According to this article, of those surveyed, “only about 17 percent of federal agencies have implemented and are consistently using Earned Value Management (EVM), and 59 percent of the federal professionals lacked earned value management training.”  There are many prerequisites for effective performance management in government. First, agency or department mission must be well articulated and shared throughout the organization. All IT investment must be aligned with agency missions and have quantifiable value to them. In addition, outcomes needed to achieve the mission must be known and must be measured quantitatively and/or qualitatively. Most critically, people responsible for implementing performance management must be motivated to accomplish these outcomes. Even when these conditions are met, it is often difficult to determine exactly how IT supports the agency or department mission. Developing appropriate measures, analysis methods, and optimization processes to give valuable performance information takes commitment, skill, and expertise. EVM is a tool that provides valuable performance information. The basis of EVM is that work is earned as it is performed, and as long as the cost of the resource is as planned in dollars or labor hours or other measurable quantities, the project is on track, and differences in what is earned versus planned are treated as variances and addressed. EVM is intended to encourage effective internal technical, cost, and schedule management control systems and provide timely progress reports.  Government agencies tend to have more success when managing projects with EVM. This early warning approach can forecast problems and minimize risk by allowing quick corrective actions.  EVM has been used on large federal projects since the 1960s, and OMB is increasingly requesting that agencies use EVM and requires EVM on all capital asset acquisitions.

Sadly, as the Federal Computer Week article indicates, not much has changed since IDC Government Insights conducted a Performance Management Survey in June of 2007. Findings from the IDC survey indicate that only 37% of federal respondents use EVM (see, U.S. Government Performance Management - GI211086, March, 2008.) In examining the drivers for, and attitudes and perceptions toward performance management, limited resources and budget constraints topped the government challenges in carrying out performance management activities. Given the recent survey results referred to in the Federal Computer Week article, this issue may have become a self-fulfilling constraint for government. If agencies cannot assess programs and communicate results to mission, oversight will become more stringent, and funding, tied to implementing program success, may be delayed/terminated. If implemented well, performance management cannot only cut costs and save resources but also measure and optimize IT programs, projects, and contracts.

So in this era of significant change, including Web 2.0 and citizen engagement, it’s time for government to adopt better performance practices, and time for agencies to train managers on effective, proven tools and processes. Government will become more efficient, and, who knows, may even have better results to share and post on IT dashboards.

Be sure to join us for our upcoming free Web conference on July 14: Expand and Contract: Successfully Meeting U.S. Federal Government IT Priorities. We'll be talking about how performance management impacts agency Web 2.0 implementation and agency transparency efforts.