ORD
Workshop
Managing
Change
US EPA Research and Development
December 2-5,1996
Williamsburg, Virginia

-------
The goal of the workshop Is to improve
the delivery	of high-quality
0 Understanding the new direction in ORD;
0 Building the ORD team and improving communication;
0 Sharing views and listening to all participants; and
Developing action plans and change agents to
achieve specific organizational improvements.

-------
QeneraC Information
The workshop begins at 1:00 pm on Monday, December
2 and ends after lunch on Thursday, December 5.
Registration/Welcome Desk
Workshop registration is from 8:00 am - 5:00 pm on
Monday, December 2nd in the Center Room, next to
the hotel registration desk.
Conference Office
A conference office will be set up in the lower level of
the Cascades Conference Center. A message board
will be available there from Monday - Thursday.
Messages: Phone: (804) 565-8822
FAX: (804) 565-8827
Meals
**¦ *¦ ¦
y	f	'	'
Monday evening ?J\te fare
Tuesday	breakfast, ttijjcb-- and dinner
Wednesday breakfast, lunch, and dinner;
(optional off-^ite dinner)
; Thursday	breakfast and iunch
Breakfast starts at 7:00 am everyday at the Cascades and the Woodlands Grill.

-------
'Day 1
Monday, 'December 2nd
Overall Change
The Center Room
8:00 - 5:00 Registration
Commonwealth Hall
1:00	Workshop Begins
1:00 - 1:30 Welcome/Purpose
Bob Huggett
1:30 - 4:45 Guest Speaker on
Organizational Change
David Noer
4:45 - 5:00 Wrap-up and Overview of ..
Upcoming Events
u, '?<
(lower level)

5:30 - 7:00 Poster Session/Gallery Walk/
Lite Fare
' r
' I 3
* # # #
Cascades Meeting Center
¦ :,r\\
00: t

-------
'Day 2
Tuesday, (December 3rd
Improvement Opportunities
7:00	Breakfast -
Cascades or Woodlands Grill
Commonwealth Hall
8:00 -8:15 Introduction and Overview
8:15 -10:00 Review of ORD Data
10:00- 10:30 Break
10:30 - 11:30 Brainstorming the ORD
Improvement Opportunities
11:30 - 12:00 Identifying Priority Issues
12:00-1:00 Lunch
The Cascades Meeting Center/Center Room
Break-Out Rooms
1:00 - 2:30 Selecting Top Priorities
2:30 - 3:00 Break
3:00 - 4:30 Framing the Issues
7:00	Dinner - Commonwealth Hall

-------
Day 3
Wednesday, (December 4 th
Framework for Action
7:00	Breakfast -
Cascades or Woodlands Grifl
Commonwealth Hall
8:00 - 8:10 Introduction and Overview
8:10 - 8:45 Presentation of the Improvement
Opportunities
The Cascades Meeting Center/Commonwealth Hall
Break-Out Rooms
8:45 - 11:30 Action Planning on the
Improvement Opportunities
11:30-2:30 Lunch

i \
Commonwealth Hall	: f
2:30 - 5:00 Panel Presentations on the
Improvement Opportunities
7:00
Dinner -
Garden Room or Shields Tavern

-------
(Day 4
^Ihursday, (December 5tfi
Commitment to Action
7:00	Breakfast -
Cascades or Woodlands Grill
The Cascades Meeting Center
Break-Out Rooms
8:00 - 9:45 Lab/Center/Office Discussions
Commonwealth Hall
10:00 - 11:25 Actions and Commitments
11:25 - 11:45 Summary
11:45 - 12:00 Meeting Evaluation
The Cascades
12:15 - 2:00 "Launch" Lunch
* Check-out time is at noon.
(Luggage can be stored in Commonwealth Hall)
Conference Rooms will be available for the
remainder of the day if Labs/Centers/
Offices would like to continue to meet.
!

-------
%Wam^6imcWoo(&mds
*—		.*<-		-.Ufi^s
Vr	J .	iAi/N/vrki Aiific -w» ^
^ -*,4 -¦< ¦¦--» *—
» -• ^i '.«
r* V i
>5


^®i -	>
&hrf ' T
FTOtfSS ? RAH
commonwealth hall
REGiSTRATlON OFFICE
1
S Self-service moms
include canned soft
drinks and free
ice cubes
• Transportation system
bus stop
VISITOR CENTER
W Washers and Dryers

-------
US EPA Research and Development
Success and
Accomplishment
Poster Session
December 2,1996

-------
NRMRL
A1. Biogenic Emissions
Larry Jones and Chris Geron (919)541-4639
NRMRL RTF
A poster focused on the major national and regional
contributions of biogenic emissions to total VOC
emissions which produce ozone compliance
problems will be presented. Ozone control
strategies must produce NOx emission reductions in
areas with high biogenic VOC emissions (biogenic
emissions are over half of all annual VOC emissions
and are an even higher proportion during ozone
episodes). Without this knowledge, Agency control
strategies could have focused on ineffective VOC
only reductions resulting in the waste of millions of
dollars of VOC emission control expenditures.
A2. Navy Shipboard Chillers
Bill Rhodes and Ted Brna (919)541-2683
NRMRL RTP
NRMRL/APPCD initiated a program to find
replacements for Ozone Depleting Substances. In
this search, one chemical in the family of
hydrofluorocarbon (HFC)-236 was found which upon
synthesis, evaluation of properties, computer
modeling, application testing, and safety testing was
found to be acceptable as a replacement for the
refrigerant in all Navy shipboard chillers that used
chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-114. Utilizing HFC-236fa
as retrofit is estimated to save the Navy between
$300 million and $500 million (depending on the
number of ships converted) compared to having to
completely replace the chillers and HFC-236fa has
no ozone depletion potential.
2

-------
A3. Landfill "Waste" Gas and Fuel Cells
Bill Rhodes arid Ron Spiegel: (919)541-7542
NRMRL RTP
In order to reduce methane emissions in waste
gases from landfills, NRMRL/APPCD has developed
a gas cleanup system and coupled it to a fuel cell to
prevent emissions, produce electricity, and provide
incentives for incorporating this technology into
similar end uses. The coupled technology has been
demonstrated at a landfill site in Broton, Connecticut
in cooperation with Northeast Utilities. International
Fuel Cells is a cooperator in this effort.
A4. Fine Particulate Matter from
Combustion Sources:
Physical, Chemical, and Health Effects
Characteristics
Bob Hall and Andy Miller: (919)541-2920
NRMRL RTP
Work has begun to connect an understanding of
combustion source
operations and health effects to help define origins
and mechanisms of adverse health impacts due to
increases in ambient particulate levels.
Researchers at the National Risk Management
Research Laboratory (NRMRL) and the National
Health and Environmental Effects Research
Laboratory (NHEERL) have developed a joint
research project that enhances each organization's
capabilities. By combining the expertise and
facilities of NRMRL's Air Pollution Technology
Branch (APTB) on combustion source operations
and emissions with that of NHEERL's Pulmonary
Toxicology Branch (PTB) on damage to lung function
from exposure to particulate matter, it is hoped that a
link between specific types of particulate sources
and adverse health impacts can be determined.
3

-------
This project is a clear case of how cooperative
research involving diverse areas of expertise can
improve the scientific understanding of complex
issues.
A5. Improving Indoor Air Quality Through
Pollution Prevention
Mike Osborne and Kelly Leovic (919) 541-7717
NRMRL RTP
This poster will provide an overview of three
on-going projects that are using pollution prevention
to improve indoor air quality. 1) Reducing Indoor Air
Emissions from Office Equipment: APPCD is
supporting research to develop a standard test
method that will assist manufacturers in
understanding emissions from office equipment and
how these emissions might be reduced through
pollution prevention. 2) Development of an
innovative Spray Nozzle: The new design will allow
manufacturers to reformulate certain aerosol
consumer products using air and water in place of
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
hydrocarbons while still maintaining acceptable
product characteristics. 3) Evaluating Emissions
from Engineered Wood Products: This project is
targeted at identifying the primary sources of
emissions from engineered wood products and
evaluating lower-emitting alternatives.
A17. Development of a Water Quality Contaminant
Propagation Model for
Drinking Water Distribution Systems (EPANET),
WSWRD, NRMRL, ORD
Robert M. Clark (513)569-7201
NRMRL CIN
The recent Cryptosporidium waterborne outbreak,
that caused 400,000 people to become ill in
4

-------
Milwaukee, and other drinking water related
problems including USEPA's "takeover" of the
Washington DC water system has heightened
national concerns over drinking water issues. This
concern is exemplified by the recent reauthorization
of the Safe Drinking Water Act. It is anticipated that
billions of dollars will be expended in order to meet
tough new drinking water standards being
considered by the USEPA. These requirements and
standards are directed primarily toward water
treatment, however there is a growing awareness
that aging drinking water distribution systems and
archaic design and operational philosophies may
result in significant deterioration of water quality
before it reaches the consumer. To provide a
mechanism to study these infrastructure related
effects, the Water Supply and Water Resources
Division (WSWRD) of NRMRL has developed a
computer program (EPANET) that performs
extended period simulations of hydraulic and water
quality behavior within drinking water distribution
systems.
A18. Development of a Wet Weather Flow
Research Plan, WSWRD, NRMRL, ORD
Frank Freestone (908)321-6832
NRMRLEDN
The Water Supply and Water Resources Division
(WSWRD) of NRMRL was created as part of the
ORD Laboratory Reorganization. As part of the
reorganization, the Urban Watershed Management
(UWMB) Branch was established in WSWRD,
composed primarily of former Superfund staff who
had been extramural project officers. In October
1995, UWMB, located in Edison New Jersey, was
given the responsibility for preparation of a plan to
address needed research regarding the impacts and
5

-------
management of urban wet weather flows (WWFs).
WWFs are the leading cause of water-quality
impairment in the United States today. Improving
WWF controls is one of the two highest priority
water focus areas cited by EPA in its National
Agenda for the Future. A draft Research Plan was
issued for internal review in December 1995. The
draft Plan has been circulated extensively
throughout EPA Headquarters and ORD and
addresses WWF characterization, watershed
management, toxics, engineering control
technologies, and infrastructure improvement. It
also presents more than 75 projects to be done by
WSWRD in collaboration with others. The Plan was
revised and sent out for peer review on August 19,
1996. Comments were received from two peer
review organizations (Water Environment Research
Federation and American Society of Civil Engineers)
as well as from about fifteen stakeholder groups.
A19. Drinking Water Quality Problems and
Waterborne Disease Outbreak Studies, WSWRD,
NRMRL, ORD
Don Reasoner (513)569-7234
NRMRL CIN
The risk of illness due to consumption of
contaminated drinking water is a major concern for
consumers, the water utilities that produce the
water, and state and federal regulators. This
concern ranges from questionable water quality
problems (coliform occurrences) in distribution
monitoring samples, to low level undetected
illness(endemic disease), to overt disease outbreaks
affecting some proportion of the consuming public.
The Water Supply & Water Resources Division
(WSWRD) of the National Risk Management
Research Laboratory (NRMRL) provides technical
6

-------
assistance to States and U.S.E.P.A. Regions to
investigate problems related to coliform non-
compliance issues such as the Washington, D.C.
coliform problem that occurred this past summer.
The WSWRD staff have also assisted the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP, Atlanta,
GA), and the pertinent state and E.P.A. Region in
investigating identified waterborne disease
outbreaks. During the past year, these activities
included telephone conference calls to discuss
CDCP investigational findings, analysis of water
samples and characterization of microbial isolates
obtained from suspect water samples. Assistance
was provided to the CDCP related to an outbreak of
chronic diarrhea (causative agent undetermined) in
a small town in Texas, to the State of Idaho in a
suspected Campylobacter outbreak in a summer
camp, and to the Georgia Division of Public Health
in a suspected swimming pool outbreak.
A20. Environmental Technology Verification
Program — ETV
Penelope Hansen (202) 260-2600
NRMRLDC
The Environmental Technology Verification Program
(ETV), which began in October 1995, was created to
accelerate the commercialization of new
technologies into the domestic and international
marketplace. Initiated through the President's
environmental technology strategy, Bridge to a
Sustainable Future, ETV uses the facilities and
expertise of partner organizations to carry out
technology evaluations and, through these
evaluations, verifies the performance of
commercial-ready innovative technologies. In 1996
five pilots were put in place covering drinking water
systems, site characterization and monitoring
7

-------
devices, indoor air products, pollution prevention
and waste, treatment technologies, and an
independent pilot that focuses on no prescribed
technology area (see poster 21A for more
information on the latter two pilots). Through the
FY96 budget all of the above pilots were broadened
in scope and five new pilots were added covering
pollution prevention through innovative coatings,
advanced monitoring systems, wet weather flow
technologies, air pollution control technologies, and
an international verification pilot. Congress
continued its support of ETV in FY97, and the
program has received approximately $27 million to
date. ETV is managed through a cross-laboratory
(NRMRL and NERL) team in which team members
come from six ORD divisions and eleven branches.
A22. Common Sense Initiative (CSI)
Jane Franklin (513) 569-7601
NRMRL CIN
The Common Sense Initiative (CSI) represents a
unique opportunity to move beyond the adversarial
relationships that have historically dominated
environmental debates. The CSI will emphasize the
search for pollution prevention, innovative
technologies, and cross-media approaches to
environmental problems. The U.S. EPA is committed -
to CSI outcomes that are both cleaner and cheaper -
cleaner because of improved environmental results;
cheaper because of reduced industry compliance
costs. Equal participation by stakeholders which are
comprised by agency, industrial, trade associations,
environmental groups and public involvement will
make consensus recommendations to a workplan to
define the issues and develop projects. The Metal
Finishing Industry is a perfect case study to illustrate
the recent success of the CSI.

-------
A23. Environmental Technology Verification
Program (ETV) Pilots
Sandra Taylor (513) 569-7228
NRMRL CIN
The Sustainable Technology Division in the National
Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) is
supporting two of the Environmental Technology
Verification Program pilots (see poster 20A). The
Pollution Prevention and Waste Treatment pilot
partners with the State of California Environmental
Protection Agency to verify systems in the metal
finishing, electronics, petroleum and printing
industries. Eleven technologies have been selected
for evaluation to date. The Independent Pilot is
carried out by the Civil Engineering Research
Foundation and will operate independently of EPA in
the selection and verification of technologies.
A24, Benefit/Cost and Cost Engineering Research
Initiative Poster
Jane Franklin (513) 569-7601
NRMRL CIN
During ORD's reorganization, the Systems Analysis
Branch (SAB) was created as a part of NRMRL's
Sustainable Technology Division. The SAB's
mission is to develop and demonstrate the use of
decision making tools for use by the private and
public sectors. These tools attempt to integrate
knowledge of technological solutions to
environmental problems with cost engineering
issues such as life cycle assessment, value
engineering, and benefit/cost analysis. The
establishment of the SAB marks the first formal
attempt within ORD to bring together the wide
variety of cost engineering issues under one
Branch. The FY97 Budget provides funding to
NRMRL in support broad based cost engineering
9

-------
research initiative. The overall goal of this initiative
is to support the development of standard cost
engineering methodologies and software tools that
can be used by EPA's Regions, Program Offices,
and Laboratories in support of standards setting,
policy development, and in the establishment of
research priorities. Toward this end, the SAB has
begun the process of evaluating the status of
current research activities, identifying needs, and
structuring an integrated research agenda.
A26. SITE: Innovation On The Move
Annette Gatchett (513) 569-7697
NRMRLCIN
The Superfund Technology Evaluation Program
(SITE) has supported the development of innovative
remediation technologies for the past ten years.
With the ORD reorganization and the new directions
that have been developed in the ORD Strategic
Plan, the SITE Program must be redesigned to be
more market drive (i.e., away from technology push
toward market pull). As a result, the SITE Program
emphasis is being shifted to strategic partnering with
other federal organizations, industry, and consulting
firms to ensure that their remediation needs/
problems are addressed with the most cost effective
technologies available. The key elements of this
new SITE verification program will be : (1)
developing highly credible data, (2) ensuring
technical objectivity, and (3) getting the technology
implemented in the user community quickly.
A32. NRMRL Technology Transfer and
Support Division
Dan Murray (513) 569-7522
NRMRLCIN
This will be a general NRMRL display with an
10

-------
emphasis on our Technology Transfer Program. We
will display some of our more recent products and
have a demonstration of our new Technology
Transfer homepage.
A62. Natural Attenuation of Organic Contaminants in
Ground Water: A Risk Management Approach
Clint Hall (405) 436-8510
NRMRLADA
NCEA
B6. Air Quality Criteria Document for
Particulate Matter.
Larry Folinsbee (919)541-2229
NCEA RTP
This poster will illustrate the process of production,
quality control, and peer review of the scientific data
base which is used to compile the AQCD for PM.
Key conclusions and supplemental analyses will
also be illustrated.
B7. Air Quality Criteria Document for Ozone and
Related Photochemical Oxidants.
Larry Folinsbee (919)541-2229
NCEA RTP
This poster will illustrate the process of producing an
integrated review from the vast scientific database
for the atmospheric chemistry, exposure, and health
and ecological effects of ozone. Production, peer
review processes, and quality control will be
illustrated.
11

-------
B8. Oxyfuels Information Needs.
Mike Davis (919)541-4162
NCEA RTP
The "Oxyfuels Information Needs" document, issued
in May 1996, identifies the types of information
needed to support comparative assessments of the
risks and benefits of oxygenated and reformulated
gasolines (oxyfuels) in comparison to conventional
fuels. Two oxyfuel programs required by the 1990
Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) have received
considerable attention from the public and various
scientific groups. This poster will describe a
framework for the comparative risk assessment of
fuels, summarize briefly the research that has been
done or is currently being done on conventional and
oxyfuels, and highlight areas of needed further work.
B9. Quantitative Dose-Response Assessment of
Inhalation Exposures to Toxic Air Pollutants.
Mike Davis (919)541-4162
NCEA RTP
Provisions of the 1990 CAAA require accurate
human health risk estimates of both acute and
chronic inhalation exposures to hazardous air
pollutants. This poster will describe three projects
pertaining to improved quantitative approaches for
dose-response assessment of air toxics: (1) an
approach for derivation of risk estimates of acute
exposures; (2) a probabilistic approach for dose-
response estimates; and (3) refinement of
uncertainty factor values for inhalation exposures.
Projects (1) and (2) are scheduled for SAB review in
FY97. The Society for Risk Analysis has invited
presentations on all three projects at its upcoming
annual meeting in December.
12

-------
B51. Superfund Health Risk Technical
Support Center
H. Choudhury (513)569-7536
NCEACIN
The Superfund Health Risk Technical Support
Center (STSC) provides technical assistance to
Regions, state, Local and other Federal Agencies
and other onsite coordinators. The STSC is the
focal point for the assessment of toxicity information
and the development of provisional toxicity values
for chemicals commonly found at Superfund sites.
Benefits of the STSC to the Agency include the
credible evaluation of toxicity information and the
consistent application across all regions. Through
the STSC, ORD is able to identify which human
health methods and exposure information is needed
to advance EPA risk assessment.
B52. SERDP: Improving Risk Assessment of
Defense-Related Pollutants
H. Choudhury (513)569-7536
NCEA CIN
During the past two years, work undertaken by the
Material/Chemical Risk Assessment (MCRA)
Working Group, a collaborative effort between
DOD, DOE and EPA, includes evaluations of
munition chemicals, warfare agents, and solvents
including trinitrotolune (TNT) and trinitrobenzene
(TNB), VX, GA, GB, GD, HD, CK, ethylene glycol,
propylene glycol, stoddard solvents,
trichloroethylene, depleted uranium, and various jet
fuels. This collaborative effort resulted in new
toxicity information that resulted in the development
of a 600-fold higher RfD for TNB, based on
analogy to DNB, than the one previously
developed by the EPA in 1988. TNT and TNB have
undergone external peer review and the remaining
13

-------
chemicals are in the final process of the MCRA
Working Group review.
B53. Fish Consumption: Methylmercury Exposure
K. Mahaffey (513) 569-7957
NCEACIN
Methylmercury exposure among human populations
can be predicted from
the quantities and species offish and shellfish
consumed. The EPA has analyzed dietary survey
data from longitudinal and cross-sectional surveys
of the general U.S. population, as well as fish
consumption data from groups known to have
higher than typical fish consumption. This report will
discuss mercury/methyImercury concentrations in
different types fish and the subsequent health risk in
both adults and children based on their body weight
and types of contaminated fish consumed.
B54. Local Scale Mass Balance of Emitted
Anthropogenic Mercury
H. Choudhury (513) 569-7536
NERLCIN
Atmospheric emissions of mercury are of
widespread concern because they may be related,
through subsequent deposition and
bioaccumulation, to the elevated mercury
concentrations in fish that have been measured
across the U.S. and many other countries. Both
natural and anthropogenic sources emit mercury to
the atmosphere. This report, using a standard short-
term Gaussian plume model, will discuss the
pattern of deposition of mercury emitted from
anthropogenic sources and industrial facilities.
14

-------
B55. Detecting Departures from Additivity for
Estimating Toxic Interactions
H. Choudhury (513) 569-7536
NERL CIN
The U.S. EPA has pursued the estimation of risk of
adverse effects from exposure to chemical mixtures
since the early 1980s. Initial methods to calculate
risk estimates were often component based
approaches that requires assumptions of dose-
addition of response-addition and ignored possible
changes in response due to interaction effects. In
this research, a dose-response model is built for the
mixture of concern, under the assumption of
additivity, using single chemical dose-response
information on the individual components of the
mixture. This report will further discuss the
application of this model to predict rrisk estimates
using laboratory data.
10AA
C10. Launching 5-year "Survey-Guided Development"
Program
Lois Riley (292)260-7653
AAORD
•	96% participation in first survey
•	Valid "snapshot" of employee attitudes and
perceptions at all levels
of EPA
•	Accurate benchmark for the 5-year study of ORD
organizational climate
•	Foundation for identifying ways to improve and
strengthen ORD
•	Basis for ORD workshops at all organizational
levels
15

-------
C16. Congressional Concerns: From Criticism
to Support
Bob Huggett
Mary Shaffran (202) 260-0881
AAORD
Congress (and especially the House and Senate
Appropriations Committees) has been monitoring
the Agency's research programs closely over the
past few years. Since the Office of Research and
Development has introduced its Strategic Plan,
reorganization, and improved peer review process,
Congressional comments have evolved from
criticism to support. This poster features quotations
from the House and Senate Appropriations
Committees from Fiscal Year 1993 to Fiscal Year
1997 regarding Research & Development programs
at EPA
NHEERL
D11. Community Outreach and Long-Term Monitoring
for the New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site
William Nelson (401)782-3053
NHEERL NAR
The New Bedford Harbor Long-Term Monitoring
Program (NBH-LTM) addresses three aspects of
EPAs mission: regulation, scientific research, and
community outreach. Research scientists at AED
were requested by EPA Region I and the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers to design a monitoring program
to assess the effectiveness of NBH. The NBH-LTM
Program was developed using state-of-the-art
science to quantify spatial and temporal changes in
physical, chemical and biological parameters within
various environmental compartments. By applying
ORD's scientific expertise to this regulatory
16

-------
situation, and at the same time making technical
information understandable to the public, this long-
term monitoring project was successfully
implemented.
D12. The National Health & Environmental Effects
Laboratory - Atlantic Ecology Division :
Responding to a Changing Mission
Larry Rossner (401)782-3132
NHEERLNAR
The Atlantic Ecology Division (AED) is a premier
marine/estuarine research facility located on the
shores of Narragansett Bay, R.I. Since the inception
of EPA, this facility has been focused primarily on
national issues affecting water, sediment, and living
resource quality in near-coastal environments. As a
result of the significant changes that occurred from
the ORD reorganization, AED now has the
responsibility to develop and evaluate theory,
methods and data needed to understand and
quantify the environmental effects of anthropogenic
stressors on the coastal waters and watersheds of
the Atlantic seaboard. Responding to these
changes, AED staff developed a Strategic Plan
based in part on ORD's model, assembled a
Science Council to help focus the research, and
developed five new research themes that address
many of the primary ecological problems confronting
the Atlantic coast and its watersheds.
D36. An Index of Benthic Condition to Determine the
Magnitude of Environmental Stress
Jim Harvey (904)934-9237
NHEERL GB
Using EMAP-Louisianian Province data, an index of
benthic condition was developed and validated that
can be used as an ecological indicator for
17

-------
determining the magnitude stress caused by
contaminants and other stressors.
D37. An Indigenous Gulf of Mexico Amphipod for
Determining Sediment Toxicity.
Jim Harvey (904)934-9237
NHEERLGB
An amphipod, indigenous to the Gulf of Mexico, was
identified that is easily cultured in a laboratory and is
sensitive to contaminants in sediments. Current
methods for determining toxicity for Gulf of Mexico
sediments rely on exotic species; this finding
provides the basis for a more realistic method to
assess the biological hazard of Gulf of Mexico
sediments.
D38. A Strategy to Join and Integrate Top-Down with
Bottom-Up Research Planning
Jim Harvey (904) 934-9237
NHEERL GB
The approach used at GED to intersect top-down
and bottom-up research planning is presented along
with the strategic framework for GED's 5-year
research plan.
D39. Gulf of Mexico Mortality Network (GMNET)
Jim Harvey (904)934-9237
NHEERLGB
A Gulf of Mexico-wide network has been established
to document the occurrence of unusual mortalities
and epizootics occurring in coastal waters and to
determine their cause. The organization,
procedures, and relationship to environmental
monitoring will be presented.
18

-------
D40. Biologically Relevant Indices of Ozone Exposure
for a Secondary Air Quality Standard
Tom Murphy (541)754-4601
NHEERL COR
D41. Ecoregions- A Powerful Tool for Classifying
Ecological Systems
Tom Murphy (541)754-4601.
NHEERL COR
D42. Setting Regional Priorities for Protection of
Biodiversity
Tom Murphy (541)754-4601
NHEERL COR
D43. Projecting Alternative Ecological Futures - A
Tool for Community Based
Environmental Protection
Tom Murphy (541)754-4601
NHEERL COR
D44. ECOTOX: A Database of Toxic Effects to Aquatic
and Terrestrial Species
Steve Hedtke (218)720-5550
NHEERLDUL
In response to a need by risk assessors and
researchers for a
comprehensive database of ecological effects data,
the Mid-Continent Ecology Division (Duluth)
developed ECOTOX. The Unix-based on-line
version of ECOTOX provides a single user interface
for identifying and downloading toxicity data for
aquatic life, terrestrial plants, and terrestrial wildlife.
19

-------
D45. Managing Change at MED: Evolution in
workforce composition, research planning
and team
Steve Hedtke (218)720-5550.
NHEERLDUL
The poster covers two related areas: 1) changes in
MED/NHEERL workforce composition and
organizational structure as a consequence of the
ORD reorganization; and 2) incorporation of Teams
and their use in research planning, project design
and implementation, during the same period. The
poster concludes with a discussion of the remaining
Team building challenges that need to be overcome
for the efficient use of research Teams to advance
the goal of high quality science.
D46. Cryptosporidium serosurvey
Hillel Koren (919)966-6200
NHEERL RTP
Success story is that we have compared two
methods for measuring antibody and determined
which one would be suitable for the study. The
initial study on the NHANES data is available and
well as preliminary data on the first set of paired
cities. In addition this project is an example of
leveraging funds with industry and cross
collaboration with another EPA lab (NERL) and
another federal agency (CDC).).
D47. Reproductive Toxicology Division
Robert Kavlock (919)541-2771
NHEERL RTP
The Reproductive Toxicology Division carries out
research to improve our ability to detect, quantify,
and interpret developmental toxicity induced by
environmental pollutants. A variety of in vitro and in
vivo techniques are used to improve our ability to
20

-------
understand how environmental chemicals might
interact with reproductive processes or the
developing conceptus.
D48. Divisional Reviews - Peer Review of NHEERL's
Science Programs
Robert Dyer (919)541-2760
NHEERL RTP
NHEERL has begun a cycle of regular peer reviews
of its 9 research divisions. The poster will describe
the purpose, process and period (time frame) for
these reviews.
D49. The NHEERL Synergy Workgroup: Organization,
Goals and Progress
Steve Bradbury (218)720-5610
NHEERLDUL
The poster describes the background, the goals and
accomplishments of the synergy workgroup.
Examples of synergy-related travel and collaborative
projects are included.
D50. US-Mexico Border Project
Hal Zenick (919)541-2283
NHEERL RTP
The U.S.-Mexico Border Project represents a highly
successful, binational partnership between Federal
and State agencies and border communities to
identify, prioritize and address the major
environmental health risks in that region. The
program blends surveillance/monitoring and
research, intervention/mitigation, education/training
and community outreach as a multi-pronged
approach to problem resolution. ORD, along with
CDC has co-chaired this interagency effort. The
success of this venture was recognized recently by
the formal establishment and inclusion of an
21

-------
environmental health workgroup in the new,
binational Border XXI program.
NERL
E14. Genetic Diversity Monitoring of Plants and
Wildlife at Wurtsmith Air Force Base
Gregory Toth (513)569-7242
NERL CIN
Comprehensive exposure characterization ultimately
includes assessment of the vulnerability of a
resource and its receptors. Reductions in genetic
diversity of a species indicate a vulnerability to
exposure to stressors. This poster displays the
results of research on genetic diversity indicator
development. The Wurtsmith AFB was selected for
the Department of Defense National Environmental
Technology Demonstration Program (D/NETDP) to
demonstrate bioremediation-based systems for in
situ remediation of soils, sediments and ground
water contaminated with fuels solvents and organic
mixtures . Funded by the DoD Strategic
Environmental Research and Development
Program, we have collected tissue samples from
several populations of bullhead catfish, amphibians
and plants directly off base. These samples were
used to test the hypothesis that stressors of
anthropogenic origin can act as barriers to gene flow
or create bottlenecks that lead to a loss of genetic
diversity and further population declines.
E21. NERL Site Characterization
Jeff Van Ee (702)798-2367
NERL LV
The NERL Site Characterization CD-ROM is
available through NTIS. It was finished this year. It
22

-------
contains approximately 3000 pages of guidance on
site characterization that can be electronically
searched. It also contains a number of software
packages that were produced at NERL-Las Vegas
for use in hazardous waste site characterization.
E25. A Landscape Approach for Assessing
Ecological Risk in a Southwestern Watershed. -
San Pedro River Case Study
Bill Kepner (702)798-2193
NERL LV
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently
initiated a national approach to assess ecological
risk relative to exposure to environmental stressors.
A key component of this framework enlists
landscape ecology as a theoretical basis from which
to assess cumulative exposure to stress at multiple
spatial and temporal scales. This project has
focused its research into developing a system of
landscape composition and pattern indicators which
can be used to estimate current status, trend, and
changes in ecological and hydrological condition.
Specifically, it is designed to determine ecosystem
vulnerability relative to large-scale natural or human-
induced disturbances (e.g. climatic change and
livestock grazing, respectively) using a system of
landscape pattern metrics derived from remote
sensing, spatial statistics, and geographic
information system technology.
E28. Site Characterization Technology
Demonstrations
Eric Koglin (702)798-2432 and
Steve Billets (702)798-2232
NERL LV
The acceptance of new field measurement
technologies into general use is hindered by a lack
23

-------
of reliable performance data. The Consortium for
Site Characterization Technology (CSCT) was
instituted to fill this gap. The CSCT is a partnership
between the EPA, the Departments of Defense
(DoD), Energy (DOE), Interior, the States and the
private sector, all of whom share the goal of
increasing the use of innovative characterization
technologies in assessing contaminated sites. The
CSCT is funded through the Environmental
Technology Verification (ETV) program of the
Environmental Technology Initiative (ETI) and the
DoD Strategic Environmental Research and
Development Program (SERDP). This presentation
describes the process used by the CSCT to verify
performance.
E29. A Field Demonstration of Portable Mass
Spectrometers
Gary Robertson (702)798-2215
NERL LV
In FY96, three field portable mass spectrometers
were demonstrated under the Consortium for Site
Characterization Technology (CSCT). The CSCT
conducts demonstrations, through third-party
verification organizations, of new and innovative
field-deployable measurement technologies. The
purpose of this demonstration was to qualify the
developers' performance claims and to create
verified data sets that can be used to confirm the
performance of the technology. The demonstration
is intended to generate the information needed by
potential users to determine the applicability of the
technology to their environmental problem-solving
needs. Environmental Technology process used to
verify cost and performance.
24

-------
E30. Chirality in the Environment:
The Ultimate in Speciation
Arthur W. Garrison (706-355-8219)
NERLATH
Many pesticides and other chemicals of
environmental importance are chiral, i.e., composed
of two or more enantiomers, mirror-image species
each of which may be degraded by microbes at
different rates. Knowledge of this chemical chirality
is important to EPA, not only because of differences
in degradation rates and persistence of
enantiomers, but mostly because one enantiomer is
likely to be more toxic than the other. Moreover,
some pesticides and other chemicals are endocrine
disruptors, the hormone-mimicking activity of which
could be restricted to specific enantiomers.
Knowledge of the persistence and toxicity of the
respective enantiomers of chiral pesticides would
improve ecosystem risk assessment and could lead
to pollution prevention if manufacturers were to
formulate only the enantiomer that was toxic to a
target organism. The poster shows the application
of capillary electrophoresis and gas chromatography
using chiral columns to separate enantiomers in
studies of the microbial degradation of dichlorprop, a
phenoxy acid herbicide, and the plant-enzyme
degradation of DDT.
E31. Phytotransformation: Use of Plant Enzymes to
Remediate Soil-Water Contamination
Lee Wolfe (706)355-8207) and
Steven C. McCutcheon (706)355-8235
NERLATH
The transformation of trinitrotoluene (TNT) to
environmentally acceptable products is achieved
through a new process that uses common aquatic
plants containing a nitroreductase enzyme. This
25

-------
research breakthrough provides an efficient,
inexpensive, an aesthetically pleasing technology
for the cleanup of water and soil contaminated with
munitions waste at military installations and other
sites. With the support from the interagency
Strategic Research and Development Program
(whose participants include the Departments of
Defense and Energy along with EPA), the
technology has moved on a fast track from bench
study to pilot-scale field research. The 12-minute
video provides an overview of the research on
nitroreductase and other plant-enzyme systems.
Models-3*. A Unifying Framework for
Environmental Modeling and Assessment
Joan Novak (919)541-4545
NERL RTP
Models-3 is a state-of-the-art environmental
modeling system supporting multi-pollutant
"one-atmosphere" issues (oxidants, nitrogen & acid
deposition, and particulate matter) on urban to
regional scales. Models-3 is designed to incorporate
a variety of environmental models important to
ecosystem and human risk assessment. Thus the
Mode!s-3 framework can provide an integrating
mechanism for fate and transport research across
the agency and scientific community.
Interchangeable science components, and
cross-platform data management and computing,
facilitate the development of multi-media ecosystem
exposure assessment capabilities. A graphical user
interface enables local communities and regional
planners to evaluate a range of local control options
and risk reduction strategies to promote more
informed judgments about ecosystem planning,
preventative methods, and restoration. The poster
is supplemented with a video highlighting rnulti-

-------
media modeling in the Chesapeake Bay, the use of
remote sensing data to improve model predictions,
and the complexity of atmospheric chemistry
associated with acidic deposition.
E34. Summer Study of Field Methods for Estimating
Exposure of Children in Low-Income Families to
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Nancy Wilson (919)541-4723
Children in low-income families may have high
exposures to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAH). Such exposures could arise from home
locations near industrial sites or heavy traffic, poor
diet, environmental tobacco smoke, contaminated
play areas, or other causes. The work reported
here is one of several related studies that serve to
evaluate methods for estimating exposure and to
provide preliminary estimates of the exposure of
children in low-income families to PAH.
Nonsmoking participants with preschool children
and incomes at or below the US poverty level were
recruited. Concentrations of PAH were measured in
indoor and outdoor air, house dust, yard soil, and
diet for nine households. Urinary metabolites of
PAH were measured for an adult and a preschool
child in each home. Initial results of the recently
completed summer study are presented here.
E35. Ambient Particle Concentrator for Conducting
Laboratory InhalationExposure Studies
Robert M. Burton (919)541-3077
NERL RTP
The recent EPA invention of a unique 0.1 micron
cutpoint virtual impactor makes possible the
concentration of ambient particulate matter in size
range of 0.1-2.5 microns. The system is a major
breakthrough for use in experimental inhalation
27

-------
exposure studies. It delivers particles concentrated
by a factor of 30 to the test subjects, thus providing
more of a chance to observe dose/response
relationships.
E56. Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC)
Denice Shaw (919)541-2698
NERL RTP
The MRLC program is a partnership of federal
environmental monitoring programs and agencies.
The goals of MRLC include the acquisition,
management and distribution of multiscale land
characterization informtion as well as the research
for and production of Landsat TM based land cover
data for the conterminous United States. As of this
date, MRLC has completed land cover mapping for
Standard Federal Regions 2 and 3, acquired
complete Landsat TM coverage for the U.S. and
developed a data management system to support
the management, distribution and archive of MRLC
products.
E57. Applications for Using Exhaled Human Breath
as an Exposure Assessment Tool for Volatile
Organic Compounds.
Jachim D. Pleil and Andrew B. Lindstrom
(919)541-4680
NERL RTP
The presence of specific compounds in human
blood can indicate a recent exposure (or biological
response) to a drug or environmental pollutant, or
indicate a disease state of the individual. The direct
measurement of blood for various substances and
biomarkers is one of the primary medical diagnostic
tools in current use. Because the organic
constituents of exhaled human breath are
representative of their blood-borne concentrations
28

-------
through gas exchange in the blood/breath interface
in the lungs, a breath measurement could
conceivably replace a direct blood measurement. A
classic example of this is the "breathalyzer" test for
inebriation from ethanol.
E59. Fish Biliary Metabolites as an Indicator of PAH
Exposure at an Ecoregional Scale
Susan Cormier 513-569-7995
NERLCIN
This poster displays an application of biochemical
indicators of exposure. The study demonstrated
that bile metabolites of polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons could be used to estimate the
distribution and exposure levels that occur in aquatic
systems at a large geographic scale. Bile
metabolites were measured in fish collected from
the Eastern Cornbelt Plains (ECBP) Ecoregion to
determine the distribution and levels of exposure to
combustion by-products and petroleum. Bile was
collected from the gall bladder of 1 to 6 white
suckers from 118 sites across Ohio (107), Indiana
(8) and Michigan (3) using a randomized EMAP
statistical sampling design.
E61. AEROSOL TEST FACILITY
Fu Lin Chen (919)541-3791
NERL RTP
I.	Aerosol Physics Research Program
II.	Methods Standardization and Equivalency
III.	Aerosol Exposure/Activity Research Program
29

-------
ORMA
F13. ORMA Customer Service iR	J
Peter Durant
ORMA staff recently developed a vision statement
that sets customer service as a key goal of our
organization. In FY 1996, we worked to improve
customer service by advocating ORD facility
improvement needs within and outside EPA,
helping to fund scientific instrumentation, providing
ORD-specific training on assistance instruments,
and other activities. We look forward to soliciting
suggestions from all our key customers ~ ORD
scientists, engineers, technicians, support staff and
managers - on how to improve service in FY 1997!
F15. ORD Awards Program
Shirley Thomas (202)260-9372
ORMA HQ
Poster focuses on ORD's 1995-1996 Awards
Program reflecting ORD employee
accomplishments in the different award categories.
F27. Improving ORD communications through use of
new technologies
Pam Bassford (202)260-7466
ORMA HQ
•	Videoconferencing (just being installed at ORD
sites),
•	OMIS (which provides us new ways of sharing info
through ORD data base),
•	Our government-wide, prize-winning use of
internet for contract solicitations
•	Local area and wide area networks
30

-------
NCERQA
G58. NCERQA's First Years of Success.
NCERQA's ScienceTo Achieve Results (STAR): An
ORD Success Story-meeting the specific science
needs of the EPA, building on the scientific creativity
of the country's foremost research scientists.
'
, \S * ^ '
	¦ 	
pnirif*
H60. OSP + ORSI = the new Office of Science Policy
OSP 202-260-7669
OSP has two primary functions for relating ORD's
research and expertise to the Agency's mission -
today and for the future. One function is to guide
the use of scientific analyses in current regulatory
and science policy activities of EPA's laboratories,
program and regional offices, and the Science
Policy Council. The other is to assist in determining
the kind and quality of information available for
future environmental decisions by leading ORD and
Agency research planning activities. These
functions are accomplished by coordinating with
ORD's most valuable resource — its people. OSP
builds bridges between ORD and Agency programs
for strategic planning, developing scientifically
based regulations and policies, and for considering
and resolving agency-wide science issues. Upon
Agency approval of the offices' reorganization
package, the Risk Assessment Forum, part of the
old Office of Science Policy, will be under the
National Center for Environmental Assessment.

-------
1st Annual ORD Workshop ~ Managing Change
c|	December 2-5,1996
Pay 1 -- Overall Change
o Weleome/lntroductions.ete. (Bob Huggett & Others)
o Grappling with Change
o Open Space/Gallery Walk/Celebrate Successes
Context of Change \
Day 2 -- Improvement Opportunities]
o Review What We Know About ORD
o Pata to be used:
-	Strategic Plan (over arching)
-	Survey, Councils, Participants
-	Workshop 5teering Committee
o Identify Opportunities For Improvement
o Select Priority Opportunities
Data
Prioritize
~	o
f
*
* !
^ e
A 5
Pay 3 -- Framework for Action
° Present Opportunities
° Develop Action Plan Ideas
o Reach Consensus on Action Plans
0 Present & Discuss Plans
Opportunities
3ecome Plan;
X

Day 4 -- Targeting Action
0 Lab/Center/Office Discuss Plans
0 Commitments/Celebration Lunch
Commitments
Desired Outcome: Using Our Strategic Plan to
Improve Delivery of the f3est Science for EPA

-------
1st Annual ORD Workshop ~ Managing Change
December 2-5,1996
EPA ERL-Corvallis Library
00007403
Day 1 -- Overall Change
o Welcome/lntroductions.etc. (Bob Huggett & Others)
o Grappling with Change
o Open Space/Gallery Walk/Celebrate Successes
Context of Change ^
Day 2 -- Improvement Opportunities
o Review What We Know About ORD
o Data to be used:
-	Strategic Plan (over arching)
-	Survey, Councils, Participants
-	Workshop Steering Committee

Prioritize
3
o Identify Opportunities For Improvement
o Select Priority Opportunities
x o
X u
t
*f
			—
Day 5 -- Framework for Action
° Present Opportunities
0 Develop Action Plan Ideas
° Reach Consensus on Action Plans
0 Present & Discuss Plans
Opportunities
become Plan
Day 4 — Targeting Action
° Lab/Center/Office Discuss Plans
° Commitments/Celebration Lunch
Commitments
Desired Outcome: Using Our Strategic Plan to
improve Delivery of the Beet Science for EPA

-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D C 20460
DEC 2 B96
OFFICE OF
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Dear ORD Colleague:
Welcome to the First Annual ORD Workshop - Managing Change. The materials in this
notebook are to give you an orientation to the scope, purpose, and intended outcomes of this
important meeting. We encourage you to review all of these materials to help establish a general
understanding of what we hope to accomplish. Change and evolution in an organization are
always difficult, and there are challenges at every level in the organization, from the support staff
to the bench scientist to the senior manager. Each of us is impacted ~ and each of us is part of
the solution
We are committed to a fuller understanding of the issues arising from our change efforts.
And we are committed to jointly working with you to find meaningful and lasting improvements
in the way we do business in ORD. This meeting is intended to surface the most important
issues in our organization in a setting of creative engagement and full amnesty. And while we
want you to feel free to openly express your concerns, we are also providing an Amnesty Box to
allow anonymous contributions There will also be flip charts strategically placed in the
Workshop open space for people to make comments or suggestions throughout the meeting.
Let us emphasize again, that this is the beginning of a continuing process to improve
ORD over the long term and position ourselves for the science needs of the coming millennium.
We know we can count on you to help us do that
Rficycted/Racyclable
<\ Printed with Soy/Canota ink on paptriha!
Vic/ contains at least 75* recycled ttir

-------
3
s
» ET
s tr
a. o
p 2
s
fr
8

-------
1st Annual ORD Workshop - Managing Change
December 2-5,1996
Overarching Principles for the Workshop:
1	Workshop is a beginning not an ending - an on-going improvement effort.
2	Use the talents and creativity of all of ORD's staff and managers
3. Have a good time as we work on serious solutions
4	Suspend cynicism and personal gripes — don't bring any axes to grind
5	Integrate action planning along the way in the meeting, don't leave it until the end when
everyone is out of steam
6	Have an "amnesty" box at registration to drop in a card describing one burning issue or
question that each attendee wants addressed by the meeting.
7	Set reasonable boundaries for the workshop. Don't try to cram in too much.
Goals of Meeting:
1	Identify critical needs in implementing the new ORD.
2	Identify actions to address those needs
3.	Be ready to evolve, while sustaining excellence
4	Work as a team, valuing all contributions of talent Tap into creativity
5	Improve the organizational climate in ORD
6	Understand that these changes are real, and move forward
7	Initiate new beginning together.
Desired Outcomes:
1	Share and listen (and vent) - use data from survey, Science, Management and Human
Resources Councils, and amnesty box
2	Understand the new directions in ORD, their meaning and benefits Attain mutual
understanding of Bob's vision, and the perspective from the Labs. (Also value past
accomplishments)
3	Build the ORD team and improve communications up, down, and across ORD
4	Come up with action items. Build a mechanism to assure that they actually happen, an
accountability systems or something
Steering/Agenda Committee Meeting
July 18, 1996

-------
~
CT9
a
a
a.
®

-------
First Annual ORD Workshop - Managing Change
December 2-5, 1996
The Woodlands
Williamsburg, Virginia
AGENDA
Monday. December 2. 1996
Theme: Overall Change
1:00 PM Welcome	Henry Longest
Goals of the Workshop
"Charge" for the Workshop Bob Huggett
Workshop Roles	Henry and Joe Alexander
1:30 PM Breaking Free for Change David Noer, D.B.A.
Guest Speaker
Author and noted Organizational Behavior
practioner, Dr Noer will interact, lead discussions
and lecture on the theme of change, personal and
organizational realities associated with change, and
the various responses associated with change.
5:00 PM Wrap-Up	Henry Longest
5:30- Gallery Walk/Poster Session and Lite Fare
7:00 PM Celebrating ORD's Successes with posters from ORD
Labs, Centers and Offices while enjoying a lite buffet and
meeting each other.
Additionally, an "Open Space" array of flip charts are
available to allow each participant to write concerns,
issues or ideas about ORD. Everyone's comments are
welcome. Begin an issue/idea flipchart yourself or add to
others' comments.

-------
Tuesday. December 3. 1996
Theme: What we, ORD, know about ourselves and what needs
improvement
8:00 AM Introduction and Overview
Review of ORD Data
Presentations:
ORD Strategic Plan
Survey Results
Human Resources
Council
Unions
Management Council
Science Council
Henry Longest
Joe Alexander
Henry Longest
George Moore/
Betsy Howard
Debbie Dietrich
Hugh McKinnon
10:00- Break
10:30 AM Brainstorm Improvement Opportunities
and Identify Priority Issues
Walt Galloway
Richard Brown
12:00 LUNCH
1:00 PM Select Top Priorities-Breakout Sessions
Group 1
Group 2
Group 3
Group 4
2:30 PM Break
Tables 1-7
Tables 8-13
Tables 14-19
Tables 20-25
Cascades Room
Council Room
Center Room
North Room
3:00 PM Framing the Issues-Breakouts continued
(4:30-5:30 PM - Historians and Facilitators develop one page
descriptions of top improvement opportunities-room to be
announced)

-------
Vednesday. December 4. 1996
Theme: Defining priority improvement opportunities and finding
a framework for action
8:00 AM Introduction and Overview Henry Longest
Presentation of the Priority Improvement
Opportunities
8:45 AM Action Planning for Improvement Opportunities
Breakout Sessions*
Group 1	Commonwealth Room
Group 2	Center Room
Group 3	Garden Room
Group 4	Corner Room
11:30 AM LUNCH
2:30 PM Panel Presentations and Action Planning
Report out from Breakout Discussions
Commonwealth Hall
5:00 PM Adjourn
7:00 PM Shields Tavern or The Woodlands, Garden Room
(Use Hotel pass for free transportation to the Shields
Tavern Dinner. Williamsburg buses leave about every 15
minutes from designated Woodlands bus stops-See Hotel
map)
* See Table in Conference Book for breakout group assignment
(Under Tab "Tables and Room Seating Plans")

-------
Thursday. December 5. 1996
Theme: Taking the Action back home-getting started
8:00 Lab/Center/Office Teams Meeting
Breakout Sessions
Group 1
NRMRL
Commonwealth 1
Group 2
NERL
Cascades 2
Group 3
NHEERL
Commonwealth 2
Group 4
NCERQA
Cascades 1
Group 5
NCEA
Council 1
Group 6
ORSI
Seminar 2
Group 7
ORMA
Council 2
Group 8
IOAA
Corner Room
10:00 Final Plenary Session
Lab/Center/Office Teams Presentation
11:25 Summary of Key Highlights
Next Steps
11:45 Meeting Evaluation
12:15 PM The "Launch" Lunch
Informal Summary and Farewell
2:00 PM Workshop Adjourns

-------
H
05 »
ft (T
ft «

-------
TABLE AND ROo.vi SEATING PLANS

DAY 1 AND 2
DAY 3
DAY 4
NAME
TABLES
BREAKOUT RMS
BREAKOUT RMS








AKLAND, ANN
3
1
3
ALEXANDER, JOE
4
1
8
ANDREASEN, JAMES
1
2
5
ARTHUR, JOHN
12
3
3
BARRON, JESSICA*
14
2
3
BASSETT, MARYANN
16
4
3
BASSFORD, PAM
6
4
7
BELILES, ROBERT
2
2
5
BETZ, ELIZABETH
17
4
2
BIRNBAUM, LINDA
5
1
3
BOBSEINE, KATHY
9
2
3
BOWEN, JULIE*
15
1
2
BOWMAN, SANDRA*
16
4
3
BOYDE, SHARON
3
4
5
BRADY, RANDY*
17
1
3
BROWN, RICHARD*
18
1
3
BRYAN, ELIZABETH
6
1
4
CAIRNS, MICHAEL
17
3
3
CALLAHAN, MICHAEL
7
1
5
CAMPBELL, JED
22
2
3
CARR, JIM*
9
1
1
CARSON-COX, LATASHA
5
4
1
CHOE, JASON
24
4
7
CHOUDHURY, HARLAL
9
3
5
CLARK, BOB
8
1
1
CLARK, TOM
8
1
2
CLAXTON, LARRY
10
1
3
COLON, MARIBEL
18
3
2
CONRATH, SUSAN*
10
4
3
11/21/96 03.09 PM 1

-------
TABLE AND ROO... SEATING PLANS

DAY 1 AND 2
DAY 3
DAY 4
NAME
TABLES
BREAKOUT RMS
BREAKOUT RMS








CONTRERAS, JANET
8
4
2
CONVERY, JOHN
11
1
1
CORBETT, JOSEPH
4
4
5
CORN, RUTH
21
4
1
CORTESt, ROGER
12
1
4
CROFT, JEAN
15
4
8
CUPITT, LARRY
13
1
2
DAVIS, J MICHAEL
8
3
5
DAVIS, ROBERT
16
4
2
DEAN, KAREN F.
10
4
3
DEMPSEY, CLYDE
7
2
1
DIETRICH, DEBBIE
14
1
7
DIXON, THOMAS
6
2
4
DRIVER, KATHY*
19
3
3
DRYER, JIM
17
4
1
DUFOUR, ALFRED
16
1
2
DURANT, PETER
13
1
7
DYER, BOB
18
1
3
EDER, BRIAN
19
2
2
EDWARDS, NICOLE
25
4
6
ERICKSON, PATRICIA
8
3
1
EXTON, MARGERY*
22
2
8
EXUM, LINDA
12
4
2
FARLAND, BILL
17
1
5
FEIGE, LOUIS
24
3
2
FEIGE, WALT
9
2
1
FINCH, CAROL
19
1
8
FOLEY, GARY
18
1
2
FREDERICK, ROBERT
5
2
5
11/21/96 03 09 PM 2

-------
TABLE AND ROU.„ SEATING PLANS

DAY 1 AND 2
DAY 3
DAY 4
NAME
TABLES
BREAKOUT RMS
BREAKOUT RMS








FREESTONE,FRANK
18
2
1
FRICK, WALTER
13
2
2
GAGE, MICHAEL
11
4
3
GALLOWAY, WALT*
21
3
2
GATCHETT, ANNETTE
10
3
1
GAY, BRUCE
20
3
2
GEORGE, SUSAN
17
2
3
GIBB, HERMAN
6
2
5
GLASER, JOHN
11
2
1
GRAHAM, JUDY
19
1
2
GRANT, LESTER
20
1
5
GRINDER, GREGORY
8
4
3
GROGARD, MEGAN
13
4
3
GUNDERSEN, JENNIFER
1
2
3
HALL, CLINT
21
1
1
HANLON, DEBORAH*
20
2
4
HANSEN, DAVID
2
2
3
HARDESTY, RICHARD
22
1
5
HARVEY, JAMES
23
3
3
HARVEY, TERRY
23
1
5
HAWK, PATRICIA A
18
4
3
HAWKINS, SHERRY
3
4
6
HEDTKE, STEVEN
24
1
3
HERRMANN, JONATHAN*
23
2
1
HOFFMAN, ALAN
21
2
2
HOLDSWORTH, THOMAS J
25
2
1
HOLM, HARVEY
14
3
2
HOWARD, BARRY
25
1
3
HOWARD, ELIZABETH
14
3
1
11/21/96 03 09 PM 3

-------
TABLE AND ROUv, SEATING PLANS

DAY 1 AND 2
DAY 3
DAY 4
NAME
TABLES
BREAKOUT RMS.
BREAKOUT RMS
HUGGETT, ROBERT
1
1
8
HUTCHINGS, DEE L
19
4
1
JACKSON, PATRICIA
2
1
3
JACKSON, TOYA
1
4
2
JENSON, CORRENE
13
3
3
JOHNSON, MIMI
22
4
3
JONES, ESTHER
22
4
7
JONES, PAT
21
4
8
KADELI, LEK*
24
4
7
KAHL, MICHAEL
14
3
3
KANTOR, EDWARD
9
3
2
KAPLAN, NORMAN
22
3
1
KAVLOCK, ROBERT
3
1
3
KOREN, HILLEL
5
1
3
KULP, RUSSELL
23
2
1
LAMBERSON, JANET
6
2
3
LAPAN, RICK
3
2
3
LAURIE, VERNON
5
4
4
LAWRENCE, CAL
6
1
1
LESLIE, ANNE
24
4
7
LEW, ROSE
1
3
6
LEWIS, DENISE
23
3
3
LEWIS, NORMA
12
3
1
LINGLE, STEVE
10
1
4
LINTHURST, RICK
9
1
2
LONGEST, HENRY L
9
1
8
LYONS, TERRENCE
13
2
1
MABELLOS, JESSE
20
3
3
MAHAFFEY, KATE
10
3
5
11/21/96 03 09 PM 4

-------
TABLE AND ROOM SEATING PLANS

DAY 1 AND 2
DAY 3
DAY 4
NAME
TABLES
BREAKOUT RMS
BREAKOUT RMS








MARTIN, BARRY
11
1
2
MASON, SHARON
25
4
7
MAYER, FOSTER
12
1
3
MCCARTHY-O'REILLY, MARY
20
4
6
MCCLANAHAN, MELINDA
13
1
2
MCCRILLIS, ROBERT
24
3
1
MCKENNEY, CHARLES
2
4
3
MCKINNON, HUGH
14
1
1
MENZER, ROBERT
15
1
4
MESSER, JAY*
25
3
2
MILLER, CHARLES A
25
2
1
MILLER, DIANA
14
2
3
MOORE, GEORGE
1
2
1
MOORE, JOHN
10
1
2
MOORE, MIKE*
12
1
7
MORRIS, CURTIS M.
22
3
2
MULKEY, LEE
16
1
1
MULLIN, MICHAEL
7
3
3
MURPHY, CATHY
15
4
2
MURPHY, THOMAS
23
1
3
NACCI, DIANE
4
3
3
OLEXEY, ROBERT
17
1
1
OPPELT, TIM
18
1
1
OSBORNE, MICHAEL
1
3
1
OWENS, JAMES H
15
2
1
PAHL, DALE
23
2
2
PATTON, DOROTHY
19
1
6
PEACHER, CLAY
19
4
3
PEARSON, GARETH
7
2
2
11/21/96 03 09 PM 5

-------
TABLE AND ROOM SEATING PLANS

DAY 1 AND 2
DAY 3
DAY 4
NAME
TABLES
BREAKOUT RMS
BREAKOUT RMS








POTTER, BILL
2
2
2
PREUSS, PETER
22
1
4
PRINCIOTTA, FRANK
21
1
1
PRYOR, MARGHERITA
2
4
6
PUZAK, JACK
20
1
4
RADZIKOWSKI, MARYELLEN
24
1
6
REASONER, DONALD
14
3
1
REITER, LARRY
25
1
3
RENARD, ESPERANZA P
7
3
4
RILEY, LOIS
5
4
8
ROHRER, JUDY
4
4
8
ROSS, LINDA B*
11
1
7
RUBINSTEIN, NORMAN
1
1
3
RUSSO, ROSEMARIE
2
1
2
SAILSTAD, DENISE
15
2
3
SAKIEWICZ, CAROL A
5
4
3
SALMON, LEE*
1
1
6
SANTAVY, DEBORAH
24
2
3
SCHIERMEIER, FRANK
3
1
2
SCHMELLING, STEPHEN
20
3
1
SERGEANT, ANNE*
3
3
5
SHAFFRAN, MARY*
2
2
8
SHAW, DENICE
6
3
3
SHIMABUKU, RAY
20
3
3
SIKDAR, SUBHAS
4
1
1
SIMES, GUY
16
3
1
SLIMAK, MICHAEL
5
1
5
SMART, JAN
16
4
3
SMITH, BENNETT
3
3
2
11/21/96 03.09 PM 6

-------
TABLE AND ROOM SEATING PLANS

DAY 1 AND 2
DAY 3
DAY 4
NAME
TABLES
BREAKOUT RMS
BREAKOUT RMS








SMITH, KATE
6
1
2
SMITH, STEVE*
4
4
7
SOLOMON, ALLEN
21
2
3
SPARKS, ALLEN R
25
4
3
SPYRES, JULIE*
5
1
4
STANTON, MARK
17
3
3
STEEN, WILLIAM
16
2
2
STELMA, GERARD
4
2
2
SUTTON-BUSBY, VERLA
23
4
7
TEICHMAN, KEVIN*
6
1
6
TERRELL, DOCK
18
3
3
THOMAS, SHIRLEY
7
4
7
THORLAKSON, BOB*
7
3
1
TILSON, HUGH
7
1
3
TUCKER, DONNA
11
4
5
VAN EE, JEFF
11
3
2
VEITH, GIL
8
1
3
VORMWALD, RON
15
4
3
WASSON, SHIRLEY
2
2
1
WATERS, KAY
11
4
7
WATKINSON, WILLIAM
19
3
3
WATSON, PATRICIA L
12
4
1
WENTWORTH, NANCY
3
1
4
WHITFIELD, JAMIE
21
2
1
WIENER, RUSSELL
10
1
2
WIGGINTON, MARY
9
4
6
WILKINS, AMINA
7
2
5
WRAY, EVELYN
9
4
7
WRIGHT, KEN*
8
2
2
11/21/96 03 09 PM 7

-------
TABLE AND ROU... SEATING PLANS

DAY 1 AND 2
DAY 3
DAY 4
NAME
TABLES
BREAKOUT RMS
BREAKOUT RMS








ZARBA, CHRIS
10
1
8
ZENICK, HAL
11
1
3
	
_




*Facilitators





DAY 3 BREAKOUT



1=managers



2=scientists



3=scientists



4=other







DAY 4 BREAKOUT



1=NRMRL



2=NERL



3=NHEERL



4=NCERQA



5=NCEA



6=ORSI



7=ORMA



8=IOAA











11/21/96 03 09 PM 8

-------
Day One Seating Arrangements
TABLE 1
James Andreasen
Jennifer Gundersen
Rose Lew
Toya Jackson
Michael Osborne
Robert Huggett
Norman Rubinstein
George Moore
Lee Salmon - facilitator
TABLE 2
Robert Bellies
David Hansen
Margherita Pryor
Bill Potter
Shirley Wasson
Patricia Jackson
Rosemane Russo
Charles McKenney
Mary Shaffran - facilitator
TABLE 3
Sharon Boyde
Rick Lap an
Nancy Wentworth
Bennett Smith
Ann Akland
Robert Kavlock
Frank Schiermeier
Sherry Hawkins
Anne Sergeant - facilitator
TABLE 4
Joseph Corbett
Diane Nacci
Judy Rohrer
Gerard Stelma
Joe Alexander
Subhas Sikdar
Steve Smith - facilitator

-------
TABLE 5
Robert Frederick
Carol Sakiewicz
Vernon Laurie
Latasha Carson-Cox
Linda Birnbaum
Hillel Koren
Michael Slimak
Lois Riley
Julie Spyres - facilitator
TABLE 6
Herman Gibb
Janet Lamberson
Tom Dixon
Pam Bassford
Elizabeth Bryan
Cal Lawrence
Kate Smith
Denice Shaw
Kevin Teichman - facilitator
TABLE 7
Amina Wilkins
Michael Mullin
Esperanza Renard
Clyde Dempsey
Michael Callahan
Gareth Pearson
Hugh Tilson
Shirley Thomas
Bob Thorlakson - facilitator
TABLE 8
Michael Davis
Gregory Grinder
Janet Contreras
Patricia Erickson
Bob Clark
Tom Clark
Gil Veith
Ken Wright - facilitator

-------
TABLE 9
Harlal Choudhury
Kathy Bobseine
Edward Kan tor
Walt Feige
Rick Linthurst
Henry Longest
Mary Wigginton
Evelyn Wray
Jim Carr - facilitator
TABLE 10
Kate Mahaffey
Karen Dean
Steve Lingle
Annette Gatchett
Larry Claxton
John Moore
Russell Weiner
Chns Zarba
Susan Conrath - facilitator
TABLE 11
Donna Tucker
Kay Waters
Michael Gage
Jeff Van Ee
John Glaser
John Convery
Barry Martin
Hal Zenick
Linda Ross - facilitator
TALBE 12
John Arthur
Pat Watson
Linda Exum
Norma Lewis
Roger Cortesi
Foster Mayer
Mike Moore - facilitator

-------
TABLE 13
Correne Jenson
Megan Grogard
Walter Fnck
Terrence Lyons
Larry Cupitt
Melinda McClanahan
Peter Durant
TBD - facilitator
TABLE 14
Michael Kahl
Diana Miller
Harvey Holm
Donald Reasoner
Debbie Dietrich
Hugh McKinnon
Elizabeth Howard
Jessica Barron - facilitator
TABLE 15
Ron Vormwald
Denise Sailstad
Cathy Murphy
James Owens
Robert Menzer
Jean Croft
Julie Bowen - facilitator
TABLE 16
Maryann Bassett
Jan Smart
William Steen
Guy Simes
Alfred Dufour
Lee Mulkey
Robert Davis
Sandra Bowman - facilitator

-------
TABLE 17
Michael Cairns
Mark Stanton
Elizabeth Betz
Susan George
Bill Farland
Robert Olexy
Jim Dryer
Randy Brady - facilitator
TABLE 18
Patricia Hawk
Dock Terrell
Maribel Colon
Frank Freestone
Gary Foley
Tim Oppelt
Bob Dyer
Richard Brown - facilitator
TABLE 19
Clay Peacher
William Watkinson
Brian Eder
Dee Hutchings
Judy Graham
Dorothy Patton
Carol Finch
Kathy Driver - facilitator
TABLE 20
Ray Shimabuku
Jesse Mabellos
Bruce Gay
Stephen Schmelling
Lester Grant
Jack Puzak
Mary McCarthy-O'Reily
Deborah Hanlon - facilitator

-------
TABLE 21
Allen Solomon
Ruth Corn
Alan Hoffman
J ami Whitfield
Clint Hall
Frank Princiotta
Pat Jones
Walt Galloway - facilitator
TABLE 22
Jed Campbell
Esther Jones
Curtis Morris
Norman Kaplan
Peter Preuss
Richard Hardesty
Mimi Johnson
Margery Exton - facilitator
TABLE 23
James Harvey
Verla Sutton-Busby
Dale Pahl
Russell Kulp
Terry Harvey
Tom Murphy
Denise Lewis
Jon Herrmann - facilitator
TABLE 24
Deborah Santavy
Jason Choe
Louis Feige
Robert McCrilhs
Steve Hedtke
Mary Ellen Radzikowski
Anne Leslie
Lek Kadeli - facilitator

-------
TABLE 25
Allen Sparks
Nicole Edwards
Thomas Holdsworth
Charles Miller
Barry Howard
Larry Reiter
Sharon Mason
Jay Messer - facilitator

-------
*
0.
G.
•a
»
9
r
B5*

-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
A
R
n
n
AKLAND, ANN
NHEERL
RTP
manager
ALEXANDER, JOE
IOAA
WASHINGTON
manager
ANDREASEN, JAMES
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
ARTHUR, JOHN
NHEERL
DULUTH
self-nominated
BARRON, JESSICA
OARM
CINCINNATI
facilitator
BASSETT, MARYANN
NHEERL
CHAPEL HILL
self-nominated
BASSFORD, PAM
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
BELILES, ROBERT
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
BETZ, ELIZABETH
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
BIRNBAUM, LINDA
NHEERL
RTP
manager
BOBSEINE, KATHY
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
BOWEN, JULIE
REG 10
SEATTLE
facilitator
BOWMAN, SANDRA
OARM
CINCINNATI
HRO rep.
BOYDE, SHARON
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
BRADY, RANDY
OARM
RTP
HRO rep
BROWN, RICHARD
OHROS
WASHINGTON
facilitator
BRYAN, ELIZABETH
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
CAIRNS, MICHAEL
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
self-nominated
CALLAHAN, MICHAEL
NCEA
WASHINGTON
manager/steering cmte
CAMPBELL, JED
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
CARR, JIM
OARM
WASHINGTON
facilitator
CARSON-COX, LATASHA
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
CHOE, JASON
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
CHOUDHURY, HARLAL
NCEA
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
CLARK, BOB
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
CLARK, TOM
NERL
RTP
manager/steering cmte
CLAXTON, LARRY
NHEERL
RTP
manager
COLON, MARIBEL
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
CONRATH, SUSAN
OAR
WASHINGTON
facilitator
CONTRERAS, JANET
NERL
LAS VEGAS
self-nominated
CONVERY, JOHN
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
1

-------
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
.a
D
CORBETT, JOSEPH
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
CORN, RUTH
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
CORTESI, ROGER
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
CROFT, JEAN
I OA A
WASHINGTON
steering cmte
CUPITT, LARRY
NERL
RTP
manager
DAVIS, J MICHAEL
NCEA
RTP
self-nominated
DAVIS, ROBERT
AFGE
RTP
Union rep
DEAN, KAREN F
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
DEMPSEY, CLYDE
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
DIETRICH, DEBBIE
ORMA
WASHINGTON
manager/steering cmte
DIXON, THOMAS
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
DRIVER, KATHY
NHEERL
RTP
facilitator
DRYER, JIM
NFFE
CINCINNATI
Union rep
DUFOUR, ALFRED
NERL
CINCINNATI
manager
DURANT, PETER
ORMA
WASHINGTON
manager
DYER, BOB
NHEERL
RTP
steering cmte
EDER, BRIAN
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
EDWARDS, NICOLE
ORSI
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
ERICKSON, PATRICIA
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
EXTON, MARGERY
OPPTS
WASHINGTON
facilitator
EXUM, LINDA
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
FARLAND, BILL
NCEA
WASHINGTON
manager
FEIGE, LOUIS
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
FEIGE, WALT
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
FINCH, CAROL
IOAA
WASHINGTON
steering cmte
FOLEY, GARY
NERL
RTP
manager/steering cmte
FREDERICK, ROBERT
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
FREESTONE, FRANK
NRMRL
EDISON
self-nominated
FRICK, WALTER
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
GAGE, MICHAEL
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
GALLOWAY, WALT
NERL
LAS VEGAS
facilitator
11/22/96 07 54 AM 2

-------
ORD WORKSHo.- PARTICIPANTS
A
A
B
c.
n
63
GATCHETT, ANNETTE
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
64
GAY, BRUCE
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
65
GEORGE, SUSAN
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
66
GIBB, HERMAN
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
67
GLASER, JOHN
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
68
GRAHAM, JUDY
NERL
RTP
manager/steering cmte
69
GRANT, LESTER
NCEA
RTP
manager
70
GRINDER, GREGORY
NHEERL
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
71
GROGARD, MEGAN
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
72
GUNDERSEN, JENNIFER
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
73
HALL, CLINT
NRMRL
ADA
manager
74
HANLON, DEBORAH
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
facilitator
75
HANSEN, DAVID
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
76
HARDESTY, RICHARD
NCEA
WASHINGTON
manager
77
HARVEY, JAMES
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
78
HARVEY, TERRY
NCEA
CINCINNATI
manager
79
HAWK, PATRICIA A
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
self-nominated
80
HAWKINS, SHERRY
ORSI
WASHINGTON
work group
81
HEDTKE, STEVEN
NHEERL
DULUTH
manager
82
HERRMANN, JONATHAN
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
facilitator
83
HOFFMAN, ALAN
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
84
HOLDSWORTH, THOMAS J
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
85
HOLM, HARVEY
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
86
HOWARD, BARRY
NHEERL
RTP
manager
87
HOWARD, ELIZABETH
NRMRL
RTP
HRC rep
88
HUGGETT, ROBERT
IOAA
WASHINGTON
manager
89
HUTCHINGS, DEE L.
NRMRL
ADA
self-nominated
90
JACKSON, PATRICIA
NHEERL
RTP
manager
91
JACKSON, TOYA
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
92
JENSON, CORRENE
NHEERL
DULUTH
self-nominated
93
JOHNSON, MIMI
NAGE
NARRAGANSETT
Union rep
11/22/96 07 54 AM 3

-------
A
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
JONES, ESTHER
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
JONES, PAT
I OA A
WASHINGTON
work group
KADELI, LEK
ORMA
WASHINGTON
facilitator
KAHL, MICHAEL
NHEERL
DULUTH
self-nominated
KANTOR, EDWARD
NERL
LAS VEGAS
self-nominated
KAPLAN, NORMAN
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
KAVLOCK, ROBERT
NHEERL
RTP
manager
KOREN, HILLEL
NHEERL
RTP
manager
KULP, RUSSELL
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
LAMBERSON, JANET
NHEERL
NEWPORT
self-nominated
LAPAN, RICK
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
LAURIE, VERNON
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
LAWRENCE, CAL
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
LESLIE, ANNE
NFFE
WASHINGTON
Union rep
LEW, ROSE
ORSI
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
LEWIS, DENISE
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
LEWIS, NORMA
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
LINGLE, STEVE
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
LINTHURST, RICK
NERL
RTP
manager
LONGEST, HENRY L
IOAA
WASHINGTON
manager
LYONS, TERRENCE
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
MABELLOS, JESSE
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
MAHAFFEY, KATE
NCEA
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
MARTIN, BARRY
NERL
RTP
manager
MASON, SHARON
AFGE
WASHINGTON
Union rep
MAYER, FOSTER
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
manager
MCCARTHY-O'REILLY, MARY
ORSI
WASHINGTON
steering cmte
MCCLANAHAN, MELINDA
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager/steenng cmte
MCCRILLIS, ROBERT
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
MCKENNEY, CHARLES
NAGE
GULF BREEZE
Union rep
MCKINNON, HUGH
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager/steering cmte
11/22/96 07 54 AM 4

-------
A
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
MENZER, ROBERT
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
MESSER, JAY
NERL
RTP
facilitator
MILLER, CHARLES A
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
MILLER, DIANA
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
MOORE, GEORGE
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
HRC rep
MOORE, JOHN
NERL
LAS VEGAS
manager
MOORE, MIKE
ORMA
WASHINGTON
steering cmte
MORRIS, CURTIS M
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
MULKEY, LEE
NRMRL
ATHENS
manager/steering cmte
MULLIN, MICHAEL
NHEERL
GROSE ILE
self-nominated
MURPHY, CATHY
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
MURPHY, THOMAS
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
manager
NACCI, DIANE
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
OLEXEY, ROBERT
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
OPPELT, TIM
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
OSBORNE, MICHAEL
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
OWENS, JAMES H
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
PAHL, DALE
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
PATTON, DOROTHY
ORSI
WASHINGTON
manager
PEACHER, CLAY
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
PEARSON, GARETH
NERL
LAS VEGAS
self-nominated
POTTER, BILL
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
PREUSS, PETER
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
PRINCIOTTA, FRANK
NRMRL
RTP
manager
PRYOR, MARGHERITA
ORSI
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
PUZAK, JACK
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
RADZIKOWSKI, MARYELLEN
ORSI
WASHINGTON
manager/steering cmte
REASONER, DONALD
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
REITER, LARRY
NHEERL
RTP
manager
RENARD, ESPERANZA P
NCERQA
EDISON
self-nominated
RILEY, LOIS
I OA A
WASHINGTON
work group
11/22/96 07 54 AM 5

-------
A
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
ROHRER, JUDY
IOAA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
ROSS, LINDA B
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
RUBINSTEIN, NORMAN
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
manager
RUSSO, ROSEMARIE
NERL
ATHENS
manager
SAILSTAD, DENISE
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
SAKIEWICZ, CAROL A
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
SALMON, LEE
OAR
WASHINGTON
facilitator
SANTAVY, DEBORAH
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
SCHIERMEIER, FRANK
NERL
RTP
manager
SCHMELLING, STEPHEN
NRMRL
ADA
self-nominated
SERGEANT, ANNE
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
SHAFFRAN, MARY
IOAA
WASHINGTON
work group
SHAW, DENICE
NHEERL
RTP
work group
SHIMABUKU, RAY
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
self-nominated
SIKDAR, SUBHAS
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
SIMES, GUY
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
SLIMAK, MICHAEL
NCEA
WASHINGTON
manager/steering cmte
SMART, JAN
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
SMITH, BENNETT
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
SMITH, KATE
NERL
CINCINNATI
manager
SMITH, STEVE
ORMA
WASHINGTON
facilitator
SOLOMON, ALLEN
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
self-nominated
SPARKS, ALLEN R
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
SPYRES, JULIE
OPPE
WASHINGTON
facilitator
STANTON, MARK
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
STEEN, WILLIAM
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
STELMA, GERARD
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
SUTTON-BUSBY, VERLA
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
TEICHMAN, KEVIN
ORSI
WASHINGTON
facilitator
TERRELL, DOCK
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
THOMAS, SHIRLEY
ORMA
WASHINGTON
work group
11/22/96 07 54 AM 6

-------
A
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
THORLAKSON, BOB
OHROS
WASHINGTON
HRO rep
TILSON, HUGH
NHEERL
RTP
manager
TUCKER, DONNA
NCEA
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
VAN EE, JEFF
NERL
LAS VEGAS
self-nominated
VEITH, GIL
NHEERL
RTP
manager
VORMWALD, RON
NHEERL
DULUTH
self-nominated
WASSON, SHIRLEY
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
WATERS, KAY
ORMA
WASHINGTON
work group
WATKINSON, WILLIAM
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
WATSON, PATRICIA L
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
WENTWORTH, NANCY
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
WHITFIELD, JAMIE
NRMRL
KANSAS CITY
self-nominated
WIENER, RUSSELL
NERL
RTP
manager
WIGGINTON, MARY
ORSI
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
WILKINS, AMINA
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
WRAY, EVELYN
ORMA
WASHINGTON
work group
WRIGHT, KEN
OHROS
WASHINGTON
facilitator
ZARBA, CHRIS
IOAA
WASHINGTON
steering cmte
ZENICK, HAL
NHEERL
RTP
manager/steering cmte
11/22/96 07 54 AM 7

-------

-------
1st Annual ORD Workshop - Managing Change
ORD Steering Committee:
Carol Finch, Chair	10AA
Michael Callahan	NCEA
Tom Clark	NERL
Jean Croft	IOAA
Debbie Dietrich	ORMA
Bob Dyer	NHEERL
Gary Foley	NERL
Judy Graham	NERL
Shirley Hamilton	NCERQA
Mary McCarthy-O'Reilly	OSP/ORSI
Melinda McClanahan	NCERQA
Hugh McKinnon	NRMRL
Michael Moore	ORMA
Les Malkey	NRMRL
Mary Ellen Radzikowski	OSP/ORSI
Michael Slimak	NCEA
Chris Zarba	IOAA
Hal Zenick	NHEERL

-------
Workshop Coordinating Workgroup
Mary McCarthy-O'Reilly
OSP/ORSI
Chair
Richard Brown
Mary Shaffran
OARM
IOAA
Facilitators-Lead
Sherry Hawkins
OSP/ORSI
Strategic Integration and
Communications
Denice Shaw
NHEERL
Poster Session-Lead
Michael Moore
ORMA
Selection Process-Lead
and Special Guests
Steven Smith
ORMA
HRC Liaison
Jayne Ramsey
ORMA
ORD Workshop Mailbox
Coordinator and Participants
Liaison
Kay Waters
ORMA
Implementation Team-Lead
Lois Riley
Ken Wright
IOAA
OARM
ORD Survey-Lead
ORD Survey-Lead
Shirley Thomas
ORMA
Registration Manager
Special Projects
Evelyn Wray
ORMA
Special Projects
Pat Jones
IOAA
On-Site Office Manager
Roxanne Settle
NCERQA
Reservations/T ravel

-------
On-Site Workgroup
Coordination Workgroup, Chair
Staff
Implementation Team, Lead
Staff
Mary McCarthy O'Reilly
Evelyn Wray
Kay Waters
Shirley Thomas
Pat Jones
Strategic Integration, Lead
Sherry Hawkins
Walt Galloway
Denice Shaw
Facilitators Team, Lead
Facilitators:
Richard Brown
Mary Shafifran
Jessica Barron
Julie Bowfin
Jim Carr
Sandy Bowman
Kathy Driver
Randy Brady
Margery Exton
Walt Galloway
Deborah Hanlon
Jonathan Herrmann
Lek Kadeli
Jay Messer
Linda Ross
Mike Moore
Lee Salmon
Ann Sergeant
Steve Smith
Julie Spyres
Kevin Teichman
Bob Thorlakson
Ken Wright
Honorary Member Carol Finch

-------
Hrst Annual ORDWorkshop
Planning Organization
ORD SENIOR
MANAGEMENT
STEERING COMMITTEE
Chair: Carol Finch
Members: Designated by
Executive Council
COORDINATING WORK GROUP
Chain Mary McCarthy-O'Reilly
ROl.F. OF STEERING COMMITTEE
Assure that the Workshop meets the needs of ORDwide
staff/ Identifies needs for Workgroup
Serves as communication link to the whole organization.
Evaluates change Workshop and identifies/
envisions next steps.
Serves as "bridge" between local organization and ORD
corporate!structure to achieve improvements
ana anchor change.
Chair. Serves as link to Senior Management
and provides policy guidance to the
Coordinating Work Group
ROLE OF COORDINATING WORK GROUT
Serves as operations center for preparations
necessary for the Workshop
•	Agenda Design and Facilitation Training
•	Logistics-Site Selection, Contractor Support, Travel. Funding etc.
•	Communications:
ORD-wide information. Summary Documents, etc.
Participant Invitations/Confirmations
Phone Traffic, On-site Communications,
Reports to SC Chair and tracks progress on all fronts
Develops options for SC decisions
Assures Executive Team priorities are met
Chair • Provides daily oversight and guidance
to Teams
• Serves as link to SC Chair
DESIGN/FACILITATION
TEAM
Chain Richard Brown
Members: Peter Durant,
Steve Smith, Mary Shaffron,
Ken WRight
IMPLEMENTATION TEAM
Chain Kay Waters
Members: Roxanne Settle,
Shirley Thomas, Lois Reily
STRATEGIC INTEGRATION
TEAM
Chain Sherry Hawkins
Members: Denise Shaw,
Melinda McClanahan
PARTICIPANTS SELECTION
PROCESS TEAM
Chain Jayne Ramsey,
Members: Mike Moore,
Shirley Thomas

-------
o
>
a
<
»¦«
Cfl
o
n
o
§
a
fT

-------
SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL ROLES
for
ORD EXECUTIVE, SCIENCE & MANAGEMENT
COUNCILS
Background
The Agency's mission is to protect environmental quality and human health
through effective environmental policies and regulations. The Office of Research
and Development (ORD) provides the scientific foundation for EPA's mission and
is the Agency's lead office for the production, review and integration of scientific
and technical knowledge into a credible science base on which effective policies and
regulations can he developed. To achieve this credible scientific base, ORD senior
management must be involved in defining, developing and implementing effective
policies, procedures, practices and systems.
In 1995 ORD redesigned itself to be more efficient and effective in its efforts.
Part of this redesign involved streamlining headquarters to focus on strategy, policy,
budget and external government interfaces. Program management responsibility is
delegated to the National Laboratories and Centers. This approach requires special
attention to integrating management and science across the organization and
providing opportunities for consensus building and decision making. Three senior
management bodies (Executive, Management and Science Councils) have been
established to fill this need. The specific roles and responsibilities of each of these
councils are summarized as follows:
Executive Council
The Executive Council is the senior governing body for ORD and is
responsible for providing the overall policy direction of the Office. Within the areas
delegated by the Assistant Administrator this Council:
V	Serves as ORD's senior body for developing policy direction and resolving
major policy issues.
V	Oversees, guides and directs ORD-wide activities.
V	Responds to issues forwarded to it from the Science and Management
Councils
V	Forwards issues to the Science and Management Councils for their
recommendations or resolution.
Members: * Assistant Administrator, Deputy Assistant Administrators,
Laboratory, Office and Center Directors
1

-------
Management Council
The mission of the Management Council is to facilitate a strong, well
managed and effective national environmental science and technical organization.
The Management Council:
V	Oversees ORD-wide management activities.
V	Advises the AA/ORD on ORD-wide management and administrative
issues and on their impact on ORD/EPA science initiatives and
programs.
V	Serves as an advisory and decision-making body for resolving ORD
management policy issues, as delegated by the AA/ORD.
V	Coordinates development and implementation of management policies,
procedures and systems.
V	Provides increased managerial awareness, cross-organizational
participation, collective direction and effective feedback on those issues
having significant impact on ORD's overall management operations.
Members: * DAA for Management, + DAA for Science, Director, Office of
Resource Management and Administration, Deputy Laboratory
and Center Directors for Management
Science Council
The mission of the Science Council is to facilitate a coherent research
program which supports Agency decision making. The Science Council:
V	Oversees ORD science planning, including leading the development of the
ORD Strategic Plan.
"v/ Advises the AA/ORD on science issues and on their impact on EPA/ORD
initiatives and programs.
V	Provides increased managerial awareness, cross organizational
participation, collective direction and effective feedback on those issues
having significant impact on ORD's overall scientific and technical
operations.
V	Provides a forum for guiding the development of research plans and for
regularly reviewing the status, progress and future milestones in ORD
research programs.
V	Serves as a decision-making body for resolving ORD science policy issues, as
delegated by the AA/ORD.
2

-------
Members: * DAA for Science, + DAA for Management, Director, Office of
Research and Science Integration, Director, Office of Science
Policy, Associate Laboratory Directors for Ecology and Health,
Associate Director for Science, National Center for
Environmental Research and Quality Assurance
* = Chair
+ = Ex Officio

-------
¦8
I
3
ts
a
o

-------
HBR
MARCH-APRIL T995
Leading Change:
ijEtlSIQN
- AHEAD
tb; . ^ -
Why Transformation Efforts Fail
by John!
Over the past decade, I have watched more than
100 companies try to remake themselves mto sig-
nificantly better competitors. They have included
large organizations (Ford) and small ones (Land-
mark Communications), companies based in the
United States (General Motors) and elsewhere
(Bntish Airways), corporations that were on their
knees (Eastern Airlines), and companies that were
earning good money (Bristol-Myers Squibb). These
efforts have gone under many banners: total quality
management, reengmeenng, right sizing, restruc-
turing, cultural change, and turnaround. But, m al-
most every case, the basic goal has been the same:
to make fundamental changes in how business is
conducted in order to help cope with a new, more
challenging market environment.
A few of these corporate change efforts have been
very successful. A few have been utter failures.
Most fall somewhere m between, with a distmct
P. Kotter
tilt toward the lower end of the scale. The lessons
that can be drawn are interesting and will probably
be relevant to even more organizations m the in-
creasingly competitive business environment of
the coming decade.
The most general lesson to be learned from the
more successful cases is that the change process
goes through a series of phases that, in total, usual-
ly require a considerable length of time. Skipping
steps creates only the illusion of speed and never
produces a satisfying result. A second very general
i John P Kotter is the Konosuke Matsushita Professor of
Leadership at the Harvard Business School in Boston,
Massachusetts He is the author of The New Rules. How
to Succeed in Today s Post-Corporate World (New York
Free Press, 1995), Corporate Culture and Performance,
coauthoied with James L Heskett (New York Free Press,
1992), and A Force for Change How Leadership Differs
from Management (New York Free Press, 1990)
DRAWINGS BY KURT VARGO
59

-------
LEADING CHANGE
lesson is that critical mistakes in any of the phases
can have a devastating impact, slowing momentum
and negating hard-won gains. Perhaps because we
have relatively little experience in renewing organi-
zations, even very capable people often make at
least one big error.
Error # 1: Not Establishing a Great
Enough Sense of Urgency
Most successful change efforts begin when some
individuals or some groups start to look hard at a
company's competitive situation, market position,
technological trends, and financial performance.
They focus on the potential revenue drop when an
important patent expires, the five-year trend m de-
clining margins in a core business, or an emerging
market that everyone seems to be ignoring They
then find ways to communicate this information
broadly and dramatically, especially with respect to
crises, potential crises, or great opportunities that
are very timely. This first step is essential because
just getting a transformation program started re-
quires the aggressive cooperation of many individu-
als. Without motivation, people won't help and the
effort goes nowhere. -
Compared with other steps in the change pro-
cess, phase one can sound easy. It is not. Well
over 50% of the companies I have
watched fail in this first phase. What
are the reasons for that failure'
Sometimes executives underesti-
mate how hard it can be to drive
people out of their comfort zones
Sometimes they grossly overesti-
mate how successful they have al-
ready been in increasing urgency
Sometimes they lack patience.
"Enough with the preliminaries,-
let's get on with it." In many cases, executives be-
come paralyzed by the downside possibilities They
worry that employees with seniority will become
defensive, that morale will drop, that events will
spin out of control, that short-term busmess results
will be jeopardized, that the stock will sink, and
that they will be blamed for creating a crisis
A paralyzed senior management often comes
from having too many managers and not enough
leaders Management's mandate is to minimize risk
and to keep the current system operating Change,
by definition, requires creating a new system,
which in turn always demands leadership Phase
one in a renewal process typically goes nowhere un-
til enough real leaders are promoted or hired into
senior-level jobs
Transformations often begin, and begin well,
when an organization has a new head who is a good
leader and who sees the need for a major change If
the renewal target is the entire company, the CEO
is key. If change is needed in a division, the division
general manager is key. When these individuals are
not new leaders, great leaders, or change champi-
ons, phase one can be a huge challenge.
Bad business results are both a blessing and a
curse in the first phase. On the positive side, losing
money does catch people's attention. But it also
gives less maneuvering room. With good busmess
results, the opposite is true: convincing people of
the need for change is much harder, but you have
more resources to help make changes.
But whether the starting point is good perfor-
mance or bad, in the more successful cases I have
witnessed, an individual or a group always facili-
tates a frank discussion of potentially unpleasant'
facts: about new competition, shrinking margins,
decreasing market share, flat earnings, a lack of
revenue growth, or other relevant indices of a de-
clining competitive position. Because there seems
to be an almost universal human tendency to shoot
the bearer of bad news, especially if the head of the
organization is not a change champion, executives
in these companies often rely on outsiders to bring
unwanted information. Wall Street analysts, custom-
One chief executive officer
deliberately engineered the
largest accounting loss in the
history of the company.
ers, and consultants can all be helpful in this re-
gard The purpose of all this activity, in the words of
one former CEO of a large European company, is
"to make the status quo seem more dangerous than
launching into the unknown."
In a few of the most successful cases, a group has
manufactured a crisis One CEO deliberately engi-
neered the largest accounting loss in the company's
history, creatmg huge pressures from Wall Street in
the process One division president commissioned
first-ever customer-satisfaction surveys, knowing
full well that the results would be terrible. He then
made these findings public. On the surface, such
moves can look unduly risky. But there is also risk
in playmg it too safe, when the urgency rate is not
pumped up enough, the transformation process
60
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW March-April 1995

-------
Eight Steps to Transforming Your Organization
Establishing a Sense of Urgency
Examining market and competitive realities
Identifying and discussing crises, potential crises, or major opportunities

Forming a Powerful Guiding Coalition
Assembling a group with enough power to lead the change effort
Encouraging the group to work together as a team

Creating a Vision
Creating a vision to help direct the change effort
Developing strategies for achieving that vision
Communicating the Vision
Using every vehicle possible to communicate the new vision and strategies
Teaching new behaviors by the example ofLthe guiding coalition
Empowering Others to Act on the Vision
Getting rid of obstacles to change
Changing systems or structures that seriously undermine the vision
Encouraging risk taking and nontroditional ideas, activities, and actions
or
tr	-p J
Planning for and Creating Short-Term Wins
Planning for visible performance improvements	<
Creating those improvements
Recognizing and rewarding employees involved in the improvements
t
i V*
^>1
Consolidating Improvements and Producing Still More Change
Using increased credibility to change systems, structures, and policies that don't fit the vision
Hiring, promoting, and developing employees who can implement the vision
Reinvigorating the process with new projects, themes, and change agents
,,,


Institutionalizing New Approaches
Articulating the connections between the new behaviors and corporate success
Developing the means to ensure leadership development and succession

' f " ~-'- h £
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW March-April 1995
61

-------
LEADING CHANGE
cannot succeed and the long-term future of the or-
ganization is put in jeopardy.
When is the urgency rate high enough? From
what I have seen, the answer is when about 75% of
a company's management is honestly convinced
that business-as-usual is totally unacceptable. Any-
thing less can produce very senous problems later
on m the process
Error #2: Not Creating a Powerful
Enough Guiding Coalition
Major renewal programs often start with just one
or two people. In cases of successful transformation
efforts, the leadership coalition grows and grows
over time. But whenever some minimum mass is
not achieved early in the effort, nothing much
worthwhile happens.
It is often said that major change is impossible
unless the head of the organization is an active sup-
porter. What I am talking about goes far beyond
that. In successful transformations, the chairman
or president or division general manager, plus an-
other 5 or 15 or 50 people, come together and devel-
op a shared commitment to excellent performance
through renewal In my experience, this group nev-
er mcludes all of the company's most semor execu-
tives because some people just won't buy in, at least
not at first But in the most successful cases, the
coalition is always pretty powerful - m terms of
titles, information and expertise, reputations and
relationships.
In both small and large organizations, a success-
ful guiding team may consist of only three to five
people during the first year of a renewal effort. But
in big companies, the coalition needs to grow to the
20 to 50 range before much progress can be made in
phase three and beyond. Semor managers always
form the core of the group. But sometimes you find
board members, a representative from a key cus-
tomer, or even a powerful union leader.
Because the guiding coalition mcludes members
who are not part of senior management, it tends to
operate outside of the normal hierarchy by defini-
tion. This can be awkward, but it is clearly neces-
sary. If the existing hierarchy were working well,
there would be no need for a major transformation.
But since the current system is not working, reform
generally demands activity outside of formal bound-
aries, expectations, and protocol.
A high sense of urgency within the managerial
ranks helps enormously m puttmg a guiding coali-
tion together. But more is usually required. Some-
one needs to get these people together, help them
develop a shared assessment of their company's
problems and opportunities, and create a minimum
level of trust and communication. Off-site retreats,
for two or three days, are one popular vehicle for ac-
complishing this task. I have seen many groups of 5
to 35 executives attend a series of these retreats
over a period of months.
Companies that fail in phase two usually under-
estimate the difficulties of producing change and
thus the importance of a powerful guiding coali-
tion. Sometimes they have no history of teamwork
at the top and therefore undervalue the importance
of this type of coalition. Sometimes they expect the
team to be led by a staff executive from human re-
sources, quality, or strategic planning mstead of a
key line manager. No matter how capable or dedi-
cated the staff head, groups without strong line
leadership never achieve the power that is required.
Jk
In failed transformations, you often find plenty of plans and programs, but no vision.
62
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW March-April 1995

-------
Efforts that don't have a powerful enough guiding
coalition can make apparent progress for a while.
But, sooner or later, the opposition gathers itself to-
gether and stops the change.
Error #3: Lacking a Vision
In every successful transformation effort that I
have seen, the guiding coalition develops a picture
of the future that is relatively easy to communicate
and appeals to customers, stockholders, and em-
ployees. A vision always goes beyond the numbers
that are typically found m five-year plans. A vision
says something that helps clarify the direction in
which an organization needs to move. Sometimes
the first draft comes mostly from a single individ-
ual It is usually a bit blurry, at least initially But
after the coalition works at it for 3 or 5 or even 12
months, something much better emerges through
their tough analytical thinking and a little dream-
ing Eventually, a strategy for achieving that vision
is also developed.
In one midsize European company, the first pass
at a vision contained two-thirds of the basic ideas
that were in the final product. The concept of
global reach was in the initial version
from the beginning So was the idea
of becoming preeminent in certain
businesses. But one central idea in
the final version-gettmg out of low
value-added activities - came only
after a series of discussions over a
period of several months
Without a sensible vision, a trans-
formation effort can easily dissolve mto a list of
confusing and incompatible projects that can take
the organization m the wrong direction or nowhere
at all Without a sound vision, the reengineering
project m the accounting department, the new 360-
degree performance appraisal from the human re-
sources department, the plant's quality program,
the cultural change project m the sales force will
not add up in a meaningful way.
In failed transformations, you often find plenty of
plans and directives and programs, but no vision. In
one case, a company gave out four-inch-thick note-
books describing its change effort. In mind-numb-
ing detail, the books spelled out procedures, goals,
methods, and deadlines. But nowhere was there a
clear and compelling statement of where all this
was leading Not surprisingly, most of the employ-
ees with whom I talked were either confused or
alienated The big, thick books did not rally them
together or inspire change. In fact, they probably
had just the opposite effect
In a few of the less successful cases that I have
seen, management had a sense of direction, but it
was too complicated or blurry to be useful. "Recent-
ly, I asked an executive m a midsize company to de-
scribe his vision and received m return a barely
comprehensible 30-minute lecture. Buned in his
answer were the basic elements of a sound vision.
But they were buned-deeply.
A useful rule of thumb: if you can't communicate
the vision to someone in five minutes or less and
get a reaction that signifies both understanding
and interest, you are not yet done with this phase
of the transformation process.
Error #4: Undercommunicating the
Vision by a Factor of Ten
I've seen three patterns with respect to commu-
nication, all very common. In the first, a group ac-
tually does develop a pretty good transformation
vision and then proceeds to communicate it by
holding a single meeting or sending out a single
communication. Having used about .0001 % of the
yearly intracompany communication, the group is
startled that few people seem to understand the
A vision says something that
clarifies the direction in which
an organization needs to move.
new approach In the second pattern, the head of
the organization spends a considerable amount
of time making speeches to employee groups, but
most people still don't get it (not surprising, smce
vision captures only .0005% of the total yearly
communication) In the third pattern, much more
effort goes mto newsletters and speeches, but some
very visible semor executives still behave in ways
that are antithetical to the vision. The net result is
that cynicism among the troops goes up, while be-
lief in the communication goes down.
Transformation is impossible unless hundreds or
thousands of people are willing to help, often to the
point of making short-term sacrifices Employees
will not make sacrifices, even if they are unhappy
with the status quo, unless they believe that useful
change is possible Without credible communica-
tion, and a lot of it, the hearts and minds of the
troops are never captured.
This fourth phase is particularly challenging if
the short-term sacrifices mclude job losses. Gain-
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW March-April 1995
63

-------
LEADING CHANGE
mg understanding and support is tough when
downsizing is a part of the vision For this reason,
successful visions usually include new growth pos- |
sibilities and the commitment to treat fairly any- ;
one who is laid off.	j
Executives who communicate well incorporate j
messages into their hour-by-hour activities In a
routine discussion about a business problem, they i
talk about how proposed solutions fit (or don't fit) I
into the bigger picture. In a regular performance ap- !
praisal, they talk about how the employee's behav-
ior helps or undermines the vision. In a review of
a division's quarterly performance, they talk not
only about the numbers but also about how the
division's executives are contributing to the trans-
formation In a routine Q&A with employees at
a company facility, they tie their answers back to
renewal goals
In more successful transformation efforts, execu-
tives use all existing commumcation channels to
broadcast the vision. They turn boring and unread
company newsletters mto lively articles about the
vision. They take ritualistic and tedious quarterly
management meetings and turn them mto exciting
discussions of the transformation They throw out
much of the company's generic management edu-
cation and replace it with courses that focus on
business problems and the new vision. The guiding
principle is simple: use every possible channel, es-
Worst of all are bosses who
refuse to change and who make
demands that are inconsistent
with the overall effort.
pecially those that are being wasted on nonessen-
tial information
Perhaps even more important, most of the execu-
tives I have known in successful cases of major
change learn to "walk the talk " They consciously
attempt to become a living symbol of the new cor-
porate culture This is often not easy. A 60-year-old
plant manager who has spent precious little time
over 40 years thinking about customers will not
suddenly behave in a customer-oriented way But
I have witnessed just such a person change, and
change a great deal In that case, a high level of ur-
gency helped The fact that the man was a part of
the guiding coalition and the vision-creation team
also helped So did all the communication, which
kept reminding him of the desired behavior, and all
the feedback from his peers and subordinates,
which helped him see when he was not engaging in
that behavior
Communication comes m both words and deeds,
and the latter are often the most powerful form.
Nothmg undermmes change more than behavior by
important individuals that is inconsistent with
their words
Error #5: Not Removing Obstacles to
the New Vision
Successful transformations begin to mvolve large
numbers of people as the process progresses. Em-
ployees are emboldened to try new approaches, to
develop new ideas, and to provide leadership The
only constraint is that the actions fit within the
broad parameters of the overall vision The more
people mvolved, the better the outcome.
To some degree, a guiding coalition empowers
others to take action simply by successfully com-
municating the new direction But communication
is never sufficient by itself. Renewal also requires
the removal of obstacles Too often, an employee
understands the new vision and wants to help make
it happen. But an elephant appears to be blocking
the path. In some cases, the elephant is m the per-
son's head, and the challenge is to convince the in-
dividual that no external obstacle ex-
ists. But in most cases, the blockers
are very real
Sometimes the obstacle is the or-
ganizational structure, narrow job
categories can seriously undermine
efforts to increase productivity or
make it very difficult even to thmk
about customers. Sometimes com-
pensation or performance-appraisal
systems make people .choose be-
tween the new vision and their own self-interest.
Perhaps worst of all are bosses who refuse to change
and who make demands that are inconsistent with
the overall effort
One company began its transformation process
with much publicity and actually made good
progress through the fourth phase Then the change
effort ground to a halt because the officer m charge
of the company's largest division was allowed to
undermine most of the new initiatives. He paid lip
service to the process but did not change his behav-
ior or encourage his managers to change. He did not
reward the unconventional ideas called for m the
vision He allowed human resource systems to re-
main intact even when they were clearly mconsis-
64
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW March-\pril 1995

-------
Too often, an employee understands the new vision and wants to help make it happen.
But something appears to be blocking the path.
tent with the new ideals. I think the officer's mo-
tives were complex. To some degree, he did not be-
lieve the company needed major change. To some
degree, he felt personally threatened by all the
change. To some degree, he was afraid that he could
not produce both change and the expected oper-
ating profit. But despite the fact that they backed
the renewal effort, the other officers did virtually
nothing to stop the one blocker Agam, the reasons
were complex. The company had no history of
confronting problems like this. Some people were
afraid of the officer. The CEO was concerned that
he might lose a talented executive. The net result
was disastrous. Lower level managers concluded
that senior management had lied to them about
their commitment to renewal, cynicism grew, and
the whole effort collapsed.
In the first half of a transformation, no organiza-
tion has the momentum, power, or time to get nd of
all obstacles But the big ones must be confronted
and removed If the blocker is a person, it is impor-
tant that he or she be treated fairly and in a way that
is consistent with the new vision But action is es-
sential, both to empower others and to maintain
the credibility of the change effort as a whole.
Error #6: Not Systematically Planning
For and Creating Short-Term Wins
Real transformation takes time, and a renewal ef-
fort risks losing momentum if there are no short-
term goals to meet and celebrate Most people
won't go on the long march unless they see com-
pelling evidence within 12 to 24 months that the
journey is producing expected results Without
short-term wins, too many people give up or active-
ly join the ranks of those people who have been re-
sisting change
One to two years mto a successful transforma-
tion effort, you find quality beginning to go up on
certain indices or the decline m net income stop-
ping. You find some successful new product intro-
ductions or an upward shift in market share. You
find an impressive productivity improvement or
a statistically higher customer-satisfaction rating.
But whatever the case, the win is unambiguous.
The result is not just a judgment call that can be
discounted by those opposmg change.
| Creating short-term wins is different from hop-
1 ing for short-term wins. The latter is passive, the
former active. In a successful transformation, man-
agers actively look for ways to obtain clear perfor-
mance improvements, establish goals in the yearly
plannmg system, achieve the objectives, and re-
ward the people involved with recognition, promo-
tions, and even money. For example, the guiding
coalition at a U S manufacturing company pro-
duced a highly visible and successful new product
mtroduction about 20 months after the start of its
renewal effort The new product was selected about
six months into the effort because it met multiple
criteria- it could be designed and launched m a rela-
tively short period; it could be handled by a small
team of people who were devoted to the new vision;
it had upside potential, and the new product-devel-
opment team could operate outside the established
departmental structure without practical problems.
Little was left to chance, and the wm boosted the
credibility of the renewal process.
Managers often complam about being forced to
produce short-term wms, but I've found that pres-
sure can be a useful element in a change effort.
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW March April 1995
65

-------

While celebrating a win is fine, declaring the war won
can be catastrophic.
When it becomes clear to people that major change
will take a long time, urgency levels can drop.
Commitments to produce short-term wins help
keep the urgency level up and force detailed analyt-
ical thinking that can clarify or revise visions.
Error #7: Declaring Victory Too Soon
After a few years of hard work, managers may be
tempted to declare victory with the first clear per-
formance improvement. While celebrating a win is
fine, declaring the war won can be catastrophic.
Until changes sink deeply into a company's cul-
ture, a process that can take five to ten years, new
approaches are fragile and subject to regression
In the recent past, I have watched a dozen change
efforts operate under the reengmeenng theme. In
all but two cases, victory was declared and the ex-
pensive consultants were paid and thanked when
the first major project was completed after two to
three years. Within two more years, the useful
changes that had been introduced slowly disap-
peared. In two of the ten cases, it's hard to find any
trace of the reengmeenng work today.
Over the past 20 years, I've seen the same sort
of thing happen to huge quality projects, organi-
zational development efforts, and more. Typically,
the problems start early in the process: the urgency
level is not intense enough, the guiding coalition is
not powerful enough, and the vision is not clear
enough. But it is the premature victory celebra-
tion that kills momentum. And then the powerful
forces associated with tradition take over
Ironically, it is often a combination of change
initiators and change resistors that creates the pre-
mature victory celebration. In their enthusiasm over
a clear sign of progress, the initiators go overboard.
They are then joined by resistors, who are quick to
spot any opportumty to stop change. After the cele-
bration is over, the resistors pomt to the victory as
a sign that the war has been won and the troops
should be sent home Weary troops allow them-
selves to be convinced that they won. Once home,
the foot soldiers are reluctant to climb back on the
ships. Soon thereafter, change comes to a halt, and
tradition creeps back in
Instead of declaring victory, leaders of successful
efforts use the credibility afforded by short-term
wins to tackle even bigger problems. They go after
systems and structures that are not consistent with
the transformation vision and have not been con-
fronted before. They pay great attention to who is
promoted, who is hired, and how people are devel-
oped They include new reengmeenng projects that
are even bigger in scope than the initial ones They
66
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW March-April 1995

-------
LEADING CHANGE
understand that renewal efforts take not months
but years. In fact, in one of the most successful
transformations that I have ever seen, we quanti-
fied the amount of change that occurred each year
over a seven-year period. On a scale of one (low) to
ten (high), year one received a two, year two a four,
year three a three, year four a seven, year five an
eight, year six a four, and year seven a two. The
peak came in year five, fully 36 months after the
first set of visible wins.
Error #8: Not Anchoring Changes
in the Corporation's Culture
In the final analysis, change sticks when it be-
comes "the way we do things around here," when it
seeps into the bloodstream of the corporate body.
Until new behaviors are rooted in social norms and
shared values, they are subject to degradation as
soon as the pressure for change is removed.
Two factors are particularly important m institu-
tionalizing change m corporate culture. The first is
a conscious attempt to show people how the new
approaches, behaviors, and attitudes have helped
improve performance. When people are left on their
own to make the connections, they sometimes cre-
ate very inaccurate links. For example, because re-
sults improved while charismatic Harry was boss,
the troops link his mostly idiosyncratic style with
those results instead of seeing how their own im-
proved customer service and productivity were in-
strumental. Helping people see the right connec-
tions requires communication. Indeed, one company
was relentless, and it paid off enormously. Time
was spent at every major management meeting
to discuss why performance was increasing. The
company newspaper ran article after article show-
ing how changes had boosted earnings.
The second factor is taking sufficient time to
make sure that the next generation of top manage-
ment really does personify the new approach. If the
requirements for promotion don't change, renewal
rarely lasts. One bad succession decision at the top
of an organization can undermine a decade of hard
work. Poor succession decisions are possible when
boards of directors are not an integral part of the re-
newal effort. In at least three instances I have seen,
the champion for change was the retiring execu-
tive, and although his successor was not a resistor,
he was not a change champion. Because the boards
did not understand the transformations in any de-
tail, they could not see that their choices were not
good fits. The retiring executive in one case tried
unsuccessfully to talk his board into a less seasoned
candidate who better personified the transforma-
tion. In the other two cases, the CEOs did not resist
the boards' choices, because they felt the transfor-
mation could not be undone by their successors.
They were wrong. Within two years, signs of re-
newal began to disappear at both companies.
There are still more mistakes that people make,
but these eight are the big ones. I realize that in a
short article everything is made to sound a bit too
simplistic. In reality, even successful change efforts
are messy and full of surprises. But just as a relative-
ly simple vision is needed to guide people through a
major change, so a vision of the change process can
reduce the error rate. And fewer errors can spell the
difference between success and failure.	^
Repnnt 95204
"A penny for youi premeditations "
CARTOON BY GEORGE DOLE
67

-------
Gfi
69
3
¦o
n
>
n
a
o
S
65
9.

-------
ORD IMPROVEMENT OPPORTUNITY
FOLLOW-UP ACTION PLAN FORMAT
Current State: State the problem succinctly.
Impact of Current State: How does this affect your organization?
Desired State: What is the goal of the improvement?
Barriers: What obstacles do you foresee in achieving desired state?
SPECIFIC ELEMENTS OF FOLLOW-UP PLAN:
1)	Responsible party — Party responsible for implementing the action.
2)	ORD contact — Knowledgeable ORD-level person, interested in real change.
3)	Lab/Center/Office Contact for your organization — person who will report to
ORD on progress/obstacles.
4)	Timeline for Action Items — schedule, at organizational level (tentative to be
confirmed with organization after Williamsburg), as well as at the ORD level.
5)	Milestones — indicators that progress is being made.
6)	Measures of Success — average time from initiation to completion.
6)	Reports —quarterly, or as needed for milestones or other major
accomplishments (ORD wide and/or organization specific).
7)	Model for dealing with opposition at the organization level
-Identify source of opposition - whose turf is being threatened
--Are the concerns "real" or "perceived"
—Does the issue stand alone or is it tied to other opportunities for
improvement? Impacts7
—Perspective of Others -Get buy-in early in the process.
Note: Use "Force Field Analysis" to anticipate other sources of opposition
If an improvement opportunity turns out to be a stone wall and simply cannot be
changed, communicate the efforts made as well as legal or regulatory barriers that
made change impossible.
note: FOLLOW UP PLAN SHOULD ALSO ACCOMMODATE INPUT BY STAFF
WHO DID NOT ATTEND THE CONFERENCE:

-------
§1
¦S H3
0	2
1	<
c
IL 3
ex. »
8 S

-------

-------
J.'6"'"'.,
# £5 *3
ISSSl
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D C 20460
NOV 2 2 ISS5
OFFICE OF
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Additional Information on ORD First Annual Workshop - Managing
Change
FROM:*) Robert J. Huggett, Ph.D.
f ju/f\Assistant Administrator	7
m/^ju^-fbr Research and Development (plOl)
TO: * ALL ORD STAFF
The purpose of this memo is to touch base with you on the status of our First
Annual ORD Workshop - Managing Change. As you know, this workshop is the
first step in a long-term process to improve the delivery of high caliber science to
the Agency, and enrich the quality of ORD's work environment. Workshop
participants will develop specific action plans to address our most pressing
organizational concerns. In addition, we will designate change agents responsible
for implementing the improvements, and we will monitor progress in achieving
measurable outcomes. We are committed to listening, understanding, and
responding to the issues of concern to our workforce, with solutions developed by all
Workshop participants.
Of the more than 400 employees who volunteered to attend the meeting, 100
were randomly selected to join ORD's senior management team in our improvement
deliberations. We are attaching the list of attendees for your information. Details
on the random selection process were sent to the Management Deputies in each Lab
and Center, who will share this information with you, if you are interested.
Successive annual meetings will involve a new selection of employees to assure a
broad breadth of participation over time in change management activities.
i.llllWniKU, kAYmHD fu
1'HV i WOMI'll N 1 A1 Rl '>1 AkOl I I
-zoo .;mii mki i (
rokVAi i t s ok va>.* *
CO. Hecycted/Roeyelable
\\ Prlmad with Soy/Ctnoia Ink on papar ihtl
eonuin»a!lM«l 75%»eye)Klll**f

-------
2
We are also including for your information, a draft agenda so you can see our
intended process for framing, prioritizing, and solving the issues raised by the
Organizational Survey, the ORD Advisory Councils, and Workshop attendees. We
will also forward for your information the background materials for the meeting
provided to the attendees. We want all ORD employees not attending this First
Workshop to have a good understanding of what the meeting is about and what we
hope to accomplish. In the meantime, I encourage you to quickly review the basic
structure of and introduction to ORD's Strategic Plan, since the Plan will provide
the framework for our considerations on future directions and opportunities for near
term improvements.
By now, you have received information on the results of the ORD
organizational survey. I regret that a number of administrative interruptions
prevented us from sharing this information with you sooner. The results of the
survey are one of the tools we will use in assessing where we need to strengthen our
operations, and where we can begin to measure improvement in the years to come.
The survey results are an important source of data for us, but nothing can
substitute for vour active participation in contributing vour suggestions
on where we need to focus attention, and how we might implement
specific improvement measures. I hope you will share your ideas with your
colleagues attending the Workshop, and assist m the deployment of the follow up
measures brought back from the meeting. Your colleagues who designed the flow
and content for the Workshop are highly motivated to prompt the continuing
evolution of ORD. I hope we can count on your support as well.

-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
AKLAND, ANN
NHEERL
RTP
manager
ALEXANDER, JOE
IOAA
NCEA
NHEERL
OARM
NHEERL
OR MA
WASHINGTON
manaqer
ANDREASEN, JAMES
ARTHUR, JOHN
BARRON, JESSICA
BASSETT, MARYANN
BASSFORD, ~PAM
WASHINGTON
DULUTH
CINCINNATI
CHAPEL HILL
WASHINGTON "
self-nominated
self-nominated
facilitator
self-nominated
self-nominated
BELILES, ROBERT
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
BETZ; ELIZABETH
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
BIRNBAUM, LINDA
NHEERL
RTP
manager
BOBSEINE, KATHY
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
BOWEN, JULIE
REG 10
SEATTLE
facilitator
BOWMAN, SANDRA
OARM
CINCINNATI
HRO rep.
BOYDE, SHARON
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
BRADY, RANDY
BROWN, RICHARD
OARM
RTP
HRO rep.
OHROS
WASHINGTON
facilitator
BRYAN, ELIZABETH
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
CAIRNS, MICHAEL
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
self-nominated
CALLAHAN, MICHAEL
NCEA
WASHINGTON
manager/steerinq cmte.
CAMPBELL, JED
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
CARR, JIM
OARM
WASHINGTON
facilitator
CARSON-COX, LATASHA
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
CHOE, JASON
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
CHOUDHURY, HARLAL
NCEA
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
CLARK, BOB
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
CLARK, TOM
NERL
RTP
manager/steering cmte.
CLAXTON, LARRY
NHEERL
RTP
manager
COLON, MARIBEL
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
CONRATH, SUSAN
OAR
WASHINGTON
facilitator
CONTRERAS, JANET
NERL
LAS VEGAS
self-nominated
CONVERY, JOHN
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
11/22/96

-------
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
CORBETT, JOSEPH
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
CORN, RUTH
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
CORTESI, ROGER
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
CROFT, JEAN
IOAA
WASHINGTON
steering cmte.
CUPITT, LARRY
NERL
RTP
manager
DAVIS, J. MICHAEL
NCEA
RTP
self-nominated
DAVIS, ROBERT
AFGE
RTP
Union rep.
DEAN, KAREN F.
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
DEMPSEY, CLYDE
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
DIETRICH, DEBBIE
ORMA
WASHINGTON
manager/steering cmte.
DIXON, THOMAS
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
DRIVER, KATHY
NHEERL
RTP
facilitator
DRYER, JIM
NFFE
CINCINNATI
Union rep.
DUFOUR, ALFRED
NERL
CINCINNATI
manager
DURANT, PETER i
DYER, BOB
ORMA
WASHINGTON
manager
NHEERL
NERL
RTP
Steering cmte.
EDER, BRtAN
RTP
self-nominated
EDWARDS, NICOLE
ORSI
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
ERICKSON, PATRICIA
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
EXTON, MARGERY
OPPTS
WASHINGTON
facilitator
EXUM, LINDA
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
FARLAND, BILL
NCEA
WASHINGTON
manager
FEIGE, LOUIS
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
FEIGE, WALT
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
FINCH, CAROL
IOAA
WASHINGTON
steering cmte.
FOLEY, GARY
NERL
RTP
manager/steering cmte.
FREDERICK, ROBERT
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
FREESTONE, FRANK
NRMRL
EDISON
self-nominated
FRICK, WALTER
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
GAGE, MICHAEL
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
GALLOWAY, WALT
NERL
LAS VEGAS
facilitator

-------
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
ORD WORKSHO, PARTICIPANTS
GATCHETT, ANNETTE
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
GAY, BRUCE
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
GEORGE, SUSAN
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
GIBB, HERMAN
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
GLASER, JOHN
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
GRAHAM, JUDY
NERL
RTP
manager/steering cmte.
GRANT, LESTER
NCEA
RTP
manager
GRINDER, GREGORY
NHEERL
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
GROGARD, MEGAN
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
GUNDERSEN, JENNIFER
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
HALL, CLINT
NRMRL
ADA
manager
HANLON, DEBORAH
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
facilitator
HANSEN, DAVID
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
HARDESTY, RICHARD
NCEA
WASHINGTON
manager
HARVEY, JAMES
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
HARVEY, TERRY
HAWK, PATRICIA A.
NCEA
NHEERL
CINCINNATI
manager
CORVALLIS
self-nominated
HAWKINS, SHERRY
ORSI
WASHINGTON
work group
HEDTKE, STEVEN
NHEERL
DULUTH
manager
HERRMANN, JONATHAN
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
facilitator
HOFFMAN, ALAN
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
HOLDSWORTH, THOMAS J.
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
HOLM, HARVEY
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
HOWARD, BARRY
NHEERL
RTP
manager
HOWARD, ELIZABETH
NRMRL
RTP
HRC rep
HUGGETT, ROBERT
IOAA
WASHINGTON
manager
HUTCHINGS, DEE L
NRMRL
ADA
self-nominated
JACKSON, PATRICIA
JACKSON, TOYA "
NHEERL
NERL.
RTP
manager
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
JENSON, CORRENE
NHEERL
DULUTH
self-nominated
JOHNSON, MIMI
NAGE •
NARRAGANSETT
Union rep.
11/22/96 07:54 AM 3

-------
A
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
JONES, ESTHER	
JONES, PAT	
KADELI, LEK
KAHL, MICHAEL
KANTOR. EDWARD
KAPLAN, NORMAN
KAVLOCK,ROBERT
koren; hilLel
	EL
ORMA
IOAA
KULP, RUSSELL
ORMA
NHEERL
NERL
NRMRL
NHEERL
NHEERL^
NRMRL
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON
;duluth
LAS VEGAS
RTP
RTP
RTP
self-nominated
work group
facilitator
self-nominated^
self-nominated
self-nominated
manager	
RTP
manager
self-nominated
LAMBERSON, JANET
LAPAN, RICK	
NHEERL
NEWPORT
self-nominated
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
LAURIE. VERNON
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
LAWRENCE, CAL
LESLIE, ANNE
LEW; ROSE '
LEWIS, DENISE
LEWIS, NORMA
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
NFFE
ORSI
NHEERL
NRMRL
WASHINGTON
Union rep.
WASHINGTON
RTP
CINCINNATI"
self-nominated
seif-nominated
self-nominated
LINGLE, STEVE
LINTHURST, RICK
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
NERL
RTP
manager
LONGEST, HENRY L
IOAA
WASHINGTON
manager
LYONS, TERRENCE
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
MABELLOS, JESSE
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
MAHAFFEY, KATE
MARTIN, BARRY"
NCEA
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
NERL
RTP
manager
MASON, SHARON
AFGE
WASHINGTON
Union rep.
MAYER,FOSTER
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
manager
MCCARTHY-O'REILLY, MARY
ORSI
WASHINGTON
steering cmte.
MCCLANAHAN, MELINDA
MCCRILLIS, ROBERT
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager/steering cmte.
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
MCKENNEY, CHARLES
MCKINNON, HUGH
NAGE
GULF BREEZE
Union rep.
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager/steering cmte.
11/22/96

-------
A
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
i/IENZER, ROBERT
MESSER, JAY
	B	
NCERQA
NERL
WASHINGTON
RTP
manager
facilitator
FILLER, CHARLES A.
FILLER, DIANA
dOORE; GEORGE
NRMRL
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
RTP
self-nominated
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
HRC rep.
MOORE, JOHN
NERL
LAS VEGAS
manager
MOORE, MIKE
ORMA
WASHINGTON
steering cmte
MORRIS, CURTIS M
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
MULKEY, LEE
NRMRL
ATHENS
manager/steering cmte.
MULLIN, MICHAEL
NHEERL
GROSE ILE
self-nominated
MURPHY, CATHY
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
MURPHY, THOMAS
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
manager
NACCI, DIANE
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
OLEXEY, ROBERT
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
OPPELT, TIM
OSBORNE, MICHAEL
OWENS, JAMES H
manager
NRMRL
nrmrL
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
RTP
CINCINNATI
manager
self-nominated
self-nominated
PAHL, DALE
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
PATTON, DOROTHY
ORSI
WASHINGTON
PEACHER, CLAY
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
manager
self-nominated
PEARSON. GARETH
POTTER, BILL
NERL
LAS VEGAS
self-nominated
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
PREUSS, PETER
PRINCIOTTA,"FRANK
NCERQA
NRMRL
WASHINGTON
manager
RTP
PRYOR, MARGHERITA
ORSI
manager
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
PUZAK, JACK
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
RADZIKOWSKI, MARYELLEN
ORSI
WASHINGTON
manager/steering cmte
REASONER, DONALD
REITER, LARRY
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
NHEERL
RTP
manager
RENARD, ESPERANZA P.
RILEY, LOIS
NCERQA
EDISON
self-nominated
IOAA
WASHINGTON
work group
11/22/96

-------
A
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
ROHRER, JUDY
IOAA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
ROSS, LINDA B
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
RUBINSTEIN, NORMAN
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
manager
RUSSO, ROSEMARIE
SAILSTAD" DENISE
NERL
ATHENS
manager
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
SAKIEWICZ, CAROL A.
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
SALMON, LEE
OAR
WASHINGTON
facilitator
SANTAVY, DEBORAH
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
SCHIERMEIER, FRANK
NERL
RTP
manager
SCHMELLING, STEPHEN
NRMRL
ADA
self-nominated
SERGEANT, ANNE
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
SHAFFRAN, MARY
IOAA
WASHINGTON
work group
SHAW, DENICE
NHEERL
RTP
work group
SHIMABUKU, RAY
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
self-nominated
SIKDAR, SUBHAS
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
SIMES, GUY
SLIMAK, MICHAEL
NRMRL
NCEA ""
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
WASHINGTON
manager/steering cmte
SMART, JAN
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
SMITH, BENNETT
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
SMITH, KATE
NERL
CINCINNATI
manager
SMITH, STEVE
ORMA
WASHINGTON
facilitator
SOLOMON, ALLEN
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
self-nominated
SPARKS, ALLEN R
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
SPYRES, JULIE
OPPE
WASHINGTON
facilitator
STANTON, MARK
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
STEEN, WILLIAM
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
STELMA, GERARD
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
SUTTON-BUSBY, VERLA
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
TEICHMAN, KEVIN
ORSI
WASHINGTON
facilitator
TERRELL. DOCK
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
THOMAS, SHIRLEY
ORMA
WASHINGTON
work group
11/22/96 0" AM 6

-------
A
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
ORD WORKSHOP "PARTICIPANTS
A
B
C.
n
THORLAKSON/BOB
OHROS
WASHINGTON
HRO rep.
TILSON, HUGH
NHEERL
RTP
manager
TUCKER, DONNA
NCEA
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
VAN EE, JEFF
NERL
LAS VEGAS
self-nominated
VEITH, GIL
NHEERL
RTP
manager
VORMWALD, RON
NHEERL
DULUTH
self-nominated
WASSON, SHIRLEY
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
WATERS, KAY
ORMA
WASHINGTON
work group
WATKINSON, WILLIAM
NHEERL'
RTP
self-nominated
WATSON, PATRICIA L.
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
WENTWORTH, NANCY
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
WHITFIELD, JAMIE
NRMRL
KANSAS CITY
self-nominated
WIENER, RUSSELL
NERL
RTP
manager
WIGGINTON, MARY
ORSI
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
WILKINS, AMINA
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
WRAY, EVELYN
ORMA
WASHINGTON
work group
WRIGHT, KEN
OHROS
WASHINGTON
facilitator
ZARBA, CHRIS
IOAA
WASHINGTON
steering cmte.
ZENICK, HAL
NHEERL
RTP
manager/steering cmte.
11/22/96 07:54 AM 7

-------
ORD
Workshop
Managing
Change
US EPA Research and Development
December 2-5,1996
Williamsburg, Virginia


-------

pS*
QoaCs
The goal of the workshop is to improve
the delivery of high-quality science in ORD by:
i/\ Understanding the new direction in ORD;
~1 Building the ORD team and improving communication;
^] Sharing views and listening to all participants; and
~I Developing action plans and change agents to
achieve specific organizational improvements.

&
QenemC Information
The workshop begins at 1:00 pm on Monday, December
2 and ends after lunch on Thursday, December 5.
Registration/Welcome Desk
Workshop registration is from 8:00 am - 5:00 pm on
Monday, December 2nd in the Center Room, next to
the hotel registration desk.
Conference Office
A conference office will be set up in the lower level of
the Cascades Conference Center. A message board
will be available there from Tuesday - Thursday. On
Monday, the message board will be located in the
registration area.
Meals
Monday evening
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
lite fare
breakfast, lunch, and dinner
breakfast, lunch, and dinner;
(optional off-site dinner)
breakfast and lunch
T.AA	.J.. . .1 IL.
. - -	i iu. i ¦ r	ii	

-------
'Wednesday, (December 4th
Framework for Action
Commonwealth Hall
8:00 - 8:15 Introduction and Overview
8:15 - 9:00 Presentation of the Improvement
Opportunities
The Cascades Meeting Center
Break-Out Rooms
9:00 - 11:00 Action Planning on the
Improvement Opportunities
11:00-2:30 Lunch
Commonwealth Hall
2:30 - 4:30 Panel Presentations on the
Improvement Opportunities
7.nn
ninnot*
I
Thursday, DecemBer 5th
Commitment to Action
(Day 4
The Cascades Meeting Center
Break-Out Rooms
8:00 - 9:45 Lab/Center/Office Discussions
Commonwealth Hall
10:00 -11:45 Actions and Commitments
11:45 -12:00 Meeting Evaluation
The Cascades
12:15	"Launch" Lunch
Conference Rooms will be available for the
remainder of the day if Labs/Centers/
Offices would like to continue to meet.

-------

Day 1
Monday, DecemBer 2nd
Overall Change
The Center Room
8:00 - 5:00 Registration
1:00	Workshop Begins
Commonwealth Hall
1:00-1:30
Welcome/Purpose

Bob Huggett
1:30-4:45
Guest Speaker on

Organizational Change

David Noer
4:45 - 5:00
Wrap-up and Overview of

Upcoming Events
Cascades Meeting Center
(lower level)
5:30 - 7:00 Poster Session/Gallery Walk/
Lite Fare
Tuesday, (Decem6er3rd
Improvement Opportunities
Commonwealth Hall
8:00 - 8:15 Introduction and Overview
8:15 -10:00 Review of ORD Data
10:00-10:30 Break
10:30 -11:30 Brainstorming the ORD
Improvement Opportunities
11:30 -12:00 Identifying Priority Issues
12:00-1:00 Lunch
The Cascades Meeting Center
Break-Out Rooms
1:00 - 2:30 Selecting Top Priorities
2:30 - 3:0d Break
3:00 - 4:30 Framing the Issues
5:30	Dinner

-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D C 20460

NOV I 5 1996
OFFICE OF
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
NOTE TO: ALL ORD WORKSHOP PAR TICIPANTS
Enclosed are the materials we wanted you to have before the December Workshop
We are 111 the final countdown in our preparations, and we believe ORD has assembled a cogent
and interesting agenda that will give us a strong start in our long term improvement efforts. We
are pleased with the enthusiasm of the attendees - we think we have a great representation from
ORD's best and brightest that includes all disciplines, locations, and levels of our organization
We hope you will take time to review these materials and come "loaded for bear" with
thoughtful suggestions and solutions. See you in two weeks'
Enclosures-
Workshop Agenda (draft)
Map of the Conference Facility (Woodlands)
Summary of Survey of Organizations 2000 Results
List of Workshop Participants
SAMPLE Write-up of an "Improvement Opportunity" to be Discussed at the Workshop
Biographical info on our "Grappling with Change" Speaker. Da\ id Noer
ORD's Strategic Plan
Maps
Materials on Colonial Williamsburg
oe Alexander
Henry Longest
ftecycled/Recyclablo
Print** wtm Sey/Canol* en p#pmr thai
conuJrta si lew 75X rccycM fiber

-------
Nov 15, 1996
Example of Improvement Opportunity for Williamsburg
The following example is provided in the hope it is informative enough for participants to
understand the scope of possible improvement opportunities. It is neither real nor complete —
that's what the workshop is for! This is simply to give you an idea of the range (basically wide
open) of ideas, and that our goal is to have plans by the end of the workshop with implementation
and follow up actions
Possible Issue There is too much bureaucracy - red tape - that gets in the way of doing good
research
Possible Action Evaluate all levels of bureaucracy -- Federal, EPA, ORD, Lab/Center, Division,
supervisor, team -- and use cross-functional teams to cut the red tape we have control over to the
bone

-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D C 20460
NOV 8 1996
OFFICE OF
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: First Annual ORD Workshop - Congratulations to Workshop Selectees
and Preparation for the Meeting
This note is to convey my congratulations to each of you upon being selected
to attend our First Annual ORD Workshop - Managing Change, in Williamsburg,
Virginia, Dec. 2 - 5, 1996. I was pleased that a high number of our employees
volunteered for the selection pool, and am satisfied that we have a good geographic
and organizational cross section of ORD to explore opportunities for improving
In preparation for the Workshop, I urge each of you to talk to and "prod" your
co-workers. Solicit their ideas and observations about life in ORD and bring this
information to the Workshop. How are we doing in setting a vision for the
organization? Have we communicated effectively to the employees of ORD our
common goals and priorities and do individuals understand and agree with how
they fit into them? Are we moving forward with a shared purpose and mission?
Are we keeping all employees well-apprised of important scientific, management,
budget, and human resource activities and events? Are we using to the maximum
extent possible the diverse talents available in our workforce, from all categories
and levels? Do you have the material resources and consistent direction necessary
to accomplish your piece of ORD's mission? How do our EPA customers perceive our
responsiveness to their needs for scientific expertise and support? How about our
other customers in the academic and private sectors - are we engaged in mutually
beneficial relationships and are we respectful of our clients? Is ORD on the right
track for positioning ourselves for the science needs of tomorrow? What can I, or my
office do to help with solutions?
FROM: Robert J. Huggett, Ph.D.
Assistant Administrator
for Research and Developi
TO:
Williamsburg Workshop Selectees
ORD.
Recycled/Recyclable
Prtntod with Soy/C«nola Ink on p«p«r that
conuins at lent 75"< recyctai fiber

-------
I want each of you to seriously consider the mission-effectiveness and culture
of ORD, from your own unique viewpoint, and what might be done to help the
organization's continuing evolution. We can make good use of this information in
conjunction with the results of the ORD organizational survey which will be shared
with all employees before the meeting. Site visits and briefings on the survey
results are being arranged now. I am committed to this Workshop serving as the
start of an ongoing process for improving ORD's operations and future.
We are preparing more specific information to send to you on the Workshop
regarding the detailed agenda, logistics, and materials to read in preparation for
the meeting. Please don't hesitate to ask questions, and engage your colleagues in
candid constructive discussions. Also, feel free to call any of the members on the
Workshop Steering Committee (attached) for any clarification on the Workshop you
believe necessary.
I am looking forward to working with you next month.
Attachment
cc: Joe Alexander
Henry Longest
Executive Leads

-------
ORD Workshop Steering Committee:

Phone
Fax
Chair: Carol Finch
202-260-9463
202-260-4260
Hal Zenick
919-541-2283
919-541-4201
Bob Dyer
919-541-2760
919-541-4201
Gary Foley (ORD HRC Chair)
919-541-2106
919-541-7588
Tom Clark
919-541-2107
919-541-0445
Judy Graham
919-541-0349
919-541-3615
Hugh McKinnon
513-569-7689
513-569-7549
Lee Mulkey
513-569-7689
. 513-569-7549
Melinda McClanahan
202-260-5750
202-260-0929
Shirley Hamilton
202-260-0468
202-260-0929
Mike Callahan
202-260-8909
202-401-1722
Mike Slimak
202-260-5950
202-260-0393
Chris Zarba
202-260-1326
202-260-4260
Jean Croft
202-260-9837
202-260-4260
Mary McCarthy-O'Reilly
202-260-4461
202-260-0744
Mary Ellen Raddzikowski
202-260-3200
202-260-0744
Debbie Dietrich
202-260-7500
202-260-0552
Mike Moore
202-260-0277
202-260-2242
Workshop Coordinating Work Group;
Chair: Mary McCarthy O'Reilly	202-260-4461	202-260-0744
Richard Brown	202-260-9397	202-260-4997
Peter Durant	202-260-7461	202-260-2830
Sherry Hawkins	202-260-5593	202-260-0106
Mike Moore	202-260-0277	202-260-2242
Jayne Ramsey	202-260-7355	202-260-2242
Lois Reily	202-260-7653	202-260-4260
Roxanne Settle	202-260-5881	202-260-4235
Mary Shaffron	202-260-0881	202-260-4260
Denice Shaw	919-541-2698	919-541-3615
Steve Smith	202-260-5735	202-260-2242
Shirley Thomas	202-260-6743	202-260-2242
Kay Waters	202-260-8941	202-260-2242
Ken Wright	202-260-3271	202-260-
Evelyn Wray	202-260-6737	202-260-2344

-------
NAME
DAY 1 AND 2	DAY 3	DAY 4
TABLES BREAKOUT RMS. BREAKOUT RMS.
DREASEN, JAMES
1
2
5
NDERSEN, JENNIFER
1
2
3
TTUGGETT, ROBERT
1
1
8
JACKSON, TOYA
1
4
2
LEW, ROSE
1
3
6
MOORE, GEORGE
1
2
1
OSBORNE, MICHAEL
1
3
1
RUBINSTEIN, NORMAN
1
1
3
SALMON, LEE*
1
1
6
BELILES, ROBERT
2
2
5
HANSEN, DAVID
2
2
3
JACKSON, PATRICIA
2
1
3
MCKENNEY, CHARLES
2
4
3
POTTER, BILL
2
2
2
PRYOR, MARGHERITA
2
4
6
RUSSO, ROSEMARIE
2
1
2
SHAFFRAN, MARY*
2
2
8
WASSON, SHIRLEY
2
2
1
AKLAND, ANN
3
1
3
BOYDE, SHARON
3
4
5
HAWKINS, SHERRY
3
4
6
KAVLOCK, ROBERT
3
1
3
LAPAN, RICK
3
2
3
SCHIERMEIER. FRANK
3
1
2
SPRGEANT, ANNE*
3
3
5
TH,BENNETT
3
3
2
^TWORTH, NANCY
3
1
4
ALEXANDER, JOE
4
1
8
CORBETT, JOSEPH
4
4
5
NACCI, DIANE
4
3
3
ROHRER, JUDY
4
4
8
SIKDAR, SUBHAS
4
1
1
SMITH, STEVE*
4
4
7
STELMA, GERARD
4
2
2
BIRNBAUM, LINDA
5
1
3
CARSON-COX, LATASHA
5
4
1
FREDERICK, ROBERT
5
2
5
KOREN, HILLEL
5
1
3
LAURIE, VERNON
5
4
4
RILEY, LOIS
5
4
8
SAKIEWICZ, CAROL A.
5
4
3
SLIMAK, MICHAEL
5
1
5
SPYRES, JULIE*
5
1
4
BASSFORD, PAM
6
4
7
BRYAN, ELIZABETH
6
1
4
DIXON, THOMAS
6
2
4
GIBB, HERMAN
6
2
5
LAMBERSON, JANET
6
2
3
LAWRENCE, CAL
6
1
1
SHAW, DENICE
6
3
3
;H, KATE
6
1
2
HMAN, KEVIN*
6
1
6
CALLAHAN, MICHAEL
7
1
5
DEMPSEY, CLYDE
7
2
1

-------
MULLIN, MICHAEL
7
3
3
PEARSON, GARETH
7
2
2
RENARD, ESPERANZA P
7
3
4
THOMAS, SHIRLEY
7
4
7
THORLAKSON, BOB*
7
3
1
TILSON, HUGH
7
1
3
WILKINS, AMINA
7
2
5
CLARK, BOB
8
1
1
CLARK, TOM
8
1
2
CONTRERAS, JANET
8
4
2
DAVIS, J MICHAEL
8
3
5
ERICKSON, PATRICIA
8
3
1
GRINDER, GREGORY
8
4
3
VEITH, GIL
8
1
3
WRIGHT, KEN*
8
2
2
BOBSEINE, KATHY
9
2
3
CARR, JIM*
9
1
1
CHOUDHURY, HARLAL
9
3
5
FEIGE, WALT
9
2
1
KANTOR, EDWARD
9
3
2
LINTHURST, RICK
9
1
2
LONGEST, HENRY L
9
1
8
WIGGINTON, MARY
9
4
6
WRAY, EVELYN
9
4
7
CLAXTON, LARRY
10
1
3
CONRATH, SUSAN*
10
4
3
DEAN, KAREN F
10
4
3
GATCHETT, ANNETTE
10
3
1
LINGLE, STEVE
10
1
4
MAHAFFEY, KATE
10
3
5
MOORE, JOHN
10
1
2
WIENER, RUSSELL
10
1
2
ZARBA, CHRIS
10
1
8
CONVERY, JOHN
11
1
1
GAGE, MICHAEL
11
4
3
GLASER, JOHN
11
2
1
MARTIN, BARRY
11
1
2
ROSS, LINDA B *
11
1
7
TUCKER, DONNA
11
4
5
VAN EE, JEFF
11
3
2
WATERS, KAY
11
4
7
ZENICK, HAL
11
1
3
ARTHUR, JOHN
12
3
3
CORTESI, ROGER
12
1
4
EXUM, LINDA
12
4
2
LEWIS, NORMA
12
3
1
MAYER, FOSTER
12
1
3
MOORE, MIKE*
12
1
7
WATSON, PATRICIA L.
12
4
1
CUPITT, LARRY
13
1
2
DURANT, PETER
13
1
7
FRICK, WALTER
13
2
2
GROGARD, MEGAN
13
4
3
HAWK, PATRICIA A *
13
4
3
JENSON, CORRENE
13
3
3
LYONS, TERRENCE
13
2
1
MCCLANAHAN, MELINDA
13
1
2

-------
BARRON, JESSICA*
14
2
3
DIETRICH, DEBBIE
14
1
7
LfcLOUM, HARVEY
14
3
2
VARD, ELIZABETH
14
3
1
IL, MICHAEL
14
3
3
MCKINNON, HUGH
14
1
1
MILLER, DIANA
14
2
3
REASONER, DONALD
14
3
1
BOWEN, JULIE*
15
1
2
CROFT, JEAN
15
4
8
MENZER, ROBERT
15
1
4
MURPHY, CATHY
15
4
2
OWENS, JAMES H
15
2
1
SAILSTAD, DENISE
15
2
3
VORMWALD, RON
15
4
3
BASSETT, MARYANN
16
4
3
BOWMAN, SANDRA*
16
4
3
DAVIS, ROBERT
16
4
2
DUFOUR, ALFRED
16
1
2
MULKEY, LEE
16
1
1
SIMES, GUY
16
3
1
SMART, JAN
16
4
3
STEEN, WILLIAM
16
2
2
BETZ, ELIZABETH
17
4
2
BRADY, RANDY*
17
1
3
CAIRNS, MICHAEL
17
3
3
DRYER, JIM
17
4
1
	LAND, BILL
17
1
5
DRGE, SUSAN
17
2
3
	XEY, ROBERT
17
1
1
STANTON, MARK
17
3
3
BROWN, RICHARD*
18
1
3
COLON, MARIBEL
18
3
2
DYER, BOB
18
1
3
FOLEY, GARY
18
1
2
FREESTONE, FRANK
18
2
1
OPPELT, TIM
18
1
1
TERRELL, DOCK
18
3
3
DRIVER, KATHY*
19
3
3
EDER, BRIAN
19
2
2
FINCH, CAROL
19
1
8
GRAHAM, JUDY
19
1
2
HUTCHINGS, DEE L
19
4
1
PATTON, DOROTHY
19
1
6
PEACHER, CLAY
19
4
3
WATKINSON, WILLIAM
19
3
3
GAY, BRUCE
20
3
2
GRANT, LESTER
20
1
5
HANLON, DEBORAH*
20
2
4
MABELLOS, JESSE
20
3
3
MCCARTHY-O'REILLY. MARY
20
4
6
PUZAK, JACK
20
1
4
—4MELLING. STEPHEN
20
3
1
klABUKU, RAY
20
3
3
«~,*N. RUTH
21
4
1
GALLOWAY, WALT*
21
3
2
HALL, CLINT
21
1
1

-------
HOFFMAN, ALAN
21
2
2
JONES, PAT
21
4
8
PRINCIOTTA, FRANK
21
1
1
SOLOMON, ALLEN
21
2
3
WHITFIELD, JAMIE
21
2
1
CAMPBELL, JED
22
2
3
EXTON, MARGERY*
22
2
8
HARDESTY, RICHARD
22
1
5
JOHNSON, MIMI
22
4
3
JONES, ESTHER
22
4
7
KAPLAN, NORMAN
22
3
1
MORRIS, CURTIS M.
22
3
2
PREUSS, PETER
22
1
4
HARVEY, JAMES
23
3
3
HARVEY, TERRY
23
1
5
HERRMANN, JONATHAN*
23
2
1
KULP, RUSSELL
23
2
1
LEWIS, DENISE
23
3
3
MURPHY, THOMAS
23
1
3
PAHL, DALE
23
2
2
SUTTON-BUSBY, VERLA
23
4
7
CHOE, JASON
24
4
7
FEIGE, LOUIS
24
3
2
HEDTKE, STEVEN
24
1
3
KADELI, LEK*
24
4
7
LESLIE, ANNE
24
4
7
MCCRILLIS, ROBERT
24
3
1
RADZIKOWSKI, MARYELLEN
24
1
6
SANTAVY, DEBORAH
24
2
3
EDWARDS, NICOLE
25
4
6
HOLDSWORTH, THOMAS J.
25
2
1
HOWARD, BARRY
25
1
3
MASON, SHARON
25
4
7
MESSER, JAY*
25
3
2
MILLER, CHARLES A
25
2
1
REITER, LARRY
25
1
3
SPARKS, ALLEN R.
25
4
3
'Facilitators
DAY 3 BREAKOUT
1=managers
2=scientists
3=scientists
4=other
DAY 4 BREAKOUT
1=NRMRL
2=NERL
3=NHEERL
4=NCERQA
5=NCEA
6=ORSI
7=ORMA
8=IOAA

-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
A
R
C
n
AKLAND, ANN
NHEERL
RTP
manager
ALEXANDER, JOE
IOAA
WASHINGTON
manager
ANDREASEN, JAMES
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
ARTHUR, JOHN
NHEERL
DULUTH
self-nominated
BARRON, JESSICA
OARM
CINCINNATI
facilitator
BASSETT, MARYANN
NHEERL
CHAPEL HILL
self-nominated
BASSFORD, PAM
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
BELILES, ROBERT
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
BENFORADO, JAY
IOAA
WASHINGTON
manager
BETZ, ELIZABETH
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
BIRNBAUM, LINDA
NHEERL
RTP
manager
BOBSEINE, KATHY
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
BOWEN, JULIE
REG 10
SEATTLE
facilitator
BOWMAN, SANDRA
OARM
CINCINNATI
HRO rep
BOYDE, SHARON
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
BRADY, RANDY
OARM
RTP
HRO rep
BROWN, RICHARD
OHROS
WASHINGTON
facil co-leader
BRYAN, ELIZABETH
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
CAIRNS, MICHAEL
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
self-nominated
CALLAHAN, MICHAEL
NCEA
WASHINGTON
manager/steering cmte
CAMPBELL, JED
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
CARSON-COX, LATASHA
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
CHOE, JASON
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
CHOUDHURY, HARLAL
NCEA
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
CLARK, BOB
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
CLARK, TOM
NERL
RTP
manager/steering cmte
CLAXTON, LARRY
NHEERL
RTP
manager
COLON, MARIBEL
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
CONTRERAS, JANET
NERL
LAS VEGAS
self-nominated
CONVERY, JOHN
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
CORBETT, JOSEPH
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
11/15/96 02 25 PM 1

-------
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
CORN, RUTH
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
CORTESI, ROGER
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
CROFT, JEAN
IOAA
WASHINGTON
steenng cmte
CUPITT, LARRY
NERL
RTP
manager
DAVIS, J. MICHAEL
NCEA
RTP
self-nominated
DAVIS, ROBERT
AFGE
RTP
Union rep
DEAN, KAREN F
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
DEMPSEY, CLYDE
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
DIETRICH, DEBBIE
ORMA
WASHINGTON
manager/steering cmte.
DRIVER, KATHY
NHEERL
RTP
facilitator
DRYER, JIM
NFFE
CINCINNATI
Union rep
DUFOUR, ALFRED
NERL
CINCINNATI
manager
DURANT, PETER
ORMA
WASHINGTON
manager
DYER, BOB
NHEERL
RTP
steenng cmte
EDER, BRIAN
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
EDWARDS, NICOLE
ORSI
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
ERICKSON, PATRICIA
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
EXTON, MARGERY
OPPTS
WASHINGTON
facilitator
EXUM, LINDA
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
FARLAND, BILL
NCEA
WASHINGTON
manager
FEIGE, LOUIS
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
FEIGE, WALT
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
FINCH, CAROL
IOAA
WASHINGTON
steenng cmte
FOLEY, GARY
NERL
RTP
manager
FREDERICK, ROBERT
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
FREESTONE,FRANK
NRMRL
EDISON
self-nominated
FRICK, WALTER
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
GAGE, MICHAEL
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
GALLOWAY, WALT
NERL
LAS VEGAS
facilitator
GATCHETT, ANNETTE
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
GAY, BRUCE
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
11/15/96 02-^SPM 2

-------
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
A
A
R
C.
D
63
GEORGE, SUSAN
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
64
GIBB, HERMAN
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
65
GLASER, JOHN
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
66
GRAHAM, JUDY
NERL
RTP
manager/steenng cmte
67
GRANT, LESTER
NCEA
RTP
manager
68
GRINDER, GREGORY
NHEERL
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
69
GROGARD, MEGAN
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
70
GUNDERSEN, JENNIFER
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
71
HALL, CLINT
NRMRL
ADA
manager
72
HANLON, DEBORAH
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
facilitator
73
HANSEN, DAVID
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
74
HARDESTY, RICHARD
NCEA
WASHINGTON
manager
75
HARVEY, JAMES
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
76
HARVEY, TERRY
NCEA
CINCINNATI
manager
77
HAWK, PATRICIA A
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
self-nominated
78
HAWKINS, SHERRY
ORSI
WASHINGTON
work group
79
HEDTKE, STEVEN
NHEERL
DULUTH
manager
80
HERRMANN, JONATHAN
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
facilitator
81
HOFFMAN, ALAN
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
82
HOLDSWORTH, THOMAS J
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
83
HOLM, HARVEY
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
84
HOWARD, BARRY
NHEERL
RTP
manager
85
HOWARD, ELIZABETH
NRMRL
RTP
HRC rep
86
HUGGETT, ROBERT
IOAA
WASHINGTON
manager
87
HUTCHINGS, DEE L
NRMRL
ADA
self-nominated
88
JACKSON, PATRICIA
NHEERL
RTP
manager
89
JACKSON, TOYA
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
90
JENSON, CORRENE
NHEERL
DULUTH
self-nominated
91
JOHNSON, MIMI
NAGE
NARRAGANSETT
Union rep
92
JONES, ESTHER
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
93
JONES, PAT
IOAA
WASHINGTON
work group
11/15/96 02 25 PM 3

-------
A
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
KADELI, LEK
ORMA
WASHINGTON
facilitator
KAHL, MICHAEL
NHEERL
DULUTH
self-nominated
KANTOR, EDWARD
NERL
LAS VEGAS
self-nominated
KAPLAN, NORMAN
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
KAVLOCK, ROBERT
NHEERL
RTP
manager
KLEFFMAN, DAVID
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
KOREN, HILLEL
NHEERL
RTP
manager
KULP, RUSSELL
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
LAMBERSON, JANET
NHEERL
NEWPORT
self-nominated
LAPAN, RICK
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
LAURIE, VERNON
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
LAWRENCE, CAL
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
LESLIE, ANNE
NFFE
WASHINGTON
Union rep
LEW, ROSE
ORSI
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
LEWIS, DENISE
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
LEWIS, NORMA
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
LINGLE, STEVE
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
LINTHURST, RICK
NERL
RTP
manager
LONGEST, HENRY L
IOAA
WASHINGTON
manager
LYONS, TERRENCE
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
MAHAFFEY, KATE
NCEA
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
MANTY, DALE
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
MARTIN, BARRY
NERL
RTP
manager
MASON, SHARON
AFGE
WASHINGTON
Union rep
MAYER, FOSTER
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
manager
MCCARTHY-O'REILLY, MARY
ORSI
WASHINGTON -
steenng cmte
MCCLANAHAN, MELINDA
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager/steenng cmte
MCCRILLIS, ROBERT
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
MCKENNEY, CHARLES
NAGE
GULF BREEZE
Union rep
MCKINNON, HUGH
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager/steering cmte
MENZER, ROBERT
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
11/15/96 r-->5PM 4

-------
A
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
MESSER, JAY
NERL
RTP
facilitator
MILLER, CHARLES A
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
MILLER, DIANA
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
MOORE, GEORGE
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
HRC rep
MOORE, JOHN
NERL
LAS VEGAS
manager
MOORE, MIKE
ORMA
WASHINGTON
steering cmte
MORRIS, CURTIS M
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
MULKEY, LEE
NRMRL
ATHENS
manager/steering cmte
MULLIN, MICHAEL
NHEERL
GROSE ILE
self-nominated
MURPHY, CATHY
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
MURPHY, THOMAS
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
manager
NACCI, DIANE
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
OLEXEY, ROBERT
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
OPPELT, TIM
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
OSBORNE, MICHAEL
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
OWENS, JAMES H
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
PAHL, DALE
NERL
RTP
self-nominated
PATTON, DOROTHY
ORSI
WASHINGTON
manager
PEACHER, CLAY
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
PEARSON, GARETH
NERL
LAS VEGAS
self-nominated
POTTER, BILL
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
PREUSS, PETER
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
PRINCIOTTA, FRANK
NRMRL
RTP
manager
PRYOR..MARGHERITA
ORSI
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
PUZAK, JACK
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
RADZIKOWSKI, MARYELLEN
ORSI
WASHINGTON
manager/steering cmte
REASONER, DONALD
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
REITER, LARRY
NHEERL
RTP
manager
RENARD, ESPERANZA P
NCERQA
EDISON
self-nominated
RILEY, LOIS
IOAA
WASHINGTON
work group
ROHRER, JUDY
IOAA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
11/15/96 02 25 PM 5

-------
A
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
ORD WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
ROSS, LINDA B
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
RUBINSTEIN, NORMAN
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
manager
RUSSO, ROSEMARIE
NERL
ATHENS
manager
SAILSTAD, DENISE
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
SAKIEWICZ, CAROL A
NHEERL
NARRAGANSETT
self-nominated
SALMON, LEE
OAR
WASHINGTON
facilitator
SANTAVY, DEBORAH
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
SCHIERMEIER, FRANK
NERL
RTP
manager
SCHMELLING, STEPHEN
NRMRL
ADA
self-nominated
SERGEANT, ANNE
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
SHAFFRAN, MARY
IOAA
WASHINGTON
work group
SHAW, DENICE
NHEERL
RTP
work group
SHIMABUKU, RAY
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
self-nominated
SIKDAR, SUBHAS
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
manager
SIMES, GUY
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
SLIMAK, MICHAEL
NCEA
WASHINGTON
manager/steenng cmte
SMART, JAN
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
SMITH, BENNETT
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
SMITH, KATE
NERL
CINCINNATI
manager
SMITH, STEVE
ORMA
WASHINGTON
facilitator
SOLOMON, ALLEN
NHEERL
CORVALLIS
self-nominated
SPARKS, ALLEN R
NHEERL
GULF BREEZE
self-nominated
SPYRES, JULIE
OPPE
WASHINGTON
facilitator
STANTON, MARK
NHEERL .
RTP
self-nominated
STEEN, WILLIAM
NERL
ATHENS
self-nominated
STELMA, GERARD .
NERL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
SUTTON-BUSBY, VERLA
ORMA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
TEICHMAN, KEVIN
ORSI
WASHINGTON
facilitator
TERRELL, DOCK
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
THOMAS, SHIRLEY
ORMA
WASHINGTON
work group
THORLAKSON, BOB
OHROS
WASHINGTON
HRO rep
11/15/96 0^5 PM 6

-------
A
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
ORD WORKSF^ PARTICIPANTS
TILSON, HUGH
NHEERL
RTP
manager
TUCKER, DONNA
NCEA
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
VAN EE, JEFF
NERL
LAS VEGAS
self-nominated
VEITH, GIL
NHEERL
RTP
manager
VORMWALD, RON
NHEERL
DULUTH
self-nominated
WASSON, SHIRLEY
NRMRL
RTP
self-nominated
WATERS. KAY
ORMA
WASHINGTON
work group
WATKINSON, WILLIAM
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
WATSON, PATRICIA L
NRMRL
CINCINNATI
self-nominated
WENTWORTH, NANCY
NCERQA
WASHINGTON
manager
WHITFIELD, JAMIE
NRMRL
KANSAS CITY
self-nominated
WIENER, RUSSELL
NERL
RTP
manager
WIGGINTON, MARY
ORSI
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
WILKINS, AMINA
NCEA
WASHINGTON
self-nominated
WRAY, EVELYN
ORMA
WASHINGTON
work group
WRIGHT, KEN
OHROS
WASHINGTON
facilitator
ZARBA, CHRIS
IOAA
WASHINGTON
steering cmte
ZAVALETA, JENNIFER
NHEERL
RTP
self-nominated
ZENICK, HAL
NHEERL
RTP
manager/steenng cmte
11/15/96 02 25 PM 7

-------
DAVID M. NOER, D.B.A.
Dr. Noer's current speaking and research interests deal with the effects of layoffs and downsizing on those
who remain in organizations, the revitalization of people in the work force, and executive and team
effectiveness.
Noer currently heads his own consulting and training organization in Greensboro, North Carolina. He has
been designated an Honorary Senior Fellow of the Center for Creative Leadership, and was previously
Senior Vice President for Training and Education with worldwide responsibility for the Center's training
and educational activities.
Before joining the Center for Creative Leadership, he was president of his own consulting firm. His
previous position was as Dean of the Control Data Academy of Management, and Vice President of
Human Resource Development. He had worldwide responsibility for executive succession planning and
top executive development. He also was responsible for human resource research, planning and
organizational development strategies.
He served as President and CEO of Control Data Business Advisors. This involved P&L responsibility for
a 60 million dollar subsidiary of Control Data specializing m technology based human resource oriented
management consulting This organization included Control Data's corporate human resource
development, strategic planning, and market research staff, and provided products and consulting services
through offices in the United States, London and Melbourne. In addition to managing the firm, Dr. Noer
provided personal organization diagnostic and development consulting to top executives in a number of
client systems, particularly those considering the human implications of restructuring and downsizing
From 1975 to 1982, he was the Senior Vice President, Personnel and Administration, for Commercial
Credit Company Commercial Credit was a holding company with operating units in the insurance,
finance, consumer lending, banking, leasing and real estate fields. In addition to the traditional human
resource activities, he managed strategic planning, purchasing, public relations and data processing
Considerable effort was spent in divestiture and acquisition planning.
From 1965 to 1975, he held a number of increasingly responsible human resource positions in the United
States, Europe and Asia. Dr Noer resided in Melbourne, Australia for three years during this period and
was responsible for human resource management and consulting throughout Asia
He is the author of a wide range of popular articles and published research in consulting skills, individual
and executive development, and international human resource management, and has written four books:
Multinational People Management A Guide to Organizations and Employees (BNA, 1974), The
Employment Came (Chilton, 1975), Jobkeeping A Hireling's Survival Manual (Chilton, 1976), and
Healing the Wounds. Overcoming the Trauma of Layoffs and Revitalizing Downsized Organizations (Jossey
Bass, 1993).
He received a B A from Gustavus Adolphus College, and a M.S in Organizational Development from
Pepperdme University He earned a Doctorate in Business Administration with a concentration in
Organizational Behavior, and a supporting field of Executive Mental Health from George Washington
University He served as a member of the governing board of the Organizational Development Network,
and was editor of the journal, O D Practitioner

-------
DAVID M. NOER, D.B.A.
Professional Publications, Research Reports, and Selected Papers
July 1996
BOOKS AND BOOK CHAPTERS
Multinational People Management • A Guide to Organizations and Employees. (1975)
Washington, D.C.. BNA Books.
How to Beat the Employment Game (1976) Radnor, Pennsylvania Chilton
Publishing Company
Jobkeeping: A Hireling's Survival Manual (1977) Radnor, Pennsylvania- Chilton
Publishing Company.
With Gilroy, Edwin B , and Spoor, James E , (1978) "Personnel Administration in the
Multinational/Transnational Corporation." In Herb Heneman and Dale Yoder (Eds.)
ASPA Handbook of Personnel and Industrial Relations Washington, D.C : BNA
Books Volume VII, 121-147.
"Lessons in Converting Corporate Staff Units into Profit Centers " (1993) In William
Halal, Ali Geranmayeh, and John Pourdehnad (Eds ) Internal Markets• Redesigning
Organizations for a New Economic Era New York John Wiley and Sons.
"Four Demons in Need of Confrontation by OD Practitioners " (1993) In Robert T.
Golembiewski (Ed J Handbook of Organizational Consultation New York: Marcel
Dekker, Inc
Healing [he Wounds. Surviving Layoff Trauma and Revitalizing Downsized
Organizations (1993) San Francisco, California Jossey-Bass Inc Publishers

-------
David M. Noer (continued)
"A Recipe for Glue." (1996) In Marshall Goldsmith, Frances Hesselbein, and Richard
Beckhard (Eds.) The Drucker Foundation: Leader of the Future series. San Francisco,
California: Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers.
"Of Cowboys and Leaders." (In press, July 1996) In Ken Shelton (Ed) A New
Paradigm of Leadership. Provo, Utah: Executive Excellence Publishing.
"Layoff Survivor Sickness. What it is and what to do about it " (In press, October
1996) In American Psychological Association (Ed.) The New Organizational Reality-
Downsizing, Restructuring, and Revitalization.
Breaking Free• A Prescription for Personal and Organizational Change. (In press,
October 1996) San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers.
PERIODICALS AND JOURNALS
With Whittaker, James O. (1969) "The Effects of Masculine-Feminine Ego-
Involvements on the Acquisition of a Mirror-Tracing Skill." The Journal of
Psychology, 56, 15-17
"Integrating Foreign Service Employees to the Home Organization- The Godfather
Approach." (1974) Personnel Journal 53, 45-51
"Predators- A Metaphor of Human Erosion and Organization Seduction " (1983) OD
Practitioner, 15, (2), 7
"Hireling Survival." Maryland Business and Living Journal October 1984.
"Ready, Set, Turn a Profit." Training and Development Journal. (1985) 39, (5), 38-
40
2

-------
David M. Noer (continued)
"Consultants: Creating Meaningful Relationships." Maryland Business and Living
Journal. April 1985.
"Ten Simple, But Not So Simple, Propositions with the Potential to Humble, Reorient,
and Energize Most Practitioners." (1986) OD Practitioner, 18, (4), 18.
"The Role of Organizational Development in Healing Layoff Survivor Sickness."
(1987) OD Practitioner. 20, (2), 3-5.
"Layoff Survivor Sickness- The Issue Beneath the Symptoms." (1988) Burning
Bright. 1, (2), 1-3
"Healing Layoff Survivors Sickness: A New Frontier for the Human Resource
Professional." (1989) Conference Proceedings, American Management Association
Annual Human Resource Conference, Nashville, TN 222-229.
"Layoff Survivor Sickness, New Challenge for Supervision." Supervisory
Management. (1989) In Press.
"Me and My Shadow." (March 1993) OD Practitioner, Vol. 24, No. 1, 10-11
"Four New Realities." (November 1993) Executive Excellence, Vol. 10, No 11, 16-
17.
"Getting Beyond Downsizing " (January 1994) Fortune.
"A Manager's Career in the New Economy." (April 1994) Fortune.
"Burned Out Bosses " (July 1994) Fortune
"Inhuman Resources " (July/August 1994) Across The Board.
3

-------
David M. Noer (continued)
"You're On'Your Own." (January 1, 1995) Training Magazine.
"Slice! Cut! Slash!" (February 6, 1995) Newsweek.
"Leaner and Meaner." (April 11, 1995) Resources.
"Easing the Pain of Layoffs." (January 1, 1996) Nation's Business.
"Disconnected." (January 15, 1996) Time.
"The False Security of Employability " (April 1, 1996) Fast Company.
"Does America Still Work?" (May 1996) Harper's.
RESEARCH PAPERS AND PROFESSIONAL PRESENTATIONS
Effective Multinational People Management. (1976) Boston, The Employee Relocation
Council.
The Effects of Training Managers m Helping Skills on Employee Perceptions of the
Relevance and Usefulness of Performance Appraisal. (1979) Masters Thesis,
Pepperdine University, Los Angeles, CA.
A Study on the Use and Effectiveness of the Management Academy Concept at IBM,
GE, and Xerox. (1980) Control Data Corporation, Minneapolis, MN.
Relevancy Skills for the Personnel Professional (1981) Minneapolis, The Human
Resource Conference Proceedings published, Dorn Communications.

-------
David M. Noer (continued)
Human Resource Competence in 2000. (1982) San Antonio, American Society of
Personnel Administrators.
Myths, Metamorphoses, and Miracles: Lenses for a Preview of an Employee Relations
Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow. (1983) Baltimore Personnel
Association, Minneapolis, The Human Resource Conference. Proceedings published,
Dorn Communications, 1984.
The Staff Officer as an Entrepreneur. (1984) University of Illinois.
Organizational Development, Organizational Behavior, Organizational Transformation,
Therapeutic and Mental Health Concepts History, Philosophical Underpinnings and
Relationship to the Practitioner. (1985) George Washington University.
The Effects of Involuntary People Reductions on Those Who Remain Within
Organizational Systems An Investigation of the Pathology, Prognosis, and Value
Orientation of I/ryoff Survivor Sickness. (1986) Doctoral Dissertation, George
Washington University, Washington, D.C.
The Effects of Involuntary Reductions on Those Who Remain. (1988) The Academy of
Management National Convention, Anaheim, CA.
The Pathology of Layoff Survivor Sickness: Research and Current Issues (1988) The
University of Minnesota Executive Forum, Minneapolis, MN
Layoff Survivors and Human Resource Strategy (1988) The Human Resource
Planning Society, Minneapolis, MN.
Layoff Survivor Sickness ¦ Issues and Symptoms (1989) The American Association of
Management, National Human Resource Conference, Nashville, TN
5

-------
David M. Noer (continued)
Chairman's Perspective: Current OD Issues and Interventions. (1989) American
Management Association, New York.
The Shattered Covenant: Putting (he Pieces Back Together, OD and Layoffs. (1993)
OD Network National Conference, San Francisco, CA, and the San Diego OD
Network Annual Conference, San Diego, CA.
Downsizing: Before, During, After. (1994) SIOP Workshop, Nashville, TN.
Parting the Pieces Back Together ¦ Training Interventions for Layoff Survi vors (1994)
ASTD National Conference, Anaheim, CA
Leadership m an Age of Layoffs: Healing the Wounds. (1994) Conference Board
Management Development Conference, New York, NY.
The Impact of Corporate Transformation (1994) European Federation Management
Development Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Effects of Layoffs on Those Who Remain. (1994) Visiting Scholar, Wright State
University, Dayton, Ohio
The Art of Practice• Applying Psychology to Management. (1995) SPIM Workshop,
Atlanta, GA.
Effects of Downswings on Those Who Remain: The Dynamics of Layoff Survivor
Sickness. (1995) National Human Resources Association Conference and Exposition,
San Diego, CA
Nonprofit Revitalization. (1995) Center for Creative Leadership/Drucker Foundation
Conference, San Diego, CA.
6

-------
David M. Noer (continued)
The Dynamics of Layoff Survivor Sickness. (1995) Conference of Organizational
Systems Designers, Washington, DC.
Leading Organizational Renewal. (1995) Future of Work Conference, Toronto,
Canada.
Healing the Wounds: Dealing with the Personal and Organizational Impacts of
Downsizing (1995). Institute for Management Studies (IMS) Boston.
Healing the Wounds, Individual and Organizational Renewal. (1995) International
Federation of Training and Development Organizations Conference. Personal
Renewal. Helsinki, Finland.
Leadership in Downsized Organizations. Seminar jointly sponsored by Lee Hecht
Harrison and University of Colorado Executive Programs (1995) in Denver, Colorado.
Leading Organizational Transition. (1995) Japanese Management Association, Tokyo
and Osaka Seminars The Downside of Downsizing, the US Experience.
Recovery from Downsizing (1995) Suridridge Park Management Centre, UK and the
Center for Creative Leadership. London, UK.
Healing the Wounds VP Chapter of Society for Human Resource Management
(videotape) (1995) Iselin, NJ.
Revitalizing Yourself and Your Organization. (1996) Featured speaker, Bell Canada
Executive Forum, Toronto, Canada.
On the Tail of the Dragon¦ The Aftermath of Trauma Conference (1996). Keynote
speaker, Lousage Institute, Edmonton, Canada.
7

-------
David M. Noer (continued)
Surviving Organizational Downsizing and Reorganization. 1996 Isobel MacLeod
Conference Keynote Speaker/Program Facilitator. Montreal General Hospital,
Montreal, Canada.
Surviving the Rightsizing. US Department of Agriculture Graduate School. (1996)
Washington, DC. Videotape with Kerry Bunker.
SAMPLE CITATIONS (A summary list of quotations, interviews and citations.)
ASHA, "The Sky's The Limit." January 1, 1995
Chicago Tribune, "Jumping Off The Fast Track " January 22, 1995.
Tulsa World, "Career People Now Jumping Off The Fast Track " January 28, 1995.
Las Vegas Review-Journal, "Workers Finding Less Job Success And More Stress."
January 29, 1995
The Charlotte Observer, "Throttling Down - Ambition Has Gone The Way Of Job
Security." January 29, 1995.
New Haven Register, "Ambition? People Want A Life." January 29, 1995.
Houston Chronicle, "American Career Dream Is It A Thing Of The Past?" January
29, 1995
Courier (Waterloo, IA), "More Find American Dream Is Really A Nightmare."
January 30, 1995
The Salt Lake City Tribune, "Today's Workers Prefer Getting A Life To Getting
Ahead." January 31, 1995
Akron Beacon Journal, "Job Malaise Settles Over United States Like A Fog "
February 5, 1995.
The Wichita Eagle, "Jumping Off The Fast Track " February 12, 1995.
St Louis Post-Dispatch, "Take This Job And.. ." February 15, 1995
Orlando Sentinel, "Turning Our Backs On Ambition." February 19, 1995
Denver Post, "The End of Ambition." February 19, 1995
8

-------
David M. Noer (continued)
Christian Science Monitor, "New Employer, Employee Contract Replaces Loyalty and
Job Security." February 21, 1995.
The (Norfolk) Virginian-Pilot, "Ambition: For Many Workers. It's Fading Away."
February 22, 1995.
Juneau Empire, "Defining Success." February 26, 1995.
Asbury Park Press (Neptune, NJ), "Bailing Out." March 5, 1995.
The Edmonton Journal, "Layoff Survivor Sickness* May Afflict Firm After
Downsizing " March 11, 1995.
Syracuse Herald-Journal, "Dropping Out Of The Rat Race " March 13, 1995.
SendOUT (Southern Calif. Gas Co.), "How You Can Survive Survivor's Guilt." March
17, 1995.
The (Lorain, OHj Morning Journal, "Kmart Execs Rush To Fill Void At Top " March
23, 1995.
Ocala Star-Banner, "Ex-Kash n' Karry CEO Leads Kmart." March 24, 1995.
The Ottawa Citizen, "Treating Layoff Survivor Sickness " April 15, 1995.
Federal Times (Springfield, VA), "Prepare for New Jobs." June 5, 1995.
Business Marketing, "Noer Tackles Survivor Issues " Juiy 1, 995.
Executive Female, "After the Pink Slips." July 1, 1995
Small Business News, "Layoff Survivors Often Suffer From Morale Problems " July
1, 1995
Press-Telegram (Long Beach, CA), "We're All Temps in the Future Workplace " July
10, 1995.
NPR "Morning Edition "July 11, 1995
Federal Times (Springfield, VA), "Bosses Need to be 'Culture Busters August 14,
1995
The New York Times, "Fun At Work"7 Boy, That's A Laugh." October 8, 1995
Rocky Mountain News (Denver), "Today's Corporate Managers Are 'All Temps.'"
October 22, 1995
The Wall Street Journal, "It's Time You Became A Manager of Change..." October
31, 1995
Anchorage Daily News, "Plotting A New Course " November 1, 1995
9

-------
David M. Noer (continued)
Valley Times (Pleasonton, CA), "Focus On Company Growth With Change."
November 5, 1995.
CNN, "In Your Prime-Money." November 15, 1995.
National Public Radio, "All Things Considered." December 17, 1995.
London Financial Times, "Misfortune of the Lucky." December 20, 1995.
Edmonton Sun, "Layoff Survivors" (March 1996)
CHQR, Calgary, Open line interview. March 6, 1996.
CHED New-Line Talk Show interview. March 13, 1996.
CBCRadio, Edmonton, March 13, 1996.
The Wall Street Journal, "Off The Track: Is Your Job Going Nowhere7" February 26,
1996.
Atlanta Constitution, "Expert Urges Workers To Be Versatile, Self-Reliant " March 5,
1996.
Rocky Mountain News, "Flats' Layoffs By PA Raise Hackles - And Eyebrows." April
7, 1996.
NPR (WFDD Public Radio) "Piedmont Voices " Winston-Salem, NC May 7, 1996
Microsoft WWW Home Page "Encarta On The Record." May 15, 1996.
10

-------
DUE TO THE CURRENT
FINANCIAL RESTRAINTS
- THE LIGHT AT THE END
OF THE TUNNEL WILL BE
TURNED OFF UNTIL
FURTHER NOTICE.
PARADIGM
SHIFTS
ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT
People
From 	
To
People as Assets
People as Costs
to be Developed
to be Reduced
"Grow & Cultivate"
"Hire and Cut"
© 1996 David M Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
Language patterns
From
	~ To
Nurturing
Violent
"Develop"
"Take Out"
"Help"
"Shoot"
"Grow"
"Terminate"
Time Orientation
From
	~ To
Long Term
Short T erm
"A Career"
"A Job"
"Make"
"Buy"
Size orientation
From 		 To
Synergistic
"Build Up"
"Develop"
"Enlarge"
Reductionist
"Make Smaller"
"Cut"
"Reduce"
© 1996 David M Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
PERSISTENCE OF
Symptoms
* Resignation,

Fatigue and

Depression
SSk
• Loss of
Control

• Heightened

Anger

FEELING CLUSTERS
• Fear


-Insecurity


- Uncertainty

• Frustration

- Resentment


- Anger
B§f ^

• Unfairness


-Betrayal


- Distrust


Coping Mechanisms
Less Risk
Taking
Low Productivity
Information
Thirst
Survivor Blaming
© 1996 David M Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
THE BASIC BIND
Trust
A.
Survivor

A
Symptoms
I
The more trust the

The higher the sense
higher the sense of

of violation, the more
violation

susceptibility to


survivor symptoms



pyramid Intervention

MODEL
Level 1
/ \ DoinflttRljftf
/ Prociw \
Level 2
\ Fidamg
/ \E/rolonJ R*l«a»»
/ Odtvlng \

Level 3
/ \ Brntong
/ EmpowM L.trrJng
Level 4
/ \ Accommodi* Nrm
/ \ Employment
f Realigning Systems and PncticM \ c«nnci
\
Pyramid Intervention
Model
Level 1
© 1996 David M Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
traditional process
Interventions
-Fairness
-Equity
-Participation
-Caretaking
-Prior Notice
DENIAL TRAPS
*	Spurious Self Actualization
•	Myopic Mergers (They'll leave me
alone/ I'll leave them alone)
CONTROL TRAPS
•	Managing Communications
(controlling the way things are said)
•	Managing Emotions (restraining
authentic feelings
•	Image Management (inappropnate
coolness, detachment, analysis)
© 1996 Davtd \t Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
Tips for Authentic
Communication
-Be Real, Be Congruent
-Behave Appropriately, Think of a
Funeral
-Lead with the Heart; Follow with
the Head
-Never Say Never
Pyramid Intervention
Model
Faditabng
Emolofttl Reitm
Level 2
Interventions
(what to do)
• Install Processes that Facilitate
Emotional Responses
-Small Group Communications
-Facilitated Group Discussions
-Team Building Sessions
© 1996 David M Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
interventions
(What To Do)
• Train Managers in Intra- and Inter-
personal Skills
-Listening
-Feedback
-Responding to Feelings
Pyramid Intervention
Model
BreaJring OrQarva-
boraJ C»Oep«ndency
Level 3
Empowered Learning
Alt Needs Met by
Organizational System
Self Esteem
Identity
Social Patterns
SocieMl Contributions
All f lourisned by
C'canizdtional Soil
(Tap Rcot into Organization)
© 1996 David M Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
w 1	1
STRATEGY OF ESTABLISHING NON- ¦
DEPENDENCY RELATIONSHIP
F .	 *
External Networks
Social & Emotional Eggs
Number of Baskets
Diffuse Root System
Job
Community
Family
External Networks
Professional Societies
BREAKING ORGANIZATIONAL
CO-DEPEN DENCE
•	Detachment
-	Bonding Around "Good WorK"
-	Diffuse Root Strategy
•	Letting Go
-	Not Controlling the Uncontrollable
-	Internal Focus and Valuing
•	Connecting with Core Purpose
-	Life Planning
-	Value Clarification
PYRAMID INTERVENTION
MODEL
\ Accommodate
\ Emptoymtnl
Realigning SystTfn «nd Practice \ conwti
Level 4
© 1996 David M Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
"Old" Employment
CONTRACT

Assumptions Strateaies
Outcomes
•Paternalistic -Excessive and
management duplicative
support services
•Dependent
workforce
•Long-term career
planning systems

"NEW" EMPLOYMENT

CONTRACT

Assumptions
Strateaies
Outcomes
•Empowering
•Promote autonomy
•Empowered
management

workforce

•Stop "taking care"


of employees


•Don't do detailed


long-term career


planning

"Old" Employment

CONTRACT

Assumptions
Strateaies
Outcomes
•Reward for
¦Linear
•Ptateaued
performance
compensation
workforce
15 promotion
systems
•De motivated

•Linear status
(betrayed)

symbols
workforce

•Fixed job


descriptions


•Static performance


standards

© 1996 DavidM Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
"New" Employment

CONTRACT

Assumptions
Strateaies
Outcomes
•Reward for per-
formance-sense
of contribution
and relevance
•Job enrichment and
participation
•The philosophy of
quality
•Self-directed work
quality
•Non-hierarchical
performance and
reward systems
•Motivated
workforce
¦Task invested
work force
"Old" Employment

CONTRACT

Assumptions
Strategies
Oufcomes
•Long-term
employment
relationship
•Benefits and
recognition
systems reward
tenure
•Older
work force
¦Demo graphically
narrow work
force
"New" Employment

CONTRACT

Assumptions
Strateaies
Outcomes
•Situational
•Flexible and
•Flexible
relationship
portable benefit
workforce

plans


•Tenure free


recognition systems


•Blurring distinction


between full-time and


temporary


classifications

© 1996 David M Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
"Old" Employment
CONTRACT

Assumptions Strategies
Outcomes
•Life time 'Fitting in important
•Co-de pendent
career
wort; force
•Relationships

important

"New" Employment

CONTRACT

Assumptions
Strateoies
Outcomes
•Explicit job
contracting
•Short-term )ob
planning
•Employee does not
sign up for life
-Organization does
not assume life-time
ca retaking
¦Employee and
organization
bonded around
good work
"Old" Employment

Contract
Assumptions
Strateaies Outcomes
•Loyalty is
equated to
remaining with
the organization
•Approved career • Narrow work force
paths only within ... . .
r. ' _ -Mediocre work force
the organizations
r> i -i _	-Ncndiverse work
•Penalize voluntary ,
force
turnover
•Internal promotion,
discourage external
hiring
© 1996 David M Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
"New" Employment

CONTRACT
AssumDtions
Strateaies Outcomes
•Loyalty is
•Norvtraditonal career -Responsible
equated with self
paths work force
responsibility and

good work
•In/out process

¦Employee choice

•Accelerate diversity

recruiting
LEADERSHIP
Moving Tow/ The New
Organizational Reality
REALIGNING THE LEADERSHIP "INGS"
FROM	TO
Controlling	—Helping
Evaluating	—+¦ Empowenng
Directing	—*•	Coaching
Planning	—*- Listening
© 1996 David M Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
new Paradigm Leadership
Competencies (Self and
< Others)
•	Transition Facilitation Skills
•	Visionmg Skills
•	Empowerment Skills
•	Process Wisdom
•	Collective Learning
New Paradigm Leadership
COMPETENCIES (SELF)
•	Value Congruence
•	Self-understanding
Leadership As Easing Behavior
FROM THE COMFORTABLE OLD TO THE
Relevant new
From 	
Motivational strategies tfraf
p/omote dependence
		 To
Strategies that promote
independence
The yearning for belonging
The necessity of autonomy
The o/ga/uzatwn as a primary
social system
Employment primaidy an
eooncme relationship
The leader as savior
The leader as helper
The desire for permanence
The reality ctf transience
The leader as purveyor of
objective reality
The leader as a maker ol
meaning
© 1996 David M Noer (not to be reproduced without permission)

-------
Leading Downsized Organizations
R Factor Model
Notes
The "R" Factor
Patterns of Response to
Uncertainty, Change, and
Downsizing
The "R" Factor
HICH
LOW	Learning Rcidineu	HICH
Comfort With Change
The "R" Factor
HJCH


THE
OVERWHELMED

LOW	Learning Readiness	HICH
Comfort Wuh Change
3 Center for Creative Leadership 1994
Not to be copied or used without written
permission from CCL

-------
Leading Downsized Organizations
R Factor Model
Notes
The Overwhelmed
Withdrawing
and
Avoiding
The Overwhelmed
How The Person Feels
•	Somewhere Between Unhappy and Depressed
•	Frustrated and Anxious
•	Overwhelmed, Particularly By Work
•	Bruised S«lf-£steem
•	Powerless
•	In Need of Approval and Reassurance
•	Reliant Upon Others
•	Fearful of Mistakes and Failure
•	In Need of Stability and Symptom Relief
The Overwhelmed
How The Person Typically Reacts to Transitions
•	Blocks Out the Stressful Changes
•	Avoids Confronting Issues Head-on
•	Retreats Into "Safe" Activities
•	Avoids Risk
•	Waits for Things to "Return to Normal"
•	Feels Angry - May Be Passive-Aggressive
•	Looks for Symptom Relief • Not Solutions
•	Avoids Thinking About What Might Happen
•	Blames and Complains
© Center for Creative Leadership. >994
Not to be cooied or used without written
oermission from CCL
2

-------
Leading Downsized Organizations
R Factor Model
Notes
The Overwhelmed
How The Person Operates as a [.earner
•	Shuts Down . A Blocked Learner
•	SeeJo Aaiw«n that cu Turn Back the Clock
•	Bzpe ads Energy Trying to Look Busy
•	Withdraws from the SipilGcuit Learning
C hallo ages
•	Doesn't Take Care of Self (Smoking,
Drinking)
•	Commiserates With Others Who Feel the
Same
•	Becomes a Barrier to the Learning of Others
The Overwhelmed
What the Person Seeds to Become a Successful Survivor
•	Understanding and Help In Dealing with
Stieas, Feax and Frustration
•	Effective Superiors and Peera Who can Help
Calm the Waters
•	Phaied-In Transition with Bridges to the
"Old Wa7s"
•	Development in Place , Rather than Job
Change
a Protection £rom Quick Empowerment that
Might be Viewed as a Set up for Failure
•	A Series of Mini-Challenges and Crafted
Success Experiences - Rebuild Confidence
and Openness
The "R" Factor
HIGH
a«
fi |
S o
-J u
a a
< m
u
LOW	Learning Readme»
Comfort Wnb Chaoge
© Center for Creative Leadership. 1994
Not to be ccoied or used without written
permission from CCL
THE
ENTRENCHED



HICH
3

-------
Leading Downsized Organizations
R Factor Model
Notes
The Entrenched
Clinging
to
Narrow
Learnings
The Entrenched
How The Person Feels
•	Axudout, Frustrated uid An fry
e Threatened By Sudden Change ld Valued
Behavior
•	"We're Forgetting What Made U« fTho We Axe*
•	Con/tdeat of Proven Skills and Past Performance
•	Afraid of Being a Victim of the Number* Game
•	Often Guilty About Surviving While Others Left
< Reluctant to Take Risks that could Lead to
Mistakes and Failure
•	Unhappy but Unwilling to Start Over la the
External Job Maxket
The Entrenched
Hov The Person Tvntcallv Reacts to Transitions
•	filamei and Complains
•	Acknowledges Need for Change , But Resists
New Learning
•	Works Harder than ever at Previously
Successful Behavior
•	Avoids Talcing Rials
•	Tries to "Ride It Out" Until Tilings Return to
Normal
© Center for Creative Leadershio 1994
Not to be copied or used without written
permission from CCL
4

-------
Leading Downsized Organizations
R Factor Model
Notes
The Entrenched
Ho* The Person Operates as a Learner
o Narrow Learner • Locks Onto Previously
Successful Strategies and Practice*
o Unconsciously Blocks Out Demands of
Change
o Engages in "Action Frenzy" to Justify
^dstenco
o Accepts Need to Be Different • Doesn't Enow
How
o Resists Risk of High Impact Developmental
Assignments
The Entrenched
What (he Person Heeds to Become a Successful Survivor
o Understanding and Help in Coping with
Stresj, Fear and Frustration
o Carefully Paced Learning Activities - Be
Careful Not to Overwhelm
o Don't Expect Too Much Too Soon
o Developmental Job Opportunities
o A Safe Place to Test New Learning and
Experience Success • Simulations Work Well
o Effective Role Models
o Feedback, Encouragement and Support
The "R" Factor
HICH



THE
"BS er"
LOW	Leimuit Reidinesj	HICH
Comfort With Change
© Center for Creative Leadership 1994
Not to be copied or used without written
permission from CCL

-------
Leading Downsized Organizations
R Factor Model
Notes
The "BS er"
Aggressive
Hipshooter
"Makes It Up"
High Drive But
Low Substance
The "BS er"
Hoiffhe Person
•	Comfortable With the Need For Cbinge
•	Anxious to Move On With Transition
•	Surprised at (atnd Unsympathetic to) the
Stress Felt by Others
•	Ready to Take Action Do Something -
Anything
•	Frustrated with the Confusion and "Whining"
•	Confident in Own Ability to Function La Any
Situation
The "BS er"
H
-------
Leading Downsized Organizations
R Factor Model
Notes
The "BS er"
Ho*> the Person Operates as a Learner
•	Wot Very Wall!
•	Oblivious to Core Chail*aget
•	Overestimates Strengths, Doesn't See
(7-eaJca eases
•	Puihe* and Pulls Others Into Action
•	Overdoes the Notion of "Ready, Fire, Aim"
•	Dug«roaa u i Risktaker
•	Often L«ads the Overwhelmed Down, the
Cvdea Path
The "BS er"
What the Person Needs to Become a Successful Survivor
•	Provide Regular, Objective ud Accurate
AueumeaC of Skills ud L
-------
Leading Downsized Organizations
R Factor Model
Notes
The Learner
Growing
and
Processing
The Learner
Row the Person Feels
•	Challenged and Stretched
•	Comfortable With the Need for Change
•	Ajxnoua About the Transition - But Open to
the Possibilities
•	Optimistic About the Long-Term future
•	Has the "Power of Positive Doing"
•	b CoatTol of Own Destiny
•	Not Afraid of Short-Term Mistakes or
Setbacks
The Learner
How the Person Tvptcalh Reacts to Transitions
•	Seeks the Silver Linings Hidden Beneath the Dark
Clouds
•	View Ambiguity and Change as Challenge and
Opportunity
•	Finds Humor in Difficult Situations and Uses It as
a Tool
•	Keen Awareness of Both Strengths and
Weaknesses
•	Treats Life as a Continuous Learning Experience
•	Expands the Perimeter of Penona! Comfort Zone
© Center for Creative Leadership, 1994
Not to be copied or used without written
permission from CCL
8

-------
Leading Downsized Organizations
R Factor Model
Notes
The Learner
How the Person Operates as a Learner
•	Driven to Fill Gaps In Personal Development
•	"Growth Through Developmental Surrender"
•	Pay* Attention to Learning Process • The "How*
of Learning
•	Strlv«s to Solve Problems, Rather than to Place
Blame
•	See la Out Variety Both in Experience and
Learning Tactics
•	Will Risk Short-Term Performance Decrement 1/
Learning Is the Payoff
What the Person Weeds to Become a Successful Survivor
e Reward and Support for Being the Ke7 Player
in the Transition Process
•	Flenble Growth Opportunities Coupled with
Visible Rewards
•	Latitude to Model Effective Learning
Behavior for Others
•	Relief from Being Caught In the Crossfire •
I e. Trying to be All Things to Ail People
•	High Impact Developmental Assignments
The Learner
The "R" Factor
HIGH
LOW
Learning Readiness
Comfort Wnh Chinge
HICH
© Center for Creative Leadership 199<»
Not to be copied or used without wnnen
permission from CCL
9

-------
O&D Works/]
CAM
n '	W
Cr-?,i996^Williamsb^'
"WE ARE THE PARAMOUNT SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH FOUNDATION IN THE COUNTRY...IF
NOT THE WORLD"--Dr. Robert Huggett
The first annual ORD workshop
opened with a key note address from
Bob Huggett He challenged all of
us to have a new commitment toward
ORD He said that the purpose of
the meeting was "to identify what is
or is not happening in ORD and then
to make actual improvements and
create a process to continue to imple-
ment these " His hope for the meet-
ing was that "each of us could speak
our mind, listen, come up with
(solutions., and then pull them off""
Bob highlighted positive changes
that ORD has already seen He ap-
plauded the quality and volume of peer
reviews and the many accomplish-
ments highlighted in the evening's
poster session/gallery walk He noted
also the change in how Congress
views ORD—starting in 1995 with
strict criticisms, to 1996 with words
of encouragement, to 1997 with clear
signs of support He noted that ORD
was the only organization in EPA that
did not get a budget cut, in fact, ORD
received an increase. The ORD bud-
get in 1997 is within 1% of the
President's budget. Bob stated that
this reflects the hard work of ORD
staff It showed that we all have lis-
tened to our outside critics and our
own Lab study, and we have taken
action
Bob commented that he has looked
closely at the ORD survey results and
wants to hear issues and ideas at the
workshop to address these He wants
to continue to hear ideas of ways to
reduce levels of bureaucracy and red
tape He knows we need to better
communicate our goals, objectives,
and priorities to our entire organiza-
tion He stated that the job of man-
agement is essential to the organiza-
tion because managers facilitate our
ability to deliver our ORD products-
science and technology He empha-
sized that there is a change afoot
Scientists are being asked to focus on
their science and research, where just
a few years ago they were told to fo-
cus as managers He recognized that
this change will be hard but that it is
essential to the mission of ORD.
He closed with thoughts on ORD's
mission, serving the science of the
Agency, and on the value of the mes-
sages in our strategic plan ORD, he
noted, has a strategic plan that he en-
visions as a "living document." It is a
road map to guide us "We are not
out of the woods .we have to do
well. all of you are here to help us
stay on course "
Henry Longest opens the
First Annual ORD
Workshop
Henry welcomed over 200 partici-
pants to the First Annual Workshop, a
forum that has brought together ORD
employees from all levels and loca-
tions. One hundred of the participants
were selected at random from a list
of 400 ORD volunteers The other
participants are members of the se-
nior executive service and senior man-
agement He reminded everyone that
this workshop is the first step in what
will be a multi-year process to improve
ORD
Henry expressed his hope that all
participants would have an opportu-
nity to be heard and that everyone
would do their best to listen to each
other and respect each other's views
Henry emphasized the significance
of ORD's role in providing the sci-
ence foundation to support EPA's mis-
sion. To illustrate ORD's high profile
in the scientific community and in the
world, he displayed a recent front page
headline from The New York Times
describing EPA's new air standards.
"This issue came from ORD We
are the organization that provides the
science for EPA's mission," he said
A Successful
Registration
Registration was a success thanks
to all participants and the set up
team and staff running the table
We had a few early birds that
started the registration process at
7 30 a m Even during the busiest
time between 10 30 and 12 30,
registration moved quickly because
the process was well organized and
participants were cooperative
Shirley Thomas, one of the registra-
tion volunteers, reflected that "the
process went smoothly because
everyone was friendly, cooperative,
and had their money ready for their
specific meal selections " Pam
Bassford, also at the table, men-
tioned that "it was nice to finally
have the opportunity to put faces
to the voices she has interacted
with in the past" Pat Jones also
volunteered her day to help register
the workshop participants At 5 00
p m closing time, 225 attendees had
registered

-------
DAVID NOER PROVIDES ADVICE FOR
CHANGE AGENTS AT ORD
With an ORD Conference focused on change, David Noer of the Center for Creative
Leadership offered several salient points for conference participants about managing
change within ORD He addressed several aspects of his pyramid model for effective
change (level one-the right process and level two-letting go) According to Noer, people
typically react to change and uncertainty through exhibiting one of four specific personality
types
TYPE
HOW THEY FEEL
HOW THEY REACT
HOW THEY
LEARN
HOW TO HELP
THEM ADJUST
Overwhelmed
powerless
avoids dealing
with change
issues
withdraws,
sinks--doesn't
learn
build
confidence,
show success is
possible
Entrenched
angry,
threatened
resists, tries to
"ride it out",
opponent
blocks out,
narrow focus
gentle coaching
"BSer"
superior to all
others-can't
empathize
when in doubt-
act, rush to act
and decide
superficial,
excessive risk-
taking
»
strong oversight,
objective
feedback, a short
lease
The Learner
stretched but
controlling own
destiny
life is a learning
experience
focus on solving
not blaming
support, guard
carefully for
burnout
A key lesson from David Noer is that effective change agents need to pay much more
attention to emotions and feelings rather than structure and logic. To quote David Noer
"lead with your heart, not with your head." More detail on his approach to change is in his
book Breaking Free (which all participants received)
Poster Session/
Gallery Walk
Showcases ORD's
Successes
The goal of ihe evening was
to demonstrate the pride
and accomplishments of all
the different facets in
ORD This goal was
clearly achieved as several
participants commented
favorably on the gallery
walk Subhas Sikdar from
Cincinnati felt 'the event
helped bring all parts of
ORD together" Dee
Sailstad from RTP reflected
that 'it was a good chance
to see how EPA functions
as a unit " Chris Zarba
from Headquarters (IOAA)
commented that "the event
was extremely well
organized and attentive to
detail on the content and
implementation " Denice
Shaw who organized the
poster display was
thankful that "people who
brought posters were
cooperative and timely"
Overall, the work that was
showcased clearly
demonstrated that ORD is
having an impact in the
Agency's science, research
and technology
Noer Engages Participants in Activities About Change and Transition
David Noer did not let his audience snooze this afternoon. He engaged the participants in several activities at
their tables in an effort to get people thinking and talking about change.
For the first exercise, Noer had each table come up with one word to describe how they feel about ORD.
Although many of these words sounded like they came from overly-creative scrabble players, they seemed to
capture the feelings within the organization. Feelings ranged from "hopeful" to "skeptical" to "skeptically
hopeful." There were several "concerned," a few "optimistic," and several sort-of optimistic: "cautiously
optimistic," "confusedly optimistic," and even "frumistictranslation, frustrated+optimistic.
In another exercise, Noer used the metaphor of a family to illustrate feelings associated with downsizing. He
asked the participants to imagine a family: mother, father, and four children. The mother and father decide that
they can no longer support the whole family, and therefore they have decided to let two of the children go - send
them away. Noer asked the participants how they would feel if they were a) the children that were "separated",
b) the children that were kept, and c) the parents. This exercise was designed to look at the issue of change
and downsizing from an emotional perspective, rather than a practical perspective.
In a third group activity, Noer asked the participants to think about someone going through a transition, and then
to identify characteristics and behavior patterns of two types of people. 1) the person who accepts and adapts
well to change; and 2) the person who has trouble accepting and adapting to change. The participants agreed
that the "ideal" person would be someone who is upbeat, motivated, helpful, open, communicative, and listens
well - as one group put it, "the energizer bunny."

-------
pfcD WorksA
etm

Brainstorming the
"Improvement
Opportunities"
Before the group got to the top 5
issues, the participants listened to and
raised many issues. The first step in
the process was to have the partici-
pants work in groups of 8 to identify
6-8 issues that ORD need to address.
After this "brainstorming" session, the
issues were posted and grouped
around the room. Each participant
then voted on the issues to narrow
the extensive list down to 10 (Allof
the issues that were raised in this ses-
sion-not just the top 10 issues-will
be documented and disseminated.)
The top 10 vote getters
were:
Resources & Infrastructure - 78
Red Tape- 72
Communications - 65
External Grants- 39
Lack of Technical Support for
Research - 31
Career Advancement for
Scienusts - 28
Trust - 23
Integrate Science w/
Organizauonal Vision - 21
Career Development - 21
10 Planning Science-18
Workshop Participants
Select 5 Priority Issues
Day 2 of the Workshop focused on
identifying the issues and getting them
out on the table After several hours
of discussion on many issues and two
rounds of voting, the participants se-
lected the top 5 issues. These are
the issues that the participants have
collectively determined to be the most
important issues to address, here at
the conference and throughout the
year. They are
•	Red Tape
•	Communications
•	Resources and Infrastructure
•	Integrating Science w/ EPA's
mission
•	Career Development
"ORD'S Strategic Plan is a Living Document That Helps Us
Respond to and Anticipate Change"... Joseph K. Alexander
Joe Alexander presented the ORD Strategic Plan He emphasized that "it's not the document that is important,
rather it is the concepts and the process of thinking through answers to fundamental questions, defining the core values
of the organization, and what things are the most important to us." The strategic planning process challenges us to
think about what we will be doing in the future. It challenges us to know who are customers and clients are and what
service they request from us. It prompts us to envision the characteristics of environmental science in the future.
(Note
votes)
Each participant had 3
Joe identified four primary functions of the document:
1)	a place where we describe our process to establish priorities;
2)	a place that helps us make decisions about the allocation of resources,
3)	a communications tool for our colleagues within ORD and the clients we serve, and
4)	a communications tool for our stakeholders outside the Agency
continued on back of page

-------
continuedfrom from
The plan discusses the process for setting priorities
based on risk. It identifies the technical support ORD
can provide to program offices. Joe also highlighted six
near term priorities that the plan addresses:
1)	research on drinking water
2)	research on particulate matter
3)	research on endocrine disrupters
4)	research into new levels of capability in human
health risk assessment
5)	research into new levels of capability in
ecological risk assessment
6)	research into pollution prevention and new
technologies
What ORD has is the first ediuon of the Strategic Plan;
it is a living document that will need revisions. Joe hopes
that the Strategic Plan can help us better articulate our
vision and position ourselves to address the strategic
needs of the Agency. The Strategic Plan needs to cap-
ture our thinking on where we want to be in 10 to 20
years. In revising the Strategic Plan, he hopes to "en-
gage all colleagues across ORD so we have a set of ideas
that makes ORD even better than it is today."
ORD Survey Results
Shared
Henry Longest presented an overview of the ORD sur-
vey results. The survey, with a 96% response rate, high-
lights areas of strengths, concerns, and areas needing im-
provement. Among the strengths were job challenges,
decision-making practices, influence and control, team
building, and encouragement from supervisors for par-
ticipation. Some of the concerns included communica-
tion flow, job reward, goal emphasis, and peer relation-
ships The areas needing improvement included bureau-
cracy/red tape, group performance, and individual per-
formance efficiency.
Given the high level of participation and the detailed
responses, Henry stated that the survey provides ORD
with "a good snapshot of peoples' perceptions and feel-
ings and serves as a good basis from which to work."
Henry discussed his experience using survey instru-
ments to monitor and improve organizations. He
stressed that organizations have to make a long term
commitment to this process for it to be effective. He IS'
hopeful that ORD's commitment to a multi-year survey
process will be effective in ensuring that the needed
changes occur in the organization.
Henry expressed that the challenge for this Work-
shop is to "clearly define the problems so that we can
come up with appropriate solutions to address them."
Councils and Union
Representative Present Their
Roles
Human Resource Council
Gary Foley (NERL/RTP) described the purpose and
genesis of the Human Resources Council, which was
formed in May 1996 as an advisory body to provide
advice and assistance to the AA and Executive Coun-
cil on human resource issues. The HRC, which in-
cludes representatives from every office, acts as an ofj
fice-wide sounding board and communication network
Betsy Howard (NRMRL/RTP) described the four
HRC workgroups: 1) the Team Workgroup, 2) Ca-
reer Development/Promotion Potential Workgroup,
3) Awards/Performance Appraisal Workgroup, and 4)
the Scientific Productivity Workgroup.
George Moore (NRMRL/Cmcinnati) presented sev-
eral communication issues, highlighting specific areas
that need improvement
Management Council
Debbie Dietrich, Director of ORMA, provided an
overview of the Management Council, describing its
mission and function within ORD The Management
Council reviews and establishes policies and proce-
dures across ORD. Last year's shut down and fur-
loughs put the Management Council in a reactive mode;
this year, they hope to set a proactive agenda. Tom,
continued on next pi

-------
Clark, from NERL of RTP, NC, provided a field perspective on the role of the
Management Council Woven in with his humor was a description of some of the
Management Council's priority issues, including improving delegation and empow-
erment, wider use of OMIS, and improving infrastructure in the labs.
Science Council
Hugh McKinnon (NRMRL/Cmcinnati) presented the role of the Science Council.
The Science Council played a role in the reorganization, especially in coordinating
scientific issues across all the ORD Labs. Now that the reorganization is in place,
the Science Council is focusing on other issues, including implementing and coor-
dinating various pieces of the strategic plan. The Science Council is working with
scientists in the labs to develop research plans and is also working to encourage
interaction between ORD and other scientific organizations.
Unions
Mimi Johnson, the Union representative from the NAGE, described the role of
the Unions within ORD. Mi mi emphasized the Union's desire to successfully imple-
ment the partnership councils, and stated that, "the Union will continue to push for
issues that make it easier for ORD to conduct science "
Kudos for the Facilitators
The workshop facilitators had their work cut out for them today. There was a lot
to accomplish and not a lot of time to do it The reaction from several facilitators
indicates that the willingness and motivation of the participants made their job a lot
easier
Karen Dean (ORD/NHEERL) "It's been fun People are really primed. They
want input These are issues they've thought a lot about for a long time "
Julie Spyres (OPPE) "Everyone is really cooperating well, trying to listen to what
everyone is saying - and following directions'"
Steve Smith (ORD/ORMA). "We've all spent a lot of time both in planning and
practice. I'm impressed by the motivation and capabilities of all of the facilitators
and planners - great spirit and dedication "
Lek Kadeli (ORD/ORMA): "I'm impressed with the openness, commitment, and
involvement from everyone... They are a motivated group."
Mary Shaffran (ORD/IOAA): "Today was intense It's hard to organize an activ-
ity for 200 people It was a challenge but it worked - everyone got their issues out
on the table."
Thanks to all the ORD (and
non-ORD) facilitators who
made the day a success!
Lee Salmon (OAR)
Mary Shaffran
Walt Calloway
Dick Gamis
Steve Smith
Julie Spyres (OPPE)
Ken Wright (OARM)
Bob Thorlakson (OARM)
Kevin Teichman
Jim Carr (OARM)
Karen Dean
Linda Ross
Jessica Barron (OARM)
Pat Hawk
Mike Moore
Julie Bowen (Region 10)
Sandra Bowman (OARM)
Randy Brady (OARM)
Deborah Hanlon
Kathy Driver
Richard Brown (OARM)
Margery Exton (OPPT)
Jonathan Herrmann
Lek Kadeli
Jay Messer
Anne Sergeant
A special thanks to Walt Galloway,
Richard Brown, Mike Moore, Kevin
Teichman, and Mary Shaffran for
coordinating a very intense and
productive day'

-------
O&D Works/}

"	\J\W
5.-/996^Williamsb^?''
Bob Huggett Sees Progress at the
ORD Workshop
Bob Huggett shared some of his
thoughts and perceptions about the ORD
Workshop He expressed his enthusi-
asm and optimism for the outcome of the
Workshop, and emphasized his commit-
ment to "doing whatever needs to be
done" to carry out the action plans that
we develop here in Williamsburg He
stated that he, Henry, and Joe would sit
down after the workshop, study the rec-
ommendations for each of the 5 priority
areas, and then work with the Executive
Council to implement the plans "There
are a number of innovative things we can
do .. we can do a lot and we must give it
our best shot," he said He specifically
mentioned the possibility of establish-
ing committees with representatives from
each lab and center to work on each of
the issues. He also suggested that in
order to understand the different per-
spectives coming from Headquarters and
the field, we might have Headquarters
people go to the field and, in turn, have
field representatives come to Headquar-
ters. "There's an old Indian saying,
never judge a person until you've walked
in their shoes."
Action Plans
See back page
m
Bob was encouraged by the progress
of the Workshop He was impressed with
the dynamic of engaging 200 people from
every part and level of the organization
He was* also encouraged to hear the par-
ticipants espouse realistic approaches to
these difficult issues "People seem to
understand that there are bounds."
He said that he hopes the participants
come away from this workshop with more
optimism than when they arrived "Re-
member the words that we used on the
first day to describe the way we feel about
ORD?. I hope that after this workshop,
there are more people who would use the
word "optimistic" to describe how they
feel." He encouraged the participants to
talk to their colleagues when they return
home and to share with them their experi-
ences from the workshop. He also chal-
lenged people to think about ORD as a
whole and not in individual parts. He
used the analogy of 5-part madrigal mu-
sic. each part can stand alone and sound
good, but together the parts blend and
sound more beautiful than any individual
part. In ORD, each part can stand alone,
but together we are better.
When asked about the Second Annual
Workshop, he said, "it will definitely hap-
pen " His hope is that next year, we will
be well on our way to solving the priority
issues from this Workshop, and we can
work on the next five issues.
"We are confronted with insur-
mountable opportunity"
-Pogo
Henry Longest
Expresses
Enthusiasm
About Sessions
Henry Longest started Day 3 by
expressing how impressed he was
with the sessions on Day 2 that iden-
tified the top five issues. He felt
"everyone was energized" and that
the sessions were very "stimulating".
He explained the activities for Day 3,
which involved taking the five prior-
ity issues that the groups have now
defined and developing action plans
to address the specific problems.
Panelists Present the
Five Priority Issues
Volunteer panelists gave concise and
quick presentations based on the outcome
of the "issue framing" sessions, designed
to define clearly the five issues. Each
issue was defined using the following
criteria:
Current Slate - the situation now;
Impact - how does it affect ORD,
Desired State - the "ideal" situation,
Bounds - barriers and limitations to
achieve the desired state; and
Measures - ways to evaluate success
These presentations and the handouts
that summarized them served as the foun-
dation from which to develop the specific
action plans.
Thank you to all the participants who
volunteered to record and present the
issues

-------
From Defining the Problems to Finding
Solutions
After a long day a talking about and
defining the problems on Tuesday, the
participants were ready to solve them'
Following the Wednesday morning
panel presentations that summarized the
"issue framing" activity from the previ-
ous day, the participants met in groups
to work on action plans Rather than
having people grouped randomly, as
they were in previous sessions, the
participants were divided into manag-
ers, scientists, and "others " The ob-
jective for each group was to come up
with some action planning ideas for
each of the five priority issues
Volunteers from each group then got
together to discuss, debate, and con-
solidate their conclusions, so that they
could present them at the plenary ses-
sion Clear and comprehensive solu-
tions and plans were presented for all
five priority issues
The following actions were recom-
mended for each issue
I Integrate Science with EPA Mission
Recommended Action
•	create bulletin board/chat room
•	develop case studies of good/
bad examples of integrated
science
•	reevaluate and redefine roles of
Pis, ALDs, and clients in research
planning and implementation pro-
cess
•	hold regular cross-lab/client state-
of-science workshops
•	submit a proposal to the Adminis-
trator for an Agency-wide program
for scientific strategic plans
Thanks!
Special thanks to the office team led by
Evelyn Wray for taking care of faxes, phone
messages, typing, and everything else1
Also, many thanks to the Workshop
coordinating committee and steering com-
mittee for making this Workshop happen
Most of all, tliank you to all the partici-
pants who shared their valuable time and ideas
with everyone this week
Resource Infrastructure
Recommended Action
•	develop strategic resource alloca-
tion/create staffing plan for bal-
anced workforce
•	clarify definition of infrastructure
•	provide research team support
•	analyze travel needs to support
science
I. Red Tape
Recommended Action
•	redelegate to lowest possible level
•	review, evaluate, and revise ORD
policies and procedures for value
added and accountability.
•	ensure that service-oriented orga-
nizations in ORD act as facilitators
norbarriers
•	simplify Lab Implementation Plan
and reduce information requests
Effective ORD Communication
Recommended Action
•	provide effective, reliable, and
compatible electronic communica-
tion
•	establish/strengthen two-way
communication mechanisms
•	develop and organizational com-
munications strategy
5 Career Development
Recommended Action
•	set up career mentoring programs
for all paths and levels
•	set clear, consistent guidelines
and train for implementation
•	create and implement high-qual-
ity Individual Development Plan
•	obtain and protect travel budget
for development.
•	create long-term investment in
study of career path
•	communicate career development
information - disseminate high
quality user-friendly information
on career development, training,
and promotion opportunities
Have a Safe Trip Home!
The
Recipe
FILL Glue Pot with the fresh,
pure, clear water of undiluted
human spirit
•/ Take special care not to contami-
nate with preconceived ideas, or
to pollute with excess control
¦/ Fill slowly, notice that the pot
only fills from the bottom up
It's impossible to fill it from the
top down1
STIR in equal parts...
•	Customer focus
•	Pride in good work
BRING to a boil and blend in
•	A liberal portion of diversity
•	One part self-esteem
•	One pan tolerance
FOLD in ..
•	Accountability
•	Openness to learning
SIMMER until smooth and
thick, stirring with..
•	Shared leadership and clear
goals
SEASON with..
•	A dash of humor and a pmch
of adventure
LET cool and garnish with...
•	A lopping of core values
SERVE by coating all boxes in
the organization chart, with
particular attention to the
white spaces. With proper
application, the boxes disappear
and all that ean be seen is
productivity, creativity, and
customer service.
- David Noer

-------
Labs/Centers/Offices Make
Commitments to Improve ORD
The lasl day of ihc Workshop focused on what each
lab, ccnlcr, and office could do lo implement actions lo
address the five priority issues
During the last morning session, each lab, ccnlcr, and
office met separately lo talk about how lo implement
these actions at Ihc local lab/ccnlcr/oflicc and
ORD-le\el, and how to engage their colleagues back
home in doing so
There were a total of eight groups that met together
The Labs
NHEERL - National Health and Environmental Effects
Laboratory
NERL - National Exposure Research Laboratory
NRMRL - National Risk Management Research
Laboratory
The Centers
NCERQA - National Ccnlcr for Environmental
Research and Quality Assurance
NCEA - National Center for Environmental
Assessment
The Offices
ORMA - Office of Resources Management and
Administration
ORS1 - Office of Research and Science Integration
IOAA - Immediate Office of the Assistant
Administrator
Following arc brief summaries of the specific
commitments made by each group
NRMRL will:
Red Tape
1 Hold a
management meeting
in January
1	Endorse the two-signature
approach
1 Establish a ' red tape raiders"
task force
Career De\ elopnient
l	Assign a "resource person" lo
handle career development issues
i	Reinvigorate the 1DP process
i Set aside travel $ for Pis
Communication

-------
i Take lead on selling up ORD
Inlcrncl and Inirancl communication
strategy
i	Conduct survey on information
needs
i	Standardize communication
systems
i Hold all hands, division, and
branch meetings to make workshop
information available
Resource!) and Infrastructure
i Conduct 5 year luring review
in line with current direction
i Communicate infrastructure
analysis
i	Conduct travel analysis
Integrating Science with kl'A's Mission
i	Take lead on setting up
bulletin board/chat room (pilot by June)
l Take lead \uth ORSI in
setting up slate-of-llic science reviews
NHEERL will:
i Hold an all hands meeting to
convey messages from the AA and lab
directors, and involve staff locally
l
Ap-
po i
n t
staff
who
will
spc
n d
t i ni
c
deal
ing
wit
h
each
1 s
sue
i	Form workgroups/opportunity
teams with a mix of people from the lab
l	Establish performance
standards across management levels
i Sliare experiences with oilier
labs/cenlers
NCERQA will:
Red Tape
l	Identify "choke points"' by	i	Begin implementing corrective
January	action by mid-February

-------
i Complete corrections by
mid-June
Integrating Grants l'i ogram into ORD/Agency Process
i	Work on redefining roles of
principle investigators (Pis)
InternaI and External Communication
1 Work on home page to
incorporate information on abstracts and
grants
i Hold workshops for home and
program offices
NERL will:
Protect infrastructure
i	Create process for evaluating
equitable distribution
i	Create model of infrastructure
needs to use when making rapid
first-cut decisions
Improve Communication
i Expand NERL Home Page
l	Focus on ORD-widc
communication
l	Work with ORMA to
implement the two-signature model for
reducing red tape
i	Conduct a review of ORD
policy and procedures
i Finalize and stabilize NERL
strategy to include PI interaction and
boliom-up interaction
i Promote the use of electronic
signatures
l	Implement a new career
development plan
i	Devise a clear definition of
long and short-term research
NCEA will:
i	Identify' an ' issue champion"
for each issue
Red Tape
l Establish small teams to
identify problem areas
Resources and Infrastructure
i Create a small team of people	resources
to define/characterize infrastructure to
get a better understanding
i	Address the issue of travel

-------
Integrate Science with EPA Minion
1 Develop more high visibility
case studies
1	Reactivate review of PI and
ACD roles
Career Development
1	Develop a handbook for new
employees
i Identify common training
needs and provide group training
i	Establish a mentoring program
Communication
i Complete NCEA Home Page
i	Survey and identify'
communication needs
ORS1 will:
Career Dewlopment
l Strengthen the IDP,
emphasizing teaming opportunities,
new projects, and training
Red Tape
i	Redelegate to lowest le\el
consistent with 9th floor
Resources/Infrastructure
i	Create draft of strategic plan
Communication
i Take steps to better
communicate within Lhc organization
i Take steps to communicate
what ORSl's role is in the organization
Integrating Science with Agency's Mission
i	Reevaluate the role of ALDs
i	Seek mput from Pis
i	Develop draft approaches to
integrated Siatc-of-thc- Science
workshops
i Report to the Science Council
by March
ORMA will:
i	Act as an agent for change by
listening, learning, and actmg
l	Focus on support to the
organization, not oversight and control

-------
Communication
1 Establish a feedback
mechanism for customers
i	Support development of a
communication strategy with ORS1 and
10AA
Integrating Science with EPA's Mission
1 Focus GPRA on results, not
red tape
Red Tape
l	Dc-laycr the acquisiUon
process - fewer signatures
i Identify 3 procedures and
reduce their processing time by 50%
Career Development
i	Survey best practices and
include these in management reviews
i Create navigation aids
Resouices and Infrastructure
i Define infrastructure by 3/97
i	Report on how travel dollars
are spent
i	Devote next Executne Council
Meeting to Workshop follow-up
l Regularly monitor progress on
carrying out these commitments
l	Integrate these conuniuncnts
into the Strategic Plan
l	Initiate a communication
strategy
i	Implement a system for
feedback
i Assess the chain of approval
i	Conduct a review of all ORD
policies
i	Support scrvicc-oncntcd
altitude
Career Development
i	Human Resources Council to
work on a career development strategy
i Conduct supervisor training
with lab/center input
IOAA will:
Communication
Red Tape

-------
Resources and Infrastructure
i	Clarify definition of
infrastructure and communicate this
definition
i	Reallocate resources based on
new definition
1 Establish process to link
budget to strategic plan and research
plans
she would work to encourage the Science and
Management Councils to meet soon
Mike Slimak said he would make sure that the
Workshop issues are in the forefront of NCEA's
activities
Peter Preu.ss stated that he would strive to nuke the
NCERQA grants program an integral part of EPA's
grants program
Gary Foley committed to encouraging creativity
through empowerment
Personal Commitments to Change
After each lab/center/office presented their
commitments, Henry asked the participants to voice
individual commitments to the ORD improvement
process Several participants, both managers and
non-managers stood up to offer a personal comnutincnt
Henry Longest committed to following through on
the "two-signature" uuUali\c to minimize red tape
He also committed to finalizing llic lease pohcj
associated with international lra\ cl
Joe Alexander stated that he would integrate the ideas
and action plans from the Workshop into the 19'J7
Strategic Plan revision
Debbie Dietrich said she would commit to making the
ORD Management and Information System (OM1S)
work
Evaluations Convey Positive
Feedback
The final task for the participants after four long days of
hard work was to evaluate the First Annual Workshop
There was an overwhelming 85% response rate
Overall, the responses were full of positive comments
tliat seemed to capture the encrgj and momentum of
the four da> s Following arc some excerpts
What aspects of the Workshop did you find
interesting, useful and beneficial...
Tim Oppelt said he would commit 25% of his time to
implementing improvement actions He also offered to
host the Second Annual Workshop in Cincinnati
Dorothy Patton stated that she would listen to her staff
and help them meet their commitments She also said

-------
i	the ability of 200 people to
focus on areas of common interest and
concern and then identify action for
follow-up was unbelievable "
1	"The open and trusting
atmosphere to discuss all issues made
me a more trusting employee "
i ' Bob, Joe, and Henry's strong
endorsement for positive change and
real follow-up "
l "All of it1"
i	"It was an excellent
opportunity especially for non-
management stair to meet and uilcract
with other ORD colleagues across all
labs, centers, etc "
i	"Wide ORD representation,
enthusiasm, posters, amnesty box
Three cheers to the organizers and
facilitators1"
What aspects of the Workshop need
impt ovemenfi
I	"More time for action
planning "
i	"More time for de\ eloping
issues "
i '"Allow more tunc for
discussion/characterization of ncU
acUons/stcps in terms of both
overarching ORD follow-up and
individual lab/ccntcr efforts "
i ' Workshop was too long "
i	"Workshop was too short
Do you feel that the actions crafted at the
Workshop will be implemented back home ?
i "Yes, bul only if each
participant puts personal energy into
continuing the process "
i "Day 5 will be the real test"
i	"The key is follow through "
"Launch Lunch" Provides Appropriate
Send-off for Workshop Participants
The First Annual ORD Workshop ended on Thursday
afternoon with a lunch to recognize and thank all of the
participants Each participant was presented a Tribute
of Appreciation "in recognition of your efforts as an

-------
agcnl for change m ORD"
Coming Soon....
A full summary of the Workshop aclivilics and
outcome is being prepared It will higlilighi tiic issues
that were raised on Day 2, the action plans tlial were
developed and presented on Day 3, and Day 4's
commitments Irom each lab, center, and office

-------
ISSUES FROM THE AMNESTY BOX (Monday, December 2)
1.	Scientists gain expertise vicariously by supervising students and technicians and by
collaborating with larger teams. The significant reduction in contractor support and
cooperative agreements will reduce the breadth of expertise of ORD scientists overtime.
This, together with the "random" removal of expertise through early outs and retirement,
can be expected to leave critical gaps in ORD's ability to provide a full (or wide) range of
advice to EPA's regulatory and policy programs. This factor must be addressed in
strategic planning, particularly via hiring and staffing plans
2.	The need for EPA to solve "puzzles" (complex, with interacting issues) vs problems
(direct questions which science or engineering can address). What should be the role of
ORD—research on problems, or puzzles?
3.	ORD scientists are viewed by top management as inferior to academicians, stripped of
funding and kept out of the loop in extramural grants/coops. ORD scientists are not
inferior and should be involved with extramural recipients at all stages.
4 Why is not the in house expert used more often9 Why are people with peer reviewed
publications not assigned to team etc.?
5. What is being done about the under representation of minorities and SES minorities in
ORD?
6 This is a top-down change...the hitch is that we 're asking managers to change a system (
a dysfunctional one, to be sure^ under which they have been successful. Why should they
change? There would not appear to be anything in it for them, and certainly few (if any)
operate with the greater good in mind.
7.	I was shocked to read in ES&T that the idea is to get scientists away from contract
management and back to science.* That is exactly the opposite of what's happening in
NCEA-DC.
* I would love it if that happened!
8.	What level of funding—all accounts—goes directly to Research? What is the % of
ORD's total budget?
9.	Change the culture. Move the SESers.
10 Co-workers feel with all of the downsizing that they will be shutting down Divisions.
Why is NERL considered the mother Lab? What makes RTP so special besides
Cincinnati or Las Vegas, etc...? The Divisions are being reorganized so much that science
research is not being done and scientist are frustrated. Comment: Why bother saying
1

-------
ISSUES FROM THE AMNESTY BOX (Monday, December 2)
anything, nothing is or will be done.
11.	Greater access to information. Less restrictive Information Security. Our division's
Homepage is not accessible to the public to serve This is not only unproductive by illegal
(FOIA) The Information Security is overly restrictive to our internal researchers (can't
attach instruments or OS's of choice, WTN 95, etc ) Can't use dynamic IP's yet there is
absolutely no individual user accountability only machine level (vp addresses).
12.	Lack of clerical and "non-professional" admin, staff (in the field). Researchers, scientists
and managers are, of course, the backbone, but there have to be staff in the "trenches" to
push the paper, handle the Agency "exercises". Where are they—most locations are
surviving with the SEE Prog and this appears somewhat shaky!! There must be some
relief here.
13.	Too much time is spent by Project Officers in managing EPA contracts. Why not
streamline and shorten some of the Management Processes, particularly the Financial
Management
14.	In spite of statements of a 50% cut in HQ, there has been no corresponding cut in
authority from HQ. How do we implement change if no one is willing to give up some
power?
15.	ORD has had numerous exercises with employee participation for change. They have had
many names, reinvention, etc. However, no actions ever arose. Sometimes,
recommended actions of the committees were not even entered into a record accurately.
Will this REALLY be different, or just more broken promises.
16.	Publications are important! Let scientist publish without management review. Just the
standard disclaimer.
2

-------
Which of 3 Williamsburg Action Scenarios to Choose?
(1)	Low profile scenario all keep quiet and enjoy Williamsburg
No one gets hurt
(2)	Democracy scenario (attempt to) implement constituents' suggestions
Builds on the existing framework
A range of possible outcomes beneficial change to even more bureaucracy
(3)	Philosophical scenario "let us work," "out of the way, please" science
Commitment to unleashed thought and political shielding
The Philosophical Scenario
Given that,
(z) A malignant EPA system has evolved outside of EPA's leadership intentions or control
(a)	EPA ORD bureaucracy is excessive and turned inward
© Dl-conceived political interference has been destructive
(d)	Corrosive effects of power are not well understood or appreciated
(e)	EPA has lost its philosophical perspective
(b)	EPA career tracks lack balance
(f)	The ORD survey is proof of these assertions and a mandate for change
Conclusions. The Williamsburg Convention might find-
® No single segment of EPA is solely responsible for EPA's malaise, solutions can be
found without wasteful and destructive indictments
© EPA's bureaucracy can be streamlined by turning significant parts outward
© An outward directed "corps" manned by former high level bureaucrats can cultivate
political allies and educate adversaries
© Leadership must seek enlightenment necessary to recognize adverse effects of power; i e.,
(or corollary7) scientists tend to be under represented in power circles because they tend
to shun non-scientific assignments
© Only a deeply rooted, commonly shared, and commonly understood scientific philosophy
can bring balance to EPA's power circle, strength to its protective "corps," and a sense of
right to its search for a political umbrella
© A primary cause of loss of prestige of ORD is its undervaluing its indigenous science,
ORD must sustain a phalanx of practicing experts as well as principal investigators
primarily managing public resources
Candidate Elements of a Working EPA Scientific Philosophy
Preamble Perhaps the most important tenet of science is the concept of fun EPA would do well not to
deny or apologize for this fact "It is remarkable", wrote Laplace, "that a science [like physics] which began with
considerations of play has risen to the most important objects of human knowledge " Thus, a playful technique
provides unexpected clues to problems in different fields — one of the leitmotifs in the history of science
It is important to note that fun in science connotes a certain looseness and fluidity of thought and action, not
perks In the Manhattan Project, General Bradley indulged scientists even as he kept them focussed
While it is not hard to imagine that EPA has enemies who will try to make EPA science pay for having fun,
EPA stands to lose more support among its allies by denying it If Laplace can say it, EPA can say it1
A corollary is that scientists who have fun are not eager to be promoted This concept has profound
implications that should not be taken lightly What type of individuals seek and attain management and power
positions9 Why9 Enlightened leaders will contemplate the implications
3

-------
Aspects of the IG's recent campaign through ORD illustrate the dangers of denying our soul If the IG's
cleansing exercise helped EPA science, then why are we at an acknowledged low point just two or three years later9
A premiere reason for the fact that EPA suffers from its profound malaise is that so little was done (or could
be done) to resist the excesses of both the IG and EPA's detractors in Congress EPA did not or was unable to cause
its adversaries to reflect on the differences between legitimate corrections to EPA science, such as funding levels or
programmatic emphases, and basic and unacceptable tampering with the need for scientists to work without
intimidation and manipulation The cause of this failure was the disconnect between management and bench level
scientists, conversely, with the firm support of its scientists management could have spoken more boldly
The point is, whether or not EPA ORD is allowed by prevailing forces at any given
time to exercise its philosophy or not, EPA should at least have a philosophy to promote.
Elements of ORD's philosophy that it might expound to the world include, in addition to fun.
Postulate systems filter unfavorable information, 1 e , they lie. The ORD survey proves this
contention It needs to be understood and counteracted
Toleration (cultivation?) of error, there is too much emphasis on certainty in work plans, science
that does not make mistakes is not taking very big steps
Shielding scientists must be protected from unreasonable interference growing out of
dissatisfaction with the pace of performance, the bureaucracy should dedicate itself to
removing as much administrative burden from scientists as possible. Undue legal
influence over ORD or legal tampering is not in the best interest of science
Stability scientists should be allowed to maintain their disciplines as much as possible, "forced"
transitions should allow for ample learning curve time, new ventures should be manned
by volunteers and recruits as much as possible
Travel whether or not it prevails, ORD management should periodically persuade those opposed
to lighten up on travel restrictions, science is a social enterprise, educate potential allies to
that reality
Diversity science is incredibly complex, some areas are harder to publish in than others, EPA
should augment its "bean counting" with deeper philosophical notions, including the fact
that indigenous science done by EPA scientists has value comparable to principal
investigator work using EPA monetary resources. The dual track needs to be really
implemented fairly
Simplicity ORD should recognize the fundamental difference between engineering and science.
Engineering in science often represents an interim solution to a complex problem,
dependent on substantial empirical experience, while science works more slowly to
define governing physical and other principals that may provide more accurate future
solutions. ORD should strive to revisit models to upgrade them, particularly in the sense
of simplifying them as governing principles become more firmly established
Dangers of committees: ORD's perspective on peer review regurgitates what its critics want to
hear Peer review can be the manipulation of power as well as other instruments
controlled by individuals and institutions Everyone knows that peer review has resulted
in gross abuses of power and has impeded important work from time to time It is not in
ORD's interest to put peer review on pedestal There are times when the only good peer
review comes from the scientific community as a whole, support that notion In some
cases administrators are simply hiding behind committees
Conviction of our beliefs• the strategic document does not give the sense that ORD believes in
itself, partly because it accepted all outside criticism so uncritically (was the
reorganization really necessary'') And, there is a lack of philosophical underpinning
4

-------
ISSUE FOR AMNESTY BOX
ISSUE
Name
(Optional)

-------
OPEN SPACE ISSUES—Monday December 2nd
1	Better define ORD's role and clients. (Less than 20, greater or equal to 3).
I	a.	How do ORD parts contribute to ORD's mission9
2.	How can ORD's program better meet client needs9 e g. regions, CBEP initiatives
3.	Promote climate of freedom where job is well defined and then staff is free to perform.
4.	How should ORD provide support to regulatory process? Is there a better way ?
5.	Look at how the ORD culture values information How can we improve the way we share
information-
—within ORD (up and down ; labs to HQ; down and up)
—with clients (regions and programs)
--with the public
6 How can ORD better coordinate and integrate with other agencies, academia, NGOs?
7.	Futures/emerging issues research— needs more emphasis.
8.	Ways to improve performance appraisal process?
9	How can ORD make/use "flexiplace" and "telecommuting" for example, to meet
workforce changes, e.g. role of support staffs ?
10	Cooperative agreements grants and research planning— how well are they working?
II	ORD needs a new or restructured process to get client feedback to measure ORD's
success.

-------
IMPORTANT!
Tomorrow morning you'll be hearing a discussion of data for a couple of
hours. Then, at 10:00 am, you will be asked to brainstorm some issues.
These instructions describe what will be happening from 10-11:30. Please
familiarize yourself with these steps - - If it's not clear, discuss the steps
with any facilitator. Thanks!
(1)	write an ORD issue (preferably one which cuts across ORD,
could produce a near-term success, and is measurable in some
way) on each of two post-it notes
(2)	walk around and talk to at least two people you don't know
about your issues and theirs
(3)	come back to this table in 30 minutes and discuss everyone's
two issues until the table narrows the focus down to 6-8 issues
which you agree on
(4)	record those issues on post-it strips 27" x 10"
(5)	post them around the outside of the room in groups of related
issues
(6)	multivote on the groups of issues on your way to lunch
Instructions to Participants -
Br:-"	:—
In this session you will.

-------
Instructions to Participants -
Brainstorming
In this session you will
(1)	write an ORD issue (preferably one which cuts across ORD,
could produce a near-term success, and is measurable in some
way) on each of two post-it notes
(2)	walk around and talk to at least two people you don't know
about your issues and theirs
(3)	come back to this table in 30 minutes and discuss everyone's
two issues until the table narrows the focus down to 6-8 issues
which you agree on
(4)	record those issues on post-it strips 27" x 10"
(5)	post them around the outside of the room in groups of related
issues
(6)	multivote on the groups of issues on your way to lunch
Facilitator's Guide - Brainstorming -10:35 Day 2 -11/26 - Page 5

-------
;AH
Instructions to Participants - Inner/Outer Circle
(2)	walk over to a flip chart page with one of the approximately 10 issues
the conference just selected by multivote, joining several other participants
(3)	select a spokesperson for the issue
(4)	discuss the issue and why it is important, with the spokesperson taking
notes
[The spokesperson will sit in one of about 10 chairs in the center of the
room. The group will discuss each of the issues, beginning with 2-3 min-
utes from the spokesperson for an issue, followed by discussion.]
(5)	multivote on the issues, then take a break
In the next session you wil
(1) go to your breakout room with about 50 other participants
Facilitator's Guide - Selecting Top Priorities -1:00 Day 2 -11/26 - Page 8

-------
I l( lb p
Instructions to Participants - Framing
After this break you will.
(1)	frame each of the improvement opportunities the conference has
selected
(2)	come back to this breakout room and sit with your tablemates from
yesterday
(3)	begin the work of defining and determining the scope of one issue
at your table, recording your conclusions on a form
(4)	meanwhile, select an Historian to stay with this issue during the
session
(5)	after 20 minutes, rotate clockwise, leaving your Historian, Facilita-
tor, and issue at your table
(6)	discuss the next issue for 15 minutes, building on the work of the
previous group
(7)	continue to rotate around the circle until you all come back to your
original tables
(8)	when you come full circle, clarify any remaining questions
(9)	send your Historian and Facilitator to the Panel Room for the issue
(10)	leave for the day
Facilitator's Guide - Progressive Framing - 3:00 Day 2 -11/26 - Page 8

-------
Instructions for Action Planning
During this 165-minute period you will address & plan each
of the improvement opportunities the conference has se-
lected At this table you will spend 25 minutes brainstorming
approaches, considering them, and recording your recom-
mendations on Improvement Action Planning Forms Your
facilitator has completed items 1 & 2 You should complete
one form in its entirety as a group for each step you think
ORD should take to accomplish the improvement in this 25
minutes After you have worked on this opportunity, you will
paper clip and place your completed forms in the envelope
on the table Your facilitator will take the envelope to the
next table and the facilitator on your left will bring a second
envelope to you By the time each envelope travels all the
way around the circle of tables, there will be 5 sets of action
plan forms for each opportunity in each envelope
Before you finish your first round, you will have five extra
minutes to select a Historian Your Historian will travel with
the opportunity, envelope, and facilitator, while everyone
else stays at this table. They will participate actively in the
discussion you have on the issue, but will observe only while
the other tables discuss the issue
When the envelope rotates the fifth time, your Historian will
rotate back to this table You will take a good look at the five
sets of forms in the envelope You will select from the five 1 -
3 which you think merit further consideration You may
recommend one in particular, or develop a consolidated
approach combining the best features from different propos-
als You will then be released for a long lunch, except for
your Historian They will take your Action Planning Forms to
the Panel Room for the opportunity (panel rooms will be
listed on a chart by the door of the room you are in They
will then become one of four panelists who will synthesize
their views into up to five Action Planning Forms and make a
presentation to all participants later in the day
Facilitator's Guide - Pass the Envelope - 8:45 Day 3 -11/27 - Page 8

-------
INSTRUCTIONS TO PARTICIPANTS - DAY 4
PERSONAL COMMITMENTS SESSION:
o You will be asked to make 3 personal commitments that will help
Ensure your organization's action plan involves colleagues back home
and secures their commitments.
o You will share your commitments with others at your table and in the
plenary session. Your written commitments will be used to help ensure
Follow-up.
NEXT STEPS FOR FOLLOW - THROUGH SESSION:
o Think about how we can ensure the action plans for improvement are
implemented and successful. Share these ideas during the next steps session.
o Think about what went well during the workshop and where there are areas
for improvement. Share these ideas in the Evaluation session.

-------
THESE ARE MOST OF THE STRIPS THAT WERE
DEVELOPED AT YESTERDAY'S 10:30 PLENARY
SESSION

-------
COMMUNICATIONS (176 VOTES)
-	Need to improve communication both within ORD and to outside
-	Inadequate and ineffective communications
-	Lack of coordination
-	Identification of client needs
-	Ineffective - "du loop"
-	Improve communication
-	Lack of communication: Listening and understanding all directions
-	Too much centralized management versus oversight
-	Inconsistent management
Lack of delegation authority, responsibility and accountability
Contract management too bureaucratic (scientist spends too much time managing)
Too much micromanagement
-	Micromanagement
Lack of empowerment
Lack of true streamlining
Administrative burden on science
-	Too much paperwork and procedures
-	Improve communication/ORD self-portrait
-	Lack of adequate communication
-	Improve communication linking top down and bottom up and with clients
-	Insufficient communication/concern between scientists and managers
-	No consistent message on scientific issues and ORD policies
-	Improper utilization of work force
-	Rotten communication
-	Lack of communication
-	Dysfunctional communication
-	Not enough horizontal and vertical communication (internal)
-	Lack of communication to, from, within ORD
-	Lack of real 2-way communication
-	Lack of means

-------
RESOURCES & INFRASTRUCTURE STRIPS (150 votes)
-	Protect infrastructure
-	No standardized financial database for EPA Project Officers
-	Predictability of resources — Monetary & Staff
-	Resource/info sharing
No incentives to collaborate
Hoarding of resources
-	Focus resources on doing research
-	Resources-what you need, when you need it
-	Need for internal resources to support doing work ~ Current problems with:
Lack of administrative/clerical help
-	Scientific career development
Career path
Travel & meeting support
-	Not enough support staff (secretarial,-administrative, technical)
-	Resources to support program offices
-	Lack of travel resources
-	Stability in research directions & funding
-	Stability in m-house research program
-	Strong intramural research program:
Poor qualification research
Limited infrastructure ($, people)
-	Enhancing intramural research including infrastructure
-	Inadequate Resources
Infrastructure
Travel/Training
Technicians for P.I.

-------
INTEGRATING SCIENCE WITH EPA MISSION (119 VOTES)
-Chronic instability in ORD research priorities/programs
-Crisis management (too many firedrills)
-In-house research without competition
-More opportunity to plan science (research stability)
-Improved integration of science with planning and client needs
-Programs are budget driven not science driven
-Lack of bottom-up input into science planning
-Need for mechanisms for bottom up input in research planning
-Disconnects in science planning
EPA-wide
Across program offices
ORD
-Succession planning for scientists/meet priorities of strategic plan
-Involve scientists in planning
-Lack of integrated research
Reconnect: Eco/Human/Risk assessment/Risk management
Planning to bench-level scientist
-Scientists have no say in direction of ORD—it's all managers
-Lack of true integration and buy-in for R/D agendas, programs and goals across ORD
labs/centers
-ORD temporally out of synch with regional clients
-Lack of connection between ORD scientists and overall EPA mission
-Problems with research and planning: emphasis on turf; long/cumbersome; wrong players

-------
RED TAPE (200 VOTES)
-	Comp time/ O.T. policies
-	Obstacles to participation in conferences, especially foreign
-	Excessive paperwork for coops
-	Planning & budgeting process takes too many months & person-years
-	Streamline procurement process
-	Process of Awards of contracts & coops is bureaucratic & wasteful
-	Grants program separates ORD from peers, needs of EPA program offices
-	Integrate extramural and intramural grant programs
-	Scientists need involvement in extramural funding
-	Ensure implementation of QA/QC by grantees
-	Fewer grants, more coops- make sure division needs OK first
-	Delegation of authority to P.I. level (e.g., budget decisions)
-	Stop micromanagement, especially travel
-	Insufficient delegation/ too slow to process actions
-Too much review above labs for contract actions
-Too many administrative burdens on scientists
-	Simplify lab implementation plan
-	No empowerment at lab/div level; only exists in IOAA & ORMA
-	Excessive bureaucracy and procedures

-------
CAREER ADVANCEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT FOR ALL (129 VOTES)
-Lack of opportunity for career development and enhancement

-------
Improvement Oppu lity: Communication
Action
Specific Steps to be Taken
Contributions Needed by ORD's
Principal Organizations
Measures or Success
Follow-up Planned
Establishing/
Strengthening 2-way
Communication
Mechanisms
•	Establish chat rooms
•	Customize information flow
•	Institutionalize bottom's up
communication opportunities
-	SOO Survey
-	Amnesty E-mail
•	Skip level interaction
(lunches) open door policy
•	Clarify roles and
responsibilities of
ALD/ACD's
» 360 evaluations
•	Intensive communication and
feedback on Strategic Plan
• ORD/HRC
•	Communication standard in
management performance
agreement
•	Reflected in SOO Survey
•	Completion of 360° evaluations
•	Report from HRC on employee
satisfaction on 6 months
communication
•	Reduced time spent on
employed
•	Manage by walking around
•	Report on
•	Assess feasibility of informatioir
customizing
•	Quarterly conference call with
9th floor and Division Directors
•	Newsletter (different level)
produced bi-weekly
Develop a
Communication
Strategy
•	Address internal/external
•	Develop SOP's for difference
and substantive issues/types
of communication, e.g.,
budget information and
raising ethic policies, review,
and comment (what, when,
how)
•	HRC
•	ORSI - lead in lab/center
workgroup
• SOO Survey results
•	Periodic meetings with ORD
staff
•	Reflected in Strategic Plan
•	Random surveys
•	Communication Strategy
Timeframe- 3 months
WORKING DRAFT - 12/04/96
2- I

-------
Improvement Opportunity: Communication
Action
Specific Steps to be Taken
Contributions Needed by ORD's
Principal Organizations
Measures of Success
Follow-up Planned
Electronic
Improve (yesterday) electronic
• OIRM/NCC
• The mail goes through/
• Survey of Users
Communications -
communications by.
• ORMA
throughout
"Customer Survey"
more effective
• Make it available to people/
• ADP Coordinators
• People get equipment
"Comparability Survey"

train
• Management Council *
* Reduced down time
"Detail Survey"

•, Hardware/software;
• User Community
comparable to private sector
Timeframe. SOO Survey

y standardize, compatible,

• ADP plan with short and long-
• Develop Action Plan (ORMA)

reliable and user friendly (E-

term perspective - Annual
- Compatibility Feasibility

mai!/LANs)

response
Timeframe: 3 months

• Painless tele/video/phone

• Quicker response/support
• Equipment and training

• Adequate expertise


Timeframe, yesterday

• Effective use of Internet/


• Homepages for all organizations

Intranet


Timeframe: yesterday

• Integrate as part of planning


• Beta Testing

and budgeting process


Timeframe: 6 months
WORKING DRAFT - 12/04/96
o

-------
Improvement Opportunity: p rate Science with EPA Mission
Action
Specific Steps to be Taken
Contributions Needed by
ORD's Principal
Organizations
Measures of Success
Follow-up Planned
t. Bulletin Board/Chat
Room
Define research needs, priorities,
and direction with active
involvement by ORD Pis,
Program Offices, Regions
•	Advertise existence and availability
of systems
¦ Science Council establish pilot area
(e.g., ecosystem sustainabililty)
•	Solicit other topic areas to be
established (possibly, media based)
•	Access hits (time per hit)
•	Establish 5 top topics of
interest
•	Track activity and progress over
time
Establish small groups of Pis to take
ownership of specific topic areas.
Periodic summaries prepared and
presented to chat room/bulletin
board, as well as through formal
planning process
2. Case studies of
good/bad examples of
integrated science
•	LedbyORSI
•	Has Lab and Center
members
•	Within 6 months
• ORSI lead coordination
^ Labs & Center contribute
•	ORD, Programs, and Regions
feel both planning process
•	Science review of regs is
working
•	Science inputs occur early in reg
development process and not as
afterthought
Case studies used to work with
ORD, Programs, and Regions to
revise/improve Research Planning
and requests for ORD sign off on
Program Office Regulatory actions
3. Reevaluate and
refine roles of Pis,
ALOs, clients in
research planning and
implementation process
•	View increasing research
scientist involvement in
planning
•	improving ORD/Client
communication and
understanding of mission
•	Improving use of ORD
expertise
•	Defining budget decision
authority
•	Improved understanding of
processes at all levels
•	Each center laboratory
reevaluate current/desired
involvement (defined
appropriate balance)
•	ORS1/ORMA revisit roles of
ALDs, ARDs, etc
•	ORMA lead evaluation of
issues in process
•	Revised strategic plan which all
stakeholders feel have had input
to (via survey?)
•	Repeat survey on how
ALDs spend their time
demonstrates
improvements/better
understanding
Scheduled progress review to look
for interactive/incremental
improvements
4 Regular cross-
lab/client state-of-
science workshops
•	Cross the entire paradigm of
issues
•	Carefully selected topics (no
more than 2 or 3 a year)
•	All labs and related
•	All laboratories participating on
expert basis
•	Engage program scientists
•	Envalue the grants program
•	Leads to a formal report
•	Utility in planning for later years
•	Reinforce mission/reputation for
cross-discipline environmental
research

5. ORD preparation of
a proposal to the
Administrator for an
Agency-wide program
for scientific strategic
plans
•	Selected topics
•	Structural exchange of
information between ORD's &
programs on mission
•	Strategies developed jointly
with ORD programs
•	Open to peer review
•	Flexibility to accommodate changes
•	Living documents
•	Source of information for GPRA
purposes
•	Returns-of-scale if we truly join
program and ORD mission areas
to design strategy for
development and use of science

WORKING DRAFT - 12/04/96

-------
Improvement Oj (unity: Red Tape
Action
Specific Steps lo be Taken
Contributions Needed by ORD's
Principal Organizations
Measures of Success
Follow-up Planned
1 Redelegate to lowest
possible level
•	Personnel action
•	Acquisition
•	Travel $
•	Planning
• Representation from Mgmt Council,
Science Council, HRC to ensure
implementation
•	ORD delegatation no more
restrictive than Agency
delegations
•	No more than 2 signatures
required
•	Improved survey results
•	Subsequent survey
•	Mgmt review of site delegations
and implementation progress
•	Quarterly report on progress to
ORD personnel
2. Review, evaluate and
revise ORD policies
and procedures for
value added and
accountability
Review policies re'
•	acquisitions
•	awards
•	$ in
•	Representation from Mgmt Council,
Science Council, HRC to ensure
implementation
•	EMS network
•	ORD policy consistent with
Agency-wide policy
•	Only 2 signatures
•	Labs/science not halted due to
lack of $ or ability to spend.
•	Reduction in average time of
receipt or spending of S.
Management reviews
3. Service-oriented
organizations in ORD
act as facilitators, not
barriers
•	Timeliness
•	Feedback
•	Service standards
•	Electronic tracking (OMIS)
•	Internal travel trackings
All internal service organizations
Customer feedback

4. Communicate ORD
rules
•	Easy electronic access by all
ORD staff to current guidance
•	Engage the ORD community
(bite-size steps) through
current information (i e ,
policy of the month)
•	ADP expertise
•	Writing skills
•	Volunteers
Same access to same rules
•	Issuance of final rules
•	Mgmt council follow-up
5 Simplify Lab
Implementation Plan
and reduce information
requests
• Use OMIS
•	National labs
•	Mgmt Council
•	Science Council
•	ORMA
•	Clear LIP guidance
•	OMIS replaces former systems
•	Reduced requests for same info -
analyze requests
•	Periodic evaluation of requests -
looking for decrease
•	Feedback on evaluation
•	Feedback on plan (all levels)
WORKING DRAFT - 12/04/96

-------
Improvement Opporr y: Career Development
Action
Specific Steps to be Taken
Contributions Needed By ORD's
Principal Organizations
Measures of Success
Follow-up Planned
Plan for development
•	Get serious—have a positive
attitude about career
development
•	Set up career-mentoring
programs for all paths and all
levels
•	Set clear/consistent
Guidelines and Train for
Implemention
•	Create and implement high
quality Individual
Development Plan (IDP)
•	Obtain and protect travel
budget for development-not
to be confused with
mandated credential
maintenance
•	Long-term investment in
study of career path-
including KSAs, personal
and organizational goals
•	Dramatic change in ORD attitudes
and leadership by employees and
management
•	Charge a group with setting up a
mentoring program (e g., MC,
HRC)
•	Make group accountable for
accomplishing guidelines/training,
etc.
•	Each organization commit to
implementation
•	ORMA establish baseline
budget/needs
•	Training is a job duty, tailored to
the individual
•	Do long-term job analysis studies
•	Each PI goes to at least 1
professional meeting a year
•	Each additional key person has
at least 1 professional meeting
every 2 years
•	Increase the number of
positions advertised as
rotational
•	Budget stats made available
•	Audit of IDPs for quality,
existence, and closure by XS of
organization being audited

Communication of
career development and
+advancement
information
• Disseminate high quality,
user-friendly information on
career development, training,
and promotion opportunities
•	HRMD and HRC create
documentation
•	Train supervisors and disseminate
information at all hands meetings
at all sites
•	Every supervisor and employee
has easy access to all
documentation
•	Build in specific question to
measure success in SOO 2000
or alternative surveys)
•	Multiple qualified applicants
for most training opportunities
• HRC or local HR groups
evaluate progress
WORKING DRAFT - 12/04/96

-------
Improvement Opportui. Resource Infrastructure
Action
Specific Steps to be Taken
Contributions Needed by ORD's
Principal Organizations
Measures of Success
Follow-up Planned
Strategic Resource
Allocation
•	From Strategic Plan and
Research Plan, allocated
FTEs & RD & E to
lab/centers.
•	Lab/centers develop staffing
plan for balanced work force
to support Pis (i.e., how
many technicians,
administrative, post doc.,
fellowships, secretaries, etc.
•	Lab/centers develop S&T
needs (i.e., supplies, travel,
salaries, etc.)
•	ORD policy for indefinite
time all new hires occur in
lab/centers.
•	ORMA lead allocation drill
•	Lab/centers do own subsequent
local allocation (FTEs and money),
i.e., staffing plans
•	ORMA helps with post doc.,
fellowship programs
•	AA/ORD issues policy on low
vacancies will be filled, over FTEs
used, etc.
•	Strategic Plan ORSI et al
•	Research plans
•	An acceptable allocation of
resources, i.e, transparent,
justifiable
•	New post docs, junior
researchers
•	Flow of personnel to
labs/centers
•	Low correlation between actual
staffing and plan , i e, balanced
work force for efficient support
to Pis.
•	Tracking of FTEs
•	DAA/ORD start allocation
process with schedule
•	Work with OARM where
necessary for post docs , etc.
•	AA/ORD issues policy on how
vacancies will be filled and
where new hires go..
•	Schedules for Strategic Plan,
Research Plans, Staffing Plans
Travel to Support
Science
•	Review past budgets
(megalab and division levels)
•	Analyze needs to support
science (divisions)
•	Reallocate dollars to support
Pis directly
•	Divisions
•	Megalabs
•	NCEA
•	Pis attend 2 meetings per year
•	Greater recognition of our Pis
outside ORD
•	Training needs met
•	Field studies completed on
schedule
• Annual reviews of travel
allocations and feedback
(megalab)
WORKING DRAFT - 12/04/96


-------
Improvement Opportunity: Resource Infrastructure
Action
Specific Steps to be Taken
Contributions Needed by ORD's
Principal Organizations
Measures of Success
Follow-up Planned
Infrastructure
• Clarify definition of
• Executive Council, working with
• Clarified infrastructure
• Add question to ORD survey
Definition
infrastructure in time to
science and management councils,
definition is published by
"Do you understand what is

influence FY99 budget
will publish clarified definition
March 97 (in time for FY99
included in infrastructure?"

process
(next meeting, 1/97)
budget planning)
• Pis guide (user's guide) to

- March 97
• Science and management
• Clarified infrastructure
infrastructure

- Issues that could be
councils, with bottomup input from
definition is reflected in FY99
• Periodic audits of budget process

clarified in definition could
scientists, will review existing
resource allocations
by independent organization

include, core, i e.,
allocations in light of clarified
• ORMA receives fewer calls


untouchable, allocations;
definition
asking about infrastructure


ways to accommodate or
¦ Reality check' describe what
accounting


reduce impact of taps; dollars
happens to resources; identify
* Consistent accounting across


vs FTEs; decision making
where allocations should be
ORD


levels; and flexibility to meet
adjusted to reflect infrastructure
• Greater infrastructure stability


site-specific staffing needs
categories
but also more responsiveness to


• Disclose infrastructure
• ORMA participates to ensure
specific science needs


universe fully and openly, so
consistency of final definition with



that it's transparent to all
existing resource tracking systems



users, including Pis, OMB,




auditors




• Agree on process to reach




closure on clarified




definition, as well as to adjust




infrastructure definition in




future based on factors such




as inflation, legislative




redirections, etc.




• Proceed, with AA




concurrence, on re-




allocations that may occur as




result of using clarified




definition



WORKING DRAFT - 12/04/96


-------
Improvement Opportu Resource Infrastructure
Action
Specific Steps to be Taken
Contributions Needed by ORD's
Principal Organizations
Measures of Success
Follow-up Planned
Travel to Support
ScienceResearch Team
Support
•	Make EPA an attractive place
to work for by offering an
adjusted salary scale
•	Increase availability of post
doc , graduate and permanent
technician
•	Determine Agency's training
needs and allocation of
training needs
•	Offer opportunity for faster
upgrade (determine what
other Agencies are doing and
parallel this)
•	Offer bonus incentives
•	Bring back "stay-in-school"
program, national research
council program, and others
•	Determine what works in
technical support from other
organization (NASA, DOD)
and adapt what fits in the
organization
•	Analysis of how teams look
like 10 years ago and at
present
•	PI contact or investigate
scientist from other agencies
and determine Pl/technical
ratio
•	Increase training resources
and improve training
•	Provide incentive, i.e ,
reward for training
participants for participation,
e g., advancement
recognition of benefits and
value added to training,
•	Strong recommendation from
management council/HRC
•	HRC with Divisional
representation should provide
historical ratio of Pl/technical ratio
that includes all tech supprot from
(contract, P.O , and others)
•	Division Director allocation
•	Assessment of training needs by
Brach Chief
•	Survey of other Agency and HRC
•	Emplouees age stabilized
•	Satisfied PI
•	Increased publication
•	Increased productivity
•	High retention of new hire
•	Learn from negative and exit
survey should be conducted
from employees leaving
•	2 years evaluation to determine
any change
•	Continue to survey trained
employees needs and to
determine effect of training
•	Continue to survey employees
training needs.
WORKING DRAFT - 12/04/96

-------
INTEGRATE SCIENCE WITH EPA MISSION
CURRENT STATE
•	Lack of commitment to integrate science planning across agency (planning=initial identification of
research needs through use of products)
•	Research/regulatory agenda driven by political pressures
•	Regulatory process does not factor in scientific concerns
•	No agency-wide science strategy
IMPACT:
AGENCY
ORD
PERSONAL
•	Regs not supported by science
•	Damage to EPA effectiveness
•	Value of ORD questioned
•	Difficult to maintain stable
research environment
•	Inability to fulfill promises
•	T*oor client relationships
•	Clients turn to others
•	Low morale
•	Career damage
•	Inefficient use of resources
DESIRED STATE-
AGENCY
ORD
PERSONAL
•	All EPA regs/policies based
on strong science
•	Acknowledgment of ORD's
unique expertise
•	Integrated science planning
•	Research advances science
and anticipates future
research needs
•	Research sought by clients
• Recognition of individual
research accomplishments
BOUNDS
Ability of clients to prioritize/articulate needs
Statutory deadlines/legislative mandates
Political pressures/public opinion
Resources
Skill mix/abilities
MEASURES:
AGENCY
ORD
PERSONAL
•	Decisions driven by ORD
research results
•	Quality of science not a
limiting factor in EPA
decision making
•	Congressional support
•	Improved environmental
conditions
•	Customer satisfaction as
reflected in support for
budget and investment in
ORD process
•	Peer reviews support ORD
• Recognition of unique
contributions of ORD to
environmental science and
protection

-------
RED TAPE
CURRENT STATE:
•	CYA culture
•	Poor ratio of process to product
•	Lack of trust, empowerment, appropriate delegation
•	Micromanagement
•	Redundancy and excess review
IMPACT:
•	Frustration and low morale
•	Lack of trust
•	Increased and inappropriate human and dollar cost of doing business
•	Lack of timeliness
•	Productivity problems
•	Loss of research momentum
•	Difficulty in attracting and keeping excellent scientists
DESIRED STATE
•	Administrative/management staff to have service mentality rather than watchdog attitude
•	High and timely research productivity
•	Administrative/management support for strong research infrastructure
•	Delegate decisions to lowest (legal) level
•	No controls beyond those required by Agency without cost justification
•	Elimination of excessive/unnecessary reporting
•	Reasonable standards and time for review
•	Mutual accountability t <-~
•	Information management systems to simplify processes
BOUNDS
•	Legal/federal/regulations (e.g., FMFIA)/EPA policies
•	Perception of Agency by public and Congress
•	Common sense/cost effectiveness
•	Trust/legacy of IG review
•	Comfort level with vulnerability
MEASURES
•	Improved morale and productivity
•	Shortened processing time
•	Fewer signatures/less paper
•	OMIS replaces other systems
•	Adoption of work flow procedures
•	Increased ratio of practicing scientists to all others
•	Improved results on S002000
•	Identify and reduce red tape by quantifiable % by X time
•	Adoption of Agency policies instead of ORD policy (e.g., international travel policy matches rest
of Agency)
•	Increased delegation authority - delegate to lowest legal level

-------
RESOURCES/INFRASTRUCTURE
CURRENT STATE
•	Confusion on definitions of resource categories - especially infrastructure.
•	Poor skill mixes to accomplish "new" mission(s).
•	Perception that ORD did not protect its infrastructure resources as promised.
•	Mismatch between available resources and research expectations (is amount of resources adequate for
work to be done?)
•	Inconsistency in allocation of infrastructure (across laboratories/centers)
•	Long-term planning is difficult.
•	Misaligned resources (Ratio of administrative to scientific personnel skewed)
IMPACT
•	Mission of ORD stifled
•	Inhibits scientific productivity
•	Loss of trust
•	Instability
•	Low morale
•	Discourages enthusiasm for long-term planning
•	Creates unhealthy competition between labs/centers
•	Hard to maintain state of the art science
•	More strongly affects groups who have traditionally done more extramural research
DESIRED STATE
•	We have more junior level scientists and technicians
•	Everyone understands what "infrastructure" means.
•	Better allocation of FTEs to do quality science
•	We have the right kind of resources at the right time in the right place to successfully complete the
mission (science).
•	There is more input from scientists into definition and allocation of infrastructure.
•	Upper management supports stable and protected levels of infrastructure, periodically reviewed and
revised based on science.
•	First priority is placed on resources to do science.
•	The number and type of programs is consistent with the infrastructure $$ we have.
BOUNDS
•	Size of appropriation
•	FTE ceiling
•	Budget process
•	Set categories of funding
•	ORD priorities (Program Offices/Congressional Priorities)
•	Political reality
•	Inflexible federal personnel system (can't get rid of dead wood, can't move people)
MEASURES
•	Survey results show improvement
•	Clear, consistent definitions
•	Benchmark against other federal scientific agencies
•	Improved morale
•	Ratio of technicians: scientists: administrators is appropriate
•	More people promoted through science track
•	Meet milestones

-------
COMMUNICATION
CURRENT STATE-
ORD's ability to communicate both within and outside the Agency is ineffective, irregular,
inefficient and selective. This inadequate, unprioritized communication, is frequently top-down,
untimely and of poor quality; it is hampered by technological barriers and lack of trust. The
quantity of information ranges from overload to absent.
ORD communication should be based on a humanistic approach and an understanding of the
ORD culture. Communication should encompass common terminology and technology, user-
friendly processes, coordination, and the free flow of information all directions. We should
optimize use of existing mechanisms. Good communication include: accurate, consistent,
sufficient, clear, sufficient, timely, relevant, accessible, open, honest, transparent and personal
when appropriate.
ORD communication is restricted by inconsistent technology, legal considerations, lack of
resources and training, and geographic and organization isolation. Individual desire for power
and control lead to information hoarding. These conditions do not provide motivation to
communicate well, and there is no process to improve the system.
MEASURES:
Feedback from Improved future survey response skip level meetings, clients
Predictable response rates and frequency of appropriate responses, i.e., hits on intra-net
Pulse different levels of the organization for consistent message
100% compatible E-mail for ail staff
Cadre of accessible IRM professionals in ORD
IMPACT:
Resentment
Hostility
Distrust
Insecurity
Distortion/rumor
Frustration harms environment
Creates confusion
Information Overload
Stressed
Missed Opportunities
Wasted time and effort
Overwhelmed
Vulnerable to political intervention
Undervalued
Hinders career development
Less effective
Negative impact on productivity
Hinders our ability to do our job
Lack of communication is disrespectful
DESIRED STATE:
BOUNDS:

-------
CAREER ADVANCEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
CURRENT STATE
•	Most attention paid to training related to management and oversight. Less systematic plan for
professional development.
•	Lack of attention to promotion (outside manager track) of scientists and especially technical and
administrative support personnel.
•	Out-dated OPM standards for administrative support personnel.
•	Lack of resources ($) to support training and associated travel
•	Promotion only vehicle to increase salary
•	Fear for individuals to go off for long-term training
•	University training is available
•	Inequity in promotions between labs; standards are vague and ambiguous
•	Stuff already on books - not used; inequity over ORD (Athens satisfied w/current status career
track model)
•	Management plays major role in promotion and development
•	Training/retraining - selection criteria; no reevaluation of policy since reorganization
•	Selection criteria for training opportunity unclear; long-term training unclear for GS11 and up;
OPM decision?
•	Management unaware or not priority; lack of orientation
•	Reorganization leads to skill mismatch; some specific (more) or some broader
•	Not necessary mentoring; money is available for programs; communication of what is available is
not there, no clear policy
•	Career development is responsibility of employee and supervisor
•	Managerial culture is not supportive of advancing staff
•	Support career tracks are not being used - are blocked
•	Career development to 14/15 is limited due to ceiling limits - science/admin should not be
combined
•	Lack of flexibility to back fill due to attrition
•	Branch chiefs are not 15, should be (throughout ORD)
•	No track for experts (QA, computer, etc.) environmental specialist
•	No procedure to promote to 16 as a bench scientist (have to go into management)
•	Inconsistent promotion process and standards between labs and Headquarters
•	Inconsistent definitions of roles (team leader, PI, technicians)
•	Career development at all levels is limited
•	Different criteria for managers (increased responsibility, vulnerability)
•	Jobs are perceived as tailor-made for a specific individual and therefore do not apply
•	Promotions limited due to increased responsibility to do non-science work.
•	Team leaders don't get extra credit for their leadership, team members don't get credit for their
work if they are not the P.I. or senior author
•	Limited training opportunity for new skills development
•	Development should be a life-long process not stop at any level
•	Insufficient information about training
•	Lip service on IDP's
•	10% of industry budget on training - ORD much less
•	Inconsistent application of the research grade evaluation
•	Too few travel $, stifles collaboration
•	Insufficient information on career pathways and criteria
•	Need management endorsement to be peer reviewed
•	No competitive career ladders for scientists and administrative
•	EPA ceiling abrogates the panel process for research careers
•	No mentoring or guidance on careers
•	Managers and scientists burn out and return to bench - do they retain grade and get retrained?

-------
•	No career planning office/officer/program
•	The way money is applied to training and development
•	ORD deficient in communicating advancement opportunities and an imbalance of applying
resources at various sites
Imbalance of resources devoted to career development and advancement in ORD
IMPACT
•	Inequity of promotions
•	Negative impact on recruitment of quality scientists
•	Low morale
•	People dissatisfied - tune out or leave - seek other opportunities
•	Inefficient work and decreased productivity
•	Internal jealousy
•	Technical skills stay static - loss of quality science and ORD's stature
The current state leads to lowered morale, productivity, satisfaction, and connectivity.
DESIRED STATE
•	A revised performance appraisal system
•	Mentoring program available
•	Adequate travel $
•	Management commitment to staff career development
•	Well defined airing strategy and management plan
•	Improve overall ORD science
•	"Truth" in position descriptions
•	Staff has a complete picture of opportunities for training and advancement
•	Better alignment of personnel skills with organizational needs
•	Flexibility of hiring at all levels with a stated long-term hiring strategy
A well communicated and fair approach to career development based upon individual needs as
relate to the overall improvement of ORD science.
BOUNDS
•	Money for career development not geographically consistent
•	Travel dollar limitations
•	Lack of attention ORD pays to the issue
•	Training must be related to mission
•	Peer panel review for GS 14 and 15
•	OPM standards for specific grades
•	Competing demands limit long-term training ("Never a good time")
MEASURES
•	ORD survey: increased morale over time (fairness)
•	Closure on IDP's
•	Increased peer recognition and credentialing
•	Better science with greater
•	Increased solicitation of advice and technical assistance from outside ORD
•	Promotion process expedited
•	Increase in % workforce receiving training toward professional development

-------
ORD IMPROVEMENT OPPORTUNITY FOLLOW UP PLAN
CURRENT STATE:	State the problem succinctly. Conduct of research is hampered by the
amount of red tape required to carry out day to day operations.
IMPACT:	How does this affect your organization? Scientists spend increasing
amounts of time on paperwork, reducing productivity, effectiveness and morale.
DESIRED STATE:	What is the goal7 Paperwork is cut to the bone. Scientists are free to do
science. Adequate secretarial and administrative staff take care of the paperwork
BARRIERS TO DESIRED STATE: What obstacles do you foresee in reaching the desired
state? 1) FTE ceiling is inadequate for science and administrative positions; 2) Federal regulations on
contracts and assistance management; 3) Restrictions on Delegations of Authority to appropriate
levels
ORD Contact for reporting progress/obstacles:
Lab Contact for reporting progress/obstacles:
Person at ORD level knowledgeable of the area
and interested in real change
Person at lab level knowledgeable of the area
and interested in real change—consider those
who could not attend the workshop
Timeline for Action Items: ¦ ORD level responsibility	# Lab level responsibility
Times given for example only -- come up with your own-- Be realistic - assign responsibility
1 week out
2	weeks out
3	weeks out
3	weeks out
4	weeks out
5	weeks out
6	weeks out
7	weeks out
7 weeks out
8 weeks out
9 weeks out
12 weeks out
Each Division Director nominates 2 people for Lab-wide workgroup, possibly
one who did and one who did not go to Williamsburg to work with Lab
contact. Management Deputy designates representative.
Red Tape Workgroup meets with Management Deputy, selects chairperson,
sets schedule for periodic meetings
What do you needfrom ORD? How do you want to structure ORD-Lab
interactions?
Workgroup solicits comments from interested persons
Workgroup reports on progess to Management Deputy, ORD contact
ORD contact reports on ORD commitments
Workgroup sends activity report to all employees
Workgroup presents findings and recommendations to Management Deputy
Management Deputy presents findings and recommendations to Lab Director,
gains concurrence
Workgroup and Management Deputy presents findings and recommendations
with ORD implications to ORD contact
Recommendations are implemented by Management Deputy
Poll staff for effects of change at their level

-------
MILESTONES FOR GAUGING PROGRESS: Indicators thatprogess is being made
Workgroups established
Real Paperwork requirements vs. Institutional Practices identified
Delegations of Authority amended
Standard Operating Procedures revised to reflect new authorities
REPORTING: How do you communicated effectively and in a timely fashion?
In addition to quarterly reports, updates provided to all parties as decisions are reached.
DEALING WITH OPPOSITION:
Source of Opposition:
Legitimacy of Concerns:
Related Issues:
Perspective of Others:
Whose turf is threatened?
Are concerns real? Or perceived?
How do your needs and proposed changes impact other areas?
Get buy in all around early in the process
Use Force-field Analysis to anticipate other sources opposition
ACCOUNT ABILITY: Who is accountable for this issue?

-------
asolomon@oimb-nt.uoregon.edu, 12/6/96 7:17 AM,ORD meeting review
1
Fromt asolcmon£oimb-nt.uoregon.edu
Commentst Authenticated sender is 
Tot allimail
Datei Fn, 6 Dec 1996 15il7t05 +0000
Mime-Version < 1.0
Subjecti 0RD meeting review
he-ply lo. a£.olOTor».;cj.!rJ3.aoJr'?g
1

-------
asoIonion@oiinb-nt.uoregon.edu,12/6/96 7:17 AM,ORD meeting review
2
late at night, while other organi
zers were working on the day's results or the next day's activities.
Great thought and preparation had been applied to "capturing" the intermediate and final products of
the meeting, through regular
note taking and retyping, selection of "historians" at each stage,
and so on. In short, the meeting was prepared and implemented as though the explicit goals were also
the true goals! If it was desig
ned to be just the rubber stamp to the Strategic Plan that many
people expected, it could have been done much more easily (and cheaply) and still been masked as the
ORD improvement meeting it was bil
led to be.
ORGANIZATION
I think we must understand meeting organization to understand
the nature of what did (and did not nor will not) come out of the meeting. The meeting appeared to
have been professionally organize
d to specifically reduce to a working few, the diverse and numerous
agendas and ideas of ALL the assembled multitude. By professionally, I mean that consultants were
probably hired (for big bucks) wh
o were known to be experts at creating approaches for specific goals.
The obvious goal here was making sure that everyone had a finger (and, I suppose, ownership) in the
activities taking place at ev
ery stage in the evolution of the final set of action plans.
At each stage, the 205 attendees were divided into groups of 7
or 8. Each group spent half an hour or more with the help of a facilitator to get the ideas out on
the table, and same additional
tine to reduce those ideas to a few which each table could agree
upon. In turn, the ideas of each table were melded with similar ideas from other tables, to form a few
ideas for the group to evaluate
in plenary. Then, those few phrases, or keywords were further
distilled to form a very few statements. The advantage of this approach was obvious: everyone could
see that their ideas were not only h
eard, but were woven into the fabric of the outcomes (rather than
being heard and ignored as moat had expected). The disadvantage also became obvious when we viewed the
first product of our analysis
of ORD deficiencies. The rich variety and logic that underlay the
many statements, few phrases and fewer keywords had been lost by the time they were woven into the
final statements. The result is th
e submerging into "overarching issues" of many of the specific
concerns and deficiencies that we each have noted singly, in groups or universally. The people who
were at the meeting know where many o
f those items are subsumed, but it may be difficult if not impossible
to drag them out of the meeting products.
THE PLAY
The meeting had four essential parts: initial exercises to
loosen us up to interacting with each other; defining the problems (framing the issues); defining the
required responses (framing the a
nswers); and, implementing the solutions (documenting the
commitments).
In addition, there was an "amnesty box" which was to bring up
issues that people thought were too hot to handle in public, but which were extracted to be entered
into the mix. I put in the anon
ymous questions and comments of those at Corvallis who talked to, or
emailed me, regarding their concerns. However, inputs to this box had no apparent role in the
proceedings although they were duly
typed up and distributed on the second and fourth day of the meeting.
Also, to keep us frcrn focussing too long on negative aspects of
ORD, the organizers ended the first day with a cash bar and horse-duvers, surrounded by posters of ORD
accanplishments. On the fa
Printed for Ray Shimabuku 
2

-------
asoloinon@oiiiib-nt.uoregon.edu, 12/6/96 7:17 AM,ORD meeting review	i
ce of it, much of this appeared to be propaganda, and it certainly
was not as carefully prepared as the rest of the meetingi WED had three posters, including one on
somewhat-dated ozone research resu
Its, one on our application of Forest Service's Ecoregions
classification, and one on our coop with the Harvard birders. Yet, the situation also served as a
means to induce people to talk about what
they DID think about that was good m their professional lives, and
to consider the worthwhile accomplishments of ORD. This, I think, put many in an optimistic mood for
the analyses the next day, per
haps not coincidentally.
THE MIND-BENDING
This was not perfectly aimed, but it appeared to hit the mark all
the same. The speaker was an expert on responses of corporations to rapid change. Unfortunately, his
message was aimed at respons
es to corporate downsizing (something we have stopped worrying as
much about since the Congress backed off of their threats to downsize EPA) and to how managers can
classify, then manipulate, the peo
pie who were leaving and those who remained after the downsizing.
However, between parts of the lecture, there were exercises in
which individuals at the tables of 7-8 (carefully mixed) strangers tried various activities, all aimed
at breaking the ice among th
em, at which the activities were successful. The initial exercise was
the most effective, I think: each table had to ccsne up with one word that best described their
attitude toward ORD. With all 8 pe
ople working at finding the most appropriate word, the politics were
out on the table in about 30 seconds. Luckily, the politics at our table were fairly similar, and we
agreed that the most optimist
ic word was "disenfranchised." Sane were similarly negative toward
ORD ("abandoned," "undervalued," "disconnected") and others, more guarded or positive ("challenged,"
"anticipating," "hopeful"). Not
surprisingly, the latter were primarily found at tables where lab
directors and similar officials sat.
FRAMING THE ISSUES
To present the flavor of the meeting, I wrote the following with
more detail than you may want to review; if so, skip liberally.
Framing the issues began with a morning session in which
individuals at each of the 25 tables dredged up their favorite complaints (requested to be those which
cut across ORD, which produce near
-term success, and which are measurable in sane way). Each person
wrote those two items on post-its, talked to others in the roan about the items, then came back to the
table to discuss the issues. O
f the 16 or so issues at each table, 6-8 were chosen as those agreed
upon. After the 6-8 X 25 tables-worth of issues were posted around the room on big sheets (with some
being combined as being very
similar), people then were given 3 colored sticky tags to use to vote
for the most important. From among these issues were "voted" the most important, overarching issues.
Hence, by noon, 400 issues
(probably actually closer to 300, considering real duplications) were
whittled down to 10 or 15, with most people still feeling a sense of ownership.
The afternoon was spent further winnowing and then framing these
issues. While the group was off lunching, the facilitators and staff counted the votes and printed
the lists of issues and one-1
iners encompassed within each of the ten issues selected. On our
return, we were divided into four rooms of about 50 people each, told to gather under a specific issue
banner displayed on the walls i
n which we were most interested, and to and discuss the issue. Next,
one person was selected to try to convince the group why their issue was the most important, and the
group then voted again on the
five most important of these 10 issues. The 5 issues, as you will
Printed for Ray Shimabuku 
3

-------
asolomon@oiinb-nt.uoregon.edu, 12/6/96 7:17 AM,ORD meeting review	^
learn in more detail, were (1) overwhelming red tape, (2) need for sponsorship of ORD personnel
advancement, (3) poor communications
up, down and across the organization, (4) lack of integration of
science in ORD planning, and (5) inadequate infrastructure and resources to do the science required.
The rest of the afternoon was spent rotating from one "issue
table" to another, framing the issue. Framing was defined as (1) characterizing the current problem,
(2)	the effects of the problem,
(3)	the nature of the desired state and (4) the barriers to complete
solution of the problem.
By the end of the day, the issues had been analyzed by five
groups in each of four different rooms, with the results subsequently contained and reduced further
after the groups completed their wor
k. The evening was spent by the attendees, listening to cute
observations, songs and poems about Bob, Joe and Henry, with an early adjournment by many when there
was a fake bomb-threat.
FRAMING THE ANSWERS
The next day of framing answers was much like the previous one
involving framing the questions. This time, however, the four roans consisted not of
carefully-assenfoled mixes, but of managers (1)
, scientists (2) and other staff (1). The goal was determine how to
solve the five overarching issues resulting from issue framing activities. Again, the ideas of many
were winnowed down to a few, an
d these combined with the winnowed-down ideas from the other rooms.
In this case, the solutions were defined by describing the what/when/how of the step to be taken,
defining measures of success, and
the follcw-up actions to be taken.
DOCUMENTING THE COMMITMENTS
The final morning was spent in groups consisting of personnel
frcm the three laboratories and two centers. The tables of about 8 people were again formed to discuss
how the answers could be appl
led in, in our case, NHEERL. This exercise again winnowed the many
down to a few. The presentation to the plenary of these individual solutions and ccmmitmBnts to help
the labs was followed by a few
minutes in which individuals described how they were going to
implement the results themselves. Bob Huggett gave a fine speech on how Henry and Joe would be held
accountable in their CJE's, Henry and
Joe allowed as how this was what they had been seeking for ages and
they would leave no tern unstoned in implementing the proposals, the directors of the Labs and Centers
each discussed how they wou
Id implement the results (I cannot seem to find my notes on what
Larry Reiter said, but it was all reasonable stuff and should be available soon), and individuals "at
random" gave testimonials. In so
me ways, it ended just in time, as people's expressed conrnitments
began taking on a vague similarity to those in an old-fashioned gospel tent meetings where the
participants become continuously more
enthusiastic about witnessing for their deity (I told you this was my
subjective opinion; please don't be offended).
THE CONCLUSION
This was a great meeting whose worth should not be minimized.
For valuation sake, one can subdivide it into two components: the meeting itself, and subsequent
application of the results of the m
eeting. It seemed to me that the meeting itself justified most if not
all its cost. First, it was a great opportunity by participants to smooze with people in the
organization with whom they rarely g
et the opportunity for informal communication. The famous gargoyles
of our lives turn out to be human, many of whcm are attempting to do THEIR jobs as well as possible,
too. Second, it was an opportu
nity (which many took) to present and detail their difficulties in
Printed for Ray Shimabuku 
4

-------
asolomon@oiinb-nt.uoregon.edu,!2/6/96 7:17 AM,ORD meeting review	£
doing the job they are paid to do, to the headquarters and RTP powerpeople, in a context that demanded
not only listening by hdqtrs
and rtp, but HEARING the problems. Third, in working closely with
many different ORD people to assemble and formulate the issues and solutions, the participants got to
know many others up and down th
e management chain, and most began to perceive the almost universal
desire by those individuals to do a decent job for a day's pay. If we ran the meeting every year, and
eventually all ORD personnel
attended, it would be worth the effort that went into it.
Yet, the second component, the subsequent application, may yet
prove to be even more valuable than the first. After the religious fervor has worn off the
participants, there is still the written
canmitments of individuals throughout the organization to work
TOGETHER to better the operation; not alone, but in concert with others who are waiting for the
products now. It remains to be seen how
much of the completed agenda will be implemented, but make no
mistake, this was not an empty or hollow exercise. Despite my famous naivet, about this organization,
I firmly believe the lmplementatio
n of the meeting results will be a significant increase in the
effectiveness of our professional efforts, and hence, of our satisfaction with our jobs at WED. Gut,
you don't have to believe me - watc
h for the documentation of the promises and the subsequent results
during this next year.
Thanks for reading this far. Your comments and discussion are
MOST welcome.
Cheers,
AL
Printed for Ray Shimabuku 
5

-------