Teamwork is essential to the National Guard, and yet, when I was assigned as Deputy Director, I quickly discovered that there was conflict and disillusionment within and between our national public affairs office and the 54 state and territory public affairs offices. While I was provided sufficient latitude to make necessary changes at the national level, I had no such direct authority at the state level. I also learned that there were myriad issues at hand that contributed to tension and thwarted pride and cooperation among these professionals.
At the state level, our public affairs officers had two primary concerns. First, many of them expressed that they were being kept too distant from the General Officer they served. Some were assigned under an executive officer, others worked for a Chief of Staff, and still others were assigned to the Personnel Officer. In each case, they rightly argued, they were marginalized in their ability to give frank and direct feedback to the general in response to public affairs issues. Second, almost all of these state public affairs officers complained that they their positions were maintained at the GS-12 level, while many of their counterparts in the Army and Air Force who had much less responsibility, were being hired at the GS-13 level. In fact, in their roles they are responsible for all public affairs actions, internal and external, speechwriting, newsletters, leadership counsel, supervision, national and international awareness, and countless other duties in support of a state National Guard ranging in numbers to the several thousands.
At the same time I was learning of these challenges, I learned that there were similar concerns in my immediate office. The staff, in particular the division chiefs, did not feel compensated for their work, again comparing their responsibilities to their counterpart military public affairs professionals. In their case, they were responsible for policy, guidance, leadership, and oversight for an organization of over 460,000 members, more than 400 public affairs professionals nationwide, and leadership counsel to well over 100 General Officers. They were GS-14’s. By way of comparison, the Department of Defense employed GS-14’s to be Media Desk officers and answer queries. The second issue that adversely impacted the spirit and esprit de corps of the national staff was that their organizational structure did not mirror other institutions and caused confusion when interacting with other military public affairs counterparts. It was also a vertical structure that minimized opportunity for growth and discouraged participation.
No singular solution was going to solve all of these conflicts and ensure an inclusive workplace that fostered development and growth. So I applied a multi-tiered approach. Since I could not direct or mandate the position assignment for public affairs officers at the state level, I wrote a personal and informal letter to their General officers and explained the value of an immediate and personal relationship. I cited examples of problems where there was no direct contact and other success stories from where there was an immediate relationship. I provided doctrine references that supported my position. I closed with a description of how I was developing my staff in support of the Chief of the National Guard Bureau so they would have a model to imitate. I followed-up in person during media training and other workshops with these Generals to reinforce the message. Within a year, over 50 of the 54 state public affairs officers were assigned on the personal staff working directly for their General Officer. In response to their GS-12 grade, although not the direct supervisor, I drafted completely new position descriptions for them that accurately reflected their current duties. I formally submitted them to the human resources offices for re-classification who, in turn, performed desk audits and confirmed the level and scope of work. As a result, all 54 state public affairs officer positions were upgraded to GS-13’s. The second and third order effects were increased morale, enhanced relationships, higher quality hires and longer tours of satisfied and productive employees.
At the national level, I accomplished the same task for our division chiefs, who were upgraded to GS-15’s. Not only did it inspire them and their immediate subordinates, but it fostered an atmosphere where National Guard Bureau Public Affairs became a diverse and valued place to work. Our staff immediately began earning more invitations to substantive meetings with decision makers and applications to work in our office tripled. Finally, I re-organized our Division structure from four offices to six, mirroring the design of our military counterparts and allowing for more productive matrix management. Our states, our leadership, and our military counterparts have all commented on ability to coordinate, provide timely and useful feedback, and accomplish the mission. Based in large measure on my ability to lead people, I have been asked to apply for the position of civilian Director upon my pending military retirement.
Stoneking Strategic Communications (SSC) 