i felt we had a lot of flexibility to assemble the team that we needed but the thing about hiring is hard to get right when i came there was a percent of the leadership debris either vacant or coming vacant so with that many people are hired at the same time that is the enormous undertaking such to have that flexibility is hard to say you are not good for the team but that flexibility. >> i will be skeptical. >> i have not observed

walking back if you had these 15 positions to fill you with across the world to try to recruit them. my observation is in the federal government whitehouse personnel office do not say have the assistant secretary position >> and those who want to be in those positions we have to pick among the people who want to serve the you are not able to serve but i was

not hampered by the administration but who wants to come into government or the of limitations of that. or through the confirmation. >> to be cast as wide a net as we reykjavik and as we should crack. >> we should cast a wider net to the mind experience was similar. with the of whitehouse adopted it is great job to screen candidates given me a lot to look at following my guidance or thought would be effective if i need somebody with these skills but i think that the mechanism to

find people is just different. >> why does it have to be quick. >> taking the positions are different. >> we didn't always find our candidates through the list that we were given through the office of presidential personnel. we were looking obviously ultimately if you found somebody to go into a position they had to have this same screening and vetting process but i found one of the greatest assets one of the people that were working with us they may know people so we were trying you dating trying to figure out the skill sets and two months to come and serve.

definitely we don't have the world to choose from but we have the people who are trying to attract the best and that our available. >> i felt like i azov candidates faster than the private sector because the list comes through p. p.o. is where these people worked on campaigns and needed a general counsel and he was the senior attorney at large financial-services firm. he understood the issues. and i could hire people that i had experience with in the private sector. if they're open to look added dual so please let them my had no problem with that.

>> when you got your agencies did you find a word top notch or uneven? >> i thought they were under even across the board is extremely knowledgeable in the areaand across the board resources. but i will tell you that some of the most remarkable things were because people at those levels had an idea and a passion and we could not down the walls to support them to do that. i served the last year of the bush presidency of the

four major public housing developments were raised in the rebuilding of follows looked impossible with funding and tax credit pair programs for:and had money was other places we were looking at vacantly and aunt no way to get there. she said i can see how to get those out of the ground so we worked with her and other federal agencies and supporter her and got to love those ground broken and the next industry shinkin in working with the new secretary he was terrific when recanted over to him it was an 80% more like 20 percent but he figured it

out and nine months later and said they broke ground because of a career civil servant had a vision in we just supported her in the right way. now they are beautiful. >> what was of an even but. >> there were good ones and they could do great things quick. >> it was more how to make the program better if only it could get sponsorship for the agency. as a leader that is gold. other ad that they rent their positional long time and could have done better but it is tough leadership changes, mandate changes, it is hard to get things done

if you are a couple of levels down. and also something would devise everybody other than with policy issues for gadabout the political career divide. i really would put career people if i thought they were more competent it was healthier for the organization and because we're done. >> i found the following situation the organization was under lead and under directed. one of the biggest challenges in is i walked in and ended with secretary what your priorities as opposed to stepping back and looking at the organization redo everything from weather service said patent and

trademarks or national institute of technology or telecommunications. we have a broad, ray of things that we do och -- self-service is we provide what do you mean? the question was what should be organization be focused on an? so we tuck the senior career people and came together think there were seven u.s. to put a strategic plan for the department based on five pillars of trade and innovation climate intelligence and organizational excellence. and there were three 1/4 things under each of those

that we would focus on trying to accomplish. it wasn't your career or your political we had a career jobs and people and they were mixup into helping people develop and to giving a good set of directions but they were developed to gather then the point of view was my job as secretary is to support you to execute against the strategic plan you have developed. that helped us organization to understand what we try to accomplish but what is the secretary's job? to help break the logjam where nobody else can do that.

mother capital hill or the business community or the administration or interagency challenge yet to help us accomplish the objectives that were consistent with what the president announced. so that kind of transparency helped to inform where we are focused and how the various agencies to find what they are doing on a day-to-day basis then we would revise that 18 months later and update the plan to be more reflective of what we learned today think that

has been a great tool with the idea of the secretary agenda and the department over here which is one piece of a vice was given just the over here at the tehran it and go do what you want to do and that is crazy. that is why i think the leadership that you need and want that we face the challenges like cybersecurity they will be held accountable for the basic management or the websites if they break down if it is not happening there could be serious consequences up to the top. we've made it no-fault.

but what you got were more resources in more support in what i made clear to make the secretary of unhappy is to read as what is going wrong in the newspaper with our ability to try to address the head of the problem. problems have been in any organization view won a leader so that is the way we try to manage. >> but what we have heard

running like a business. >> but those dictators? >> economic decisions. and then you have a leader coming what is your plan? would assure agenda? the issue in is a massive work-force with great ideas that also tells you the organization is well after the election to engage and carry that forward they believe the men it is clear. . .