As set out in legislation, departmental secretaries have vital roles at the apex of the APS, both as principal policy advisors to ministers and as leaders and stewards of the service. It is therefore important that all Australians have confidence in the appointment, performance management and termination processes for secretaries.
What we think is needed
- Retention of the Prime Minister’s legislated role to make recommendations to the Governor-General on the appointment of departmental secretaries.
- A codified process to inform these recommendations, including published criteria.
- Transparency around performance expectations and management of secretaries. This could include clear criteria on the basis for performance and evaluation, and measures linked to legislated responsibilities, government and ministerial priorities, and departmental and service-wide outcomes.
What is shaping our thinking
- ‘Part 7—Secretaries of Departments’ in the Public Service Act 1999.
- Feedback on the benefits of greater clarity in this area, including for quality of APS advice to ministers and the ongoing recruitment of potential future leaders.
- The experience of international jurisdictions, such as New Zealand and the UK, with prescribed processes for appointments of departmental heads.
What we are still exploring
- Options to support advice to the Prime Minister on appointments, for example a panel including the Secretary of PM&C, the APS Commissioner and a ministerial nominee.
- Options for greater rigour and transparency for any proposed termination of secretaries, while retaining the Prime Minister’s legislated role to make recommendations to the Governor-General.
- Structural options to support greater collaboration among secretaries.
- Appointment processes and expectations of agency heads, building on existing guidelines.
Comments
Mon, 29 Apr 2019
I like this proposal because it provides a framework that helps us move on from focussing on the supposed (uni dimensional, often media-generated) personalities of Secretaries to judging them according to their effectiveness, the intellectual capital they bring to bear and how this suits the requirements of their jobs.
This is important for the public good. In the past, we have lost (or nearly lost) some of our most experienced, knowledgeable and effective people owing to trial by media or what appear to be the most capricious judgements. I remember Dennis Richardson, the former Secretary of Defence, saying in his valedictory that he came to the realisation that he could, “...seek to do the right thing 24/7 and I could still end up being sacked in disgrace.” How unfair and counterproductive that we should treat the people who have arguably done the most for public service in such a disrespectful and wasteful way.
I am relieved and appreciative that the Panel is looking into this because the seeming self-interest associated with this issue means the APS can not resolve this problem without external champions.
Wed, 10 Apr 2019
Major General John Cantwell's book referenced in previous comment is called "Leadership in Action" - very solid and accessible work on the attributes of good leadership.
Fri, 05 Apr 2019
It has been touched upon by a number of other comments - but the key roles for Secretaries and other agency heads is leadership of their people - their is a great chapter early on in John Cantwell's book where he outlines the negative impacts of poor leadership, all of which translate in the APS context to very real costs to the taxpayer - this is worth having a look at to frame leadership expectations.
I think in addition to clarity about the appointment - it would be nice to see ongoing learning by Secretaries. I think some thought should be given to ongoing "mentoring" - not in the conventional sense by previous secretaries etc... but by a variety of different sources, like innovators, technology people, academics...etc and people who mentor in leadership.
in some succesful businesses, they have formalised this model to help avoid the groupthink that can come from always being patted on the back by people who think the same way as you.
I was heartened to hear Kerri Hartland talk about younger people being mentors to senior people on issues like technology, social media etc...
Wed, 03 Apr 2019
The proposal should explore more about the traits expected of a Secretary and senior leadership - their ability to lead and show courage (and not over-engineer things to try and wholly mitigate risk) should be better reflected when looking to appoint people to these positions, and then as a part of their ongoing performance. The good and the bad start at the top - leadership is the basis of organisational culture. Leaders need to be held to account for staff turnover and poor morale.
Sun, 31 Mar 2019
The problem is that whilst the PM maintains a legislated role to make recommendations, there will always be a systemic pressure to choose political Secretaries, so we need a stronger process where the best candidates will get it on merit. Transparency isn't enough, as we've seen. People will choose their pick and then rationalise, so unless there is some form of actual merit based requirement, then people without the necessary merit will continue to flow into senior roles. Too often do we hear that departments are there to serve their Minister, when we are here to serve the people, the parliament and the Minister.
Why no advertise Secretary roles? Perhaps we need a period of time between working in a political office and working in senior exec roles (at least for Secretaries)?
This excellent paper was prepared by the APH Library https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp9899/99rp03
Fri, 29 Mar 2019
Clear and transparent background information about secretaries and access by community to expectations of secretaries and measurement of those expectations.
Wed, 27 Mar 2019
As a member of the public one department secretary refuses facts and evidence regarding staff misconduct and defective administration is ignored. The relevant minister also refuses to acknowledge any problem in his department. The public service and ppga acts have no relevance when those in power choose to ignore them. Why have a secretary at all?
Fri, 22 Mar 2019
I haven't quite acquired the skill-set to comment fully however from my experience in the APS over the past 20 years, I have observed a creeping politicisation of the public service - particulary the SES.
I am very happy to see this is being addressed and really like the idea of a panel to oversee the appointment of departmental secretaries. It is essential that this panel is immune to ministerial interferance.
I can only image it would be one tough job being a departmental secratary and this initiative will hopefully provide them with confidence they can get on and do the job without fear or favour.
Thu, 21 Mar 2019
This initiative is critical. Too often in the past the APS has tolerated some particularly poor leadership behaviours from some Secretaries because they are seen to be "doers" irrespective for the damage they cause along the way. So giving equal wait to behaviours and ability to lead and inspire their workforce is needed. They should also demonstrate courage and withstand the pressure of MInisters who try to influence other SES appointments
Tue, 19 Mar 2019
I support recruitment and selection that is transparent and accountable, that reflects: merit, performance against departmental deliverables, integrity, leadership, issues management, people management, communication skills, and stakeholder liaison skills.
Secretaries have an important and tough job, and they also need to be backed by processes that recruit, select and develop the right Deputies, Chief Operating Officers, other Executives, and staff in HR branches.
I have worked with some outstanding people occupying high-level positions, who I am glad to see up there, look up to and am proud of. And then there are some others…