniably, there are many built-in barriers to implementing change in the public sector and change in the public sector does not evolve quickly; however, there are federal agencies that advocate the reinvention concept and have altered their cultures, practices, and procedures. In theory, any one of the new laws that have been enacted over the past few years support and promote good




management; however, in practice, these management concepts are not easily implemented and, in some cases, are not feasible for total transfer to the public sector. However, some do work and can bring about tremendous change and benefit. While Light (1997:21) states that "no reinventor, no matter how gifted, can undo all the rules, layers, and

managerial sediment that have piled up over the years, thus in the collision of theory and practice," there can be

changes made around the fringes and, at some point, major and permanent change takes form.

The PTO has pioneered change, persistently chipping away at the edges and making change around the fringes to

slowly reinvent its character. Despite the inherent barriers

bureaucracy creates, years before the PTO considered

seeking federal cooperation status or was nominated as a Performance-Based Organization or High Impact Agency, the agency consistently looked for ways to improve.

Initiatives such as creating a Patent and Trademark Office University to upskill and reskill employees to meet the demands of the next century, the reengineering of many of its processes (Patent, Trademark, Human Resources, Board of Patent Appeal and Interference, and Travel), and the automation of its financial accounting systems, demon- strate that federal agencies can change despite the rhetoric. There will be set-backs, uneasiness, and discomfort for those who accept the challenge; nevertheless, change has to occur.

There are "many revolutionaries in the reinvention efforts who reason that, if a public organization wants to think and act like a private business, it ought to just go out and become one" (Sanders and Thompson, 1997:54). Unfortunately, because operating as a private business

enterprise in a bureaucratic environment "is not as simple as it sounds" (Ibid.), federal agencies must find innovative




approaches to improve operations despite the barriers. In most cases, thinking like a private business does not neces-

sarily require change in legislation but rather change in behavior and focus. Emphasis on common sense management practices, the customer, and service delivery can, and should, be every organization's mission.

Many federal agencies, like the PTO, began seeking new methods and practices of improving service delivery long before reinvention, reengineering, and strategic management were the latest trend in change management. Similar to the PTO, there are many federal agencies engaged in positive change throughout government. As an

example, the Social Security Administration (SSA) stunned the business world by coming in first in an independent survey on the country's best 1-800 telephone service (Gore, 1996:3). In addition to the SSA, there are other radical

changes occurring throughout the federal government in

departments such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency, General Services Administration, and the Depart- ment of Commerce. These agencies, and many others, are

continuously working to discover, reinvent, and apply new

ways of improving service delivery to their customers and the American public - the PTO is one such agency.

NOTES

1. Awards given to federal agencies under the auspices of the National Performance Review (NPR), now known as National Partnership for Reinventing Government, for developing innovative approaches to improve service delivery to customers.

2. Presidential Appointees and Senior Executive Service Members.

REFERENCES

General Accounting Office (1992). "Organizational Culture." GAO/N- SLAD-92-105. (February):2.




Gore, A1 (1996). The Best Kept Secrets in Government Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

Kettl, Donald L., Patricia W. Ingraham, Ronald P. Sanders, and Charles Horner (1996). Civil Service Reform: Building a Govern- ment that Works. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.

Kotter, John P. (1996). Leading Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Light, Paul C. "The Tides of Reinvention." Government Executive (January):23-24.

Sanders, Ronald P. and James Thompson (1997). "Where No Fed Has Gone Before: Performance-Based Organizations Want to Break Free of Bureaucracy's Orbit." Government Executive (April):46-49.

(1997). "Reinvention: The Next Generation: Two Agencies Learn the Limits of Reinvention." Government Executive (November):65-66.

Strebel, Paul (1996). "Why Do Employees Resist Change?" Harvard Business Review (May/June):86-92.



REINVENTING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: THE PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE EXPERIENCE

Documents

Transcript of REINVENTING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: THE PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE EXPERIENCE