Anticipate, find, fix, track, target, engage and assess anything, anywhere, anytime

Transcription

1 1 1 Contribution based Pay in the Air Force Research Laboratory Michelle Williams Laboratory Demonstration Project Office HQ Air Force Research Laboratory AFRL Vision Anticipate, find, fix, track, target, engage and assess anything, anywhere, anytime 2 2 Background What is a Demonstration Project? Most federal government employees fall under Title V - a set of personnel management regulations Title V is administered by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Other controls are established by the agency (Department of Defense), service (Air Force), and command (Air Force Materiel Command) Demonstration project authority allows waivers to be granted to Title 5 and encourages relief from other controls 3 3

2 4 4 Demo Legislation FY95 Defense Authorization Act gave S&T Reinvention Labs personnel demo authority About 15 demos across Army, Navy, and Air Force Labs Single Air Force Demo: 2,500 Scientists and engineers in 9 primary locations Broad Guidance Broad paybands Simplified classification New performance management system Cannot effect employee rights or entitlements Goals and Objectives Enhance Work Force Quality Motivate employees through equitable compensation Enhance employee development Flexibly adjust work force in times of change Bottom Line: Achieve the best work force to accomplish AFRL s mission Improve Work Force Efficiency Simplify current personnel procedures 5 5 Key Demonstration Initiatives Simplified Classification Positions classified by supervisors Classification authority delegated to laboratory management Positions classified based on standard set of factors and descriptors 1 page classification document: Statement of Duties and Experience (SDE) Automated PC-based software; menu driven Programmed Look-up Tables 6 6

3 7 7 Key Demonstration Initiatives Broadbanding Seven traditional civil service grades combined into four bands Lab Demo DR-I DR-II DR-III DR-IV Title V GS-7 GS-9 GS-11 GS-12 GS-13 GS-14 GS Salary $40,710 67,773 $56,948 89,423 $78,598 $100,248 $111,073 $124,010 Bands follow typical career progression Progression through the bands meant to be seamless Key Demonstration Initiatives Contribution-based Compensation (CCS) An integrated broadbanding, classification and performance management system Measures the contribution to the organization rather than how well the employee performed a job as defined by an individualized performance plan Provides an equitable and fair basis for salary adjustments Does not view pay increases as entitlements Supports rank-in-person concept and dual track 8 8 Contribution-Based Compensation System What is measured in the AFRL Contributionbased Compensation System? Six Factors Technical Problem Solving Communications and Reporting Corporate Resource Management R&D Business Development Technology Transition/ Technology Transfer Teamwork and Leadership 9 9

4 10 10 Contribution-Based Compensation System Highlights of the AFRL Contribution-based Compensation System Employee scores are determined by a group of supervisors Meeting of Managers Individual factor scores are assigned for each employee Factors scores are weighted (by job category) Weighted average is the Overall Contribution Score (OCS) The OCS listing is reviewed to ensure equity Some surprises may result from the bottoms-up approach OCSs are plotted against salaries and pay adjustments are then determined Definition of Key Terms OCS - Overall Contribution Score (OCS) The weighted average of an employee s six factor scores. The weights depend on the employee s job category. Expected Score The OCS corresponding to an employee s basic pay. This is the level of contribution expected of the employee, given his or her pay. Delta OCS The difference between an employee s actual OCS and his or her expected OCS, based on their current basic pay and the Standard Pay Line. Delta Y The difference between and employee s actual basic pay and what their pay should be based on their OCS and the Standard Pay Line CCS Scatterplot G = General Cost of Labor Increase (Set by Congress) I = Incentive Increase (Set by AFRL Corporate Board) Base Salary ($K) $100 $90 $80 $70 $60 $50 Over- Maximum Increase is G SPL Minimum Increase is G $40 $30 $20 Delta-Y ($20K) Delta OCS 1.4 Overall Contribution Score (OCS) Under- Minimum Increase is G + I

5 13 13 Salary Adjustments Management has a lot of pay adjustment flexibility and they use it Significant raises are given to the most under-compensated Raises are withheld from the over-compensated Maximum 2007 percentage increase was 28.6% Max in % Average 2007 increase was 4.8% 2006 average 4.0% Maximum 2007 dollar increase was $16,797 Max in 2006 $15,920 Average 2007 increase was $4, average $3,306 Broadband Movement Movement between levels is seamless Zones established for CCS score/salary combinations Eligible (but not recommended) for change Recommended for change (but not mandatory) Mandatory; change is automatic No formal competition is required for advancement within or between broadbands Broadband Distribution After 2007 Band Movements High-grade controls lifted More DR-IIIs than DR-IIs DR-III 0.3 DR-II 0.2 DR-IV 0.1 DR-I * 15 15

6 % 1997 Overall LabDemo Plot 1 FY1997 Base Pay Lower Rail SPL Upper Rail 1997 Total 70.4% FY1998 Base Pay 1998 Overall LabDemo Plot 1 Lower Rail SPL Upper Rail 1998 Total % FY1999 Base Pay 1999 Overall LabDemo Plot 1 Lower Rail SPL Upper Rail 1999 Total 18 18

7 % FY2000 Base Pay Overall LabDemo Plot Lower Rail SPL Upper Rail 2000 Total 82.7% 2001 Overall LabDemo Plot 1 FY2001 Base Pay Lower Rail SPL Upper Rail 2001 Total % 2002 Overall LabDemo Plot 1 FY2002 Base Pay Lower Rail SPL Upper Rail 2002 Total 21 21

8 % FY2003 Base Pay Overall LabDemo Plot Lower Rail SPL Upper Rail 2003 Total 91.2% FY2004 Base Pay 2004 Overall LabDemo Plot 1 Lower Rail SPL Upper Rail 2004 Total % FY2005 Base Pay Overall LabDemo Plot Lower Rail SPL Upper Rail 2005 Total 24 24

9 Overall LabDemo Plot 94.3% FY2006 Base Pa 1 Lower Rail SPL Upper Rail 2006 Total 94.0% FY2007 Base Pay 2007 Overall LabDemo Plot 1 Lower Rail SPL Upper Rail 2007 Total What Managers Like Increased ability to recruit top talent 70% believe AFRL is able to attract high-quality candidates Up from 36% in 1996 Increased ability to reward high contributors Supervisors expressed an eight-fold increase from implementation values in authority to influence pay Simple, streamline classification process What used to take weeks now takes hours CCS process keeps employees focused on mission Employees feel more empowered with more active role Over 90% of workforce understand how their job relates to AFRL s mission 98% of AFRL supervisors are in favor of the Demonstration Project initiatives 27 27

10 What Employees Like Ability to reward top contributors 70% of workforce is satisfied with their pay Improved mentorship and feedback Enhanced mission awareness Over 91% of workforce understand Laboratory s mission Better understanding of what it takes to succeed Almost 90% of workforce understand the Contribution-based Compensation System Evolving improvement in quality of supervision CCS forcing managers to be more proactive Almost 75% believe they received adequate contribution feedback 87% of AFRL employees are in favor of the Demonstration Project initiatives Summary Lab Demo is an Air Force success story Supervisors have the ability to manage their workforce CCS is clearly accomplishing its goals Overall contribution has increased Deserving employees are rewarded for high contribution High contributors stay and low contributors either improve or leave Simplified processes Driving the culture of AFRL Salary increases are not peanut-butter spread Rewards initiative and breaks the entitlement mentality Success is not automatic Management understanding, support for, and attention to CCS is vital for continued success For More Information Lab Demo public website: and Phone Michelle.Williams2@wpafb.af.mil