• Home• Index and downloads• Glossary ☎ Contact us

Print this page Find Download

 

Leadership

Effective leadership is critical to the public service’s identity and its public image. However, the pathways to senior leadership in the APS have changed markedly in the last decade, mainly in response to the departure of large numbers of baby boomers who have reached an age when they can access their superannuation benefits. The loss of senior staff is likely to continue as the 70% of current SES employees and 55% of existing EL2 employees now aged 45 or over retire. This group will need to be progressively replaced over the next five to ten years and beyond.

The next generation of senior APS leaders will typically have advanced to management levels more quickly and have worked in fewer agencies than did their predecessors. There are also growing numbers of mature entrants to the APS who are experienced in other sectors, but may lack grounding in government processes. This pattern of lateral recruitment is likely to continue, given the removal of superannuation constraints and other barriers to moving in and out of the APS at varying career points.¹

The identification of future leaders and the design of leadership development programmes are both critical to leadership development. International research shows that many countries are developing or have developed methods for identifying future leaders, in addition to leadership development programmes, to ensure they have the required public sector leadership capability into the future. The examples below show two different approaches being taken in Canada and the United Kingdom.

 

Identifying future APS leaders

There is a clear imperative for the APS to identify and invest in the development of high potential leaders. One of the major outcomes of the MAC report, Managing and Sustaining the APS Workforce, is that all APS agencies will develop systematic approaches to developing potential future leaders, including making use of the emerging APS-wide menu of career development options. The importance of leadership development is also emphasised by MAC in its Senior Executive Service of the Australian Public Service: One APS–One SES statement issued in October 2005.²

The identification of a need for a greater APS-wide focus on leadership capabilities and development is consistent with international developments. As highlighted above, for example, both Canada and the United Kingdom have developed approaches to identifying high potential leaders. The Canadian and United Kingdom case study examples are illustrative of the attention being paid to leadership development overseas. They are also illustrative of the different types of approaches being taken—one is aimed at identifying middle managers with leadership potential and the other is aimed at identifying graduates with potential for senior leadership positions. The approach adopted by different countries will depend on the local context. In particular, the countries overall approach to public sector management and the degree of devolution within the systems will play an important role in determining the approach to take.

In the agency survey, agencies were asked to indicate how they identify potential leaders. As Figure 10.1 shows, ‘manager/agency head identification’ was the most common method of identifying future leaders for all classifications. Next to this method there was a fairly even spread between ‘individual self-identification’, ‘performance management system’ and ‘development opportunities’. Assessment centres are used less often by agencies, and almost not at all for identification of potential leaders at the APS 1–6 classifications.

Figure 10.1: Agency identification of future leaders, 2004–05

Source: Agency survey

Figure 10.1 shows that agencies across-the-board see the identification of future leaders as an important issue and are committed to taking action in this area. It is also clear that some agencies such as the ATO, have a particularly strong focus on identifying and developing future leaders and have developed an agency-specific approach to identification.

Whole of APS leadership development

While there is no formula for the depth and breadth of learning and career experiences required of a senior APS leader, all senior executives are expected to exhibit common capabilities, and share common values, common ethical standards and a common commitment to development and collaboration. Consequently, it is important that there be a whole of APS approach to leadership development.

SELC framework and leadership capability

The Senior Executive Leadership Capability (SELC) framework articulates the crucial success factors for senior APS leaders— in particular, the behaviours that support high performance. In summary, the five capability areas are:

• achieves results
• cultivates productive working relationships
• shapes strategic thinking
• communicates with influence
• exemplifies personal drive and integrity.

As detailed in last year’s report, the Commission has extended the SELC framework to non–SES employees through its Integrated Leadership System (ILS). The ILS, which was launched progressively across Australia during 2004, builds on the SELC framework by describing behaviours that support the SES capabilities and by clarifying pathways to leadership from EL1 to SES Band 3. It is supported by a range of tools for both agencies and individuals to use in their leadership development.

Beyond the capability areas included in the SELC framework there are, of course, more agency-specific requirements reflecting the appropriate culture and structures required to achieve each agency’s mission. The ILS acknowledges more specifically than in the recent past the mix of leadership, management, technical and professional skills and experience necessary to perform effectively in the SES. At the same time it continues to emphasise the importance of the core SELC criteria for the SES—to comprise a cohesive leadership cadre for the APS, consistent with the Act’s provision on the constitution and role of the SES (s. 35).

The SELC framework capabilities have been the core criteria for selection to the SES since September 1999. However, the Commissioner may accept requests from agencies for additional selection criteria for particular SES vacancies. In recognition that agencies have generally used the capacity to add extra criteria appropriately and sparingly, mainly with the aim of tailoring selection criteria to specialist positions, after 6 December 2004, agencies were given the authority to add one further selection criterion without seeking the Commissioner’s agreement. Between 1 July and 6 December 2004, the Commissioner agreed to 24 requests for additional selection criteria; only two requests have been submitted since then. It is anticipated that this change will result in only a small number of future requests for multiple additional SES selection criteria. Of the 26 requests received, Defence (8) and the ATO (5) accounted for half. The Defence cases were primarily from the Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO).

The employee survey asked employees to rate their immediate supervisor (not necessarily at the SES level) against the SELC framework capabilities. As Figure 10.2 indicates, overall, employee perceptions of their immediate supervisor’s leadership capabilities (as assessed against the ILS/SELC framework) were relatively stable between 2002–03 and 2004–05. Compared to the other core leadership capability areas, more employees continued to rate their immediate supervisor as ‘high’ in the areas of ‘achieves results’ and ‘exemplifies personal drive and integrity’. However, the proportion of employees who rated their immediate supervisor as high in the area of ‘achieves results’ declined (61% in 2004–05 compared to 65% in 2003–04). The relatively higher rating of these two capabilities amongst immediate supervisors is consistent with trends identified within the feeder group to the SES who participate in the CDAC programme. There is a consistent pattern that many CDAC participants are strong in driving outputs, but weaker in the areas of ‘productive working relationships’ and ‘shapes strategic thinking’.

There was no change in the proportion of employees who rated their supervisor as high against ‘cultivates productive working relationships’ (53%) and personal drive and integrity (58%). Furthermore, the proportion who rated their supervisor as high in the areas of ‘communicates with influence’ (49% in 2004–05) and ‘shapes strategic thinking’ (48% in 2004–05) remained fairly stable. Relative to the other leadership capabilities, the proportion of employees who rate their supervisor high in the area of ‘shapes strategic thinking’ remains relatively low—this is a cause for concern.

Figure 10.2: Proportion of employees who rated their immediate supervisor as ‘high’ on leadership capabilities, 2002–03 to 2004–05

Source: Employee survey

SES leadership development

SES officers should take a professional and disciplined approach to their development, and evaluate their performance and consider the training available to them.

For her part, the Commissioner has a specific responsibility under the Act to ‘contribute to, and foster, leadership in the APS’. In practice, the Commissioner exercises this responsibility in close collaboration with agencies. In particular, the Commissioner consults with Portfolio Secretaries on the development of leadership and development programmes for the SES and EL employees through the Leadership and Learning Advisory Committee (LALAC), which consists of agency heads from 10 departments and two other APS agencies. In 2004–05, LALAC’s focus included the implementation of the ILS by APS agencies and the development of new leadership programmes for the SES and ELs.

The new suite of SES development programmes being provided by the Commission in 2005–06 includes a series of three-day residential programmes for Band 1, 2 and 3 employees, and a range of short courses focussing on specific capabilities such as strategic thinking, governance, and financial, programme, and performance management.

The two-day Orientation to the Senior Executive Service programme was run three times from July to December 2004. The programme has since been redeveloped as a three- day SES Orientation programme and was delivered for the first time in June 2005, after the trialling of a number of versions of a senior executive transition programme.

A total of 67 senior executives attended these orientation programmes in 2004–05. Of the senior executives who were engaged or promoted to the SES in the last three years, 29% attended an orientation programme during their first year in the SES, 4% attended in their second year in the SES and none attended during their third year.

With the redevelopment of the SES orientation programmes and the emphasis placed on leadership development in MAC’s SES statement, the objective is to have all new SES employees attend an orientation programme sometime in their first three years in the SES. In addition to what participants actually learn as part of these programmes, programme attendance can play an important role in developing a cross-agency perspective and promoting collaboration between SES employees in all APS agencies.

Other key programmes offered to the SES are the Commission’s Leading Australia’s Future in Asia (LAFIA) programme and the executive fellowships from the Australia and New Zealand School of Government (ANZSOG).

The LAFIA programme offers SES Band 2 and 3 employees the opportunity to better equip themselves for the international dimension of their current and future roles, by exposing them to a range of high-level business, government and academic leaders both in Australia and overseas. Over 150 senior executives from the Commonwealth, state and territory governments have participated in LAFIA since it commenced in 1994. In 2004–05, the Commission led two programmes in Asia. In total, 23 SES employees participated in these programmes along with 11 participants from other jurisdictions. Fourteen SES employees participated in a three-week study tour of Japan and China (along with six participants from state jurisdictions); and nine SES employees participated in a three-week study tour of India and Malaysia (along with five participants from state jurisdictions).

Under the guidance of LALAC a new LAFIA programme to the Pacific (LAFIA Pacific) has been developed for all levels of the SES. The first iteration of this programme was run in July 2005. Fourteen senior executives including 12 SES employees participated in a study tour of Papua New Guinea, Fiji, the Solomon Islands and Samoa. This programme is part of the Commission’s contribution to strengthening public administration in the Asia-Pacific region.

ANZSOG is a school established collaboratively by a consortium of Australian and New Zealand governments, universities and business schools to provide world-class education and development for emerging public sector leaders. The Australian Government became a member of ANZSOG in September 2002 and during 2004–05 was represented on the ANZSOG board and its research committee by the Commissioner.

The Australian Government has made a substantial investment in the school through its commitment to placing APS employees on ANZSOG programmes over the first three years of their operation and through its support for an enhanced research capacity. In addition to the $600,000 provided for ANZSOG research from 2004–06, the Australian Government announced in May 2005 the provision of a $10 million grant. This grant will further assist ANZSOG to maintain and develop its flagship programmes; increase the scope and effectiveness of its research; strengthen its capacity to undertake new initiatives, and make a wider contribution to improvement and innovation in government administration; and contribute to improved governance in the region, including through training courses and secondments.

ANZSOG has two flagship teaching programmes—the Executive Fellows Program (EFP) and the Executive Master of Public Administration (EMPA). ANZSOG’s EFP is an intensive three-week residential programme tailored for senior executives at the Band 2 and 3 levels to enhance core leadership and management skills needed to lead public sector organisations. In addition to receiving both structured and informal learning experiences, participants have the opportunity to meet key government leaders, and leading Australian and international academics and practitioners. The first EFP was held in 2003 with 80 participants (16 of whom were from the APS). The number of APS participants increased to 20 in 2004 and 21 in 2005. The level of participant satisfaction with the EFP in 2004–05 has been high. The 2004 EFP achieved an overall rating of 4.3 on a five point scale.

In addition to the formal leadership development programmes outlined above, the 2005 MAC report, Managing and Sustaining the APS Workforce, has foreshadowed that Portfolio Secretaries and agency heads, in consultation with the Commissioner, will undertake systematic career planning discussions with SES Band 2 and 3 employees and arrange mobility opportunities where these are deemed appropriate.

SES feeder group development

Two key APS-wide programmes for the SES feeder group are CDAC (an ‘assessment centre’) and ANZSOG’s EMPA (a ‘leadership development programme—not tailored for agency specific requirements’).

CDAC assesses high-performing EL2s identified by their agencies as having clear potential to reach the SES. Their performance is rated against the SELC framework through a variety of activities. Since the inception of CDAC in 2000, participation has included 703 EL2s, with 118 participants in 2004–05 (down from 138 in 2003–04).

Table 10.1 provides CDAC participation details for CDAC Series II (2002–03 to 2004–05).

Table 10.1: CDAC—Number of participants and number of participating agencies, Series II, 2002-03 to 2004-05

	No. of participants	No. of participating agencies per year	Cumulative no. of participating agencies over Series II
2002-03	98	17	17
2003-04	138	30	33
2004-05	118	23	36
Total	354

Source: Australian Public Service Commission

The number of agencies participating in CDAC increased substantially in 2003–04 following correspondence from the Commissioner to all heads of departments and agencies. In 2004–05, the number decreased due to changes in departmental structures and reduced involvement from a number of the small agencies who had participated for the first time the previous year. The cumulative column represents the total number of agencies who sent at least one participant on the second CDAC series.

Comparison of the progression from EL to SES levels between participants in CDAC and non-participants shows that, as at June 2004, 10% of 2002–03 CDAC participants were in the SES compared to 4% of non-participating EL2s who were EL2s as at June 2002; and 52% of 1999–2000 participants were in the SES compared with 11% of nonparticipating EL2s who were EL2s as at June 1999. This is not necessarily a measure of the success of the programme, but it does indicate that suitable people are generally being nominated, and that they are being helped to identify their development needs for future advancement.

As pointed out in last year’s report, CDAC may not be the most cost-effective way of identifying development needs for everyone with potential to move to the SES, but it has proven to be very effective for most of those who have participated, providing them with a frank and detailed assessment of their strengths and weaknesses. Given the challenge of increasing the numbers of employees able to take on leadership positions in the next five years, the Commission would expect CDAC rates to be nearer the rate of appointment to the SES (as is the case for some participating agencies). Agencies might consider the further participation of suitable employees in the CDAC programme as a means of identifying employees with SES potential. This may include younger employees in the feeder group and EL2s new to that role, for whom CDAC might indicate development requirements early in their management careers. However, CDAC is a rigorous programme and it is important that managers exercise careful judgment in relation to assessing the readiness of EL2s for CDAC participation so as to guard against discouragement by possible negative feedback.

The other key programme for the feeder group to the SES, ANZSOGs EMPA, is a two- year part-time postgraduate degree aimed at high-performing EL2s, which is intended to develop the depth and breadth of management and policy skills needed in today’s public sector. The first cohort of this programme commenced study in May 2003, with 30 APS agency participants from 17 APS agencies, and concluded in mid-2005. The second cohort had 24 participants from 13 APS agencies. In 2005, 31 APS employees from 17 APS agencies commenced the third Master’s course. The programme is highly innovative and carefully designed to be relevant to today’s public sector. Feedback to date has been positive. Evaluations from the three cohorts of the Master’s programme (2003 to 2005) achieved an overall rating of 3.9 on a five point scale. The continuing success of the programme will depend on maintaining the calibre of the participants, the relevance of the curriculum and access to leading academics and teaching staff.

In April 2005, the Commission’s inaugural Leadership in the APS—An Indigenous Experience programme commenced with 14 participants. The 12 month leadership programme is designed for indigenous EL employees. Participants undertake a range of leadership development experiences including a 12 week work placement and personalised coaching forums and residential workshops.

Leadership capability development within agencies

As part of the survey agencies were asked to identify the leadership development activities they offer at different classification levels.³

As Figure 10.3 shows, agencies are continuing to take an active and targeted approach to leadership development, particularly for the SES feeder group. Coaching, mentoring and/or personal sponsorship and specialised leadership programmes are the dominant learning and development activities offered by agencies. However, the results show a decline in the use of leadership development programmes not tailored to agency- specific requirements and a sharp increase in ‘agency-specific leadership development programmes— designed/tailored for their agencies’ requirements’ for ELs and APS 5–6s. The results also show an increase in the use of ‘assessment centres’ as an option for ELs and the SES in 2004–05.

Figure 10.3: Leadership development activities offered by agencies, 2004–05

Source: Agency survey

Last year the agency survey results showed that the use of placements and/or mobility options ‘across the APS’ and ‘outside the APS’ was limited. Whilst the change in the wording around mobility to include ‘structured’ makes it difficult to point to trends in this area, this year’s survey results show that agencies are not embracing structured placements and/or mobility placements to the same degree that they are embracing other leadership development activities.

The employee survey results support the agency survey results. The employee survey asked employees what their agency offered them personally in the way of leadership development opportunities. Compared to 2002–03, overall there was little change in what employees were offered. However, there were some changes in what opportunities employees in particular classifications were offered. In 2004–05, a higher proportion of ELs reported being offered agency-specific leadership development programmes than in the preceding year (42% compared to 32%) and mentoring and/or personal sponsorship (31% compared to 25%).

A smaller proportion of SES employees than in previous years reported being offered specialised leadership development programmes external to the agency and assessment centres. Placements and/or mobility options external to the agency ranked low in terms of what SES employees said they were offered by their agency.

The survey results indicate that the offer of coaching opportunities has increased across- the-board for all classifications.

The employee survey results indicate that employees in large agencies were more likely to be offered leadership opportunities than their colleagues in smaller agencies. The employee survey results also indicate that large agencies are more likely to offer future leaders programmes within the agency whilst small agencies rely more heavily on leadership programmes external to the agency.

It appears that agencies might be placing a greater reliance on formal leadership development courses at the expense of practical learning and development embedded in on-the-job experiences. In this context the benefits to be gained from mobility opportunities (whether employee or agency initiated) should not be underestimated.

The 2004 MAC report, Connecting Government,⁴ found that organisational agility can be fostered through public service-wide and agency-based approaches, and that placement and mobility options should form part of capability and succession management strategies. This finding appears not to have been embraced by agencies as part of their formal learning and development programmes to the extent that MAC might have hoped.

Mobility also features as a theme in the MAC report, Managing and Sustaining the APS Workforce, referred to earlier in the chapter. As part of its examination of APS workforce trends, the report found an increasing narrowness in the APS experience of the staff now moving towards and into senior leadership levels and pointed to the longer-term decline in interagency mobility. There are substantial benefits to be derived from potential leaders taking steps to broaden their experience and exposure by working in different environments—not only within the APS, but also in other public, private and nongovernment organisations. In its APS workforce report, MAC advocated a more targeted approach to the issue of mobility which places it in a broader capability development context.

As was reported in 2002–03, despite the priority placed by agencies on leadership development, employee satisfaction with leadership development opportunities was again mixed. This year 26% of employees indicated that they were satisfied with their access to leadership development opportunities in their organisation and 30% of employees indicated dissatisfaction. However, a greater proportion (40%) indicated that they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied.

Satisfaction levels were again related to age, length of service and classification. Employees aged between 45 and 54 years were more likely to be satisfied and less likely to be dissatisfied with their leadership development opportunities. Employees with five or fewer years of service in the APS expressed low levels of satisfaction and high levels of dissatisfaction. SES employees were much more likely to report satisfaction (52%) than APS or EL employees (22% and 38%, respectively). However, SES employee satisfaction levels have dropped considerably since 2002–03 (52% compared to 67%). They were much more likely than before to indicate that they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied.

When employees were asked to provide general comments on leadership, as in other years many spoke about their dissatisfaction with leadership development opportunities. The reasons for dissatisfaction were varied but included issues around resource constraints and lack of management support.

---

1 Management Advisory Committee 2005, Managing and Sustaining the APS Workforce, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

2 Management Advisory Committee 2005, Senior Executive Service of the Australian Public Service: One APS–One SES, Australian Government, Canberra.

3 This year’s results are not directly comparable with results from previous years because of changes in the wording of the leadership development categories.

4 Management Advisory Committee 2004, Connecting Government: Whole of Government Responses to Australia’s Priority Challenges, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

go to top of the page