presentation to the consultative workshop on ... 2011/johan n… · purpose of the presentation the...
TRANSCRIPT
Presentation to the Presentation to the Consultative Consultative Workshop on Workshop on Organizational Service Organizational Service
Delivery Readiness (OSDR) AssessmentDelivery Readiness (OSDR) Assessment
25 February 201125 February 2011Presenter: Johan NelPresenter: Johan Nel
2
Presentation OutlinePurpose of the presentationIntroductionBackground on Previous StudiesDefinitionLegislative FrameworkThe Aim of OSDR AssessmentsPrinciples of AssessmentThe Assessment Process The Role of –
the DPSAOther Stakeholders
Assessment Project Governance and Reporting ArrangementsAssessment Project Management RequirementsFollow-up Action by Assessed Department/Institution
3
Purpose of the Presentation
The purpose of the presentation is to:Share information on the background to the development of a framework methodology and toolkit to assess the readiness of departments to deliver on their mandate. Provide participants with context for considering why, how, by whom the framework methodology should be used.Obtain further inputs to progress towards the finalization of the Methodology and Toolkit.
Introduction (1)
The South African Public Service is an important contributor to the sustainable growth and development of the country by rendering and ensuring access to public services to the citizens.
Since 1994 the political and socio economic changes in the country required government departments to speed up service delivery.
In order to adapt to ever-changing challenges government must put in place frameworks, systems, processes and structures to guide service delivery and to assess the failure or success of such processes.
From previous assessments, including government’s ten-year and fifteen-year reviews as well as municipal capacity assessments and performance reports, it emerged that lack of required capacity and institutional constraints pose major service delivery challenges
4
Introduction (2)This appears to be supported by the apparent anomaly that the public service has put in place commendable policies, but poor service delivery indicates the inability to translate such policies into action and envisaged results.
A need has therefore been identified to look deeper into the total service delivery system when assessing organizational readiness of government institutions to deliver on their mandates.
The need to ensure government service delivery performance has also been identified as a high priority to the extent that a newapproach (the outcomes approach) has been adopted.
To ensure that the outcomes approach is successfully implementeda new Department of Monitoring and Evaluation in the Presidency (DPME) has been created to co-ordinate the effective management and implementation of the outcome approach.
5
Introduction (3)
As part of this process, the DPME will, together with the DPSA, Treasury and COGTA, implement a system to assess the management of service delivery performance in the Public Service.
It is important that there is alignment between the performance monitoring system of the DPME and the OSDR readiness assessment system and framework of the DPSA
6
Background on Previous Studies (1)Previous OSDR assessments took different forms and approaches, depending on the nature of the organization and factors to be assessed.
These studies and research provided valuable information, but they were not always methodically conducted.
Many government departments, including the DPSA, conducted OSDR assessments in the past, however most have been conducted on an ad-hoc and fragmented basis, or followed a reactive approach.
This is because there is no common approach in conducting such readiness assessments.
The G & A cluster of the Forum of South Africa Directors-General (FOSAD) was tasked by Cabinet with the responsibility for driving initiatives that will ensure accelerated and integrated service delivery by public sector institutions.
7
Background on Previous Studies (2)
Since 2005, the G & A cluster initiated OSDR assessments in targeted social and economic clusters, which have identified various weaknesses that impeded services delivery. These assessments were prompted by the February 2005 State of the Nation Address, in which the President indicated that “there is a lack of all-round capacity and weaknesses in the implementation of certain national programmes”.The findings of these assessments, indicate that although achievements have been recorded in terms of public service transformation, there is growing evidence of poor service delivery in most government institutions (During his 2011 address at the opening of Parliament, the President referred to 117 instances of mass action against poor service delivery during 2010). A number of studies and surveys on municipal performance highlighted capacity gaps that lead to the identification of 136municipalities that required capacity building interventions.
8
Background on Previous Studies (3)
This confirms that issues of capacity or OSDR is a serious issue of concern across the public sector, and needs to be address in a planned and systematic way. It is generally assumed that “lack of capacity” and OSDR has a specific human resource focus, which is viewed as the absence orlimited availability of specific technical skills to implement or deliver services. Previous studies indicate that these assumptions are not accurate and support the view that addressing skills related deficienciesalone will not improve OSDR.OSDR should therefore be defined in terms of both internal and external factors.
9
Definition (1)
Organisational service delivery readiness assessment refers to conducting a systematic and planned process to ascertain whethergovernment institutions/departments have the basic enablers in place that will enable them to deliver on their mandates.Assessments should focus on the enablers (depicted in the four pillars of the diagram below) of government institutions/departments to adapt to changes and to respond to service recipient needs. The focus must be holistically on an organization’s service delivery apparatus as a complete systemThis will create alignment with the departmental Performance Assessment Tool (PAT) that is currently being developed by the DPME to carry out its mandate of performance monitoring individual departments.
10
Definition (2)
Important to distinguish between the concepts of OSDR assessmentorganizational performance management (OPM).OSDR assessment is a process to assess whether all the necessaryservice delivery enablers are in place to support delivery processes in an optimum and accountable manner. OPM has a more comprehensive focus and is a process to determine in a quantifiable manner whether the strategic objectives and service delivery outputs of an organization have been achieved as planned.
11
12
Definition focus:Input / output service delivery value chain
Legal Framework (1)
Constitution:Section 195 sets basic values and principles to govern public administration. From a service delivery readiness perspective, the following are important:
Efficient effective and economic use of resources must be promoted.
Public administration must be development oriented
Public administration must be responsive to people’s needs and must cater for public participation in policy making
Public administration must be accountable.
The values are applicable to all 3 spheres of government.
13
Legal Framework (2)
PSA:Chapter 2 of the Public Service Act, 1994, states that the MPSA is responsible for establishing norms and standards relating to thefunctioning of the public service.
This relates to all aspects such as people, processes, structure, systems and technology that may impact on the transformation, reform, and improvement of the effectiveness and efficiency of the public service and its delivery of services to citizens.
PSR:Provides interpretations, and elucidates the application of the Public Service Act, 1994. It mandates the MPSA to lay down rules and restrictions pertaining to public administration.
This is achieved through the issuing of guidelines and policies frameworks, directives and circulars.
14
Legal Framework (3)
PSR: Part III provides that –
An executing authority shall, in order to provide services with the best value for money, set measurable objectives for her or his department, optimally utilise the department’s human and other resources and apply fair labour practices.
Within available funds, she or he shall, based on the department’s and the Government’s service delivery objectives and mandates, plan to execute functions with an efficient and effective internal organisation and well developed human resources.
OSDR assessment will be focusing on determining whether the relevant enablers to deliver services in and efficient effective and economic manner have in fact been put in place.
15
Legal Framework (4)
The White Paper on Transforming Public Service Delivery of 18 September 1997 -Provides a policy framework and a practical implementation strategy for the transformation of public service delivery.The White Paper states that “The South African public service will be judged by one criterion above all: its effectiveness in delivering services which meet the basic needs of all South African citizens”.
DPSA’s medium term strategic focus on the building of a developmental state:OSDR assessments is aligned with the DPSA strategic focus. Future regulatory change is expected give effect to the enforcement and monitoring of compliance of the departments with regard to the basic enablers of public administration, which is currently onlyapplicable to the HRM function.
16
The Aim of OSDR Assessments (1)
Most departments who do OSDR assessments do so to serve very specific (own) objectives.As a result assessing OSDR takes place in a piecemeal manner,
requiring a much effort to obtain an view of organizational service delivery readiness in the public service.Even centre of government departments (Presidency, National Planning Commission, DPME, OTPs, DPSA, NT and DCOG have so far conducted assessments mostly in a piece-meal manner.This may be because there is currently no comprehensive guideline in place to assist departments in terms of understanding the basic administrative tools or enablers that should be put in place to ensure the effective operation of departments. The appropriate application of these basic administrative tools or enablers, are what constitute organizational service delivery readiness or capacity.
17
The Aim of OSDR Assessments (2)
Studies aimed at determining the state of the public service, conducted by the OPSC and government’s 10-year and 15-year reviews indicate that -
there is a declining level of compliance with regard to putting in place basic administrative enablers such as policies, systems, technology, structures and procedures; and .
Non-compliance will continuously widen the gap between needs, policies and implementation.
The aim of conducting OSDR assessments is therefore assess the capacity and efficacy of the state to deliver on its mandates, policies, programmes and service/product commitments
The results of the OSDR would then be utilized to improve the capacity of departments to deliver, through the strengthening ofbasic administration.
18
The Aim of OSDR Assessments (3)
OSDR assessments, amongst other, are conducted to:Determine if departments, based on their mandates ,put in place policies, programmes, structures, technologies, processes, standards and resources that form the building blocks of public administration to support the operations of departments and implementation of programmes.
Improve accountability for service delivery. It may be possible for departments to deliver adequately without the required administrative enablers, but accountability for service delivery performance would suffer.
Contribute towards objectively determining the readiness status (capacity) of departments to deliver on their mandates. The collective results of individual assessments will also assist in forming an opinion with regard to government’s readiness to deliver on its social contract.
Assist in scrutinizing what is going on in a total or sub-system (e.g. department or SCM), interpreting the findings and identifying the correct interventions, should it be found that corrective measures are required.
19
The Aim of OSDR Assessments (4)
OSDR assessments, amongst other, are conducted to (contd):
Move away from a reactive problem-solving approach to a pro-activeapproach in identifying and addressing service delivery challenges in the public service as they emerge.
Contribute to the enhancement of organizational development and performance improvement initiatives. Support engagement initiatives in departments can yield more positive results if service delivery improvement processes are kicked-started by the objective diagnosis of the underlying reasons for poor service delivery that may emerge as stumbling blocks for the operations of the department.
Determine the current delivery readiness status of departments (baseline) and to learn lessons they need to be in terms of having adequatecapacity to deliver.
20
Principles of Assessment (1)
OSDR assessments must be exercised with due regard to the Constitution, the PFMA and Financial Regulations, the PSA, and PSR, the relevant statutory and financial requirements, applicable collective agreements and departmental policy.OSDR assessment is by its nature a multi disciplinary process and should be conducted by multi-disciplinary assessment teams on a project basisOOSDR assessments should be conducted on the basis of the approved OSDR Toolset, which will facilitate a comprehensive, holistic and multi-disciplinary project management approach. Assessments can be conducted by either internal or external teams.Good recordkeeping of all supporting documents is a requirement and copies must be submitted to the DPSA for purposes of recordkeeping and to facilitate service delivery readiness trends analysis.
21
Principles of Assessment (2)
OSDR assessments should be seen as the beginning of an improvement process that is aligned to other existing governmentinitiatives aimed at improving services delivery.
The application of the approved toolkit should be regarded as a pre-requisite for the initiation of organizational development and service delivery improvement processes.
OSDR assessment is not a replacement for OPM, but is designed toserve as a standard source of information for the Performance Assessment Tool (PAT) currently being developed by the DPME.
22
The roles of stakeholders: The DPSA (1)
The DPSA (in support of the MPSA’s role to set norms and standards pertaining to the functioning of the public service), has a policy, oversight implementation and assistance role as far as OSDR assessments are concerned. This is in line with the Public Service Act and regulations.
From a policy perspective, the DPSA is responsible for the development and review of the framework methodology for conducting OSDR assessments. This includes the development and review of the assessment tool.
To implement the framework methodology and toolset, the DPSA will take responsibility for –
the dissemination of the framework and toolset,
initial advocacy and induction to apply the toolset,
conducting external assessments to validate departmental assessments, and
occasional assistance and support where departments do not have the required capacity to conduct assessment
23
The roles of stakeholders: The DPSA (2)
From an oversight perspective the DPSA will ensure compliance to the assessment framework, the application of the approved assessment tool, OSDR trends analysis and the submission of regular reports to Cabinet. Departments will be required to submit all OSDR assessments, and supporting documents, to the DPSA to be placed in a central repository. This information will also serve as the basis of medium to long term impact assessments to determine thevalue-add of OSDR assessments and to enhance the framework and toolset.
Occasional assistance is not expected to represent a significantportion of the DPSA’s overall responsibilities. Assistance will only be provided on request and if a department has no capacity to conduct such assessments. The DPSA will also conduct independent assessments when so directed by the MPSA or Cabinet
24
The roles of stakeholders: The DPME
The DPME has a critical role to play as its responsibilities include:
Monitoring the implementation public sector administration functions as well as the administration of service delivery institutions across the spheres of government. These include conducting of diagnostics, evaluation of institutional service delivery performance effectiveness and theidentification of service delivery blockages, as well as to determine business needs and identify areas of intervention, where necessary. The DPSA, NT and COG is partnering with the DPME in the development and implementation of the PAT, and it is envisaged that the results of the OSDR assessments will serve as an important source of information for the PAT.
25
The roles of stakeholders: The National Planning Commission
The National Planning Commission is responsible for –developing a draft long term vision and strategic plan for SouthAfrica. This will include discussion and engagement across the country and research on sector specific developmental programmes that inform the development and review of the vision and plan.
It is expected that the outcomes of OSDR assessments will form an important source of information in the process of research and engagement to develop the long term strategic plan for South Africa and its advisory role pertaining to cross-cutting issues that impact on South Africa’s long term development.
26
The roles of stakeholders: The The National Treasury (1)
The National Treasury’s legislative mandate as described in the Public Finance Management Act (Chapter 2) is:
to promote government’s fiscal policy framework;
to coordinate macroeconomic policy and intergovernmental financial relations;
to manage the budget preparation process;
to facilitate the Division of Revenue Act, which provides for an equitable distribution of nationally raised revenue between national, provincial and local government; and to monitor the implementation of provincial budgets.
In South Africa very little is done to cost the implementation of new policies. Budgeting for this is largely a process where Treasury has to prioritize existing funding based on the competitive inputs of different departments.
27
The roles of stakeholders: The The National Treasury (2)
The outcomes of OSDR assessments will enhance Treasury’s ability to validate information on which budgetary requests are made, aswell as the equitable distribution of nationally raised revenue between national, provincial and local government.
Obviously, the National Treasury would also have the responsibility to conduct OSDR assessments for its own service delivery purposes.
28
The roles of stakeholders: Office of the Public Service Commission
The Office of the Public Service Commission (OPSC) is tasked and empowered to –
investigate, monitor, and evaluate the organization and administration of the Public Service.
This mandate also entails the evaluation of achievements, or lack thereof of Government programmes.
The OPSC also has an obligation to promote measures that would ensure effective and efficient performance within the Public Service and to promote values and principles of public administration as set out in the Constitution, throughout the Public
OSDR assessments are expected to enhance the OPSC’s functions as an additional source of information.
29
The roles of stakeholders: Offices of the Premier (OTPs)
The OTPs assist the Premiers, together with the other members of the Executive Council, to ensure that the province has the administrative capacity to assume effective responsibility in terms of administering and implementing all national and provincial legislation within their functional areas.
The OTPs will play a leading role in provincial administrations in the co-ordination and implementation of OSDR assessments.
This may range from co-ordination and project management to actual readiness assessments where the Premiers may require objective external opinions of the readiness status of departments within the province.
OTPs are regarded as the DPSA’s strategic partner for conducting OSDR assessments within provincial administrations.
30
The roles of stakeholders: Policy Development and Oversight Departments (1)
These departments are responsible for developing appropriate service delivery and transformation policies for implementation in the service delivery sectors they serve.
Such policies are usually developed in partnership with implementation departments in a co-operative manner.
These departments also have the responsibility to ensure that service delivery implementation take place within the boundaries of the policies they are responsible for.
In the past, the OSDR status played a minor role in the development of policies, hence the generally stated view that South Africa has well developed policies, but that implementation is weak.
OSDR assessments can play an important role in the development of implementable policies.
31
The roles of stakeholders: Policy Development and Oversight Departments (2)
Where OSDR assessments of a specific service delivery sector need to be conducted, these departments will play a leadership and co-ordination role.
OSDR assessment outcomes will place such departments in a better position to advise on the resourcing of service delivery institutions to implement new and existing policies and legislation in the relevant sectors they serve.
32
The roles of stakeholders: Implementation Departments
These departments are responsible for the implementation of sector specific policies.
They will have to take responsibility for conducting OSDR assessments within their own sphere of responsibility, to ensure that they have objective information on their own service delivery readiness status.
This will enable them to identify, in an objective manner, where their service delivery readiness status may be under threat.
OSDR assessments will serve as an input to determine where corrective action and resource changes need to take place.
Where they partner with external service delivery agents such asNGOs, they may also need to conduct OSDR assessments in such institutions to determine whether partnering arrangements with such institutions would have a low or high risk of success.
33
The Assessment Process (1)
OSDR assessments must take place in an objective and structured manner.
The nature of the areas to be assessed and the scope of the initiative may inform the approaches and methodologies to be applied, but it is possible to apply a fairly generic methodology that would be relevant to most of the readiness assessment programmes.
Assessments may be carried out as a project by a combination ofinternal or external individuals forming a project team. The proposed toolkit provides the backbone of the methodology and guidance with regard to the scope of the project.
It is envisaged that the service delivery readiness assessment process will unfold in seven phases. These phases are diagrammatically depicted below.
34
The Assessment Process (2)
35
2. Entry and Scope
Contracting
3. Planning
4. Information Gathering
and Situational Analysis5. Analysis
and Findings
6. Recommendations and Reporting
7. Proposed further action
1. Rationale and Background on the conducting capacity assessment
The Assessment Process (3)
Rationale and BackgroundOSDR assessments must be informed by the need to improve service delivery. The need to conduct assessments can be prompted by service delivery challenges as articulated in-
Cabinet decisions to assess targeted programmes/institutions. Auditor Generals’reports.
OPSC’s state of the public service reports.
Public Management Watch
Annual Reports.
Departmental organizational performance reports.
Impact assessment studies.
Citizens’ surveys.
Requests/instructions by Executive Authority.
Requests by strategic partners’ or key stakeholders.
Analysis of such documents will provide information on the background and reasons why a particular department should be assessed.
36
The Assessment Process (4)
Entry and Scope ContractingIrrespective whether the assessment is conducted by and internal or external team or a mixed team, it is important that the assessment be conducted as a project with a definite scope and timelines.
To manage the assessment as a project, all stakeholders should have clarity on the following issues to facilitate buy-in and agreement:
The origin and rationale of the initiative
The purpose and objectives of the assessment
The expected outcomes
The assessment process
Possible governance structures.
37
The Assessment Process (5)
Planning an assessment project should focus on the following: Establish a project team, and determine the roles and responsibilities of team members. Develop the terms of reference of the project and work streams responsible for sub-projects.Identify the main elements in the system to be assessed. The rationale and purpose of the assessment will assist to determine the areas of focus. Identify specific indicators and quality mechanisms for collection of data.Develop a project plan, indicating required resources.Develop and implement a communication strategy to ensure that all the staff and key stakeholders have a common understanding of the project, its objectives and benefits. Determine the approaches and methodologies for gathering and validation of information for analysis.
38
The Assessment Process (6)
Information Gathering Approaches and TechniquesA key element in conducting readiness assessments will the collection of high-level information that should be linked to identify issues in order to present logical and objective findings. The approved toolkit will assist in terms of guiding the nature of data to be collected.
Validation of information may require the utilization of appropriate additional data collection methods. The following methods and techniques can be used for additional data collection and validation
Action research
Document
In-depth Interviews
Site-Visits or Observations
Focused Sessions or Group Interviews
39
The Assessment Process (7)
Analysis of the Findings Detailed information is required to support the analysis process. The approved assessment toolkit facilitates this process by providing for a structured approach to focus on the potential areas of assessment, and facilitates judgment on the possible outcomes of the assessment by way of leading the assessment to team to interpret information both qualitatively and quantitatively, culminating in a dashboard display (red, yellow, green) of findings pertaining to specific building blocks that can have an impact on service delivery readiness status. This is done on the basis of validated information and emerging patterns and trends addressing specific focus areas.The outcomes of the analysis should leads to a rational conclusion pertaining to service delivery readiness status revolving aroundidentified focus areas (administrative enablers). Such conclusion/s must be relevant to the objectives of the assessment.
40
The Assessment Process (8)
Recommendations and Reporting
The detail of the project findings, the final assessment based on the analyzed information as well as the recommendations to correct shortcomings in the service delivery readiness of a department or sector must be presented in the form of a report.
Recommendations for further action should be informed by the proposed strategies that have been identified to address identified problems, monitor and sustain best practices.
The report should identify limitations as well as lessons learnt to inform future assessment activities.
The report should be presented to the relevant decision maker and other stakeholders, based on the VARICE principle (Verify, Accountable, Responsible, Information, Consult and Execute).
41
Assessment Project Governance and Reporting Arrangements (1)Governance arrangements will depend on the initiator, the nature and the scope of the assessment.
It is necessary and important for the assessed department to play a leading role and take ownership of the assessment project to ensure successful implementation and accountability for the implementation of corrective measures, where necessary.
It is advisable that technical and strategic task teams be put in place to oversee the implementation and management of the project.
Project support will be implemented in the spirit of co-operative governance.
42
Assessment Project Governance and Reporting Arrangements (2)
Diagram: Macro Governance Structure (initiated by Cabinet Committee)
43
Political: Cabinet (Endorsement and
Approval)
Strategic: MINEXCO(Accountability, Reporting and
Decision Making.)
Tactical: EXCO(Adoption and recommending for approval)
Operational: Responsibility Managers(Content owners – providing information
and validate findings)
Activity Level(Technical Team: Planning, implementation and
reporting)
ClusterQuality Assurance
Assessment Project Governance and Reporting Arrangements (3)
Diagram: Micro Governance Structure (Initiated by EA)
44
Strategic: MINEXCO(Accountability,
reporting and decision making
Tactical: EXCO(Adoption and recommending for approval)
Operational: Responsibility Managers(Content owners – providing information and validate findings)
Activity Level(Technical Team: Planning, implementation and reporting)
Assessment Project Management Requirements
Assessment project teams should represent multi-disciplinary skills to be able to conduct OSDR assessments in diverse service delivery environments, addressing a broad spectrum of administrative enablers. The roles of team members should be clearly delineated.
Project team members should have a sound understanding of the legislative frameworks governing the department being assessed as well as those regulating the administrative enablers that would impact on the OSDR of departments.
A project governance structure would ensure the steering and oversight of the implementation of the assessment project.
The project should have charter, detailing and clarifying issues such as the assessment activities, expected project performance, reporting mechanisms, problem solving and dispute resolution procedures, clients and supporting departments’ roles and responsibilities, legislative compliance, intellectual property and confidentiality issues.
45
Follow-up Action by the Assessed Department/Institution
Recommendations to respond to identified OSDR challenges should be documented in the form of a detailed project plan. The project plan should be aligned to the departmental operational and service delivery improvement plans to make sure that improvement strategies are resourced and integrated with departmental operations.
The outcomes of the OSDR assessments would often require organizational change, and that organizational changes often have a rippling effect that may affect interpersonal relationships, authority relationships and ultimately, employee and service recipients’attitudes and behavior.
To ensure that employees respond optimally to such change, it isnecessary to put change management strategies in place to guide the implementation of the interventions aimed at improving the functioning of the department.
46
Follow-up Action by the Assessed Department/Institution (2)
An effective communication strategy, as part of change management, should form part of this.
Effective monitoring and evaluation strategies to monitor implementation progress as well as to assess whether the implementation of recommendations were able to respond to the identified challenges should be put in place.
Ultimately it is employees who must initiate and sustain the change to enhance organizational performance.
It is therefore crucial to have sustainability strategies in place that are aligned to managing stakeholder relations and satisfying customer relations.
47
