Key chapter findings

Like overseas public services, the APS is placing greater emphasis on leadership development. The survey results show that agencies are continuing to take an active and targeted approach to leadership identification and development through the widespread availability of leadership development opportunities. However, survey results also show that agencies are not embracing structured placements and/or mobility programmes to the same degree that they are embracing other leadership development activities. This is disappointing, given the finding in the MAC report, Connecting Government, that organisational agility can be fostered through APS-wide and agency-based approaches, and that placement and mobility options should form part of capability and succession management strategies. Such results lend support to the action-oriented approach adopted in the most recent MAC report, Managing and Sustaining the APS Workforce, and the related MAC statement on the SES.

This year’s employee survey results confirm results from previous years which indicated low levels of satisfaction in relation to leadership development opportunities. The decline in SES employee satisfaction levels is a cause for concern. While the majority of employees rate their supervisor highly against most of the five leadership capability areas, 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 (at 48%). This is a further cause for concern. LALAC and the Commission’s emphasis on redeveloping existing leadership programmes and developing an additional suite of programmes, incorporating a greater focus on policy development, may go some way towards addressing certain problems. However, much will depend on agencies’ support for, and the commitment of individual SES and EL employees to, their own development.

In 2004–05, agencies continued to develop a strategic focus on learning and development, through aligning learning and development with organisational business goals, particularly by identifying learning and development priorities as part of their performance management system. Agencies also prioritised learning and development to reflect the different capabilities required at different classifications. Furthermore, it is reassuring to see that agencies are placing a focus on performance management, with performance management being the only learning and development area that was rated as a top five priority at all classification levels (including at a whole of agency level). Performance management is discussed in more detail in Chapter 8.

It is also pleasing to report this year the increase in the proportion of agencies that could estimate their investment in off-the-job learning and development—up from around 60% in previous years to just over 75% of agencies this year. The data shows that many agencies are making a large investment in learning and development, with large agencies spending more on formal off-the-job learning and development and dedicating a larger proportion of their departmental operating expenses to these activities. While the investment being made by large agencies is commendable, employees in smaller agencies may not have the same degree of access to formal off-the-job learning opportunities available to employees working in larger agencies. However, it should also be noted that the differences reported may reflect different strategies being used by these agencies to invest in the development of their employees in response to their differing business needs and circumstances. Measuring the cost of on-the-job learning and development remains a challenge for almost all agencies.

For the third year in a row, in the area of evaluating learning and development strategies, agencies continued to focus substantially on evaluating the content of programmes and the effectiveness of their delivery. Although an increasing proportion of agencies were evaluating the degree of capability acquired by the individual in 2004–05, there needs to be a greater focus by agencies on the difficult issue of evaluating the benefits of learning and development to individual and agency performance. However, it should be recognised that the approaches taken by agencies may need to vary, depending on the nature and business of the agency, including its size. Assessing the organisational value of learning and development is important in engaging our employees and in building APS-wide capability that is flexible, accountable, and responsive to the government of the day.

go to top of the page