- Retired Army Colonel to Challenge Stefanik
- Top Races to Watch in 2016: The Southwest
- Top Races to Watch in 2016: Mid-Atlantic States
- Top Congressional Races in 2016: The West
- Murphy to Announce He'll Seek Rematch With Blum (Updated)
Next month, the Congressional Management Foundation and the Society for Human Resource Management will release a new study, “Life in Congress: The Member Perspective.” It is based on CMF research during our 35-year history and a confidential survey we conducted of 25 members of Congress about their work habits, interests and goals. One of the interesting findings relates to how members view their goals. Nearly all members (95 percent) agreed, “My staff clearly understands . . . what I’m trying to accomplish.” However, only 43 percent said, “I have written, defined goals for what I want to accomplish this term in Congress.”
The CMF views this incongruity as somewhat disturbing. We know that it is challenging to have clear goals without written goals. In more than 500 strategic-planning and management assessment sessions the CMF has conducted in the past decade, we see a lack of clear strategic goals as a leading factor for a legislator’s ineffectiveness.
This makes perfect sense. Selecting three to five strategic goals forces members of Congress to make tough choices on which issues or groups they will focus attention and precious resources. It forces politicians to do something they hate doing: saying “no” to a group or issue. However, if members do not make these tough decisions, they will face one of two outcomes: 1. if they are in a safe district, they will become ineffective, or 2. if they are in an unsafe district, they will become former members. Fortunately, there are ways to focus a legislator’s attention on some clear goals.
Strategic goals should be derived from two sources: the member’s vision/mission and an analysis of the member/district-state strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. Goals should involve multiple staff members, ideally involving a partnership of Capitol Hill and district/state staff members. They also should have clear metrics to assess office/staff performance. Finally, a key question is for the goal to answer “why” or “to what end.” Why is this goal relevant to the member and his/her constituents? What ends will it achieve?
The embodiment of strategic goals is the action plan, which outlines how the goals will be achieved. The strategic goals are the “what” of the process; the action plan is the “how.” Having a clear written document provides a reality checkpoint in the final stages of strategic planning. Finally, the plan acts as an accountability agent — a reference tool for the member and management to use in assessing individual staff members and team performance.
Nonetheless, the CMF recognizes that the greatest challenge of managers/staff is to get a member to make the tough choices — to be able to say “yes” to a few initiatives and “no” to many others. For them, we offer the following historical guidance.
In the 17th century, Sweden’s King Gustavus Adolphus wanted to create the mightiest warship ever built, the Vasa. He hired the best shipbuilders and laid before them his grandiose plan. The shipbuilders began designing and then constructing an amazing ship. The king took an unusual interest in construction, examining every detail. He directed the builders to double the number of guns and to change the ship’s basic engineering to make room for articles of vanity such as statues.