Reform of Australian Government Administration
Values in the public service: what do you think? (2-4 November)
There are currently 15 APS Values contained in the Public Service Act 1999.
They are that the Australian Public Service:
- is apolitical, performing its functions in an impartial and professional manner;
- is a public service in which employment decisions are based on merit;
- provides a workplace that is free from discrimination and recognises and utilises the diversity of the Australian community it serves;
- has the highest ethical standards;
- is openly accountable for its actions, within the framework of Ministerial responsibility to the Government, the Parliament and the Australian public;
- is responsive to the Government in providing frank, honest, comprehensive, accurate and timely advice and in implementing the Government's policies and programs;
- delivers services fairly, effectively, impartially and courteously to the Australian public and is sensitive to the diversity of the Australian public;
- has leadership of the highest quality;
- establishes workplace relations that value communication, consultation, co-operation and input from employees on matters that affect their workplace;
- provides a fair, flexible, safe and rewarding workplace;
- focuses on achieving results and managing performance;
- promotes equity in employment;
- provides a reasonable opportunity to all eligible members of the community to apply for APS employment;
- is a career-based service to enhance the effectiveness and cohesion of Australia's democratic system of government;
- provides a fair system of review of decisions taken in respect of employees.
The discussion paper Reform of Australian Government Administration: Building the best public service in the world, in Chapter 4, suggested that the relatively large number of Values, combined with the way they are expressed, may make them difficult to remember and apply on a day-to-day basis.
Question for discussions
Should the APS Values as contained in the Public Service Act 1999 be streamlined and simplified?
What values do you consider should be included in any revised set of values?
Reading the APS code of conduct I think to myself - where do we draw the line between our individual selves and what we are paid to do in the course of our employment?
I was disappointed to find in my PA that the APS code of Conduct had been interpreted by the people that wrote the standard proforma that I should be measured on my level of concern and repect for other people's feelings and ideas.
I'm not saying that the APS Code of Conduct is wrong, just that how are we to be measured on feelings? I don't believe any employer should have the right to control my feelings. Yes I am paid to do a job and I am proud to do it with honesty, integrity, care and diligence etc etc but I am still an individual person with real feelings serving real people with real needs in the Australian community.
I also agree there is a lot of room to simplify the current Code of Conduct (and make it more real!)- at least to assist with marketing and promotion.
The APS Values, and Code of Conduct, are often referenced as guiding principles for public servants, but unfortunately their formulation and application is not as they should be.
The APS needs some aspirational statements, from which values and codes of conduct can be straightforwardly and consistently derived. The APS Values must be structured better, to be more easily recalled and applied.
A few points on some of the APS Values.
. Can we have an apolitical APS when department heads and others are political appointments? Department heads must be able to work with Ministers, but is this consistent with an APS where employment decisions are based on merit? The perception must be that there is some political bias, although this may or may not be the case in reality.
. Ministerial advisors are not accountable. They should be, as should all who work for the government. A set of values and/or code of conduct must be all inclusive.
. We live in a society where many people choose to belong to organisations that discriminate against women and homosexuals - most particularly, and as an example, churches instil in many that women and homosexuals cannot take leadership positions in their churches. The perception must be that people who belong to such discriminatory organisations cannot suddenly be non-discriminatory, just because it is a work day and not a Sunday. The gender gap in most public service agencies derives from such discrimination, and needs to be addressed at a fundamental level. Discrimination is not acceptable in a modern Australia or APS. So while freedom from discrimination is an APS Value, its application is not as good as it should be.
. Statements such as 'the APS has the highest ethical standards' and 'leadership of the highest quality' are promotional statements. How do you measure these? We would be better served by statements that public servants can ensure that the highest ethical standards be upheld - but of course people have different ethical standards, and so these perhaps should be spelt out in another document.
. We have all heard of contentious political issues that arise because of the perception that perhaps an APS officer was not as timely or frank with their advice to a Minister as they should have been. When a promotion at the highest level is a political one, this is no surprise.
The APS Values should be used to define a framework and provide a vision for the public servant today and in the future. Context for these values, a method of ensuring their application, and evaluating this, will be a good first step in ensuring that the APS attracts and keeps high quality applicants, and works to achieve outcomes consistent with the framework provided by our Constitution and our parliamentary system.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
The APS values form a clear set of behavioral standards against which APS staff should adhere. At issue though is their consistent application and enforcement. The process of investigating "breaches" of the APS Values all to often degenerates into a quasi legal process where the accused and the accuser require legal representation. It is expensive, time consuming and confusing to all parties.
I believe the APS Values should be separated and managed as part of the performance management process at first instance. With feedback and counselling being most applicable and salary increments being withheld for more serious matters. Investigations into breaches of the APS Code of Conduct should then be reserved for most serious violations only and parties involved should be provided with legal support given the gravity of possible decisions on demotion or termination. Examples should be provided as to where performance management and conciliation should occur for failing to adhere to values as distinct from where investigations should occur for more serious offenses. At present the same process appears to apply from a minor loss of patience with a peer (disrespect) to a major violation of harassment or bullying (also disrespect?)
Also these procedures should be standardised across the APS at all levels of the APS (from APS1 to SES 3) to ensure fairness, transparency, consistency and merit based review by the Merit Protection Commissioner if requested.
The following is a true and recent scenario in a government office ( level / department name intentionally withheld/ changed to prevent identification and incrimination ). It makes one wonder if the APS values are still alive and well or have they been reduced to rubbles in this particular 'very wealthy' government office :
Lisa joined the government office as a junior non-ongoing clerk a year ago at the behest of her mother who also worked in the same office and happened to be 'best friend' of a senior supervisor. Even though Lisa had made it abundantly clear to almost everyone that she never liked the job and her interests were actually somewhere else, immediately when she turned 18 she was 'helped' to win a written test/ interview to get a permanent position earning more than $50K a year over other more qualified but older staff. Everyone smelled the rat but was too intimidated by the all-powerful supervisor to speak out. For the sake of good money, Lisa stayed on but would use up all her sickies and even no pay leaves and other excuses/leaves to be absent from work. "No worries, the supervisor is as good as my mum" , well shielded and protected, and no performance assessments were stringent enough to threaten her rock-solid position. Meanwhile the other more conscientious but older staff had to plod along and plough on just to cover her slackness while earning less. And I am telling everyone who reads this that that was a true situation with firsthand info . There is absolutely no necessity for me to make up one just to discredit the APS values as I am happy where I am where the well-meaning APS values take on a bit more real meaning.
The implementation and safeguard of APS values need support and enhancement and not the values themselves or the statement about them.
"If you wish to change the Broth, you need to change the ingredients" according to Confucius. Just stirring the ingredients in different ways will not give you a New Broth !.
This has already been posted, however ready through it again I saw some typos.
In my opinion the values are not worth the paper they are written on. For example you have APS wide values and agency specific values and behaviors (Only the APS values should be applied, therefore not creating confusion for staff). Also any values relating to equity in employment conflicts with the specific conditions and wage structures oulined in each agency Certified Agreement. I have been in the APS for over 20 years and have seen a severe decline in accountability and capacity of the APS to effectively deliver services to the Australian community. The values are applied in a way that suits the need of the top echelon in the APS. They are never applied equitably to those at the lower classification levels. The ability of the APS to operate in an apolitical manner and perform its functions in an impartial and professional manner is impeded by the lack of leadership and willingness of senior management to provide fearless and frank advice to Government. There is too much emphasis placed on achieving the political agenda of Government and very little on addressing the needs of society which often conflicts with the political agenda of Government.
The ethical standards in the APS have declined over the years. There is no transparency in decision making, there is no open discussion on either policy or program directions, discussions are held behind closed doors and those who have to do the work at the lower classification levels are excluded from the discussions. In my opinion if the Code of Conduct was applied to the letter of the law, very few senior managers would have a job, because I believe they are often in breach them because of their management and decision making practices.
The merit principles are non-existent and promotions or career opportunities are based on close working relationships and not on someone’s skills and abilities to undertake the work. Often people are chosen for positions prior to selection processes are undertaken especially for expression of interest positions.
Other aspects of the APS Values such as diversity, communication, consultation, co-operation and input from employees on matters that affect their workplace are not applied in the workplace. Diversity for example, part of the APS review should look at the number of people with ethnic backgrounds who hold senior positions in the APS. Also the majority of people who work in and hold senior positions in Indigenous Affairs come from a white Anglo-Saxon heritage. This provides an avenue for prejudice to creep into policy development and program mangement.
In my opinion the only value that should be applied in the APS is to treat people with respect and dignity.
The APS values could be simplified under various types such as ethics, discrimination, accountability, management/ leadership.
The real problem is enforcement of the values.
In my local workplace, the general consensus is that the values are a good set of values for the APS. Some suggestions to make the values more relevant in the workplace are:
- Amend the way the values and code of conduct are presented into two streams: APS Value Principles and guidelines.
- Let Agencies and Departments decide if they want to further define the guidelines for the culture of their workplace by creating 'local guidelines' in addition to the APS guidelines ie more specific and relevant to an area of work or staff.
- Include a way for values to be measured for all APS staff eg, 360 feedback, individual development plans/performance plans and staff surveys.
Changing the practical application of the values rather than the values themselves is important if we are to be a better APS.
Thank you.
The APS values are meaningful and adequate. Other than refining them a little, there is nothing wrong with them.
There is, however an issue with holding people accountable for not upholding the values. There is simply not enough follow up and disciplining of employees who do not uphold the values, at the end of the day, they are not aspirations, they are part of legislation in the Public Service Act. We all know of dodgy recruitment rounds, incompetent team leaders, bullies, managers who use performance management as a means to terminate employees through false observations, APS 1- 6 employees who don’t pull their weight, full time EL1’s and EL2’s that have special arrangements and therefore don’t work full time hours. People don’t put in complaints because of the repercussions from their agency /department. This is not inline with many of the APS values. Out sourcing the decision maker on reviews to an independent body as a primary action would potentially help with some of these issues on transparency.
I am probably a little puzzled with these nice words as the APS Values. It looks that we should adhere to them (i.e., we should act like what the values describe) but they are not really enforcable or applicable to an APS workplace. In this context for comparison, they are just not as strong in term of enforcability as the words for the Code of Conduct. If you break one of the code of conduct as a rule, you expect to be caught for punishment, right? And in practice, can I say that almost all of the values have not been seriusly followed in lots of the APS workplaces? I am not saying with a qualified assessment that all the values are not observed at a large scale and so much of widespread of doing wrongs. However, instances or disputes about the bad behaviours relating to those designated values do happen all the times and in every places. And they can't be resolved by applying to those nice written values.
In this sense, why do we need these docorating words if they are not as enforcable as the code of conduct? Just because they are face looking good for the APS workplace or workforce.
I guess we do anything with a purpose of achieving something. Can someone tell me what the code of conduct can achieve while the values can't, and vice verse, please? I am puzzled if the values are not designed to be enforceable. You can't talk to a manager saying they should follow the proper APS values to adequately appreciate your performance and work result during a PA process. He or she would just laugh saying you were nuts. And they were probably right as they had done nothing wrong in terms of the code of conduct.
How to behave at an APS place is still largely a personal matter, right? There are always people very selfish only looking after themselves and for public interest. The nice wording of the APS Vaules has not improved much of that. What else can we do in terms of the whole issue of reforming the government administration and the APS workplace?
While the APS values are reasonably clear and well defined, I've noticed that they disappear into the mist of departmental monoliths never to be seen until some unlucky (yes, I mean unlucky) individual falls foul of someone in authority. Then the values seem to reappear and then disappear again into a jumble of hastily brought disciplinary actions which, if they are examined closely, usually fail "due process" or "natural justice" and may be overturned if the individual were to get adequate counsel.
1. Rather than simplifying APS values, I feel it is necessary to develop a clear understanding of how to apply them! It may be heresy, but perhaps we should invest some real money into training employees, including middle management, on how to live and apply the values.
It seems strange that some people first hear of a problem at a disciplinary meeting. Where have managers been when the problems first start to appear? How are individuals supposed to respond when faced with matters that go back weeks or even months?
Is it right for a manager to fall back on excuses like, "I don't think I'm obliged to provide that" or "it is my decision"?
2. What the APS values need is the backing of an oversight body that can review systemic issues, including corruption, to rid departments of inbreed management practices that show no resemblance to good governance principles.
On a whole I agree that the Values and Code of Conduct are clear and specific, yet can be applied to a whole of government context and do not need a major overhaul. I don't really see a lot of value in changing the words but rather focus on their implementation and presence and in doing those things, if they require amendment then I would support that.
There does however seem to be a common theme among posters that the executive and senior executive levels of the APS are not upholding these values and when they are reported there is little being done about it. I think there would be value in a standard approach to reviewing case of breaches, the 2007-08 State of the Service report suggest that different practices by agencies influence the likelihood of finding that the Code was breached. I also think we need to work on how we manage reports that relate to bullying as the burden of proof lays with the accuser, which is difficult to produce when the attacks are verbal or behavioural.
There has also been a trend of posters commenting on the fact that tertiary qualifications are not valued in employment decisions and that somehow this is a breach of merit. I don't believe that poor leadership has any correlation with a lack of tertiary qualifications but do agree that there are poor recruitment decisions being made. Keeping in mind that we should be representative of the community we serve, I think we need to focus on what the position needs to deliver and hire the 'best person for the job' and we wouldn't want to exclude an innovative, ethical, results driven candidate for any reason.
Merit as a value has become an obscure and unclear term and should be replaced with 'the best person for the job' and to get that person we need to simplify recruitment, demystify the values and code of conduct and the process and view recruiting a person with the same level of attention you would before entering a $500,000 contract (because in essence that is what recruiters are doing).
I don't think the values need to be streamlined or simplified. It only takes a couple of minutes to read them & are succinct. They set a high standard and given that we work for all 21.7 million Australians they should be of a high standard.
Rather than putting energy into changes the values we need to ensure that our leaders are living and promtoing the values.
I believe the issue here is not that we need to change the code of conduct, it's what we should be doing about ensuring that there is transparency in the process of assessing whether staff have breached the APS Code of Conduct.
I'm sure my department is not alone in that the people dealing with these cases (let's affectionately - and rightly - call them the powers that be) conduct themselves in a manner that would warrant serious external auditing. Each time I hear about a case going to management about the APS Code of Conduct or recruitment processes it is no surprise to me that that no one gets charged, nothing gets done and these hypocrits still walk around with a smile on their faces as if they think no one knows whats going on.
My suggestion is that the following processes should be outsourced to private companies - recruitment selection, Breaches of the APS Code of Conduct, appeals and merit protection commission appeals (yes...I believe this should be taken away from the APSC as they are absolutely useless!).
My 5 cents.
One existing value is to provide a fair, flexible, safe and rewarding workplace. I am told the APS does not cover its staff on their way to or from work unlike every other Australian employer. This does not reflect fair or safe values in the whole Australian context. The APS should aspire to being leaders rather than laggards in terms of how staff are treated and valued. Therefore a new or modified value could reflect the requirement that the APS will model world's best practice in supporting and managing its people.
They need to be redefined and succinct and have accountability statements built in. I also agree with a majority of comments that management do not committ to and/or abide by these. A lot of staff in management postions EL1 through to SES have no people skills but are employed because of their qualifications. Perception is everyting, what staff are seeing is EL1 to SES not adhereing to the APS values and when they are called upon by lower staff (whistleblowers) going through the right channels, it appears to staff at the lower level that nothing has been done the person continues to go about their business, continuing the behaviours that are not appropriate. I have witness at times staff at the lower level
whisteblowing (through the correct channels) being rewarded by being 'punished' in a way that is not public, but punished for trying to address issues. There is no use having APS values that are not adhered to by all staff. Bullying will always be rampant in the Public Service because some El1 to SES will say I was "managing" i.e. I have seen managers yelling at staff, but they have got away with it by saying I was managing poor behaviour but 'yelling is poor behaviour'. It appears to most people that the lower end staff are pulled up more on APS values but the managers seem to get around them by saying they are 'managing.' I have had a lot of discussions with people who work in private enterprise and they are shocked by some of the scenarios that I have come across and say they wouldn't be able to get away with that behaviour in private enterprise. The APS values need to be modelled from the TOP down.
Value is of no value if it can't be built (or enforced) into the mind and heart of its practitioners (or at least the senoir people). And this transition won't just happen if the workplace has no process to assist the practitioners to take the mind change. Well, this may sound like to have a brain-wash exercise with those idealilised values and ethics for a good course or a workplace? But what else can we do to educate the APS workforce to take up these nice words as values into their daily practice? Reform the APS, the most difficult thing to do is to change the people. their attitude and work culture.
On the other hand, I somehow feel that the APS Values in terms of wording lose a bit of the sight to the foundmental essence of the so-called public services. That is that we are employed by the public to serve the public via the current government and its administrations. If we are always very mindful about this fact, we got to adhere to these nice words. For example, "focuses on achieving results and managing performance" won't become a joke in lots of APS places.
Many middle managers and team leaders in my observation don't really appreciate results or performances because they have very low formal qualification and never need to achieve something meaningful to others and themselves. The best thing they are doing is to have good time with senior managers in order to try their luck for promotions. Overall, it's a very personalised place with no ethical standard enforcable unless something is really bad. Therefore there are "trivial" instances where people at EL level are fraudulent with their attendance record. They can't even attend adequately, still got awarded and promoted.
Talking of APS Values, who really cares about them? Not even a manager in a performance assessment process.
The APS values are well-considered, well-expressed and coherent. It's hard to understand what advantage would be achieved by 'streamlining' or 'simplifying' them. Presumably this implies that if they were fewer or shorter they would be easier to assimilate and effect. It is unclear what words or ideas could be removed without diminishing the whole.
The most significant problem with the APS values is not their content, but their uneven application.
Those with the power to enforce the values (and the code) -- the SES and HR -- normally do not use the values as a measure their own conduct, but as a tool to control their staff when required.
Arguably the underlying value is integrity (i.e., both wholeness and wholesomeness); all other values can be derived from this. This implies honesty, consistency of action and accountability.
In the APS, the application of the values -- while universal -- should be proportional to level; in practice it is often inversely proportional. Integrity decreases with level rather than increases.
This is obvious. If CEOs, the SES and HR always acted with openness and integrity, and if they applied this standard to themselves and the people around them, then there would be no need for this forum.
The values need to be simple and evident in their intent. The current problem is that they are not stated clearly so do not guide behaviour and that they leave a lot of room for manipulation by HR teams and management not taking proper responsibility. They write their own rules from them. Real leadership is lacking and has been taken over by poor management techniques. Many have commented on these and I would like to reiterate that the there is a real problem with management capability and the SES in Canberra. Ethics and values have lost their way leaving the APS wondering why things have gotten so bad. Many basis management skills are lacking and the combination of management and leadership is nearly not understood. They are distinct skills and abilities and at times can overlap. The concentration on leadership has just served to cover up that people are doing management and calling it leadership, and are doing it badly. They have few real ideas and little skill to know how to make and lead in the big picture. If they used some simple consultation techniques it would lead to better ideas and better policy. People do not share in this environment they protect themselves and compete. The Code needs to reflect our Human Rights obligations as an APS and could possibly be formed from the articles in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights.
Should the APS Values as contained in the Public Service Act 1999 be streamlined and simplified?
Yes I believe they should be simplified. I agree with previous comments of not confusng principles with values. Values inform behaviour in the workplace- clear, simple, streamlined values then create a clear standard. I was interested re some of the comments re bullying behaviour or really any negative behaviour- this is not just a leadership responsibility it is everyone's responsibility- and should be resolved at the lowest possible level-preferably before it becomes a Code of Conduct matter. The APS values need to be adhered to by all- not just the Senior Leadership. So often I have seen an effective manager or team leader be blamed by staff for changes to work practices (directed by above after consultation -sometimes I think we need a clear defintion of what consultation is that defines employee input in the APS values) and because they don't like the changes staff then create a complaint driven environment that is not based on honesty or integrity. Additionally I have seen some poor performers initiate a complaint to highjack the commencement of the process of performance management. If complaints are made these need to be investigated thoroughly and if these complaints are correct then the perpetrator needs to be sanctioned if they are not substantiated then the person(s) bringing the complaint(s) need to be sanctioned.
What values do you consider should be included in any revised set of values?
Clear definitions of the value that benchmark the required standard- as for exapmle- employee input as discussed above and another example- highest ethical standard- definition? if this encompasses honesty then is it honesty to everyone- so you can't say one thing to your peers and another to your supervisor?
I support the idea of APS values and think they are important, but also agree with previous comments that as currently framed they place too much emphasis on interpersonal relationships and conduct and factors affecting employment conditions etc (important though these are) at the expense of other important issues of public administration.
As I see it one of the most important differences between public sector and the private sector is that government has the coercive power to make the population pay for the services it provides. With this comes a very special (almost sacred) responsibility to husband and use public resources wisely - this is a totally different situation to the private sector where market forces discipline resource usage.
After 45 years in both the private and public sectors I am concerned that in recent years there does seem to have been some loss of focus on efficiency, cost effectiveness and accountability in the use of public resources. It seems to me there has been an increased preparedness to write off or tolerate ill considered expenditure on all manner of programs, projects, policies and activities that clearly fail to deliver useful outcomes (in some cases delivering nothing at all). Worse, we don't seem to be adequately considering the consequences of these failures through evaluation and learning.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the FMA Act, in my view that part of the public service culture that some tens of years ago provided a strong focus on efficiency and cost effectiveness has to a degree been lost. Too frequently the public sector launches into ill advised, poorly considered activity with little consideration of risks balanced against possible benefits (ITC activities are a particular transgressors but the problem is wider than this). In many cases there is an insufficiently critical or informed review process screening spending proposals for cost effectiveness. In some cases, it seems the public sector has been almost gullible in signing up to proposals that consideration with even a modicum of commonsense cwould show there was no prospect of a cost effective outcome. This trend is damaging for government and ultimately calls into question the sustainability of public administration.
I would suggest this be addressed front and centre in the APS code by changing 'point one' as follows:
"(the Australian Public Service) :is apolitical, performing its functions in an efficient, cost effective, impartial and professional manner;"
This should be supported by management and training initiatives that make it clear what efficiency and cost effectiveness are about. 'Point one' should also mean that achieving outcomes for government 'at all costs' are unacceptable; outcomes must demonstrably be achieved in an efficient and cost effective manner that makes wise use of resources and husbands public funds and there should be sanctions imposed where this is not the case. A revised 'point one' would need to be supported by a process of continual learning and improvement that fosters evaluation, learning from experience and past mistakes to drive continual improvements in efficiency.
Thanks for the opportunity to have my say
Yours in 'getting a better bang for the buck'
Jim G
The APS Values are not in their currrent form able to be applied, or more correctly in their current form they are not able to be complied with. One of the reasons for this is the lack of clarity regarding the 'Values'.
I think homerj's structure suggestion is a good place to start - i.e. 'state (revised/agreed) value' - then add 'how to apply this value or comply with this value' : 'this is achieved by...'.
I particularly like homerj's breakdown points i.e. Fairness and Impartiaility (is the value) and it is achieved by
(- actions and decisions being sensitive to the diversity of the Australian public
- providing a fair system of review of decisions affecting members of the the Australian public and APS employees
- employment decisions being based on merit;
- having a workforce which recognises and utilises the diversity of the Australian community it serves
- providing a fair, flexible, safe and rewarding workplace for employees free from discrimination and harassment )
This is a useful starting point but we then need to identify what 'actions and decisions' would demonstrate sensitivity to the diversity of the Australian public etc..
Also: Accountability
- This is achieved by
- having the highest ethical standards;
- being openly accountable for its actions, within the framework of Ministerial responsibility to the Government, the Parliament and the Australian public
We then (again) need to look at what we mean by 'highest ethical standards' - and what 'actions or behaviours' demonstrate this value.
There also seems to be some interesting questions about who the APS actually serve .. the public? the government of the day? or the parliament?
I would be interested in hearing comments from the Advisory Group. I found the Reform of Australian Government Administration:Building the world's best public service (Goveernment Reform / p. 11) affirming of the high quality and callibre of individuals that form the public service. This is demonstrated by a survey conducted by the Advisory Group showing that 96% of APS indicated they were willing to put in extra effort to get the job done and that 79% of the APS wre proud to work for the APS (71% for their agency).
I think the characteristics of a good public service as outlined in pages 18> would be a useful structure to follow - however I dont think the APS Values require simplifying but they would be benefited by review and re-articulation. Chapter 5 identifies an exciting body of work - as is common across the APS policy is very often made on the run .. and this very often leads to costly remedial actions to correct gaps and issues not identified on the run.
I too would like to thank the PM&C for their work on the Government Reform paper and in building and administering a forum for the purpose of collecting APS input to this discussion. An edit function capability against each poster's comments (allowing only poster or adminstrator access to edits) would be very useful also.
As a long term APS member (nearly 30 years) I beleive that the current values provide adequate guidance for those wh are employed in the APS however the problem seems to be that not many people are aware of the values except just prior to an interview for a job where they are likely to be asked how they personify those values and those of their department. The real problem seems to be that even when someone fails to adhere to the values it is difficult to pursue any form of action against that member.
The APS Values are OK. Theres a few that may be combined for simplicity but its not a big issue.
The primary issue is that we just don't see/ hear/ reflect enough about them so its difficult to correlate the APS Values with Systems and behaviours that are exemplify them.
A lot of what I'm writing is based on a text "Systems Leadership: Creating Positive Organisations" which they rolled out at my previous workplace.
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Education / Traning on Process ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Values --> Systems of work --> Behaviour (measurable) --> Consequence (reward/ coach/ remove)
|________________Auditing / Review of Process________________________|
1) SES should be commited the APS Values. They should memorise these (including some corresponding Systems and expected behaviours) and incorporate it in their presentations, management meetings, coaching sessions, etc.
2) Announcements of merit and achievement should be be linked back to the APS Values.
3) Incorporate the APS Values into the default desktop background or screensavers of public APS computers.
4) Meeting rooms and offices (in particular where soft skills are practiced) should have banners or posters with the APS Values (Several of these are focussed around 'righteousness', treating other fairly, rewarding merit, etc. These abstract values are more likely to be displayed/practiced in meeting rooms than in front of the computer or in a laboratory).
To bring focus on the Values, every quarter one APS Value becomes the "theme of the quarter".
In that quarter any System(s) rolled out in the APS to drive behaviours aligned with the particular "APS Value of the quarter" are audited, discussed and reviewed where neccessary. There could be educational seminars on the particular "APS Value of the quarter", corresponding Systems, and which behaviours should be encouraged or not tolerated. There could be prizes for the person(s) who has best applied a System (new and old) or demonstrated behaviours exemplifying the "APS Value of the quarter".
PPRs should contain measurable behaviours expected to stem from the APS Values
e.g. % reduction on absenteeism compared to previous year, zero safety breaches, zero discrimination complaints, % completion of goals, % scheduled hours for coaching staff met, % scheduled hours for accountability meetings met, etc.
Staff needs to be better educated on systems that in place to facilitate the Values.
Some companies provide all levels of staff pocket booklets listing the applicable Systems and behaviours under each Value. They use the pocketbooks as reference during periodic audits of the Systems.
The "APS Value of the quarter" and example Systems and behaviours can be posted on the department/ section homepage.
Most of all, anyone who is promoted internally to manager or supervisor must be already be committed to rolling out the APS Values and removing behaviours and Mythologies contrary to the Values.
I feel that the Staff and Managers know of the Values/ Code of Conduct, but they relate to some obscure Acts of Parlaiment e.g the Crimes Act 1914 that govern our actions.No doubt an important piece of legislation in its time, but does it hold relevance for APS employees in 2009?
Some of the earlier threads refer to the value of having ' has leadership of the highest quality' I would like to add - ' has the highest ethical standards'- ethics and leadership, two intangilbles that we should have as leaders, but are not enacted by all , this was proven by the last Staff survey.
To have a true and relevant document that can be followed by all, the APS values must be changed, to fit the workplace now, keeping in mind that every Medicare Australia PSA in the country has as it's first mandatory goal- adhering to The APS Values and Code of conduct, the point is- if Managers do not or cannot uphold these same values due to lack of understanding, how can others exercise these behaviours ?
Onto behaviours, I feel our Code of Conduct should be re named our Code of Behaviours, most staff newly employed undergo an interview process that is heavily based on behavioural outcomes and this Value should be continued with all staff. It's basic stuff, but the work environment and those within it, are governed by good/bad behaviour traits. Of course this requires pro active and transformational leadership to maintain a 'healthy' workplace.
In summary my version of the APS Values would look something like this-
Promote fairness and equal opportunity in the workplace.
Accept and promote diversity in the workplace, celebrate difference.
Maintain a healthy workplace through education and learning.
Make the workplace a great place to be, free of any form of harrassment.
Listen to and value Staff input, where possible implement this as part of the internal (local) Values.
Note- there is nothing about productivity here, if we are real deal about the APS value of - Providing a Safe, fair, flexible and rewarding workplace. Then the stats will look after themselves, and you will find a reduction in absenteeism will occur as well.
The APS is not about values etc anymore, its about who you know to get you where you want to go.
The values are good but too airy fairy, you can twist them to get away with what you want when you know the right people, i have seen SES fire people they dont like for doing something that could be considered a breach by one person and not another and hten I see SES keep a person who has totally breached them yet the SES knows how to twist things.
SES and leaders, EL2's and EL1's need to be held accountable and practice role modelling the values.
APS values and ethics, while noble in intent, are often vague, ambiguous and difficult to apply to daily work practices. I think revision of the stated values is necessary but not in such a way that results in further simplification. If anything there should be a clearer sense of purpose behind the values; are they codified to provide a moral compass or are they a yardstick used to determine who has been naughty or nice? This quandary is further clouded by the fact that APS values are so difficult to pin down; each person has their own interpretation of a values statement. This is the very ambiguity that undermines any perceived authority that the Values may possess.
I think it is very important that the function and purpose of APS values are analysed and I applaud PM&C for opening this forum. This is certainly an issue that encapsulates policy and legislation and should be given due consideration along these lines.
I have read some of the comments and agree with simplifying and streamlining the values so that they are more easily understood so that there can be no misunderstandings. I also agree with other comments that it is not so much the understanding but the adherence to them, for example 'has leadership of the highest quality' , we wouldnt have half the problems we have with bullying etc if we complied to this value and if we all had the highest ethical standars , investigations wouldnt need to take place by code of conduct officers. I feel it sometimes seen as a bit of joke. It needs to be taken more seriously, maybe thats the challenge.
The APS Values.
• The APS values are set out in Section 10 of the Public Service Act 1999 (the Act).
• The values are defined in Section 7 as “APS Values means the values in section 10.”
• A cat could be a ‘value’ if it was listed in Section 10 – but a cat is a cat is a cat!
• The 15 matters listed in 10(1) (a) to (o) are not all true understandable/rational values as the average person in the street (or the average public servant) would understand them (although some may be).
• The legislative drafting was a tad lazy.
• Aspirations in the form of motherhood statements prevail in 10(1).
• Many of the matters listed are bold statements of the things aspired to (the goals?).
• Are the statements true values?
• Are the matters listed in 10(1) goals, or aspirations, or principles, or ideals?
• The word ‘values’ should be clearly defined as an irrefutable stand alone concept.
• The true values of the APS should be identified and listed in brief, and clearly written form in the Act (the drafters seem to have had no idea of what they are!).
• There are only about 4 or 5 true values – but the principles upon which the APS is guided could be listed in the Act under a separate the heading “Principles of the APS”.
• The pompous and wordy Section 10(2) tacks on the merit principle as a bit of an afterthought. This is clearly a ‘principle’ and should be rewritten and included in the Act together with all the other important guiding principles.
• If Section 10 is to be worked over please also take the opportunity to tidy up the equally sloppy Section 13.
You can have all the ethical/moral values and expectations in the world but they don't mean anything if they are not practiced. The Values don't need changing, but the application and monitoring are weak in my experience. I agree with another poster who said that the lower level staff have the Values applied to them, but upper management seem to be immune. Provision of jobs for the mates, bullying of subordinates, irresponsibility in decision making, lack of leadership qualities, getting rid of poor performers by promotion, all these seem to be ignored. Managers should be held responsible for their actions and decisions, good or bad.
There isnt a great deal wrong with the values, but the values arent universally applied.
If one considers this value...
* provides a fair, flexible, safe and rewarding workplace;
the problem lies in the varying interpretations we can find between departments and agencies and even within these organisations.
An APS employee should be able to enjoy the same standards across the entire APS and these standards should not be able to be diluted by local influences, or local narrow mindedness.
The APS could have the highest standards in the world, in theory, but if an idea such as flexilibity in the workplace can be interpreted to such an extent that there is no flexibility in a particular workplace then the standard becomes meaningless.