How to improve government performance.

• Author: Roy, P. Norman

BILL CLINTON is probably the only major CEO in the country who has no idea how well or poorly the operations under his command really are doing. The heads of the major Federal agencies are in the dark as well. So is Congress. Unlike the CEOs of corporations, the President and his agency chiefs do not receive a steady stream of accurate financial data telling them whether operations are on course and achieving their goals. Instead. what they get are financial data that are notorious for their unreliability. When it comes to managing their operations, these government CEOs are helmsmen without compasses.

This is not an exaggeration. Rather, it is reported every year from the General Accounting Office (GAO), regardless of the party in power. George Bush, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, and the presidents that came before them all were flying blind. They didn't have the financial data they needed to make sound management decisions.

Clinton and Congress talk about bringing the deficit under control, but they are not giving improved financial management the priority it requires to get the job done. With nothing to measure results against, the government can't hope to improve performance. The waste that results from enormous inefficiencies in government systems is a major component of the Federal deficit. In 1990, Congress made a major effort to deal with the government's financial mismanagement by passing the Chief Financial Officers Act. Among other reforms, it calls for consistent accounting procedures. timely financial reports, and the appointment of chief financial officers at 23 of the largest agencies. Sixteen of the new CFOs must be nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate; the other seven can be appointed by the agency heads.

Though widely praised when it was passed, the CFO Act has not been given much of a chance to live up to its promise. It has fallen short because Clinton, and Bush before him, have been slow to recognize the importance of good financial management.

During the Bush Administration, CFO nominations were not taken very seriously. In nine major agencies with combined budgets exceeding $700,000.000,000, the CFO designation simply was added to an already existing administrative position. with little concern whether the nominee had the appropriate background. This basically was the approach taken before passage of the CFO Act, one that simply did not work.

Though Clinton has filled some CFO positions with people...