a

GAO

United States Government Accountability Office

Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on 

Oversight of Government Management, the 

Federal Workforce, and the District of 

Columbia, Committee on Homeland Security 

and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate

December 2005 INTERNATIONAL 

TRADE

USTR Would Benefit 

from Greater Use of 

Strategic Human 

Capital Management 

Principles

GAO-06-167
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

December 2005

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

USTR Would Benefit from Greater Use of 

Strategic Human Capital Management 

Principles 

Highlights of GAO-06-167, a report to the 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight of 

Government Management, the Federal 

Workforce, and the District of Columbia, 

Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate 

The Office of the U.S. Trade 

Representative (USTR) has a

unique role in coordinating trade 

policy, resolving disagreements, 

and framing issues for presidential

decision through an interagency 

trade policy process. In recent 

years, USTR’s increased workload 

from numerous new regional and 

bilateral free trade agreement 

negotiations and a new round of

multilateral negotiations at the

World Trade Organization has 

raised concerns about its human 

capital strategy. 

GAO examined whether USTR is 

pursuing an effective human capital 

strategy that supports the ability of 

its workforce to accomplish its 

mission. Specifically, GAO (1) 

reviewed USTR’s commitment to

strategic human capital leadership 

and planning and (2) analyzed to

what extent USTR has used human 

capital tools to address its

workforce challenges. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that the U.S.

Trade Representative develop a 

strategic human capital

management system addressing the 

areas of strategic human capital

leadership, planning, recruitment

and retention, and performance 

management. USTR said it shared

our general observations and 

recommendations regarding the 

critical importance of human

capital planning, but believes it is 

sufficiently performing these 

functions. Other agencies did not 

provide comments. 

USTR could benefit from greater use of strategic human capital management 

principles in leadership and planning, considering that its small size and 

interagency trade leadership and coordination role give it a unique 

responsibility to lead the trade agenda. First, USTR has not sustained the 

leadership resources for human capital; for example, the top human capital 

management post has not been filled for over 11⁄2 years. Second, USTR has 

not undertaken formal strategic human capital planning to mitigate the risks 

inherent in its dependency—as a “networked organization”—on interagency 

resources to achieve its mission. Therefore, it does not have a method to 

account for changes in other agencies’ resources that might impact its ability 

to achieve its mission. Third, USTR has focused its human capital planning 

efforts primarily on short-term responses to trade negotiating needs 

identified in its 2-year budget planning process; it has not conducted ongoing 

parallel efforts to analyze longer-term workforce needs. 

USTR’s efforts to address its specific workforce challenges could benefit 

from greater use of human capital tools. First, USTR could use more of the 

existing federal human capital flexibilities to better tailor its human capital 

approaches to organizational needs. Although the agency has used and 

benefited from some special hiring and pay authorities, such as the use of 

higher-than-minimum salary offers, it has yet to take advantage of others, 

such as retention bonuses. Second, while USTR prides itself on being a 

results-oriented agency, most USTR staff are not subject to agencywide 

performance expectations linked to organizational goals. While managers 

have stressed the importance of certain individual skills needed to advance

USTR’s mission, most staff are held accountable to a range of expectations 

that vary among offices.

USTR Leads the Interagency Trade Policy Process

Council on 

Environmental 

Quality

Council of 

Economic 

Advisors

National 

Economic 

Council

National 

Security 

Council

Department 

of 

Agriculture

Department 

of 

Commerce

Department 

of

Defense

USTR

Department 

of

Energy

Department 

of Health

and Human 

Services

Department 

of the 

Interior

Department 

of

Justice

Department 

of

Labor

Department 

of

State

U.S. International 

Trade 

Commission

(nonvoting)

Department

of

Transportation

Department 

of the

Treasury

Environmental 

Protection 

Agency

Agency for 

International 

Development

Office of 

Management 

and Budget

90 subcommittees

Lead

Primary 

agencies

Other involved 

agencies

Source: GAO, based on USTR information.

National Economic Council/National Security Council

Trade Policy Review Group (USTR chair)

Trade Policy Staff Committee (USTR chair)

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-167.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Loren Yager, 

202-512-4347, yagerl@gao.gov. 
Page i GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2

Background 4

USTR Could Benefit from Greater Commitment to Strategic Human 

Capital Principles in Its Human Capital Leadership and 

Planning 9

USTR Makes Limited Use of Human Capital Tools to Mitigate Risk of 

Workforce Challenges 17

Conclusions 21

Recommendation for Executive Action 22

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 22

Appendixes

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 25

Appendix II: USTR Staff Profile 27

Appendix III: Human Capital Flexibilities Available to USTR 35

Appendix IV: Comments from the Office of the U.S. Trade 

Representative 36

GAO Comments 38

Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 39

Tables Table 1: Active USTR Staff by Office 27

Table 2: Flexibilities Available to USTR that Could Address 

Recruitment Risks 35

Table 3: Flexibilities Available to USTR that Could Address 

Retention Risks 35

Figures Figure 1: USTR Organizational Structure, as of July 5, 2005 6

Figure 2: GAO Model of Strategic Human Capital Management 8

Figure 3: USTR FTEs Authorized and Actual, Fiscal Year 2000 

through First Half of Fiscal Year 2005 29

Figure 4: Number of USTR Staff by Grade Level 30

Figure 5: Percent of USTR Staff Eligible for Retirement in 5 Years 

or Less 31

Figure 6: USTR Staff Occupation Comparison, Attorneys and 

Economists 32

Figure 7: USTR Active Detailees, by Year Detail Started 33
Contents

Page ii GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Abbreviations

APEC Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

CAFTA Central American Free Trade Agreement

EOP Executive Office of the President

FTA Free Trade Agreement

FTE Full-time Equivalent staff

ITC U.S. International Trade Commission

OMB Office of Management and Budget

OPM Office of Personnel Management

SES Senior Executive Service

TPRG Trade Policy Review Group

TPSC Trade Policy Staff Committee

USTR Office of the U.S. Trade Representative

WTO World Trade Organization

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

A

December 6, 2005 Letr

The Honorable George V. Voinovich

Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight 

of Government Management, the Federal Workforce,

and the District of Columbia

Committee on Homeland Security 

and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) plays the lead role in 

developing U.S. trade policy, negotiating trade agreements, and monitoring 

and enforcing those agreements. It leads and coordinates the development 

and implementation of U.S. trade policy through an interagency trade 

policy process, comprised of 19 federal agencies and offices. As such, 

USTR has a unique role within the trade policy arena in terms of providing 

the leadership and coordination to build the consensus and marshal the 

resources to move the interagency process forward to achieve the U.S. 

trade agenda. 

As a small, cabinet-level office within the Executive Office of the President 

(EOP), USTR has about 200 full-time employees and uses temporary 

detailees from other agencies to supplement its core staff. In recent years, 

USTR’s workload has grown as the number and complexity of trade 

agreements has increased, with both ambitious negotiations of numerous 

new regional and bilateral free trade agreements and a new round of 

multilateral negotiations in the World Trade Organization (WTO). USTR’s 

extensive interagency leadership responsibilities and increasing workload 

have increased the importance of having a sound human capital strategy.

Similarly, human capital planning has taken on increased importance in the 

public sector in recent years. We have established strategic human capital 

principles and standards in recent years in our Model of Strategic Human 

Capital Management and a large body of work addressing specific human 

capital issues, such as strategic workforce planning. The Office of 

Personnel Management (OPM) has also established its Human Capital 

Assessment and Accountability Framework, which is consistent with our 

model, to provide the basis for executive branch agencies to meet the 

human capital goals set out as the first element in the President’s 

Management Agenda. All of this guidance stresses the importance of 
Page 2 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

tailoring the approaches to the characteristics of each organization, such as 

size and function.

To examine whether USTR is pursuing an effective human capital strategy 

that supports the ability of its workforce to accomplish its mission, we 

reviewed its human capital planning and implementation efforts. 

Specifically, we (1) reviewed USTR’s commitment to strategic human 

capital leadership and planning and (2) analyzed to what extent USTR has 

used human capital tools to address its workforce challenges.

To determine USTR’s commitment to strategic human capital leadership 

and planning, we reviewed internal planning documents and interviewed 

USTR human resources staff, office managers, and senior management. We 

used GAO’s Model of Strategic Human Capital Management as our 

framework to assess USTR’s human capital efforts.1

 We also discussed 

interagency resource planning with four trade agencies: the Departments 

of State, Commerce, and Agriculture, as well as the U.S. International Trade 

Commission. To determine how USTR has addressed its human capital 

challenges, we interviewed officials at USTR and the four trade agencies, as 

well as trade association representatives and former USTR officials. We 

reviewed USTR human capital data for key human capital trends in areas 

such as staff profile, retirement eligibility, and retention challenges. We 

tested USTR data for reliability by comparing them with OPM data and with 

other USTR human capital documents. We determined that these data were 

sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report. We conducted our work 

from January 2005 to September 2005 in accordance with generally 

accepted government auditing standards.

Results in Brief USTR could benefit from greater use of strategic human capital 

management principles in the areas of leadership and planning, considering 

that its small size and interagency trade leadership and coordination role 

give it a unique responsibility to lead the trade agenda. While USTR 

officials state that their human capital efforts are sufficient to accomplish 

USTR’s immediate mission, USTR does not demonstrate a commitment to 

managing its human capital strategically. First, USTR has not sustained the 

leadership resources for human capital; for example, the top human capital 

management post has not been filled for over 11⁄2 years. USTR also does not 

1

GAO, A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management, GAO-02-373SP (Washington, 

D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002).
Page 3 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

conduct formal succession planning to fill critical management positions in 

a timely manner. Second, while USTR performs an interagency leadership 

and coordination mission that it cannot achieve without the participation 

and support of other trade agencies, it has not undertaken strategic human 

capital planning to mitigate the risks inherent in its dependency—as a 

“networked organization”—on interagency resources. For example, in 

recent trade negotiations, other trade agencies comprised about 75 percent 

of the total delegation staff. However, USTR does not formally conduct any 

planning for these critical human capital resources at the interagency level 

and, therefore, does not have a method to account for changes in other 

agencies’ resources that might impact its ability to achieve its mission. 

Third, USTR’s human capital planning efforts have been focused primarily 

on short-term responses to trade negotiating needs identified in its 2-year 

budget planning process; it has not conducted ongoing parallel efforts to 

analyze the organization’s longer-term workforce needs. For example, 

USTR does not routinely review senior staff’s eligibility for retirement to 

ensure the organization’s continued capacity to achieve its mission. 

Moreover, USTR does not maintain the kind of up-to-date information on 

available staff and future human capital needs that would be necessary in 

conducting effective strategic workforce planning, reducing its ability to 

make data-driven human capital decisions.

USTR’s efforts to address its specific workforce challenges could benefit 

from greater use of human capital tools. First, USTR could use more of the 

existing federal human capital flexibilities to better tailor its human capital 

approaches to its organizational needs. Although the agency has used and 

benefited from some special hiring and pay authorities, such as the use of 

higher-than-minimum salary offers, it has yet to take advantage of others, 

such as retention bonuses. Second, while USTR prides itself on being a 

results-oriented agency, it could do even better if it linked its individual 

performance expectations to organizational goals. Most USTR staff are not 

subject to agencywide performance expectations linked to organizational 

goals. While managers have stressed the importance of certain individual 

skills needed to advance USTR’s mission, most staff are held accountable 

to a range of expectations that vary among offices. 

In this report, we make several recommendations to improve USTR’s 

human capital management in the areas of strategic human capital 

leadership and planning, recruiting and retention, and performance 

management. We provided a draft of this report to USTR; the Departments 

of Agriculture, Commerce, and State; and the U.S. International Trade 

Commission. USTR provided written comments, which are reproduced in 
Page 4 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

appendix IV. The other agencies did not provide comments. USTR stated 

that it shared our general observations and recommendations regarding the 

critical importance of human capital planning and said it would take some 

of the steps suggested by our report. However, in other areas, USTR 

believes it is sufficiently performing its human capital functions. USTR also 

provided technical comments, which we have incorporated where 

appropriate.

Background

USTR Mission and 

Organizational Structure 

USTR is responsible for developing and coordinating U.S. international 

trade, commodity, and direct investment policy and for overseeing trade 

negotiations with other countries. The head of USTR is the U.S. Trade 

Representative, a Cabinet member who serves as the president’s principal 

trade advisor, negotiator, and spokesperson on trade issues. Through an 

interagency structure, USTR coordinates trade policy, resolves 

disagreements, and frames issues for presidential decision. 

USTR provides trade policy leadership and negotiating expertise in its 

major areas of responsibility, including the following: 

• Bilateral, regional, and multilateral trade and investment issues; 

• Expansion of market access for U.S. goods and services; 

• International commodity agreements; 

• Negotiations affecting U.S. import policies; 

• Oversight of the Generalized System of Preferences and Section 301 

complaints concerning foreign unfair trade practices; 

• Trade, commodity, and direct investment matters managed by 

international institutions such as the Organization for Economic 

Cooperation and Development and the United Nations Conference on 

Trade and Development; 

• Trade-related intellectual property protection issues; and
Page 5 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

• WTO issues.

USTR has offices in Washington, D.C., and Geneva, Switzerland, where the 

WTO is located. The Geneva Deputy USTR is the U.S. Ambassador to the 

WTO and to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development on 

commodity matters. Figure 1 shows USTR’s organizational structure as of 

July 5, 2005. 
Page 6 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Figure 1: USTR Organizational Structure, as of July 5, 2005

Source: USTR.

Economic 

Affairs

Public/Media

Affairs

Special Textile 

Negotiator

General 

Counsel

Congressional 

Affairs

Policy 

Coordination 

and 

Information

Administration

Deputy USTR Deputy USTR Deputy USTR

 Geneva

Monitoring and 

Enforcement Unit

Japan, Korea, and APEC 

Affairs

China Affairs

Southeast Asia, Pacific, and 

Pharmaceutical Policy

South Asian Affairs

Environmental and Natural 

Resources

Labor

Trade Capacity Building

Intergovernmental Affairs and 

Public Liaison

Europe and Mediterranean

The Americas

WTO and Multilateral Affairs

Services, Investment, and 

Intellectual Property

Industry, Market Access, 

and Telecommunications

Chief Agricultural 

Negotiator

Agricultural

Affairs

African Affairs

U.S. Trade Representative

Chief of Staff
Page 7 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Interagency Trade Policy 

Process

USTR leads and coordinates the development and implementation of U.S. 

trade policy through an interagency process. It consults with other 

government agencies on trade policy matters through the Trade Policy 

Review Group (TPRG) and the Trade Policy Staff Committee (TPSC). 

USTR administers and chairs these groups, which are composed of 19 

federal agencies and offices. TPSC is the primary operating group, with 

representation at the senior civil service level. If agreement is not reached 

in TPSC, or if significant policy questions are being considered, then issues 

are taken up by TPRG (Deputy USTR/Under Secretary level). The final tier 

of the interagency trade policy mechanism is the National Economic 

Council, chaired by the President. The National Economic Council 

Deputies’ committee considers memorandums from TPRG, as well as 

important or controversial trade-related issues. The current administration 

operates the National Economic Council jointly with the National Security 

Council, according to a senior USTR official. 

Strategic Human Capital 

Management Principles

We have developed a Model of Strategic Human Capital Management2 to 

help agency leaders effectively use their people, or human capital, and 

determine how well they integrate human capital considerations into daily 

decision making and planning for the program results they seek to achieve. 

It highlights the importance of a sustained commitment by agency leaders 

to maximize the value of their agencies’ human capital and manage related 

risks. 

As shown in figure 2, the model has four human capital cornerstones: (1) 

leadership; (2) strategic human capital planning; (3) acquiring, developing, 

and retaining talent; and (4) results-oriented organizational cultures. Each 

of these cornerstones, in turn, is characterized by two critical success 

factors. 

2

GAO, A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management, GAO-02-373SP (Washington, 

D.C.: Mar. 15, 2002). See also, GAO, Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective Strategic 

Workforce Planning, GAO-04-39 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 11, 2003). 
Page 8 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Figure 2: GAO Model of Strategic Human Capital Management

Our human capital model is consistent with similar efforts by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and OPM to develop federal human capital 

standards. In the summer of 2001, OMB announced the President’s 

4 Human Capital

Cornerstones 8 Critical Success Factors

Leadership Commitment

to Human Capital

Management

Role of the

Human Capital Function

Targeted

Investments in

People

Human

Capital Approaches

Tailored to Meet

Organizational Needs

Acquiring,

Developing, and

Retaining Talent

ResultsOriented Organizational

Cultures

Empowerment

and Inclusiveness

Unit and

Individual Performance

Linked to Organizational

Goals

Strategic

Human Capital

Planning

Integration

and Alignment

Data-Driven

Human Capital

Decisions 

Source: GAO.
Page 9 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Management Agenda, designed to address management weakness across 

the government. To this end, the agenda highlighted five governmentwide 

initiatives for management reform. The first of these was the Strategic 

Management of Human Capital Initiative, which is being led by OPM. As 

part of this initiative, in October 2002, OPM released a Human Capital 

Assessment and Accountability Framework that built on its prior guidance 

for workforce planning. OPM has also developed Human Capital Standards 

for Success, which incorporates the GAO model’s critical success factors.3

USTR Could Benefit 

from Greater 

Commitment to 

Strategic Human 

Capital Principles in Its 

Human Capital 

Leadership and 

Planning 

USTR does not follow key strategic human capital principles in its human 

capital leadership and planning. While USTR officials state that their 

human capital efforts are sufficient to accomplish USTR’s immediate 

mission, USTR does not demonstrate a commitment to strategic human 

capital management. First, the commitment of USTR to providing the 

leadership resources of human capital has not been sustained. Second, 

while USTR performs an interagency leadership and coordination mission 

that it cannot achieve without the participation and support of other trade 

agencies, it has not undertaken formal strategic human capital planning to 

mitigate the risks inherent in its dependency on interagency resources. 

Third, USTR’s human capital planning efforts have been primarily focused 

on short-term responses to trade negotiating needs identified in its 2-year 

budget planning process; it has not conducted ongoing parallel efforts to 

analyze the organization’s longer term workforce needs to ensure its 

continued capacity to achieve its mission. 

USTR Does Not Address 

Human Capital Leadership 

Strategically Despite the 

Importance of Each 

Position

Despite being the lead U.S. trade agency and having the responsibility to 

coordinate the U.S. government trade agenda, which places a significant 

responsibility on each individual, USTR does not manage human capital 

strategically. USTR’s commitment to provide leadership resources for 

human capital has not been sustained. For example, USTR does not have 

the human capital management resources in place to ensure that critical 

human capital management tasks—such as succession planning—are 

carried out, which places its interagency leadership role at risk when key 

3

OPM’s Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework and Human Capital 

Standards for Success can be found at its Web site at www.opm.gov. OPM’s Web site also 

provides a link to the President’s Management Agenda and the Strategic Management of 

Human Capital Initiative, or this document can be accessed through OMB’s Web site at

www.whitehouse.gov/omb. 
Page 10 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

vacancies occur within a short period of time. In fact, the senior human 

capital management post has not been filled for over 11⁄2 years. USTR has 

relied on one person to act as senior manager for administration, thus 

assuming all senior human capital and administrative duties. 

Although a key element of strategic human capital leadership principles is 

the use of succession planning to ensure a smooth transition of knowledge 

from incumbents to successors to strengthen organizational capacity,4

USTR does not conduct formal succession planning. Federal agencies that 

manage succession well do so with active leadership support for 

identifying critical talent throughout the organization and linking 

succession efforts to the agency’s overall long-term goals.5

 Our analysis of 

USTR’s human capital data found substantial risk of future leadership and 

knowledge loss due to retirement. Five of 22 senior executive service (SES) 

staff are currently eligible to retire, representing 23 percent of USTR’s SES 

staff. Another 4 SES staff are eligible to retire in five years or less, for a 

total of 41 percent either currently eligible to retire or eligible in 5 years or 

less. Along with the SES posts, USTR also faces the potential retirement of 

several experienced trade experts and attorneys who also have roles 

coordinating U.S. trade policy. Just over 10 percent of GS-15 trade analysts, 

attorneys, or economists are eligible to retire in 5 years or less.6

 USTR has 

not undertaken formal succession planning to fill these eventual vacancies, 

even though the staff USTR risks losing to retirement are critical to 

managing the interagency process. Instead, senior managers reexamine the 

staffing balance as vacancies occur, and office managers may look for good 

candidates as replacements from other agencies in the interagency process 

or from the private sector. According to a senior manager, USTR receives 

an occasional list of staff eligible to retire in the next year or two from the 

EOP. However, USTR senior management staffing discussions are limited 

to short-term contingency plans for particular posts and are not part of any 

systematic agencywide succession planning effort. Likewise, when office 

managers look outside the agency to find potential USTR staff, their efforts 

also are not part of any formal succession strategy. As we have previously 

4

GAO, Human Capital Succession Planning and Management Is Critical Driver of 

Organizational Transformation, GAO-04-127T (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 1, 2003); GAO, 

Human Capital: Selected Agencies Have Opportunities to Enhance Existing Succession 

Planning and Management Efforts, GAO-05-585 (Washington, D.C.: June 30, 2005).

5

GAO-04-127T.

6

About half of USTR career staff are at the GS-15 level. For more information on USTR grade 

distribution, see appendix II.
Page 11 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

reported,7 without careful planning, an organization’s retirement eligibility 

rate can suggest that it will experience an eventual loss in institutional 

knowledge, expertise, and leadership continuity. Moreover, leading 

organizations go beyond a succession approach that simply replaces 

individuals. Rather, they instead identify and develop successors for 

leadership and other key positions. 

USTR also faces periodic management transitions, which illustrates the 

risk to its interagency leadership role of facing multiple senior vacancies 

within a short period of time. The turnover in key positions that can result 

from such management transitions is particularly critical for a small agency 

such as USTR, at which each position is vitally important and staff are not 

easily replaced. For instance, a recent transition in early 2005 resulted in 

vacancies of five key posts within a 2-month period, including the offices of 

China Affairs, Europe and Mediterranean, and Labor.8

 While USTR 

generally managed to fill these positions in a timely manner,9 the risks 

inherent in suddenly having large gaps to fill in the government trade 

leadership underscore the importance of USTR having the human capital 

leadership in place to prepare the agency for transitional vacancies with 

minimal disruption to the interagency trade process. 

7

GAO, Results-Oriented Cultures: Creating a Clear Linkage between Individual 

Performance and Organizational Success, GAO-03-488 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 14, 2003.); 

GAO-04-127T.

8

In addition, in a 6-month period, USTR had vacancies for General Counsel, as well as chief 

of staff and three presidential appointments requiring Senate confirmation. 

9

USTR filled the Europe and Mediterranean office vacancy with a temporary detailee from 

the Department of State. 
Page 12 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

USTR Operates as a 

Networked Organization 

Performing an Interagency 

Leadership and 

Coordination Mission, but 

Without Formal Interagency 

Resource Planning

USTR’s lack of commitment to strategic human capital principles in its 

human capital leadership and planning also has implications for the 

interagency trade process. USTR is a highly networked organization10 that 

performs an interagency leadership and coordination mission. It 

administers and chairs TPRG and TPSC, which make up the subcabinetlevel mechanism for developing and coordinating U.S. government 

positions on international trade and trade-related investment issues. 

Supporting TPSC are more than 90 subcommittees responsible for 

specialized areas and several task forces that work on particular issues. 

USTR works with other agencies to carry out its mission, including 

obtaining approval for initiatives in the interagency process. Through 

interviews with current and former USTR officials, other trade agency 

officials, and trade association representatives, we found that USTR, a 

small trade agency that receives support from other larger agencies (e.g., 

Commerce, State, and Agriculture) in doing its work, operates more like an 

elite core staff that provides leadership and coordination in working in 

concert with others in the interagency trade policy process. USTR’s 

networked operational mode is a defining characteristic.

In developing trade policy and conducting trade negotiations, the USTR 

office directors (Assistant USTRs) whom we spoke with described working 

with an extended interagency group comprised of other subject experts at 

USTR and at a range of agencies. One Assistant USTR for a geographic 

office described working with a “virtual team” that crossed agency 

boundaries but was instantaneously connected by e-mail. Another 

Assistant USTR stressed that she had also developed a close working 

relationship with embassy staff in her primary countries of interest, whom 

10There are various types of network structures ranging from coordination and collaboration 

to high-performing partnerships, which can involve federal agencies, state and local 

governments, and nongovernmental organizations to achieve a particular outcome or result. 

Recently, there has been an increased focus on the role of networks in public sector 

governance, in studies by Stephen Goldsmith and William Eggers (Goldsmith, Stephen and 

Eggers, William D., Governing by Network: The New Shape of the Public Sector, Brookings 

Institution Press (Washington, D.C.: 2004)); the IBM Center for the Business of Government 

(Kamensky, John M., and Burlin, Thomas J., Collaboration: Using Networks and 

Partnerships, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. (Lanham, MD: 2004)); and the National 

Academy of Public Administration (National Academy of Public Administration, Powering 

the Future: High-Performance Partnership (Washington, D.C.: 2003)). In October 2005, we 

reported on practices that can help enhance and sustain one type of network, collaboration 

among federal agencies, in GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices that Can Help 

Enhance and Sustain Collaboration among Federal Agencies, GAO-06-15 (Washington, 

D.C.: Oct. 21, 2005).
Page 13 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

she described as a critical resource. An Assistant USTR for a functional 

office added that USTR was not only interacting with the major trade 

agencies in the interagency process but also on many issues with the 

relevant regulatory agencies in order to gain their perspective. One 

example would be USTR’s Agricultural Affairs office working not just with 

the Foreign Agricultural Service at the Department of Agriculture but also 

with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service for scientific 

assessment and analysis on sanitary/phytosanitary issues such as mad cow 

disease. 

In explaining how USTR works to marshal interagency support, the 

Assistant USTR for the Americas gave the example of the recently 

concluded Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), for which 

she had the negotiating lead. She said her negotiating team included 

members of her office staff working with Central American desk officers at 

a range of agencies, such as State and Commerce. However, it also included 

subject experts from other USTR offices, for issues such as financial 

services, agriculture, intellectual property, pharmaceuticals, market access, 

and labor; and they all worked with their counterparts at a range of 

agencies, such as Treasury, Agriculture, the Patent and Trademark Office, 

the Food and Drug Administration, Commerce, and Labor, respectively. In 

addition to their interagency interactions, the Office of the Americas also 

coordinated and received input from USTR’s private sector advisory 

committees as well as trade associations.

USTR can operate as a small elite agency precisely because of the 

extensive support it receives from the other trade agencies. This support 

can be characterized as falling into three main categories of assistance: 

• Participation in the interagency process—As other trade agencies 

participate in the interagency trade process, their staff contribute to the 

work of the Trade Policy Staff Committee and its approximately 90 

subcommittees. These staff assist in trade policy development in their 

areas of expertise. When USTR forms trade negotiating teams, the USTR 

negotiating lead generally draws the team largely from this core group 
Page 14 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

of experts and supplements with others, as necessary. Generally, even 

though USTR has the lead, its staff are a small minority, averaging about 

24 percent of the total delegation staff.11

• Technical assistance—USTR receives extensive technical assistance 

from subject experts at the other agencies through formal and informal 

requests for information. For instance, U.S. International Trade 

Commission staff may provide data analyses on the impact of tariff 

reductions or eliminations in prospective free trade agreements. USDA 

Foreign Agricultural Service staff may provide commodity expertise on 

issues related to Brazilian cotton or Japanese beef, or Health and 

Human Services staff may provide information on pharmaceutical 

pricing. 

• Detailees – USTR also benefits from temporary staff on detail from 

other agencies that continue to pay their salaries; USTR provides office 

space and travel expenses. This is an important avenue for 

supplementing USTR’s core staff with specific subject expertise on a 

temporary basis. For example, as of July 5, 2005, USTR supplemented its 

core staff of 206 permanent employees with 26 detailees in its 

Washington, D.C., office and 9 in its Geneva, Switzerland, office.

This extensive assistance underlies USTR’s ability to operate as a 

networked organization. USTR officials stressed that it would not make 

sense to try to duplicate this expertise within USTR and is unnecessary 

because they can tap governmentwide expertise, when needed, without 

bringing on staff they might not need permanently. USTR only adds core 

staff for the most critical, long-term issues. For example, USTR added 

intellectual property rights staff when it became clear it was a long-term 

issue important to U.S. industry, according to a senior USTR official. In 

addition, USTR also added staff with expertise on labor issues in recent 

years.

However, USTR does not formally discuss or plan human capital resources 

at the interagency level, even though it must depend on the availability of 

11GAO, International Trade: Intensifying Free Trade Negotiating Agenda Calls for Better 

Allocation of Staff and Resources, GAO-04-233 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 12, 2004). This 

percentage was based on estimated agency staff on U.S. negotiating teams for completed 

rounds of free trade agreement (FTA) negotiations, as of October 2003. The six FTA 

negotiations examined were Australia, Central American Free Trade Agreement, Chile, 

Morocco, Southern African Customs Union, and Singapore.
Page 15 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

these critical resources to achieve its mission, according to USTR officials. 

Interagency discussions focus on the substance of trade policy; USTR does 

not formally discuss or plan the resources needed to implement policies. In 

two recent reports, we have addressed the need for USTR to conduct 

interagency resource planning related to specific trade issues, making 

specific recommendations for improvements.12 Such interagency resource 

planning would also facilitate human capital planning by the other agencies 

that work with USTR. For example, USTR undertakes resource planning 

when forming actual trade negotiating teams rather than at times when this 

would contribute to agency resource planning. USTR officials told us that 

their view is that when agencies reach formal TPRG agreement on a trade 

policy or trade agreement, it carries a commitment by the agencies to 

provide resources. In addition, they said that assisting USTR is a part of the 

other trade agencies’ missions to support the U.S. government trade 

agenda. While officials we interviewed at other agencies generally agreed 

with this perspective, some of them also said that potential budget cuts 

could result in fewer resources being available for USTR. For example, 

officials at the Foreign Agricultural Service expressed concern that the 

expanding trade agenda has been a strain on its resources, and it was 

facing serious budget cuts. As a result, since USTR does not provide the 

other agencies with specific resource requirements when the agencies are 

performing their planning, it is shifting the risk to the agencies of having to 

later ensure the availability of staff in support of the trade agenda, 

potentially straining their ability to achieve other agency missions.

A fundamental principle of strategic human capital management is that 

high-performing organizations manage risk based on strategic planning 

supported by reliable and current information. One result of USTR’s lack of 

strategic planning for these critical interagency resources is that it does not 

have a systematic method to account for potential changes in other 

agencies’ resources that might impact its ability to achieve its mission. The 

absence of this method also affects the other agencies’ ability to account 

for changes that could affect their ability to provide resources to support 

the trade agenda.

12These issues related to selection of FTA partners and monitoring and enforcement 

implementation. See GAO, International Trade: Intensifying Free Trade Negotiating 

Agenda Calls for Better Allocation of Staff and Resources, GAO-04-233 (Washington, D.C.: 

Jan. 12, 2004); and GAO, International Trade: Further Improvements Needed to Handle 

Growing Workload for Monitoring and Enforcing Trade Agreements, GAO-05-537

(Washington, D.C.: June 30, 2005).
Page 16 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

USTR Is Not Conducting 

Ongoing Strategic Human 

Capital Planning 

USTR’s human capital planning efforts have been focused primarily on 

short-term responses to trade negotiating needs; it has not conducted 

ongoing long-term analyses of its workforce needs. USTR conducts human 

capital planning primarily in its centrally administered annual budget 

process that looks forward 2 fiscal years. For instance, in the summer of 

2005, USTR planned needed adjustments for the fiscal year 2006 budget 

and made projections for fiscal year 2007. The organization plans the 

resources—including staff or funding for travel—it will need for specific 

trade activities in that time frame, whether free trade agreement 

negotiations, WTO meetings, or trade conferences. 

USTR Conducts Short-Term 

Planning through Its Budget 

Process

Each summer the USTR budget office sends a budget call to the negotiation 

offices and requests a time table of expected expenditures, such as 

negotiations rounds. Support offices review negotiation office estimates 

and complete their own estimates, accordingly. The USTR budget office 

uses the office-level information to compile a total budget estimate and set 

the level of staffing and other budgetary allowances across the agency. For 

instance, when the CAFTA negotiations were launched, the Assistant USTR 

for the Americas—whose office had the lead responsibility for the 

negotiations—estimated what additional staff might be needed, how many 

rounds of negotiations might take place over the next 2 fiscal years, and 

how much money would be needed for travel, translations, conferences, or 

other needed expenses. She also indicated the assistance her office would 

likely need from other functional offices (such as Agricultural Affairs or 

Services, Investment, and Intellectual Property) and from staff offices 

(such as General Counsel or Economic Affairs). In turn, these functional 

and staff offices could then also factor this information, as well as the 

requests for assistance from the other geographic offices, into their own 

office planning. In addition, the budget office also monitors the need for 

resources throughout the year through its mid-year adjustment reviews, 

generally in the form of monthly resource checks and quarterly revised 

budget calls. 

USTR Does Not Conduct 

Ongoing Strategic Workforce 

Planning 

While USTR uses its annual budget planning process to meet its short-term 

human capital needs, it has not conducted ongoing parallel efforts to 

analyze the organization’s longer term workforce needs. Although USTR’s 

human capital planning is directly linked to the organization’s mission and 

objectives in the budget process, this is essentially a short-term tactical 

process to meet immediate needs. USTR does not conduct ongoing 

strategic planning or routinely analyze the organization’s longer term 

workforce needs, for example, such as routinely reviewing eligibility for 
Page 17 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

retirement of senior staff and conducting formal succession planning, as 

discussed above, so that it ensures the organization’s continued capacity to 

achieve its mission. USTR also does not conduct ongoing analysis of 

workforce composition and skills. (For information related to USTR’s staff 

profile, see app. II.) While USTR conducted a workforce analysis required 

by OMB of all executive branch agencies in mid-2001, which incorporated 

many of these elements, it has not followed up on this analysis in a 

systematic, ongoing manner, or used it as the basis for strategic workforce 

planning. 

In addition, USTR management does not maintain the kind of up-to-date 

information on available staff and future human capital needs that would 

be necessary in conducting effective strategic workforce planning. USTR’s 

personnel data files are maintained in EOP’s Office of Administration; 

USTR itself maintains little human capital data. USTR’s Office of 

Administration did not have the internal human capital information 

available that would be required for workforce analyses. For instance, it 

did not have a personnel roster associated with information such as 

employees’ retirement eligibility or their specific knowledge and skills, 

such as language ability. 

USTR officials said that USTR is such a small organization that managers 

know the professional and skill backgrounds of the staff, therefore such a 

data system would not be needed. This means that, rather than establishing 

information systems, institutional knowledge at USTR depends on 

individuals. However, as we have previously reported, it is crucial that 

human capital leadership and planning be based on a data-driven decisionmaking process. The absence of such data can seriously undermine efforts 

to identify and respond to current and emerging human capital challenges, 

particularly in a small organization where turnover or unfilled positions 

could quickly deplete the institutional memory.

USTR Makes Limited 

Use of Human Capital 

Tools to Mitigate Risk 

of Workforce 

Challenges 

USTR does not make full use of available human capital tools, despite 

facing recruitment and retention challenges; and it does not link most 

employees’ performance standards with organizational needs. While USTR 

can generally recruit staff with requisite skills, competitive pressures and 

postemployment restrictions on foreign representation could place 

limitations on USTR’s ability to hire from the private sector. More use of 

available human capital flexibilities could help to better ensure consistent 

success in recruitment and retention. In addition, USTR risks inconsistent 
Page 18 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

attainment of its strategic goals if it does not link individual performance 

expectations to its needs. 

USTR Uses Some Human 

Capital Tools but Could 

Benefit from Adding Others

USTR faces risks from recruitment and retention challenges, which in turn 

could hamper its interagency leadership role. USTR addresses these risks 

in part through limited use of human capital flexibilities, and USTR office 

managers said they do not have difficulties recruiting needed staff. 

However, senior managers said that the recruitment environment for staff 

with critical skills needed for USTR’s interagency leadership role, such as 

trade attorneys, is becoming more competitive. Not only can people with 

these skills find higher-paying positions outside the federal government, 

they also face restrictions on representing foreign clients after service with 

USTR, according to senior managers. USTR often seeks interagency trade 

experts for recruitment, according to USTR and other trade agency 

management.13 Other trade agency officials have confirmed that USTR 

targets their high-performing staff and that several current USTR 

employees were hired from their agencies. However, USTR has benefited 

from the hiring flexibility to hire private sector attorneys at a “higher-thanminimum step,” which, according to a senior manager in USTR’s Office of 

General Counsel, helps attract experienced private sector attorneys who 

may be reluctant to start federal service at the minimum pay step. USTR 

also uses its authority to hire and pay administratively determined 

positions without regard to the civil service laws, but this authority 

restricts the agency to 20 such positions.14

USTR does not take advantage of other available human capital 

flexibilities, most of which are expanded and more targeted versions of 

those it now uses. As we have previously reported, hiring flexibilities could 

help agencies in expediting and controlling their hiring processes.15

Moreover, insufficient and ineffective use of flexibilities can significantly 

hinder the ability of federal agencies to recruit, hire, retain, and manage 

13USTR officials said they actively recruit staff from their interagency partners because of 

the knowledge of the interagency process, as well as demonstrated performance, that such 

hires bring.

14See 19 U.S.C. § 2171(e)(1).

15GAO, Human Capital: Increasing Agencies’ Use of New Hiring Flexibilities, GAO-04-

959T (Washington, D.C.: July 13, 2004).
Page 19 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

their human capital.16 Examples of expanded human capital flexibilities for 

which USTR has authority, but does not use, include the following:

• Expanded direct hire authority, which would streamline hiring for 

critical needs, such as trade experts;

• Recruitment and retention authorities, both of which would allow USTR 

to offer bonuses of 25 to 50 percent for new hires and highly qualified 

employees; and 

• Enhanced annual leave authority, which would allow nonfederal staff, 

such as private sector attorneys, to enter federal service with higherthan-minimum annual leave rates. 

See appendix III for a more detailed description of federal human capital 

flexibilities available to USTR.

Closely aligned with USTR’s recruiting efforts is how well it can retain staff, 

but USTR’s efforts to minimize its retention risks have also been limited. 

Retention concerns are especially relevant given that, according to senior 

officials, USTR employees have highly marketable skills. In addition, USTR 

staff have an important role in leading and coordinating the interagency 

trade policy process. To illustrate the potential for retention risks, from 

March 2000 through March 2005, 158 USTR employees separated from the 

agency, according to our calculations of EOP data.17 USTR has also 

experienced turnover among its recently hired staff during this time period. 

For instance, 25 professional staff (defined in this report as GS-13 through 

SES staff) hired in the last 5 years have already left USTR. While USTR is in 

the process of taking steps to increase compensation for senior executives 

to help keep pay competitive, which would allow for bonuses of 5 to 20 

percent, officials could not provide a specific time frame for 

implementation. In addition, a senior USTR official told us that the loss of 

senior GS-level trade experts can create a loss of institutional knowledge. 

According to a Commerce official, familiarity with the details of negotiated 

agreements is critical for subsequent enforcement of trade agreements. 

16GAO, Human Capital: Effective Use of Flexibilities Can Assist Agencies’ in Managing 

Their Workforces, GAO-03-2 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 6, 2002).

17Of the 158 employees who separated during this time period, 71 held temporary positions, 

of which 17 were students and 54 were political appointees. 
Page 20 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Finally, USTR has had challenges retaining security administrators (e.g., 

three of five hired in the past 5 years have left).18

USTR Does Not Link All 

Staff Performance 

Appraisals to Agency Goals 

USTR does not link the performance of most of its staff to agencywide 

goals, risking the loss of consistency in its implementation of agency goals, 

even though USTR’s small size and leadership role mean that all employees 

have a critical role in maintaining the agency’s trade policy coordination 

mission. Only SES staff, making up just over 10 percent of USTR 

employees, are subject to agencywide performance competencies. In 

addition, attorneys in the Office of General Counsel and its Monitoring and 

Enforcement Unit have performance competencies that are linked to 

agency goals, accounting for another 12 percent of staff. USTR managers 

have stressed the importance of certain individual skills needed to advance 

USTR’s mission, such as the ability to effectively interact within the 

interagency trade policy framework. However, USTR employees not 

subject to agencywide standards are instead held accountable for a range 

of expectations that vary among USTR offices according to specific 

assignments. As we have previously reported,19 linking performance 

expectations to organizational goals is important because strategic goals 

should guide job responsibilities. In this way, an agency can ensure that 

staff performance supports agency goals. Moreover, high-performing 

organizations use their performance management systems to help provide 

continuity during transition by maintaining a consistent focus on a broad 

set of mission priorities. In USTR’s case, without a performance 

management system that ties individual performance to USTR’s goals, it 

does not have a mechanism to translate its strategic goals into individual 

performance. Without agencywide goals, USTR is at risk of having its 

mission guided by office-level goals, which would not be conducive to 

meeting agency goals, given that USTR has over 15 separate missionrelated offices. In addition, USTR could help mitigate the potentially 

disruptive effects of periodic management transitions, such as it 

experienced this year, with a concrete set of performance expectations that 

guide staff performance throughout such periods and ensure consistency in 

mission priorities.

18Two of the three security administrators who left were responsible for a variety of duties 

for both the Washington and Geneva offices, including emergency preparedness and 

building security, and the third worked on information technology security in Washington.

19GAO-03-488, p. 17 and 29.
Page 21 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Conclusions USTR needs to place more emphasis on strategic human capital principles, 

otherwise it leaves itself open to human capital risks that could otherwise 

be mitigated. While USTR often cites its small size as a reason it can afford 

to sidestep requirements that are often applied to larger bureaucracies, in 

the case of human capital management, it is precisely because every 

individual is important that effective human capital leadership is critical. 

Yet our review has found that USTR is focused on achieving trade results 

but has overlooked the substantial additional value it could gain from 

strategic human capital management. For example, without a senior 

manager acting as its chief human capital officer, USTR cannot ensure that 

critical human capital leadership tasks, such as succession planning, are 

accomplished in a way that maximizes USTR’s ability to achieve its mission 

with minimal risk of interagency disruption due to management transitions. 

Given the number of SES staff who will be eligible to retire within the next 

5 years, it is important that USTR address these issues strategically rather 

than reactively. Further, although USTR seems to be making effective use 

of its networked structure to marshal the relevant expertise across the 

government in support of the trade agenda, it has not taken additional steps 

to mitigate the risk inherent in its dependency on interagency resources. 

Without a method to plan interagency resources devoted to the trade 

agenda, USTR has no way to account for potential changes in other 

agencies’ resources. Given the prospect of a tightening federal budget 

environment, lack of a formal interagency resource planning method 

means USTR is in no position to evaluate how budget reductions could 

impact USTR’s ability to achieve its mission. In addition, USTR has not 

conducted ongoing strategic human capital planning for its own longerterm organizational workforce needs and does not maintain the 

information systems required for such analysis. While USTR primarily uses 

its 2-year budget planning process to focus its human capital planning 

efforts, this approach limits it to planning how it can best achieve its trade 

mission with the resources available to it in the short term. USTR has not 

taken steps to strategically identify and respond to current and emerging 

human capital risks in its workforce. As a result, by not conducting ongoing 

strategic workforce planning, USTR is opening itself up to human capital 

risks that it could be taking steps to mitigate.

USTR could also better meet some of its key workforce challenges by 

making better use of available human capital tools. In an increasingly 

competitive recruitment environment, USTR could benefit from using the 

additional hiring and pay flexibilities available to it. In addition, USTR has 

not ensured that its performance standards support its organizational goals 
Page 22 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

by extending agencywide performance criteria to its entire staff. As a 

result, USTR is missing an opportunity to translate its strategic goals into 

individual performance. 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action

To improve USTR’s human capital management, we recommend that the 

U.S. Trade Representative develop a strategic human capital management 

system. The system should include the following elements, tailored to its 

small size and unique role:

• filling its senior human capital management positions with human 

capital professionals who will significantly contribute to strategic 

planning and decision making, 

• developing an interagency resource planning method with appropriate 

participation from key agency stakeholders, 

• undertaking strategic workforce planning in order to optimize its 

workforce’s continued capacity to achieve its mission,

• improving its ability to utilize data for measuring the effectiveness of 

human capital approaches in support of its mission and goals,

• determining if additional use of available pay and hiring flexibilities 

would better position USTR to hire and retain experts, and 

• developing agencywide performance criteria for staff to align 

management expectations with critical organizational goals.

Agency Comments and 

Our Evaluation

We provided a draft of this report to USTR; the Departments of Agriculture, 

Commerce, and State; and the U.S. International Trade Commission. USTR 

provided written comments, which are reproduced in appendix IV. The 

other agencies did not provide comments. 

USTR stated that the insights provided by our study were a valuable 

contribution to its ongoing internal efforts to effectively manage its human 

capital. USTR said it shared our general observations and 

recommendations regarding the critical role of human capital planning. 

USTR also noted that it (1) has recently hired a new Assistant U.S. Trade 

Representative for Administration, (2) will examine the additional human 
Page 23 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

capital flexibilities available to it, and (3) is committed to linking 

performance evaluations to its strategic planning.

USTR stated that it believed we had not adequately factored into our 

analysis how it had tailored its human capital planning to its size and 

networked organizational structure. While we have modified our report 

language in several places to clarify our discussion of USTR’s human 

capital planning, we do not agree, however, that USTR’s human capital 

planning activities, which primarily focus on meeting short-term 

negotiating needs, have to this point demonstrated a commitment to longterm strategic human capital planning. 

USTR also stated that our report suggests that it should extend its 

interagency coordinating role to formally overseeing the human capital 

planning activities of these agencies. Our recommendation that USTR 

develop an interagency resource planning method with appropriate 

participation from key agency stakeholders is not intended to suggest that 

USTR should formally oversee the human capital planning activities of the 

agencies involved, but rather envisions an extension of USTR’s interagency 

coordination role to better anticipate and plan resource needs devoted to 

the U.S. trade agenda. This recommendation is consistent with several of 

our recent reports. 

USTR also provided technical comments, which we have incorporated 

where appropriate.

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents 

earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days from the 

date of its issuance. At that time, we will send copies of this report to 

appropriate congressional committees. We will also send copies to the U.S. 

Trade Representative, the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, and State, 

and the Chairman of the U.S. International Trade Commission. We will also 

make copies available to others upon request. In addition, this report will 

be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 
Page 24 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me 

at (202) 512-4347 or yagerl@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are 

listed in appendix V.

Sincerely yours,

Loren Yager

Director, International Affairs and Trade
Page 25 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Appendix I

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology AAppenednxidexiIs

To determine whether the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) 

is pursuing an effective human capital strategy that adequately supports the 

ability of its workforce to accomplish its mission, we reviewed its human 

capital planning and implementation efforts and compared them with U.S. 

government best practices. We used our Model of Strategic Human Capital 

Management as the framework in assessing USTR’s human capital efforts. 

Specifically, we (1) reviewed USTR’s commitment to strategic human 

capital leadership and planning and (2) analyzed to what extent USTR has 

used human capital tools to address its workforce challenges.

To determine USTR’s commitment to strategic human capital leadership 

and planning, we reviewed USTR’s available human capital planning 

documents, including annual performance planning required by the 

Government Performance Results Act for the past 5 years, the most recent 

annual USTR budget call, and agency budget justifications for the past 5 

years. We also reviewed Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) human capital guidance and our 

previous human capital reports to determine how government best 

practices could be best applied to USTR. We augmented our 

documentation review with interviews with USTR human resources staff, 

office managers, and senior management at the Washington, D.C., and 

Geneva, Switzerland, offices. We spoke with the Geneva senior manager by 

telephone. We further discussed interagency planning and commitment of 

resources with officials of four trade agencies: the Departments of State, 

Commerce, and Agriculture, as well as the U.S. International Trade 

Commission (ITC). 

To determine to what extent USTR has used human capital tools to address 

its workforce challenges, we obtained USTR human capital data from the 

Executive Office of the President (EOP) for key human capital trends, such 

as retirement eligibility, time in service, and dates of separation. We also 

reviewed these data for certain routine human capital categories to better 

understand the agency’s overall staff profile, such as office level and 

aggregate staffing levels, grade levels, and occupation types. Finally, we 

used these data to determine the extent to which USTR fills its job 

announcements, as well as the number of staff who received training. We 

tested USTR data for reliability by comparing them with OPM data from the 

central personnel data file and with USTR organizational documents. We 

determined that these data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of 

this report. We used USTR’s pending senior executive service (SES) 

performance management guidance as part of our review of the agency’s 

efforts to address performance management. Along with the data review, 
Appendix I

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Page 26 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

we interviewed office managers and senior management officials at USTR 

to determine the workforce challenges they faced and how they were 

addressing those challenges. We also met with officials from the 

Departments of State, Commerce, Agriculture, and ITC, as well as with 

trade association representatives and former USTR officials, to get their 

perspectives on USTR’s workforce challenges. Finally, to determine which 

human capital flexibilities USTR was eligible for, and which could benefit 

USTR, we reviewed existing human capital statutes. We compared these 

statutory authorities with those that USTR currently uses, accounting for 

workforce challenges identified through USTR human capital data 

obtained from EOP and interviews. We conducted our work from January 

2005 to September 2005 in accordance with generally accepted government 

auditing standards.
Page 27 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Appendix II

USTR Staff Profile ApendxiI

EOP provided us with recent USTR human capital data. We analyzed data 

in the following categories: (1) active staff, by office; (2) agencywide, fulltime equivalent staff (FTE) over recent years; (3) grades; (4) retirement 

eligibility; (5) length of service; (6) occupations;1

 (7) active detailees; (8) 

position announcement fill rates; and (9) training.2

These data spanned 5 years, from January 2000 to April 2005, with the 

exception of detailees, the reliability of which was limited to active 

detailees; position announcements, available back to March 2003; and 

training data, which USTR could only provide back to May 2001, but up to 

June 2005. 

Active USTR Staff by Office As of April 2005,3

 USTR had 212 active staff. USTR offices average about 8 

staff, but some, such as Administration, have over 20 while others, such 

South Asia, Labor, and Trade Capacity, have 2 staff each. SES or political 

appointees head most offices. Exceptions include one office that is headed 

by a staff member under special hiring authority and another office headed 

by a staff member at the GS-15 level. The South Asia and the Europe and 

Mediterranean offices are both currently headed by temporary detailees.

Table 1: Active USTR Staff by Office

1

We analyzed occupation data from OPM’s central personnel data file to obtain occupation 

data back to 1995. 

2

USTR’s human resources office maintains training data.

3

These are more detailed April 2005 data from EOP and differ slightly from staff numbers 

discussed above and earlier in this report, which came from a more recent July 5, 2005, 

USTR organizational chart.

Office Active staff

Office of the Ambassador 4

Deputiesa 7

Geneva 13

Chief Agriculture Negotiator 2

Administration 21

Agriculture 8

Africa 6
Appendix II

USTR Staff Profile

Page 28 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Source: GAO analysis of EOP data.

Note: Active staff as of April 2005, not including temporary detailees from other agencies.

a

Deputies includes both Washington, D.C.-based deputy offices. 

b

The Monitoring and Enforcement Unit is part of the Office of General Counsel.

c

APEC is Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation.

d

Since we received these data, the Services, Investment, and Intellectual Property office has been 

reorganized into a Services office and an Intellectual Property office, both headed by GS-15 level staff 

acting as office heads.

USTR Agencywide FTEs in 

Recent Years

USTR’s use of FTEs has been guided by the number Congress has 

authorized.4

 USTR’s FTE authorization has increased over the past 5 years, 

from 185 in fiscal year 2000 to 225 in fiscal years 2004 and 2005. In those 

China Affairs 9

Congressional Affairs 3

Economic Affairs 4

Environment and Natural Resources 7

Europe and Mediterranean 11

General Counsel 13

Monitoring and Enforcementb 17

Industry, Market Access, and Telecommunications 12

Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Liaison 4

Japan, Korea, and APECc 6

Labor 2

Policy Coordination and Information 5

Public Media Affairs 3

SE Asia and the Pacific 5

Services, Investment, and Intellectual Propertyd 16

Special Textile Negotiator 4

South Asia Affairs 2

The Americas 13

Trade Capacity Building 2

WTO and Multilateral Affairs 13

Total 212

(Continued From Previous Page)

Office Active staff

4

A limit on the level of authorized FTEs that USTR requests from Congress is a ceiling set 

within the executive branch by OMB, which reviews USTR’s initial budget request, 

according to USTR officials. 
Appendix II

USTR Staff Profile

Page 29 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

years, USTR has actually used 171 FTEs in fiscal year 2000 and 212 FTEs by 

fiscal year 2005, as shown in figure 3. While there was a slight decrease in 

FTEs used between fiscal years 2001 and 2002, the number of FTEs USTR 

has used has risen steadily, along with its authorization. However, as of the 

middle of fiscal year 2005, the number of FTEs used has not changed 

significantly from fiscal year 2004. 

Figure 3: USTR FTEs Authorized and Actual, Fiscal Year 2000 through First Half of 

Fiscal Year 2005

Note: Actual FTEs are 4th quarter data except for fiscal year 2005, which are 2nd quarter data.

Grades USTR’s interagency leadership role is evident in its high number of middle 

and senior grade levels. About half of USTR career staff are at the GS-15 

level,5

 about one-sixth are GS-13 and GS-14 levels, and slightly over one150

200

250

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year

Authorized

Actual

FTE

Source: GAO analysis of EOP data.

0

5

About 3 percent of the federal workforce was at the GS-15 level, as of 2004.
Appendix II

USTR Staff Profile

Page 30 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

tenth are SES level. Another fifth of USTR personnel are GS-12 and below, 

which are primarily support staff. 

Figure 4: Number of USTR Staff by Grade Level

Note: Does not include 13 special employees, including presidential appointees or student employees 

and those classified under special hiring authority.

Retirement Eligibility About 18 percent of all USTR staff are eligible for retirement within the 

next 5 years. Within individual grades, political appointees and SES have 

the highest percent of staff who are eligible for retirement. Among other 

grades, the GS-15 level, made up mostly of trade analysts and attorneys, 

make up the bulk of USTR staff and have one of the lowest percent of staff 

eligible for retirement within the next 5 years or less. (See fig. 5.)

99

GS-12 and below

41

37

22

SES

GS-15

Source: GAO analysis of EOP data.

GS-13 and GS-14
Appendix II

USTR Staff Profile

Page 31 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Figure 5: Percent of USTR Staff Eligible for Retirement in 5 Years or Less

Note: Does not show political appointees or those classified under special hiring authority.

Length of Service The median length of agency service at USTR for active staff is just under 4 

years. About 30 percent of active staff have been at the agency for less than 

2 years. However, given USTR’s interagency ties, some USTR staff have 

longer experience within the interagency structure through service with 

other trade agencies. 

Occupations According to information from OPM’s central personnel data file, most 

USTR FTEs are classified as miscellaneous administration and program 

occupation. This particular occupation reflects the overall FTE gains at 

USTR in the past 5 years. However, certain occupations, such as 

economists, attorneys, and support staff, illustrate different trends. For 

instance, in the past 10 years, the number of attorneys has increased 

substantially, from 18 to 45, or 150 percent, as USTR has added attorneys to 

address an increased litigation caseload (see fig. 6). However, during that 

same time period, the number of economists decreased from 46 to 17, a 

decrease of about 63 percent. From fiscal year 2000 through 2004, support 

0

10

20

30

40

50

Total

USTR

GS-13 GS-15 SES

and

GS-14

GS-12

and

below

Percent of each grade

Source: GAO analysis of EOP data.
Appendix II

USTR Staff Profile

Page 32 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

occupations such as clerks and secretaries also decreased. USTR officials 

told us that as agency functions have become more automated, the need for 

previous numbers of support staff decreased. 

Figure 6: USTR Staff Occupation Comparison, Attorneys and Economists

Active Detailees USTR had 30 active temporary detailees from other trade agencies, as of 

April 2005.6

 USTR has a formal detailee program with the Department of 

State, and less formal agreements with other trade agencies, such as the 

Source: GAO analysis of OPM's central personnel data file.

Staff frequency

0

10

20

30

40

50

1995

Year

Attorney

Economist

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

6

According to EOP data, as of April 2005. These data are more detailed and differ slightly 

from staff numbers discussed above and earlier in this report, which came from a more 

recent July 5, 2005, USTR organizational chart.
Appendix II

USTR Staff Profile

Page 33 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

U.S. International Trade Commission, Agriculture, and Commerce. 

However, USTR also currently uses temporary detailees from a variety of 

other agencies and entities, including the Congressional Research Service, 

the Central Intelligence Agency, the Small Business Administration, and the 

White House. 

Out of the 30 temporary detailees assigned to USTR, most began service in 

2004, as shown in figure 7. However, several current detailees were 

assigned to USTR before 2003, and 1 active detailee, from USDA, has been 

at the USTR Washington, D.C., office longer than 5 years, according to data 

from EOP. 

Figure 7: USTR Active Detailees, by Year Detail Started

Notes: As of April 2005; includes 7 detailees assigned to Geneva, 4 of whom started in 2002 or before.

USTR Job Announcements Most job announcements that USTR has advertised in recent years have 

been filled, according to EOP data. Of 79 USTR announcements EOP 

posted from October 2002 through March 2005, 45 announcements, or 57 

percent, were filled. Of the job announcements USTR did not fill, most 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Detailees

Source: GAO analysis of EOP data.

Pre20002000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Total

USTR

Detail start year
Appendix II

USTR Staff Profile

Page 34 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

were trade analysts or support staff and Information Technology positions, 

but three unfilled positions were attorney slots, and four were budget or 

human resources positions. USTR did not fill one senior human capital 

position, Assistant USTR for Administration, in Spring 2004, and that 

position remains unfilled as of October 1, 2005. 

A USTR human resources official told us that the reason the agency does 

not fill certain announcements may vary. For instance, the agency may 

decide to pull announcements before they are filled, announcements may 

not receive qualified applications, or job offers may not be accepted. If a 

job announcement was not filled, USTR might post it again under a 

separate announcement. As a result, according to the USTR human 

resources official, USTR’s data did not allow us to identify that multiple 

announcements had been made for a specific job and to link them to the 

position being filled on a specific date.

Training USTR employees do not receive very much formal training. In a 4-year 

period from May 2001 to June 2005, 51 USTR staff took part in 76 training 

courses, according to USTR human resource data. A little over 80 percent 

of the courses USTR staff received were mission related; the rest were for 

personal enrichment, such as retirement seminars. Most staff who received 

training were GS-12 and under, and GS-15 levels. USTR staff from the 

offices of Administration, Americas, Agriculture Affairs, and Environment 

and Natural Resources received the most mission-related training over the 

4-year period, while staff from other offices, such as Services, Investment, 

and Intellectual Property, South East Asia and the Pacific, and Europe and 

Mediterranean, received no mission-related training.
Page 35 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Appendix III

Human Capital Flexibilities Available to USTRApendxiI

USTR is eligible to use a variety of human capital flexibilities to address its 

risk of future workforce challenges. Tables 2 and 3 show specific 

authorities that USTR is eligible to use that could address its recruitment 

and retention challenges.

Table 2: Flexibilities Available to USTR that Could Address Recruitment Risks

Source: GAO analysis of human capital statute.

Table 3: Flexibilities Available to USTR that Could Address Retention Risks

Source: GAO analysis of human capital statute.

a

USTR officials told us they are planning to eventually implement this flexibility, but they do not have a 

specific time frame.

Authority Statutory basis OPM regulations Description

Direct Hire Authority Homeland Security Act of 

2002 [P.L. 107-296, § 

1312]. Found at 5 U.S.C. § 

3304(a)(3).

5 C.F.R. §§ 337.201-

337.206.

Authority to directly hire employees (without using the 

competitive service process) for positions for which OPM 

has determined there is a critical hiring need or a severe 

shortage of candidates.

Recruitment and 

Relocation Bonus 

Authority

Federal Workforce 

Flexibility Act of 2004 [P.L. 

108-411, § 101]. Found at 

5 U.S.C. § 5753 

70 F.R. 25732 (Interim 

rule). 

Expanded authority to pay bonuses to a new hire or a 

current employee moving to a new position or geographic 

location of up to 25 percent of base pay multiplied by the 

years the employee has agreed to serve in a written 

service agreement. OPM may authorize up to 50 percent 

of base pay if there is a critical agency need. 

Enhanced Annual 

Leave Authority

Federal Workforce 

Flexibility Act of 2004 [P.L. 

108-411, § 202]. Found at 

5 U.S.C. § 6303(e).

70 F.R. 22245 (Interim 

rule). 

Authority to credit relevant nonfederal service for 

purposes of determining annual leave accrual rates if an 

agency determines it is necessary for its mission or a 

performance goal.

Authority Statutory basis OPM regulations Description

Retention Bonus 

Authority

Federal Workforce 

Flexibility Act of 2004 

[P.L. 108-411, § 101]. 

Found at 5 U.S.C. § 5754. 

70 F.R. 25732 (Interim 

rule). 

Expanded authority to pay bonuses to employees with 

unusually high or unique qualifications or to a group of 

employees if there is a high risk that a significant portion 

would likely leave. The bonus may be up to 25 percent of 

basic pay (50 percent for a critical agency need with OPM 

approval) or 10 percent for a group of employees and is 

subject to a written service agreement. 

Senior Executive 

Service Compensation 

Increasea

Homeland Security Act of 

2002 [P.L. 107-296, § 

1322]; FY04 Defense 

Authorization Act [P.L. 

108-136, § 1125]. Found 

at 5 U.S.C. §§ 5307(d), 

5382(b). 

5 C.F.R. §§ 430.401-

430.405, 530.203, 

534.403.

Increased maximum rate of base pay for the SES to 

Executive Schedule Level II and increased cap on total 

annual compensation (base salary plus bonuses, awards, 

etc.) to the Vice President's salary for agencies certified 

by OPM and OMB as having a performance appraisal 

system which makes meaningful distinctions based on 

relative performance.
Page 36 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Appendix IV

Comments from the Office of the U.S. Trade 

Representative ApendxiIV

Note: GAO comments 

supplementing those in 

the report text appear 

at the end of this 

appendix.

See comment 1.
Appendix IV

Comments from the Office of the U.S. Trade 

Representative

Page 37 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

See comment 2.
Appendix IV

Comments from the Office of the U.S. Trade 

Representative

Page 38 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

The following are GAO’s comments on USTR’s letter dated November 10, 

2005.

GAO Comments 1. We agree that human capital planning must be tailored to the mission 

and characteristics of each agency and, in fact, had stressed this critical 

idea at several points in the report, including the recommendations. We 

acknowledge the steps USTR has taken in its human capital planning 

and have added clarifications where appropriate to further reflect 

USTR’s human capital planning activities and actions. However, we do 

not believe that these steps demonstrate a commitment to long-term 

strategic human capital planning. USTR’s human capital planning 

focuses primarily on short-term responses to trade negotiating needs 

identified through the budget process, such as shifting staff and 

resources to meet the increased needs associated with particular trade 

negotiations. This kind of planning, while valuable, is not the same as 

strategic, ongoing analysis and planning for long-term agencywide 

workforce needs, such as retirement eligibility of senior staff or 

changing workforce composition and skills needs. Further, while at the 

conclusion of our study USTR provided us with a 5-year workforce 

analysis it had been required to conduct in 2001 by OMB, it was not able 

to show us that it had used this analysis in an ongoing manner as the 

basis of strategic workforce planning.

2. Our recommendation to USTR to conduct formal interagency resource 

planning is consistent with several of our recent reports that came to 

the same basic conclusion. We do not state that USTR should formally 

oversee the human capital planning activities of the agencies involved. 

Rather, we said that USTR should mitigate the risks inherent in its 

dependency on interagency resources by developing an interagency 

resource planning method with appropriate participation from key 

agency stakeholders. This would envision an extension of USTR’s 

coordination role, not increased oversight over agency human capital 

planning activities.
Page 39 GAO-06-167 USTR Strategic Human Capital Management

Appendix V

GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments ApendxiV

GAO Contact Loren Yager, (202) 512-4347

Staff 

Acknowledgments

In addition, Anthony Moran, Assistant Director; as well as Leyla Kazaz; 

Donald Morrison; and Paul Revesz made key contributions to this report. 

Other contributors include Martin DeAlteriis, William Doherty, Etana 

Finkler, Ernie Jackson, Jeffrey McDermott, Jamie McDonald, Lisa Shames, 

Sarah Veale, Michael Volpe, and Gregory Wilmoth. 

(320304)
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER