Despite some promising new initiatives, the APS’s disparate enabling systems and processes are affecting its performance, efficiency and capacity to meet expectations. A move to networked and common arrangements would facilitate greater mobility and collaboration, build digital capability, and make the most of automation and AI in service delivery.
What we think is needed
- 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.
- The Secretaries Board to oversee development of this spine, subject to any direction by government. In driving digital transformation across the APS the Board should provide clear guidance on which enabling functions should be common or shared and which should be bespoke.
- A digitally enabled APS, with sophisticated systems and deep capabilities in data analytics, AI and automation.
- Staged implementation of the required changes, commensurate with available resources, and prioritisation of projects that drive a collaborative culture.
- A move towards common pay and conditions across the service.
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.
Comments
Thu, 02 May 2019
There needs to be an evolution of process planning to favour design thinking around customer value propositions that are authentic and consistently delivered. I don't see any mention of new approaches that align with future proofing of the APS. The answer to galvanising disparate systems has to be around a centralising customer outcome that is humanised and aids a customer-centric transformation. Otherwise, we'll end up with a lot of systems and tech but the employee engagement will be missing. ASP employment satisfaction tracking must be linked to customer satisfaction tracking.
Thu, 02 May 2019
Provide common training for standardised systems so that those from different agencies can share their experiences and learnings.
Wed, 01 May 2019
We need ICT/telephony systems that support staff in collaborating. At the moment a number of departments do not have the capability to enable staff to communicate with colleagues from other agencies through Skype or video conferencing. This seems incongruous when departments are making advancements with building AI capability - yet communication tools between departments are limited.
Wed, 01 May 2019
Less people involved, just a big computer, or as miniaturisation improves things a small computer, no customer service any more just a computer screen, that is not service as in Public SERVICE.
Tue, 30 Apr 2019
Encourage or mandate our leaders to adopt and demonstrate new ways of working. Not getting others to use the systems- adopt them personally
Thu, 18 Apr 2019
Yes please! There is so much red tape and employee time spent on writing referrals to other APS agencies and getting sign off at EL1/EL2 level. Often the legislation is outdated and doesn't allow for new models/practices, or habits are so entrenched no-one wants to let the old ways go. Bring on the days when we can simply complete an email template or database platform to share information between agencies or even within the same agency. There would be huge numbers of hours saved, much happier employees and managers, and some great joint initiatives made possible.
Wed, 17 Apr 2019
Just do it properly
Wed, 10 Apr 2019
A move towards common pay and conditions across the service is laudable, and it is a factor that distorts mobility (people seeking transfer or promotion are more likely to be attracted to other agencies that offer similar or better pay and conditions). But it is unclear how this would in practical terms be able to be funded or achieved in any reasonable period. Even if pay was equalised across the APS, there are issues around the ongoing bargaining process, particularly linking pay rises to 'productivity'. More work should be done at looking at what meaningful productivity drivers are in the public sector. Given the role of the APS to respond to the elected Government of the day, priorities can change rapidly, or agencies can be subject to major upheavals - say due to MoG changes,. As such, it is difficult to see how applying productivity principles that apply to the private sector are fit for purpose in the public sector context.
Wed, 10 Apr 2019
The idea is sound, but I am lost on why this is being framed as 'a stable spine of common digital platforms' - why can't this just be put in plain English? It would be good to have more consistent APS wide processes and systems. For example, having a common parliamentary document system helps when people move around the APS. It would definitely be good to have a better way of dealing with internal HR moves (e.g. the current process for transferring entitlements is neither quick nor seamless). On-boarding is one size fits all (e.g. if you move agencies, you are often forced to needlessly re-do mandatory training on the code of conduct or similar issues). Similarly, making existing APS officers do a police check before switching Departments seems curious, and delays/impedes mobility
Thu, 04 Apr 2019
Identifying and having a centralised forum for Communities of Practice can allow for better collaboration across the broader APS.
GovTeams is an example of such an initiative, which is great. However, there could be scope for more specialised communities of practice, particularly for platforms which enable the transmission of sensitive/confidential data and information
Wed, 03 Apr 2019
Standardise as many suystems as possible in standard process, ie Finance, Risk Management, Performance Management. Bring the data together to enable full APS reporting and reduce duplication of effort. Standardise out MS Office suite. Defence just upgraded from Microsoft 2003 to 2010....but we're in 2019!
Wed, 03 Apr 2019
More analytics on the time APS spend on navigating the various systems that don't talk and vary when they move between agencies would paint a particularly grim picture but would provide a strong business case for a common systems. For example, to complete a credit card acquittal the receipt has to be scanned or saved - then copied to TRIM - then a link has to be saved onto a network drive - so that EasySAP can save the link to the TRIM file. Likewise with travel - details are repeated across numerous systems for approvals and bookings. Also, the proposal needs to better pick up on how departments are implementing the requirements under the PGPA - this has resulted in considerably more paperwork and approvals (as opposed to the FMA Act). The amount of paperwork and staff involved in the process is ridiculous, confusing and complex - a complete waste of time. The proposal needs to reflect on the need to create greater efficiencies in financial accountability and management - reflecting that most people in the APS are trying to do the right thing and that small value transactions need not be over-engineered.
Tue, 02 Apr 2019
This proposal needs to take into account the coordination & decision-making processes that exist in the APS. Technology is not an end in itself, it needs to be reflected in consultation & decision-making design.
Networked does not necessarily imply that common arrangements can work. The APS can be more a 'plug and play' or 'internet of things' model. The strength of different departments & agencies lies in their professional expertise and operating cultures.
What we need to do is accept that standing internal & interdepartmental committee arrangements are of limited utility in the Information Age.
In some departments committees are out of control. In one large department, for instance, the implementation of its First Principles Review has resulted in committee gridlock, with many senior officials doing little more than cycling between meetings. Capability acquisition, not strategy, drives operations and policy.
Membership of powerful committees is how many senior public servants retain power. In a efficiently networked system, enabled by digital communications and delegated decision-making, we could dispense with many, if not most, existing committees.
To ensure lasting change we need to actively disestablish the network of standing committees and to reward executives who devise more efficient, digitally enabled, ways of doing business. Membership of too many committees should be seen as a failure to innovate, rather than a criteria of importance.
Mon, 01 Apr 2019
Move to 1 HR team for the APS that manages pay for all staff, ICT support and career development. We have missed an opportunity to consolidate these functions and use 1 IT platform for the APS. We need all stakeholders it identify agency risks and benefits to build a solid foundational network into the future. This will reduce long term costs for government and allow more flexibility in managing staff across all agencies. This could also be expanded to having 1 performance framework aligned to the ILS framework but allow for roles to have defined performance outcomes related to the agency.
Sun, 31 Mar 2019
Go to any department and ask to see the data storage (filing) system. Most have a small section that is organised with standardised naming systems allowing orderly retrieval of information, with the majority of data having no standard for naming. The idea that people are individually responsibe for managing data means that no-one is responsible for overall management. Fixing this will facilitate many of the other objectives such as transparency, better communication between departments and the ability to comunicate across different levels of government.
Thu, 28 Mar 2019
The main barrier to common systems across the APS is Security and the sheer variety of tasks that single system must accomplish. Even within the single agency I work in, the need for security overriding all else often causes divisional systems to crash due to compulsory and instant updates, the special divisional systems need to be built on top of the existing backbone to provide the necessary functionality but cyber security are so untrusting of their colleagues that they do not communicate changes in advance to prevent these downtimes or for dependant systems to adapt to the changed strucutre. Highly specialised services that require special equipment cannot run off the common backbone and should be entirely separated in order for a backbone to exist or the backbone will become too unweildy and large to maintain.
Thu, 28 Mar 2019
I love the idea of working across departments and jurisdictions, but how do we make this work when departments are unwilling to share data and we are restricted by privacy restrictions. States are even more of a problem - we couldn't even get birth records from them when we were working on PPL, let alone getting school information from them. Abolish the states?
Wed, 27 Mar 2019
Design thinking needs to be integrated into all APS work. A 'head of design' is not a bad idea, but like risk management, design is a program and project management responsibility that needs to be devolved to all executive staff. A project or program manager needs to appreciate all the dependencies that relate to their work.
The APS needs to continue to invest in interagency 'clearing houses' (like the Australian Civil-Military Centre) which manage interagency relationships in a way that more formal and intermittent interdepartmental committees cannot.
Wed, 27 Mar 2019
Ensuring the APS has greater mobility is needed however the lack of releasing staff needs to be addressed. Departments talk about having mobility options but there is no confidence amongst staff as it is so difficult to achieve.
Wed, 27 Mar 2019
Automation and AI just look like buzzwords. The best the report can manage is to suggest automation might take over some routine processing.
Yes, they are the big thing at the moment. But they are tools. They are means to end, not ends in themselves. A more automated APS isn't necessarily a better APS ("robodebt", for example).
If we can't work out why we want automation and AI, maybe we don't actually need it right now?
Thu, 21 Mar 2019
I fully support the move towards common pay and conditions across the service. In the overseas operating model, the government has 29 agencies representing the Australian Government interests with approximately 2500 staff posted overseas. The bulk of the employees are representatives from DFAT, Defence, Home Affairs, AFP and Austrade. The 2016-17 Review of entitlements, additional allowances and financial support provided to Australian Government employees stationed overseas, which was commissioned by the Government, identified differences in entitlements, etc. across agencies. Some changes were agreed by Government to streamline and align the core overseas conditions, but with each agency having individual Enterprise Agreements and varying salary tables, full alignment of common overseas conditions across the APS will not be possible. As all agencies move to the new package effective 1 July 2020, there should be a further review in 2021 to agree on setting an single salary table which will be used for the purposes of calculating the average overseas salary which is the basis for calculating a range of allowances. Without this approach there will remain disparities between APS, EL and SES packages for indivduals serving at the same overseas mission location. DFAT, with the largest number of staff overseas, should set the salary table that must be adopted by all others - if that means all staff are on a temporary s26 transfer for the posting duration, to circumvent the home agency EA provisions, then this may be the only option to have an aligned package across agencies. The discretionary items such as the number of leave fares should also be aligned across agencies, and a common approach on the tax treatment of allowances paid needs to be aligned.
Wed, 20 Mar 2019
Agree with the body of this proposal, particularly evolving towards common systems. Digital platforms need digital reach - and this is not yet in place across Australia. There needs to be thought as to how the reach can be extended to all users of Government services, else back-up manual processes will still be needed.
Wed, 20 Mar 2019
After more than two decades in the APS in ICT it is clear to me that every agency will take their own interest first. The the idea that agencies will want to spend time, resources and effort on ICT, customer service, HR or finance reforms in the sense of new systems and processes that work across agencies, or for the benefit of other agencies, is not realistic in the current structure. After many years in DFAT trying to provide services to agencies overseas, my executive had no motivation, beyond controlling the other agency's overseas work, to provide any sort of effective service, and refused to entertain improvements only for the benefit of the customer agency.
The only way you will change this is to have service provision by a delivered separate service organisation, not from a lead agency but . The fact that you ask a Secretaries board to do this is against their interest as it diminishes their power. Note that the British separated OS service provision from the Diplomatic part of the FCO years ago.
Also to create the DTA's dream of one place to deliver coordinate life event services to citizens, there needs to be a dedicated agency empowered to deliver each theme. Starting a business, broad health services, whole of life education etc. These need to be delivery coordination organisations, not policy or funding, and take the engagement on on behalf of all layers of Government.
The current structure of policy based departments will struggle to work together when their KPIs are limited to their scope. None of the cross government benefits will be realised while departments are mandated to be self interested and the self interest works against cross government benefits.
Wed, 20 Mar 2019
Funding mechanisms for platforms outside of money going "to" an agency rather than towards a platform. Need to convert CAPEX to OPEX for cloud based/as a service solutions
Common front end platforms via API should be considered like Tell Us Once, Payments, Messaging, Identity. We can use these to deliver enabling services to APS as well as government services to Australian public.
Practical measures to help working between APS - common recognition of building access passes, ability to prove your security clearance without involving ASA/USO, common secure WIFI like UK government has with "GovWifi" and Australian educational institutions have with "eduroam"
Wed, 20 Mar 2019
In very mature private sector enterprises, particularly those with an integrated multinational business model, the art and science of "Enterprise Architecture" has evolved substantially. This means standardising and having patterns for the way business is conducted anywhere in the world, but maintaining the ability to configure for local circumstances.
There are a few factors that enable this to be successful -
Executive support for architecture, not as an ICT practice but as a business practice, to which ICT is only one component (this is rarely seen in the APS)
Design Governance - for example a design authority often headed by a Chief Architect. Here I would ask whether the APS should in addition to Head of Service and Head of People, have a "Head of Design" - someone who is accountable for the design and architecture of the service as a whole and reporting to the Secretaries Board.
Finally there needs to be people capability - in my experience in the APS, but also more broadly, these skills are difficult to come by. Generally speaking, individuals who call themselves enterprise architects are ICT people, not people who systemically understand business practice and design. It is arguable therefore that if we need to develop these capabilities, we would need to establish the right development framework and employment pipeline.
I should also clarify, that what I'm talking about here is optimising the design of everything the APS does, not just service delivery systems, ie. it icludes what is the design of an optimal policy development capability, regulatory/regtech capability, innovation capability, service delivery capability, etc. and the ability to quickly adapt and share best practice across the APS.
Tue, 19 Mar 2019
With the implementation of existing reforms and the recommendations from the APS Review, it is important that tendering processes are transparent and accountable, so it avoids any real or perceived snatches at 'gravy train'.