Rich J. asked this question in a separate thread, but it seemed like a good topic for a Friday.
Maybe a topic for a separate post, but what does everyone think of the new Chief appointment? is an outsider inherently better or worse than a career appointee?
I ask as ask a skeptic of this appointment. But if I had to support someone without any FS experience, Schultz seems like a decent choice.
I’ll start off. And sometimes I remind myself of that old quote about economists (or lawyers or..)
Monotony has now been dispelled, however, by the discovery of the firm which advertised for a one-armed economist, the previous holder of the office having been no good because he always said “On the one hand this . . . on the other hand that . . .”.
That’s me, despite being neither a lawyer nor an economist, but here goes.
1. We have no empirical evidence, because there hasn’t been a true outsider since the 1930’s. I remember Chief Vicky Christiansen coming over to the Forest Service from being a State Forester. According to this Forest History site, she joined the Forest Service in 2010 and moved into being Deputy Director of F&AM in 2010. She was also Acting Regional Forester for the Northern Region, “the same region that produced three of her four immediate predecessors.”
Interesting that the new Chief also worked in Montana’s DNR. What’s up with the Region 1 to Chief thing? I could be argued that La Grande, Oregon, home of Chief Thomas, is in the “social-shed” of Boise, Idaho.
Yes part of Region 1 is in Idaho, (and North and South Dakota) but still… and Schultz was the Director of the Idaho Department of Lands.
Anyway, she was with the Forest Service for eight years before becoming Chief, which is enough time to get the hang of it, I would think.
2. The Forest History Society pointed out in Chief Christiansen’s bio:
She’s the first chief since Ferdinand Silcox (1933-1939) not to have spent the majority of their career in the Forest Service.
Silcox had a masters degree in forestry, and worked for the Forest Service (in the Northern Rockies !) after graduation, then went in the military and the private sector.
Extensive cooperation with the U.S. Army, Department of Labor, and other federal and state land management agencies was needed to get these programs to work effectively. His previous work for the Army and in the private sector proved to be invaluable for getting the job done. An able administrator, Silcox treated his associates and subordinates with great consideration and kindness. He had an enduring humanitarian viewpoint which resulted in doing his best to help the “have nots” in society. His ideas of forest conservation and advocacy of the public regulation of timber cutting all brought strong opponents as well as loyal adherents.
This might argue that “it’s the person, not the background.”
I thought this letter (“A Challenge,” from 1937) was interesting in terms of what has changed since Silcox’s time
3. Back to the topic. What can we expect from someone who hasn’t worked in the outfit?
Pros.. fresh set of eyes, trusted by Admin, (in Schultz’s case) probably has ins with other state organizations, understands State, Tribal and Private programs better than some internal candidates. Does understand wildfire, and various players involved.
Cons.. doesn’t understand processes or bureaucratic quagmires (the flip side of fresh set of eyes), might not have trusting relationships built up over time with some employees (trusted advisors), may not understand FS R&D. Employees may be afraid to work closely with Chief due to possibilities of retaliation in next Administration. Might not understand Eastern, Southern nor Midwestern Forests.
To be fair, though, there are internal candidates who don’t know as much about State Tribal and Private programs and R&D and non-Western Forests as might be desired, depending on their history.
What we don’t know.. commitment to moving Fire to USDI. This seems to me one of the greatest challenges of the new Chief, regardless of career background.
4. Just another random point. Chief Christiansen and Undersecretary Hubbard had both come from being State Foresters, not DNR (or equivalent) Directors. Harris Sherman, for example, had been a DNR Director in Colorado and became Undersecretary. So perhaps it would be more traditional for Schultz, based on his background, to become the Undersecretary and the Chief to have remained career.
5. If most career employees are D’s then if you (career person) were to become Chief in an R Admin and attempt to carry out their policies, you might be seen as a kind of traitor, and it would be fairly clear your time would be limited. Would you sign up for ending your career that way?
***********
Anyway, those are all the things I could think of, others? And what do you think makes an “able administrator” as Silcox was thought to be?
I met Vicki Christiansen when she was the Arizona State Forester and she participated in a review of the Kaibab NF. I was very impressed with her and she was a nice person to boot.
Regarding the new Chief, here is what I wrote on the US Forest Service Employees Facebook Page:
I worked for the Idaho Department of Lands long ago, and it is a much different organization from the Forest Service. They are into production forestry with few impediments to making that happen. They used to make a lot of money for the State; I don’t know if that is still true. The FS may be quite frustrating in comparison. I am guessing that in 6 months to a year, this guy will be wondering what he got himself into. There will be big expectations to get the cut out. This will be tough because there are many Forests that do not have sawmill capacity anymore.
You can’t just change an Administration, hire a new Chief, get rid of NEPA and Shazam….we’re back to the 1980’s. Happy days are here again! And this is all going to happen with 30% fewer employees. There will also be a big expectation for significantly fewer wildfire acres burned. Good luck with that; it will not happen overnight. Once again, with fewer employees. This guy may be special, but he ain’t that special. It takes a certain amount of chutzpah to walk into a complex agency that you don’t know the inner workings of and expect to quickly get it figured out. I guess we will see how he does. I wish him luck.
If I were him, I would keep my head on a swivel, watch my back, and have a plan B in case this gig doesn’t work out. Do people forget how many of his staff Trump fired during the last go-around? It’s like the woman who decides to marry a philanderer, knowing he fools around, but they tell themselves, “He wouldn’t do that to me.”
When organizations need radical change they are more likely to turn to outsiders. I found it intriguing that Tom Schultz’s Forestry Master’s thesis was titled “Organizational culture: An impetus to influence organizational behavior and decision making.” https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/8752/
You mentioned above the new Chief is trusted by the new administration. The challenge will be establishing mutual trust between the new Chief and the USFS employees. It seems likely a leadership purge is coming to the WO, and presumably the Chief will bring some experienced agency insiders he trusts to the HQ.
How will the new Chief interact with Regions, Forests, and Districts? NGOs? The public? How will he earn their support and buy-in?
IMHO his top priority should be pulling employee morale out of the gutter. Upper management cuts are likely coming and necessary, but he should draw a line in the sand and stand up against any additional cuts to specialists and line workers. Fight to bring back probationary employees and seasonal workers who are desperately needed this summer. Let USDA and NRE folks do the dirty work of slashing contracts and thinning management while he focuses on the people doing the work to protect our forests.
If he can pull the budget out of the red and earn the trust of the workforce, I think this outsider can succeed. If he chooses instead to serve as a puppet for those above him, the organization and our forests will continue to suffer.
Kevin, I agree
“Fight to bring back probationary employees and seasonal workers who are desperately needed this summer. Let USDA and NRE folks do the dirty work of slashing contracts and thinning management while he focuses on the people doing the work to protect our forests.”
And thanks for the link to his Masters thesis, it’s too rough going for me, but nice to know he was interested in organizational stuff enough to study it.
One of the things I am concerned about is that the regional offices are developing the regional RIF plans. In my experience, the ROs are full of too many GS-12/13 coordinator-type positions that don’t do much more than attend meetings. I have worked for several federal agencies, and this has been the case for each. Just like the ROs filled way too many RO positions with their BIL dollars, I fear they are going to save way too many RO positions at the expense of those that do the work.
Do you have any evidence that the RIFs will be planned by the ROs? Up to this point, all decisions regarding workforce organization, including who is fired, has been made by people outside the USFS and/or USDA. There is no indication that the Admin is interested in delegating decision authority related to staffing down to the RO, Forest, or Districts.
It looks like his first job will be to fire a lot of people, so we’ll see how that goes.
https://laist.com/news/politics/court-considers-halting-trumps-mass-firings-federal-employees
**A federal judge in San Francisco says the Trump administration likely broke the law by firing thousands of probationary employees — typically those in their first or second year in a job.
“Statements from officials at multiple federal agencies admit that the agencies carried out the terminations not at their own discretion, but on the direct orders of OPM,” the attorneys wrote in a court filing.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup ordered a partial halt to the firings after a hearing on Thursday afternoon. His order covers the Veterans Affairs Department, the National Parks Service, the Small Business Administration, the Bureau of Land Management, the National Science Foundation and other agencies whose firings impact the civic groups that sued the Trump administration.**
Apparently this does not include the Forest Service, but the judge said “I’m going to count on the government to do the right thing and go further than I have ordered and to let some of these (other) agencies know what I have ruled.”
I know Tom Schultz and believe he’s a good choice for this administration. Tom has been working collaboratively in Idaho since retiring from IDL and joining Idaho Forest Group. While he was a little too political for my liking, he understands the Forest Service and National Forest lands, at least in the West, and knows how to get things done.
My concern is that the damage being done to the agency by Musk and his minions, by the way totally unnecessary in reducing waste, fraud and abuse, will render an agency already struggling to implement their broad mandate unable to increase the pace and scale of forest resilience restoration so desperately needed. But I wish Tom well!