Reform of Australian Government Administration
An aspiration for the Australian public service: share your thoughts (21-23 October)
The discussion paper Reform of Australian Government Administration: Building the best public service in the world argues, in Chapter 3, that a defining characteristic of high performing organisations is a clear vision for the future. It suggests that Australia’s public service can aspire to be the best public service in the world.
A statement of aspiration could embed concepts of unity, excellence and a citizen-centred approach. A possible aspiration was included in the discussion paper:
To be the best public service in the world, unified in pursuing excellence and putting Australia and Australians at the centre of everything we do
We are interested in your views on whether a statement of aspiration would be useful for the Australian public service and, if so, whether you consider the above aspiration appropriate.
Questions for discussion
What should the aspiration be for the public service?
Do you consider the following aspiration appropriate ‘.... to be the best public service in the world, unified in pursuing excellence and putting Australia and Australians at the centre of everything we do’?
There has been some very good discussion in this forum, but ultimately no general agreement. I would suggest that it is too early in the consultation process to discuss and agree the aspiration statement (if indeed one is needed at all), and that this should be done later when there is greater clarity and agreement about the APS's future purpose and objectives.
Yesterday (Thursday 22 October) one of our foremost federal government administrators, Dr Ken Henry (Secretary to the Treasury), gave a significant speech to the Business Leaders Forum at Queensland University of Technology.
In the speech he outlined how in the next few decades "the Australian economy will undergo a set of structural changes more profound than anything in its history.", and that "Just how those structural changes play out depends critically on the quality of the policy settings and decisions taken today."
The text of the speech is available on the Treasury website, and I would recommend that anyone considering what the future purpose, objectives and aspirations of the APS might be should read it with great interest, noting that Dr Henry is a member of the RAGA Advisory Group.
All too often there are 'mission statements' and 'value statements' and aspirations that quite frankly just sound like insincere rhetoric. To be the best in the world is unachievable as a coninuing target. Everyone at times reaches the top before slipping and so on, whether we are talking about cricket teams or organisations. I would rather see something meaningful. To be the 'best in the world' says little. Best at what? I would rather see something about being ethical, being humanitarian, trustworthy etc. How we would expect to be treated should inform what type of public service we wish to achieve. Considering the issues that the APS has in recent years had to manage, immigration for example, then these things will point to where we need to improve. Strive to be the best we can be, and let the rest of the world look after itself. To be comparing ourselves to the rest of the world is to take our focus away from ourselves. To state we want to be the best in the world is to ignore cultural diversity, other people's values, and assume a bland MacDonaldisation of the public sector everywhere. Yes we ought to be for Australia and Australians, which is the best exemplar we can be. We need to have a realistic, achievable and meaningful statement that will stand us in good stead for a long time.
I believe an aspiration is an excellent idea, but consider the proposal in the discussion paper inappropriate. It is too overarching and has the mark of "government", too easily criticised as being simply rhetoric and lacking substance and tangibles. As a public servant, I believe we need to move towards a closer relationship with the Australian public by engendering respect and relevance. We also need to show Australians that the APS is using their money well and provides real benefits to them.
In this context, therefore, I agree with an aspiration similar to that suggested by Lawchan - the word "service delivery" is a good one. The aspiration should be outcome focussed and use "achieving" instead of "pursuing", and be something that public servants can easily identify with. It should also be simple and to the point.
I propose: "A Public Service which prides itself on achieving excellence in public policy making and service delivery for all Australians."
I think public servants would like to be proud of the work they do.
The purpose of an aspiration to me is to strike a chord with as many people as it can to make them want to achieve something. It is at this stage where things should be exciting!
Even if there is no such competition and measure for ‘best public service in the world’, it is a motivating phrase for a broad cross-section of the community. So that part in the proposed aspiration gets a tick. However, the remainder is not so invigorating and readily applicable, with the third part being more operational in nature.
An alternative could be “To be the best public service in the world, working together to help make the lives of all Australians better and better.”
The repetition at the end is useful because it says to APS members to not rest what you have achieved or do but to keep working in that direction.
The scope of the five proposed characteristics is fine. However, one suggestion is to replace ‘the citizen’ with ‘people’ in the third characteristic. ‘Citizen’ is an individualist term and a fashionable philosophy. Whereas, it can often be useful to consider public policy as being targeted at both individuals and groups, i.e. people.
I agree. The aspiration of the Public Service MUST be to serve the public. We need to refocus from having the Minister and Parliament as our primary stakeholders back to the Australian public as our primary stakeholder. How about something like supporting the government and parliament to provide the services that Australians want when and where they need them. (achieving this will drive effective consultation)
One of the most effective ways to find gaps in services is for people from all levels of society to be employed in the APS. With the constant removal of lower level positions and outsourcing of most manual positions, the APS is no longer reflective of the Australian population and in fact now mostly only reflects middle class views. The concentration of higher level (policy and decision making) positions in Canberra also negatively contributes to a policy/service disconnect.
'...a defining characteristic of high performing organisations is a clear vision for the future.'
What this is about is that if you do not have a target, you can't aim for it, and you probably won't hit it.
A fundamental of performance management (be it an individual or large organisation) is to provide a clear, in-focus target. A target which may be interpreted in a variety of ways is not clear or in focus.
For example, the word 'respect' is variously used in the public service to demand obedience and silence, and to treat people with care and consideration.
Such words, and unclear targets, are dangerous. They can be misused.
Regarding managers, such people should not be discussed until such time as 'management' has been adequately defined. Currently the APS has many people who would describe themselves as managers simply because they have authority to direct staff. That again is a dangerous way to use words, and such words create realities for people - if you are called a manager because of what you do, your reality is that that is what a manager is.
A more appropriate aspiration is one which is the pinnacle of a real strategy. You can't have a strategy and then make an inspirational statement which is not a part of it. They would be competing.
Aspriational statement is fine. The five characteristics however may need some refining or at least there must be mention of the core role that a qualfied and professional cadre of managers (at all levels) will have on the APS. This is becasue everything the APS aspires to will be possible only where the cadre of managers is highly capable. At the moment the statement is somewhat silent on this.
A statement of aspiration on its own has absolutely no value - it must be backed up with practical actions and changes to the status quo.
If it is felt that the APS does not have a unified goal or direction, this statement will not solve that. That is a problem that needs to be solved through greater consistency in government (political) policies and the consequent strategic directions of every agency and business unit.
If it is felt that the APS does not strive for excellence (or in normal-person-speak, "to do its job very well"), then this is a failure of the APS as an organisation. Tangible and appropriate goals, appropriate resourcing and employee buy-in will help deliver this - not a one-line platitude.
If it is felt that the APS is not suitably citizen-centric, then again we need to look at our policies and strategies and determine where, in the reality of our daily work, we are going away from this focus. Citizen-centricity should be so inherent in public service that it goes without saying.
I realise that the above makes me sounds like a complete grump, but I'm actually quite a believer in the good work that the public sector can (and does) do. It's just that we seem to have a lot of mission statements, 'statements of purpose' and the like which are all equally useless - statements that are either so obvious or so vague (or both!) that they don't actually help to improve anything we're doing poorly. This seems to be yet another addition to that pile.
The APS needs practical support to make practical improvements. Get that right and you won't need to worry about glossing over things with catchy slogans.
I agree with some of the comments above and have not been in the service for 2 years yet.
I believe that the Australian Public Service should aspire to be innovative, relevant, adaptable, responsive, efficient and effective by working collaboratively with all parts of the APS to deliver the policy of the day and serve the Australian community’s needs.
I know its a sentence full of "catch-words", sorry about that but I think that these can be measured and are achievable.
To achieve this, we as the APS need to provide a challenging, rewarding and supportive environment that delivers equity in opportunity, encourages participation, honesty and integrity to retain quality staff, learn openly from mistakes and share information across the service to truly be one APS.
Personally I am not worried about being the best public service in the world, I would rather be part of delivering the best service to the Australian community, ensuring a sustainable economic environment that values culture and the earthly environment. As mentioned in one of the other posts, it really isn't a measurable aspiration to be the best in the world and very hard to even define.
One last comment would be that perhaps putting Australia and Australians at the centre of everything we do may also have some conflict from time to time. Is what's best for the country always what’s best for its people? Climate change could be an example where there are long term issues that effect the country and the short term economic impacts to the people (yes I realise the symbiotic relationship but just focusing on the economic v environment).
I agree that it's a **public** service, not a government service, so enshrining some form of commitment to building a better Australia seems far more valuable than empty posturing about being "world's best" or "excellent". The measures should simply be, "is this helping?" (Australians) and "can we do this better?".
"A statement of aspiration could embed concepts of unity, excellence and a citizen-centred approach"
Might I suggest this is a tad naive and represents a lack of awareness about what is currently in place in the APS? there are already APS Values along with departmental/agency specific values which are not dissimilar to what you are suggesting. For example, see the Department of House of Representatives Key Values reproduced below:
Our Key Values
In providing you with information and services we will:
demonstrate high ethical standards;
be professional, impartial and non-partisan;
be open, honest and helpful;
be responsive to your requests;
treat you with respect and fairness; and
treat any complaints seriously and respond to them.
I daresay that the vast majority of APS employees would not even be able to tell you ONE of their departmental/agency values or the APS values, let alone demonstrate how these inform their everyday working life.
Regarding your proposed statement of aspiration I think it too would be as useless a tool at improving the public service as the abovementioned values. We need to stop talking about mission statements and come up with real solutions.
That is all.
Like Polonius I also think the aspiration 'to be the best public service in the world' is vacuous and practically meaningless. I think a better aspiration would be more realistic and be focussed outwards - ie towards the public and the government of the day - not inwards like a self-development goal. We're here to help aren't we not to just 'be'? So I'd rather subscribe to something like 'helping the people of Australia and the government of the day achieve their goals for a better Australia'. Or something.
I mean, what are we REALLY here for? Governments make policies, we carry them out. Given the parameters set by government and the community, we try to do this as best we can, with what they used to call 'efficiency and effectiveness'. Given that, I quite like the suggestion "A public service unified to achieved excellence in public policy making and service delivery, contributing to an Australia that we can all proud of". - A bit clumsy, but others can work on and improve'. It's a bit long, but it says it. Except, of course, if you disagree with the government's policies you're not going to be contributing to an Australia 'we can all be proud of' - that's more of a value judgement, which we're not in a position to make, being mere apparatchiks.
I don't know how many public services there are in the world, but I'd guess 200 or so.
Each one might say it aims to be the best. It's just vacuous posturing.
What the public service needs is to think about what the public would consider to be a quality public service. That should then be clearly articulated in a form which can be measured either qaulitatively or quantitatively. If politicians are going to make the decision on what a good public service is, and that is likely, then they should follow the same course.
If the public service is asked to define what a great public service is, it's likely to be the self service.
‘.... to be the best public service in the world, unified in pursuing excellence and putting Australia and Australians at the centre of everything we do’?
I think the key thing to think about with the above aspiration is what do we mean by pursuing excellence? What is excellence and how to we define it? Who decides what it is? Should this be the Minister or the Secretary or at lower levels in an agency?
Different people would have different views, but the aspiration should not be too specific. I think the aspiration should be sufficently general to have bipartisan support. This way it can remain appropriate for the public service no matter who is the government of the day.
The aspiration for the public service should be for EACH individual public servant to understand that everything they do, makes a difference, either positive or negative to a fellow human life.
The inevitable ripple effect of our actions, both within our work environment and for our clients and stakeholders. In our ambition to deliver to Government, to attain our career goals we need to take RESPONSIBILITY for the decisions we make and UNDERSTAND their effects. How many times has the most 'cost effective' solution, ended up costing so much more in both economic and human terms?
We need to see examples of integrity in ALL our Leaders, this includes Government.
More sincerity and less politics.
UNIFIED
Putting Australia and Australians (ALL Australians) at the centre of everything we do. YES
Being the best is an admirable goal, however is the competitive spirit appropriate? Could we focus on CARING about WHAT we do and HOW we do it, and getting it RIGHT.
I think the aspiration for the public service should be something like:
"Creating a better Australia."
It may sound simple (and I'm no copywriter!), but it gives the public something to which they can broadly hold the public service accountable.
It might also help public servants focus their priorities. For example, 'If the work you are doing is not in some way creating a better Australia, why are you doing it? Is there a better way?'
The suggested aspiration '... to be the best public service in the world ...’ sounds reasonable enough, although I prefer something that rolls of the tongue a bit better.
However, I would change 'pursuing' to 'achieving'. I would also remove 'and Australians' because it's not just Australians who receive services from the APS. For example, visa holders, foreign tourists, permanent residents and importers of Australian goods and services.
One further point - the discussion paper seems to be focused on APS policy formulation and advice, possibly at the expense of APS service delivery. Yet there can often be distortions between each of the following:
* Government > Policy design > Service delivery > Public > Government
So I believe there should be a greater focus on minimising the gap between policy formulation and the service received by the public. Another aspiration? "Minding the gap." (Again, I'm no copywriter!)
I think it's worth acknowledging that it's very hard to find a one size fits all solution because the roles of public servants vary massively. But the discussion paper does a good job of identifying many of the issues faced by the APS.
The public service should aspire to serve the public, not themselves nor their careers. For me, a public service that encourages me to contribute to a better society, is really something to aspire to.
We need to get back to basics and remind our public servants that we administer services and programs for the community. We should be looking for innovative ways to improve those services and programs. We should be searching for gaps in our services and programs and finding solutions.
This commitment to the Australian community has to come from the top down, from our most senior public servants who need to stress that our role is not to spend all our energies in getting the next promotion but to provide a service that benefits the community. Even if we are in a regulatory role, we don’t need to adopt a heavy handed approach but more of a compassionate consultative approach.
I find the first part of the suggested aspiration ‘to be the best public service in the world, unified in pursuing excellence’ a bit of a nonsense. It is empty rhetoric. How can it be measured? What is ‘best’? Is it the largest? The most efficient? How do you measure efficiency? How do you measure excellence? By whose standards? How can you measure against all other public services in the world? Every country is different - it’s measuring apples and oranges.
However, I don’t mind ‘putting the Australian community at the centre of everything we do’. I’ve only been in the public service for a few years, after 30 years in private enterprise. I’m disappointed that many of my colleagues are only interested in their own conditions (which are unbelievably generous) and not in the work they do.
I strongly support these views.
- the suggested aspiration is largely meaningless - how would it be meaningfully measured - how would public servants relate it to their daily work?
- there is a great need to restore the concept of 'public service' in the full meaning of those words
- do we need a formal statement of aspiration for the APS - what practical purpose does it serve?
I support your comments regarding comparing other public services. We should be matured enough as a nation to set our own yardsticks rather than comparing ourselves to others, thus unnecessarily limiting ourselves.
A suggested aspiration can be along the lines of "A public service unified to achieved excellence in public policy making and service delivery, contributing to an Australia that we can all proud of". - A bit clumsy, but others can work on and improve.
Dear all,
As a current APS employee, and have been for over 2 years now - a far flung duration from some other posters with 30+ years service - I think the number one lacking characteristic of my agency and possibly other agenices is staff turnover rates and therefore there is a serious concern retaining quality employees. To this extent, our new award bargaining process has seen a new clause enter the proposed agreement which stipulates the XYZ is committed to hiring and retaining high quality staff!
Because of this, I feel there nees to be an aspiration for the APS to undertake new pathways programs for current and prospective employees so as to establish a career path rather than a job.
The five characteristics mentioned in the discussion paper, albeit more imperative in a grand sense, fails to address the concerns of public servants.
With this said, however, I do agree with the quasi-creed mentioned on page 11 and it would be beneficial for the 5 suggestions to be somehow entrenched in the APS Code and APS Values system?
Since I am the first one to post for this topic, I will leave some of my thoughts for later discussion and I look forward to some productive posts :)
This forum is now open for comment on the questions above. Please feel free to login or register to comment or simply return to this page over the next 3 days to follow the discussion.