Uncategorized

For all forest fans- forests being something that unites most of us on this blog.

165 films were submitted from 30 countries for the International Year of the Forests. For a quick over view of the films and winners check out this website. Download the pdf program at that site if you’d like to see more detailed information and beautiful pictures.

Some of these films may be showed at the 2011 SAF convention which builds on the theme of international year of the forest.

Winning films will first be showcased at the global launch of Forests 2011 in New York, and then be screened at other festivals and events around the world throughout the year. The film festival is part of a global effort to raise awareness on the importance of forests, their relationship with people and the sustainable management, conservation and development of all types of forests.

Andy Stahl has pointed out some issues around FS morale here.

But “what specific actions can be done to improve it?”, is the question at hand. The following is my contribution to the discussion. Please feel free to share your ideas.

To non- FS folks- I am aware that some of the irritations of modern organizational and technological life transcend the FS and even the government, e.g. “centralized services,” “help desks”, “self-service.”

Here is the proposal.

One cause of poor morale is a seemingly endless barrage of new requirements- usually with an unrealistic timeframe. Employees can’t understand why the new requirement is needed or imposed. One example is the new requirement to get two layers of approval plus ASC to approve requests to exceed the per diem rate, where it seems like for many years the supervisor was enough approval.

To improve morale, in my view, before a new requirement (that requires more time for employees to complete) is introduced, the new requirement would have to pass before the Board of Cranks. The Cranks would be volunteers but would also have a staff of 10 up and coming professionals, energetic, creative, and technically knowledgeable. This would then cost approximately $1,000,000 a year but be inestimably valuable in terms of morale. These would be called the Crankstaff and they would be virtual positions expected last two to three years. They would be encouraged to talk to districts and forests and conduct time trials when comparisons of alternative approaches need to be tested.

The Board of Cranks would review:
1) The necessity of a new requirement.
Why is it required? By whom? What has changed for this new requirement to be necessary?
Cranks would question the necessity. If they found it was necessary, they would move on to..
2) Is there an easier way to meet the need that led to the requirement?
a. How do the top three agencies on the morale survey handle the requirement?
b. How do other USDA agencies and BLM handle the requirement?
c. Post the requirement on a Cranks.fs.fed blog and give a substantial cash award to an individual who finds a better way to do it (based on a percentage of the costs saved agency- wide from the costs of the original “new requirement” proposal – not less than $1 K.)

Cranks would select the most cost-effective solution and post all the background information they generated on a website- say, Cranks.fs.gov. No letter with new requirements would be allowed to go out without a link to the background at the Cranksite. That way when people found out about a new requirement, they would understand why it was instituted and how hard our own folks had tried to minimize the hassle. At least, we would be no worse than other feds.

Cranks would determine the lead time for new requirements. For example, for performance evaluations, Cranks might determine that four months before the evaluations are due would be a minimal time frame for changes to the process- if changes show up after that, they can wait until next year.

Even after the new requirement is in place, there would be a specific comment section on the Cranksite blog for each requirement- for people to share their frustrations and creative ideas for minimizing the impact. The Crankstaff would monitor these sites and make recommendations to the Board of Cranks for changing the system when good new ideas were proposed.

Each month, the Chief would sit down with the Deputy Chief for Operations and the CIO (where appropriate) and the elected Chair of the Board of Cranks and review new requirements and their progress. If the Board recommended a change to a new requirement, the Deputy Chief would have to defend the new requirement to the Chief.

That’s just one idea. What’s your idea for improving FS morale?

We are entering a peaceful period for the next couple of weeks while people are on vacation. This is a season where Peace is celebrated in many spiritual traditions. Which reminds me of honoring and thanking the environmental conflict resolution professionals we deal with in our daily work. So here’s a shout out to all of you-wherever you are. I’d particularly like to thank the folks at the U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution (and their subcontractors) for their excellent work on the Planning Rule.

In the spirit of the season, here’s a quote on their homepage:

“ Politics and issues come and go, but in the end, we’ll all be remembered for the way we treat other people. ”

Morris K. Udall

Here’s a link to a blog post from Craig Zelizer of the international conflict resolution community on “10 Actions for a More Peaceful 2011.”

Happy Holidays to all, and I’ll be back the 3rd of January or thereabouts.

Senator Majority Leader Reid released today a draft of the 2011 Consolidated Appropriations Act, which he hopes to navigate through the last days of this Congress. The 1,924-page bill includes Senator Tester’s Montana Forest Jobs and Restoration Act (beginning on page 893), but does not include Senator Wyden’s Eastside Oregon counterpart. Tester sits on the Senate Appropriations Committee, from which this bill originates; Wyden does not.

This omnibus appropriations bill should not be confused with an omnibus public lands bill that has also been released in draft. The public lands omnibus includes bills passed out of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, including three designating wilderness in Oregon (Devil’s Staircase), Washington (Alpine Lakes additions) and New Mexico (Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks).

Alternate Title: “What happens if a pillar falls in the woods and no one hears it . . . ”

Former Chief Dale Bosworth had his Four Threats: fire and fuels, invasive species, loss of open space, and unmanaged recreation. Current (but for how long?) Chief Tidwell’s signature initiative was to be his “Four Pillars”: Restore and Sustain Landscapes, Protect and Enhance Water Resources, Jobs and Sustainable Communities, and Climate Change Resiliency.

But Tidwell’s pillars have fallen before construction even began because he wasn’t paying attention to one minor detail. His boss, Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack, already had “Four Pillars” — renewable energy, broadband internet access, responding to climate change and harnessing local food production.

Your Forest Service leadership hard at work.

Story here.

Here is a story about how what federal employees are paid who work in the Asheville area, entitled “The Science Brain Pays Nice Dividends” by John Boyle of the Asheville Citizen Times. The topic apparently evolved out of a discussion about the pay freeze.

But what I found most interesting was this link to a website where you can look up all federal employees’ 2009 salaries. Who knew?

Warning: The video clip ads on this site are highly annoying.

Forest Service Chief Tidwell responded this week to the agency’s “morale focus groups,” which convened in response to the Forest Service’s basement-dwelling rankings as a good federal agency workplace. In the survey, employees ranked Forest Service leadership 217th out of 223 federal agencies. Tidwell’s response? He appointed a new director for the Office of Communications “tasked to work on the effectiveness of our internal communication,” among other actions that also include a “major commitment to improving safety.” Tidwell thinks the troops have low morale because they just aren’t getting his messages and working unsafely to boot.

The good news this week is that Associate Chief Hank Kashdan is retiring. Kashdan played a key role in centralizing the Forest Service personnel functions in a new Albuquerque Service (sic) Center. This supposed cost-savings measure, for which there is no evidence of saved dollars, fouled-up hiring, payroll, travel, and other day-to-day chores that should be seamless in any well-run organization. Kashdan’s departure is a welcome start, but the exodus shouldn’t stop with him. That low-leadership ranking was also well-earned by Chief Financial Officer Donna Carmical who retaliated against Forest Service auditor Jeffrey Park after he blew the whistle on former CFO Jesse King’s travel embezzlement scheme. Former Chief Gail Kimbell earned the first-ever directed reassignment for a Chief when she recommended King for a performance raise even while he was being investigated for his malfeasance.

The housecleaning should also sweep up Chief of Staff Tim DeCoster who “reviewed and approved” Jesse King’s fraudulent travel vouchers. In addition to looking the other way as King fleeced the government, DeCoster’s position as Chief of Staff makes him the top day-to-day agency manager; a position he has held throughout the Forest Service’s steep descent to the bottom of the government’s morale rankings.

This better-off-without list wouldn’t be complete without the head guy himself, Tom Tidwell. Tidwell’s biggest failing is that he hasn’t done the housecleaning at the top that is needed to restore leadership as meaning something other than perks for the top dogs. Tidwell’s resignation would be the biggest boost to agency morale he has to offer.

This post by Bob Berwyn on his Summit County Voice blog describes how to put Flickr photos into a WordPress blog like this one. So if blog entry authors or commenters would like to share photos, this is another approach to the google docs that Derek had experimented with.

The slideshow Bob posted is also quite lovely IMHO.

Feeling some paid and volunteer work pressure reminds me that it has been a while since Martin and I specifically invited posts from readers. As in a real-world discussion, this is a specific invitation that a facilitator will often extend to those quiet individuals from whom we don’t usually hear. Martin and I would like to invite those of you who have never posted to consider writing a blog post. All we require is that you are available for online discussion when your post is posted; that you are amenable to possible editing, that you are gentle with people of opposing views, that your post is not an advertisement for a product or service, and that you share a little bit about yourself in terms of biography (a couple of sentences) or link to a biography online.
What we will commit to do is to edit, do formatting (links, etc.) if you are not comfortable with html, and moderate the comments so that it is a safe place for you to express your ideas.

You can get an idea of the topics of interest to our readers by reviewing a couple of weeks of posts and comments, or looking at the categories on the right. Just pointing to books or papers you think are valuable or interesting (and why you think so) is also something we’d appreciate. Book reviews are of interest. Finally, any feedback on the blog, including suggestions for improvement, are always appreciated. Please email to me ([email protected]) and/or Martin ([email protected]).