Comments on: ODNI Pursues Intelligence Compensation Reform http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/04/odni_pursues_intelligence_comp.html Secrecy News from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy Sat, 28 Nov 2009 00:31:30 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: GroupIntel http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/04/odni_pursues_intelligence_comp.html/comment-page-1#comment-547 GroupIntel Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:58:38 +0000 http://fasweb.beacontec.com/blog/secrecy/2006/04/odni_pursues_intelligence_compensation_reform.html#comment-547 <strong>Pay for Performance</strong> A good post at Secrecy News about changes in how intelligence officers are compensated. Perhaps it is because I can work like a fiend that I find the prospect of breaking free of the General Schedule so attractive. Knowing that the geezer with 30 year... Pay for Performance

A good post at Secrecy News about changes in how intelligence officers are compensated.
Perhaps it is because I can work like a fiend that I find the prospect of breaking free of the General Schedule so attractive. Knowing that the geezer with 30 year…

]]> By: Allen Thomson http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2006/04/odni_pursues_intelligence_comp.html/comment-page-1#comment-546 Allen Thomson Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:33:08 +0000 http://fasweb.beacontec.com/blog/secrecy/2006/04/odni_pursues_intelligence_compensation_reform.html#comment-546 >"You should all receive competitive compensation based on your competence and contribution to mission, not just on longevity," Gen. Hayden wrote. This idea has been around for a long time and has always run up against the problem of defining and quantifying competence and contribution. It's particularly problematic for the broad middle ranks of the workforce who are neither obvious superstars nor obvious deadwood. >”You should all receive competitive compensation based on your competence and contribution to mission, not just on longevity,” Gen. Hayden wrote.

This idea has been around for a long time and has always run up against the problem of defining and quantifying competence and contribution. It’s particularly problematic for the broad middle ranks of the workforce who are neither obvious superstars nor obvious deadwood.

]]>