APS leadership

This year marks the twenty-fifth anniversary of the formation of the Senior Executive Service (SES). The SES was created in 1984 to improve the management and leadership capabilities of the Australian Public Service (APS) and enhance the overall performance of the whole APS.

Its establishment recognised the growing body of research showing that leadership affects all aspects of an organisation’s effectiveness, including its capacity to achieve organisational goals and its ability to attract and retain the best employees.

The evidence also shows scope for ‘leadership’ at different levels throughout an organisation. In the APS, a leadership pathway through the APS levels and the EL 1 and 2 classifications, builds up to clear roles and expectations of a position in the SES.

During times of change, all employees need to play a part in shaping and directing that change, and to respond to urgent as well as enduring priorities. All employees must take some responsibility for aligning organisational directions and resources and for inspiring colleagues to ‘go the extra mile’. All employees play a role in embedding ethical frameworks and a positive culture. Encouraging employees to develop and put leadership skills into practice allows them to take the initiative and drive outcomes, as well as improving their overall motivation and engagement. This approach benefits the whole organisation.

The Integrated Leadership System developed by the Commission clearly articulates how leadership attributes and capabilities develop and grow through all classification levels; leadership skills do not suddenly appear, fully formed, at the EL 2 and SES classifications.

Development of leadership capabilities at an early stage is also important for growing future leaders and was identified by APS agencies as one of their key workforce challenges for the future. A large proportion of the APS’ current leadership cohort—the SES and its main feeder group, the EL 2s—are nearing retirement. The APS needs to ensure the quality, quantity and diversity of its future leadership pool is sufficient to meet increasing workplace demands. This is where well-designed and targeted talent identification and management programs, as well as succession management, are especially important.

This chapter concentrates on SES employees due to their high-level effect on organisational outcomes, and their legislated leadership responsibilities. It examines the present APS leadership against its original 1984 charter, along with the key qualities that may be required of future APS leaders. A census of all SES employees, undertaken to mark the twenty-fifth anniversary, has been used in conjunction with data from APSED and the State of the Service employee and agency surveys. The data is used to examine the present characteristics of the SES and its main feeder group, EL 2 employees; leadership self- perceptions and employee perceptions; and talent and leadership development opportunities.

SES origins

The Public Service Act 1999 consolidated the functions and roles of the SES established in 1984. Section 35(2) of the Act specifies that the functions of the SES are to:

• provide a group of APS employees each of whom, within his or her agency, provides professional expertise, policy advice, and/or management at a high level
• promote cooperation with other agencies
• promote, by personal example and other appropriate means, the APS Values and compliance with the Code of Conduct.

The capabilities and attributes required of SES are articulated in the Senior Executive Leadership Capability Framework (linked closely to the Integrated Leadership Framework), updated in 2001, which provides the formal criteria for all SES selection processes. The criteria include the ability to shape strategic thinking, achieve results, cultivate productive working relationships, communicate with influence, and exemplify personal drive and integrity. In the census of SES conducted by the Commission in August 2009, employees were asked to consider the relevance of the executive leadership framework to the work they were currently doing and to the work they anticipated doing in five years. They reaffirmed its relevance.

The ‘One APS – One SES’ statement of expectations released by the APS Management Advisory Committee (MAC) in 2005 further reinforced the expectations of the role of the SES. It makes clear the SES should be agile and flexible, collaborative and collegiate, and committed to self-development. The statement highlights that ‘the leadership of any organisation embodies its identity and image’, and recognises that its role is ‘[critical to] ... employee commitment and attracting high calibre young staff’. The MAC statement also recognises that ‘the SES must itself evolve to meet the challenges of the future’.

Recent comments by both the Prime Minister and the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet have reiterated the critical importance of leadership in the APS. Today’s APS leaders face greater economic uncertainty, higher citizen expectations, increasing policy complexity, more rapid technological change, and a tighter labour market, exacerbated by an ageing workforce, than at any time in the past 25 years.

SES and EL 2 demographics

The SES and EL 2s constitute the leadership cadre and main leadership feeder group, respectively, of the APS. The demographics of this APS leadership group continued to shift in 2008–09.

Size and composition

SES employees, including ongoing and non-ongoing, totalled 2,976 at 30 June 2009. They are predominantly employed on an ongoing basis, although since 1999, the proportion of non-ongoing SES employees has increased from 2.5% to 4.4%.

Ongoing SES employees numbered 2,845 or 1.9% of the total APS, which is only slightly higher than the 30 June 2008 proportion of 1.8%, but almost double the 1984 equivalent figure of just over 1%. While the SES cohort has been growing over time as a proportion of APS employment, the figures indicate that growth in recent years has accelerated, with the most pronounced increases taking place since 2003 (with increases in total SES of 12.3% in 2006–07 and 6.3% in 2007–08). This year’s growth of 5.4% is somewhat slower, but still higher than overall APS growth.

SES employees are concentrated in portfolio departments (1,752) with 556 in eight other large agencies¹ and 537 spread over the remaining APS agencies. The SES profile and the ratio of SES to APS employees in agencies vary considerably.

The composition of the SES by Band has remained relatively stable over the last 15 years. At June 2009, SES Band 1 ongoing employees comprised around three-quarters of the SES at 74.7%; the remainder consists of 20.2% Band 2 and 5.1% Band 3.

Most SES employees are located in the ACT; this has remained fairly stable at around 75% over the years. In terms of their occupation, more than one-third of SES employees identify their work as policy related, with another one-fifth indicating they are engaged in program design or management.

The number of EL 2 employees has also grown over time, increasing from 12,227 ongoing EL 2s to 12,950 (a 5.9% growth during 2008–09). The most significant periods of growth for this classification were recorded in 1998–99 and 2006–07.

As with the SES, EL 2 employees were mostly concentrated in portfolio departments. The largest clusters of EL 2 employees, about 1,800 each, were found in the Australian Taxation Office and Defence. Departments and agencies with more than 500 EL 2 employees included Centrelink, the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR), and the Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA). During 2008–09, the agencies with the largest net increases in EL 2 employees were the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (an additional 75 EL 2s), DoHA (67) and Centrelink (58). The agencies with the largest decreases were the Australian Bureau of Statistics (33 fewer EL 2s), the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (8) and Geoscience Australia (7).

Age profile

The State of the Service report has for many years highlighted the ‘greying’ of the APS leadership group. Almost three in five (59.9%) of the APS leadership group are aged 45 years and over, and will be eligible for retirement in the next 10 years. For the SES, the proportion is even higher (71.7%).

Figure 4.1 shows that the EL 2 feeder group has a much younger age profile than does the SES. In particular, almost one-quarter (24.9%) of EL 2 employees are aged less than 40 years, compared with only 11.5% of the SES cohort.

The median age of the SES is now 49 years, having remained steady at 48 years for the previous 10 years; however, the percentage aged 55 years and over (18.9%) or 60 years and over (5.1%) is growing. The median age for EL 2 employees is 46 years, with 14.8% of EL 2 employees aged 55 years and over, and 4.7% aged 60 years and over. These trends are shown in Table 4.1.

The age profile of women in the SES and EL 2 feeder group is somewhat younger than that of men in the same group. At June 2009, 35.2% of female Band 1 employees were aged 50 years or over, compared with 43.8% of male Band 1s; and in the EL 2 cohort, only 27.3% of female EL 2s were aged 50 years or over, compared to 41.6% of males.

As discussed in Chapter 1, significant proportions of both SES and EL 2 employees will be eligible for retirement in the next 10 years. For the SES, this equates to over 70% of employees, and for the EL 2 cohort, 45%.

Among the SES, considerable agency differences in age profiles are evident. They range from the Department of Veterans’ Affairs where 40.6% are in the 50–55 years age bracket and 71.9% are 50 years or older, to the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism where 9.0% are in the 50–55 years age bracket and 36.4% are 50 years or older.

Table 4.1: SES and EL 2 by age group, 1994 to 2009

	1994	1997	2000	2003	2006	2009
Source: APSED
Under 35	7.3	5.1	7.8	9.7	8.1	8.8
35-44	39.6	36.6	36.2	34.5	32.6	31.3
45-54	44.4	48.9	46.4	45.1	45.5	44.3
55 & over	8.7	9.5	9.6	10.7	13.8	15.6
Median EL 2	45	46	45	45	46	46
Median SES	47	48	48	48	48	49

Educational qualifications

Most SES employees have tertiary qualifications (84.8% at June 2009, up slightly from 83.2% in 1994). Postgraduate qualifications have become common (41.1% at June 2009, an increase from 21.0% in 1994). The ratios are not as high among the EL 2 cohort—78.6% tertiary and 38.5% postgraduate.

Diversity

Women’s representation has increased progressively and continuously at all levels of the SES and now sits at 37.0% overall (compared to 4.7% in 1984). Women are concentrated in the lower levels of the SES, although this is changing. At June 2009, 77.6% of women in the SES were Band 1, compared with 73.0% of men (by comparison the respective figures in 1984 were 86.0% and 72.2%).

Women’s representation in the EL 2 category has also increased significantly over this period, from 6.2% in 1984 to 39.8% in 2009. On current projections, the number of women will be equal to the number of men at the EL 2 classification and in the SES within a decade.

As for the broader APS workforce, the representation of Indigenous employees and people with disability remains low in the SES. At June 2009, only 0.6% of SES employees were Indigenous, and 2.7% had identified as having a disability. Among EL 2s, there is also a disproportionately low representation of Indigenous employees (0.9%) and employees with disability (2.7%).

Movements

In 2008–09, there were 398 movements into the SES—293 ongoing and 105 non-ongoing. Since 2004–05, the number of new SES each year has been relatively high—422 in the year to June 2006 (366 ongoing and 56 non-ongoing) and 455 in the year to June 2007 (379 ongoing and 76 non-ongoing). Movements over time are presented in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2: Movement into the SES, 1999–00 to 2008–09

	Externally engaged				movement from another agency		movement within agency
Year ending June	Ongoing	Non-ongoing	Total	%	No.	%	No.	%	Total
Note: Includes data for non-ongoing SES to give a full picture of movements into the SES, particularly engagements from outside the SES. However, the volatility of the non-ongoing engagements makes analysis difficult. The figures for non-ongoing SES include contract extensions and repeat engagements of the same person. Those on temporary assignment (higher duties) to SES classifications are not included. The data limitations need to be kept in mind when looking at these figures. Source: APSED
2000	40	43	83	38.2	15	6.9	119	54.8	217
2001	32	32	64	27.5	16	6.9	153	65.7	233
2002	45	42	87	34.3	16	6.3	151	59.4	254
2003	44	35	79	30.4	19	7.3	162	62.3	260
2004	41	55	96	42.5	14	6.2	116	51.3	226
2005	47	51	98	36.2	27	10.0	146	53.9	271
2006	105	56	161	38.2	49	11.6	212	50.2	422
2007	128	76	204	44.8	34	7.5	217	47.7	455
2008	80	80	160	37.4	59	13.8	209	48.8	428
2009	110	105	215	54.0	32	8.0	151	37.9	398

As Table 4.2 shows, in most years, movements into the SES are from within the APS—either from another agency or, more commonly, from within the agency. In 2008–09, the pattern was different, as most movements into the SES were externally engaged; in particular, a substantial increase occurred in the number of non-ongoing SES engaged. Just over half (54.0%) were engaged from outside the APS in 2008–09; 37.9% were promoted from within their agency; and 8.0% were promoted or transferred from another agency.

While the data on the background of external engagements to the SES is incomplete, it appears a sizeable proportion (51.8% in 2008–09) had had some prior experience in the APS.

Length of service

The current cadre of ongoing SES has a median length of service in the APS of 19.6 years (with a range over time of 19.3 to 22.3 years). Significantly, however, a relatively high proportion of current SES has limited experience at the SES level. The median length of service at the SES level is 4.5 years, the lowest point on record. For EL 2s, the median length of service is less at 14.1 years and their median length of service at level is 4.3 years.

Those currently moving into the SES from within the APS have had a median length of service in the APS of 13.9 years, down from a high of 18.2 years in 2000–01.

Those being promoted from EL 2 to SES have taken a median of 5.6 years to do so. This has risen over time, from 4.5 years in 1984, but has been declining in recent years since a peak in 2003 of 7.4 years. This is consistent with the strong growth in the SES in recent years.

Mobility

Mobility rates² for the SES fell to 5.2% in 2008–09, down from 6.2% in 2007–08. Figure 4.2 compares the mobility rates for different classifications over time. Mobility rates within the SES have been higher than for the APS and EL cohorts for most of the past 15 years. The mobility rate for the EL 2 cohort in 2008–09 was 3.5%, down from 4.5% in 2007–08 and compared to an overall rate of 2.3% across the APS in 2008–09.

As discussed in Chapter 1, it is true that over time the amount of time spent in different agencies generally across all levels of APS staff has reduced. However, as staff become more senior, it is increasingly likely they will have spent time in more than one APS agency. Nevertheless, in recent years, the number of SES having worked in only one agency has been increasing (from 37.4% at June 2000 to 45.4% at June 2009).

The picture for EL 2s shows a similar trend, with the proportion having worked in only one agency increasing from 59.2% at June 2000 to 68.4% at June 2009.

Looking at issues of separation and retention, on average, ongoing SES employees are leaving after 7.7 years at this classification, which is historically low. For EL 2s, the equivalent period is 6.1 years.

Over recent years, resignation has been the most common way SES employees have separated from the APS. The rate of SES retrenchments increased significantly in 2008–09, similar to the APS overall. In 2008–09, the mean age for SES employee resignations was 48.4 years, for aged retirements 58.7 years, and for redundancies 54.8 years. Of the 79 SES redundancies last year, a substantial number (35) had only been in their current position— that is, at level in their agency—for five years or less (and 23 had only been at the SES level for five years or less).

The separation pattern was similar for EL 2s, although with fewer retrenchments and more resignations. In 2008–09, the mean age for EL 2 resignations was 45.6 years, for age retirements 59.5 years, and for redundancies 51.6 years. Of the 134 EL 2 redundancies—83 had been in their current position for five years or less, and 57 had been at that level for five years or less.

SES and EL 2 satisfaction and engagement

Overall, SES employees are highly engaged and motivated, and derive high levels of job satisfaction.

Ninety-two per cent of SES employees reported moderately high to high levels of job satisfaction, compared with the overall APS result of 81%. This year’s rating is higher than for 2007–08 (86%), but consistent with the rating recorded in 2006–07 (92%). The EL 2 cohort was slightly less satisfied (85%) although this is still higher than the overall APS result.

Other notable features for the SES and EL 2 classifications, identified through analysis of employment engagement factors in Chapter 5, included:

• relatively strong levels of agreement that their remuneration is fair—79% and 74%, compared to 63% for all employees
• relatively low levels of satisfaction with their work-life balance—53% for full-time SES and 60% for full-time EL 2s, compared to 72% for all full-time employees
• a higher likelihood of working extra hours—92% of SES employees report working 80 hours or more in the previous fortnight compared to 73% of EL 2, 47% of EL 1 and 22% of APS 1–6 employees; 43 per cent of SES employees reported having worked 100 hours or more in the last fortnight, compared to only 10% of EL 2 employees
• a lower likelihood that learning and development needs have been identified—75% of SES compared to 80% of EL 1–2 and 81% of APS 1–6 employees.

When asked what was the most important factor motivating them to go ‘above and beyond’ in their current role, SES employees overwhelmingly identified ‘the opportunity to make a difference’ as the key factor. As Table 4.3 shows, this factor was significantly more influential with SES than agency-specific leadership, recognition or remuneration.

When asked to nominate up to two factors influencing their decision about where they would be in the next five years, nearly two-thirds of all SES (65%) nominated ‘availability of interesting and challenging work’ as the most influential, and a further 27% nominated ‘the ability to achieve outcomes and results’. This pattern was common to both men and women and across age groups. Work-life balance, nominated by 21% of all SES, was another commonly nominated factor. The main break to this pattern, not surprisingly, was the influence of retirement on SES employees who were 55 years or older: 32% identified retirement as a factor influencing their decision.³

These findings of strong motivation and high levels of job satisfaction among the SES parallel the findings reported in Chapter 5 on employee engagement. Across the APS, intrinsic rewards rate highly and fall in the top four engagement-related factors (71%) for all staff. Results for SES employees were very positive, and they were much more likely (93%) than other employees (70%) to feel a sense of pride and achievement in their work.

Table 4.3: Most important reasons motivating SES to go ‘above and beyond’ in their current roles by Band

Reasons to go ‘above and beyond’	Band 1	Band 2	Band 3	All
	(%)	(%)	(%)	(%)
Source: SES Census, August 2009
Inspirational leadership in my agency	8	7	5	7
Opportunity to make a difference	61	71	78	64
Chance to develop and grow my skills and capabilities	7	3	-	6
Desire to receive positive feedback and recognition	4	4	2	4
Leading by example in the workplace	11	7	11	10
Remuneration and other conditions of employment	1	2	-	1
Nothing much really	1	-	3	1
Other	7	6	2	7

Perceptions of the APS leadership group

Given their critical role, it is important to understand how APS leaders view themselves (including the strength of their own leadership capabilities) compared to how other employees view their strengths and weaknesses. Disparity between these two sets of views has been ongoing. This can also be compared to what agencies consider are the skills gaps in the SES and EL cohorts.

SES perceptions of leadership capabilities

A common trend across State of the Service reports has been for SES employees to indicate they are positive and confident about their leadership capabilities. Figure 4.3 lists responses by SES and EL 2 employees to a series of statements about leadership in their agencies.

SES employees rate themselves highly against most survey leadership statements. They are confident about having the leadership capabilities to do their job effectively, about their ability to work collaboratively across agencies, and about their active engagement in the leadership of their agency. As a group, SES employees are not so confident about their capacity to encourage innovation and creativity or to give time to talent management. In particular, they feel less confident about their capacity to improve equality and diversity in employment.

These relatively high levels of confidence by the SES in their leadership capabilities have been observed for a number of years. For example, survey data from 2006–07, revealed SES employees were similarly as confident, if not slightly less so, about whether they have the leadership capabilities to do their jobs effectively.

Employee perceptions

State of the Service surveys have also shown that as organisational distance grows between employees and their senior leadership, there is a widening gap in how positively employees view SES employees. This issue is examined more broadly in Chapter 5.

Figure 4.3 illustrates the gap between perceptions of EL 2 employees about the SES compared to SES employees’ own perceptions about themselves. Half or less of EL 2s agreed with the statements about the SES in relation to providing support for innovation and creativity, giving time to identify and develop talented people, and cultivating efforts to improve equality and diversity. However, the EL 2 response in relation to innovation had particularly improved since 2007–08.

The gap is more marked when all APS employees are asked about the SES. In 2008–09, 46% of all employees were satisfied with the quality of their agency’s senior leadership. While noting that there were improvements in the perceptions of senior leaders this year, senior leaders were rated the most poorly in relation to ‘communication between senior leaders and other employees’ and being ‘receptive to ideas put forward by other employees’ (see Chapter 5).

However overall, when asked where agencies could make gains in terms of improving employee engagement outcomes, improvement in senior leadership was identified as one of the most important factors, particularly in the areas of ‘better’ (more open, honest and inclusive) communication, more effective leadership and better engagement and mentoring.

As previously noted, employee perceptions of their leaders grow more positive when they are asked to consider the leadership of their immediate supervisors, of whom they have direct experience and knowledge. Compared to the 2004–05 results, employees rated their immediate supervisors more strongly in each of the five capability areas this year (see Figure 4.4).

Employees in Canberra were also more positive about their supervisors’ ability than were employees outside the ACT.

Using the same approach, and asking the SES to rate their own leaders against most capability clusters, SES employees were much more likely than any other employees to rate their immediate supervisors’ capability as ‘high’.

Agency views

When agencies were asked about gaps in capabilities for the SES and the SES feeder group, their responses were consistent with previous years’ results. Agencies nominated the most common gaps to be in the areas of people management capabilities, capacity to steer and implement change, and capacity to think strategically (see Figure 4.5). The continuing high incidence of reported capability gaps for the SES feeder group supports the need to invest further in the leadership development of this group.

A report from the Commission-run Career Development Assessment Centre leadership development program for high-performing EL 2 employees suggests that ‘exemplifies personal drive and integrity’ is the strongest capacity among EL 2 participants. Ranking in the middle were ‘cultivates productive working relationships’ and ‘communicates with influence’, while ‘achieving results’ and ‘shapes strategic thinking’ were ranked the weakest capability areas.

A unified leadership cadre

A common theme reinforced through the MAC ‘One APS – One SES’ statement has been the need for the SES to build a stronger unified identity. This is consistent with the SES views on future challenges and necessary skills. A unified leadership cadre was also part of the original aspiration that underpinned establishment of the SES in 1984. This was reinforced in the Prime Minister’s 2009 Australia and New Zealand School of Government address, in which he urged a ‘stronger collective identity’ across the APS and its leadership group.⁴

This year’s employee survey results are similar to the 2007–08 results with just under 40% of SES employees definitely seeing themselves as part of a broader APS leadership cadre (see Figure 4.6). This is lower than the result observed in 2006–07 (55%). In 2008–09, another 44% of SES employees indicated ‘yes, somewhat’ to the same question, a little less than the 48% reported in 2007–08. However, the category of SES employees who replied ‘no’ also increased during 2008–09 (17% compared with 11% in 2007–08).

The 2009 SES census captured further data on SES perceptions of themselves as part of a wider APS leadership group. The census found that of those who did not identify as ‘definitely’ part of the wider SES senior leadership cadre, most cited the following reasons:

• the diverse nature of the work performed across agencies (47%)
• limited leadership opportunities beyond their agency (39%)
• performance assessment based on agency outcomes (39%).

Other reasons cited pointed to a lack of contact outside the agency, often because of the pressure of in-house work. The SES also sometimes indicated agency or service-wide cultural issues, or accountability arrangements that promote an inward focus.

In this context, the views of current agency heads are highly relevant. When agency heads were asked about possible barriers to the SES making a strong identification with the broader APS, they referred to ‘cultural’ or cross-agency issues such as:

• the lack of SES movement across agencies
• a sense of distance or exclusion between the central agencies and the line agencies
• perceptions that essential regulatory or service delivery activities are somehow put at a discount compared with high-profile or urgent policy activities
• barriers erected by the SES remuneration gaps that have grown over time between the various agencies.

Other possible reasons for the relatively low-level responses from the SES on this issue could include some level of ambiguity about the meaning of the ‘One APS – One SES’ concept. In the SES census, individual comments provided in support of negative responses showed some variations in interpretation, which are of concern. In particular, a ‘One APS’ culture may have been interpreted to constitute formal networking programs rather than a common strategic involvement in engaging with complex policy issues.

Despite these results, the data provided on employee satisfaction and engagement shows a strong common motivation across the SES to undertake work that will ‘make a difference’. SES employees’ views about where they would like to be in the future (e.g. being able to undertake interesting and challenging work) also suggest high and shared levels of commitment to tackling the complex and often inter-related policy issues facing the APS.

This indicates a strong basis upon which to strengthen the APS leadership cadre in the context of future APS reform. The next section examines how current learning and development and talent management strategies are being used to strengthen APS leadership capability.

Leadership and talent development practices

Chapter 3 provided an overview of the current approaches APS agencies are using to develop leadership and talent management. This section looks more closely at how some of the activities targeted at the SES and EL 2 feeder groups are being managed.

Figure 4.7 illustrates the reported methods agencies used to identify high employee potential. Ninety-five per cent of agencies favoured personalised ‘manager/agency head’ identification of talent. More than three-quarters looked to performance management systems (82%) and development opportunities (78%), while 65% looked to self- identification. Less popular were leadership development programs (53%) and assessment centres (16%).

Among the various talent-identification methods in use since 2007–08, there appears to have been a slight increase in using performance management systems, and a slight decrease in using development opportunities and self-identification of talent.

Agencies also appear to be more actively adopting stronger approaches to succession management. Such approaches are predominantly being targeted at the EL and SES classifications and often focus on critical roles (such as finance, ICT, and senior management or leadership positions). While these practices of identifying talent are more widely used, there does not appear to be widespread use of broader, active talent management strategies which are part of a broader, strategic workforce planning framework (see Chapter 3).

Eighty-five of the 95 agencies included in the agency survey outlined the range of leadership development activities for their SES (see Figure 4.8). As highlighted in Chapter 3, agency expenditure on learning and development overall appears to have reduced.

The most common SES development avenues (more than 40% of agencies) were general leadership development programs (that is, those not tailored to agency requirements), internal coaching, learning agreements and mentoring. Less common (less than 30%) were agency-specific leadership development programs, structured placements of various types, and assessment centres. Agency responses did not show much variation when compared with the 2007–08 survey results, notwithstanding that the overall expenditure on learning and development of activities for all employees appears to have contracted during 2008–09.

The range of leadership development activities offered to EL employees is outlined in Figure 4.9. Use of EL employee development activities was similar to those used for SES employees, although agencies were less likely to use internal coaching for EL employee development in this area. In contrast, agencies were more likely to offer leadership assessment centres for EL employees than for SES employees, although use of assessment centres for EL employee development had declined compared to last year’s result.

Perceptions of future leadership needs

In the 2009 SES census, SES employees strongly agreed that each of the five capabilities identified in the Senior Executive Leadership Capability Framework would still be needed in five years’ time (see Table 4.4). Most notable was the strong agreement that the need for strategic thinking would increase markedly: 68% of respondents viewed it as a capability needed today, while 77% viewed it as a capability that would be needed in five years together with the capacity to cultivate productive relationships (from 73% at present to 81% in five years).

Table 4.4: SES capabilities needed today and in 5 years

SES capabilities	Needed today	Needed in 5 years
	Strongly agree (%)	Strongly agree (%)
Source: 2009 SES census
Achieves results	80	82
Cultivates productive relationships	73	81
Exemplifies personal drive and integrity	73	76
Shapes strategic thinking	68	77
Communicates with influence	72	79

When asked what they thought the ‘APS needs to focus on in the next five years to meet the challenges ahead’, the three areas SES employees most commonly selected were:

• leaders who look outward to understand citizen and government needs (49%)
• breaking down silos across the APS to ensure whole of government solutions (47%)
• strengthened focus on strategic, long-term policy and planning (42%).

The areas considered most important also tended to be those where performance is not currently considered high. A significant proportion of SES employees ranked the following areas as important but not being performed at a high level:

• developing relationships and skills needed to work across public, private and community sectors
• breaking down silos across the APS to ensure whole of government solutions
• reducing duplication and inefficiency across agencies and levels of government
• fostering governance that can deal with increasingly complex arrangements
• developing a stronger focus on strategic, long-term policy and planning
• taking action to attract and retain high quality/highly skilled people.

When SES employees were asked what attributes they thought were the most important for them to possess in five years’ time, the three most commonly selected were:

• driving big picture policy and service delivery reform (31%)
• collaborating and leading across boundaries (30%)
• fostering innovation and engaging with risk (25%).

When the SES were asked what initiatives they believe would be effective in improving leadership capabilities of current SES employees from a list of possible initiatives, they recorded the strongest support for ‘learning and development activities focused on developing skills to help SES employees work better across APS agencies’ (see Table 4.5).

The SES cohort also gave relatively strong endorsement of a ‘coordinated APS-wide talent identification and management scheme for current and potential future leaders’ and for formal mobility schemes. Mandatory initiatives attracted little support.

The Commission has specific responsibility under section 41(1)(j) of the Public Service Act 1999 ‘to contribute to, and foster, leadership in the APS’. The Commission offers a number of core programs for SES and EL 2 employees, which offer a range of development opportunities for employees at different levels of experience. For example, new SES employees are offered a program that provides the essential information they need to operate effectively at that level as well as an opportunity to build valuable networks with their peers. High-performing and high-potential SES Band 2 employees are eligible to participate in the Leaders Across Borders program that brings together a small group of senior leaders from Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United Kingdom to work intensively on topical and relevant case studies. The Commission also collaborates with the Australia and New Zealand School of Government, which offers formal courses in public administration. It has also commenced some additional initiatives in talent management/ succession planning at the Band 3 classification.

Table 4.5: Main initiatives believed to be effective in improving the leadership capability of the current SES, by bands

Effective initiatives for improving leadership capability	Band 1 (%)	Band 2 (%)	Band 3 (%)	All (%)
Source: SES Census, August 2009
Learning and development activities focused on developing skills to help SES employees work better across APS agencies	60	56	51	59
Coordinated APS-wide talent identification and management scheme for current and potential future leaders	41	45	48	42
Refreshed Senior Executive Leadership Capability Framework and Integrated Leadership System	13	18	13	14
Mandatory attendance at specified SES programs	15	13	8	14
Mandatory assessment process for progression into the SES	7	8	15	8
Mandatory inclusion of leadership behaviours that foster APS collegiality in SES performance agreements	27	32	25	28
Formal mobility scheme for SES across APS agencies	46	32	38	42
Formal mobility scheme for SES employees outside the APS	43	41	36	42

While Commission programs complement the mix of current agency activities, the perceptions of the SES and statements by the government suggest support for increasing and broadening the scale of APS-wide schemes offered, both in learning and development programs and mobility schemes. Across the APS, and within each agency, a strong case exists for adopting a more strategic approach to building workforce capability and for a more systematic approach to identifying talent. The Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet has publicly commented on the need for more rigour across the APS in this area.⁵

Key chapter findings

The APS and its leadership group—the SES and its main feeder group, EL 2 employees— measure up well in terms of professionalism, motivation and engagement. SES growth rates are slightly higher than those for the APS as a whole and have been higher for the past three years.

While many of the original objectives for establishing the SES as a unified and coherent leadership group have been met, the SES may need to develop further in order to meet future challenges.

A significant issue is that nearly three-quarters of the current SES cohort is eligible to retire in the next 10 years.

Most SES employees believe they have the right leadership capabilities, agreeing with key statements about the quality of agency leaders and leadership generally including: their capabilities to do their job effectively; their ability to work collaboratively with other agencies; and their active engagement in agency leadership. However, EL 2 employees were less likely to agree with these self-perceptions.

An ongoing concern is that recruits to the SES are generally internal, have worked in few APS agencies, and often stay in their home agency. However, SES employees have indicated strong support for an APS-wide mobility scheme.

Survey responses provide evidence of a limited sense of a cross-agency or whole of APS leadership identity. This is counter-balanced by a large proportion of SES considering that ‘breaking down silos across the APS to ensure whole of government solutions’ a high priority. SES employees also recorded a high level of support for learning and development activities focused on developing capabilities to help the SES work more effectively across the APS.

Overall, this year’s survey results are consistent with government perceptions that the APS leadership group has considerable strengths but needs to develop in other key areas to better meet future challenges.

NEXT » Employee engagement