William C. Adams
Professor of Public Policy and Public Administration
The George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052

With Andrew S. Goldsmith, Damian A. McKenna, and Philippe S. Rosse
 

In 1986, Charles Levine and Rosslyn Kleeman saw the Federal government as having increasing problems in attracting and retaining talented and motivated college graduates. They feared that "the situation may be sufficiently dire that the civil service is experiencing what amounts to a ‘quiet crisis’ that if left unattended could produce major breakdowns in government performance in the future."

These concerns did not originate in the 1980s. In 1964, for example, a Brookings Institution study forecasted that the Federal government would face serious problems competing with business to hire the highly skilled workers that both sectors would need. Despite such early warnings, by the late 1980s, the "quiet crisis" was becoming a little louder. For example, one study (Johnston, 1988) projected the need for a more highly trained and specialized Federal workforce but predicted an increasing shortage of qualified, hireable candidates in the decade ahead. Other researchers, such as Ronald Sanders (1989), pointed to difficulties in appealing to high-caliber college graduates.

The most prominent findings were presented by the National Commission on the Public Service, headed by Paul Volcker. The "Volcker Commission" found "an erosion of student interest in public life." Among other things, the Commission concluded (p. 26): 

"According to the Commission’s sample of honor society students, the public service is not perceived as a place where talented people can get ahead. Few of the top graduates feel the Federal government can offer good pay and recognition for performance. Fewer still say a Federal job can be challenging and intellectually stimulating."

Research Questions and Scope

This research study was designed to contribute to this discussion by analyzing how academically successful students in now view careers in public service and specifically in the Federal government. Attitudes toward other types of public service careers will be examined elsewhere; this article, like the Volcker Commission, focuses on Federal jobs. The research reported in this article addresses two fundamental questions:

How do academically successful college seniors such as Phi Beta Kappas view typical Federal civil service jobs?

What factors most influence Phi Beta Kappas to want to work in the Federal government?

To identify plausible motivating factors (both pro and con) for careers in the Federal government, an extensive review of previous research was undertaken. Then, nine focus groups were held at the George Washington University (GWU); the University of Tennessee, Knoxville (UT,K); the Catholic University of America (CUA); and the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UM,BC). These focus groups were used to revise and polish the questionnaire and to search for any additional motivating factors not cited in the literature.⁽¹⁾

Because of the public service implications of this research, the executive committee of Phi Beta Kappa reviewed the survey and approved its distribution to PBK members. In March 1998, the questionnaire was mailed to PBKs, most of whom were undergraduate seniors. A total of 605 PBKs participated in this survey, a good response rate (41%) for a mail questionnaire.⁽²⁾

Impressions of Federal Jobs

To add clarity regarding Federal civil service jobs, the instrument underscored the following:

"This survey seeks your impressions of working for the Federal government (but not in the military and not as an elected politician) in jobs where recent college graduates might be employed."

Each factor was rated on a five-point scale ranging from "not at all" to "very" typical.   Figure 1 reports the percent of PBKs who ranked each factor as "very" or "mostly" typical of Federal jobs (i.e., three or four on the zero-to-four scale).

Federal jobs are widely viewed among PBKs as providing attractive benefits (82%) and job security (67%). In the words of one GWU focus group participant, you would get good "benefits and job security" and are "not likely to lose your job." However, far fewer PBKs presume that the starting salary (18%) or subsequent salary increases (30%) are attractive. "Money is better in the private sector," commented another GWU student, without prompting dissent.

About half of the PBKs gave Federal jobs credit for workplace diversity (52%), "opportunities for career advancement" (52%), and "supportive family leave policies" (51%).

The most negative scores reflected the apparently widespread assumption that Federal workers have bureaucratic straightjackets leaving little room to maneuver. Only 4% thought that a typical Federal job held by college graduates would allow "freedom to do your job your own way." Similarly, only 11% expected such a job to have "efficient procedures for conducting work."

Other students in the focus group at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville nodded in agreement when one said, "I think of the Federal government as a big bureaucracy that is not very efficient." Likewise, a GWU student said sarcastically, "Charting the course of government? I don’t think so."

Federal workers themselves did not have a positive reputation among most PBKs. Only 21% envisioned them as "capable co-workers." In that vein, a student at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, commented, "A lot of people who get jobs with the Federal government for life are just fixtures there and they aren’t real productive."

In addition, PBKs did not expect to find much in the way of a close office family among Federal workers. Only 30% anticipate a setting with "congenial social relations at the office" and just 15% expect to find "strong relations with co-workers outside the office." A GWU student contended, "You don’t find as much collaboration in government work as you do in the private sector."

One student at Catholic University explained why she thought "congenial social relations" would not be characteristic of Federal offices this way:

"I want good relationships with my co-workers because we’ll have to work well together. But, in a public administration job or desk job, you really don’t have to interact with co-workers too much. At least, that’s how I think of the Federal government."

Consistent with this skepticism, one GWU senior asserted:

"Maybe one in a thousand people turns out to be that shining star, but that [is] a rare case... I just don’t think that they make a difference in most Federal jobs."

"I’d feel like I was making copies of the posters for the rallies to save the whales – rather than being on the boat and saving the whales."

Finally, while 52% expect Federal jobs to offer "opportunities for career advancement," fewer believe that the rewards and recognition are "merit-based" (27%) or that advancements are accompanied by "personal growth and new skills" (22%). "You’re not going to make a name for yourself in the trenches in the government," noted one CUA student.

The Appeal of Federal Careers

Given these impressions of working for the Federal government, how many PBKs exhibit interest in such a career path? An affinity scale was created to calibrate their interest.

Stalwarts. A total of 13% of the PBKs said that working for the Federal government was "very appealing" and/or that it was their top preference over other options (state or local government, non-profits, business and the private sector). These pro-Federal PBKs are termed "Stalwarts." (See Figure 2.)

Sympathizers. Altogether, 14% of the PBKs consider a Federal job "fairly appealing" and ranked it as their second choice. These students are designated "Sympathizers." Some of these seniors were clearly struggling with the issue. One GWU senior said, "I’m graduating in May and I’m trying to decide whether I want to go into the private or public sector. Do I want to go into government service?"

Skeptics. All those who consider such a job less appealing and give it a lower priority – but do say that "at some point" they would be willing to "consider working for the Federal government" – were classified as "Skeptics." They constituted 38% of the PBKs.

Scorners. Those who did not expect to ever "consider working for the Federal government" at any time during their career comprised 35% of the PBKs. These PBKs most hostile to the idea of working for the Federal government were labeled "Scorners."

Predicting Affinity by 
Congruence Scores

What values and perceptions predict affinity for Federal careers among PBKs? Just knowing what PBKs think of the Federal government on the 21 factors reviewed above is not enough to determine affinity, because a particular factor may or may not be important to a particular PBK senior. Nor is knowing the career priorities of PBKs sufficient, because PBKs disagree as to whether Federal jobs would satisfy those priorities. What does matter is the congruence between the two.

The best predictors are "congruence scores" which were calculated as the perception of Federal jobs on a specific criterion weighted by the importance each PBK senior assigns to that criterion. That multiplication produces a low congruence score if a factor is either unimportant to a PBK or if Federal jobs are perceived as typically falling short on that factor. Conversely, the highest congruence score occurs when a factor is both identified as "very" important to a PBK’s career and believed to be "very" characteristic of typical Federal jobs.¹

Impact National Issues. Using standard stepwise multiple regression, three congruence scores emerged as the most powerful attitudinal predictors and are shown in Table 1. (To avoid cluttering the model with variables that added little to its explanatory power, .001 was used as the significance threshold for the stepwise entry into the regression equation.) 

By far, the strongest predictor is congruence on having "a real impact on national issues." PBK seniors who want to make a difference on society and who believe that the Federal government provides a serious chance to do that are far more inclined to want a Federal career than are other PBKs.
 

Table 1:  Predicting Phi Beta Kappa Affinity for Federal Careers
Multiple Correlation Coefficient: .51 (n=570)	Significance	Beta
Impact national issues Good starting salary Career advancement Undergraduate major Friends/family in field	.0001 .0001 .0010 .0001 .0001	.301  .148  .131  .195 .135

When the relationship is examined more closely, it appears even stronger than the multiple correlation coefficient (multiple R) suggests. As illustrated in Figure 3, when the personal value of wanting to impact national issues converges with the perception that Federal jobs often provide that opportunity, then about half or more of these PBKs want to work for the Federal government (i.e., Stalwarts).

Along those lines, several focus group observations echoed the following:

"I see it as a hierarchy—Federal on the top, state in the middle, and local on the bottom. Federal is the most attractive choice in terms of impact." (UM,BC)

Starting Salary. Stalwart PBKs do not want to take vows of poverty in order to make a difference on national issues. Those who valued an "attractive starting salary" – and did not consider starting Federal salaries to be as low as did other PBKs – were more inclined toward Federal jobs. While some analysts have dismissed financial incentives as a motivating factor, these findings show that among these PBKs it was a significant predictor that offered additional explanatory power, independent of "impacting national issues."

This does not mean that the Stalwarts imagined that they would soon become wealthy on a Federal payroll. Few said a good starting salary was "very" typical of a Federal job. However, Stalwarts tended to believe it was at least "somewhat" typical of Federal jobs – not "slightly" or "not at all" typical as Scorners tended to assert. One interpretation is that Stalwarts seemed to be satisfied with a secure, middle-class standard-of-living and believed that a Federal job would provide it. The Skeptics and Scorners tended to want more and believed that Federal jobs delivered less.

Career Advancement Opportunities. The third major attitudinal predictor was congruence on the desire for "opportunities for career advancement" and the belief that such opportunities were available in typical Federal jobs. The PBKs who found Federal jobs most appealing envisioned that they could effectively climb its career ladder.⁽³⁾

Three Dimensions. The top three attitudinal factors in predicting affinity for Federal jobs thus span the three key dimensions that were identified earlier in the factor analysis:

• The Altruism dimension – which emerged as "have a real impact on national issues" – is multicollinear with (but significantly stronger in its predictive power than) "make the world better" and "help other people directly."

• The Affluence dimension – captured by "attractive starting salary" – is multicollinear with (but notably stronger than) "attractive benefits" and "salary increases," and somewhat stronger than "job security."

• The Actualization dimension – primarily through "career advancement opportunities" – is somewhat multicollinear with affluence variables and with other actualization variables such as "personal growth and new skills," "challenging work," and "freedom to do your job your own way."

The PBK survey revealed additional dynamics beyond the convergence of value priorities and Federal perceptions. After entering the opinion variables first, the stepwise multiple regression process next allowed demographic and other contextual variables to compete for additional explanatory power. In addition to the three key opinion factors, two notable contextual variables emerged.

While demographics such as sex, race, and region were not strong enough to enter the regression equation, two factors did independently contribute additional predictive power beyond that accounted for by the three opinion variables discussed above. The two additional factors were the student’s undergraduate major and the student’s knowing Federal workers personally.

Undergraduate Major. Major (grouped into three tiers in terms of proximity to political science) offers significant additional explanatory power beyond that of the three leading opinion measures in the regression equation. The bivariate relationship between major and Federal career affinity is also dramatic.

PBK political science majors (used here as the umbrella term for political science as well as government, public affairs, and international affairs) were not all dreaming of law school. About half were Stalwarts (30%) or Sympathizers (17%) regarding working for the Federal government.

In contrast, fewer than one-third of the other social science majors were Stalwarts (14%) or Sympathizers (17%) regarding Federal employment. And, only about one-fifth of all other majors combined were either Stalwarts (9%) or Sympathizers (12%).

Federal Friends. Another contextual factor that surfaced in the regression analysis, independent of the attitudinal predictors, was the extent to which PBKs knew people who work for the Federal government. Despite anecdotes about dissatisfied Federal workers, they are not communicating much dissatisfaction to PBK students they know. It turned out that simply having Federal workers as family and friends correlates significantly and positively with favorable dispositions toward working for the Federal government.

On a variable that ranged from zero to three, PBKs were scored as to whether Federal workers were (1) members of their immediate family, (2) other relatives, and/or (3) good personal friends. Familiarity did not breed contempt. PBKs who were surrounded by Federal workers in all three categories were two and one half times more likely to be at least sympathetic toward Federal careers than were those with no such personal contacts (49% vs. 20%, respectively).

Impediments

Just because some PBK seniors say they would like to work for the Federal government does not mean that they ultimately will. The survey found two strong impediments to converting abstract interest into actual jobs: (1) Many PBKs have no idea how to pursue a Federal job. (2) Many PBKs suppose that applying for a Federal job is a "long, burdensome process."

Uncertain Steps. The relevant agree/neutral/disagree statement was phrased this way:

"If I wanted a job with the Federal government, I would know how to go about getting one."

Seniors viewed campus recruiters as accelerating the process of getting a job, but none of the students in the nine focus groups observed much happening in the way of recruitment for Federal jobs.

"I’ve never heard of a Federal government job recruiter coming to campus." (UT,K)

"There are applications for government jobs on campus, but I’ve never seen a Federal recruiter on campus." (GWU)

"I don’t know how to find a government job. I’m utilizing the campus job search." (UT,K)

"Applying for a Federal job is a long, burdensome process."

The results are not much different among the Stalwarts. While they may like the concept of having a real impact on national issues via a Federal career, only 17% think that securing such a job would not be a "long, burdensome process." A plurality (43%) believe the process is an onerous one. Others take an intermediate view or are not sure (39%).

In the tight labor market of the late 1990s, with many employers aggressively courting students as promising as PBKs, these are not minor obstacles. Even many Stalwarts may loose heart when faced with a choice between what they may see as tangible, imminent job prospects in the private sector versus the relatively unknown but presumed lengthy, arduous task of trying to secure a good Federal job.

A recent GWU graduate told one focus group:

"Some companies are in such desperate need of people [that] I was offered a job almost before I went in to interview ... But there are government jobs that I applied for where they said they couldn’t even get back to me for six months."

Federal jobs do not evoke favorable impressions among many Phi Beta Kappas. Most PBKs do envision attractive benefits and job security, but not much else that is positive. Only a minority of PBKs believe such jobs offer "opportunities to make the world better" (one-third) or that starting salaries are attractive (one-fifth). Few (one-fifth) consider Federal workers to be particularly capable and fewer still (one-twentieth) believe they are allowed much empowerment in how they do their jobs.

While outnumbered by those with more negative opinions, one out of every eight PBKs (13%) is decidedly attracted to working for the Federal government. Those who are most attracted are particularly likely to want careers that let them "have a real impact on national issues" and believe Federal jobs will enable them to do that. Those who value and are optimistic about Federal starting salaries and advancement opportunities are also more likely than other PBKs to want Federal careers.

Along with these attitudinal dynamics, PBKs are more likely to aspire to Federal jobs if they major in political science or a closely related field and if they have friends and relatives who work for the Federal government.

If the Federal government can successfully sign up the 13% of PBKs who are quite attracted to such careers, it will actually be getting more than its proportionate share of PBKs, because Federal civilian jobs constitute only about 2% of the total U.S. workforce. Yet, converting PBK interest into actual workers confronts at least two serious obstacles.  Large numbers of interested PBKs say they have no idea how to go about applying for a Federal job, but that they suppose that it is probably a long and burdensome process.

PBKs do not live in a vacuum, and the views reported here may well reflect the impressions of many more other academically successful seniors. Certainly, the unfavorable impressions of Federal jobs held by many highly educated students who are PBKs does not make Federal recruitment any easier.

The "quiet crisis" that Levine and Kleeman warned about has not disappeared. That crisis can be substantially mitigated to the extent that Federal departments and agencies can successfully bring onboard a substantial portion of the minority of PBKs and other successful students who are attracted to Federal employment. That crucial task, however, is confounded by the widespread reputation of Federal hiring practices as both obscure and onerous.

This paper was presented to the 1998 Conference of the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration; Boise, Idaho; and also published (in slightly shorter form) in The Public Manager (Summer 2000).  The research was supported by a grant from The Pew Charitable Trusts and conducted in collaboration with the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration and the George Washington University Department of Public Administration. The researchers owe additional thanks to Michael Brintnall, Amy Downey, Elizabeth Hubbard, Kathryn Newcomer, Paul Light, and Phi Beta Kappa.

Endnotes

(1)  These focus groups did not uncover any unexpected motivating factors, but they did help refine the language used to describe each factor in the questionnaire. They also contributed to sorting some broad concepts into more precise ones. For example, "good salary" was divided into "attractive starting salary" and "attractive salary increases over time." Also, participants saw "altruism/public service" as having three different thrusts – "chances to help other people directly" (personal, hands-on altruism), "opportunities to make the world better" (a macro-orientation with a wider scope) and "have a real impact on national issues" (an efficacy and policy orientation).

(2)  For a sample of this size, the standard confidence intervals (at the usual 95% level of probability) are plus or minus 4%, although the broader patterns reviewed here do not hinge on such narrow margins.  The large majority of those surveyed were seniors, but recipients also included a few second-semester juniors and some who may have just graduated. For convenience, references in the text generalize to the respondent pool as "seniors." 

(3)  Neither this congruence measure nor other parts of the survey directly addressed one perspective regarding "career advancement" which was voiced by a few of the focus group participants: "...first develop expertise in government then go to [a business job to] sell that skill."

(4) PBKs are hardly alone in thinking that the process is cumbersome. Levine and Kleeman (1986, p. 226) concur that the Federal government "has created confusing and frustrating processes for entry into the civil service."

References

 
Adams, William C. (2000) "MPAs View Federal Employment: Incentives and Impediments." Public Administration and Management: An Interactive Journal  (Vol. 5, No. 3).

Johnston, William B. (1988) Civil Service 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Kilpatrick, Franklin P, Milton C. Cummings, Jr., and M. Kent Jennings (1964). Image of the Federal Service. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

Levine, Charles H. and Kleeman, Rosslyn S., (1986) The Quiet Crisis of the Civil Service: The Federal Personnel System at the Crossroads. Washington, DC: National Academy of Public Administration.

Light, Paul C. (1995) Thickening Government : Federal Hierarchy and the Diffusion of Accountability. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

Sanders, Ronald. (1989) Public Service and Organizational Choice: An Expectancy Approach to Assessing the Federal Government's Standing as a Prospective Employer of Top College Graduates. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Washington, DC: The George Washington University.

Appendix A:  Exact Item Wording

• Attractive starting salary
• Attractive salary increases over time
• Attractive medical/retirement/other benefits
• Capable co-workers
• Challenging work
• Chances to help other people directly
• Congenial social relations at the office
• Diversity in the workplace
• Efficient procedures for conducting work
• Freedom to do your job your own way
• Have a real impact on national issues
• Job respected by your family and peers
• Job security (low risk of losing job)
• Merit-based rewards and recognition
• Modern, high-tech equipment/facilities
• Mostly low-pressure work days
• Opportunities for career advancement
• Opportunities to make the world better
• Personal growth and new skills
• Strong relations with co-workers outside the office
• Supportive family leave policies