Requirement B

Marc is an APS 4 employee in a communications and events management team. His role includes preparing invitation mailouts, tracking RSVPs, processing invoices, and collating information packs for attendees. Marc does not feel his work is very important, and is not always clear on what the events are about.

Marc’s branch manages a range of events for the whole department—including cross-jurisdictional conferences, training sessions for stakeholders on the regulatory framework the department administers, showcases with universities, and many more. The events contribute to the department’s continuous business improvement by providing opportunities to learn from state and territory governments, the private sector, and researchers and other stakeholders; and ensuring it carries out its regulatory role effectively through education and collaborative inter-governmental activities.

For an upcoming event, Marc’s new EL1 supervisor, Janina, asks him to put together an information pack with multiple components for 80 attendees. Marc replies, ‘Yeah, will do—but do they actually even read all this stuff?’ This question makes Janina curious about Marc’s understanding of what the events are for and how they contribute to the department’s work. At their next one-on-one catch-up, Janina teases this out and realises that no-one has previously explained to Marc what the underlying purpose of their work is—and finds out that his previous performance agreement only listed his day-to-day tasks.

Janina works with Marc to develop a new performance agreement using the department template, which includes prompts for employees to reflect on how their work contributes to team, branch, and departmental goals. Through their conversations, it becomes clearer to Marc that his administrative work directly helps his branch to deliver its functions, and, in turn, enables the department to meet its goals. He comes to understand that the information packs include things like fact sheets to help businesses comply with legislative requirements; the conference papers outline new research or approaches that can help the department to do things better; and the meetings he processes catering invoices for bring key people together who do not otherwise get the chance to meet.

What happens next?

Through this process, Marc comes to understand that his work matters more than he thought it did. Throughout the course of the performance cycle, Janina checks in with Marc on how he feels about his work, and observes that he seems more engaged. Over time, Marc starts to come up with new ideas to improve the team’s processes, informed by his deeper understanding of the purpose of their work. Janina is delighted with Marc’s progress, and rates him Fully Effective at the end of the performance cycle.

Janina demonstrates Stewardship in her supervisor role by using regular catch-ups during the performance cycle, and Marc’s performance agreement, to draw the connection between Marc’s day-to-day work and the department’s role and objectives. Marc demonstrates Stewardship by actively engaging with the department and branch goals and making valuable contributions through his skills and experience.

Samir is an APS 5 employee in the Referrals Team in a large agency. Samir’s team is the initial point of contact for applicants seeking to undertake projects requiring approval under legislation governing impact on the environment. Every day Samir’s team engages with a diverse range of prospective applicants. They provide guidance about the approval process and facilitate meetings between prospective applicants and officers in the agency’s Assessment Team to assist applicants to meet the requirements of the approval process. Samir’s role includes managing a positional mailbox, triaging requests according to standard operating procedures, and maintaining online application forms and response templates.

Samir is allocated an enquiry from a pesticide manufacturer, Company B, which is developing a new product. The product includes a chemical linked to the destruction of a strain of native plants in one overseas country, which does not appear to have caused damage elsewhere. Company B wants approval to use the chemical in their product in Australia and is undertaking further research.

Samir considers this request in the context of his agency’s goals and purpose, which include facilitating projects with a positive environmental impact, and reducing harm to the environment, in order to protect Australia’s unique animals, plants, habitats, and places into the future. According to Company B, the new pesticide is more effective than the existing product, and it could have a positive environmental impact in increasing crop yields. However, Samir notes Company B has not provided any information about how it is considering in its research potential risks to Australian native plants or animals.

On the basis of these considerations, Samir escalates the request to his supervisor, Jodie, and suggests it be referred to the Assessment Team for further consideration, according to their standard process. Samir also asks Jodie whether, in the meantime, he could ask Company B to provide more information about their risk assessment process or research data. Jodie notes that, while it is a great suggestion, and probably a likely next step in the department’s engagement with Company B, it sits outside the Referrals Team’s operating procedures and Samir’s own role. Jodie explains that seeking information from prospective applicants is something the Assessment Team is best placed to do, as it requires some technical expertise and experience to ensure the right information is provided to enable an assessment in accordance with the legislation, and to make sure applicants’ expectations are managed appropriately about the likelihood of an approval.

What happens next?

Jodie suggests that if Samir would like to learn more about how the Assessment Team engages with applicants and uses their technical expertise to assess applications, she is happy to facilitate a development opportunity with the Assessment Team, to perhaps ‘shadow’ the relevant assessment officer’s management of the remainder of Company B’s application. Samir is excited by this idea as he has been thinking of how he can develop his career further in the agency, including possibly a role in that team.

Samir demonstrates Stewardship by understanding how he contributes to the agency’s goals and responsibilities through ensuring applicants’ requests are given proper and timely consideration, and looking ahead to the next steps in the agency’s approval process. Jodie demonstrates Stewardship by ensuring that agency processes are followed so that decisions are made and actions are taken by the right staff at the appropriate level. She also demonstrates Stewardship as a supervisor by ensuring that Samir continues to develop his knowledge and capability, broaden his understanding, and deepen his engagement with the department’s goals and responsibilities.

Rhian is an experienced APS 6 employee in a claims approval team in a large agency. Rhian’s team is responsible for assessing claims for customers who meet legislative eligibility requirements for hardship payments due to natural disasters.

Rhian’s own role includes reviewing claim forms and evidence from customers to determine the claim amounts to be approved, and ensuring the claims are sustained within the legislation and a specified budgeted amount.

Rhian is allocated a claim request, and meets with the customer, Ana, in person to gather the information required to make a determination. During this meeting Rhian hears about the difficult circumstances that Ana has been facing, and has a strong sense of empathy and understanding having had similar experiences of her own several years ago.

Ana provides some written reports that she would like to submit with her claim. After the meeting Rhian reviews the reports and notices that Ana appears to be seeking a larger claim amount than she is eligible for based upon the legislation. This amount could be provided if Ana demonstrates that there are exceptional circumstances—but Ana’s evidence does not indicate her circumstances meet that criteria. 

However, Rhian approves the claim in full as she feels sorry for Ana, and believes that Ana’s circumstances are exceptional enough to warrant the full claim amount. Rhian’s manager Beau notices that she has approved a significant claim following receipt of an exceptions report, and they ask Rhian to provide a rationale. Rhian tells Beau that she did not want to go back to Ana to seek a rationale for exceptional circumstances, as she was worried about adding to Ana’s existing stress, but that she felt Ana needed and deserved the payment.

Beau is concerned that Rhian has taken this course of action because the team has discussed the payment—including its limits and policy rationale—often in the past. Beau had assumed Rhian understood her own role well in this context, and was experienced enough to understand why she could not determine a higher payment amount without proper evidence to support it.

What happens next?

Beau considers carefully whether this incident is isolated or part of a pattern of behaviour, and reviews a sample of Rhian’s decisions over the past few months. Beau finds some discrepancies with large payment records to suggest Rhian might have operated outside the requirements of the legislation more than once.

Beau counsels Rhian and explains the wider ramifications of her decision. They explain that Rhian has not demonstrated Stewardship, because she failed to take into consideration the agency’s goal of achieving a sustainable system of relief payment based on demonstrated need, which cannot be maintained if payments are allocated without proper process. Beau explains that making decisions inconsistent with the legislation may also invalidate the payments that are made, and create overpayment and debt recovery difficulties for people who are still genuinely in need of assistance.

Beau explains to Rhian that this type of incident must not occur again, or it may lead to more formal disciplinary action under the Code of Conduct.