Improving Public Sector Effectiveness

Administrative coordination might be improved by principles such as:

• operational tasks (projects, plans, decisions, regulation) should be dealt with by accountable organisations with a decision making structure and budget to cope with them. Operational tasks are best performed where goals are simple and direct. Discussion with others should be 'the way things are done', rather than being enforced by external rules or committees;
• administrative coordination is essential because of the overlap of functions, and changing requirements. It can be promoted by many mechanisms (committees, budgets, special task groups) but it is most effective if connected with the mainstream methods for management of the public sector (ie cabinet, central agencies, or other agencies in their own area of expertise);
• coordination is best seen as a means for organisation building, rather than as producing specific outcomes. This is achieved by respect for the knowledge and experience of existing organisations (even if this is initially inadequate, the process results in improvement, and chaos is avoided). Though the focus will be on a specific task the major benefit is to improve the knowledge, sense of direction, mutual trust and contacts amongst agencies which affects how they individually go about future tasks. Such methods (eg focusing parts of the public sector on the need to adapt to issues of critical current concern such as population growth in SE Queensland) can avoid the need for constant restructuring (by allowing evolutionary adaptation) and avoid the creation of organisational fragments for special purposes which become a source of inflexibility when the situation changes;
• coordinated proposals should be an intelligent synthesis reflecting the intentions of various agencies, without trying to second guess them. Junior generalists can do this more easily than senior specialists;
• providing mutual trust exists, very rapid results can be achieved though administrative co-ordination machinery. However using this method routinely for specific outcomes (eg facilitation of major projects with political support) overrides the expertise of agencies, destroys the basis for co-operation, and erodes the public sector's ability to deal with the other 99% of proposals which lack special support;
• private and public enterprises are the best means to coordinate the responses of many agencies to their proposals, providing access is available to some methods to resolve inconsistencies;
• injecting current ideas and options into a coordination process minimises 'bureaucratic' self interest, and provides a sense of direction.

(Based on experience of the Coordinator General's role in the 1970s, and the references in Section 9).

Public sector attitudes and capabilities might rapidly be improved by:

• international exposure on demanding tasks for the 'best and brightest';
• treating social and environmental goals as an essential basis of prosperity, but not as the prime focus (because the latter can only lead to weakness). Those with the skills required to ensure prosperity must be the ones who ensure that social and environmental goals are also considered;
• changing how public service performance is 'valued'. Firstly experience must be highly valued, because the complexity of real problems can not be understood in theoretical or pure management terms. Secondly, the effectiveness of the system staff deal with could be more valued than what they do themselves. Thus senior staff might be valued if the organisation works (rather than for producing pieces of paper with political appeal). Similarly agencies should be valued if the real world systems they deal with work (not with 'doing things' because the real world doesn't work). Central government agencies should be valued for the effectiveness of the whole system of administration, rather than for dealing with individual investment projects.

Many organisations could profitably impose on themselves a test of their effectiveness like that which the Department of Business Industry and Regional Development proposed for the Queensland Small Business Corporation: 'a tough minded review in which it would have to prove its worth or face reforms' (Brain L., Business Queensland, 31/1/94).