Appendix 2 - State of the service additional data

This appendix presents additional data that supports the content included in this report.

Code of Conduct

In the 2023 Australian Public Service Agency Survey, agencies reported that 555 employees were the subject of an investigation into a suspected breach of the APS Code of Conduct that was finalised in 2022–23. Table A2.1 presents the number of APS employees investigated by agencies for suspected breaches of individual elements of the APS Code of Conduct and the number of breach findings in 2022–23. One employee can be investigated for multiple elements of the Code of Conduct of the Public Service Act 1999.

Table A2.1: Number of APS employees investigated and found in breach of elements of the APS Code of Conduct (2022–23)

Element of Code of Conduct	Investigated	Breached
Behave honestly and with integrity in connection with APS employment, s 13(1)	195	162
Act with care and diligence in connection with APS employment, s 13(2)	67	55
When acting in connection with APS employment, treateveryone with respect and courtesy, and without harassment, s 13(3)	98	66
When acting in connection with APS employment comply with all applicable Australian laws, s 13(4)	20	13
Comply with any lawful and reasonable direction given by someone in the employee’s Agency who has authority to give the direction, s13(5)	100	87
Maintain appropriate confidentiality about dealings that the employee has with any Minister or Minister’s member of staff, s 13(6)	2	0
Take reasonable steps to avoid any conflict of interest (real or apparent), and disclose details of any material personal interest ofthe employee, in connection with the employee’s APS employment, s 13(7)	39	29
Use Commonwealth resources in a proper manner and for a proper purpose,(s 13(8)	57	51
Not provide false or misleading information in response to a request for information that is made for official purposes in connection with the employee’s APS employment, s 13(9)	43	35
Not make improper use of: inside information, or the employee’s duties, status, power or authority, in order to: a) gain, or seek to gain, a benefit or advantage for the employee or any other person; or b) cause, or seek to cause, a detriment to the employee’s Agency, the Commonwealth or any other person, s 13(10)	48	35
At all times behave in a way that upholds the APS Values and APS Employment Principles, and the integrity and good reputation of the employee’s Agency and the APS, s 13(11)	447	389
While on duty overseas, at all times behave in a way that upholds the good reputation of Australia, s 13(12)	2	2
Comply with any other conduct requirement that is prescribed by the regulations, s 13(13)	4	4

Source: 2023 APS Agency Survey

Table A2.2 presents the number of APS employees investigated for suspected breaches of the APS Code of Conduct during 2022–23 that resulted from each type of report.

Table A2.2: Type of reports leading to finalised APS Code of Conduct investigations (2022–23)

Type of report	Number of employees
A report generated by a compliance/monitoring system (e.g. audit)	278
A report made to a central conduct or ethics unit or nominated person in a human resources area	149
A report made to an email reporting address	85
A report made to a fraud prevention and control unit or hotline	21
A Public Interest Disclosure	10
A report made to an employee advice or counselling unit	2
A report made to another hotline	1
Other	21

Source: 2023 APS Agency Survey
Note: Individual employees may have been reported through multiple avenues.

Table A2.3 presents the outcomes for APS employees investigated for suspected breaches of the APS Code of Conduct during 2022–23.

Table A2.3: Outcome of investigations into suspected breaches of the APS Code of Conduct (2022–23)

Outcome	Number of employees
Breach found and sanction applied	287
Breach found but no sanction applied: employee resigned prior to sanction decision	112
Breach found but no sanction applied: other reason	80
No breach found (for any element of the Code)	47
Investigation discontinued: employee resigned	18
Investigation discontinued: other reason	11

Source: 2023 APS Agency Survey

Table A2.4 presents the sanctions applied to APS employees found to have breached the APS Code of Conduct during 2022–23.

Table A2.4: Sanctions imposed for breaches of the APS Code of Conduct (2022–23)

Sanction	Number of employees
Reprimand	199
Reduction in salary	102
Deductions from salary by way of a fine	92
Termination of employment	52
Re-assignment of duties	10
Reduction in classification	10

Source: 2023 APS Agency Survey

In the 2023 APS Employee Census, 10.4% of respondents indicated they had been subjected to harassment or bullying in their workplace in the 12 months preceding the APS Employee Census. Table A2.5 presents the types of behaviour perceived by respondents.

Table A2.5: Type of harassment or bullying perceived by respondents

Type of behaviour	% of those who indicated they had been subjected to harassment or bullying in their workplace in the previous 12 months preceding the 2023 APS Employee Census
Verbal abuse (e.g. offensive language, derogatory remarks, shouting or screaming)	41.3
Interference with work tasks (e.g. withholding needed information, undermining or sabotage)	41.2
Inappropriate and unfair application of work policies or rules (e.g. performance management, access to leave, access to learning and development)	30.1
Deliberate exclusion from work-related activities	26.5
Cyberbullying (e.g. harassment through IT, or the spreading of gossip/materials intended to defame or humiliate)	8.7
Physical behaviour	4.1
Interference with your personal property or work equipment	4.0
Sexual harassment	3.6
'Initiations' or pranks	2.5
Other	19.0

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who said they had been subjected to harassment or bullying in their current workplace. As respondents could select more than one option, total percentages may exceed 100%.

Table A2.6 presents the perceived source of the harassment or bullying indicated by respondents in 2023.

Table A2.6: Perceived source of harassment or bullying

Perceived source	% of those who indicated they had been subjected to harassment or bullying in their workplace in the previous 12 months preceding the 2023 APS Employee Census
Co-worker	38.0
Someone more senior (other than your supervisor)	30.0
A previous supervisor	26.9
Your current supervisor	17.5
Someone more junior than you	8.4
Client, customer or stakeholder	4.5
Contractor	2.7
Consultant / service provider	0.9
Representative of another APS agency	0.9
Minister or ministerial adviser	0.2
Unknown	1.7

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who said they had been subjected to harassment or bullying in their current workplace. As respondents could select more than one option, total percentages may exceed 100%.

Table A2.7 presents the reporting behaviour of respondents who had perceived harassment or bullying in their workplace in the 12 months preceding the APS Employee Census.

Table A2.7: Reporting behaviour of harassment or bullying

Reporting behaviour	% who perceived harassment or bullying in their workplace during the previous 12 months preceding the 2023 APS Employee Census
I reported the behaviour in accordance with my agency’s policies and procedures	34.8
It was reported by someone else	8.0
I did not report the behaviour	57.2

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who said they had been subjected to harassment or bullying in their current workplace.

Table A2.8 presents the reasons for not reporting harassment or bullying given by respondents who had perceived harassment or bullying in their workplace in the 12 months preceding the APS Employee Census and who did not report the behaviour.

Table A2.8: Reasons for not reporting harassment or bullying

Reason	% who perceived harassment or bullying in their workplace during the 12 months preceding the 2023 APS Employee Census and did not report the behaviour
I did not think action would be taken	47.5
I feared possible retaliation or reprisals	46.1
I did not want to upset relationships in the workplace	39.4
It could affect my career	36.7
I did not think it was worth the hassle of going through the reporting process	33.9
Managers accepted the behaviour	30.7
I did not think the harassment or bullying was serious enough	17.0
I did not have enough evidence	15.4
The matter was resolved informally	8.4
I did not know how to report it	5.0
Other	9.4

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who said they had been subjected to harassment or bullying in their current workplace and did not report the behaviour. As respondents could select more than one option, total percentages may exceed 100%.

Table A2.9 presents the number of recorded complaints of harassment and bullying made by APS employees within APS agencies during 2022–23.

Table A2.9: Complaints to agencies about harassment and bullying (2022–23)

Type of behaviour	Number of complaints
Verbal abuse (e.g. offensive language, derogatory remarks, shouting or screaming)	305
Inappropriate and unfair application of work policies or rules (e.g. performance management, access to leave, access to learning and development)	238
Sexual harassment	129
Interference with work tasks (e.g. withholding needed information, undermining or sabotage)	113
Cyberbullying (e.g. harassment through IT, or the spreading of gossip/materials intended to defame/humiliate)	37
Physical behaviour	24
Interference with personal property or work equipment	9
Initiations or pranks	1
Other	534

Source: 2023 APS Agency Survey

Table A2.10 presents the proportion of respondents who, during the previous 12 months, had witnessed another APS employee within their agency engaging in behaviour they considered may be serious enough to be viewed as corruption.

Table A2.10: APS employee perceptions of corruption

Potential corruption witnessed	%
Yes	3.2
No	90.7
Not sure	3.8
Would prefer not to answer	2.3

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Of those who had witnessed potential corruption, the types of corruption are presented in Table A2.11.

Table A2.11: Type of potential corruption witnessed

Type of potential corruption witnessed	% who had witnessed potential corruption
Cronyism-preferential treatment of friends, such as appointing them to positions without proper regard to merit	62.0
Nepotism-preferential treatment of family members, such as appointing them to positions without proper regard to merit	24.0
Acting (or failing to act) in the presence of an undisclosed conflict of interest	19.7
Fraud, forgery or embezzlement	12.4
Green-lighting	10.5
Theft or misappropriation of official assets	6.4
Unlawful disclosure of government information	4.1
Perverting the course of justice	2.9
Bribery, domestic and foreign-obtaining, offering or soliciting secret commissions, kickbacks or gratuities	2.2
Insider trading	1.1
Blackmail	1.4
Colluding, conspiring with, or harbouring criminals	0.7
Other	12.5

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who said they witnessed potential corruption. As respondents could select more than one option, total percentages may exceed 100%.

In the 2023 APS Employee Census, 10.4% of respondents indicated they had been subjected to discrimination during the 12 months preceding the APS Employee Census and in the course of their employment.

Table A2.12 presents the types of discrimination perceived by respondents during the 12 months preceding the APS Employee Census and in the course of their employment.

Table A2.12: Type of discrimination perceived by respondents

Category	% of those who indicated they had been subjected to discrimination during the 12 months preceding the 2023 APS Employee Census and in the course of their employment
Gender	29.3
Age	25.6
Race	22.1
Caring responsibilities	19.8
Disability (e.g. loss of hearing or sight, incomplete use of limbs, or mental health issues)	14.6
LGBTIQA+	4.8
Religion	4.7
Identification as an Australian Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander person	4.0
Other	20.5

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who said they had perceived discrimination during the 12 months preceding the APS Employee Census and in the course of their employment. As respondents could select more than one option, total percentages may exceed 100%.

Table A2.13 presents the proportion of respondents identifying with each cultural background who indicated they had been subjected to discrimination during the 12 months preceding the 2023 APS Employee Census and in the course of their employment.

Table A2.13: Proportion of employees from each cultural background who indicated they had been subjected to discrimination

Cultural background	% of those who indicated they had been subjected to discrimination during the 12 months preceding the 2023 APS Employee Census and in the course of their employment
Australian Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander	23.3
Maori, Melanesian, Papuan, Micronesian, and Polynesian	15.7
Sub-Saharan African	14.7
North African and Middle Eastern	14.6
North-West European (excluding Anglo-European)	13.5
Southern and Central Asian	12.9
South and Central American and Caribbean Islander	12.2
North American	12.1
Southern and Eastern European	11.5
Anglo-European	11.5
New Zealander (excluding Maori)	11.2
South-East Asian	10.8
North-East Asian	9.6
Australian (excluding Australian Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander)	9.1

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Note: Respondents could select more than one cultural background.

APS employees with disability

Table A2.14 presents the proportion of respondents with an ongoing disability who have that information recorded in their agency’s human resource information system.

Table A2.14: Respondents with disability who have that information recorded in their agency’s human resources information system

Is the information that you have an ongoing disability recorded in your agency’s human resources information system (i.e. have you informed your agency that you have a disability)?	% of those with an ongoing disability
Yes	45
No	30
Not sure	24

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Table A2.15 presents the reasons respondents with an ongoing disability provided for not having the information they have an ongoing disability recorded in their agency’s human resource information system.

Table A2.15: Reason respondents did not provide the information they had a disability to agency human resources systems

Why is the information that you have an ongoing disability not recorded in your agency’s human resources information system?	% with an ongoing disability who did not have that information recorded in their agency’s human resources information system
I do not require any adjustments to be made to perform my role	36
I do not see any reason for or benefit in sharing this information with my agency	36
I am concerned about being discriminated against	34
It is private information I do not wish to share	28
My disability is not relevant to my employment	23
I have never been asked for this information	20
Other reason	10

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Note: As respondents could select more than one option, total percentages may exceed 100%.

Understanding neurodiversity in the APS

Table A2.16 presents the proportion of respondents within each classification level in the APS who considered themselves to be neurodivergent.

Table A2.16: Proportion of employees within each classification level who considered themselves to be neurodivergent or who were not sure

Classification level	% who considered themselves to be neurodivergent	% who were not sure
Trainee/Apprentice	11.8	21.7
Graduate	11.5	13.5
Cadet	9.2	15.3
APS 1 to APS 2	10.1	15.9
APS 3 to APS 4	8.6	15.4
APS 5 to APS 6	8.5	11.8
EL 1	6.6	9.0
EL 2	4.6	7.0
SES Band 1	3.7	4.0
SES Band 2 to SES Band 3	2.5	3.2

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Table A2.17 presents the proportion of respondents performing each type of work who considered themselves to be neurodivergent.

Table A2.17: Proportion of employees by type of work who considered themselves to be neurodivergent

Type of work	% who considered themselves to be neurodivergent
Accounting and finance	5.5
Administration	6.9
Communications and marketing	9.0
Compliance and regulation	5.7
Data and research	10.5
Engineering and technical	7.7
Human resources	8.0
Information and communications technology and digital solutions	9.1
Information and knowledge management	11.4
Intelligence	6.3
Legal and parliamentary	6.8
Monitoring and audit	7.8
Policy	8.4
Portfolio, program and project management	7.9
Science and health	6.7
Senior executive	4.0
Service delivery	7.9
Trades and labour	7.4

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Table A2.18 presents the proportion of respondents within each age group who considered themselves to be neurodivergent.

Table A2.18: Proportion of employees within each age group who considered themselves to be neurodivergent

Age group	% who considered themselves to be neurodivergent
Under 20 years	12.0
20 to 24 years	12.7
25 to 29 years	12.8
30 to 34 years	11.6
35 to 39 years	8.6
40 to 44 years	6.9
45 to 49 years	6.1
50 to 54 years	5.1
55 to 59 years	4.1
60 to 64 years	2.8
65 years or older	2.4
Prefer not to say	6.5

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Table A2.19 presents the proportion of respondents of each gender who considered themselves to be neurodivergent.

Table A2.19: Proportion of employees of each gender who considered themselves to be neurodivergent

Gender	% who considered themselves to be neurodivergent
Man or male	6.8
Woman or female	7.6
Non-binary	58.2
I use a different term	35.0
Prefer not to say	10.7

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Table A2.20 presents the proportion of respondents identifying with each cultural background who considered themselves to be neurodivergent.

Table A2.20: Proportion of employees with each cultural background who considered themselves to be neurodivergent

Cultural background	% who considered themselves to be neurodivergent
Australian (excluding Australian Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander)	8.5
Australian Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander	12.5
New Zealander (excluding Maori)	12.2
Maori, Melanesian, Papuan, Micronesian, and Polynesian	7.9
Anglo-European	12.1
North-West European (excluding Anglo-European)	13.1
Southern and Eastern European	8.1
South-East Asian	3.5
North-East Asian	4.1
Southern and Central Asian	3.1
North American	13.7
South and Central American and Caribbean Islander	7.6
North African and Middle Eastern	7.3
Sub-Saharan African	6.9

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Mobility in the APS

Table A2.21 presents the proportion of respondents who perceived barriers to temporary moves.

Table A2.21: Employee perceptions of barriers to temporary moves

Are there barriers to you seeking a temporary move?	% in 2021	% in 2022	% in 2023
Yes	29	28	22
No	38	45	43
Not sure	33	28	35

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

APS employee engagement

Table A2.22 presents perceptions held by Australian Public Service Employee Census respondents between 2020 and 2023.

Table A2.22: Employee perceptions related to work (2020 to 2023)

Statement	Level of agreement	% in 2020	% in 2021	% in 2022	% in 2023
Overall, I am satisfied with my job	Agree	75	73	74	73
	Neither agree nor disagree	15	15	15	15
	Disagree	10	11	11	12
My job inspires me	Agree	57	56	61	61
	Neither agree nor disagree	27	27	25	25
	Disagree	16	17	14	14
The work I do gives me a sense of accomplishment	Agree	79	78	76	76
	Neither agree nor disagree	12	12	15	15
	Disagree	9	9	9	9
I feel a strong personal attachment to my agency	Agree	66	65	61	60
	Neither agree nor disagree	22	22	26	26
	Disagree	12	13	13	14
I would recommend my agency as a good place to work	Agree	69	68	69	68
	Neither agree nor disagree	20	19	19	19
	Disagree	11	13	12	12

Source: 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023 APS Employee Census

Supporting mental health and wellbeing

Table A2.23 presents employee perceptions of emotional demands.

Table A2.23: Employee perceptions of emotional demands

Question	Level of agreement	%
To what extent is your work emotionally demanding?	To a very large/large extent	29
	Somewhat	39
	To a small/very small extent	33

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census

Attracting and retaining employees

Table A2.24 presents the previous Australian Public Service experience of respondents prior to commencement.

Table A2.24: Prior APS experience of new employees

Prior to most recently commencing in the APS, what previous experience have you had with the APS?	% in 2023
Previously worked as an ongoing employee in an APS agency	15
Previously worked as a non-ongoing or casual employee in an APS agency	23
Previously worked as a contractor or consultant to an APS agency	17
No prior experience with the APS	52
Other	3

Source: 2023 New Starters Survey

Note: As respondents could select more than one option, total percentages may exceed 100%.

Experience and capability of APS managers

Table A2.25 presents the proportion of responding managers who had taken each action to develop their managerial capabilities.

Table A2.25: Actions managers carried out to develop their managerial capabilities

What actions have you carried out to develop your managerial capabilities?	%
Sought advice or support from your manager	85
Reflected on experiences to grow and learn	79
Sought advice or support from a colleague	74
Sought feedback from those you manage	74
Actively sought out new and/or challenging opportunities to apply your managerial skills	65
Completed formal leadership training	62
Received mentoring/coaching	59
Consulted books, websites or podcasts	42
Completed self-directed online learning	37
Attended conferences or similar speaking events	33
Other	4

Source: APS Management Survey

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who said they currently manage employees or have managed employees in the past. As respondents could select more than one option, total percentages may exceed 100%.

Table A2.26 presents the forms of formal leadership training undertaken by responding managers.

Table A2.26: Form of leadership training undertaken

What form did your formal leadership training take?	%
A course offered by my agency	66
A course provided by an external training provider	48
A formal tertiary qualification	23
A course offered by the APS Academy or Australian Public Service Commission	23
Other	5

Source: APS Management Survey

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who indicated they had completed formal leadership training. As respondents could select more than one option, total percentages may exceed 100%.

Table A2.27 presents perceptions of how helpful the formal leadership training was in improving managerial capabilities.

Table A2.27: Assessments of formal leadership training to improve managerial capability

How helpful was your most recent instance of formal leadership training in improving your managerial capabilities?	%
Very helpful/Extremely helpful	51
Slightly helpful/Moderately helpful	46
Not at all helpful	2

Source: APS Management Survey

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who indicated they had completed formal leadership training.

Table A2.28 presents perceptions of how helpful their most recent period of mentoring and/or coaching was in improving managerial capabilities.

Table A2.28: Assessments of mentoring/coaching to improve managerial capability

How helpful was your most recent period of mentoring/coaching in improving yourmanagerial capabilities?	%
Very helpful/Extremely helpful	63
Slightly helpful/Moderately helpful	34
Not at all helpful	3

Source: APS Management Survey

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who indicated they had received mentoring/coaching.

Table A2.29 presents the proportion of responding managers who would take up opportunities to develop their managerial capabilities.

Table A2.29: Proportion of managers that would take up opportunities to develop their managerial capabilities

Would you take up opportunities to develop your managerial capabilities?	%
Yes	80
No	7
Not sure	13

Source: APS Management Survey

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who said they currently manage employees or have managed employees in the past.

Table A2.30 presents the ways responding managers preferred to develop their managerial capabilities.

Table A2.30: Managers’ preferred means of developing managerial capabilities

How would you most like to develop your managerial capabilities?	%
Formal leadership training	58
Mentoring/coaching	56
New and/or challenging opportunities to apply your managerial skills	56
Advice or support from your manager	51
Reflect on experiences to grow and learn	43
Attend conferences or similar speaking events	41
Seek feedback from those you manage	40
Advice or support from a colleague	35
Self-directed online learning (e.g. EdX, Coursera, LinkedIn Learning)	30
Consult books, websites or podcasts	23
Other	2
Not interested or unsure	20

Source: APS Management Survey

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who indicated they would take up opportunities to develop managerial capabilities. As respondents could select more than one option, total percentages may exceed 100%.

Table A2.31 presents the skills and capabilities responding managers most wanted to develop.

Table A2.31: Managerial skills and capabilities managers most want to develop

What managerial skills and capabilities would you most like to develop?	%
Skills and abilities to manage underperformance	50
Conflict resolution and mediation skills	46
The ability to persuade and influence	41
The ability to motivate others	38
Analytical and strategic thinking	35
Communication skills – verbal, non-verbal and listening skills	32
The ability to manage talent and high performers	31
Coaching and mentoring skills	29
Problem-solving and decision-making skills	28
Techniques for managing hybrid teams or remote employees	25
Resilience	24
Self-awareness	22
The ability to delegate	17
Other	2
Not interested or unsure	21

Source: APS Management Survey

Note: Percentages are based on respondents who indicated they would take up opportunities to develop managerial capabilities. As respondents could select more than one option, total percentages may exceed 100%.

Secretaries Charter of Leadership Behaviours

Table A2.32 presents Australian Public Service employee perceptions of the behaviours of their immediate supervisors.

Table A2.32: Employee perceptions of immediate supervisors

Statement		Overall (%)	Classification level of supervisor
			APS 5 to APS 6 (%)	EL 1 (%)	EL 2 (%)	SES (%)
My supervisor is willing to be innovative	Agree	77	73	80	77	81
	Neither agree nor disagree	13	16	12	13	10
	Disagree	10	12	9	10	9
My supervisor engages with risk	Agree	64	51	67	70	75
	Neither agree nor disagree	22	30	21	18	13
	Disagree	14	19	12	13	11
My supervisor has a positive attitude	Agree	84	80	85	85	88
	Neither agree nor disagree	9	11	10	8	7
	Disagree	7	9	5	7	6
My supervisor identifies and works to solve problems	Agree	81	78	84	82	83
	Neither agree nor disagree	10	11	9	9	10
	Disagree	9	11	7	9	7
My supervisor treats people with respect	Agree	87	84	89	88	89
	Neither agree nor disagree	7	8	7	7	6
	Disagree	6	8	4	5	5
My supervisor actively ensures that everyone can be included to make their best contribution	Agree	77	74	81	78	76
	Neither agree nor disagree	12	14	11	11	12
	Disagree	10	11	8	11	11
My supervisor is open and honest	Agree	82	79	85	84	84
	Neither agree nor disagree	11	13	9	10	10
	Disagree	7	8	6	6	7
My supervisor isaccountable	Agree	81	76	83	82	84
	Neither agree nor disagree	12	15	11	11	10
	Disagree	8	9	6	7	7
My supervisor takes responsibility for what happens in our workgroup	Agree	79	74	82	81	82
	Neither agree nor disagree	12	15	12	10	11
	Disagree	9	11	7	9	8
My supervisor calls out unacceptable behaviour	Agree	67	65	68	66	71
	Neither agree nor disagree	23	24	24	23	20
	Disagree	10	11	8	11	9
My supervisor listens to others	Agree	83	79	85	84	85
	Neither agree nor disagree	10	12	10	9	8
	Disagree	7	9	5	7	7
My supervisor values the contributions and perspectives of others	Agree	81	77	84	82	82
	Neither agree nor disagree	12	15	10	10	11
	Disagree	7	9	6	7	7
My supervisor understands our team	Agree	76	73	81	76	73
	Neither agree nor disagree	12	14	10	12	14
	Disagree	11	13	9	12	13
My supervisor builds effective relationships with others	Agree	78	74	81	78	81
	Neither agree nor disagree	13	15	12	13	10
	Disagree	9	11	8	9	9
My supervisor empowers others	Agree	73	67	75	74	76
	Neither agree nor disagree	16	20	15	15	13
	Disagree	12	14	10	11	11
When my supervisor sets work they provide the information I need to get the job done	Agree	73	70	75	71	73
	Neither agree nor disagree	16	18	15	16	16
	Disagree	11	12	10	12	10
My supervisor uses networks to achieve outcomes	Agree	78	70	79	81	83
	Neither agree nor disagree	17	23	15	14	12
	Disagree	6	7	5	5	6
When I make mistakes, my supervisor supports me to bounce back	Agree	75	73	77	75	74
	Neither agree nor disagree	18	18	17	17	19
	Disagree	8	9	6	8	7

Source: APS Management Survey

Senior Executive Service

Table A2.33 presents attitudes towards Senior Executive Service managers by Australian Public Service Employee Census respondents between 2021 and 2023.

Table A2.33: Employee perceptions of SES managers (2021 to 2023)

Statement		% in 2021	% in 2022	% in 2023
My SES manager ensures that work effort contributes to the strategic direction of the agency and the APS	Agree	73	74	73
	Neither agree nor disagree	20	20	21
	Disagree	7	6	6
My SES manager communicates effectively	Agree	69	70	69
	Neither agree nor disagree	19	20	20
	Disagree	12	11	11
My SES manager clearly articulates the direction and priorities for our area	Agree	67	69	68
	Neither agree nor disagree	21	21	21
	Disagree	12	10	11
My SES manager promotes cooperation within and between agencies	Agree	66	67	66
	Neither agree nor disagree	27	27	27
	Disagree	7	6	7
My SES manager encourages innovation and creativity	Agree	64	66	65
	Neither agree nor disagree	26	25	26
	Disagree	10	9	10
My SES manager creates an environment that enables us to deliver our best	Agree	62	64	63
	Neither agree nor disagree	25	24	24
	Disagree	13	12	12
In my agency, the SES clearly articulate the direction and priorities for our agency	Agree	60	63	63
	Neither agree nor disagree	26	24	23
	Disagree	14	13	14
My SES manager presents convincing arguments and persuades others towards an outcome	Agree	61	62	62
	Neither agree nor disagree	29	29	29
	Disagree	10	9	10
In my agency, the SES work as a team	Agree	53	54	53
	Neither agree nor disagree	32	32	32
	Disagree	15	14	15
In my agency, communication between SES and other employees is effective	Agree	51	54	53
	Neither agree nor disagree	29	28	27
	Disagree	20	19	20
My SES manager routinely promotes the use of data and evidence to deliver outcomes	Agree	-	-	66
	Neither agree nor disagree	-	-	27
	Disagree	-	-	8

Source: 2021, 2022 and 2023 APS Employee Census

Ways of working

Table A2.34 presents the average proportion of Executive Level 1, EL 2 and Senior Executive Service Band 1 employees with numbers of direct reports.

Table A2.34: Average proportion of EL 1, EL 2 and SES Band 1 employees with numbers of direct reports

Number of direct reports	Average % of EL 1 employees	Average % of EL 1 employees	Average % of SES Band 1 employees
No direct reports	45	16	5
One to 3 direct reports	42	47	23
Four to 6 direct reports	9	27	45
More than 6 direct reports	3	9	27

Source: 2023 APS Agency Survey

Service to Australians

Table A2.35 presents perceptions held by Australian Public Service Employee Census respondents in 2023.

Table A2.35: Employee perceptions related to role and purpose

Statement		%
I understand how my role contributes to achieving an outcome for the Australian public	Agree	92
	Neither agree nor disagree	6
	Disagree	2
I believe strongly in the purpose and objectives of the APS	Agree	84
	Neither agree nor disagree	13
	Disagree	2

Source: 2023 APS Employee Census