What are Public Services Good at? Successes and Failures of Public Services in the field of Human Resource Management Study commissioned by the Slovenian.

What are Public Services Good at? Successes and Failures of Public Services in the field

of Human Resource Management

Study commissioned by the Slovenian Presidency of the EU

Prof. Dr. Christoph Demmke/Thomas Henökl, Researcher EIPA, Timo Moilanen, Researcher, University of Helsinki

50th Meeting of DGs responsible for Public Administration, Brdo 28/29 May 2008

Learning to build Europe

50th DG meeting 28 May - What are Public Services Good at?

2

• Shift the view from negative approaches and reform needs to a more realistic view:

• shortcomings, achievements and successes• What do we know about effects of different HR-

reforms during the last years? • Explore the attitudes of employees and

managers as to public service and HR-reforms• Identify critical and positive developments and

good practices as well as success factors• Enhance the attractiveness of public employment

1. Assignment and interest of the study1. Assignment and interest of the study

1. Assignment


3

2. Methodology2. Methodology

• Online questionnaire at www.eupan.eu Target groups:

• EUPAN HRWG membersplus

• Top managers• Middle managers• Employees from central public administrations in the EU Member States

• Analysis of existing studies and literature

2. Methodology


4

3. Response rate and classification3. Response rate and classification• In total 363 public employees responded to the survey

– 198 employees (54%)– 122 middle managers (34%)– 43 top mangers (12%)– 49 of these were members of EUPAN network

• Variation among countries – participation levels from 2 (BE, LT, RO) to 101 (SK) responses

• Regional variation– 156 responses from Eastern European countries (43%)– 99 responses from Scandinavian countries (27%)– 53 responses from Continental Europe (15%)– 32 responses from Mediterranean countries (9%)– 14 responses from Anglo-Saxon countries (4%)– 9 responses from New Member states (2%)

3. Response rate and classification


5

• General picture is optimistic: more than 65% of respondents consider that HR policies have generally improved (8% say that HR policies have failed) see Figure 4.1a-e

• However, the success of particular HR policies varies

• Success in the field of HRM+ 60% of respondents think that public services have become

more customer-oriented and citizen-friendly (11% disagree)+ 45% replied that HR reforms have been successful in

reducing administrative costs and burdens (24% disagree)+ 60% answered that equality between sexes has improved

(however, 10% of men and 21% of women disagree)+ civil servants have become better qualified (53% vs. 13%)+ improvements in public service ethics: ethical standards are

better known (46% vs. 20%) and ethical attitudes have improved (37% vs. 26%)

see Figures 4.2 and 4.3

4. Findings and preliminary results of the study:4. Findings and preliminary results of the study: general observations general observations

4. Findings and preliminary results: general observations


6

Figure 4.1a: Overall picture of the HR-policy improvements within the last 15 years

4. Findings: general observations


7

Figure 4.1b: Overall picture of the HR-policy improvements by respondent‘s position



8

Figure 4.1c: Overall picture of the HR-policy improvements within the last 15 years by HRPA

4. Findings: positive developments


9

60

45

3429

22 21 18

29

31

40

3646

4446

11

24 26

35 32 34 35

0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %

70 %

80 %

90 %

100 %

Becoming morecustomer/citizen-

friendly?

Reducingadministrative

costs/becomingmore efficient?

Less rule-oriented,less bureaucratic?

Recruiting the besttalented/most

qualifiedcandidates?

Rewarding staff forgood

performance?

Retainingstaff/leaders in the

public sector?

Managing poorperformance?

No, not successful

Same

Yes, successful

Figure 4.2: Successful and less successful HR developments



10

Figure 4.3: Perceptions of public employees

189 12

6 510

5 5 5 3 5 4 3 3

42

4434

3734 27

30 2821

20 1915 16 17

2534

35 36 4238

3643

4851 49

44

9 812

1012

1418

16

17 1617 19

1821

6 5 8 117

12 127

15 1612 11 14 16

4245

0 %

20 %

40 %

60 %

80 %

100 %

Fully agree Agree Neutral Disagree Fully disagree



11

4.4. Challenges and critical developments in the field of HRM Performance management is not working well:– 32% said that staff is not rewarded for good performance (21%

consider that there has been progress)– 35% think that public sector has been unsuccessful in managing

poor performance (18% see improvements)– 37% found that performance rewards were not more transparent

and quicker (20% were more optimistic)– 32% considered that performance assessment systems are too

subjective (19% were positive)

– Respondents also indicated that there are some problems with mobility policies between public and private sectors (decreased 32% vs. increased 26%) and between EU Member States (29% vs. 24%), as well as with promotion procedures (unfair 30% vs. fairer 19%) and HR rules (increased 32% vs. decreased 23%)

see Figures 4.2 and 4.3



12

• 44% of the respondents considered work in the public sector as attractive (25% not), and 62% would recommend it to friends or family (18% not) see Figures 4.4a-b and 4.5

• Comparison to private sector shows that public sector is thought to be quite competitive with regard to working time and pensions, but less competitive with salaries and various HR policies (with the exception of involvement of staff in management decisions) see Figures 4.6a-b and 4.7

• However, even people who are not satisfied with their salary still would recommend working in the public sector for their friends or family – why? In order to understand this we need to analyse the developments in respondents’ organisations and in their own jobs

4.5. State’s competitiveness as an employer:4.5. State’s competitiveness as an employer:public-private comparisonspublic-private comparisons


13

Figure 4.5a: How competitive is the public service compared to the private sector?

31

18

8 7

31

21

14 16

6

6

2424

5

8 2627

3

12

3 5

0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %

70 %

80 %

90 %

100 %

Working time Pensions Salaries for employees Salaries for top positions

Cannot say

Not at all competitiveLess competitive

NeutralCompetitive

Very competitive

4. Findings: state’s competitiveness as an employer


14

Figure 4.5b: Salaries for top positions by HRPA



15

Figure 4.6: Do you think that HR-policies in comparable private services are performing better or worse

29

17

2721

28 2925 28 25

34

1821

26 26 27 3035 37 39 40 40 41 42 42

0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %

70 %

80 %

90 %

100 %

PS better

Same

PA better



16

• Mostly respondents find the development with regard to their own organisation and job more positive than the general development

• Respondents are very positive about their work content (77% vs. 4%), working atmosphere (74% vs. 7%), working conditions (71% vs. 8%), responsibility (70% vs. 10%), feedback and communication from colleagues (62% vs. 13%) and autonomy (59% vs. 15%) see Figure 4.8

• They also saw the development of the working conditions in their own organisation in a positive light: most issues, including leadeship (41% vs. 20%) and payment issues (e.g., better pay 43% vs. 18%) were rather favourable. Only two issues were considered more negative: stress and time pressure (27% vs. 42%) and motivational pay such as incentives and bonuses (28% vs. 32%) were considered more unfavourable see Figure 4.9

4.7. Developments in one’s own organisation and job4.7. Developments in one’s own organisation and job

4. Findings: micro-level development


17

Figure 4.8: How do you perceive your own work in the following categories?

26 2522 22

18 1916 16

5149

49 48

44 40

34

28

1817

2019

2424

2432

24 6

6 1011

79

2 3 2 4 34

4

6

1 1 1 2 1 2

159

0 %

20 %

40 %

60 %

80 %

100 %

Work content Workingatmosphere

Workingconditions

Degree ofresponsibility in

the w ork

Feedback andcommunicationfrom colleagues

Autonomy and jobcontrol

Relationship w ithStaff

Representatives

Relationship w ithHR-office

Cannot say

Very negative

Negative

Neutral

Positive

Very positive



18

Figure 4.9: How would you judge the development of the working conditions in your organisation?

179

1915

9 7 10 12 9 8 106

116 8 5

44

5036

37

39 41 37 3436 35 31

3530

27 19 23

31 32

2730

4336 37

28

4339 41 40 43

45

30

41

7 7

1015

7

12 13

21

914 14 14

1418

24

24

1 38

4 2 5 3 5 4 4 5 6 3 4

18

8

0 %

20 %

40 %

60 %

80 %

100 %

Anti-d

iscrim

inatio

n

More j

ob re

spons

ibility

Flexibl

e wor

king t

ime

Distrib

ution

of to

p pos

itions

betw

een m

en and

wom

en

Diversi

ty iss

ues

More j

ob au

tonom

y and

job co

ntrol

Training

(qua

ntity

/ quali

ty)

Work/life

balan

ce (w

orkin

g flex

ible

hour

s)

Vacati

ons a

nd le

ave

Better

pay

Job s

ecuri

ty

Lead

ership

Working

t ime

Fairer

pay

Stress

/ tim

e pres

sure

Motiva

tiona

l pay

(ince

ntive

s, bon

uses e

tc.)

Strong improvement Some improvement Neutral Some deterioration Strong deterioration



19

Figure 4.10: Value Changes: Attitudes Towards Leaders/Leadership Styles

50

4236

19

3545

47

56

9 59

17

6 8 9 9

0 %

10 %

20 %

30 %

40 %

50 %

60 %

70 %

80 %

90 %

100 %

More communication More critical More participative More respect

Cannot say

No

Same

Yes

4. Findings: Value Changes


20

5. Critical success factors

5. Critical success factors


21

6. Conclusions• Common trends: Europe-wide progress on a number

of issues such as the general evolution of HRM, equality, ethics, customer-orientation, working conditions and work contents

• Common challenges: performance management, mobility policies, competitiveness as an employer

• Persisting differences between systems and traditions: Eastern European countries seem to be more cautious about improvements

• Accentuated divergences according to response groups such as position, sex and age

• The preliminary findings are promising and it is advisable to continue cross-country HR comparisons in future. To ensure that a large sample size is collected, co-operation with organisations such as TUNED-network should be considered

7. Conclusions


22

What are Public Services Good at? Successes and Failures of Public Services in the field of Human Resource Management Study commissioned by the Slovenian.

Documents