USA 
United Kingdom
Elon Musk’s controversial attempt to have all federal workers list five accomplishments each week has stuttered and faltered, thanks in part to top government HR officers who refused to strictly enforce the policy.
According to a report from The Washington Post, citing federal records and anonymous staffers from across government, Musk’s ill-fated directive is slowly but surely losing traction.
Officials from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and Chief Human Capital Officers from several government departments reportedly refused to comply with the order from the get-go.
Musk, whose directive was sent to all federal staff on February 22, is preparing for an exit from his role as ‘special government employee’ in May.
How did Musk’s ‘five accomplishments’ email order play out?
February’s directive sparked chaos and confusion across federal government.
Announcing the policy on X, Musk warned that all federal employees would “shortly receive an email requesting to understand what they got done last week,” in line with instructions from President Trump. “Failure to respond will be taken as a resignation,” he asserted.
Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has relentlessly and aggressively pursued attempts to downsize government departments and cut spending.
Federal employees were subsequently sent a short but emphatic email by OPM, the government’s HR agency: “Please reply to this email with approx. 5 bullets of what you accomplished last week and cc your manager.”
AI in Hiring: Trends, Insights and Predictions
As AI revolutionizes the recruitment life cycle at warp speed, HR leaders must stay informed about AI’s advantages and its current shortcomings.
How can we adopt these tools to stay competitive and efficient while retaining the human touch that remains critical to optimizing candidate experience, making informed decisions, and, ultimately, building strong teams and cultures?
That is our industry’s biggest challenge as we navigate this new terrain. We hope these insights, tips, and predictions will help drive innovation and excellence in your hiring practice.
But while Musk called his mandate a “very basic pulse check” needed to ensure an efficient and accountable federal workforce, the policy has been inconsistently applied within and between government departments.
OPM’s email stated: “Agencies will determine any next steps.” The point of discretion was confirmed by the White House, with Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt explaining that Cabinet secretaries had been “entrusted to pursue the guidance relative to their specific workforce.”
Indeed, that is exactly what happened. Chaos and inconsistency ensued in the days and weeks following Musk’s order, as some agency bosses ordered employees to comply, while others resisted the order and told employees that no action would be required. Meanwhile unions and lawmakers – both Republican and Democrat – questioned the legality of the order.
Some departments have adjusted their compliance with the order over time. While a small handful of government agencies continue to mandate the policy, many others have dropped requirements or are no longer tracking responses in any meaningful way, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
According to emails cited by The Post, a weekly accomplishments email is now “encouraged, but optional” at EPA, and has been scrapped entirely at the NIH because the department “manages its own performance review processes and will notify employees directly if any information related to work duties or performance is needed.”
A spokesperson for the White House declined The Post’s request for the number of agencies still requiring weekly updates.
How did HR officials shape the outcome of Musk’s ‘pulse’ directive?
Documents revealed by The Post appear to show that key HR officials across government have played a key role in shaping the increasingly lax adherence to Musk’s directive.
Two days after the initial memo, HR officers across governments were sent an email by OPM contradicting Musk. The government’s HR agency confirmed that listing accomplishments was voluntary and noncompliance would not be taken as a resignation, according to The Post.
Moreover, OPM reportedly did not plan to act on any information contained within employee submissions, with no central strategy in place for handling responses from federal workers.
The email summarized notes from a meeting between OPM and chief human capital officers from agencies across federal government, during which Musk’s “weekend email” was the top agenda item.
According to the summary, some agencies were still considering making it a weekly requirement for staff to list accomplishments. OPM, meanwhile, had no clear insight on how the responses would be acted on.
“What will be done with the information that staff have provided?” one attendee asked, the note stated. It continued: “OPM’s response — No plans.”
Ignore, Ctrl+V, ChatGPT: How fed staff are coping the inconsistent policy
Some agencies, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission and OPM itself, are still asking staff to complete a weekly email update of their accomplishments.
Chuck Ezell, Acting Director of OPM, sent a reminder to staff in March, noting that emails would be “aggregated and shared with Associate Directors and Office Heads… and will be used to track progress, make course corrections, and celebrate accomplishments.”
Moreover, one employee told The Post that a department staffer had been disciplined for sending an email that profanities rather than project achievements.
However, in many departments, employees have taken advantage of the confusion, chaos, and lax enforcement of the mandate.
It is not uncommon for federal staffers to respond with the same, barely modified responses each week, or even to fudge responses with replies written in foreign languages.
An employee at the Department of Defense, for example, said that agency bosses are still reminding staff to send weekly updates; however, with individual responses reportedly summarized into broader reports as the update moves up the chain of command, most employees copy and paste last week’s update with minimal changes.
“I don’t know anyone who’s manually creating a new response each week,” they said.
The Post also heard from a staffer at the US Department of Agriculture, who said department leadership have given mixed messages over time. Employees were first told not to reply to the memo, before being advised to consider responding, and then ultimately that they should provide a weekly update and forward it to their manager.
However, the staffer said USDA leadership never called the accomplishment update mandatory, meaning he and many confused department colleagues have instead opted to respond in foreign languages such as Russian or to avoid filling out an email altogether.
“I have not sent one in at all,” the USDA staffer said, claiming he had faced no disciplinary action for failing to respond. “I don’t think I should have to justify my job to some unknown entity, especially when I’m handling private customer information.”
Other reports included similar accounts of repeated boilerplate responses and some cases of staff using generative AI tools to craft nonsensical responses.
The Post did cite one employee who said they craft a careful message each month after being warned by their bosses at the Department of Veterans Affairs that failing to do so could harm her career prospects.
Without a clear and consistent application of the policy – something near impossible across the government’s sprawling ecosystem of departments – it’s easy to see why agency bosses have been in a twist since February, and how employees have been left to figure out the best course of action for themselves.
As soon as HR officials were given the discretion to choose their own interpretation of the policy, and it was confirmed that compliance was mandatory, Musk’s memo was undermined and ultimately doomed to fail. Inconsistency and confusion were the only likely outcomes.
Unfortunately, with the controversial DOGE boss on his way out, it’s employees and managers who will pay the price, as they attempt to untangle the web of weekly reports and performance processes left in his wake.
