Australia

28th Session of the Public Management CommitteeChâteau de la Muette, Paris

Governing for Performance in Australia

Lynne Tacy

14 November 2003

The Context

• our legislative framework is principles based and devolves financial authority and employment powers to Agency Heads– they are responsible for the efficient, effective and ethical

use of resources– and for promoting and upholding the APS Values

• this is underpinned by– a robust performance monitoring and evaluation regime– strengthened accountability for results

• it is set against an environment of increased contestability and competition

Performance Management Framework

Australian Public Service Commission

GovernmentPortfolio Minister/s, Minister/s, Parliamentary SecretaryLegislative and regulatory framework

Outcomes & Outputs Structure• Outcomes• Outputs• Performance indicators

Business Planning• Priorities, Resource Allocations, Risks• Budget cycle links• Organisational capabilities• Corporate Strategies (IT, people, financial)• Individual action plans/performance agreements

•Objectives•Values/behaviours

Performance Review & Feedback• Organisational Performance Reviews• Individual and Team Performance Reviews• Performance Linked Remuneration Policy• Managing Under-performance

Corporate Planning & Governance• Vision, Mission, Aims• Values, Behaviours• Major Directions/priorities• Management Structures

Performance Management Framework

Performance Management Framework

GovernmentPortfolio Minister/s, Minister/s, Parliamentary SecretaryLegislative and regulatory framework

Outcomes & Outputs Structure•Outcomes•Outputs•Performance indicators

Performance Budgeting Management and Reporting

• the system is based on an outcomes and outputs framework– the basis for appropriations and accountability for

performance

• agencies are required to specify and cost outputs against planned outcomes and identify performance targets and indicators– and report against their achievement

• the system has been supported by a move to accrual accounting

• the framework has been modified recently to provide for more lower level program information

Accountability and Assurance

• there has been a growing level of scrutiny by Parliament

• the Auditor-General plays a key role in monitoring and reporting on performance and accountability– an independent officer of the Parliament– strengthened role in performance auditing and better

practice guidance

• the Public Service Commissioner has a statutory role to evaluate the application of the APS Values and APS employment policies and practices– including to prepare an annual report on the State of the

Service

Performance Management Framework

Corporate Planning & Governance•Vision, Mission, Aims•Values, Behaviours•Major Directions/priorities•Management Structures Business Planning

•Priorities, Resource Allocation, Risks•Budget cycle links•Organisational capabilities•Corporate Strategies (IT, people, financial)•Individual action plans/performance agreements

•Objectives•Values/behaviours

Planning and Evaluation

• we have moved from a general requirement for a regular cycle of program evaluation to a more targetted approach, eg– all lapsing programs are required to be reviewed– major new programs and initiatives have a built in evaluation

phase

• agency governance systems include business planning processes– with an increasing use of balanced scorecard and other

performance monitoring type approaches

• all agencies dealing with the public must have service charters

Performance Management Framework

Performance Review & Feedback•Organisational Performance Reviews•Individual and Team Performance Reviews•Performance Linked Remuneration Policy•Managing Under-performance

Performance Management

• all agencies must have an effective performance management system in place

• features include– statement of performance expectations and links to business

plans– regular performance feedback and appraisal– recognition and reward– focus on capability development– management of poor performance

• approaches vary between agencies, including in relation to performance based remuneration

• there is room for improvement in relation to the alignment, integration and credibility of systems

Challenges and Issues

• using meaningful performance information and linking results into decision making in practical and useful ways

• giving more emphasis to the implementation of public policy– establishment of a Policy Implementation Unit in the

Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet

• ensuring that the system caters for effective whole of government approaches

• providing appropriate performance governance arrangements for outsourced service provision

• improving agencies’ performance management systems, including performance based remuneration

For Further Information

• The Australian Experience of Public Sector Reform APSC 2003

• Performance Management in the Australian Public Service Management Advisory Committee 2001

• Performance Management APSC 2002www.apsc.gov.au

• For details of Australia’s financial management system: www.dofa.gov.au