I attended a forum a few weeks ago where behavioral experts talked about projects underway to improve the performance of government programs by applying behavioral interventions. For example, if you want new employees to invest in their 401(k) retirement plans, there is a much higher participation rate in companies that require a new employee to reject – or opt-out – of participation, than in companies where employees are required to sign up – or opt-in – to participation.

The forum participants comprised a range of stakeholders in the federal performance and results management system:  agency performance improvement officers, strategic planners, program evaluation leaders, and priority goal leaders.  In addition, there were participants from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Federal agencies, Congress, the Government Accountability Office, the Congressional Research Service, academia, state and local government, unions, and non-profits – all of whom play a role in improving government performance.

More importantly, it introduces a select group of government leaders who offer their insights, outline successes, and tell us how they, in their own unique way, are making a difference in an era of fiscal austerity. Today’s conditions require government executives to go beyond simply doing more with less—to find smarter ways of doing business, using resources more efficiently, and investing them more wisely. The dramatic nature of this historical moment cannot be overstated. It is fully revealed by the depth of the vicissitudes being faced.

And the question was raised none too soon – President Obama that morning issued an executive order, “Promoting Efficient Spending,” directing more cuts in administrative costs, on top of the $2.1 billion already ordered, according to Government Executive.

Career Overview Jonathan D. Breul was the Executive Director of the IBM Center for The Business of Government and a Partner in IBM Global Business Services. The IBM Center for The Business of Government helps public sector executives improve the effectiveness of government with practical ideas and original thinking. The Center sponsors independent research by top minds in academe and the non-profit sector, and creates opportunities for dialogue on a broad range of public management topics.

A "twofer" is when you get two of something at once - sort of two for the price of one. That's what you would have gotten if you were at the National Press Club yesterday morning.

A series of presentations at the annual conference  of the National Academy of Public Administration focused on the complicated management challenges all levels of government will be facing upon the passage of any health care reform legislation.  As one participant noted: “There’s too much of a view that programs are self-executing and you just need more inspectors general and audits. . . that happened with the Recovery Act.”  The consensus seemed to be that this assumption clearly won't work for health care reform!

Yesterday, I described how Eggers and O’Leary examined implementation of big government initiatives from a process perspective.  Another NAPA conference session highlighted another book, “

Government Executive’s Alyssa Rosenberg hits the nail on the head in her Fed Blog today, “How Health Care Would Be Run.”  Her piece looks at the increased role of the Secretary of Health and Human Services in the Senate version of the bill.  The House version has significant roles for other agencies as well, and creates a new independent agency, the Health Choices Administration.

There has been flood of memos and guidance on procurement reform coming out of the White House and OMB in recent months.  But an open call for ideas was launched earlier this month via a collaborative project being undertaken by the General Service Administration, the National Academy of Public Administration, and a joint government/industry group called the American Council for Technology/Industry Advisory Council.