Australian Government - click here to go to our home page

go to start   text resizing

Australian Public Service Commission
Employment policy and advice - Click to go to the Publications page

related resources

On our website

on our site

Site help

help with using this site

Site menu

news

Home page
> Archive > People planning in the APS
> Employment policy and advice
‹ Previous page

Last updated: 4 December 1996

People planning in the APS: A preliminary report of the Strategic people planning project

Please note: This document is for reference purposes only and is no longer considered by the APS Commission to be current. It may contain good practice advice and/or advice on the transitional arrangements between the 1922 and 1999 Public Service Acts.

Foreword

It has now been some months since the findings of the MAB/MIAC Report, Achieving Cost Effective Personnel Services, and the follow on work in the ten pilot agencies, Re-engineering People Management: From Good Intentions to Good Practice were published.

A constant theme of the human resource management (HRM) reform suggested by this body of work revolves around the twin issues of how do we get the right people in the right place at the right time, and how do we manage them better, once they are in place. Put simply, this theme says how can managers, at all levels in the APS, achieve their outcomes through their people.

Taking a more strategic view of people management in an organisation is one of those ways.

The Strategic People Planning Project, sponsored by the PSMPC in the first half of 1996, was designed to explore what APS managers might do in order to achieve a more strategic approach to HRM in the APS.

The report which follows draws on the literature of recently published research which specifically focuses on public and private sector attempts to apply a more strategic approach to the traditional HRM functions of an organisation. It looks at the findings of some of that literature when applied and records what happened when ten groups of Senior Executive Officers in two APS Departments spent some time in a series of focus groups examining their opinions and attitudes towards people management in their agencies. A simple diagnostic tool was designed to initiate discussion, in the focus groups, across a common set of HRM issues. By reflecting on their expressed opinions the focus groups were able to look at their people management practices and consider their willingness, and the perceived willingness of their organisations, to change.

The PSMPC is committed to working with managers in the APS who want to change the way they manage people. My team, the Strategic People Management Team, is keen to find ways to assist and support managers who have understood the messages of ACEPS, and the lessons of the ten pilot agencies, with their strong emphasis on fundamentally re-engineering people management processes.

In this report we offer the experiences gained through the first exposure of the Strategic People Planning Project to interested agencies. It is a small part of the mosaic of change processes available to be tailored to the individual needs of agencies. We will have achieved pour goal with this project if this report continues to stimulate the thinking and questioning of those who are seeking to find ways of achieving their business outcomes through the better management of their people. We look forward to receiving feedback on this project, and any other questions or comments it stimulates.

This foreword would not be complete without a word of thanks to the participants in the initial development of the project. The PSMPC was fortunate in having the enthusiasm and energy of Cheryl Hannah, our 1996 EDS placement, who devised and managed the project. Our thanks to her, and to the various HRM specialists in the seven APS and two private sector organisations who helped shape the project. A special word of thanks to the Department of Transport and the Department of Communication and the Arts for their willingness to participate. We were pleased to have had the opportunity to play a part in their strategic planning and change initiatives currently underway.

I recommend this report to you, our interested Internet audience, and look forward to continuing the dialogue as we endeavour to achieve better outcomes for the APS through our people.

 

Dominic Downie
Strategic People Management Team Leader
PSMPC
November 1996

Introduction

The publication of the findings of the MAB/MIAC Report, Achieving Cost Effective Personnel Services, (ACEPS) , focused considerable attention on how "best practice" in human resource management can be achieved in the APS.

One of the consistent themes of the "best practice" findings in private sector performance is the development, acceptance and widespread understanding of strategic planning about people as an important tool to increase competitive advantage. Leading organisations have recognised the link between organisational objectives and people practices in order to gain a competitive advantage through motivated, developed and empowered employees. This goal is a major part of their HR strategies.

Forward thinking APS managers are asking how they can gain similar advantages for their agencies, while recognising that their "bottom line" may be quite different from their private sector colleagues.

The following report presents the preliminary findings of the Strategic People Planning Project, (SPPP), designed and conducted between April and August 1996.

Part 1: A quick introduction to the ideas and suggested changes for making people management more strategic

This section of the report draws together a brief overview of the issues raised about the value, purpose, and practice of Strategic People Planning. The overview is based on selected interviews with senior managers in several public sector agencies, senior HR managers in two "best practice" private sector organisations, discussions with SPPP focus group participants, and some background research conducted during the SPP Project.

For quick reference the commonly asked questions and a summary of the suggested answers are listed below.

Each question is then explored in more depth through the observations and comments of focus group participants, interviewees, and by reference to some of the management theory currently available.

Summary of commonly asked questions

Why do APS Agencies need to get "strategic" About People Management?

What kind of "People Management" is needed in the APS to support the reform agenda?

Where do we start?

How Do We Encourage a Dialogue About People Management between Senior Managers in the APS ?

What Are the Next Steps?

Why do APS Agencies need to get "strategic" About People Management?

Redrawing the lines and boxes on the organisational chart doesn't work unless the people involved buy into the change and make it work...getting workers to embrace change will require a constant management focus.
Watson Wyatt, HR 21 Human Resources for the Next Century, 1996, p.3

On every side we are being told that the administrative structures and processes developed for more stable times will no longer work for a Public Service which must respond to "customers, competition and change". Created to control a workplace that no longer exists, the old structures and strategies have lost their effectiveness.

A new approach to Human Resource Management, People Management, (HR), however it is described, has the potential to totally transform the business of Government. At the risk of offending their colleagues, some managers were prepared to acknowledge that old style "personnel" sections, secure within their Corporate Services Divisions, cannot provide the radical change of attitude needed to transform people management in the Australian Public Service. Their role as administrators of policies and procedures increasingly places them at odds with the purpose of their organisations. Likewise, it was observed that the old style Central Agencies, who saw themselves as "protectors of the faith", must also realign their business to provide useful, constructive support and advice to the Agencies tasked with doing the business of government.

To succeed in a world where customers, competition and change demand flexibility and quick response, the people who are serving the customers, ensuring that Government is more competitive and demonstrating their flexibility need to be included as an integral part of the change process.

Strategic human resource management is about getting the organisation's corporate and business goals implemented effectively; getting everybody in the organisation doing things that make the business of the organisation successful.

The HR managers have to reposition their business to directly link to the strategic needs of the whole management group.

The necessary components of a strategic plan are mission, values, environmental scan, goals and objectives, targets, strategies, action plans, budget. "Best Practice" organisations incorporate HR elements into each of these components in their corporate strategic planning. To ensure excellent people management is valued as a part of the strategic endeavour of an organisation, senior managers, across the full range of functional areas, must accept their share of responsibility for changing the way the APS uses its workforce.

Some managers suggested that it is possible the APS has been slower to pick up the message that getting "strategic' about people management is an important way to save the Government money, and produce a higher quality of service at the same time, because many managers have been reluctant to see themselves as personally responsible for the "people" outcomes of their organisation. Private sector managers have been quicker to ask themselves, "what happens to an organisation when it shifts its thinking from seeing people as expenses to seeing people as investments?"

The difficulty for many APS mangers seems to lie in the fact that they have not seen their people as an "expense" to themselves, and so they have trouble imagining that there would be real benefit to themselves to see their people as an "investment" in the future.

As managers are made increasingly accountable for the results they obtain through the work of their people, the benefit may be a great deal more obvious.

In short, strategic people management is about a fundamental shift in corporate management thinking, where the management group accepts that:

(1) HR management must be fully integrated with the strategic needs of the organisation,

(2) HR policies cohere across policy and operational areas, and their functional hierarchies, and

(3) HR practices are adjusted, accepted and used by line managers and employees as part of their everyday work.

What kind of "People Management" is needed in the APS to support the reform agenda ?

"The parties are committed to... strengthening performance through renewed emphasis on existing program management mechanisms and integrating people management into the agency's management and planning framework..."
Continuous Improvement in the APS: Enterprise Agreement 1995-96 [Attachment 1, Schedule 6,(f)(ii)]

Human resource effort in the APS needs to be recast from pre-occupation with operational, process based activities into more strategic policies and programs which can be used as tools for linking new business principles to daily working life.

In 1993 MAB/MIAC Report No 12 reminded APS managers that a continuing emphasis on organisational effectiveness and productivity, and an increasing community pressure for quality of service, will focus attention on the link between individual and corporate performance. These pressures will require a much more coherent and strategic approach to performance management. In 1996 these pressures are even greater and the need for a strategic approach more urgent.

"Performance Management" can be required by senior management, and designed by their HR expert advisors, but it has to implemented by the line managers and their staff. As obvious as this statement may be, it does not alter its reality. Comprehensive performance management systems, incorporating personal development plans, competency based skill assessments, performance agreements, and possibly reward systems, all rely on the capacity of the managers to communicate expectations to their staff, and to asses the outcomes.

A number of the APS Senior Executives who participated in the SPPP focus groups reported that introducing more people management functions to line managers, where it had been tried, had proven very difficult because of the levels of complexity "personnel" work was seen to entail. It was easier, if more expensive, to establish small "support units" in divisions or outposted agencies to provide personnel services, and to let their managers get on with the "work" of the organisation.

Some of the managers who participated in SPPP focus groups observed that while they have taken on increased responsibility for risk management in financial processes and some policy formation, (for example, community consultation and liaison), they believe their scope for streamlining personnel processes is severely limited by the external accountabilities to which they are subject. Some went so far as to say that they tried to avoid doing any formal recruitment to the sections or branches under their direction, preferring to transfer staff on temporary arrangements, which made staffing positions faster, and ensured they had more control over who they acquired. They were reluctant to "waste their time going through the arduous, attenuated process of recruitment, only to risk having someone they did not want foisted onto them by appeal".

They identified "technical support" as critical to line managers being able to take more responsibility for making decisions about people management issues. For example, knowing how to "case manage" an occupational stress claim, or advise a staff member on their parental leave entitlements, would be the types of specialist personnel technical knowledge that should be available to a line manager on as needed basis. Most believe that under the existing arrangements it is easier, and probably more cost effective, for an individual line manager to leave such matters to a personnel section. Cost effective personnel services need streamlined, process stripped, regulatory support implemented across the whole APS.

It was acknowledged by some of the interviewees that in a more "strategically people conscious" organisation, a line manager might gain considerable benefit from knowing how to "case manage" occupational health issues, or competently factor in parental leave entitlements to forward planning for a sections potential recruitment requirements. If the personnel advice and technical knowledge was easily accessible, and the culture of the organisation supported the line manager's role as a more expert people manager, then, it was suggested, managers might be more likely to tackle their people management responsibilities enthusiastically.

A consistent observation among SPPP focus group participants on responsible people management focused on the "supply side" of staffing. It was noted that until quite recently APS managers have been able to rely upon the recruitment of staff to a "career service" to provide a flow of relatively well trained people to fill their vacancies, and staff the new projects created by the policy directions and program delivery expected of their areas.

Where someone turned out to be a "dud", it was frankly acknowledged by many in the focus groups that, more often than not, the poor performer was moved "somewhere out of the way" and largely forgotten. It was generally accepted that because "lots of people had been recruited to the APS as generalists in earlier times", then it was "a fact of life that some would not be able to keep up with the changes expected of them". There seemed to be an acceptance on the part of many managers that they would rather carry their share of mediocre to poor performers as a "corporate overhead", than take a stronger role in shaping the staffing strategies of their organisation because basically the current system provided what they needed.

There seemed to be an almost self-contradictory view about how to approach staffing as many of the same managers who expressed resignation about the standard of many of the staff available to them also prided themselves on being able to "pick the winners" in their immediate work areas.

It was readily acknowledged that the best managers are those who can identify the "winners" in other areas as well, and successfully negotiate for their trade across Sections, Branches, Divisions, and even Departments. Senior officers reported many instances of SES officers taking "their good people with them" when they moved between Departments, and many reported personal knowledge of promotions organised to keep good staff in a particular area. So it seems that for either "key" jobs or "highly desirable" staff, managers are prepared to expend a considerable amount of effort securing the "personnel" response that they prefer.

There was some discussion of how to harness that degree of interest and put it to work for other people management issues, and most managers interviewed recognised the inefficiencies in the longer term of continuing to leave workforce management issues to the vagaries of chance. As staffing numbers across the APS fall, the demands increase for each remaining officer to be the best they can, and to be assessed for the standard of performance that they can actually give.

What about "Performance Information"?

Can you manage what you don't measure? HR practitioners in the "best practice" organisations are adamant that a first step towards being able to inject strategic people management into changing their corporate endeavour was a commitment from the top decision making levels of the organisation to "measure" improvement in the systems and applications of people management changes.

Performance Management, Performance Communication, Performance Information, whatever it is called, it comes down to fundamental questions about:

Traditionally, most Human Resource Information Systems , (HRIS), have been used for processing rather than reporting. This is reflected in the number of systems which only operate the payroll, leave and biographical modules, and where other modules, (such as the ones available on the NOMADª system), are not implemented. Effective use of professional and strategic reporting using more powerful HRIS has enabled "best practice" organisations to double their return on their investment in HR information systems.

Because of the increasing rate of change confronting organisations, the role of experience alone is less relevant as a basis for decisions about "people management". However, when managers turn to the HRIS for assistance they find that they have difficulties caused by inaccurate data input, that they are using a "processing only" system, and the systems lack real reporting facilities.

Based on "relational data base" designs, most of the systems were designed to store large amounts of data on staff which was only needed for transaction processing, not for developing professional reports. A more powerful HRIS enables managers to move from administrative to strategic HR reports.

The key is in having more sophisticated HRIS covering functional areas such as establishment, staffing, leave management, occupational health & safety, human resource development and workforce forecasting available to managers, and then, having managers who are able to read and interpret professional HR reports.

The kind of "People Management" needed in the APS to support the reform agenda must include:

(1) Simpler rules and transparent people management processes linked to the business objectives of the organisation;

(2) HRIS information that is collected, processed, and reported on in ways that specifically support strategic people planning and management for the organisation; and

(3) Managers who understand how to use the people management information available to them.

Where Do We Start?

Top HR professionals are shifting responsibilities for the everyday processes that get the best out of people to line managers and employees. This shift empowers line managers to focus more on people management and empowers employees to take greater responsibility for tasks such as managing their benefits information.
Watson Wyatt, HR 21 Human Resources for the Next Century, 1996, p.7

Drawing on the body of management theory and practical experience in the best of the bench-marked agencies there seem to be five useful places to start changing from operational to a strategic people management.

1. Start by raising people planning to a strategic level in the organisation.

As noted earlier, the necessary components of a strategic plan are mission, values, environmental scan, goals and objectives, targets, strategies, action plans, budget. Of these components, values, an environmental scan, target setting and careful detailing of budget implications are critical to successful strategic people planning. HR practitioners in the "best practice" organisations stressed that inclusion of people-related values in the planning is one of the key drivers of organisational performance and staff satisfaction for their workforces.

Goals for people planning must be linked to the organisational goals articulated in the agency's corporate plan. If an organisation is still thinking of HR as a "personnel" plan based on HR functional areas, it is likely to be an operational plan only.

To raise people planning to a strategic level, an organisation will need to rethink the purpose of its HR planning. It will need to address what it is actually trying to achieve, have the explicit commitment of the CEO and other senior executives, an effective Human Resource Information System, and be consciously enhancing the capacity of key HR staff to provide strategic level advice.

Some organisations have reached a limited strategic stage of people planning where their HR strategies are aligned to the business goals of individual units, but where responsibility for achieving those goals is still largely seen as the responsibility of the Corporate Services or Personnel areas of the agency.

It is not until an organisation consciously integrates its goals for people management into its corporate and business planning that its HR planning can be described as "Strategic People Planning". The better the corporate planning processes of an organisation, the more involved the senior managers and line managers are in developing a common understanding of what the organisation is trying to achieve, the more likely its people planning goals will be usefully articulated, and linked to organisational outcomes.

For example, in order to develop a common understanding among its senior managers about how to draw the links, one of the "best practice" organisations incorporated Schuler's Model , sometimes known as the 5-P Model, into its strategic planning process. The links between corporate strategic goal setting and people management activities are systematically checked off against the list of its people management:

Referred to as the "Strategy-Activity" link, the goals of the organisation, the needs of its business units and its people planning are specifically linked by ensuring that each level of its planning articulates the activities that relate to each of the "5 Ps".

In another "best practice" organisation managers at each decision making level, for example business unit managers at Regional and Branch level, are responsible for producing plans that explicitly link budget, people, work organisation and accommodation. Through their planning they are specifically accountable for their business outcomes, workforce productivity, technical excellence, security, financial stewardship, and equal employment opportunity outcomes. The basic approach to business in this particular organisation is "good people management makes good business management sense".

2. Start by creating a "feedback driven" organisation.

What is a "feedback driven" organisation? One where staff at all levels expect their managers to "get to the point", communicate their expectations clearly, and listen to what is said in response.

In some "best practice" organisations this concept is raised to the level of a corporate HR strategic goal, expressed as developing a culture of "instant feedback". In an organisational culture of "instant feedback" if you have a problem or an idea about any aspect of the business, or about an individual's performance, then the organisation demands that you raise the issue appropriately and discuss it maturely. The focus is expected to be on how to improve performance. In such an organisation tolerance for diverse approaches has to rise, and stratification or hierarchical patterns have to diminish.

In a feedback driven organisation the emphasis is on working to improve the individual's performance as a direct contribution to achieving the outcomes of the organisation.

3. Start by identifying the expectations of the roles played by leaders, managers and strategically positioned HR practitioners in the organisation.

Although each organisation places differing emphases on the necessary elements of their planning processes, the roles expected of their leader, managers and senior HR advisers share the following characteristics in common:

Leadership:
- establishing direction,
- aligning people,
- motivating and inspiring individuals, and
- causing dramatic and useful change

Management:
- objectives are clearly understood,
- be honest about what is not negotiable,
- orient people to new assignments,
- deal effectively and immediately with performance problems,
- give people the information they need to be successful,
- give timely, appropriate performance feedback,
- give people the freedom they need to do their jobs,
- give co-workers the opportunity to try new ideas,
- encourage collaboration and participation on projects/decision making as often as appropriate, and
- use competencies to develop a specific language about the work standard expected of a particular level (not "good work", but specifically "you did well when you ... describe behaviour ...and achieved ... describe specific outcome ...)

Strategic HR Practitioners:
- assist senior managers to formulate change,
- become a model of change,
- develop and guide divisional HR,
- change organisational structure,
- serve as a clearing house,
- serve as a trainer for other HR personnel,
- do benchmaking analysis,
- develop HRIS capability, and
- audit competencies

4. Start by Developing an Accountability Model for Leaders in People Management

Successful efforts at strategic HR management begin with identifying strategic business needs - if these needs are important to the success of the business, and if strategic HR management can be instrumental in meeting these needs, then these needs should be systematically analysed for their impact on HR management activities, including HR philosophies, policies, programs, practices and processes.

Strategic HR management depends on a systematic and analytical mindset, first identifying strategic needs and then designing HR activities with consistent cues and reinforcements.

Organisations that have worked over the past three to five years to introduce strategic people planning have paid particular attention to developing the skills of their senior level HR advisers/practitioners. Whether it is known as a "High Performance Excellence Model" or "HR Account Manager Competency Agreement" or some other schema, the fundamental principle which underpins their approach is an acceptance by the whole management layer of the organisation that their HR practitioners are expert advisers, used as a source of knowledge and support to the line managers responsible for "best practice" people management.

A competency model that outlines the necessary behaviour and skills that business managers and HR professionals have agreed HR leaders need to have to add value to the business will include accountability for :

(1) Business Results

(2) Self Image

(3) Interpersonal Relationship Management

5. Start With Where You Are Now

Common to all the organisations who have sought to increase their productivity and efficiency in achieving their strategic goals is the realisation that the solutions come from the ideas and experiences of the managers and staff working together in their own organisation. Lessons might be drawn from the experience of others, and models might be tried and adapted, but in the end, when it comes to successful strategic people planning, there are "no blue prints only guideposts".

Managers looking at the "guideposts" in this process are likely to find they reading a guide to "starting point" rather than a "destination". Only by talking, arguing and trying things out for themselves can their desired destination be obtained.

How do we encourage a dialogue about people management between senior managers in the APS?

"Further, senior management acting in a reasonably cohesive manner, communicating effectively on key issues, contributes considerably to growing a performance oriented environment...(for the APS) the comparatively low scores on the leadership factor (implies)that introducing new or improved innovation and services, changing the structure of the organisation or embarking on fundamental change, is unlikely to work as intended, as the leadership contribution necessary for effective implementation is considered as lacking"
Andrew and Nada Korac-Kakabadse, "The Leadership Challenge for the Australian Public Service(APS): An Internationally Comparative Benchmarking Analysis", 1996

When senior managers in the APS, (outside of the Corporate Services areas), talk to one another about people management issues it is usually in informal "corridor" discussions about who might be a suitable candidate for a particular vacancy or project team? Apart from the occasional need to comment on personnel policies, or to contribute to the development of an "our people" type charter, very little systematic or rigorous discussion about people management is included in the management mechanisms of most APS agencies. And where it does take place, it is often relegated to a much lower priority than other policy or financial management issues.

One reason for this may be the perceived difficulty managers have in believing that they can have influence over more than the most immediate staffing arrangements, and their reluctance to devote time and energy to issues that take them away from what they believe to be their primary functional responsibilities.

Senior management groups are conscious of the competing demands on their time, and most are highly pragmatic in determining what to devote their attention to, in the context of those demands. Whether from previous experience, or by absorption of the plentiful anecdotes about the difficulties of changing people management practices, most managers remain to be convinced that there is much to be gained by introducing people management issues into corporate and business level planning.

The current surge of public sector workforce restructuring, and the proposed reform flowing from the proposed Workplace Relations Bill, (1996), has convinced many APS senior managers that they can no longer take the people management of their organisations for granted. As one manager expressed it:

"...we need to get a lot smarter about choosing who we need to get our work done, not just for next week or next month, but for the next three years. We can no longer rely on hiding our less able workers in a backwater somewhere, while we work our good performers into an early grave. The challenge is how to get more strategic about our people."

In recent days APS senior managers have been confronted by the observation that many of them need to rethink their beliefs about what it means to be a leader in the public sector. They have been challenged to reflect on the maturity of their professional relationships, the extent to which they are willing to be open with their colleagues and staff, and their commitment to taking a "risk management" approach to their work.

These are similar challenges to the ones confronting senior managers in the private sector, and ones which must be confronted honestly if the process of changing people management practices is to have integrity. Organisations which have chosen to invest heavily in training their managers to work intensively on their people management skills report that workplace behaviours that may have previously passed for "personality clashes", or been ignored in the hope that they will disappear of their own accord, are purposefully being addressed. Managers are being expected to be as accountable for the astute use of their human "capital" as they have always been for their material and financial resources.

It has been suggested that the future for productive, competitive organisations will be in the hands of the skilful communicators within their ranks. Communicating more than the content of their message, these people will be active in shaping the attitudes, priorities and image of their organisations for their clients, and for their fellow workers. Those senior managers who have relied on their positional power to "command and control" will find it increasingly difficult to silence these "communicators" within their organisations. The better managers will not seek to silence them, they will instead become one of them.

How well the senior managers of the APS meet the challenges to engage in real dialogue about people management will be a measure, in itself, of their capacity to shape its future.

What Are the Next Steps?

"If people management is the key to the productivity of work for the 1990s, then managers should stop reading technical journals, business case studies and management textbooks, and start reading novels."
Tom Peters, author of "In Search of Excellence", 1996 Seminar Broadcast

When "best practice" managers talk about the need to meet the challenges of "customers, competition and change", they also talk about meeting those challenges with "communication, courage, and consistency". They talk about the primacy of building relationships, (sometimes referred to as partnership), with their customers, their suppliers, their competitors, and their stakeholders. Increasingly their workforces are regarded as is treated as one of the "stakeholders", if not actual "shareholders". Relationships, in this context, are seen as an investment in the future, as well as the current success of the organisation.

By investing in intensive communication with customers, (including the internal, as well as external stakeholders), by having the courage to contest the services and sources of advice, and by committing to a consistent emphasis on continuous improvement, APS managers can benefit from using this approach.

Initiatives such as "leadership programs", which specifically target improving the communication and strategic thinking skills and abilities of senior managers, are becoming a popular way of assisting managers to better meet their people management challenges. Such programs have a strong emphasis on enabling managers to develop greater expertise in their inter-personal skills, and more flexibility in their approach to performance management. Highly developed analytical ability, coupled with pragmatic policy advising skills are not enough to lead the groups of people who will make a critical difference to the performance of the APS over the next five to ten years.

Like their private sector contemporaries, APS senior managers are looking for ways to progress:

The "next steps" for embarking on structured, integrated, strategic people planning for the APS depend on managers across the Public Service recognising that they need to personally engage with the issue. Whether by talking about people planning in their usual management committees and meetings, or introducing the issue into their management training, or embarking on specific "change" projects, managers need to get "what our people do, what we expect them to do, how we know what they do, and how we encourage them to do better" onto the management agenda, and then make sure that it stays on it.

Our environment has already changed. The business of government is under intense scrutiny. There are risks, as well as opportunities, for the managers who embrace the need to change the way that people are managed, but judging from the experience of the organisations who have chosen to do so, the benefits make it worth the effort.

In the words of one very experienced senior APS manager who has been an "agent of change" in several organisations, ..."here may be no blueprints for action, and the guideposts that we do have may look more like starting points, but it is imperative that we start the discussions, launch the initiatives, explore the options, or take whatever other first step can be imagined; the one step to avoid is the one labelled 'wait' ".

Part 2: An information paper on the Strategic People Planning Project (SPPP) Aims and Methodology.

This section of the report details the aims and methodology of the SPP Project, designed and conducted between March and September 1996.

The project was initiated by the Strategic People Planning Team of the Public Service and Merit Protection Commission as one of the follow-on projects of the MAB/MIAC Project, "Achieving Cost Effective Personnel Services".

The SPPP was conducted with the cooperation of The Department of Transport and Regional Development, the Department of Communications and the Arts, the Department of Social Security, and two private sector "best practice" advisers. A number of other Departments assisted in trialing the design of the project materials, and provided valuable feedback on the utility of the approach.

 

Introducing Strategic People Planning for Public Sector Agencies:

"If it was easy we would already be doing it; but in this environment we can no longer pretend that it doesn't matter that we don't "
HRM Manager in a private sector service industry about to tackle Strategic People Planning., 1995.

Following the publication of the findings of the MAB/MIAC Report, Achieving Cost Effective Personnel Services, (ACEPS) , considerable attention has been focused on how "best practice" in human resource management can be achieved in the APS. One of the consistent themes of the "best practice" findings in private sector performance is the development, acceptance and widespread understanding of strategic planning as an important tool to increase competitive advantage. Leading organisations have recognised the link between organisational objectives and people practices in order to gain a competitive advantage through motivated, developed and empowered employees. This goal is a major part of their HR strategies.

Forward thinking APS managers are asking how they can gain similar advantages for their agencies, while recognising that their "bottom line" may be quite different from their private sector colleagues.

Very few organisations in either the public or private sectors have fully integrated their People Planning, (intended to include all aspects of workforce planning, best summarised as "ensuring an organisation has the right people in the right place at the right time with the right skills, or the means of acquiring them"), into their Corporate Strategic Planning. Those in the private sector who have begun to do so, report that their integrated Strategic People Planning has been in place for one to three years, and that the benefits of its full impact are expected to begin to show a return on investment in the third to fifth year. All agree that the sooner managers across their organisations are aware of, and integrated into, the strategic focus on People Planning processes, the sooner those returns begin to flow.

It is important to distinguish the difference between fully integrating strategic People Planning into Corporate Planning, and having a strategic Human Resource Plan. Of the few Human Resource (HR) Strategic Plans currently developed in agencies most are stand alone documents, which may be linked by reference to objectives/goals of the Corporate Plan, but are not developed by the senior line management responsible for overall corporate planning. This is a critical difference which is discussed in more detail below.

Where to Begin?

It appears that most leading organisations who have chosen to incorporate strategic people planning into their corporate planning began by making a decision at a very senior level, (often CEO), to give people planning issues the same rigorous attention that had previously been reserved for financial and information technology planning. In doing so, they turned to the performance measuring tools, and environment scanning techniques used to analyse financial performance and product/service delivery.

Benchmarking performance has proved a useful tool to assist in diagnosing performance problems in an organisation, and identifying how far short of best practice the overall performance falls. When applied to HR practices and performance, it has enabled organisations to test themselves against those who consistently outperform them. It is now well documented that the characteristics of leading organisations include most or all of the following characteristics:

Those APS agencies who underwent HR benchmarking in the ACEPS project of 1995 have the opportunity to capitalise on the information gathered and learning experienced by their managers in a number of ways. Those agencies who undertook the second stage of the ACEPS project, (the "pilot projects"), have exhaustively examined:

In the words of one of the HR managers interviewed for the project,

... "we now know that ALL managers across our organisation must be involved in, and take responsibility for planning how we will get the right people in the right place at the right time, with the right skills. We can no longer leave it to just one area of our organisation to struggle with this fundamental aspect of our strategic planning. Unless all managers understand their individual responsibility to plan cooperatively for their budget, people, work organisation and accommodation, we cannot achieve our corporate objectives. They can no longer leave it to someone else: if they do, this organisation will fail in its task. We might be coordinating and supporting the task, but they have to be involved in the process. "

The Need for a Coordinated Approach to Change

Summing up the findings of ACEPS Stage One, MAB noted the capacity of APS agencies to significantly improve the performance of their delivery of HR services, and made clear its expectation that fundamental change would need to occur.

In suggesting what agencies could do to move on implementing better HR practices, MAB highlighted the opportunity for agencies to begin effectively integrating their corporate and HR Planning processes. MAB also listed the issues that Central Agencies might take a role in promoting. Central Agencies were encouraged, amongst other things, to "further encourage strategic human resource management through the promotion of the Human Resource Management Framework, and supporting advice on good practice.

In early 1996 it was agreed that the PSMPC Strategic People Management Team would focus on the development of a number of practical projects which would give expression to "supporting advice on good (HR) practice" within the framework of promoting ACEPS across the APS. The Strategic People Planning Project is one of those projects. Others included "Strategies for Change in APS Selection and Recruitment" and "Service Wide Personnel Management Reforms".

The first application of the SPP Project was completed in August 1996. Further opportunities to apply the approach and methodology of the project will be pursued later in the year.

The Strategic People Planning Project

A number of APS agencies who completed ACEPS HR Benchmarking in 1995 indicated an interest in participating in an HR Strategic Planning project. Some of these agencies had been involved in a previous Reference Group, coordinated by the then PSC, looking at HR Planning . The Strategic People Planning Project picked up elements of this earlier work, but was heavily focused on the need for integrated strategic HR Planning. The project participants were able to draw on the data available from ACEPS, and the project was tailored to the individual needs of particular agencies, in recognition of the fact that one size does not fit all when it comes to strategic people planning.

Briefly, the project provided managers in the participating agencies with the chance to use a "constructive questioning" technique, adapted from the Business Process Reengineering methodology in a project planning framework, to focus on how best to develop the data and skills needed for integrated strategic people planning. The process involved taking the Senior Executives of the organisation through a structured inquiry session designed to enable them to examine:

In those organisations that have already expended considerable energy on developing HR plans, the process built on that knowledge and experience. Where possible, the inquiry sessions were incorporated in an agency's scheduled Corporate Planning processes. The methodology was quite flexible and was used with a cross section of Senior Executives, or a Senior Executive and a selected group of his/her staff.

The outcome of the "constructive questioning" was twofold:

(1) It produced a set of data which could be used to inform discussion at Senior Executive level about how people planning is currently understood in the organisation from which a better approach to people planning can be developed; and

(2) It exposed a critical decision making level of an organisation to a process which they could tailor to use in their own strategic planning processes. Managers who have been through the process are more conscious of the need to incorporate people management issues into their Corporate Plans . They understand how strategic HR Planning informs and strengthens their business level planning within the divisions/business lines/regional offices of their organisation.

How Was the Project Managed?

The project was managed on an individual agency basis, and coordinated on a cross-agency basis. Effectively each participating agency had their own Strategic People Management Project as part of their continuing HR initiatives.

The project was resourced from within participating agencies, and was carefully aligned with HR planning and projects already underway in those agencies in order to minimise cost and disruption. The assistance provided by the PSMPC was at no additional cost to participants.

The PSMPC officer responsible for coordinating the project, Cheryl Hannah , developed the Strategic People Planning Management Opinion Inventory to assist senior managers with the process of Strategic People Planning. She coordinated and facilitated the SPPP Focus Groups for participating agencies, and documented the results.

In the intensive phase of the project, scheduled for June-July 1996, it was anticipated that participants would need to provide the equivalent of one full time ASL for 20 days, to work with the project coordinator in the conduct and analysis of the "constructive questioning" instrument. However, because the scope, levels of participation, and intensity of the data collection were aligned with existing HR management commitments within the organisation, and tailored to the needs of participants, the project was conducted more as an introduction to strategic people planning. Participants related the discussion findings of their focus groups to other HR initiatives underway in their organisations, such as the leadership program in Department of Transport and regional Development, and the Personnel Process Review underway in Department of Communication and the Arts.

Consequently, very little agency resource was needed from the project, participants over and above the direct contact with senior executives in preparatory interviews, and the focus groups. Where the project was used by an agency as the first phase of Business Process Reengineering of personnel practices, the resource commitment was absorbed by the HR Review Team undertaking the process reengineering.

The outcome of the project was primarily focused on providing managers, who are not usually involved in developing HR planning, with an opportunity to consider the advantages that a more strategic people planning focus can provide. These opportunities varied, depending on the needs and corporate goals of each agency, but they had some common elements of interest to managers across the APS, (covered in detail in Part 1 of this report).

Three "Project Advisors", (one public sector, and two private sector), drawn from best practice agencies, and who are advanced in their HR strategic planning, were secured for the project. The contribution of these advisors ensured that the practical realities of implementing better processes for strategic people planning could be addressed on a cross-sector basis.

It is worth noting that the "Project Advisors" agreed to be involved because they are frequently approached by individual organisations for advice on how to commence strategic HR planning. They are normally reluctant to engage, in any depth, with individual requests because of their own resource constraints. They saw this project as a way of contributing to the development of knowledge and experience in HR Strategic Planning in a cost effective and efficient manner by reaching a number of agencies simultaneously, as well as benefiting from the shared information expected from the project's completion.

Who Participated in the Project?

In order to meet the original schedule for the project with the resources available, the number of participating agencies was kept small. The project group was finalised in mid- May, and subsequently revised as pre-budget contingencies dictated the priorities for resources. The Department of Transport and the Department of Communications and the Arts are the two Departments to have completed the project to date. The Department of Social Security is considering doing so as part of the planning for transition to the new "agency" in 1997.

To Conclude

Introducing Strategic People Planning into Public Sector Agencies is a challenging task. As the outcome of the Second Stage of ACEPS reports, introducing HR best practice into organisations depends on teams and key stakeholders defining what outcomes they want from changes to the people management processes within their specific agencies. The process of developing Strategic People Planning provides the senior management group of an agency with an excellent starting point for such an undertaking.

APS agencies undertaking strategic people planning are leading the way on integrating HR planning as a part of their corporate business planning. With an increasing focus on workforce planning, more effective policy development and a mechanism for measuring the performance of HR service delivery, they are "closing the gap" for cost efficient and effective people management in the public sector.

Part 3: A copy of the Strategic People Planning Management Opinion Inventory- Individual Contributor with an explanatory note on how to use it as a diagnostic tool for strategic planning.

This section sets out the diagnostic instrument:

It explains the context of the Inventory, and suggests ways that it might be used with groups of managers to get them thinking about strategic people management in the APS.

The SPPP Diagnostic Tools

The "Strategic People Planning Management Opinion Inventory" is designed to provide participants in SPPP Senior Management Focus Groups with a quick snapshot of their personal attitudes towards twenty key questions on people management. In a two hour facilitated session the questions are designed to explore:

Focus Group participants record their answers on the inventory and then transfer their scores to the tally sheet for an "on the spot" compilation of their the group score for each section of the questions. The average of the scores for each section can be plotted on the "Group Opinion Map" which then provides the participants with a group snapshot of the relative strengths of the group facing the responsibility of introducing people management change in their organisation.

This simple diagnostic tool provides a structured entry to a "change imperative" discussion which can be used to question assumptions about what can or cannot be changed. Using the "constructive questioning" technique, outlined below, the facilitator assists the participants to reflect on their opinions for each of the areas of people management covered by the Opinion Inventory . Opportunities for change can be identified for further discussion and for input into the corporate strategic planning processes of the organisation, or other strategic human resource initiatives underway.

It can be used with Senior Executive Officers , Senior Officers or middle managers because it is designed to be used with natural decision making groups, however they are configured in an organisation. It is not a sampling tool, but rather a discussion catalyst to stimulate the thinking of management groups. It is very useful for managers who have previously spent little time talking together specifically about people management and people planning issues.

The "Tips for Change" are intended to generate further discussion in the workgroups of the participants, and to provoke more extensive thinking about what a strategic approach to people planning might mean for those workgroups.

Strategic People Planning Management Opinion Inventory

Individual Contributor

This diagnostic tool is designed to help you determine how conscious you are, as a manager, of People Management Issues in planning your work to achieve your business outcomes.

On the next two pages are twenty descriptive statements about various people management behaviours and activities. Please read each statement carefully. You should ask yourself how true each statement is for you, and your organisation, in your role as a manager in your Division /Branch /Section.

You are given five choices:
1. If you do not agree at all with the statement , circle "1".
2. If you agree very little with the statement, circle "2".
3. If you are undecided or ambivalent about the statement, circle "3".
4. If you mostly agree with the statement, circle "4".
5. If you agree strongly with the statement, circle "5".

In selecting your response, be realistic: respond in terms of how you typically react to people management situations in your current position. Do not respond in terms of what you would like to see happening, or how people management should be operating in your organisation.

After you have marked responses for all twenty questions, please transfer your ratings to the blanks provided at the end of Page 4.

Remember there are no right answers, only your answers!

 

1. This organisation is comfortable with the way that changing people management might proceed, ( for example, through risk taking, learning, ambiguity and a strong focus on listening to others).
1 2 3 4 5

2. Communication and performance management are given high priority and sufficient resources to make them effective for people management in my workgroup or organisational unit.
1 2 3 4 5

3. I experiment and take risks with new approaches to managing people even when there is a chance of failure.
1 2 3 4 5

4. The work of my section/work group is so different from all the other work groups in the organisation that we could not share staff, (for example, through a mobility scheme), with other areas.
1 2 3 4 5

5. My work group recognises that we need to manage our people more cost effectively.
1 2 3 4 5

6. Managers in this organisation can direct their people management efforts to achieving their key business outcomes rather than administering an organisational unit.
1 2 3 4 5

7. I look ahead and forecast what I expect staffing needs to be in my work group or organisational unit.
1 2 3 4 5

8. My senior management team is keen to foster better people management in our organisation.
1 2 3 4 5

9. Key support staff (for example, human resources, finance and information systems), are positive about the prospect of improving people management and capable of innovative responses to my requests for assistance.
1 2 3 4 5

10. This organisation places high value on serving our clients and has a solid understanding of stakeholders' needs.
1 2 3 4 5

11. I look for ways to reward the people in my work group (or organisational unit) for work well done.
1 2 3 4 5

12. Public service systems and rules do not prevent me from having the mix of people/levels and skills that I need to achieve the outcomes expected of my work group.

 

1 2 3 4 5

13. This organisation understands that taking a more strategic approach to planning people management will result in multi-dimensional change that impacts processes, jobs, organisational structure, management responsibilities and supervisory culture.
1 2 3 4 5

14. In this organisation managers feel empowered to "break the rules" and to challenge long-standing assumptions about the way that people are recruited, developed and rewarded.
1 2 3 4 5

15. I am comfortable with my knowledge of the personnel options available to me for planning the workforce I need to meet my current responsibilities.
1 2 3 4 5

16. Managers in this organisation are given end-to-end responsibility for the people management processes and are motivated to assure the processes are successfully integrated into organisational planning at the business level.
1 2 3 4 5

17. Performance management information (for example referee reports, performance appraisal systems, performance feedback information, training profiles, training and development plans, etc), is available to me as a manager in a form that is useful for improving the performance of staff.
1 2 3 4 5

18. As an organisation, we manage underperformance with tact and persistence.
1 2 3 4 5

19. I have at least two ideas on how to improve people management in this organisation that I would like to implement in the next six months.
1 2 3 4 5

20. People in my work area believe that they will be valued for the contribution they make to the work of the organisation.
1 2 3 4 5

Please transfer your scores to the table below

 


1
2
3
4

5
6
7
8

9
10
11
12

13
14
15
16

17
18
19
20

Total


Constructive Questions to Ask about Your Answers to the Management Opinion Inventory

For each question, try to consider the questions below from as many points of view as you can. You may find it useful to discuss your opinions with others in your work group, or management team.

You need to keep asking "why,why,why?" until you are satisfied that there is a sound reason for keeping a process, or supporting a course of action. You are trying to uncover the assumptions that underlie the way that people management issues are handled, and to explore the possibilities for change. It may be a change in a policy or process, or it might be a challenge to a long held belief or philosophy.

The critical question to ask when you are challenged to change something is "why not?" You will be surprised at what you discover about your own views, and those of the others in your group.

What Do Your Answers Mean for You?

Change Readiness/ Openness to Change

1. This organisation is comfortable with the way that changing people management might proceed, (for example, through risk taking, learning, ambiguity and a strong focus on listening to others).

5. My work group recognises that we need to manage our people more cost effectively.

9. Key support staff (for example, human resources, finance and information systems), are positive about the prospect of improving people management and capable of innovative responses to my requests for assistance.

13. This organisation understands that taking a more strategic approach to planning people management will result in multi-dimensional change that impacts processes, jobs, organisational structure, management responsibilities and supervisory culture.

17. Performance management information (for example referee reports, performance appraisal systems, performance feedback information, training profiles, training and development plans, etc), is available to me as a manager in a form that is useful for improving the performance of staff,

This cluster of questions explores the way that you perceive your organisation's ability to support you as a manager interested in changing the way that you manage people. For example, if you see your organisation as having a high desire to change its people management, but a low capacity to do so, the questions may help you identify which aspects of people management need to be strengthened before you attempt to make major changes to people management processes.

 

Tips for Change:

Comment?

Personnel "Style" of the Agency/Organisational Taboos

2. Communication and performance management are given high priority and sufficient resources to make them effective for people management in my workgroup or organisational unit.

6. Managers in this organisation can direct their people management efforts to achieving their key business outcomes rather than administering an organisational unit.

10. This organisation places high value on serving our clients and has a solid understanding of stakeholders' needs.

14. In this organisation managers feel empowered to "break the rules" and to challenge long-standing assumptions about the way that people are recruited, developed and rewarded.

18. As an organisation, we manage underperformance with tact and persistence.

This cluster of questions explores the "style" of your organisation. There are often aspects of organisational culture which work to undermine individual attempts to change the way things are done. Understanding the relationships between work culture and personnel "style" can be a useful starting point for questioning what needs to be changed to get different outcomes from people.

Tips for Change:

Comment?

Level of Personal Involvement/Willingness to Design Change

3. I experiment and take risks with new approaches to managing people even when there is a chance of failure.

7. I look ahead and forecast what I expect staffing needs to be in my work group or organisational unit.

11. I look for ways to reward the people in my work group (or organisational unit) for work well done.

15. I am comfortable with my knowledge of the personnel options available to me for planning the workforce I need to meet my current responsibilities.

19. I have at least two ideas on how to improve people management in this organisation that I would like to implement in the next six months.

This cluster of questions challenges you as a manager to consider how much you are already contributing to changing the way people are managed in your organisation, and to think about ways that your involvement could be enhanced. Your answers provide you with an indication of how prepared you are to experiment and take risks, as well as how creative you are with opportunities which present themselves.

Tips for Change:

Comment?

Barriers to Change/What has been tried before?

4. The work of my section/work group is so different from all the other work groups in the organisation that we could not share staff, (for example, through a mobility scheme), with other areas.

8. My senior management team is keen to foster better people management in our organisation.

12. Public service systems and rules do not prevent me from having the mix of people/levels and skills that I need to achieve the outcomes expected of my work group.

16. Managers in this organisation are given end-to-end responsibility for the people management processes and are motivated to assure the processes are successfully integrated into organisational planning at the business level.

20. People in my work area believe that they will be valued for the contribution they make to the work of the organisation.

This cluster of questions examines some of the commonly identified barriers to change, including the difficulties of structural barriers, as well as the more subtle psychological "blockers". The questions are cast in the positive so that organisations which have already commenced work on overcoming these types of barriers continue to score highly on the overall index.

Tips for Change:

Comment?

Management Opinion Inventory Group Opinion Map

 

  1.
Change Readiness 		2.
Agency "Style" 		3.
Personal Involvement 		4.
Barriers to Change

25

20

15

10

5
  1.
Change Readiness 		2.
Agency "Style" 		3.
Personal Involvement 		4.
Barriers to Change

Note: Points to plot a "group map" are calculated from the simple averages of the score totals for each question cluster by group.

Selected References

James Champy, Reengineering Management, Harper Collins, London, 1995

Alan Green, A Company Discovers its Soul: A Year in the Life of A Transforming Organisation, Berret-Koehler, San Francisco, 1996

Michael Hammer and Steven A. Stanton, The Reengineering Revolution, Harper Business, New York, NY, 1995

Robert Hriegel and David Brandt, Sacred Cows Make the Best Hamburgers, Harper Business, New York NY, 1996

HRM Consulting, Focus on HR Practice: HR Strategic Planning, HRM Consulting Ltd, Milton, QLD, 1996

Andrew and Nada Korac-Kakabadse, "The Leadership Challenge for the Australian Public Service (APS): An Internationally Comparative Benchmarking Analysis", Cranfield University School of Management, 1996

Rosabeth Moss Kantor, When Giants Learn to Dance: Mastering the Challenges of Strategy, Management, and Careers in the 1990s, Routledge, London, 1989

Faith Popcorn and Lys Marigold, Clicking: 16 Trends to Future Fit Your Life, Your Work and Your Business, Thorsons, London, 1996

Martin J. Plevel, et.al, "AT&T Global Business Communications Systems: Linking HR With Business Strategy", Organizational Dynamics, Winter 94 (22/3), pp.59-71.

Eileen C. Shapiro, Fad Surfing in the Boardroom: Reclaiming the Courage to Manage in the Age of Instant Answers, Harper Business, New York NY, 1995

Randall S. Schuler, "Strategic Human Resources Management: Linking the People with the Strategic Needs of the Business", Organizational Dynamics, Summer 92 (21/1), pp.18-30.

Watson Wyatt Consulting, HR 21 Human Resources for the Next Century: A Study of Human Resource Reengineering, Watson Wyatt Worldwide, Washington D.C., 1996