The recent upheaval at the Technology Transformation Services (TTS), a division within the General Services Administration (GSA), has sparked concern and confusion amongst its employees, echoing a similar scenario from Elon Musk’s early days at Twitter. Current TTS director, David Shedd, mandated individual meetings with staff, ostensibly to discuss their monthly accomplishments and progress towards goals, a practice reminiscent of Musk’s demand for one-page progress reports. However, the execution of these meetings diverged dramatically from expectations, fueling anxiety and raising questions about transparency and security protocols within the agency.
Instead of meeting with Shedd directly, TTS employees were confronted with unfamiliar individuals who appeared unprepared for the discussions. These unidentified participants reportedly lacked access to the pre-submitted progress reports, leaving employees struggling to articulate their work without the supporting documentation they had prepared. This disconnect created a sense of bewilderment and frustration among the staff, who openly voiced their concerns about the opaque nature of these meetings on internal Slack channels. The ambiguity surrounding the identities and roles of these individuals further compounded the unease.
Shedd subsequently addressed the growing discontent in a Slack message, acknowledging the confusion caused by the vague meeting invitations and the presence of unnamed individuals. He attributed the anonymity to their ongoing onboarding process, claiming they were still awaiting government-issued laptops and identification cards. Shedd claimed personal responsibility for their actions and instructed them to identify themselves by their first names and as advisors to him. He assured staff that these individuals were vetted and physically present with him at GSA headquarters, having been badged into the building. This explanation, however, indirectly confirmed that these participants lacked official government credentials, raising further questions about their clearance and the appropriateness of their involvement in sensitive discussions.
The ambiguous identities and apparent lack of proper credentials for these “advisors” prompted speculation and concern within TTS. Sources indicate that at least two of these individuals were identified as college students seemingly granted unusually high A-suite clearances, typically associated with the GSA administrator’s office. One account detailed a review meeting involving Edward Coristine, a recent high school graduate with a brief tenure at Musk’s Neuralink, who was reportedly working at the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and reporting directly to its new chief of staff, Amanda Scales, another former employee of Musk’s xAI. These connections to Musk’s companies fueled further speculation about the influence and intentions behind these personnel choices.
The GSA has offered minimal clarification, stating that they had no further personnel announcements at this time, leaving many questions unanswered. The opacity surrounding these new additions to the TTS team, combined with the unusual meeting format, has created a climate of uncertainty and distrust within the agency. The request for detailed technical achievements also raised concerns about potential breaches of sensitivity agreements, given that TTS projects often involve inter-agency collaboration and access to sensitive data from external sources.
Shedd attempted to allay these fears, assuring employees that they should adhere to existing protocols regarding sensitive information. He framed the meetings as an opportunity to “brag” about their accomplishments and problem-solving skills. However, the lack of transparency surrounding the participants and their purpose within TTS undermined this message, leaving employees apprehensive about sharing sensitive information with individuals whose roles and clearances remained unclear. The situation underscores a broader concern about potential changes in agency culture and operational practices under new leadership, potentially mirroring the disruptive and often contentious management style associated with Elon Musk. This incident leaves lingering questions about the future direction of TTS, its relationship with other government agencies, and the security of sensitive information within its purview.
