Senior Fellow
IBM Center for The Business of Government
600 14th Street, NW Second Floor
Washington, DC 20005
United States
202-551-9341

Mr. Kamensky is a Senior Fellow with the IBM Center for The Business of Government and an Associate Partner with IBM's Global Business Services.

During 24 years of public service, he had a significant role in helping pioneer the federal government's performance and results orientation. Mr. Kamensky is passionate about helping transform government to be more results-oriented, performance-based, customer-driven, and collaborative in nature.

Prior to joining the IBM Center, he served for eight years as deputy director of Vice President Gore's National Partnership for Reinventing Government. Before that, he worked at the Government Accountability Office where he played a key role in the development and passage of the Government Performance and Results Act.

Since joining the IBM Center, he has co-edited six books and writes and speaks extensively on performance management and government reform.  Current areas of emphasis include transparency, collaboration, and citizen engagement.  He also blogs about management challenges in government.

Mr. Kamensky is a fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration and received a Masters in Public Affairs from the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, in Austin, Texas. He can be reached at: john.kamensky@us.ibm.com

Weekly Roundup: April 2-6, 2018

John Kamensky

The Federal Workforce of the Future.  The Partnership for Public Service has released a new report that provides: “a snapshot of what the government looks like now and recommendations on how agencies can prepare for the future.”

Funding What Works Requires Building Performance Systems

The Urban Institute has launched a new web resource to explain Pay for Success, which it says is various forms of performance-based contracting used to support the delivery of targeted, high-impact preventative social services where an intervention at an early stage can reduce the need for higher-cost services in the future. Pay for Success funding systems can take many different forms and already operate in different policy arenas.

Weekly Roundup: December 18-22, 2017

DOD Acquisition Reform Panel. In an Op-Ed in Federal Times, Dee Lee and Hannah Oh write: “Repealing or amending outdated provisions that bog down the acquisition process is long overdue.

OMB's FY 2012 Budget Guidance

OMB released specific guidance to agencies on how they should prepare their budget submissions to OMB, which are due September 13. The key element being that agencies should submit requests that would be 5 percent below what was estimated for FY 2012 when OMB submitted the president’s FY 2011 budget in February. There have been good stories on this in the Washington Post and

3D Worlds Come to Government

I saw an intriguing article in Government Computer News, by Alice Lipowicz, on how the departments of Agriculture, Homeland Security, the National Defense University, and the Air Force are getting together to create a government-only 3-D “virtual world” where they could conduct training and joint exercises. Paulette Robinson, dean of NDU’s “iCollege,” told GCN “Webinars are boring,” and that the immersive experience of bringing people together on-line can be dramatically improved.

Weekly Roundup: August 7-11, 2017

John Kamensky

Exciting OpportunitiesGovernment Executive reports: “Though their written plans remain shrouded from public view, agency officials charged by the Trump White House with making government more efficient say they are “excited” about what they see as a rare opportunity for systemic and lasting change to government operations.”

When Are Managers Willing to Take Risks?

The common perception is that, as a group, federal managers tend to be risk adverse.  However, new research based on data from the annual federal employee viewpoint survey concludes that the answer is: it depends.  Managers in both high-performing and low-performing organizations tend to be risk takers.  They probably feel they have little to lose by trying something new.  In contrast, managers in stable, middle-of-the-road organizations tend to be risk adverse and do not want to rock the boat by taking risks.

Pages