INDEPENDENT REVIEW
OF THE APS
Independent
Review of the APS:
Priorities for Change
19 March 2019
Copyright Statement
_____________________________________________________________________
Priorities for Change
© Commonwealth of Australia 2019
978-1-925364-11-8 APS Review: Priorities for change (online)
Copyright Notice
With the exception of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms, this work is licensed
under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence (CC BY 4.0)
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Third party copyright
Wherever a third party holds copyright in this material, the copyright remains
with that party. Their permission may be required to use the material. Please
contact them directly.
Attribution
This publication should be attributed as follows:
©
Commonwealth of Australia, Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet, APS Review: Priorities for change
Use of the Coat of Arms
The terms under which the Coat of Arms can be used are detailed on the
following website: http://www.pmc.gov.au/government/its-honour.
Other uses
Enquiries regarding this document are welcome at: xxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Contents
Message from the chair
4
Part I: Building an APS that is fit for the future
5
Context and case for change
8
Priorities for the future
15
Delivering lasting change
19
Part II: Priorities for change
23
Strengthen the culture, governance and leadership model
24
Build a flexible APS operating model
31
Invest in capability and talent development
36
Develop stronger internal and external partnerships
43
Next steps
50
Appendices
52
3
Independent Review of the APS

Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Message from
the chair
From left to right: Glyn Davis, Belinda Hutchinson, David
Thodey, Alison Watkins, Gordon de Brouwer, Maile Carnegie
Ten months ago, the panel and I began the independent review of the
Australian Public Service. Our instruction was to ensure the APS is fit for
purpose in the decades ahead.
During this time, we have been struck by just how important the APS is to
Australia and its people. As our country faces new challenges and change,
more than ever we need a public service that is united, trusted and focused
on the people it serves.
We need the APS to provide stability and surety, to promote the wellbeing
of all Australians, and to support successive governments in navigating future
challenges – whether this is tackling entrenched disadvantage, harnessing the
technological revolution to make lives better for all Australians, or defending
Australia’s security and economic interests in a less stable world. In short, this
means investing in the APS and setting it up to succeed – not for its own sake
but for Australia’s.
This report reflects what we have learned and what changes we believe
are needed to build an APS that is fit for the future. Part I summarises our
approach and our understanding of the APS today, the challenges and
opportunities it is facing, and our aspiration for the APS’s transformation. Part
II sets out our current thinking on the priorities for change, and some of the
initiatives we are considering to help deliver this change.
This report presents our current view – both what we think and what we’re still
exploring. We were not asked to publish our interim findings, but we believe it
is only through testing our thinking, openly and iteratively, that we will come
to the best answers – robust, implementable recommendations that achieve
the desired outcomes for the APS.
So, please, challenge our thinking and take this opportunity to influence the
future of the APS – and through it, Australia.
I would like to thank the other panel members, our Reference Group and the
secretariat for their valuable contribution to date.
David Thodey
4
Independent Review of the APS
Part I:
Building an APS that
is fit for the future
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Part I: Building an
In May 2018, the Australian Government commissioned us, as an independent
APS that is fit for
panel, to review the APS to ensure it is fit-for-purpose for the coming decades.
the future
We were asked to set out an ambitious transformation program and to guide
and drive future public sector reforms. We will deliver our findings and
recommendations to the Prime Minister in mid 2019 (see
Exhibit 1: APS
review journey at a glance).
We are conscious of the significant and complementary reforms underway,
including those led by the Secretaries’ APS Reform Committee. Our work
builds on these important initiatives and the genuine groundswell for change
we have seen across the APS.
Our approach, our optimism, and our findings are reflected in one aspiration:
a trusted APS, united in serving all Australians. This aspiration forms the
organising principle for the priorities for change set out in this report.
The APS comprises 18 departments of state, more than 100 agencies and
authorities, and over 150,000 employees. It is and will remain a broad and
complex institution. The opportunity is to harness all of its skills, insights and
energy. The APS must have a strong foundation of trust if it is to best serve
Australia and its people. Integrity is, and will remain, a key determinant of
trust – indeed, it has been remarked that if you have integrity, nothing else
matters; if you don’t have integrity, nothing else matters.
But we know that change cannot happen in isolation. There is much the APS
can do to chart its own destiny and improve its performance, but strong support
and active championing from outside the service is essential to deliver lasting,
transformative change. There is a critical role for government in this context,
but also for the Parliament and the Australian public – and we all stand to benefit.
The findings outlined in this report reflect what we have learned to date – through
conversations with the public and APS employees, past and present, and through
research into the APS and public sector reform (See
Box 1: Insights and evidence
underpinning this review).
6
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Exhibit 1: APS review journey at a glance
2018
The Government announced the Review to ensure the APS is fit-for-purpose for the coming decades.
May
We asked
Jun
“What does the future hold for
“What is the experience of practitioners,
“What are the lessons of
Australia?”
and our partners?”
the past?”
… and we heard
the insights and experiences of public servants, members of the public, experts and other
government stakeholders and partners from Australia and the globe.
700+
500+
270+
2,900+
Research
& analysis
Submissions
people at
comments
survey responses
37 workshops
Then we identified characteristics of a fit-for-purpose APS in 2030
Nov
… and asked how we could make these a reality?
“How can we make sure the APS pulls
“How can we make sure the APS is nimble
“How should the APS work with partner
in the same direction?”
and ready for change?”
organisations and parliament?”
“How do we make sure the APS gets and keeps
“How can we make sure the work of the APS is all
the people it needs?”
that we want it to be?”
2019
We set a vision and designed a path to get there
Mar
Our research, your feedback and the evidence has helped us distil four priorities for change,
and initiatives to achieve a fit-for-purpose APS for coming decades
The aspiration: A trusted APS, united in serving all Australians
Strengthen the culture,
Build a flexible
Invest in capability and
Develop stronger internal
governance and leadership
APS operating
talent development
and external partnerships
model
model
Now, we’re asking you ‘Have we got this right?’
“How can we strengthen each proposal?”
“What are we missing?”
“How do we ensure lasting change?”
Mid
Final report to be provided to the Prime Minister.
2019
7
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
BOX 1: INSIGHTS AND EVIDENCE UNDERPINNING
THIS REVIEW
The proposals presented here build on ideas from the many stakeholders
who have contributed to the review, voiced opinions, and offered solutions.
The review is evidence-driven, drawing from available APS data, and new
and existing independent research, using quantitative and qualitative
analytical methods.
We are considering upwards of 700 submissions, 270 suggestions on
our digital platform, 2900 survey responses, and the insights from 37
roundtables and workshops – that have involved more than 550 members
of the public and the APS at all levels. Our thinking is also shaped by more
than 200 one-on-one meetings to date with parliamentarians, community
and business leaders and others who work closely with the APS, as well
as meetings with current and former public sector leaders.
We are also working with the Secretaries Board to ensure our proposals
take note of – and build on – initiatives driven by its sub-committee, the
APS Reform Committee, to modernise the APS. And we are drawing on the
insights from the panel’s Reference Group, which brings together highly
experienced national and international experts with diverse perspectives
on the public sector.
We have sought to understand the APS’s operating environment in 2030
through scenario planning. We have taken insights from previous APS
reforms and the wealth of broader public sector scholarship, best practice
guidance and case studies.
We have also commissioned independent research from leading academics
and practitioners through the Australia and New Zealand School of
Government (ANZSOG) to further inform our deliberations (see
Appendix 1).
These papers do not necessarily reflect our views, but are important
contributions and are being published to support public discussion.
Context and case for change
In this section we consider the history and traditions of the APS,
the context in which it operates today, and the extent to which
the APS is ready to adapt and respond to emerging challenges
and opportunities.
The APS history and tradition
Given the scope of this review, it is important to contextualise the history and
role of the APS.
Since 1901, the APS has been a critical institution in Australia’s federation.
Its work is broad and diverse. It provides impartial advice to government on
national security, economic, social and foreign policy matters. It helps protect
Australia’s national security and supports delivery of education, health, social,
aged care and disability services. It collects taxes and manages government
finances. And it helps develop, monitor, and enforce the laws and regulations
that underpin much of Australia’s social compact.
Strikingly, over 70 per cent of the APS works in implementation, regulation or
service delivery roles, and over 62 per cent of the workforce is located outside
8
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Canberra (see
Exhibit 2: The APS at a glance). Any changes to the service
must have regard for the full breadth of its roles and how and where
they are performed.
The APS has a proud history of independent civil service. It has remained true
to enduring values of acting as an apolitical steward of the common good for
the people of Australia and serving as the institutional memory of the nation.
These values are the basis on which reform must be built.
The APS has deep roots in the Westminster tradition, characterised by a
continuous, impartial, and merit-based career civil service that supports the
elected government. Crucially, as set out in its governing legislation, the APS
is expected to efficiently and effectively serve the government, the Parliament
and the Australian public.
This model has proven remarkably durable, evolving over time to meet the
demands of different eras – from the expanded role of the Commonwealth
in World War II and the post-war reconstruction period, to establishing
significant features of Australia’s social security system, and helping to drive
important economic reforms in recent decades. Throughout, the APS has
been a bedrock of stability and continuity for Australia’s democracy, serving
successive governments. The Westminster tradition will remain the foundation
for the APS in coming decades, provided it continues to evolve to meet the
needs of the time.
Overall, international comparisons paint a positive picture of the APS. The OECD
ranks Australia highly on regulation, data availability and accessibility. We enjoy
above average citizen confidence and satisfaction in public services, including
health care, education, law enforcement and the judicial system. The 2017
International Civil Service Effectiveness Index ranked the APS third in the world
– although it also identified room to improve in integrity, policy making, social
security and tax administration, and human resource management.
While proud to recognise the achievements and international standing of
the APS, we must also understand where and why it is not meeting its full
potential. As we discuss below, Australia needs the APS to be at its best to
address the challenges and opportunities brought by new technology and
broader social, geopolitical and economic developments.
9
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Exhibit 2: The APS at a glance
Serving the people of Australia
What the APS looks like
The APS’s work has a fundamental impact on individuals, families and
businesses. There are many touchpoints where citizens expect access
to quality, reliable services delivered in a way that meets their needs.
150,000+
In 2017-18, the APS:
Of which …
total employees
$112.4b
736m+
3.8m
70%
20%
in social security and
digital and online transactions
small businesses
work on implementation or
develop
welfare payments
for Medicare, Centrelink and
reigstered in the
service delivery
policy
delivered
child support services enabled
tax system
54.6m
22,742
17 tonnes+
7%
3%
international mail
of illicit drugs and
patents granted
deliver
develop or enforce
items inspected
precursors seized
specialist
regulation
support
They work in …
160m+
2m+
12,982
18
100+
passengers enabled
passports
successful electoral events
departments
agencies and
and more than
issued
conducted since 2006-2007,
authorities
4 million aircraft
including federal elections,
movements
by-elections & referendums, &
industrial & commercial elections
And are located in …
APS Headcount
% of total APS
Northern Territory
2,000 1.3%
Queensland
17,000 11.3%
Western Australia
7,000 4.6%
South Australia
9,000 6.0%
New South Wales
27,900 18.5%
Australian Capital
Overseas
Victoria
Territory
1,500 1.0%
25,500 17%
57,100 37.9%
Tasmania
!
Source: Australian Public Service Commission’s 2017-18 State of the Service Report
and departmental annual reports
3,700 2.5%
NOTE: Figures rounded to nearest 100
10
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Adapting to a rapidly changing world
The world is changing rapidly and it is important to consider the global trends
that are affecting Australia and the APS.
First, we are experiencing rapid and profound change in technology and
connectivity. To put this in perspective, 90 per cent of the world’s data was
produced in the last two years. The global number of connected devices was
around 500 million in 2003, overtook the world’s population in 2014, and is
expected to exceed 50 billion in 2025.
Modern devices, app-based technologies, and tailored solutions driven by
data analytics all show how technology can be used to ease many day-to-day
challenges. In this context, people are coming to expect greater personalisation
in the services they use.
Second, we have seen declining trust in traditional institutions, accompanied
by dissatisfaction with public services and a push to solutions that are more
local and personalised in design and delivery. The last five years have seen the
emergence and rapid growth of new political parties in some of the world’s
largest economies. Trust scores are the lowest on record, particularly for
government. The pressures of 24/7 news coverage have been amplified by
social media networks.
Third, work and career paths are changing fundamentally, both inside and
outside the public service. Demographic shifts, improving standards of
living, and shifting workforce expectations are changing the nature of jobs
and creating new opportunities. At the same time, enhanced use of data,
automation and artificial intelligence (AI) present compelling opportunities
for the APS to deliver better services for all Australians.
Approximately 40 per cent of the time spent on tasks performed by the APS
today involves highly automatable data collection and processing (see
Exhibit
3: The future of work). Automation and digitisation can improve the experience
for people interacting with the APS in areas such as grants and payments.
It may also free employees from routine tasks, enabling them to spend more
time on customer facing roles and other higher value activities. Further, it will
provide opportunities to improve the service’s own enabling services, helping
the whole APS deliver better outcomes.
Automation and digitisation should deliver better quality and more
personalised services for Australians and will create opportunities for
APS employees to build new skills and take on new roles. Realising these
opportunities will require a joint commitment across the APS, reflected in
a whole-of-service workforce strategy and supported by collaborative ways
of working and common and interoperable enabling platforms.
11
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Exhibit 4: The future of Work
In the APS today approximately 40 per cent of time is spent
Capturing the opportunities for improved services through
on highly automatable tasks such as data collection
automation will change the skills needed in the APS
and processing
Estimated shift in skills in the APS 2017-2030, %
Estimated distribution of time on tasks, 2017
% of total hours spent
Expected automation
adoption >= 20% by 2030
Expected automation
adoption <= 20% by 2030
Managing
Basic cognitive
staff
-15%
skills
Collection data
7
18
Physical and
-3%
manual skills
Applying
expertise
Higher cognitive
27
skills
3%
22
Processing data
Social and
emotional skills
12%
20
5
Technological
Interfacing
Physical tasks
skills
21%
Source: McKinsey Global Institute automation impact model; APSC data
Finally, geopolitical instability is increasing, characterised by a rise in nationalism
and populism and a decline in the influence of multilateral economic and
security institutions and frameworks. Once-stable regional blocs are increasingly
characterised by trade tensions or conflict, affecting many Australian markets.
The implications of these technological, workforce and political global trends
for the average Australian are profound. People experience remarkable levels
of personalised service through new technology and have come to expect the
same from all service providers. This trend will only continue. Australians are, on
the whole, more sceptical of government and the media than ever before. And
in coming decades Australia could face ongoing uncertainty about the global
political and economic environment.
The implications for government and the APS are equally profound. The public
sector will face increased expectations for delivery of seamless, personalised
services. Social, economic and international flux will exacerbate policy
challenges and put a premium on an understanding of, and connections
into, Australian communities, the Asia-Pacific, and the world more broadly.
The battle for talent will intensify. And in a contested, low-trust environment,
politics will likely continue to be conducted as a ‘permanent campaign’, in
turn influencing the priorities of government and the risk appetite of the
public service.
To help us understand these future challenges, we commissioned research
to explore the global trends likely to affect the APS over the coming decades.
This informed scenario planning for the future of the APS (see
Box 2: Potential
scenarios for the future of the APS).
12
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
BOX 2: POTENTIAL SCENARIOS FOR THE FUTURE OF
THE APS
The work we commissioned identified four scenarios for 2030. All are
provocative and extreme, yet still plausible. They are as follows:
1. A
tech-dominated Australia where people embrace breakthrough
technologies; rapid workforce transitions create new challenges; and
data, advanced analytics and AI drive government policy and operations.
2. An Australia where people are
losing trust in big institutions and
growing dissatisfied with standard public services, instead putting
trust in local and place-based approaches.
3. A scenario where people are frustrated with political institutions and
demand
personalised solutions; ‘echo chambers’ have replaced
traditional sources of news; and Australians are increasingly taking
control and governance into their own hands, using online platforms to
engage with the APS to shape policy on the issues that matter to them.
4. An
insular Australia where perpetual near-conflict and populist
national views dominate the global political landscape, driving
nationalistic sentiment in domestic politics.
Such scenarios are not an objective for Australia, but they usefully highlight
the different environments in which the APS may need to operate. We cannot
predict what the future will hold, but scenario planning helps us prepare for it
by pushing our thinking beyond immediate problems. In reality, the future will
likely comprise various elements from across the four scenarios.
Given the profound changes ahead, Australia and the APS will need to
be adaptable and resilient. There are some clear ‘no regrets’ actions – for
example, ensuring the APS’s people can deliver tailored solutions, developed
in partnership with state and territory governments, communities and
others, with greater flexibility and across organisational boundaries. This
will require skills and mindsets that embrace analytics at scale, a focus on
users in service design and delivery, and a commitment to openness and
transparency. Stability and continuity – founded on a culture of integrity
– will become even more vital during periods of volatility.
Current context and challenges
In considering the large-scale shifts discussed above, we must also be mindful
of the historical underpinning of today’s APS.
Many aspects of the current culture, capabilities and operating model of the
APS reflect reforms introduced over decades, including following the Royal
Commission Report into Government Administration (the Coombs review)
of 1976. Many changes were driven by new managerialism or New Public
Management thinking that sought to deliver greater efficiency and value for
money through the adoption of new practices.
These reforms saw widespread devolution across the APS. Responsibility for
internal budgets and enabling functions was given to individual agencies,
and departmental secretaries and agency heads were conceptualised as
chief executive officers. Many changes focused on driving productivity,
including through outsourcing significant public services to commercial
and not-for-profit providers, introducing efficiency dividends for all agencies,
and emphasising accountability for outcomes and outputs. Meanwhile,
13
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
governments have exerted greater influence over the APS over time, including
through senior appointments and the role of ministerial advisers.
These changes have progressively reshaped the APS and delivered significant
benefits. They have increased the responsibilities and autonomy of agencies,
and driven a greater focus on performance, efficiency, strategy and delivery.
They have also ensured increased responsiveness to ministers and governments.
Despite the benefits, it is clear, three decades on, that the APS is now grappling
with some of the inevitable consequential challenges in a rapidly changing
operating environment.
For example, devolution has empowered agencies – but has made it more
difficult for the APS to tackle the interconnected challenges Australia will face
in coming decades. There is widespread agreement that the constituent parts
of the APS will need to work together on these challenges and to realise the
opportunities provided by breakthrough technologies and better engagement.
But this will be difficult with no APS-wide view on current capabilities, let
alone future capability needs. And some approaches to service provision
seem increasingly at odds with public expectations of a seamless experience,
regardless of which agency is responsible.
There are strong concerns the APS’s underlying capacity has been weakened
over time. This is commonly reflected in suggestions about latent skills,
talent leaking to the private sector, and missing capability and connections
with Australia, the Asia-Pacific and the rest of the world. The risk is that
Australia will find itself with an APS that, in coming years, struggles to provide
successive governments with integrated advice and support – informed by
a deep understanding of the needs of the Australian people – to best tackle
complex problems.
There are also concerns that the APS’s operating model can stand in the
way of people, skills and resources being deployed in the most efficient
and effective manner. And long-term underinvestment in major capital,
particularly digital and data infrastructure, will risk leaving the APS with
expensive legacy systems that do not support exceptional services or
enable data-led policy making.
And too often, successful leadership within the APS is more associated with
responsiveness and upward management than with employee development,
entrepreneurialism and stewardship of the service. These are not mutually
exclusive attributes: there is a gap between the leadership skills and culture
of today and those the APS needs to be at its best in the future.
These pressures are reflected in the veins of frustration evident across the
service, and are affecting the APS’s confidence and institutional authority.
They are not unique to Australia and are being faced by other Western liberal
democracies. Nor is the APS the only institution facing challenges in response.
But in Australia, these shifts and sentiments – and their impact on the APS
– have been reinforced, and indeed exacerbated, by specific experiences in
recent public memory. These include a number of high profile inquiries that
have criticised key aspects of public administration.
The public should rightly expect the APS to serve Australia’s elected
representatives. This remains a key feature of public services in all Westminster
democracies, for parliamentarians are elected by the people; officials
are not. But we can and should also expect our public service to provide
continuity of service to successive governments, as required by the APS’s
14
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
governing legislation. This is ultimately about balance: the APS should be
empowered both to remain responsive to the government of the day and to
act as custodian of the range of functions and institutions that endure from
government to government.
It is important to emphasise there are countless inspiring examples of
excellence across the APS. These warrant greater recognition both within
and beyond the service. They demonstrate the service can and does operate
well in many contexts. But too often successes are not the rule and rely on
workarounds, the commitment of individuals and teams, or some external
impetus – often in the form of a crisis. In future, they will flow naturally from
the prevailing culture, capability and operating model of the APS.
Priorities for the future
In this section, we set out our aspiration for the APS, and our priorities
for change to meet this aspiration.
Our aspiration
We need a trusted APS, united in serving all Australians.
This aspiration has three parts. First, the APS must be
trusted – by government, the
Parliament and the people of Australia. Trust is founded on integrity, transparency
and reliability, and these underpin our proposed priorities for change.
As reflected in its legislated values, the APS must be ethical and act with
integrity in all it does. This is an enduring feature of public administration
across Western liberal democracies, most recently reinforced in Australia by
bipartisan support for a new anti-corruption body. Integrity is vital to the APS
performing its duties and, if anything, will become more so in the future. The
APS operates in an increasingly complex environment with significant external
pressures. It manages a multitude of formal and informal relationships
with others outside the service, and undertakes frequent and high-value
procurement decisions.
Second, our priorities are driven by the need for the APS to deliver more than
the sum of its parts as a
united institution. This does not mean homogeneity,
false consensus, or the absence of rich debate across the constituent parts of
the service. However, it does mean getting on the same page, with employees
and agencies working to shared goals and collaborating for the benefit of
those the APS serves. To do this, the APS must better harness its different
people and agencies, its diverse insights and perspectives, and all its energy
and will, to serve Australians. A united APS will be characterised by joined-up
leadership and a flexible operating model, with collaboration the norm.
Finally, the APS must put the
interests of the Australian people at the heart
of all it does. From designing services
with those who use them, to enabling
participation in identifying and solving problems – for families, businesses,
communities and the nation. The focus must be much more on the Australian
people and much less on the internal business of the APS, guided by a deep
spirit of service to others. This focus underpins our priorities for change, from
governance at the most senior levels, to how outcomes are resourced and
measured and how services are delivered and policy made.
To realise this aspiration, the APS will need to transform: its
governance
and leadership model, its
operating model, its
people, and its
partnerships
(see
Exhibit 4: Priorities for building an APS fit for the future). These
changes are summarised in turn below, with Part II of the report providing
15
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
further detail on our priorities for change and some proposed initiatives
to deliver them.
Our priorities for change to transform the APS are as follows.
Strengthen the culture, governance and leadership model
Australia will increasingly need an APS that is more than the sum of its many
parts. This means a service that instinctively pulls together to tackle complex
challenges, bringing all its expertise, perspectives and resources to bear. Key to
this will be ensuring the people of the APS understand and have confidence
in what they are striving to achieve, and how well they are performing.
Drawing on the different perspectives and contributions of all parts of the
APS, this common purpose will unify the service and strengthen its ability
to deliver outcomes that matter to the government, the Parliament and the
Australian people. Crucial to this will be the individual leadership of each
secretary and agency head, alongside the collective leadership of a revitalised
Secretaries Board. Together, they will provide direction and cohesion, ensuring
the APS can deliver on agreed priorities - many of which will transcend the
responsibilities of particular portfolios and agencies.
In delivering these outcomes, a culture of openness, transparency and
accountability will become the norm.
Build a flexible APS operating model
To meet these challenges, the future APS must be able to flexibly adopt new
approaches, reconfigure teams, and deploy skills where and when most
needed. This means having rules, systems, structures and ways of working
that empower, not encumber, the flexibility and collaboration essential to
advancing Australia’s long-term interests. It also means enabling the APS
to meet government priorities quickly and adeptly, by bringing together
the right people, insights, resources and energy from across the service to
get the job done.
The workforce structures and practices of the future must therefore support
effective decision-making, empower people and deepen the culture of
collaboration across institutional boundaries. Networked enabling systems
- including across HR, finance, ICT and data - and common processes will
further break down boundaries between agencies and remove barriers to
collaboration. An APS that is a leader among digitally enabled organisations
will see people at all levels empowered to lead, innovate and coordinate to
deliver effective outcomes. Common enabling platforms will position the
service to utilise data and emerging technologies to the benefit of all.
These approaches will be underpinned by a flexible, disciplined budgetary
framework that ensures the APS can meet the expectations of government and
the public for high quality advice, regulation and delivery for decades to come.
Invest in capability and talent development
To fully deliver upon future needs, the APS must also prioritise its own people -
and be supported in doing so. This includes boosting its leadership, capability
and diversity – and supporting all staff to be ‘professional public servants’.
We need an APS that builds and maintains the necessary skills, innovates
across the service, and provides fulfilling work opportunities in an increasingly
competitive labour market.
16
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
This will involve two major shifts. First, the APS will need to value and prioritise
its people and their development far more. Second, the APS will need to
undertake strategic, whole-of-service workforce analysis and planning as a
matter of course - and use it to underpin long-term workforce strategies.
New recruits and experienced hands alike will see positive change. They will
be both trained in core public sector skills and supported to develop deep
expertise in specialist areas. They will also see a wide range of possibilities for
their career, supported by managers in realising their potential.
This workforce of capable and empowered people will lift APS performance. It
will spearhead a renewed focus on the foundations of outstanding, integrated
policy advice and delivery excellence – including through research, evaluation
and data analytics – and ensure the APS best serves the government and the
people of Australia.
Develop stronger internal and external partnerships
The APS’s impact, influence and success in the years and decades ahead will
rely heavily upon meaningful, lasting relationships. Such relationships are
essential if the APS is to deliver on government priorities and serve the public.
This will require a fundamental shift in mindset and approach, with the APS
bringing greater confidence in its role and contribution, and greater humility
in how it partners with others. The partnerships will be many and varied -
including with state, territory and local governments, civil society, business,
communities, service providers, and the Australian public. They will be typified
by the highest standards of ethics and integrity.
Relationships of this quality will be evident in genuine commitments to work
with others (and willingness to be held to account), regular release of the
valuable data and research the APS gathers and produces, and best practice
approaches to engaging meaningfully with the public. In time it could also
mean, for example, seamless, personalised service delivery through closer
relationships with and between Commonwealth providers, and greater
collaboration with states and territories.
Nowhere is the importance of genuine partnerships truer than in supporting
the aspirations of, and pursuing outcomes with, Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples. Now is the time for the APS to reconceptualise how it works
with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
The APS will also strengthen one of its most critical relationships – with
Ministers and their offices – including by providing ministers with better
access to APS expertise and insights.
Implementation is key
Some of these priorities have been recommended in past reviews but have
either not been fully implemented or their original intent has not been fully
realised. And taken individually, no single idea is sufficient to drive meaningful
change in the APS. The APS will be fundamentally transformed if:
■ the complete set of initiatives is taken forward as an integrated package
■ they are owned and embedded across the APS – which will require a new
and sustained approach to implementation.
17
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Exhibit 4: Priorities for building an APS fit for the future
The aspiration: a trusted APS, united in serving all Australians
Priorities for change
Strengthen
Build a
Invest in capability
Develop
the culture,
flexible APS
and talent
stronger internal
governance and
operating model
development
and external partnerships
leadership model
Shared purpose and values
A dynamic operating model that
An integrated workforce strategy,
Working openly and with integrity
across the APS, championed by
enables collaboration and
building and maintaining
with partners, to support the
strong and accountable leaders
focusses APS energy on the
service-wide skills to deliver and
delivery of outcomes for
highest priorities
innovate
Australians
Initiatives
Common purpose and
Dynamic ways of
Professionalised functions
Seamless services and local
vision that unites and
working and structures to
across the service to
solutions designed and
inspires the APS
empower individuals and
deepen expertise
delivered with states,
teams – making
territories and other
Secretaries Board driving
Empowered managers
collaboration the norm
partners
outcomes across
accountable for
government and APS
Strategic allocation of
developing people and
An open APS, accountable
performance
funds and resources to
teams
for sharing information
outcomes and essential
and engaging widely
A defined ‘head of service’
Strategic recruitment,
investment
and ‘head of people’
development and
Strategic, service-wide
Networked enabling
mobility to build the
approaches to
Clarity and confidence in
systems and common
workforce of the future
procurement to deliver
the appointment and
processes across the
better value and
expectations of secretaries
21st century delivery,
service
outcomes for Australians
regulation and policy
Genuine transparency and
capabilities
Ministers supported
accountability for
through easier access to
delivering outcomes for
Policy advice that
APS expertise and insights
Australians
integrates social,
and formal recognition of
economic, security and
distinct role of ministerial
international perspectives
advisors
Implementation: delivering lasting change
Senior leadership cohort who
A transformation leader with the
Funding, resources and
own transformation
influence to drive and coordinate delivery
support to drive
transformation
Clear prioritisation of reforms,
Deep engagement across the service in
focusing on the most
developing and implementing change
Meaningful metrics for short
important things first
with service-wide investment in capability
and long term success of
building
transformation
18
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Delivering lasting change
This section lays out the panel’s initial perspective on how to ensure
change is implemented fully and effectively across the APS.
Having examined many previous recommendations to improve the APS
(see
Appendix 2), it is striking that many of the issues and suggested solutions
are evergreen. Though the Coombs review was the last exercise of similar scope,
on average there has been more than one major review every year for the past
15 years.
Beyond these formal reviews, there is also a substantial body of work on public
sector reform by government agencies, such as the Australian Public Service
Commission (APSC) , parliamentary committees, the Productivity Commission,
the Australian National Audit Office and the Commonwealth Ombudsman. This
sits alongside a wealth of academic discourse, international experience, and
domestic and global case studies.
This material provides insights for the review and conclusions that warrant
reiterating. But it also suggests that, regardless of the richness of ideas about
what needs to happen to prepare the APS for the future, making it happen
is a very different matter.
Many people involved in developing and implementing past reviews are
justifiably proud of the changes achieved. But they also reflect with some
frustration that many solutions and innovations have not been fully delivered
or the intent fully realised.
In some cases, the momentum for reform petered out. In others, technical
change was made and the box ticked, but the desired outcome was not
realised. Resourcing constraints and a lack of continuity in leadership are
common, and often very valid, explanations. Notably, reforms seen to have had
most impact are characterised by strong APS and political support, a sound and
transparent case for change, and clear accountability for implementation.
In finalising this review, the panel will therefore give equal consideration to how
change is implemented, not just what changes are required. This is difficult
in any organisation, let alone an institution as large and complex as the APS.
Globally, there are more examples of failed public sector transformations than
successes. And there is inevitably some cynicism about the possibility of change,
or about having heard it all before. Simplistic solutions will not suffice. Nor
should we just turn to the private sector for the answers.
The deep spirit of service across the APS is striking. This is a remarkable quality.
There is genuine enthusiasm and willingness across the APS – from graduates
to the Secretaries Board – to engage in real, not token, reform. There is much
the APS can already do to improve its own performance. Considerable work is
underway, and much of what we think is needed can be readily implemented
within existing legislative and policy frameworks.
But, beyond the APS, the broader authorising environment really matters. In
particular, government – as a key beneficiary – has a vital role. In some instances
the government will need to specifically agree and resource the necessary
changes. In other areas, government will simply need to champion and support
the APS to do what needs to be done.
19
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Without such an authorising environment there are still good prospects for
continued incremental performance improvement across the service. But the
opportunity for genuine, lasting transformation will be lost.
It will therefore be important to identify and focus on early quick wins,
within what will be a long-term reform agenda. This will help make these
initiatives tangible and meaningful for the APS’s people and provide assurance
to government and other stakeholders that the effort and resources are
worthwhile and should be sustained.
Box 3: Ensuring successful reform sets out some principles the panel will
consider in settling its findings on implementation of the review.
BOX 3: ENSURING SUCCESSFUL REFORM
Success means a fit-for-purpose APS that delivers for governments, the
Parliament and the people of Australia over coming decades. This will be
measured by the APS’s readiness to adapt, to deliver and to renew itself
to help Australia prosper in the years ahead. It will also be measured by
the impact it has on Australia.
As set out in our terms of reference, we will propose a transformation
program to ensure delivery of recommendations and to guide and drive
future APS reforms. This will build on important work already underway,
including that led by the Secretaries’ APS Reform Committee. We will
also make these changes concrete by illustrating what they will mean
for the day-to-day working lives of people across the public service.
Drawing on global and domestic public and private sector experience,
we have identified key principles for successfully changing large, complex
organisations. We are considering these in the context of potential
approaches to implementing the outcomes of this review. The common
elements of successful large-scale transformations include:
■
committed leadership to ensure reforms are owned and embodied
at senior levels across the service – and leaders act consistently with the
reform directions
■ clear
prioritisation of reforms, focused on the most important things at
all times with scope to take stock and adjust priorities as necessary
■ a
transformation leader with the resources and influence to drive and
coordinate delivery
■
deep engagement of people across the service – at all levels and in
all places – in developing and implementing changes, supported by
compelling communication and investment in
capability building to
underpin ambitious reform
■ short, medium, and long-term
metrics for success, including specific
indicators of impact, so implementation remains focused on delivering
outcomes, rather than ticking off recommendations
■ enduring
funding, resources and support, including from government,
to enable genuine transformation
20
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
We recognise that some – though not all – of the current proposals entail cost.
Some reprioritisation and more strategic use of current resources is certainly
conceivable. But government will ultimately have decisions to make once our
final report is provided, balancing the importance of investing in the future of
the APS against many other priorities.
The long-term benefits of adequately resourcing APS transformation will
be profound for the nation as a whole. An enduring funding mechanism to
support these reforms over the coming years is therefore highly desirable. There
are domestic and international precedents for such an approach – indeed,
the current Public Service Modernisation Fund is predicated on reinvesting a
proportion of the efficiency dividend into a range of projects. The panel will
further consider these issues when finalising this review.
21
Independent Review of the APS
Part II:
Priorities for change
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Part II: Priorities
We need a trusted APS, united in serving all Australians. This is our aspiration
for the APS. We’ve outlined how we have arrived at this aspiration in Part I of
for change
this report. Part II sets out the four priorities to deliver this aspiration. In this
section you will find the following information:
i. An overview of each priority: the context and the transformation
opportunity, supported by a selection of insights that have informed
our thinking.
ii. Some
proposed initiatives to deliver change: further details on what
we think is needed, what is shaping our thinking, and what we
are still exploring.
By releasing the information in this section, we are sharing and testing
our thinking with everyone who is interested in how the APS will operate
in the future.
You will see that these priorities for change and potential initiatives may not
always present a complete picture of the required transformation. This reflects
our current view – both what we know and what we’re still exploring.
We would like to invite you to add to, and challenge, our thinking to assist
us in making the final recommendations as strong as possible. We have
also published the submissions, research, insights and feedback that have
informed our thinking.
WE WANT TO TEST OUR THINKING WITH YOU.
Go to our website and give your comments and
feedback by 2 May 2019. We’re asking you the
following questions:
■ How can we strengthen each proposal?
■ What are we missing?
■ How do we ensure lasting change?
23
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Priority: Strengthen the
Shared purpose and values across the APS, championed by strong
culture, governance and
and accountable leaders.
leadership model
Context
■ The APS has a compelling institutional foundation. Its mission is to be
What we have heard
an apolitical public service that acts with integrity in all it does, and is
■
“For the APS to be best
efficient and effective in serving the government, the Parliament and
placed to serve Australian
the Australian public.
governments and the
community into the future,
it is essential there is visible,
■ Australia needs a confident and impactful APS to help tackle complex,
cohesive leadership and
interdisciplinary problems in coming decades, ranging from delivering
a clear strategic vision for
seamless services, to navigating international and security interests, and
the APS delivering on the
working with communities on local solutions.
principle that a citizen’s
interactions with government
■ Globally, trust in large institutions has fallen significantly. The APS is not
are as integrated and
immune: Australians want their public service to be accountable and
seamless as possible.”
transparent, and to operate with integrity.
Submission – Australian
Taxation Office
■ There is an aspiration within the service to be one APS, bringing together
■
“Public service should be
the best of all its parts, but this is not lived in practice – incentives,
based on stewardship
institutional structures and the broader authorising environment push
and accountability to
work into vertical siloes that inhibit collaboration and the ability to deliver
drive long-term outcomes
better outcomes.
‘leaving something better
off than we found it’.”
The transformation opportunity
Public workshop
■ Service-wide leadership around clarity of purpose, vision, values and
■
“… the lack of unifying
collective outcomes will ensure that all public servants and agencies see
purpose plays a significant
themselves as part of the service, harnessing their talents and insights in
role in the weaknesses the
the interests of Australia.
APS has in collaboration and
coordination, governance,
■ Clear roles and responsibilities for the APS at its most senior levels – and a
strategic decision-making
renewed mandate for its leaders to work across the service – will enable it to
and organisational
work for the collective benefit of Australia and build long-term capability.
performance management.”
Submission - Anonymous
■ Strengthened governance, with clearer accountability, will drive improved
■
“There are enormous
performance with a renewed focus on integrity.
benefits to encouraging
joined-up outcomes,
particularly as policy
problems become more
interconnected and
dependent on the efforts of
multiple actors.” Submission
– Melbourne School of
Government
■
“The central issue … is to
demonstrate that top
appointments in the APS
are merit-based, and
that the public and the
Parliament can be confident
that appointees can and
will promote as well as
uphold the Values including
of impartiality and non-
partisanship.” Submission
– Andrew Podger
24
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Exhibit 5: A selection of insights informing our thinking on the need to strengthen the culture, governance
and leadership model
We aspire to be a united APS but this is not lived in
Research shows that a shared purpose brings
practice
employees together and delivers benefits
Proportion of APS staff who identify primarily as either an
of executives believe that purpose-driven
APS employee or an employee of their agency
companies will deliver a higher quality of
81% products and services for their clients1
% of respondents
An APS employee
An employee of your agency
Employees who feel connected to their company’s
mission and find meaning and purpose at work are
as likely to
be satisfied
2.2x at work
“One of the benefits for higher-purpose driven
companies is an increase in the willingness of
45 55
40 60
52
48
50
50
teams to partner across functions and product
Small agency
Medium agency
Large agency
Total APS
boundaries”1
SOURCE: APS Employee Census, 2016, q26: If asked to choose, which would you
SOURCE: 1. HBR/EY, The business case for purpose, 2015; 2. HBR/The Energy
primarily consider yourself to be?
Project, Human era at work, 2014
There are opportunities for leaders to set clearer strategic
Strong and accountable leaders are key to success-
vision and foster collaboration
ful change
Respondents indicating that action was taken during
Under
transformation, weighted % of total , global sample
Under 60% of staff think their
Completely successful
Unsuccessful
SES set a clear strategic
transformations
transformations
60% direction for the agency1
Leaders role-modelled the
behaviour changes they
43%
were asking their employees
22%
Under
to make
Under 60% think SES
clearly articulate the
60% direction and priorities
Leaders were held accountable
for the agency1
for their contributions to change
43%
programs in their annual
22%
performance evaluations
Under
Under 45% of APS
employees agree their
Senior-management
49%
45% SES collaborates with
communicated openly and
other agencies2
across the organisation about
18%
progress and success
SOURCE: 1 2018 APS employee census [Q31c,g,h) [agree or strongly agree] 2 2012
SOURCE: McKinsey Centre for Government Transformation Survey,
APS employee census [q53.iv strongly agree or agree] - this question did not
December 2017
appear in recent years, but related questions and submissions to the panel suggest
this remains a challenge for the service
25
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Strengthen the
What we think is needed
culture, governance
■ A legislative requirement to develop an inspiring purpose and vision that
and leadership model
unifies the public service, linked to and building on the existing Public
Service Act values. The purpose should articulate the reason for the APS’s
existence. The vision should outline how the service works and contributes
Common purpose
to Australia.
and vision that
■ A vision for the APS, developed by the Secretaries Board and supported
unites and inspires
by the APS200 (agency heads and deputy secretaries cohort), drawing on
the APS
feedback and ideas from across the service.
The APS has no articulated common
purpose and vision to complement
■ The vision, purpose and values to be embedded in the APS’s culture and
its legislated objects and values. With
way of working, including through public reporting on outcomes and
the issues that matter most becoming
management of performance.
increasingly complex and crossing
portfolio boundaries, a shared purpose What is shaping our thinking
and vision can provide a foundation
■ The well-established practice in high-performing organisations that
for coherent leadership, service
aligning around an aspirational purpose and vision improves individual
alignment and shared execution
satisfaction and lifts organisational performance.
across the APS.
■ Current legislation that establishes
“an apolitical public service that is
efficient and effective in serving the government, the Parliament and the
Australian public”. It also requires collaboration across agencies, and that
individual agencies develop annual purpose statements.
■ Feedback that, while current legislation helps define who the APS serves
and outlines agency responsibilities and deliverables, it does not provide a
focal point for the APS to deliver its work, or address complex or
cross-cutting issues.
■ Commonwealth agencies have purpose and mission statements, which
provide a frame for their work and have been effective in helping
employees clearly identify with their agency. This has resulted in
hundreds of purpose statements across the service.
■ Evidence that, for a shared purpose to endure and move beyond rhetoric,
it should be co-developed through genuine engagement with employees.
■ Positive feedback from current APS employees that a common purpose
and vision would assist in linking their daily work to a national perspective
and align the service.
What we are still exploring
■ Effective ways to embed the common purpose and vision across the
service to drive better outcomes.
■ Whether the present APS values should be amended alongside a new
purpose and vision.
26
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Strengthen the
What we think is needed
culture, governance
■ Secretaries Board with the decision-making rights and support to fulfil its
and leadership model
mandate in leading the APS – including by driving cross-portfolio policy
and delivery outcomes and ensuring the APS is fit for the future.
Secretaries
■ Secretaries Board to prepare a national outlook – with key trends,
Board driving
opportunities and challenges for Australia, based on service-wide data and
outcomes across
insights – published after each election to help inform government policy.
government and
■ Greater access to and communication of the work and decisions of the
APS performance
Secretaries Board, where appropriate, consistent with its leadership role.
The Secretaries Board is the APS’s
■ Establishment of specific Secretaries Board committees as required
principal service-wide governance
to support delivery of government priorities (for example, mirroring
body. There is an opportunity to
Cabinet committees) and service-wide initiatives (for example, the APS
build on its high-level legislated
Reform Committee).
responsibilities, with the Board
driving collective accountability
What is shaping our thinking
for leadership of the APS and
■ The current legislated functions of the Secretaries Board, including:
unifying the service in delivering
taking responsibility for stewardship of the APS; identifying strategic
on government priorities and
priorities; drawing together advice from senior leaders in government,
outcomes for Australians.
business and the community; and working collaboratively and modelling
leadership behaviour.
■ The relationship between accountability of secretaries to their portfolio
ministers and secretaries’ broader stewardship and cross-service
responsibilities as set out in legislation.
■ Feedback on limited APS or public awareness of the Secretaries Board,
alongside evidence that, for the best organisational outcomes, key
governance boards must clearly and regularly communicate their role
and decisions.
■ Experience of comparable international jurisdictions that demonstrates
the benefits of outcomes-focused governance structures that enable cross
portfolio collaborative approaches (for example, Canada and New Zealand).
■ Work already undertaken by the Secretaries Board to support service-wide
initiatives, such as the Diversity Council and APS Reform Committee.
What we are still exploring
■ Appropriate governance, resourcing and support for a strengthened
Secretaries Board. This could include a delivery assurance function to help
monitor and drive delivery of whole-of-government outcomes.
■ How to best reflect in legislation and practice the distinct and complementary
roles of the Secretaries Board, individual secretaries, the Secretary of the
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) and the
APS Commissioner.
27
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Strengthen the
What we think is needed
culture, governance
■ Role and responsibilities of the Secretary of PM&C, as ‘head of service’,
and leadership model
explicitly set out in legislation.
■ Responsibilities of the APS Commissioner clarified in legislation, as ‘head
A defined ‘head
of people’, including a reinforced role in appointment and performance
of service’ and
management of Senior Executive Service (SES) officers, and responsibility
‘head of people’
for professions and for leading a strengthened pro-integrity regime.
The APS needs empowered and
■ Measures to ensure confidence in the appointment process for the APS
accountable leaders to set the
Commissioner, such as requiring parliamentary consultation.
tone and direction for the service.
In particular, the Secretary of
■ A revamped APSC, empowered to fully deliver on its responsibilities,
PM&C and the APS Commissioner
including through sustainable resourcing and strengthened in-house
have critical roles in, respectively,
capability.
overall leadership of the service
and responsibility for people and
What is shaping our thinking
capability within the APS.
■ The analysis and findings of the ANZSOG paper ‘Being a trusted and
respected partner: the APS integrity framework’ by Nikolas Kirby and
Simone Webbe.
■ The experience of other jurisdictions, domestic and international, in
defining and enacting key leadership responsibilities (for example,
Canada and New Zealand).
■ Previous reviews that have envisaged a strengthened role for the APSC,
but implementation has not enabled the necessary change.
■ ‘Division 2 – Commissioner’s appointment, conditions etc.’ of the
Public
Service Act 1999.
What we are still exploring
■ Mechanisms to underpin and reinforce the head of service role for the
Secretary of PM&C – for example, directions powers.
■ Governance options to support the APS Commissioner discharge their role,
such as an advisory board.
28
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Strengthen the
What we think is needed
culture, governance
■ Retention of the Prime Minister’s legislated role to make recommendations
and leadership model
to the Governor-General on the appointment of departmental secretaries.
■ A codified process to inform these recommendations, including
Clarity and
published criteria.
confidence in the
appointment and
■ Transparency around performance expectations and management of
secretaries. This could include clear criteria on the basis for performance
expectations of
and evaluation, and measures linked to legislated responsibilities,
secretaries
government and ministerial priorities, and departmental and service-
wide outcomes.
As set out in legislation, departmental
secretaries have vital roles at the
What is shaping our thinking
apex of the APS, both as principal
■ ‘Part 7—Secretaries of Departments’ in the
Public Service Act 1999.
policy advisors to ministers and as
leaders and stewards of the service.
■ Feedback on the benefits of greater clarity in this area, including for
It is therefore important that all
quality of APS advice to ministers and the ongoing recruitment of
Australians have confidence in
potential future leaders.
the appointment, performance
management and termination
■ The experience of international jurisdictions, such as New Zealand and the
processes for secretaries.
UK, with prescribed processes for appointments of departmental heads.
What we are still exploring
■ Options to support advice to the Prime Minister on appointments, for
example a panel including the Secretary of PM&C, the APS Commissioner
and a ministerial nominee.
■ Options for greater rigour and transparency for any proposed termination
of secretaries, while retaining the Prime Minister’s legislated role to make
recommendations to the Governor-General.
■ Structural options to support greater collaboration among secretaries.
■ Appointment processes and expectations of agency heads, building on
existing guidelines.
29
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Strengthen the
What we think is needed
culture, governance
■ Public performance commitments and reporting that focus on measures
and leadership model
and outcomes that matter to the Australian people.
■ The Secretaries Board taking a prominent role in improving the quality of
Genuine
performance reporting across the service, including through realising the
transparency and
intent of the
Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act
accountability for
2013 (PGPA Act) and with a focus on providing meaningful information
to people.
delivering outcomes
for Australians
■ Reinstatement of regular independent capability reviews for all departments
and large agencies. Such reports – and management responses – should be
It is important that measures of
publicly released.
outcomes and performance in the
APS are not exclusively based on
■ Publication of annual APS employee census results for each agency,
agency silos, reflect a robust evidence
alongside management responses, with the APS Commissioner empowered
base, and address project or cross-
to review results that warrant attention.
portfolio outcomes that matter
most to Australians. This will boost
■ A disposition to seek and act upon external perspectives to help improve
accountability and trust in the service.
agency health, for example, through the greater use of advisory boards.
A future APS will welcome scrutiny
and feedback, and make the most
What is shaping our thinking
of such insights to lift performance
■ Feedback that fear of failure is affecting the approach to performance
across the service.
reporting, including use of metrics that are easier to measure rather than
outcomes of importance to the public.
■ International (for example New Zealand and Canada) and domestic (NSW
and WA) efforts to improve transparency of performance, for both policy
and citizen-service measures.
■ Relevant findings of the ‘Independent Review into the Operation of the
Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013’ (PGPA Act
Review), particularly recommendations 1, 4 and 34.
What we are still exploring
■ How to ensure that any new arrangements around APS performance
reporting are useful to the Parliament, including the Joint Committee
for Public Accounts and Audit and other parliamentary committees.
30
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Priority: Build a flexible
A dynamic operating model that enables collaboration and focusses
APS operating model
APS energy on the highest priorities.
Context
■ Like all large, complex organisations, the APS will need to adapt to respond
What we have heard
effectively to shifting challenges in an uncertain future.
■
“Our research into MoG
changes suggests they
■ Organisations that adopt more dynamic operating models respond faster
are frequently enacted
to changing priorities, better meet the needs of people they serve, and
but poorly implemented…
engage and empower employees.
and highly disruptive.” Submission – UNSW, Public
■ The APS and its people aspire to a unified service, but significant cultural
Service Research Group
and structural barriers constrain effective collaboration outside of crises.
■
“There are different HR and
■ Many of the APS’s systems, processes and policies limit the flow of
filing systems, different
information, people and resources between agencies. Efforts to harmonise
reporting structures and
this have faced challenges of coordination, funding, and governance.
so on. This results in an
incredible waste of time to
■ Machinery of Government (MoG) changes are a principal means for
transfer from one agency
governments to align APS functions around their priorities. Over the past
within the APS to another.”
20 years, the APS has undergone more than 200 MoG changes.
Submission - Anonymous
The transformation opportunity
■
“It is imperative that
■ An APS with common or networked enabling platforms, systems and
cultures and behaviours
policies will deliver efficiencies and allow resources and people to be
across the APS facilitate
focused on strategic priorities.
collaboration across
portfolios, including
■ Rather than reverting to centralisation and control, a move to common,
as policy priorities and
shared or interoperable platforms will enable the APS to link up and
portfolio intersections
coordinate to deliver more effective outcomes.
change.” Review
questionnaire - Department
■ A better flow of information and people across the APS will facilitate
of Human Services
collaboration across and within agencies, allowing faster and more
effective responses.
■
“[To] support a culture of
collaboration [we need]
■ An improved resourcing and financing framework will ensure that,
the development of a
consistent with government policy, the APS can reallocate resources
consistent set of principles
proactively and – for example – enable investment in the underlying
for working together.”
digital platforms needed to deliver long-term outcomes.
Submission - Australian
Taxation Office
■ Simpler workforce structures will support effective decision-making,
empower employees and deepen the culture of collaboration across
institutional boundaries.
■ A truly dynamic operating model will reduce the need for MoG changes –
and when they are needed they will be cheaper, quicker, and more efficient.
31
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Exhibit 6: A selection of insights informing our thinking on the need to build a flexible APS
operating model
The APS lacks common ways of working, networked enabling systems, and resource allocation processes needed dynamic
prioritisation and collaboration
Survey of APS on operating model dimensions that contribute to organisational agility
%, n = 900
Strongly agree
Somewhat agree
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
People in the APS are able to move seamlessly
between agencies as a result of standardised
1
9
31
40
approaches and systems (e.g. HR practices, security
procedures, IT)
Decision-making processes at my agency
4
24
32
22
are efficient and timely
My agency redeploys resources (e.g.
high-performing individuals, funds) to
6
25
28
16
where they are needed most
The APS is broadly underpinned by consistent
and common workplace practices and
7
29
27
14
business processes at agency-level
SOURCE: Results from APS Review survey of operating model elements across the service. Note: Figures do not add to 100% as neutral responses are not included
APS processes and systems are fragmented and some
Organisations that have adopted agile
are nearing end of life
working practices see benefits
Survey on impact of agile practices1
% of respondents who believe agile has
bespoke IT systems being separately
produced better outcomes, n=3880
managed and maintained across
170+ the APS to deliver corporate services1
…ability to manage
changing priorities
87
bespoke business
…increased team
productivity
85
processes across
200+ government agencies
with little coordination
…increased team
morale/motivation
81
SOURCE: Department of Finance
SOURCE: 10th Annual State of Agile report, VersionOne, 2016
32
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Build a flexible APS
What we think is needed
operating model
■ An operating model that dynamically responds to new and shifting
priorities, with a culture and shared ways of working that allow teams to
come together to tackle priorities for government and the Australian people.
Dynamic ways
of working
■ The optimum hierarchies, management layers and spans of control to
and structures
empower people and teams, and drive effective decision-making.
to empower
■ Performance measures that reward collaboration and support employees
individuals and
to excel in a dynamic and adaptive environment.
teams – making
What is shaping our thinking
collaboration
■ Increasing evidence that more dynamic ways of working help large
the norm
organisations respond to people’s needs faster, deliver better outcomes,
Australia’s most significant public
increase productivity and improve employee engagement.
policy challenges are invariably
complex and will increasingly cut
■ Concerns that current work practices too often reflect individual agency
across portfolio and organisational
preferences and focus, rather than being oriented around solving complex
boundaries. The future APS must be
issues and delivering outstanding services..
able to take on challenges with the
capacity to adopt new approaches,
■ Balancing the important prerogative of government to structure the
reconfigure teams and deploy skills
APS as it sees fit, against feedback on the cost, disruption and variable
where and when most needed.
outcomes when such MoG changes occur.
Machinery of government changes
can be used to align the APS with
■ Work underway through the Secretaries Board examining structures and
government priorities, but the service
operating models, to ensure the APS way of working supports integration,
should not wait for – or rely on – these
efficiency and a focus on citizen services.
to transform the way it works.
■ Feedback that current structures and ways of working inhibit information
sharing and can delay decision-making. Evidence on optimal approaches
to hierarchy, management layers, and spans of control in improving
efficacy of decision-making and overall organisational health.
What we are still exploring
■ Initiatives to drive the necessary cultural change to embed new ways of
working, including training, incentives and other support.
■ Opportunities for the APS to meet government expectations and minimise
the need for MoG changes, and to reduce costs and disruption when they
do occur.
33
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Build a flexible APS
What we think is needed
operating model
■ A budgetary framework that: retains fiscal discipline and aligns spending
with government priorities; enables faster resource reallocation and
improved collaboration; and ensures the APS is sustainably resourced
Strategic
to serve the government, the Parliament and the Australian public.
allocation of funds
and resources
■ Clear alignment between government priorities and public service
resourcing. This could include agreement on a small number of cross-
to outcomes
portfolio policy priorities (guided by government and supported by
and essential
Secretaries Board) and reprioritising existing spending to reflect these.
investment
■ Processes to ensure ministers receive the best Budget advice from
Some aspects of the Budget process
an investment and policy perspective, taking a whole-of-government
can have unintended consequences
approach to funding and incorporating long-term assessments of
for APS collaboration, experimentation
program and investment outcomes.
and long-term thinking. This risks
undermining both the quality of
■ A sustainable approach to departmental capital funding, including greater
advice to government and the
capacity to invest in long-term projects.
implementation of government
decisions. A cross-portfolio approach
What is shaping our thinking
to allocating resources and prioritising
■ The important role of government in setting Budget rules that best support
investments presents an opportunity
its fiscal strategy and policy priorities.
to deliver better outcomes for all.
■ Governments’ expectations that APS systems, and structures and
resourcing enable both the development of good policy and budget
advice, and the effective implementation of government decisions.
■ Feedback that some processes are impeding the APS’s ability to reallocate
resources to shifting priorities, or to work across agency boundaries to
design or implement policies that reflect cross-government priorities and
deliver the best results for people.
■ Concerns around the approach to investment in APS infrastructure and
systems, including: the way offsets work in practice; challenges presenting
the benefits of longer-term investment; and the steady decline of
departmental capital budgets.
■ Recent efforts to address internal APS capital investment priorities,
including initiatives such as the Modernisation Fund.
■ The experience of other jurisdictions in aligning whole-of-government
priorities with civil service resourcing, including through long-term results
frameworks and outcomes-based budgeting (e.g. New Zealand, NSW and
the UK).
What we are still exploring
■ The best approach to funding for APS capital investments and sustainable
departmental capital allocation models.
34
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Build a flexible APS
What we think is needed
operating model
■ A stable spine of common digital platforms and policy frameworks that
can operate across the APS for core enabling services, including human
resources, finance, ICT and data sharing.
Networked enabling
systems and
■ The Secretaries Board to oversee development of this spine, subject to any
common processes
direction by government. In driving digital transformation across the APS the
Board should provide clear guidance on which enabling functions should be
across the service
common or shared and which should be bespoke.
Despite some promising new
initiatives, the APS’s disparate
■ A digitally enabled APS, with sophisticated systems and deep capabilities
enabling systems and processes
in data analytics, AI and automation.
are affecting its performance,
efficiency and capacity to meet
■ Staged implementation of the required changes, commensurate
expectations. A move to networked
with available resources, and prioritisation of projects that drive a
and common arrangements would
collaborative culture.
facilitate greater mobility and
collaboration, build digital capability,
■ A move towards common pay and conditions across the service.
and make the most of automation
and AI in service delivery.
What is shaping our thinking
■ Feedback that many APS assets are nearing end of life, concerns over
potential business risks, and support for a coordinated service-wide
approach to investment in this area.
■ Feedback that a lack of standardised processes and systems (such as for HR,
security, IT) are barriers to working across internal APS boundaries; and that an
inability to move resources quickly to where they are most needed is affecting
APS capacity to innovate and deliver outcomes for people and government.
■ International experience that consolidating and harmonising mainstream
IT platforms and associated processes can deliver significant cost savings
and operational improvements (for example, Denmark’s Government IT
Services Agency).
■ The approaches of other jurisdictions experimenting with shared portals for
citizen services, and finding that inter-operability between services can be
more efficient than moving to single platforms.
■ Significant APS work underway to tackle these challenges, including reform
initiatives under the Modernisation Fund, such as shared services, and the
Data Integration Partnership for Australia.
■ The conclusions and recommendations of Ahead of the Game on aligning
processes and policies, including pay and conditions, over time.
What we are still exploring
■ Optimal arrangements to deliver a digitally enabled APS, including the
important role of the Digital Transformation Agency.
35
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Priority: Invest in capability An integrated workforce strategy, building and maintaining
and talent development
service-wide skills to deliver and innovate.
Context
■ The APS is a knowledge organisation and its most valuable asset is its people.
What we have heard
■
“I joined for a job, stayed
■ However, this asset can be taken for granted. Workforce planning can be
because of the fulfilment
fragmented and ad hoc, current capability and future capability needs are
each day – started by
unclear, and learning and development activities are not systematically linked
chance, stayed by choice.”
to agency objectives.
APS employee workshop -
Anonymous
■ There are concerns that the APS’s capability has diminished over time, that
there is too much unused potential, that specific skills gaps have emerged,
■
“Government as an
and that the APS’s bench strength is not what it once was.
employer should be
setting a gold standard
■ There are also concerns that successful leadership is more often concerned
example – not only meeting
with responsiveness, and upward management, rather than the
minimum standards but
management and development of people.
going above and beyond
to strive for excel ence,
■ The APS has long aspired to reflect the diversity of the broader community
innovation and best
but there is more to do. The barriers to entry for outsiders can be too high,
practice as an employer.”
which limits the range of skills, experience and insights across the service.
Principal submission,
Commonwealth Public
■ If not addressed, these weaknesses will be exacerbated in the coming years
Sector Union
as the APS workforce is reshaped by technological and other trends.
■
“We have many ambitious,
The transformation opportunity
capable people not
■ Empowered people with the right capabilities will lift overall performance
reaching their full potential
of the APS, enabling the APS to best serve the government and the people
(they are frustrated, bored).”
of Australia.
Submission - Anonymous
■ An APS-wide workforce strategy, led by the APSC, presents a good
■
“I have observed a gradual
opportunity to drive new approaches to long-term workforce planning
erosion of specialist expertise.
and capability development. This will help the APS attract and retain a
This affects the ability of the
diverse workforce in an increasingly competitive labour market.
APS to provide quality policy
advice, regulatory oversight
■ The approach to capability and talent development should be predicated
and services.” Submission -
on a sophisticated understanding of long-term workforce trends, including
Anonymous
the opportunities flowing from technological advances. It should reflect a
contemporary employee value proposition, centred on meaningful work,
■
“We need greater diversity.
inclusive workplaces, and opportunities for development and growth for
We have to change the
all employees.
lens on how decisions
are made. If we want a
■ A transformed workforce will underpin stronger institutional capacity,
fairer Australia, we need a
including to undertake deep research, evaluation and data analytics. It
public service that reflects
will also be critical to integrated policy approaches that take a strategic
Australia.” Public workshop
view of Australia’s interests across economic, social, security and
- Anonymous
international domains.
36
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Exhibit 7: A selection of insights informing our thinking on the need to invest in capability and
talent development
The APS does not put enough focus on coaching
Capability reviews have highlighted gaps
and development
in strategic capability
of those thinking of leaving their
Assessment of strategic capability of agencies
agency cite career-development
42%
Number of agencies assessed at each capability level, n=22
-related reasons as the primary
explanation1
8
Over
6
of APS employees said they
were not coached by their
40% line manager at work2
4
2
2
Just over
of agencies reported having
a formal talent management
3
4
5 6 7
8
9 10
11
12
25% strategy in place3
Serious
Development
Well placed
Strong
concerns
area
Strategic capability assessment composite score reflecting
outcomes-focused, evidence-based, and collaboration
SOURCE: 1. APS Census, 2018. Note: This is the sum of 5 questions related to career
SOURCE: APSC Capability Reviews, 2012-2015
development Q42.1-5; 2. APS Census, 2018; 3. State of the Service 2017-18, ASPC
The APS struggles to attract and retain diverse employ-
Capturing opportunities for improved services
ees, particularly at senior levels
through automation will change the skills needed in
the APS
Diversity by classification
% of classification by diversity group, 2018
% of Australian
Estimated shift in skills in the APS
population
APS 1 - 3
APS 4-6
EL 1-2
SES
2017-2030, %
Indigenous1
7%
3%
2%
1%
3%3
Basic cognitive
skills
-15%
Physical and
-4%
manual skills
Ongoing
disability2
11%
8%
7%
5%
18%4
Higher cognitive
skills
3%
Language
Social and
other than
emotional skills
12%
English at
home
15%
21%5
2
21%
19%
8%
Technological
skills
20%
50%3
Women1
67%
59%
50%
45%
SOURCE: 1. APSED, June 2018 [Indigenous rates exclude missing data]; 2. 2018 APS
employee census [Q16, 18a]; 3. ABS population statistics, 2018; 4. ABS Disability, Ageing
and Carers, Australia: Summary of Findings, 2015 [Percentage in the labour force]; 5.
SOURCE: APSC data, 2017; ATO data, 2018, McKinsey Global Institute
ABS Census, 2016 [Percentage of those who speak a language other than English at
workforce skills model
home]
37
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Invest in capability and
What we think is needed
talent development
■ Formal, focussed professionalisation of all APS roles delivered through a
new ‘professions model’, drawing on international best practice. It should
encompass delivery, regulation and policy, as well as key enabling functions
Professionalised
including HR, procurement and data analysis.
functions across
the service to
■ Constituent professions should reflect the core, long-term capability needs,
and encompass both generalists and specialists. All professions will be of
deepen expertise
equal status, and people will be encouraged to move between them where
Today’s approach to capability
it makes sense to do so.
development and career planning
is not building the workforce the
■ A Head of Professions – the APS Commissioner – to steward development
APS increasingly needs or providing
and implementation; and nurture the next generation of leaders from across
employees with opportunities they
the APS.
seek. A systematic, service-wide
approach to lifting people capability
■ Senior officers appointed to head each constituent profession, supported
and making the most use of skills
by the APSC, to develop competencies, standards and career pathways, and
and experience will improve overall
to guide recruitment priorities and approaches. Their responsibilities and
performance of the APS for today
accountabilities will be distinct from those of agency heads.
and the future.
■ A dedicated, sustainably resourced, APS Academy to source, design, deliver
and/or leverage relevant capability-building initiatives to support the model.
This should draw on best practice in each profession, as well as public,
private, domestic and international experience.
What is shaping our thinking
■ Lack of career development and progression being the primary stated
reason people leave the APS.
■ The experience of other jurisdictions (for example, the UK and Singapore)
and leading private sector organisations in developing specialist professional
development tracks.
■ Lessons from other jurisdictions that have established dedicated specialist
learning academies (for example, Canada’s School of Public Service) and
portfolio-specific initiatives such as DFAT’s Diplomatic Academy.
■ Concerns that the APS’s capability has diminished over time, that there
is too much unused potential, that specific skills gaps have emerged (for
example, data capabilities), and that the APS’s bench strength is not what it
once was.
What we are still exploring
■ How best to empower heads of each profession with appropriate authority
and influence without confusing accountabilities or disrupting agencies’
management of their workforce.
■ How best to define professions and prioritise skills and roles most in need of
capability uplift.
■ Opportunities to partner with existing institutions, for example ANZSOG, in
developing an APS Academy proposal.
38
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Invest in capability and
What we think is needed
talent development
■ Managers required to devote significant time developing and mentoring staff
- and recognised for doing so - supported by effective leadership training, and
reinforced through positive role modelling and clear accountabilities.
Empowered
managers
■ Stronger incentives for managers to build and nurture capable and diverse
accountable for
teams and inclusive workplaces.
developing people
■ Performance management practices and systems that support both
and teams
managers and staff – including: routine use of 360-degree feedback and
views of external stakeholders; and linking appraisal outcomes with career
It is important that APS managers
opportunities and learning and development requirements.
are incentivised to deliver outcomes
in the long-term interests of
■ These practices and systems should complement the new professions
Australia, build capability of their
model by recognising and rewarding a diverse range of skills and
staff and agency, and are responsive
career paths.
to immediate priorities. Formal
recognition and celebration of great
■ Performance management of the Senior Executive Service that better
people managers will strengthen
reflects its legislated APS-wide functions and emphasises collaboration
APS capability and make it a more
and cross-portfolio outcomes. This should be developed by the APS
rewarding place to work.
Commissioner and implemented by agency heads.
What is shaping our thinking
■ International best practice, which highlights the importance of linking
individual performance goals to organisational priorities, ensuring that
managers provide continuous feedback, reward high performers, develop
the broad middle, and move quickly on underperformers.
■ Concerns about a lack of focus on coaching and development. Less than
half of APS employees consider SES make time to identify and develop
talented people and just over a quarter of all agencies report having a
formal talent management strategy.
■ Feedback that current career development and performance evaluation
frameworks are not applied rigorously or consistently. Few APS employees
consider their agency deals effectively with underperformance or
recognises high performance.
What we are still exploring
■ Strategies to upskill managers to develop their employees effectively,
and to prioritise this responsibility consistently.
39
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Invest in capability and
What we think is needed
talent development
■ Strategically-targeted recruitment, based on an APS-wide workforce
strategy and informed by the new professions model. The focus should
be on building the right capabilities across the service and positioning
Strategic
agencies to make the best decisions about their respective workforces.
recruitment,
development and
■ Annual external recruitment at EL and SES levels, modelled on the
approach to graduates, to reduce barriers to entry from outside the APS.
mobility to build
the workforce of
■ Targeted mobility into, out of, and across the APS, particularly for
the future
potential leaders, and more access to career-defining opportunities for
all employees (such as overseas postings and exchanges with state and
The APS relies on outdated
territory public services).
approaches to recruitment, lacks
consistency in inducting new
■ Whole-of-service induction and ongoing initiatives to build common
entrants, and does not routinely
understanding of the APS’s role, purpose and culture. This should be
identify and nurture talent and
complemented by specific profession- and agency-based initiatives to
future leaders. This is affecting
build competencies and knowledge of key systems.
the composition of its workforce.
Recruiting, nurturing, and
What is shaping our thinking
developing people with a diversity
■ Evidence that both public- and private-sector organisations deliver better
of backgrounds, skills and insights
outcomes, with greater customer trust and confidence when they reflect the
will help build capability and foster
diversity – in identity and lived experience – of those they serve, and create
greater creativity across the service.
the environment for those teams to flourish.
■ The fact that graduate recruitment is currently the only time the APS
systematically looks outside itself for recruitment. Ninety-two per cent of
promotions in the APS in 2017 were internal to the agency, and over a
quarter of external-hire SES leave within two years.
■ Fifty-two per cent of APS employees agree that their agency provides
opportunities for mobility within the agency, and just 32 per cent say their
agency provides opportunities for mobility outside the agency.
■ Evidence that the APS continues to struggle to attract and retain employees
with diverse backgrounds, particularly at senior levels, and the sustained
effort needed to achieve lasting change.
■ Promising Secretaries Board initiatives being implemented by the APSC to
nurture leaders.
What we are still exploring
■ Specific mechanisms to attract, retain and progress a genuinely inclusive
and diverse workforce, including targets with hard accountability.
■ How to ensure mobility measures are carefully planned, create clear value
for agencies and individuals, and do not undermine continuity or expertise
within the affected agencies.
■ How best to nurture high performers with demonstrated potential to be
future leaders in the APS.
40
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Invest in capability and
What we think is needed
talent development
■ Explicit acknowledgement – in agency planning, resourcing and
reporting – of the importance of research, evaluation and data analytics
in policy development and delivery.
21st century delivery,
regulation and
■ Additional and ongoing resourcing to: build in-house research capability;
policy capabilities
sustain existing evidence-gathering tools and agencies; proficiently
commission external research; and develop necessary digital talent and
There is an opportunity to reprioritise
skills, particularly in data analytics and emerging technologies.
time, effort and resources for deep
research, analysis and evaluation, and
■ Evaluation capability and practices embedded across the APS, supported
big data and analytics, to underpin
by central enabling advice and consistent methodologies, with specific
APS capacity to provide the highest
requirements to undertake evaluations of major measures.
quality advice to governments.
■ Experimentation with new models to challenge and disrupt traditional
approaches to developing policy, regulation and services (for example,
time-limited special purpose units).
What is shaping our thinking
■ The analysis and findings of the ANZSOG paper ‘Evaluation and learning
from failure and success’ by Rob Bray, Matthew Gray and Paul ‘t Hart.
■ Public policy discourse on the role of evaluation in improving policy, and
international experience in embedding evaluation. For example, the
Government Accountability Office in the United States of America, and the
What Works Network in the UK.
■ Global experience in the use of data analytics in policy development,
including to simulate the impacts of proposed policy changes.
■ Feedback that applied research functions across the APS have diminished
over time.
What we are still exploring
■ How best to overcome the understandable reluctance to identify, accept
and act upon potential findings flowing from evaluations.
■ Options for the design and use of the ‘professions model’ in these areas.
41
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Invest in capability and
What we think is needed
talent development
■ Measures to ensure the APS overcomes cultural and structural silos, with
people understanding other perspectives and disciplines, and looking to
find shared solutions, without eroding healthy contestability. This should
Policy advice that
be developed through explicit professional and career development and
integrates social,
movement between portfolios.
economic, security
■ New frameworks and structures to underpin high quality and whole-
and international
of-government advice on cross-cutting social, economic and security
perspectives
issues. This could include a Secretaries Board committee to frame and
commission work on such issues, and a cross-disciplinary Integrated
The APS has placed longstanding
Strategy Office in PM&C to coordinate policy advice to the Prime Minister
emphasis on the need to take a
and Cabinet.
whole-of-government perspective
to its work. This will become even
■ Regular whole-of-government scenario exercises to identify key pressures
more crucial in the years ahead.
on international, social, economic and security matters, and possible
The opportunity is for a system
approaches and actions for government consideration.
geared to consistently provide
robust advice to government
What is shaping our thinking
that integrates and balances the
■ The ongoing challenge for the public sector, domestically and globally, to
emerging international, social,
ensure silos do not undermine the quality of advice to governments. This
economic and security pressures
includes grappling with fragmentation and the cultural and behavioural
facing Australia and Australians.
change required to tackle cross-cutting issues.
■ The experiences and lessons of multiple international jurisdictions (including
the UK, Singapore and Finland) in establishing inter-disciplinary or future-
focused units, with dedicated resources and strong mandates.
■ Feedback that these models are more successful when they are empowered
to consider a wide range of inter-disciplinary issues, rather than focusing on
a specific policy challenge, such as national security.
■ The Intergenerational Report, which assesses the long-term sustainability
of current government policies with a focus on demographics.
■ The legislative requirement for secretaries to ensure their portfolio has a
strong strategic policy capability that can consider complex, whole-of-
government issues.
What we are still exploring
■ Options to embed and resource integrated policy development functions,
with the necessary capability, across the APS.
42
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Priority: Develop
Working openly and with integrity with partners, to support the
stronger internal and
delivery of outcomes for Australians.
external partnerships
Context
■ Key to the APS’s success in serving the government, the Parliament and the
What we have heard
Australian public is the quality and depth of its relationships.
■
“Developing good policy
involves negotiations
■ There are concerns that these relationships can be undermined by the APS’s
between the public service
misplaced sense of primacy: as, for example, the exclusive provider of advice
and stakeholders, and
to government, curator of privileged information, keeper of rules, and owner
the testing of ideas. Not
of process.
everyone gets everything
they want. In such
■ At its worst, public engagement by the APS can be seen as a series of cynical,
situations, trust and respect
tick-a-box consultation processes with pre-determined outcomes. States and
can be the difference
territories also express dissatisfaction with the quality of some engagement.
between people remaining
at the table or walking
■ One of the APS’s most critical relationships – with ministers and their offices
away.” Prof Ian Anderson
– could be strengthened, reflecting the APS’s important role as a trusted
adviser to successive governments.
■
“The independence of the
APS has been corroded
The transformation opportunity
over time by a blurring of
■ Advances in technology and data analytics mean the APS is better placed
the line between the role of
than ever to routinely engage with its partners, and to deliver robust and
the service and the role of
timely advice, and quality services.
elected politicians and their
staff … creating a culture
■ A fundamental rethink of its key relationships will move the APS to solving
of defensiveness that
problems in genuine partnership with ministers and their offices, civil
impedes frank and fearless
society, business, academia, other jurisdictions, and the Australian public.
evidence-based advice or
learning from iterations
■ The APS must approach these relationships openly and with humility.
of policy development
Like all effective partnerships, there will at times be robust debate and
and implementation.”
even disagreement – but the goals will be clear and shared, and the
Submission - Anglicare
interactions respectful.
■
“Progress on society’s most
■ More broadly, there should be an expectation that great agencies and
complex problems will not
public servants engage meaningfully and regularly outside the service
occur without all levels of
as part of core business. People at all levels must be empowered to live
government and all sectors
this approach.
of society collaborating
more effectively… leveraging
■ Embracing this approach will boost the APS’s ability to design and deliver
government’s convening
innovative, fit-for-purpose solutions, its position as a trusted adviser to
power, and working cross-
successive governments, and its reputation as an organisation with the
sectoral y.” Submission -
highest standards of integrity and ethics.
Save the Children Australia
■
“Greater collaboration with
industry to identify and
solve problems (‘codesign’)
can identify alternatives to
legislation or improve the
effectiveness of policies,
reduce costs and avoid
unintended consequences.” Submission - Business
Council of Australia
43
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Exhibit 8: A selection of insights informing our thinking on the need to develop stronger internal and
external partnerships
There are clear opportunities for government agencies to
These is significant room for improvement in how
increase coordination and
the APS delivers services
collaboration in delivery of services
Citizen satisfaction with APS agencies;
Overall satisfaction (%)
People have up to
different logins for
various government
30 services1
100
ServiceNSW (benchmark)
National Disability
90
Insurance Scheme
IP Australia
80
Service NSW has been able to get
35 government entities partnering together
35
Centrelink
to provide seamless transactions2
70
Australian Taxation
Office
60
2016
2017
2018
SOURCE: 1 Australian Government Digital Transformation Strategy.
SOURCE: Agency annual reports. Note: each agency uses a slightly
2 Service NSW Annual Report 2018
different questions to test satisfaction but these are broadly comparable
There is significant room to improve procurement
Open data will improve outcomes but the
outcomes across the APS
Australian Government is not sufficiently trusted
of government expenditure
% of respondents who ‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’
on procured goods and
$47.4Bn services in 2016–171
The Australian government …
… could respond
quickly and effectively
33
0.5%
to a data breach
of contracts accounted for almost
three-quarters of the total value of
APS contracts in 2017-20182
… has the ability to
prevent data being
29
hacked or leaked
… can be trusted
Estimated savings from application of
to use data
best practice procurement disciplines,
15%
28
responsibly
drawing on experience of
governments worldwide3
… is open and honest
about how data is
26
collected, used and shared
SOURCE: 1. Australian Government Procurement Contract Reporting, ANAO, 2017;
2 Janine O’Flynn and Gary L. Sturgess (2019) “2030 and Beyond: Getting the work
of government done” 3 McKinsey (2017), “Government Productivity: unlocking the
SOURCE: Public attitudes towards data governance in Australia, ANU, 2018
$3.5 trillion opportunity”
44
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Develop stronger internal
What we think is needed
and external partnerships
■ A service-wide ambition to ensure people can access seamless and
personalised services and support irrespective of which agency, portfolio
and ultimately government is responsible for its provision.
Seamless services
and local solutions
■ Close links between Commonwealth service providers (for example,
designed and
social, health, employment, immigration and education) and greater
collaboration with states and territories on joined up service delivery.
delivered with
states, territories
■ New ways of working with families, communities, non-government
and other partners
providers and other partners to enable better social outcomes – including
through wrap-around case management and place-based approaches.
The APS is not best-placed to
meet growing expectations for
■ Connected digital platforms, with the requisite privacy protections, to
government services to be delivered
streamline services and focus them where they are most needed.
in an integrated and individualised
fashion. Technological advances,
■ Agencies empowered and accountable for continuous improvement of
and a renewed focus on outcomes
customer satisfaction with key government services and support.
and impacts rather than inputs and
process, present an opportunity to
What is shaping our thinking
rethink how the APS designs and
■ The analysis and findings of ANZSOG papers ‘Delivering local solutions’
delivers government services.
by Catherine Althaus and Carmel McGregor and ‘Working with other
jurisdictions’ by Ben Rimmer, Cheryl Saunders and Michael Crommelin.
■ The Government’s Digital Transformation Strategy, especially the priority
that
“government is easy to deal with by 2025”.
■ Evidence from other jurisdictions that streamlining the user’s end-to-end
journey, through human-centred design and digitisation, significantly
improves experience while reducing costs.
■ The fact that Australia’s most pressing public policy challenges increasingly
manifest at the boundaries of Commonwealth and state responsibilities, in
areas such as health, education, environment and energy.
■ Reflections on how public servants from all levels of government work
together in emergencies or crises, placing local communities at the centre,
with those responsible liberated to challenge traditional processes, frame
problems and identity solutions cooperatively, and take calculated risks.
What we are still exploring
■ Options for structural change to drive coordination and alignment of
service delivery.
■ Potential to pilot joint Commonwealth and state delivery arrangements for
particular services and/or regions.
45
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Develop stronger internal
What we think is needed
and external partnerships
■ Regular release of, and transparency around, data, analysis, research and
evaluations, driven by an ongoing commitment to create greater
public value.
An open APS,
accountable for
■ Formal commitments to work in partnership with others (for example, civil
sharing information
society and business) on core policy, delivery and regulatory work – with all
parties publicly accountable for adhering to those commitments.
and engaging widely
The APS is too often perceived by
■ Proactive approaches to engaging with Australians on their views and
stakeholders to be a closed book,
expectations of the APS, including through regular citizen surveys.
reflecting a risk averse culture,
reluctance to provide information
What is shaping our thinking
and sometimes tokenistic approaches
■ Initiatives underway as part of Australia’s ‘Open Government National
to consultation. Sharing more of its
Action Plan’.
work with partners, and genuinely
listening to and acting on their
■ Steps in Australia and elsewhere to increase openness and engagement.
insights, will help deliver better
For example, the Victorian framework for planning and implementing
outcomes and earn public trust.
effective public participation exercises, and New Zealand’s decision to
proactively release some traditionally confidential material.
■ Evidence that technology has lowered barriers to understanding what
people want and expect from government and their satisfaction with
public services. For example, Indonesia allows citizens to report on
services in real-time by SMS, while other countries use citizen surveys to
understand what drives public trust and satisfaction over time.
■ The regular national survey of citizen experiences and satisfaction with the
APS and the services it delivers, being undertaken by PM&C.
What we are still exploring
■ The extent to which the Freedom of Information regime is helping the
APS balance openness with the importance of providing frank and
fearless advice to government.
■ Suitable mechanisms to authorise and empower senior APS officers to
lead by example in setting an ‘openness by default’ culture.
46
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Develop stronger internal
What we think is needed
and external partnerships
■ Policies that, when taken together, empower agencies to achieve long-
term positive outcomes and value for money through procurement
activities, and holds them accountable for this, as well as maintaining
Strategic, service-
fiscal discipline and strong compliance mechanisms.
wide approaches
to procurement to
■ Centres of excellence to: aggregate and provide transparency on the
costs and benefits of procurement activities; apply data analytics to this
deliver better value
information and identify potential whole-of-service efficiencies; and
and outcomes for
develop and drive new approaches to procurement.
Australians
■ Specialist capability to: project demand for procured goods and
The APS invests significantly in
services; make strategic decisions about when to procure goods and
goods and services from private
services externally and when to develop them in-house; shape supplier
and not-for-profit providers and
markets to drive innovation; and evaluate procurement activities against
this is unlikely to change in the
intended outcomes.
future. It is therefore critical the
APS has the knowledge and skills
■ Use of the ‘professions model’ to develop this capability.
to expertly design, oversee
and manage its contractual
What is shaping our thinking
arrangements with integrity.
■ The analysis and findings of the ANZSOG papers ‘2030 and Beyond:
Getting the Business of Government Done’ by Janine O’Flynn and
Gary L. Sturgess and ‘The APS Integrity Framework’ by Nikolas Kirby
and Simone Webbe.
■ The Commonwealth Procurement Rules and the new Centre of
Procurement Excellence.
■ Key characteristics of success in use of third parties to efficiently and
effectively deliver goods and services on behalf of the APS. For example,
knowledge transfer requirements and implications for long-term
in-house capability.
■ Feedback on implications from the use of consultants, contract labour, and
outsourcing arrangements for the APS’s long-term capability.
■ The experience of other jurisdictions, such as the UK, Canada, New Zealand
and NSW, in developing ‘strategic commissioning’ frameworks.
■ Experience to date with commissioning approaches in parts of the APS,
including the Department of Defence’s ‘independent contestability’ function,
and the Digital Transformation Agency’s ‘ask the marketplace’ initiative.
What we are still exploring
■ How best to ensure the APS’s high standards of ethics and integrity are
reflected in arrangements with external providers; including protocols for
former public servants.
■ How best to integrate current thinking around the application and benefits
of a strategic commissioning framework.
47
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Develop stronger internal
What we think is needed
and external partnerships
■ Measures to provide greater access for ministers to subject matter and
public administration expertise, and to deepen APS understanding of
ministers’ needs and expectations. This could include new positions for
Ministers supported
senior public servants in ministerial offices and a higher proportion of
through easier
ministerial policy staff with public sector experience.
access to APS
■ Deployment of technological platforms to enable ministers to access up-to-
expertise and
date advice from the APS at any time and from anywhere in the world.
insights and
formal recognition
■ Practical induction, ongoing guidance and training in public administration
and how to get the best out of the APS for ministers and other
of distinct role of
parliamentarians, and their staff.
ministerial advisors
The APS’s critical relationship with
■ Formal recognition of the distinct and important role of ministerial advisors,
the executive and the Parliament
including clarity of role (both in relation to ministers and public servants)
has evolved, but without a
and accountability.
corresponding evolution in some
of the conventions and practices
What is shaping our thinking
surrounding this relationship. There
■ The analysis and findings of the ANZSOG paper ‘The APS’ relationship with
is untapped opportunity to strengthen
Ministers and their offices’ by Anne Tiernan and Ian Holland.
the relationship, including through
a commonly agreed understanding
■ Consistent feedback both from ministers and APS leaders that the nature
of respective roles, clarifying the
and quality of relationships between the government and the APS affects
important role of ministerial advisors,
the quality of public administration and long-term public policy outcomes.
and making it easier for ministers to
access APS expertise and insights.
■ The findings of reports (for example, ‘Learning from Failure’) highlighting
the impact of APS-executive relationships on effective program delivery, risk
identification and management.
■ The current ‘Statement of Standards for Ministerial Staff’, which sets out
performance expectations.
What we are still exploring
■ Administrative options to support senior APS officers in serving meaningfully
and apolitically in ministerial offices.
■ Mechanisms to ensure accountability of ministerial staff, similar to that
applied to public servants, and international approaches (for example,
Canada and New Zealand).
48
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
BOX 4: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ABORIGINAL
AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER PEOPLES AND THE
APS
The panel’s emphasis on the importance of relationships recognises that
the APS cannot meet its purpose of serving all Australians unless it works
openly and with integrity with partners across the community.
Nowhere is this truer than in supporting the outcomes and aspirations of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have been calling for decades
for the APS to genuinely partner with them to improve outcomes. The
Coombs review proposed that Aboriginal communities be assisted to
develop institutions, giving them real power for the “substantially
independent conduct of chosen aspects of their own affairs”.
But, despite the efforts of those involved, this has not delivered
substantively better outcomes across the board, nor genuine
empowerment for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
In the first 50 years of Commonwealth administration (1967 to 2017)
there were at least 11 different public administration structures (with
ten of these in the past 30 years).
If pursued, the priorities for change outlined in this report provide an
opportunity for the APS to work profoundly differently with Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples. Creating a genuine partnership would be
fundamentally transformative.
Such a partnership needs to operate at different levels. Locally, it will
often mean working collectively on community-led or place-based
initiatives. This will require the APS to work with much greater humility
and to focus on building the strength and impact of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander organisations.
Nationally, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples must be able to
participate meaningfully in matters affecting them. The panel believes this
simple proposition should be a guiding principle for the APS. Achieving
it will require supporting mechanisms and institutions that provide for
national participation and representation. The panel notes the 2018 Special
Gathering on Closing the Gap – which brought together Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander leaders and the first ministers from states, territories
and the Commonwealth – reflects the spirit of this principle in action.
It is also critical that the APS supports and develops its Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander employees, including fostering the development of
senior leaders across the service.
The panel will be seeking to hear more voices from Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander people, including from within the service, over
the coming months.
49
Independent Review of the APS
Next steps
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
How to get
We know that testing ideas makes them better. So, please go to our website
and provide your feedback on our proposed initiatives and have your say by
involved
2 May 2019. In particular, we want to know:
■ How can we strengthen each proposal?
■ What are we missing?
■ How do we ensure lasting change?
We will be developing these proposals in coming months, taking into
account your feedback to ensure that we arrive at the best answers – robust,
implementable recommendations that achieve the desired outcomes for
the APS.
As noted above, we have taken many lessons from previous reviews into the APS
and know that implementation is critical. We are committed to ensuring we are
just as clear on what needs to happen as we are on
making it happen and will
spend the coming months refining our thinking on what is required to actually
deliver lasting change.
We will report to the Prime Minister mid-year. We want to hear your input
and insights. So, please, visit our website, challenge our assumptions, test
our thinking, and have your say.
51
Independent Review of the APS
Appendices
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Appendices
Appendix 1: Research papers prepared by ANZSOG
To help inform the review, we commissioned research papers from leading
academics and practitioners through the Australia and New Zealand School of
Government (ANZSOG). These provide an additional independent perspective
on various aspects of public sector reform. They are intended to support and
enrich public discussion and debate.
The major topics reflect areas with a rich academic foundation, where we felt it
was particularly important to hear different external perspectives.
■ Three papers focus on APS relationships with key partners: ministers
and their offices, other jurisdictions, and communities (through delivering
local solutions).
■ A further paper considers another aspect of relationships – namely, integrity.
■ The final two papers explore core aspects of APS work: commissioning and
contracting, and evaluations of performance.
The papers do not reflect our views or foreshadow the review’s recommendations.
But they are being considered carefully alongside a wealth of other material,
new and existing, on key aspects of public sector reform, as well as the
outcomes and insights of our engagement across the APS and beyond.
53
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Appendix 2: Key reports on the APS 2003-2018
Title
Year
Focus of Review
Reviewers
Australia 2030: Prosperity
2018
Whole-of-economy strategy to
Bill Ferris AC (Chair), Dr Alan
through innovation
generate and capture more benefits Finkel AO (Deputy Chair), Dr
from innovation for all Australians
Bronte Adams AM, Dr Michele
Allan, Paul Bassat, Dr Rufus Black,
Maile Carnegie, Beth Comstock,
Scott Farquhar, Prof Bronwyn
Harch, Dr Marlene Kanga AM,
Daniel Petre AO, Dr Christopher
Roberts AO, Saul Singer, Dr
Heather Smith PSM (Ex Officio)
Contestability Review into the
2018
An assessment of which components Phase One: Department of
Provi-sion of Policy Advice to
of the policy process could be made Health and Department of
Government (not yet publicly
more contestable or efficient
Industry and Science
released)
Phase two: Department of
Finance
Final report of the ICT
2017
Making it easier and cheaper for
ICT Procurement Task-force
Procurement Taskforce
ICT businesses to contract with
government and deliver better
government services at a lower cost
Shifting the Dial: 5 Year
2017
Whole-of-economy advice on where Productivity Commission
Productivity Review
our priorities should lie if we are to
enhance national welfare over the
medium term
Data Availability and Use, Inquiry 2017
Guidance on the benefits of greater
Productivity Commission
Report
data use, and ways that governments
might engage with the community to
better understand the costs, risks, and
benefits associated with data sharing
and use
Digital disruption: what do
2016
The role of government in the face of Productivity Commission
governments need to do?
potentially disruptive technological
change.
Independent Review of Whole-of- 2015
Assess the utility and impact of
Barbara Belcher
Government Internal Regulation
government regulations
(‘Belcher Red Tape Review’)
Learning from Failure: why large 2015
Government processes for large
Prof Peter Shergold AC
government policy initiatives
public programs and projects,
have gone so badly wrong in
following the Royal Commission into
the past and how the chances
the Home Insulation Program
of success in the future can be
improved (‘the Shergold Report’)
Unlocking potential, Australian
2015
Current practices around recruitment, Sandra McPhee AM
Public Service Workforce
employee mobility and separations,
Management Contestability
specifically in the context of
Review
contestability
54
Independent Review of the APS
Independent Review of the APS
apsreview.gov.au
Title
Year
Focus of Review
Reviewers
Towards Responsible
2014
Review and report on the
Tony Shepherd AO (Chair), Dr
Government: The Report of the
performance, functions and roles of
Peter Boxall AO, Tony Cole AO,
National Commission of Audit
the Commonwealth government
Robert Fisher AM, the Hon
Amanda Vanstone
Is Less More? Towards Better
2012
Review the Commonwealth’s
Department of Finance
Commonwealth Performance
financial framework and its
(CFAR discussion paper)
contribution to efficient and effective
use of public resources.
Sharpening the Focus: A
2012
Review the Commonwealth’s
Department of Finance
Framework for Improving
financial framework and its
Commonwealth Performance
contribution to efficient and effective
(CFAR position paper)
use of public resources
Review of the Measures of
2011
Promoting efficiency in government Department of Finance
Agency Efficiency
and assessing suitable alternatives to
the Efficiency Dividend
Review of the Senior Executive
2011
Review the size and growth of the
Roger Beale AO
Service: Report to the Special
Senior Executive Service
Minister of State for the Public
Service and Integrity (‘Beale
Review’)
Ahead of the Game: Blueprint
2010
Review the Commonwealth’s
Terry Moran AO (Chair), Chris
for the Reform of Australian
administration and develop a
Blake, Prof Glyn Davis AC, Jo
Government Administration
blueprint for reform
Evans, Dr Ken Henry AC, Robyn
Kruk AM, Steve Sedgwick, Ann
Sherry AO, Nick Warner PSM,
Professor Patrick Weller AO
Engage: Getting on with
2009
How the internet and tools of ‘Web
Nicholas Gruen (Chair), Ann
Government 2.0 (Government
2.0’ can improve collaboration and
Steward (Deputy Chair), Glenn
2.0 Taskforce)
innovation both within government, Archer, Sebastian Chan, Adrian
and between government and the
Cunningham, Prof Brian
general community
Fitzgerald, Mia Garlick, Peter
Harper, Lisa Harvey, Martin
Hoffman, Pip Marlow, Alan
Noble, Ian Reinecke, David
Solomon, Martin Stewart-Weeks
Review of the Australian
2008
Efficiency and effectiveness of
Sir Peter Gershon CBE FREng
Government’s Use of Information
the government’s use of ICT and
and Communication Technology
the institutional arrangements to
(‘Gershon Review’)
maximize returns to ICT investments
Review of the Corporate
2003
The corporate governance of statutory John Uhrig
Governance of Statutory
authorities and their relationships
Authorities and Office Holders
with the relevant Minister, the
(‘Uhrig Review’)
Parliament, the public and business.
55
Independent Review of the APS