Elon Musk, as is his wont, casually endorsed a tweet last night saying there were now 83 levels from top to bottom in the federal bureaucracy. ZOMG! Is that true?
No. This is based on a study by Paul Light of Brookings, and if either Musk or the original poster had bothered to read past the charts they would have discovered that Bright says there are an average of 30 layers. And even some of those are horizontal, not vertical. The real number of layers from GS-5 worker bee up to cabinet secretary is probably something like ten or fifteen.
That said, there sure a lot of titles in federal departments. Since they can't pay the executive levels very much, I suppose title bloat is all they have. In any case, I laughed as I plowed my way through all the titles, so I'm reproducing them here for your amusement. I'm not sure which is my favorite.
Secretary
Deputy secretary
Deputy to the deputy secretary
Principal associate deputy secretary
Associate deputy secretary
Assistant deputy secretary
Under secretary
Principal deputy under secretary
Deputy principal deputy under secretary
Deputy under secretary
Associate deputy under secretary
Principal assistant deputy under secretary
Deputy principal assistant under secretary
Assistant deputy under secretary
Deputy assistant deputy under secretary
Associate under secretary
Deputy associate under secretary
Assistant associate under secretary
Deputy assistant under secretary
Assistant under secretary
Associate deputy assistant under secretary
Assistant secretary
Principal deputy assistant secretary
Associate principal deputy assistant secretary
Deputy assistant secretary
Principal deputy assistant secretary
Deputy deputy assistant secretary
Associate deputy assistant secretary
Assistant deputy assistant secretary
Associate assistant secretary
Deputy associate to the assistant secretary
Deputy associate deputy to the assistant secretary
Assistant to the assistant secretary
Associate assistant deputy assistant secretary
Deputy assistant assistant secretary
Principal associate deputy assistant secretary
Deputy assistant deputy assistant secretary
Senior deputy assistant secretary
Assistant deputy assistant secretary
Deputy assistant deputy assistant secretary
Senior associate assistant secretary
Deputy principal assistant secretary
😂😂😂😂😂
Are those listed in hierarchical order, or are some parallel/of approximately equal status/standing?
I think it's probably a depth-first search: work your way down one branch of the organization chart, then come back up until you find a different branch to work down, etc. So an Assistant Secretary is higher ranking than an Associate deputy assistant under secretary, despite appearing farther down on this list, but is not directly above them in the chain of command.
Of course, at any job, including this one, while there is a pecking order, nobody uses job titles. Job titles are for resumes, not for working.
The federal government is big and complex and really the compensation for any kind of decision makers isn’t equal to the private sector so it’s all about the titles. We do the same thing in state government.
Unless many federal government managers are managing 1 person, the 83 levels thing is just ridiculous. If most managers are managing 10 people, and if the number of government employees is on the order of 1 to 10 million, then there would basically be six to seven levels. If managers are managing about 3 people, then you roughly double that to 12 to 14 levels. While you can probably find some inefficient chain of command that is 15 levels deep, realistically, the range is more likely 8 to 13 than 10 to 15.
Government often uses a manager title for someone who has no direct reports but manages a portfolio or program.
Remember Al Gore's Reinventing Government Project in the 1990s? One of his things was flattening the bureaucracy, fewer managers over more staff.
Well intentioned but the strutural forces at work ensured its failure.
I was remembering that too. Has anyone actually investigated and reported on that, or did they just issue a report that disappeared (particularly after Gore "lost" the election)?
Ah yes. Al Gore’s “reinventing government”. I lived through that.
In my lab, the model became that managers were feds, with scientists and techs (previously mostly feds) turned into contractors of some kind, mostly as employees of a nearby university, without tenure or any job security.
Of course those people always have one foot out the door applying for real jobs, and their commitment and dedication to our missions is far smaller.
But some money was saved - or at least taken off the federal salary/benefit ledger - by not paying for their benefits. My guess is that any savings is eaten by the university overheads that the lab or programs have to pay.
FYI there are 7 levels between the lowest lab tech and the Secretary of the department.
But the head of my branch (NOAA) has the can’t-be-beat title “Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere”.
So I take they're going deal with this problem by not filling these positions? I mean that's fine but I think it takes more than three people to run, say the Interior Department.
Finally a blog that makes my life better. If I were a young person starting out I'd want a position with two "deputy" names in it. Deputy associate deputy to the assistant secretary is going to confuse my friends so much they won't even ask me about it. Deputy assistant deputy assistant secretary has TWO words repeated! Challenging. For conciseness I think I'd go with Deputy deputy assistant secretary. Charming. Sounds kind of like Giddyup Giddyup Assistant Secretary. Thanks Mr. Drum, I needed a laugh to end the day. And I support our government workers, but still.............
There is an old joke with a considerable amount of truth to it that suggests the world is actually run by obscure bureaucrats in obscure offices with incomprehensible titles. Most of the titles on this list fit the joke very well.
Well, in the Expanse series, Chrisjen Avasarala basically ran the UN from an office with zero visibility and little statutory power...