While Napolitano had some notable Capitol Hill allies, her Congressional bench of supporters was not overly deep. That’s a hard thing to develop given the crushing schedule of demands and pervasive distractions that are part of any secretary’s daily schedule, but it’s part of the job and should not be underestimated or ignored. Having top cover and support from the Hill has big value, especially on the “bad days.”

 

End the Battles with the White House

Regardless of what new job a person takes, it’s hard to do that job if those who hired you are always meddling in the place you are supposed to be leading. Such is the case with the White House and DHS. While the secretary is charged with running DHS, the White House certainly makes its presence known on what it wants done. This has led to some interesting dynamics between the Napolitano camp and the White House. In fact, even current political appointees during the Obama Administration can be divided into two camps: those that are Napolitano picks and those that are the White House’s, and needless to say, those two camps didn’t always get along.

It’s true every secretary has people close to them that they bring on board to help them lead the ship they’ve just taken over. Tom Ridge had people from Pennsylvania; Michael Chertoff had people from his time at the Justice Department and that he worked with in New Jersey, and Janet Napolitano brought folks from Arizona. That is always going to happen, whoever is picked to take the secretary’s chair. It’s also true that the White House is going to have a say in how things are run at the department, but over the past four plus years, it would seem that the White House and DHS could never get on the same page. From personnel selections and policy issues, to messaging and other details, there seemed to be a tension between the two camps. That ongoing tension creates confusion and contributes to existing morale problems. The next secretary has to say to the president, “Who’s running the department? Me or your folks? Please decide so that I know what I’m doing.”

 

Personnel Decisions

The next secretary is also going to be faced with trying to fill more than a dozen open senior leadership positions within the department. These are not positions that are easy to fill, and you can’t necessarily go to USAJobs.gov or Monster.com, post a job profile and find the perfect match. People taking these posts are taking on some of the most sensitive positions in government, which require a 24-7, 7-day a week attitude, and for not a lot of pay when compared to the private sector. The next DHS Secretary needs to establish action teams for each of these open positions to identify the best persons, either career government service or outside government, to fill these spots. By putting these teams on firm 60-day turnarounds, they will declare to the components, the Congress and other stakeholders that the “acting” days are over. Additionally those in “acting” positions that are serving in those open positions should be paid as such and not at their present lower rate.

The present turnover rate of leaders and other DHS personnel in critical positions is unhealthy and should be of concern to all of us. Finding the people to fill those posts is not easy, but it needs to be a priority over just allowing the deputies to carry the water up the hill while a spot remains vacant. Band-Aid approaches to personnel and leadership needs are not sufficient to meet to the requirements and responsibilities that must to be addressed.

 

Hands on with Cybersecurity

It goes without saying that after the recent revelations offered by NSA turncoat and recent Russian émigré Edward Snowden, the American public is a bit concerned about the role of the NSA in monitoring emails, phone calls or any other correspondence. Despite those concerns, the truth is there is no one with more talent, experience or dedicated personnel in dealing with cyber issues than the NSA. It’s one of the reasons that a number of its personnel are on loan to DHS to support its assigned cyber efforts. They also have better hiring authorities and mechanisms by which to bring in talent to do the jobs that need to be done to safeguard our nation’s critical infrastructure.

DHS under Napolitano has aggressively campaigned for and received a number of notable roles and responsibilities in cybersecurity, but in terms of keeping top talent in the top DHS cybersecurity positions, it’s been a hard sell. The turnover rate in leadership spots and across the board in operational areas is pretty stunning. If DHS is going to be taken seriously in cyber and build up its capacities in this core functional area, the new secretary is going to have find some top talent that will stay in place for a respectable period of time so as to put bone and muscle in place for its cyber body to be fully stood up and functional.  Otherwise it will have to continue to “outsource” these duties to the NSA and other governmental agencies that have the talent in place to do the job.

So what’s on your wish list for the next DHS Secretary?