State of Oklahoma December 1995
Exhibit 1: Oklahoma Government Is a Big Business-Spending $7.4 Billion Annually
Source: Executive Budget Information
Changes to this structure have been recommended time and time again. Any real change, however, will require constitutional reform. The state's Constitution, which was praised as an instrument of advanced democracy in 1907, has many elements which are more of a hindrance than a help in the state's development. This 50,000-word document is not only too complex and unwieldy to serve the people well, but it is also very difficult to change.
Ultimately, the issue is one of accountability. When responsibility is diffused, no one can be held accountable for results. American businesses have found that it is much more effective to give managers and employees responsibility to achieve defined goals and objectives, measure their performance and hold them accountable for results. By restoring executive responsibility, implementing performance-based budgeting and using other modern management tools, Oklahoma can focus employees on government's most important purpose-providing the highest quality services at the lowest possible cost.
A RATIONAL APPROACH TO GOVERNANCE
The Governor's Commission on Government Performance believes that the current structure impedes the state's ability to move ahead in an increasingly competitive economy and to improve the quality of life for our people. Until the basic structure makes sense, it will be impossible to achieve the efficiency and service delivery improvements so vital to our future.
The Commission concluded that the two major obstacles standing in the way of improving the efficiency and quality of state services are a complex, out-of-date Constitution and a weak "chief executive officer." Until we change these basics, other reforms will have little impact on the operation of government.
Recommendation: Change the "single subject" constitutional requirement.
Generally speaking, the Constitution can be amended in two ways: the Legislature can call a Constitutional Convention-as required by law to be brought to the people for a vote every 20 years-or specific subjects can be put on the ballot for a vote, based on either legislative initiative or an "Initiative Petition." In practice, however, there have not been regular Constitutional Conventions and the state's strict interpretation of the "single subject" rule, which allows only one subject to be included in an initiative to revise the Constitution, has presented difficulties in effecting reforms in a coordinated manner.
Recommendation: Reduce the number of elected executive officials to strengthen executive leadership and improve management.
Oklahoma has a "plural executive" form of government. We elect 11 state officials-the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, State Treasurer, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Insurance Commissioner, State Auditor and Inspector, Labor Commissioner and three Corporation Commissioners-far more than neighboring states and almost twice the national average. It may seem as though the more elected officials, the more voice the people have. The truth is that the large number of elected officials results in inconsistent public policy.
While other states have been moving toward reducing the number of elected officials, Oklahoma has bucked the trend. The total number of elected executive officers in the 50 states dropped a whopping 42 percent-from 772 in 1972 to 446 in 1992-at the same time Oklahoma actually added the position of Labor Commissioner.
Exhibit 2: Current Structure of Oklahoma's Executive Branch
Note: Shaded areas are current executive branch elected offices
Exhibit 3: A New Model for Executive Accountability and Effectiveness
Note: Shaded areas are proposed executive branch elected offices
This Commission believes that there are good reasons to follow the lead of other states in this regard. First and foremost, reducing the number of elected officials will empower the Governor to be accountable to the voters for management of the executive branch. In addition, this shift will minimize friction among elected officials and ensure that agencies' public policies are consistent, effective and strategic.
Certain positions, such as the State Auditor and Inspector and Attorney General, require a high degree of independence and should remain elected offices. Other positions-such as the Superintendent of Public Instruction, Insurance Commissioner, Corporation Commissioners, Labor Commissioner and State Treasurer-should be changed to appointed positions. In addition, the Governor and Lieutenant Governor should run as a team to provide a unified approach to managing Oklahoma state government.
Recommendation: Strengthen the cabinet structure to further clarify executive authority and accountability.
Study after study, from as far back as 1928 to as recently as 1990, has called for fundamental change to improve the effectiveness of Oklahoma's state government. The primary recommendation? To provide the chief executive officer more authority to manage state government.
Despite this common refrain, the chief executive's ability to manage state government remains severely limited by the huge number of boards, commissions and agencies that operate without direct responsibility or accountability to the Governor. For example, while the Departments of Education, Higher Education and Human Services consume $2.6 billion-more than 66 percent of the state's budget-those responsible are essentially outside the Governor's sphere of influence.
What we have is a situation where the chief executive officer presents an executive budget and major executive agencies promote their own competing interests; where the chief executive officer can call a meeting and key managers do not have to come. It is no way to run the state's largest business.
Furthermore, the state's fragmented organization and management processes lack clear lines of authority and accountability, producing an unresponsive, duplicative and costly state government. We were amazed to discover, for instance, that there are eight different agencies and boards with responsibilities for the regulation of the state's oil and gas industry, and seven agencies responsible for activities related to water, land and environmental management.
The Commission believes that the state would do better with a strong cabinet comprised of offices that reflect the entire interests of the state. Cabinet secretaries would be appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. Cabinet secretaries should be responsible for implementation of both statutory duties and the Governor's policies, as follows:
Boards and commissions best provide policy direction and oversight, rather than direct operational and administrative management. Members of these boards and commissions would, for the most part, be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Governor.
REENGINEER ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING
Like any large organization, Oklahoma's state government can benefit from applying modern management and reengineering principles. These principles are designed to increase productivity, streamline work processes, optimize staffing levels and improve services to the organization's customers.
The Commission emphasizes that reengineering is not about eliminating positions to get quick- fix financial savings, but about rethinking work from top to bottom. It is not about moving organizational boxes on a piece of paper, but about focusing on how the work can be done better. It is not about automation, but about designing new processes that take advantage of technology. Reengineering is, above all, a powerful tool that can help the state restructure work, eliminate unnecessary activities and fulfill its mission.
Recommendation: Reengineer state government functions to improve productivity and service delivery.
We believe the big answers to improving state government lie in restructuring and reengineering the organization to focus employees on service delivery. Following the lead of the nation's most successful public and private organizations, Oklahoma must streamline its organization and operation. That means assessing the relevance of each agency to the state's mission, grouping related functions to minimize administrative costs, avoiding fragmentation among departments with similar missions and establishing clear lines of authority to increase accountability.
When the Governor's Performance Team applied these guidelines to agencies that represent the majority of the state's budget, they found many opportunities for improvement. While we recognize that any specific action will require thorough investigation of financial and service implications, we believe it is appropriate that the state consider:
Creating a strong Secretary of Health and Human Services to coordinate all related activities in a single system accountable for results and prepared for the inevitable challenges ahead
Restructuring the governance of education to provide an integrated approach across all systems that is led by a strong Secretary of Education accountable to the Governor
Consolidating the activities of the Oklahoma Department of Transportation and the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority into a single transportation organization
Centralizing oversight and management of the state's technology resources
Consolidating the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission, the Department of Labor and Workers' Compensation Court into a single labor and employment agency
Removing the Oklahoma Wheat Commission, Soybean Commission and Sheep and Wool Commission as state agencies by accelerating the sunset dates from July 2000 to July 1997
Consolidating the Office of the State Treasurer with the Office of State Finance to create a single agency responsible for financial oversight
Abolishing the Department of Tourism and Recreation and integrating its functions with related existing agencies
Recommendation: Redirect staff resources to meet the state's most pressing needs.
The Governor's Performance Team adopted an accepted organizational model for change, supported by modern management principles, and applied it to 12 agencies representing 84 percent of the state's budget. The analysis identifies 5,700-6,900 excess positions, the elimination of which would result in millions of dollars of savings. The potential first year financial impact could be as high as $200-250 million, growing to $1-1.2 billion over five years.
Exhibit 4: The Organizational Model for Change--Organization and Staffing Standards
Category: Benchmarked Standards
Management Layers: One-to-one reporting relationships are eliminated. A recommended number of management layers ranges between four or five, with a target maximum of six for unique organizations.
Span of Control: Recommended span of control is one manager per ten staffers, and in some instances higher. For highly-technical and policy-sensitive positions, a one-to-five span of control is recommended.
Clerical to Total Staff: Recommended clerical staff level is 15% (or less) of total staff.
Vacancies: Non-shortage vacancies that have been open for more than six months should be eliminated. Generally, long-term vacancies demonstrate that the agency has successfully reengineered the processes associated with those vacancies.
Consolidation and Merging of Units: Consolidate units with small numbers of employees into larger more efficient units.
Eliminating Work through Process Reengineering: A reengineering of work processes should be accompanied by a 10% to 25% reduction in tasks performed.
Central Office Staff: The largest percentage of reductions should be at the central office rather than service delivery level.
Skill Levels of Management: Managers in a reengineered work setting must learn to accept more responsibility, be given more flexibility and eliminate unnecessary work.
Source: KPMG
Our intent is to identify maximum savings while preserving the organization's capacity to fulfill its mission. We understand that "one-size-fits-all" standards need to be adjusted for particular circumstances but believe the standards represent reasonable targets.
We urge the Governor and agency heads to pursue potential savings and performance improvements by applying the successful experience of other large organizations. There are many good examples of how to examine mission and purpose, to map work processes and to better apply human and technological resources. We believe that identified staff reductions could be achieved through attrition and turnover over a reasonable period of time. In situations where attrition and turnover is insufficient to absorb displaced personnel, other options should be provided for retraining, job reassignments, outplacement services and severance pay.
Recommendation: Reduce rules and regulations to simplify state government administration and cut costs.
The maze of rules and regulations affecting state government-and Oklahoma's citizens-has grown to 23,500 sections covering 35,000 typewritten pages.
Let's simplify these rules and regulations so that people can understand them. Let's improve citizens' access and understanding of Oklahoma state agencies by eliminating unnecessary rules and start with a moratorium on new rules and regulations, except where mandated by federal law or public safety.
Recommendation: Reduce the cost of the state's professional and occupational licensing boards.
In 1994, $16.7 million in licensing fees were collected. The state ranks seventh in the nation in the amount of revenue per capita derived from licenses-which may place us at a cost disadvantage. In 1994, $1.9 million was passed to the state's general fund-in effect further "taxing" workers and professionals to subsidize general government operations.
Exhibit 5: Oklahoma's Licensing Revenue Is Much Higher Than Our Neighbors'
Source: U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, "State Government Tax Collections," 1991
In Oklahoma, 38 separate agencies, boards and commissions in nine cabinets regulate and license occupational and professional licenses. The inevitable duplication adds unnecessary costs for administration, license processing, records storage and retrieval and complaint tracking and investigation. All fees of non-appropriated professional and occupational licensing boards should be directed to improving services and reducing costs for customers. Cabinet secretaries should undertake internal efforts to consolidate similar functions, simplify licensing processes and reduce costs.
Go to next section.
Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.
Alternative Proxies:
