Who Will Lead? The Federal Executive Crisis No One Talks About

August 21, 2025

Subscribe and listen to the Fed Gov Today Podcast anytime on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or at FedGovToday.com.

Ron Sanders, former Associate Director at the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and long-time federal human capital leader, is clear about what today’s Senior Executive Service (SES) needs most: peers, mentors, and training that reflects the unique realities of serving the American people.

Sanders explains that federal executives are “dying out there” because they have no one to turn to. Many SES leaders, whether they’ve been in the role for three years or ten, lack peers inside their agencies and struggle with the isolation that comes with senior leadership. He argues that OPM’s new executive development programs are beginning to address that gap—and, for once, they are focused on what’s “inherently governmental.”

Sanders recalls that in the 1990s, he and other senior career officials questioned the value of sending executives to the Federal Executive Institute (FEI). Too often, he says, FEI emphasized generic leadership competencies—skills that anyone could find in private-sector training or university programs. “You could buy generic leadership stuff on the open market,” he notes. What you could not buy was guidance on what it truly means to be a senior civil servant in the American government.

That’s where Sanders sees progress today. OPM’s new offerings, including the Leadership for an Efficient and Accountable Government (LEAG) program, appear to emphasize the U.S. Constitution, federal law, and the unique source of authority that civil servants hold. Unlike private-sector leaders, he points out, federal executives derive their power from Congress and the people. “They have to act accordingly,” he says.

For Sanders, the most appealing element of the LEAG program is its promise to help executives build a “powerful professional network.” He stresses that SES leaders need connections across agencies, not just within their own organizations. Those networks, he argues, can provide objective advice and much-needed camaraderie when leaders face difficult challenges. Without them, executives remain isolated, with no one who truly understands their role.

He adds that OPM should focus especially on mid-career SES members who are already in leadership roles but lack support. If they find value in these programs, he believes, aspiring executives will follow.

Sanders acknowledges skepticism about some of OPM’s other initiatives, such as video-based training. He warns that leadership programs must emphasize practical skills—implementation, execution, and turning lessons into action. Otherwise, participants may walk away inspired but unprepared to apply what they’ve learned.

When asked about the Trump administration’s decision to eliminate FEI, Sanders says he supports much of OPM’s current direction but believes shutting FEI down entirely was unnecessary. He worries that OPM may still compete with private universities for generic leadership training, when instead it should double down on its unique role: preparing federal executives to serve within the constitutional framework of American government.

Sanders argues, federal leadership development should not be about creating generic managers. It should be about equipping civil servants with the tools, perspective, and networks they need to uphold the Constitution and work across government to get the mission done.