Motivated by concern that the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) will have difficulty recruiting and retaining civilian talent for the U.S. Space Force, the authors compared DoD and private-sector monetary and nonmonetary compensation. They focused on workforces with high-value skill sets: aerospace engineering and four defense acquisition workforces — business and financial management, program management, procurement, and engineering and science.

Monetary and Nonmonetary Compensation for High-Value U.S. Department of Defense Civilian Skill Sets

Molly F. McIntosh, Patricia K. Tong, Hannah Acheson-Field, Noah Johnson, Norah Griffin, Joshua Russell-Fritch

ResearchPublished Nov 16, 2020

Manning the U.S. Space Force, which was established in the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act, will require civilians with high-value skill sets. To ensure that it can attract and retain civilian talent for the Space Force, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) needs to understand how DoD civilian compensation compares with that in the private sector. In this report, the authors compare monetary and nonmonetary compensation between the DoD civilian and private sectors, focusing on workforces with high-value skill sets: aerospace engineering and four defense acquisition workforces — business and financial management, program management, procurement, and engineering and science.

The authors found that predicted average income among DoD civilians is competitive with or exceeds that in the private sector for three defense acquisition workforces: business and financial management, procurement, and engineering and science. However, DoD civilians in aerospace engineering or defense acquisition program management are predicted to earn less than private-sector workers. The authors also found that DoD civilians with less than a bachelor's degree generally earn more than their private-sector counterparts, whereas DoD civilians with a master's degree or more typically earn less than private-sector workers. Moreover, the authors found that predicted average income among DoD civilians covered by demonstration projects is in line with or even higher than that in the private sector, while the opposite is true for other pay plans, including the standard General Schedule (GS) system. Finally, the authors found that the federal government provides more-generous benefits in some cases and less-generous benefits in others.

Key Findings

DoD civilian income is competitive with or exceeds that in the private sector for three of the defense acquisition workforces: business and financial management, procurement, and engineering and science

  • For the other two workforces examined — aerospace engineering and defense acquisition program management — DoD falls short of the private sector.
  • Income among DoD civilians with less than a bachelor's degree generally exceeds that of their private-sector counterparts, but the opposite is true for those with a master's degree or more.
  • Income among DoD civilians covered by demonstration projects is in line with or even higher than that in the private sector, while income among individuals covered by other pay plans, including the GS system, is lower than in the private sector.
  • There is evidence that results vary by locality, but more research is warranted.

The federal government provides more-generous benefits in some cases and less-generous benefits in others

  • Survey data show that public-sector workers have less influence over their working arrangements and are less likely to take vacations than private-sector workers.
  • Employer case studies suggest that private-sector employers provide more-generous childcare and eldercare subsidies and certain health-related benefits, while the government provides more-generous education-related benefits and availability of life insurance.
  • Importantly, the government provides both defined-contribution and defined-benefit retirement programs, while private employers offer only defined-contribution plans; this benefit is the main reason why total compensation provided by the government exceeds that in the private sector.

Recommendations

  • DoD should investigate the merits of expanding the use of demonstration projects as a means to make DoD civilian compensation more competitive.
  • Researchers should explore using existing hiring and compensation authorities to recruit and retain DoD civilians with high-value skill sets.
  • Researchers should further investigate differences in monetary compensation at the local level.
  • Researchers should conduct studies to empirically demonstrate the extent to which recruiting and retaining DoD civilians with high-value skill sets is a problem.

Topics

Document Details

Citation

RAND Style Manual
McIntosh, Molly F., Patricia K. Tong, Hannah Acheson-Field, Noah Johnson, Norah Griffin, and Joshua Russell-Fritch, Monetary and Nonmonetary Compensation for High-Value U.S. Department of Defense Civilian Skill Sets, RAND Corporation, RR-A385-1, 2020. As of October 10, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA385-1.html
Chicago Manual of Style
McIntosh, Molly F., Patricia K. Tong, Hannah Acheson-Field, Noah Johnson, Norah Griffin, and Joshua Russell-Fritch, Monetary and Nonmonetary Compensation for High-Value U.S. Department of Defense Civilian Skill Sets. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2020. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA385-1.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

This research was sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, Economic and Manpower Analysis Division and conducted within the Forces and Resources Policy Center of the RAND National Security Research Division (NSRD).

This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.