I’m a native of the Washington, D.C. area and that has resulted in knowing a lot of people who work for the federal government, including friends and family.
Most are in shock regarding how abruptly and substantially their world is changing. For those caught in this whirlwind, I want to offer a path forward based on my career and experience with cost reduction efforts in the private sector. Navigating crisis and change is more common there, and I can offer my government brethren some counsel from that world to ease their current suffering.
To many, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is a wild, radical concept that the United States has never seen. In the private sector, that’s not the case. Most companies facing financial challenges hire firms to help analyze the situation, streamline the business, and reduce costs. Doing so can be a prelude to avoiding bankruptcy, preparing for a sale, fending off competition, or simply increasing profitability and cash flows. The first thing those companies do is to form a team that does a deep dive into all spending across the organization. In more dire financial circumstances, the team figuratively grabs the checkbook and carefully manages disbursements. The goal is to increase efficiency and reduce costs. They are the DOGE of the private sector without the creative naming, fanfare, and controversy. The only aspects unique to DOGE are that it has never been applied to the government and the sheer scale of its mandate.
Some may suggest that DOGE is going far beyond efficiency. They claim it reeks of a new ideology and political priorities that have nothing to do with efficiency or cost savings. Well, that is probably true…. but that too is not unique in the private sector. Each time new leadership in the private sector comes to a company, there are dramatic changes in the direction and culture. In fact, that’s often why the new leadership is hired: to make dramatic changes. Like DOGE, those changes to culture, priorities, and mission, can be extremely difficult to endure, often more difficult than the actual cost-cutting aspects.
With that background, let’s dive into how to manage through and survive in the new era of DOGE.
What to expect from DOGE
DOGE has got its hands full. There is no precedent to the size and scale of this effort. All I can offer is an explanation of what would be done in the private sector. Step one is to follow the money and grab the checkbook. Typically, higher dollars and perceived opportunities get priority attention. That’s followed by making the agencies justify their spending and propose changes to become more efficient. You can expect some level of funding to be withheld until a new strategy is approved. Those in charge of DOGE should articulate the planned approach and offer transparency of the process. Poor communication just causes confusion and delays potential progress.
It is also on DOGE leadership to apply a strategy that is appropriate to the circumstances. In the private sector, a company teetering on bankruptcy needs abrupt and severe action. That approach can be so disruptive that it damages the very organization that it is trying to improve. It’s a high-risk approach meant to save a company from potential collapse. While the United States is in a difficult financial position, our situation is arguably not so dire as to apply an approach that risks the underlying functioning of the government. Conversely, when a company’s problems are longer term in nature, a more measured and strategic approach can be applied. This approach takes more time but can often produce substantial results without risking the operational capability of the organization. I would suggest that it is the better approach when an organization has the luxury of time.
A wild card exists regarding the power of DOGE and the Executive Branch to reduce spending that was legally designated by bills passed by Congress and signed into law by the then president. It’s hard to say how that will play out and what future spending appropriations might be passed. Regardless, with single party control of the legislative branches, the presidency, and arguably the Supreme Court… I wouldn’t want to bet against DOGE or the Executive Branch’s authority to reduce spending.
Accept the changing world
There are already lawsuits to stop some initiatives and even DOGE itself. More lawsuits will follow. It is natural for those impacted to hope their world will return to what it was. However, to make that hope your core strategy and to resist change is not likely to end well. Those who don’t adapt to a new environment are more likely to suffer the consequences of change rather than to be saved by hope. Those consequences will go beyond one’s individual job and could impact core functions of agencies. For those who adopt a strategy of resistance, I can only say that I’ve never seen that work in the private sector. Resistance is unlikely to work for government workers either. In fact, it is more likely to cause damage to the very thing they are trying to protect, whether that be their job, the organization’s mission, or even what they may think is best for the country.
Many government employees are probably in some state of shock or depression. Probably both. I get it. Nothing this extreme has happened in the government sector in recent history. But staring at the headlights never saved any deer. Accepting the new reality and adjusting to it is not a problem for DOGE to solve. Leadership at various government agencies need to calm their teams and get them focused on handling the change. It is during difficult times when you find out if your leadership is really comprised of leaders.
Now each employee also has a responsibility here to face the new reality. For that, I offer tough love advice: Get over it. I know many government employees took their very position because they deeply believed in the mission and now that is changing, or even ending. But that’s our governmental system and they should have known that. Every four years, there is a chance for change. With our two-party system, those changes are often extreme. It’s more rare that all branches of government align for one party to make such dramatic changes but that was always a risk. My father was in the Foreign Service and I learned early that his job was to adapt and represent each administration because that’s what the American people have chosen. It’s our system and he, like all government employees, took on the responsibility to support the change of administrations when accepting a position with the federal government.
I’ll also point out that these changes were inevitable, and all of us should have realized that. No person, company, or country can consistently overspend their income by 40% every year without a comeuppance. With $36T in debt and climbing, dramatic cuts in government spending were more than predictable. The longer the country waited, the more severe the cost reduction efforts were going to be. I would suggest that we’re late to the party already but we’re not in fiscal crisis mode and, make no mistake, we were headed in that direction.
Step up your game
Assuming you believe in your mission and role in the federal government, your efforts should now turn to justifying and improving it. That’s what all cost control efforts are about, justifying the importance of what you’re doing and presenting solutions that allow you to continue that mission more efficiently. Don’t wait until someone from an organization like DOGE starts asking questions and then scramble for months trying to assemble the answers. That just shows you don’t know your business or, in this case, government agency.
Start with what you’re doing now. What the organization is spending time and money on and what those efforts are accomplishing. Now that can’t only be in broad terms. Specificity is the name of the game. A broad line item might be that the Coast Guard spends $xxB on drug and immigration enforcement in the Gulf of… America. Drilling down, a reviewer should be able to understand how many ships and personnel that involves and what that produces in the way of results whether that be drugs impounded or migrants engaged.
Metrics are a great help in explaining the big picture. One of the most well-known is the incremental tax revenue for each IRS agent hired. Such metrics easily articulate the cost-benefit if properly supported by evidence. The more detailed information you can provide that show the benefit of your efforts in relation to the cost is extremely helpful for a reviewer. Trending is also important to show not only where you are today but how that compares to prior periods. Without this information, the risk is that a reviewer just sees a vast bucket of money and very broad rationale for spending it. If you don’t know the details of how you’re spending money, it is a sure sign that you’re not spending it efficiently.
Hopefully, much of the information described is already available and the notion of proving you’re accountable for what you spend isn’t a new concept. This is where the real talent comes in. You need to explain how you’re going to become more efficient. That means spending less while still maintaining the core mission. Efficiencies can be simple cost reductions with little change to the current function and operation, essentially, doing the same with less money. However, more often than not, it involves rethinking operations and output. That can include eliminating or outsourcing functions that produce minimum benefits, producing less outputs, consolidating functions, and a whole host of changes that alter the very structure of how the organization operates. It doesn’t end there, because it also requires determining over what period of time the various efficiency initiatives can be implemented and achieved. In summary; what will change, when will it change, and what will be the impact.
It’s not a happy ending
Let me quickly dispel any notion that the approach I’m recommending will result in a happy ending. That would include an ending with reasonable expectations based on steady improvements. That’s not how most DOGE-like initiatives in the private sector generally work out. You can expect dramatic changes with unrealistic expectations. All you can do from here is do your best to accomplish the goals of the mandate and maintain constant communication on the progress and challenges.
I realize this article does not provide a lot of compassion and reassurance. It’s not really a situation that allows for it. My intent is to provide a perspective from the private sector that may very well apply here. I will offer a reassurance that isn’t available in the private sector. Unlike some companies that just… well… die, our federal government is not going anywhere. It may undergo some level of unprecedented changes but, in the end, it will still be immense, employ millions of people, and have an important role to play in supporting our nation.
