Appendix H Fit-for-purpose team design and management

The APS can assemble fit-for-purpose teams that work collaboratively and productively during a crisis, however, finds it hard to maintain these ways of working in a business-as-usual environment. There have been successful models of task forces and rapid response or project teams – some of which use Agile approaches and some that operate with more traditional roles and structures.

There is no single preferred approach, however, it is important to acknowledge the global trend away from ‘pure’ hierarchies to improve adaptability, build links across business units and provide a higher degree of autonomy. According to a global survey, three-quarters of work across enterprises of >10,000 employees was done within hierarchical structures, and the balance in team-based structures.[45] While we do not have comparable data for the APS, the latter figure is likely to be much lower.

Even when required to maintain more traditional structures, APS leaders should use implementation of the review’s recommendations as a catalyst for adopting principles and practices of more innovative and dynamic team-based work. These include:

• Setting the right tone from the outset. There should be opportunities for individuals to share with others what they bring to the team, where their skills and knowledge might be best used, their preferred ways of working and their professional development goals. Leaders should actively consider what this means for providing direction and support to team members based on this information.
• Maintaining a regular rhythm of open communication. Team meetings should be inclusive and have agendas that enable all participants to share what they are working on and what they need from others to get the job done. There should be a preference for regular, short and relatively informal (though well-structured) meetings over less frequent, more formal sessions with one person dominating. Formal presentations to or meetings with senior supervisors should be similarly inclusive, with participation based on expertise and contribution rather than classification level.
• Working with a ‘co-design’ mindset wherever possible. It is far more effective to obtain senior input early in the process of problem-solving or developing a product. Where possible this should be done through sharing early thoughts and seeking reaction in the moment rather than documenting ideas for written responses (which can trigger a focus on presentation and wordsmithing over pushing around ideas).
• Actively seeking external perspectives, rather than default to the usual stakeholders for feedback. It is important to structure in opportunities to hear from front-line service delivery staff, customers and people with technical expertise. Creating a culture of open critique and feedback is crucial to countering reflexive, hierarchical responses.

Doing so will help to both lock-in the benefits experienced by many of the APS’s approach to responding to COVID-19, and help embed a less hierarchical structure with wider spans and greater recognition of individuals’ value beyond that which is indicated by their classification level.

[45] Deloitte Research Article (2020) Benchmarking Findings: Organization Design [available under license].