You'd think that waking up every day in places such as Yellowstone, Olympic, Acadia, Yosemite or Rocky Mountain national parks would be part of a dream job. But a survey of federal employees shows that those working for the National Park Service are far from being the most content with their jobs.
In fact, according to the 2009 Best Places to Work survey, the National Park Service ranks surprisingly close to the bottom of all federal agencies in terms of job satisfaction: out of 216 agencies, the Park Service stood 160th. Topping the list were the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Government Accountability Office.
Why? The respondents pointed to poor training and development, ineffective leaders, poor teamwork, a lack of strategic management, and poor quality of life when it comes to a work/life balance. Distressingly, the Park Service’s overall reputation as a good place to work has gotten worse in recent years, according to the survey, the fourth annual.
While the latest overall index score of 59.8 was a tad higher than last year's 58.2 overall score, it was down from 62.5 noted in 2005 and 64.1 recorded in 2003.
In some specific categories, the Park Service garnered a score of just 38.5 out of 200 on the question of effective leaders, 38.3 out of 185 in the "family friendly culture and benefits" category, and 40.1 out of 200 in "performance based rewards and advancement. While the highest score was a 78.3 out of 120 in "employee skills/mission match," that was down from both the 2005 score of 78.8 and the 2003 score of 81.0 in that category.
The Park Service's National Leadership Council, which is comprised of the agency's director, deputy directors, regional directors, associate directors and assistant directors, says it is working to reverse the trends, but that it won't happen overnight.
"A number of initiatives in the learning and development arena were initiated in 2008 in response to the 2007 ranking. We will continue to focus on carrying these through to completion, as well as identify further workplace enrichment initiatives in the coming months," the leadership council said. "Emphasis in areas such as communication, supervisory skills development, and work-life flexibilities will support the NPS goal of becoming a best place to work in the federal government.
"Combined with the prior survey results (we're having the analysis done right now that compares 2002 with 2004 with 2006 and now 2008), we take the trends seriously and the similarity of responses to certain questions seriously," added the council. "Our training and development revitalization efforts over the past year-and-a-half are a direct result of 2006 results and simply haven't had time to pay off yet in terms of morale impact.
"It is important to note that real change in morale takes sustained effort over a number of years to find out what are the biggest concerns among the large number identified and to come up with meaningful ways to redress those concerns that will result in noticeable differences in the way the workforce perceives the issue."
Some of the concerns, however, were pointed out to the agency back in 2006 when Julie Elmore, then a graduate student working on her master's degree at Duke University, did her thesis project on National Park Service Employee Satisfaction and Employee Retention. That project, in which Ms. Elmore received responses from more than 2,500 Park Service employees, pointed to a number of areas of employee discontent. Some of the comments were quite biting:
* "In my park, I've seen a job created to employ the girlfriend of upper management as well as to move her entire family stateside. ... I watched my former superintendent play solitaire on his office computer for hours as well as to print out reams of paper from the Internet on recipes and ads for buying a boat."
* "We continue to put out large fires but fail to prevent the fires or see the cause."
* "Today's reality is that NPS managers at all levels are forced to concentrate all their energies on 'putting out fires' all day, every day. 'Doing more with less' is no longer an option. If preservation and protection of park lands is still important to the American people, then the case must be made to increase budgets and to hire and retain quality personnel."
* "We need to show pride and recognition to those who do a good job. This motivation goes a long way. We need to build pride again in our mission and our agency. People will see the difference and want to be a part of it. We have to build it from within, person to person, not with a national campaign and button."
* "Quit pulling out leaders and filling with cronies. Hire good people and believe in them. Let them do their work without the fear that they could be removed if a stakeholder isn't happy."
* "I have a short time left before I am eligible for retirement, and cannot wait. I believe in the mission of the National Park Service and it is extremely difficult to watch how that mission has been purposely and effectively corrupted and derogated over the past six years. Ideologues have hired ideologies."
How might the Park Service improve its overall ranking? According to the Best Places to Work survey, effective leadership at the top of the agency is the ticket:
For the fourth time in a row, the primary driver of job satisfaction in the federal space is effective leadership. While this finding is no surprise, the reasons behind it are. In a first, the 2009 Best Places rankings break down which factors shape employees’ views of their leadership. Conventional wisdom holds that the greatest influence on an employee’s satisfaction is his or her immediate supervisor. However, the 2009 Best Places rankings reveal that it is actually the quality of an agency’s senior leadership that has the greatest bearing on employee views.
Comments
I believe that they "reassigned" those bad seed managers to the Smokies.
Sigh.
And the Smokies management are also responsible for the national debt, bad breath in dogs, and most of Miley Cyrus' wardrobe decisions.
Rick,
I believe you are starting to see the light! Congratulations.
NPS is nothing but seasoned, white men who hire those that make them comfortable. Their latest campaign to attract the next generation is useless. This agency will always struggle with new talent by hindering potential talent and not embarking on change. If you do enough research, there is actually a movement of millenials that are voicing their frustration of the agency misusing their skillsets.
Lastly, the agency has no respect for humans. I reported and documented many accounts where my supervisor was out of bounds. I even caught him going through my personal belongings. Nothing was done to reprimand him or even question his horrid work ethic. Even after I received new management in a different department, he was reported "stalking" my desk by myself and other coworkers. The agency did nothing. I wouldn't recommend this agency to pile of feces. If you have moral, passion and dreams, don't let work there.
Feel your pain
I have worked seasonally, and term, since 9/11. Sadly, things seem continuing in bad trends. However, I must disagree that Millenials is the magic solution. Diversity, yes. But as a 57 year-old who has been repeatedly supervised by younger managers, I must say I don't see any plausible improvements. Careerism is careerism, and it corrupts absolutely regardless of age.
What is really required is a "browning" of faces. When this diversity is truly, and honestly embraced, a new culture will come with it. My best, and most ethical, colleagues have been non-white!
A Couple of points,
1. If they were working a Fee Station it is very likely you were talking to seasonal employees. This means they haven't been in the Agency long enought to see the bad actions, they will leave in 6-months before the crap starts to stack up too high and will not be as subjected to bad actions from those looking to climb the management ladder because seasonals do not poss any competition as they have no ability for carrer advancement as long as they are seasonal.
2. Most of us will tell you it's our dream job because it likely was at one time.
-However, it takes a while before you realy see what is going on so permanents and long term seasonals are the ones who know the truth.
-There is no use telling your real feelings to a park visitor/stranger who you've never seen before or will ever see again and who is so excited to see the park that they likely came up to you saying "Wow, what a great place this is! You are so lucky to work here!"
-Finally, you never know who a visitor is, what a visitor will say, and being caught complaining to visitors can land you in some hot water with management.
I agree with your first paragraph but disagree with your second. Good leadership is elusive but not exclusive. Just as highering a younger generation didn't change a toxic work environment, hiring more more "brown people" or more males/female wont do it either. You need to hire good leadership that knows the mission of the NPS, respects the workers, is willing to put their personal carrer on the line to help the agency and the workers not just make a show of looking good to get the next promotion. Finding people that should be promoted and not the ones that work hardest to be promoted is what you need to find out how to do. You can't do that by just looking at sex or color.
The park I currently work for has lost well over half of it's staff because fo a toxic management team. The team consists of all Native American and White managers half are male and half are female. They are all awful, it doesn't matter what race or sex they are. The problem is our best members of the parks staff (regaurdless of color) are stuck at the lowest levels and will remain stuck there becuse they are honest enough not to lie on their resumes and don't throw others under the bus for there own mistakes. In fact they are more likely to except critizim for work that isn't even their fault. Meanwhile, our worst staff that become managers will walk all over others to make themselves look good and there is no efective way to get rid of bad managers. Reporting the abuse doesn't do anything, the results of investigations into bad management are kept secret, and the only way to get rid of a bad manager is to promote them to another postion so they are not directly over you. Thus our worst managers got great reviews and were eventually promoted because all of us wanted them gone.
Note, To the NPS: You need an accountablity system to get rid of bad managers. Unfortunately the higest ranks of the NPS are now filled with bad managers so that is unlikely to happen.
Note, to hiring officials: Until there is a way for lower level staff to get rid of bad managers don't ask the boss of someone you want to be a manager how bad thay are the worst among us are good as sucking up to a boss. The staff under them know how bad they are however, until the NPS comes up with a system where lower level staff actually have an acceptible way to get rid of a bad manager, hiring officicials of managers need to ask for reference checks from the people that once worked for them but no longer do. Those people don't have an interest in promoting toxic managers because it is the only way to get rid of them.