Misconduct Resistance Framework - Corruption and Crime ...
Misconduct Resistance Framework - Corruption and Crime ...
Misconduct Resistance Framework - Corruption and Crime ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
An Integrated Governance Approach to Protecting Agency Integrity
“<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> is not a question of ‘bad apples’ – it’s a management problem . ”<br />
Australian Public Sector Anti-<strong>Corruption</strong> Conference 2007 – <strong>Corruption</strong> Prevention for Managers Workshop<br />
A NEW APPROACH TO MANAGING MISCONDUCT<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> generally occurs when a public officer abuses authority for personal gain or to cause<br />
detriment to another person, or acts contrary to the public interest.<br />
In the past, managing misconduct was seen in the same way many other corporate social responsibilities were<br />
viewed – as an expensive burden that contributed little or nothing to business outcomes.<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> was generally only considered in situations where doing ‘good’ or acting in the public interest was<br />
more important than doing ‘well’ <strong>and</strong> producing results. Experience has proven that these goals are not mutually<br />
exclusive: the integrity of an agency <strong>and</strong> management of misconduct are essential to improve business <strong>and</strong><br />
service delivery outcomes. Integrity <strong>and</strong> performance are complementary goals of public administration, therefore<br />
one should not be seen as more important than the other.<br />
This framework has been developed to help our public sector agencies better manage misconduct. To build<br />
misconduct resistance, agencies should adopt strategies that prevent, treat, detect <strong>and</strong> respond to misconduct.<br />
Simply introducing more controls, policies <strong>and</strong> systems is not enough to build a misconduct resistant agency.<br />
In fact, without careful planning, they can produce administrative inefficiency <strong>and</strong> reduce performance.<br />
This approach to misconduct resistance has two purposes:<br />
– To encourage <strong>and</strong> increase the factors which actively work to inhibit misconduct.<br />
– To eliminate <strong>and</strong> restrict the factors which allow misconduct to occur.<br />
This framework aims to enhance agency strategies in both areas to create a more efficient <strong>and</strong> effective<br />
approach, integrating misconduct resistance strategies with existing integrity systems, risk management<br />
processes, compliance <strong>and</strong> audit activities, <strong>and</strong> fraud control strategies.<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance should not be treated as a ‘bolt on’ set of accountability <strong>and</strong> compliance requirements<br />
that have nothing to do with the rest of an agency’s business activities.<br />
To be effective, deliver sustainable benefits for the agency, <strong>and</strong> reduce the risk <strong>and</strong> incidence of misconduct,<br />
misconduct resistance must be fully integrated with wider corporate systems.<br />
1
“[<strong>Misconduct</strong> management is] essential in our form of public administration [...], <strong>and</strong> there<br />
have been enough examples of abuse of power to make this clear. The question, therefore,<br />
is not whether [misconduct management] is needed, but how much of such protection is<br />
required <strong>and</strong> how it can be brought to bear without impairing effectiveness. ”<br />
Anechiarico, F & Jacobs JB 1996, The Pursuit of Absolute Integrity – how corruption control makes government ineffective<br />
WHY IS MISCONDUCT RESISTANCE IMPORTANT?<br />
All Western Australian (WA) public sector agencies have a responsibility to ensure that the<br />
services that they provide to the WA community are efficient, effective <strong>and</strong> reflect public interest<br />
st<strong>and</strong>ards <strong>and</strong> principles.<br />
Public interest st<strong>and</strong>ards <strong>and</strong> principles are commonly understood to be the intended outcomes of public<br />
sector performance, behaviour <strong>and</strong> accountability, such as:<br />
– Exercising power <strong>and</strong> authority for the common<br />
good;<br />
– Acting lawfully <strong>and</strong> impartially;<br />
– Exercising equity <strong>and</strong> fairness;<br />
– Acting with honesty <strong>and</strong> transparency;<br />
– Making fair <strong>and</strong> balanced decisions;<br />
– Using <strong>and</strong> caring for State resources in a<br />
responsible manner; <strong>and</strong><br />
– Respecting <strong>and</strong> protecting confidential information.<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> by public officials is against the public interest <strong>and</strong>:<br />
– Hampers agency performance;<br />
– Undermines the value <strong>and</strong> effectiveness of<br />
government services by costing time, money <strong>and</strong><br />
resources;<br />
– Diverts management focus;<br />
– Undermines staff morale;<br />
– Damages the reputation <strong>and</strong> competitiveness of<br />
the agency; <strong>and</strong><br />
– Erodes public confidence <strong>and</strong> trust.<br />
A 2006 survey of fraud in Australian public <strong>and</strong> private sectors has found the incidence of fraud to be<br />
rising, with nearly half of agencies reporting incidents <strong>and</strong> internal fraud representing the biggest risk.<br />
The average cost to an agency was estimated in excess of $700,000. KPMG Forensics’ Fraud Survey 2006<br />
To maintain a valued <strong>and</strong> respected public sector <strong>and</strong> produce effective business outcomes, agency integrity<br />
must be the primary concern of public officials.<br />
Integrating misconduct resistance as a part of core business will protect <strong>and</strong> strengthen the credibility,<br />
competitiveness, efficiency <strong>and</strong> long term sustainability of all agencies. It will also give agencies the confidence<br />
that their relevant legislative reporting <strong>and</strong> compliance obligations are being met.<br />
2
Successful misconduct management is needs-based <strong>and</strong> cost-effective.<br />
Agencies should tailor their approach to suit their internal <strong>and</strong> external<br />
environments, <strong>and</strong> the level <strong>and</strong> nature of risk they face.<br />
MISCONDUCT RESISTANCE IS ABOUT ACHIEVING THE RIGHT OUTCOMES<br />
Successful misconduct resistance relies on creating <strong>and</strong> sustaining the right agency culture, the right operational<br />
strategies <strong>and</strong> the right management environment. These three areas are the outcomes that agencies should work<br />
towards in building effective misconduct resistance approaches.<br />
Underpinning each outcome are key elements that highlight the specific areas that should be addressed in order to<br />
achieve each outcome.<br />
The outcomes <strong>and</strong> their key elements operate interdependently, each supporting <strong>and</strong> contributing to the success<br />
<strong>and</strong> maintenance of the others. The Commission’s experience <strong>and</strong> State <strong>and</strong> international best practice models<br />
show that all three outcomes must be considered in building a misconduct resistant agency.<br />
In 2006/2007 the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission received 2,150 reports<br />
of misconduct by public sector officials. The top five most reported types<br />
of misconduct were physical assault, breach of agency policies/codes,<br />
inappropriate behaviour, fraud <strong>and</strong> corrupt conduct.<br />
3
OUTCOME: THE RIGHT AGENCY CULTURE<br />
Agency culture values integrity <strong>and</strong> is intolerant of misconduct<br />
Systems to resist misconduct will only ever be as effective as the commitment of the staff members who implement<br />
them. While official policies may specify what management would like to happen, it is agency culture that determines<br />
what happens in practice. 1 Engaging staff in the development of the agency integrity <strong>and</strong> misconduct resistance<br />
initiatives through consultation, feedback <strong>and</strong> education can help build commitment.<br />
Collectively, we need to look beyond traditional strategies used to prevent, detect <strong>and</strong> respond to misconduct. We<br />
need to focus on creating agency cultures that generate their own high st<strong>and</strong>ards, norms <strong>and</strong> internalised controls.<br />
Key elements of a misconduct resistant culture include:<br />
– The right values – Your agency’s communication, actions <strong>and</strong> decisions reflect its values <strong>and</strong> public interest<br />
principles.<br />
– The right leadership – Leaders within your agency set an example of integrity with their own behaviour, their<br />
communication <strong>and</strong> their responses to misconduct by others.<br />
– The right workplace behaviour – Your workplace culture encourages staff to accept personal responsibility for<br />
behaving according to agency values <strong>and</strong> in the public interest.<br />
OUTCOME: THE RIGHT AGENCY OPERATIONAL STRATEGIES<br />
Agency policies <strong>and</strong> systems support the effective treatment of misconduct risks<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> resistant agencies ensure that the factors that may encourage or allow misconduct to occur are<br />
restricted <strong>and</strong> treated.<br />
Key elements of a comprehensive treatment programme include:<br />
– The right policies – Your policy platform provides a solid foundation for establishing the agency’s treatment<br />
environment <strong>and</strong> communicates your commitment, values <strong>and</strong> business practices for misconduct resistance.<br />
– The right risks – <strong>Misconduct</strong> risk identification <strong>and</strong> assessment are part of the wider corporate risk management<br />
planning process <strong>and</strong> include all of your agency’s functions <strong>and</strong> operational areas.<br />
– The right treatment – Your misconduct treatment programme is commensurate with the level <strong>and</strong> nature of risk<br />
your agency faces, comprehensive <strong>and</strong> adequately resourced, <strong>and</strong> is subject to ongoing monitoring <strong>and</strong> review.<br />
– The right underst<strong>and</strong>ing – Your staff <strong>and</strong> managers have a common underst<strong>and</strong>ing of what misconduct is. They<br />
embrace your agency’s st<strong>and</strong> on misconduct, as stated in the agency policy <strong>and</strong> treatment programme, <strong>and</strong><br />
know how to respond should they become aware of misconduct.<br />
OUTCOME: THE RIGHT AGENCY MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance is an integrated <strong>and</strong> established component of agency life<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance strategies need to have agency wide reach – embedded into all business activities <strong>and</strong><br />
integrated across all areas of core business in order to be truly effective.<br />
To ensure this happens senior management need to provide ownership <strong>and</strong> demonstrate their commitment to<br />
misconduct resistance by making it a top agency priority.<br />
Key elements of the right management environment include:<br />
– The right priority – <strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance is given high level ownership <strong>and</strong> central oversight.<br />
– The right business practices – <strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance is a fundamental part of your agency’s strategic, tactical<br />
<strong>and</strong> operational business activities – it’s the way you do business.<br />
– The right mindset – <strong>Misconduct</strong> consciousness is a fundamental part of work practices for everyone in your<br />
agency, with responsibilities structured from the top down – it’s a way of thinking.<br />
– The right review – Review <strong>and</strong> evaluation processes ensure your agency’s misconduct resistance approach<br />
remains relevant <strong>and</strong> effective in achieving stated objectives.<br />
– The right communication – Your agency misconduct resistance strategies are consolidated into a documented<br />
approach that is widely communicated.<br />
4<br />
1. Committee of Sponsoring Organisations for the Treadway Commission 1992
HOW DOES THE FRAMEWORK APPLY TO YOUR AGENCY?<br />
The <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> <strong>Framework</strong> outlines the Commission’s view on what a whole of agency approach<br />
to effective misconduct management should involve. It highlights the areas <strong>and</strong> issues that agencies should<br />
address, <strong>and</strong> the outcomes they should strive to achieve.<br />
The outcomes, <strong>and</strong> more specifically the twelve key elements which underpin them, provide the benchmarks<br />
which agencies should use to assess their performance.<br />
The key elements are not prescriptive in terms of how agencies should address them or which strategies they<br />
should adopt. However, the Commission will use these elements as st<strong>and</strong>ards in its own review <strong>and</strong> monitoring<br />
of the whole sector <strong>and</strong> individual agency performance in managing misconduct.<br />
Agencies are not expected to implement the framework without first considering their needs <strong>and</strong> required<br />
resources. Each agency should ensure that their approach to addressing the outcomes reflects their core<br />
business <strong>and</strong> takes into account their risk environment. The size <strong>and</strong> complexity of misconduct resistance<br />
systems <strong>and</strong> strategies will depend on the nature <strong>and</strong> extent of the misconduct risks faced.<br />
The framework is intended to be a practical resource for agencies to assist them in the planning, implementation<br />
<strong>and</strong> review of their own misconduct resistance efforts. Agencies can use it in a number of different ways,<br />
depending on their needs:<br />
– Those beginning to tackle the issue of misconduct resistance can use the framework to guide where to<br />
start.<br />
– Those with misconduct resistance strategies already in place can use the framework for self assessment <strong>and</strong><br />
progress monitoring.<br />
– Any agency can use the framework at any stage to benchmark its performance as a whole (or individual work<br />
areas) over time, <strong>and</strong> against the performance of similar organisations.<br />
This framework is supported by the <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> Integration Guide <strong>and</strong> a series of targeted tools.<br />
These provide more detailed <strong>and</strong> practical guidance on how to integrate misconduct resistance strategies into<br />
existing agency governance <strong>and</strong> risk management systems. The Integration Guide provides a simple methodology<br />
<strong>and</strong> a place to start using Focus Questions, Signs of Success <strong>and</strong> Ideas to Build Capacity.<br />
WHO SHOULD USE THE FRAMEWORK?<br />
The <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> <strong>Framework</strong> outlines an approach to managing misconduct that can be applied by<br />
all public authorities in WA, including State government departments, boards, public utilities, local government<br />
councils <strong>and</strong> universities. It has been written for public sector senior executives, councillors, managers <strong>and</strong> those<br />
with specialist responsibilities for related areas in corporate governance.<br />
Senior Executives: Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) of all agencies <strong>and</strong> councillors in local government have<br />
primary responsibility for addressing integrity issues <strong>and</strong> misconduct matters as part of their wider governance<br />
responsibilities. They also have a responsibility under the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission Act 2003 to<br />
report misconduct to the Commission <strong>and</strong> to ensure that the agency has the internal procedures <strong>and</strong><br />
environment that enables reporting to occur.<br />
If you are a CEO or councillor the framework provides you with a model to meet these legal obligations, identifying<br />
the strategic issues that need to be addressed for you to establish an effective misconduct resistance approach<br />
within your agency. It also provides you with a review mechanism for monitoring <strong>and</strong> benchmarking your agency’s<br />
progress against best practice outcomes.<br />
Managers: If you are a manager or hold a specialist position within an agency, you are responsible for<br />
implementing, integrating <strong>and</strong> monitoring misconduct resistance strategies within your agency on a day-to-day<br />
basis. You can use the framework to support your accountability role <strong>and</strong> report to your senior executives, CEO<br />
or council on the implementation <strong>and</strong> effectiveness of your agency strategies. You can also use the framework to<br />
strengthen, monitor <strong>and</strong> evaluate your own business unit performance <strong>and</strong> progress.<br />
5
HOW DOES MISCONDUCT RESISTANCE FIT INTO EXISTING PUBLIC<br />
SECTOR INTEGRITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORKS?<br />
The public sector operates within a complex arrangement of accountability <strong>and</strong> regulatory requirements. Some of<br />
these, like the criminal justice system, equal opportunity <strong>and</strong> occupational health <strong>and</strong> safety provisions, affect all<br />
Western Australians. Others only relate to the public sector, <strong>and</strong> include a mix of legislation, policies, oversight by<br />
independent bodies <strong>and</strong> administrative review systems.<br />
The reach of the public sector accountability framework extends to all aspects of agency operations, including its<br />
governance <strong>and</strong> administration; financial management; reporting requirements; staff conduct <strong>and</strong>; service delivery.<br />
The general aim of these arrangements is to ensure integrity <strong>and</strong> accountability in the operation of government<br />
services. They protect <strong>and</strong> promote public interests by using sector-wide st<strong>and</strong>ards <strong>and</strong> principles, which are<br />
supported by relevant legislation <strong>and</strong> policy, <strong>and</strong> regulated through oversight <strong>and</strong> reporting arrangements.<br />
The <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission is one part of the wider public sector accountability framework.<br />
The Commission’s main role is to ensure that allegations of misconduct by public officers are responded to<br />
appropriately by building capacity to prevent misconduct, <strong>and</strong> helping agencies deal with specific complaints.<br />
There are other important bodies, each with their own areas of responsibility for public sector integrity <strong>and</strong> accountability.<br />
WA Public Sector Integrity & Accountability <strong>Framework</strong><br />
WA WIDE REqUIREMENTS COVERING BOTH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS<br />
WorksAfe (DoceP)<br />
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH & SAFETY STANDARDS<br />
WA Police<br />
CRIMINAL BEHAvIOUR<br />
equAl oPPorTuniTy coMMission<br />
WORKPLACE HARASSMENT & DISCRIMINATION<br />
state records<br />
records<br />
management<br />
PUBLIC SECTOR<br />
SPECIFIC<br />
REqUIREMENTS<br />
state supply<br />
commission<br />
regulates public sector<br />
purchasing<br />
ombudsman<br />
administrative<br />
actions<br />
& decisions<br />
Auditor General<br />
auditing financial<br />
management<br />
& performance<br />
ccc<br />
individual<br />
misconduct<br />
DlGrD<br />
local government<br />
legislation<br />
& regulations<br />
information<br />
commissioner<br />
FOI decisions<br />
DTf<br />
managing public<br />
sector finances<br />
oPssc<br />
HR st<strong>and</strong>ards<br />
& codes<br />
of ethics<br />
PSc<br />
Public sector<br />
management<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> is just one of the many integrity risks that agencies need to manage. The outcomes necessary for<br />
effective misconduct resistance do not only impact misconduct – they are also relevant to many other areas of<br />
agency integrity <strong>and</strong> accountability, which in turn contribute to an agency’s misconduct resistance. <strong>Misconduct</strong><br />
resistance cannot <strong>and</strong> should not operate in isolation.<br />
The <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> <strong>Framework</strong> seeks to integrate the management of misconduct with other relevant<br />
accountability <strong>and</strong> regulatory requirements, both conceptually <strong>and</strong> practically. It also aims to highlight the importance<br />
of recognising misconduct as a significant business risk <strong>and</strong> addressing it in existing agency governance, staff<br />
conduct <strong>and</strong> service delivery frameworks <strong>and</strong> systems.<br />
6
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS<br />
The conceptual foundation for the <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong>: An Integrated Governance Approach to Protecting Agency Integrity framework draws on the<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission’s own experience; the work of other integrity bodies across Australia; risk management methodology; as well as<br />
ethics <strong>and</strong> organisational development literature.<br />
Special acknowledgement is given to the Independent Commission Against <strong>Corruption</strong> in NSW, the <strong>Crime</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Misconduct</strong> Commission in Qld, <strong>and</strong> the<br />
NSW Auditor General’s Office, whose work in developing similar integrated corruption <strong>and</strong> fraud models has been drawn on extensively.<br />
ISBN : 978 0 9805050 3 0<br />
This publication forms part of the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission’s ‘<strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong>’ series, available from www.ccc.wa.gov.au.<br />
Further information about the Commission can also be found on this website.<br />
DISCLAIMER<br />
This information does not constitute legal advice <strong>and</strong> the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information; or<br />
for any act or omission done in reliance on the information provided, or for any consequences, whether direct or indirect, of any such act or omission.<br />
© 2008 Copyright in this work is held by the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission. Division 3 of the Copyright Act 1968 (Commonwealth) recognises<br />
that limited further use of this material can occur for the purposes of ‘fair dealing’, for example, study, research or criticism, etc. Should you wish to<br />
make use of this material other than as permitted by the Copyright Act 1968, please write to the postal address below.<br />
Postal Address PO Box 7667<br />
Cloisters Square<br />
PERTH WA 6850<br />
Telephone (08) 9215 4888<br />
1800 809 000 (toll free for callers outside metropolitan Perth)<br />
Facsimile (08) 9215 4884<br />
Email<br />
Office Hours<br />
info@ccc.wa.gov.au<br />
8.30 am to 5.00 pm, Monday to Friday<br />
Public responsibility concerns aside, misconduct is bad for business.
An IntegrAted governAnce ApproAch to protectIng Agency IntegrIty<br />
iNTEGrATiON GUiDE
Introducing MIsconduct ResIstance:<br />
an Integrated Governance approach to Protecting agency Integrity<br />
Why is <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> iMpoRtant?<br />
All Western Australian public sector agencies have a responsibility to deal with misconduct to protect <strong>and</strong><br />
promote the integrity of their agency <strong>and</strong> its services.<br />
The Commission has developed the <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> <strong>Framework</strong> to help public sector agencies<br />
better manage misconduct by increasing the positive factors that prevent misconduct from occurring, <strong>and</strong><br />
eliminating the factors that foster misconduct.<br />
The main objective of the framework is to enhance agency strategies in both of these areas to produce<br />
systems that are effective, <strong>and</strong> deliver measurable business benefits. This can be achieved by integrating<br />
misconduct resistance with existing agency integrity, risk management, corporate governance <strong>and</strong> service<br />
delivery systems at the strategic, tactical <strong>and</strong> operational levels of the agency.<br />
The <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> <strong>Framework</strong> is available online at www.ccc.wa.gov.au<br />
hoW can you Build <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> in youR agency?<br />
To achieve successful misconduct resistance your agency needs to create <strong>and</strong> maintain:<br />
The right agency culture<br />
based on<br />
– the right values<br />
– the right leadership<br />
– the right workplace behaviour<br />
The right agency operational strategies<br />
based on<br />
– the right policies<br />
– the right risks<br />
– the right treatment<br />
– the right underst<strong>and</strong>ing<br />
The right agency management environment<br />
based on<br />
– the right priority<br />
– the right business practices<br />
– the right mindset<br />
– the right review<br />
– the right communication<br />
Together, these outcomes <strong>and</strong> key elements provide the benchmark for measuring the adequacy <strong>and</strong><br />
effectiveness of agency misconduct resistance approaches.<br />
While there is no order of importance across the outcomes <strong>and</strong> key elements, they do work interdependently,<br />
<strong>and</strong> agencies should address them all to manage misconduct effectively.<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> generally occurs when a public officer abuses authority for personal gain or<br />
to cause a detriment to another person, or acts contrary to the public interest.<br />
HOW TO USE THE GUiDE >>
What is the integRation guide?<br />
The Integration Guide is a practical starting point, designed to help you implement the <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong><br />
<strong>Framework</strong> in your agency. It is targeted at managers <strong>and</strong> others in specialist positions who have responsibility for<br />
the development, implementation <strong>and</strong> monitoring of agency misconduct resistance strategies.<br />
The guide contains detailed information about each outcome <strong>and</strong> provides a methodology for achieving these<br />
outcomes. The key elements underpinning the outcomes each have a set of Focus Questions <strong>and</strong> Signs of<br />
Success, with supporting Ideas to Build Capacity for each outcome area.<br />
The guide also includes a reference <strong>and</strong> resource section to help you access more detailed information should<br />
you need to.<br />
FOCUS QUESTiONS identify some of the potentially relevant issues that your agency may need to consider<br />
against the key elements. They are designed to help you evaluate how comprehensive <strong>and</strong> effective your current<br />
strategies are, <strong>and</strong> to help identify areas that may need further attention.<br />
SiGNS OF SUCCESS are descriptions of the types of results your agency should be working towards for a particular<br />
key element. They provide examples of what could be seen in agencies that have successfully implemented a key<br />
element.<br />
iDEAS TO BUiLD CApACiTy have been provided for each outcome to help your agency improve management<br />
of a specific issue where a gap or need has been identified. These ideas represent some commonly used<br />
countermeasures, actions <strong>and</strong> strategies that you can implement.<br />
The questions, signs <strong>and</strong> ideas are not exhaustive <strong>and</strong> simply provide a broad-based reference model.<br />
you should customise your use of the guide to capture your agency’s unique business environment <strong>and</strong> needs.<br />
ReMeMBeR<br />
the guide is not<br />
An audit or compliance checklist that must be strictly<br />
followed.<br />
A prescriptive method for addressing the key<br />
elements.<br />
A sequential list of activities.<br />
A definitive list of all questions <strong>and</strong> issues to be<br />
addressed.<br />
A one-size-fits-all model for how to integrate<br />
misconduct resistance.<br />
The only way to approach implementation of<br />
misconduct resistance.<br />
Intended to provide all the right questions or answers.<br />
A m<strong>and</strong>atory document.<br />
the guide is<br />
A place to start when considering how to integrate<br />
misconduct resistance.<br />
An overview of the key elements for your agency to<br />
address.<br />
A prompt of the issues <strong>and</strong> areas to consider.<br />
A reference from which to select areas needing<br />
attention.<br />
A generic model that can be customised to reflect your<br />
agency’s unique business <strong>and</strong> risk environments.<br />
A source of ideas for building capacity where a need<br />
is identified.<br />
A guide for obtaining further information <strong>and</strong><br />
resources.<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> is a significant business risk for all public sector agencies, <strong>and</strong> the costs of failing<br />
to manage it effectively can be severe. In a 2006 survey, KPMG found that 47% <strong>and</strong> 32% of<br />
Australian businesses, including the public sector, respectively reported fraud <strong>and</strong> unethical<br />
conduct by staff. The most commonly reported conduct risks (after fraud) were misuse of<br />
resources, false sick claims <strong>and</strong> disclosures of information.<br />
KPMG Forensic Fraud Survey 2006.
hoW to use the guide<br />
You can use the guide in a number of different ways, depending on your agency’s needs <strong>and</strong> the status of your current<br />
misconduct resistance approach. For example, you can use it as:<br />
— A starting point if you are beginning to tackle misconduct resistance;<br />
— A tool for self assessment <strong>and</strong> progress monitoring if you already have misconduct resistance strategies in place; or<br />
— A tool to benchmark your agency’s performance as a whole (or individual work areas) over time, <strong>and</strong> against the<br />
performance of similar organisations.<br />
Using the guide is as easy as following these five simple steps:<br />
STEp 1: Decide which of the outcomes <strong>and</strong> key elements you need to address first.<br />
(There is no set formula for where to start – your agency’s priorities <strong>and</strong> needs should form the agenda.)<br />
STEp 2: Try to answer each focus question under the key element you have chosen. This will help<br />
you assess how comprehensive <strong>and</strong> effective your current strategies are. Not all questions may be<br />
relevant to your agency situation.<br />
After you have addressed each question, you should be able to identify gaps <strong>and</strong> areas for improvement,<br />
<strong>and</strong> reach a conclusion about your agency’s overall performance.<br />
Hesitating to readily answer a question may indicate that further review or assessment is required.<br />
(Always consider whether the focus questions adequately cover all the issues relevant to your agency.<br />
Depending on your core business <strong>and</strong> risk environment, there may be other questions that have not been<br />
included.)<br />
STEp 3: Compare your current agency performance against the corresponding Signs of Success to<br />
benchmark your progress. This will also help you decide whether specific areas of the key element<br />
require further development <strong>and</strong> what priority they should be given.<br />
(Remember, these signs are indicative only – there may be other indicators that are more relevant to your<br />
agency’s operating environment.)<br />
STEp 4: Use the ideas to Build Capacity together with your own ideas to create an action plan for<br />
dealing with the areas that have been identified as needing improvement.<br />
STEp 5: Use Steps 1 to 3 to review your progress in the areas that were targeted for improvement.<br />
NOTE:<br />
Every agency has a different level of misconduct resistance – one agency’s strategies may be more<br />
comprehensive <strong>and</strong> effective than another’s.<br />
Your agency may not need to address all of the key elements at this time. However, it is important<br />
that you periodically review your misconduct resistance approach so that you are aware of your<br />
performance against all key elements, <strong>and</strong> to ensure that you stay on the right track.
THE RIGHT AGENCY CULTURE<br />
AGENCY CULTURE VALUES INTEGRITY<br />
AND IS INTOLERANT OF MISCONDUCT<br />
It is not enough to rely on legislation, codes of conduct <strong>and</strong> control systems to build<br />
a misconduct resistant agency. While it’s important to express agency values in<br />
official communications, staff need to underst<strong>and</strong> the real meaning of these values<br />
<strong>and</strong> see them applied in their workplace <strong>and</strong> in their leaders’ behaviour.<br />
Agency values, the behaviour of the leaders of an agency <strong>and</strong> workplace culture have<br />
great influence on misconduct resistance. Failing to effectively manage any one of these<br />
elements can have severe consequences, such as damage to your agency’s reputation,<br />
<strong>and</strong> a decrease in efficiency <strong>and</strong> long-term sustainability.<br />
Actions speak louder than words. Your agency culture can greatly influence how your<br />
staff will behave – it has the potential to make an ethical person act unethically <strong>and</strong> vice<br />
versa. While official policies may specify what management would like to happen, it is<br />
your agency culture that determines what happens in practice.<br />
The RIGHT AGENCY Culture
If you are a leader, you play a key role in shaping your agency culture as other staff look<br />
to you for guidance. If your behaviour doesn’t reflect the stated values, it’s likely that<br />
your staff will place less importance on these values.<br />
A misconduct resistant workplace promotes individual responsibility <strong>and</strong> accountability<br />
by working with its people <strong>and</strong> involving them in the development of integrity strategies.<br />
It also encourages staff to embrace agency values <strong>and</strong> codes of conduct, <strong>and</strong> use them<br />
to develop their own high st<strong>and</strong>ards, norms <strong>and</strong> controls. Given the constant change in<br />
the operating environment within the public sector, maintaining a misconduct resistant<br />
culture as a visible <strong>and</strong> important part of your everyday working life will pose an ongoing<br />
challenge.<br />
Making sure that your staff, customers <strong>and</strong> others who interact with<br />
your agency are aware of your agency’s commitment to integrity <strong>and</strong><br />
misconduct resistance can lead to higher st<strong>and</strong>ards across all of your<br />
business activities – it can improve decision making, increase customer<br />
confidence, <strong>and</strong> increase staff morale <strong>and</strong> productivity.
the right values<br />
Your agency’s communication, actions <strong>and</strong> decisions reflect its values <strong>and</strong><br />
public interest principles.<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Focus Questions<br />
Does your agency underst<strong>and</strong> the importance of integrity <strong>and</strong> misconduct resistance to<br />
business outcomes, <strong>and</strong> do your values <strong>and</strong> policies reflect this?<br />
Does your agency have a clear set of values that are consistent with public duty principles?<br />
Do your agency’s Human Resource processes (e.g. recruitment, promotion <strong>and</strong> performance<br />
management etc.) use the agency values as benchmarks to assess suitability?<br />
Does your agency’s code of conduct include both high level aspirational statements <strong>and</strong><br />
statements about behavioural expectations that provide a benchmark for dealing with<br />
misconduct?<br />
Does your agency’s code of conduct/values state what it means to act in the public interest in<br />
the agency workplace?<br />
Has your agency involved staff <strong>and</strong> key stakeholders in the development <strong>and</strong> review of agency<br />
values <strong>and</strong> policies to ensure their continued relevance?<br />
Does your agency have a process for ensuring that all official communication (e.g. policies,<br />
guidelines, statements, publications etc.) is in line with your agency’s values?<br />
How does your agency ensure that all of its decisions <strong>and</strong> actions align with its values?<br />
Does your agency support <strong>and</strong> encourage managers to act in the public interest when<br />
resolving integrity issues <strong>and</strong> prioritising issues?<br />
Do your agency’s policies <strong>and</strong> practices include st<strong>and</strong>ards that reflect your agency’s values<br />
<strong>and</strong> encourage your staff to act in the public interest?<br />
Has there been an evaluation of how well your agency’s values have been promoted,<br />
understood <strong>and</strong> integrated into agency operations <strong>and</strong> decision making?<br />
How does your agency ensure that values are communicated to your staff, customers <strong>and</strong><br />
suppliers regularly; <strong>and</strong> does your agency monitor whether the communication is received,<br />
understood <strong>and</strong> accepted?<br />
Does your agency have an induction for new staff at all levels which addresses the importance<br />
of acting with integrity <strong>and</strong> in the public interest?<br />
Do your agency’s other training programmes address the importance of acting with integrity<br />
<strong>and</strong> in the public interest?<br />
Does your agency measure the impact of your agency’s values on staff morale <strong>and</strong> productivity,<br />
customer satisfaction, <strong>and</strong> agency reputation?<br />
SignS of SucceSS<br />
Your agency operates using a clear set of values which are consistent with public interest<br />
principles. These values are reflected in your agency’s code of conduct, which is periodically<br />
reviewed with staff involvement.<br />
The code of conduct is actively promoted both inside <strong>and</strong> outside your agency. It is featured<br />
in your agency’s publications; <strong>and</strong> it is recognised by staff in everyday practices <strong>and</strong><br />
documentation, such as contracts with suppliers.<br />
Human Resource policies <strong>and</strong> practices within your agency reflect a commitment to recruiting<br />
people who share agency values, <strong>and</strong> to providing staff development which helps staff carry<br />
out their duties with integrity <strong>and</strong> in the public interest.<br />
Your agency has a strategy to ensure that all official written communication, policies,<br />
programmes, work practices <strong>and</strong> decision making processes are in line with agency values,<br />
reflect misconduct resistance objectives, <strong>and</strong> link to business outcomes. The effectiveness<br />
of this strategy is closely monitored <strong>and</strong> reviewed.<br />
Your agency ensures that staff, customers <strong>and</strong> others who interact with your agency know<br />
about your agency’s values, commitment to integrity <strong>and</strong> misconduct resistance. Your<br />
agency’s training <strong>and</strong> induction programmes, <strong>and</strong> other forms of agency communication are<br />
used to promote higher st<strong>and</strong>ards across all your business activities.
the right leadership<br />
Leaders within your agency set an example of integrity with their own behaviour,<br />
their communication <strong>and</strong> their responses to misconduct by others.<br />
Focus Questions<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Does your agency assess a c<strong>and</strong>idate’s commitment to integrity before appointing them to a<br />
senior management role?<br />
Do leaders underst<strong>and</strong> that they play a key role in promoting misconduct resistance?<br />
Do leaders set the tone for integrity by way of example, <strong>and</strong> do they promote your agency<br />
values to others?<br />
Do leaders reinforce the effects of proper conduct on business outcomes, <strong>and</strong> the risks<br />
associated with misconduct?<br />
As integrity issues arise, are they addressed in your staff <strong>and</strong> business unit meetings?<br />
Are agency values promoted in your staff <strong>and</strong> business unit meetings?<br />
Do management performance agreements <strong>and</strong> remuneration strategies refer to responsibility<br />
for promoting your agency’s values within the workplace?<br />
Does your agency provide an internal or external leadership programme which addresses<br />
integrity issues <strong>and</strong> is compulsory for all managers <strong>and</strong> optional for aspiring leaders?<br />
What systems exist for supporting those staff who act with integrity <strong>and</strong> for dealing with<br />
those who breach your agency’s code of conduct?<br />
Are your staff members confident in the integrity of their leaders?<br />
Does your agency include in its measurement of individual work unit performance efficiency<br />
indicators, such as customer satisfaction, complaints about staff conduct, turnover levels<br />
etc.?<br />
SignS of SucceSS<br />
Your agency appoints managers who demonstrate a high level of underst<strong>and</strong>ing of integrity<br />
issues <strong>and</strong> their impact on agency performance. Performance reviews monitor your<br />
managers’ ability to promote integrity in the workplace <strong>and</strong> their ongoing commitment to it.<br />
Your staff are confident that managers abide by the same integrity st<strong>and</strong>ards <strong>and</strong> that they<br />
promote the importance of acting with integrity.<br />
Your staff have the skills <strong>and</strong> ability necessary to lead with integrity within their business<br />
units.<br />
Your leaders <strong>and</strong> managers underst<strong>and</strong> the relationship between agency culture, misconduct<br />
resistance <strong>and</strong> business outcomes, <strong>and</strong> communicate it to their staff. They act with integrity<br />
<strong>and</strong> clearly communicate the expected st<strong>and</strong>ards, <strong>and</strong> intervene when misconduct occurs.<br />
Your agency uses efficiency indicators, such as staff morale <strong>and</strong> productivity, customer<br />
satisfaction, <strong>and</strong> integrity related complaints, to monitor individual <strong>and</strong> work unit<br />
performance.
The RIGhT woRkplACe behAvIouR<br />
Your workplace culture encourages staff to accept personal responsibility for<br />
behaving according to agency values <strong>and</strong> in the public interest.<br />
FoCus QuesTIoNs<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Do supervision, performance reviews, promotion <strong>and</strong> recognition processes take into account<br />
staff behaviour concerning your agency values <strong>and</strong> st<strong>and</strong>ards of conduct?<br />
Does your agency consistently <strong>and</strong> fairly deal with misconduct issues across all agency<br />
employee groups <strong>and</strong> contractors?<br />
Are your staff, contractors <strong>and</strong> senior executives required to formally acknowledge the code<br />
of conduct in any way?<br />
Does the behaviour of your staff show that they take full responsibility for behaving according<br />
to agency values?<br />
Does your agency culture support the practice of reporting misconduct by staff <strong>and</strong><br />
inappropriate behaviour of suppliers <strong>and</strong> customers?<br />
Does your agency support those who report misconduct in good faith?<br />
Does your agency raise integrity awareness through integrity training for staff, customer<br />
service charters, <strong>and</strong> other publicity on the rights <strong>and</strong> responsibilities of customers <strong>and</strong><br />
contractors?<br />
Does your agency have programmes that encourage staff to value integrity, transparency <strong>and</strong><br />
responsible reporting?<br />
Does your agency use performance indicators in monitoring <strong>and</strong> evaluating its culture?<br />
Are your staff members aware of the negative impact on business outcomes <strong>and</strong> specific<br />
business risks associated with misconduct?<br />
Does your agency monitor costs associated with reported incidents of misconduct<br />
(e.g. material losses; resources invested in investigation; service <strong>and</strong> customer losses;<br />
damage to reputation, etc.) <strong>and</strong> measure this against changes in your agency culture?<br />
SIgnS of SucceSS<br />
Your agency actively encourages personal commitment to its integrity framework through<br />
staff participation during the development, implementation <strong>and</strong> review of the framework;<br />
<strong>and</strong> then throughout each person’s appointment through ongoing awareness <strong>and</strong> staff<br />
development initiatives.<br />
Agency staff underst<strong>and</strong> the behavioural st<strong>and</strong>ards expected of them <strong>and</strong> the impact of<br />
misconduct on your agency’s performance, <strong>and</strong> are aware that breaches of agency code will<br />
be dealt with accordingly.<br />
Your agency widely communicates to external stakeholders that it is committed to integrity,<br />
that it will not tolerate dishonest dealings <strong>and</strong> that it expects stakeholders to report<br />
misconduct.<br />
Your agency has a programme for benchmarking agency culture <strong>and</strong> uses this information<br />
to evaluate agency performance; assess the costs <strong>and</strong> benefits of agency integrity systems;<br />
<strong>and</strong> identify areas for improvement.
!<br />
IdeAs To buIld CApACITY<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Adopt <strong>and</strong> promote ethical decision making processes within your agency.<br />
Include integrity issues in your agency induction, education <strong>and</strong> awareness<br />
programmes.<br />
Continually reinforce agency values <strong>and</strong> public interest principles – not just<br />
during training programmes.<br />
Include integrity issues in your agency discussions.<br />
Establish leadership, management counselling or mentoring programmes<br />
which focus on integrity issues.<br />
Establish clear <strong>and</strong> reasonable behavioural expectations through codes of<br />
conduct, performance measures <strong>and</strong> business processes.<br />
Communicate your agency values <strong>and</strong> their importance to the performance of<br />
your agency to key stakeholders through a targeted communication plan.<br />
Consider public interest <strong>and</strong> misconduct resistance objectives when reviewing<br />
your agency policies <strong>and</strong> procedures.<br />
Assess whether your staff underst<strong>and</strong>, accept <strong>and</strong> apply agency values to their<br />
day-to-day work.<br />
Implement a rolling integrity awareness programme through your agency<br />
publications such as newsletters, websites, policy statements on misconduct<br />
risk areas.<br />
Publicise misconduct resistance <strong>and</strong> integrity themes using promotional<br />
strategies such as campaigns, slogans, screen savers, online materials,<br />
posters, etc.<br />
Involve all employees in the development of your agency values.<br />
Employ values <strong>and</strong> public interest principles in your recruitment, selection, <strong>and</strong><br />
performance management processes <strong>and</strong> criteria.<br />
Set up an in-house process to decide on integrity issues <strong>and</strong> ethical dilemmas.<br />
Develop a recognition <strong>and</strong> rewards programme for high integrity st<strong>and</strong>ards.<br />
Use case studies <strong>and</strong> real life examples to promote the business benefits of<br />
proper staff conduct <strong>and</strong> the costs of staff misconduct.<br />
Use structured questionnaires to evaluate the current culture in your agency.<br />
Measure the impact of culture on your agency performance indicators such<br />
as productivity levels, staff morale, customer satisfaction, agency reputation,<br />
appeals against agency decisions, complaints data, etc.<br />
Establish a system for screening your potential employees, suppliers <strong>and</strong><br />
customers.<br />
When required, provide copies of agency values, code of conduct, complaints<br />
<strong>and</strong> disciplinary policies to your customers <strong>and</strong>/or contractors.
THE RIGHT AGENCY OPERATIONAL STRATEGIES<br />
AGENCY POLICIES AND SYSTEMS SUPPORT<br />
THE EFFECTIVE TREATMENT OF MISCONDUCT RISKS<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> represents a significant business risk for agencies, <strong>and</strong> if unmanaged,<br />
it can damage your agency reputation, destroy public trust <strong>and</strong> sabotage business<br />
efficiency <strong>and</strong> effectiveness. Managing misconduct risks is a key part of your<br />
agency’s overall misconduct resistance approach <strong>and</strong> is essential to good corporate<br />
governance.<br />
Agency policies give direction to strategies for dealing with misconduct <strong>and</strong> are important<br />
in effective risk management. They should be comprehensive, covering the full range<br />
of potential misconduct; <strong>and</strong> they should communicate your agency’s commitment to<br />
integrity <strong>and</strong> its firm position on dealing with misconduct.<br />
To ensure the success of risk management programmes within your agency, all staff <strong>and</strong><br />
management must underst<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> commit to your agency’s risk management approach.<br />
They should be fully aware of how they are expected to behave should they become<br />
aware or suspicious of misconduct.<br />
THE RIGHT AGENCY OPERATIONAL STRATEGIES
An effective treatment programme for dealing with misconduct should be based on a<br />
comprehensive risk management system that:<br />
w Identifies <strong>and</strong> analyses current <strong>and</strong> emerging risks across all discrete agency functions<br />
<strong>and</strong> operations;<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Embeds misconduct risks in your agency’s overall risk management plan;<br />
Includes proactive measures for increasing integrity <strong>and</strong> preventing misconduct; detection<br />
measures for identifying misconduct; <strong>and</strong> reactive measures for investigating <strong>and</strong><br />
responding to misconduct; <strong>and</strong><br />
Closely monitors your agency’s risk exposure, <strong>and</strong> reviews <strong>and</strong> improves programmes for<br />
dealing with misconduct.<br />
Each stage of the risk management process will require adequate resources.<br />
Experience has shown that one of the most common misconduct detection<br />
methods is internal reporting by staff. This means that the effectiveness of<br />
treatment programmes greatly depends on the integrity of the people who<br />
create, administer <strong>and</strong> monitor them.
THE RIGHT POLICIES<br />
Your policy platform provides a solid foundation for establishing your agency’s<br />
treatment environment <strong>and</strong> communicates your commitment, values <strong>and</strong> business<br />
practices for misconduct resistance.<br />
FOCuS QuESTIONS<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Did your agency consult with staff <strong>and</strong> key stakeholders (e.g. internal corporate governance, risk<br />
management committees, customer groups) during the policy development stage?<br />
Does policy clearly communicate your agency’s misconduct resistance approach (e.g. your<br />
agency’s values, misconduct resistance objectives <strong>and</strong> no tolerance position)?<br />
Does policy address all the misconduct risks that are specific to your agency?<br />
Is policy based on an integrated risk management approach <strong>and</strong> implemented with the support of<br />
appropriate guidelines <strong>and</strong> procedures?<br />
Has your agency identified <strong>and</strong> linked all policies that relate to misconduct risk, ensuring they<br />
reflect consistent principles <strong>and</strong> objectives, <strong>and</strong> eliminated any duplicate or redundant policies?<br />
Is there a routine review <strong>and</strong> policy amendment process to reflect changes in your agency’s<br />
operating environment?<br />
Does your agency monitor <strong>and</strong> assess the implementation <strong>and</strong> effectiveness of policy<br />
(e.g. levels of compliance, whether set objectives are achieved, work practice st<strong>and</strong>ards)?<br />
Does your agency monitor policy breaches <strong>and</strong> assess their impact on business outcomes<br />
(e.g. st<strong>and</strong>ards of service delivery, customer satisfaction)?<br />
Is policy easily accessible to staff?<br />
SignS of SuccESS<br />
Your agency has documented policy that clearly states its objectives <strong>and</strong> your agency’s approach<br />
to misconduct <strong>and</strong> building misconduct resistance.<br />
All integrity <strong>and</strong> misconduct related policies, guidelines <strong>and</strong> supporting procedures reflect the<br />
same underlying approach <strong>and</strong> position on misconduct, without contradicting each other.<br />
Policy is continuously reviewed <strong>and</strong> updated to reflect changing conditions, <strong>and</strong> is a point of<br />
reference for staff in effectively dealing with misconduct issues.<br />
Your agency closely monitors policy implementation, assesses whether the work practice<br />
st<strong>and</strong>ards it sets have been met, <strong>and</strong> measures its effectiveness against stated objectives <strong>and</strong> its<br />
impact on business outcomes.
THE RIGHT RISkS<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> risk identification <strong>and</strong> assessment are part of the wider corporate risk<br />
management planning process <strong>and</strong> include all of your agency’s functions <strong>and</strong><br />
operational areas.<br />
FOCuS QuESTIONS<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Does your agency underst<strong>and</strong> what misconduct is <strong>and</strong> what it might look like in your agency?<br />
Is your agency aware of all misconduct risks, including those which are unique to the core business<br />
of your agency, <strong>and</strong> those that are prevalent across the public sector?<br />
Have specific misconduct risks been linked to specific types of behaviours?<br />
Has your agency implemented a comprehensive risk identification process that involves<br />
consultation with all stakeholders, <strong>and</strong> identifies potential misconduct risks from internal <strong>and</strong><br />
external sources in all areas?<br />
Does your agency use the information obtained from misconduct <strong>and</strong> complaint reports <strong>and</strong> from<br />
reviews of systems <strong>and</strong> procedures to update its risk identification <strong>and</strong> assessment processes?<br />
Does your agency use a customised risk identification approach <strong>and</strong> language to identify<br />
misconduct risks within your particular agency?<br />
Does your agency underst<strong>and</strong> the impact of specific misconduct risks on business outcomes, <strong>and</strong><br />
can this impact be measured?<br />
Have your agency misconduct risks been evaluated against corporate risk criteria <strong>and</strong> prioritised<br />
for treatment as part of the corporate risk management plan?<br />
Does your agency use tailored criteria which reflect its business environment to ensure that the<br />
priority assessment is accurate in terms of the impact of misconduct risks on business outcomes<br />
(e.g. the dollar value may not be the best criterion for determining the damage caused by loss of<br />
public trust)?<br />
Is there a designated person, group or committee responsible for coordinating the assessment of<br />
misconduct risks <strong>and</strong> integrating it with corporate risk management planning processes?<br />
SignS of SuccESS<br />
Your agency has drawn on all stakeholder viewpoints to develop a comprehensive underst<strong>and</strong>ing<br />
of its misconduct risks, both those inherent to core business <strong>and</strong> those common across the<br />
sector. Your agency periodically reappraises its current misconduct risks <strong>and</strong> emerging threats in<br />
all work areas <strong>and</strong> across all operational <strong>and</strong> administrative functions.<br />
All identified risks are analysed, evaluated against your agency risk criteria <strong>and</strong> their impact on<br />
business outcomes quantified using relevant measures. You have included a prioritised list of<br />
misconduct risks requiring further treatment in the corporate risk management plan.<br />
Responsibility for the implementation <strong>and</strong> monitoring of misconduct risk assessment <strong>and</strong> planning<br />
processes has been allocated to a person or group who are also represented on the corporate<br />
risk management committee (or equivalent body).<br />
Your agency’s methodology for misconduct risk management meets recognised best practice<br />
st<strong>and</strong>ards <strong>and</strong> uses a customised process <strong>and</strong> language to address misconduct.<br />
10
THE RIGHT TREATmENT<br />
Your misconduct treatment programme is commensurate with the level <strong>and</strong> nature<br />
of risk you face, comprehensive <strong>and</strong> adequately resourced, <strong>and</strong> is subject to<br />
ongoing monitoring <strong>and</strong> review.<br />
FOCuS QuESTIONS<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Has your agency evaluated <strong>and</strong> developed treatment plans for those misconduct risks that have<br />
been identified as high priority?<br />
Do your misconduct treatment plans cover all aspects of business activities, service delivery <strong>and</strong><br />
‘corporate health’, not just financial operations?<br />
Does your agency misconduct treatment programme have a dual focus? That is, does it both<br />
eliminate <strong>and</strong> restrict factors which increase the likelihood of misconduct; <strong>and</strong> encourage <strong>and</strong><br />
increase factors which inhibit misconduct?<br />
Do your misconduct treatment strategies cover the areas of prevention, detection <strong>and</strong><br />
response?<br />
Does each misconduct treatment strategy clearly allocate responsibilities, resources <strong>and</strong><br />
timeframes for implementing <strong>and</strong> monitoring mechanisms?<br />
Does your agency have an ongoing process for detecting misconduct, <strong>and</strong> if so, how does it<br />
do this (e.g. external audits, analysis of business data for indicators of misconduct or reporting<br />
systems)?<br />
Is there a regular audit programme that independently reviews the adequacy of your misconduct<br />
treatment strategies <strong>and</strong> assesses compliance with the misconduct treatment programme<br />
throughout your agency?<br />
Does your agency have a management information system that captures <strong>and</strong> tracks all reportable<br />
incidents of misconduct from the initial complaint, throughout the notification <strong>and</strong> investigation<br />
process, <strong>and</strong> through to collation for analysis purposes, <strong>and</strong> for performance <strong>and</strong> external<br />
reporting?<br />
Is there an internal misconduct reporting system available to your staff <strong>and</strong> stakeholders that<br />
extends beyond normal communication channels <strong>and</strong> provides anonymity?<br />
Do your staff <strong>and</strong> other stakeholders use the internal reporting system; <strong>and</strong> is the system<br />
evaluated to determine its effectiveness <strong>and</strong> the protection it affords complainants?<br />
Does your agency have a policy <strong>and</strong> procedure for responding to misconduct, supported by a<br />
complaint <strong>and</strong> notification h<strong>and</strong>ling system?<br />
Does your agency have an effective internal investigation process with a clear accountability<br />
structure for response to <strong>and</strong> escalation of misconduct investigations?<br />
Are there established protocols <strong>and</strong> procedures for reporting matters to external authorities; <strong>and</strong><br />
are they followed <strong>and</strong> measured?<br />
Does your agency review the results of misconduct investigations to identify systems issues <strong>and</strong><br />
underlying causes, <strong>and</strong> does it amend misconduct controls accordingly (e.g. emerging threats,<br />
policy <strong>and</strong> procedural gaps <strong>and</strong> areas for improvement)?<br />
Has the treatment programme been reviewed following updated risk reassessments <strong>and</strong> changes<br />
in your agency’s operational systems to determine whether the strategies are still relevant <strong>and</strong><br />
address your agency’s day-to-day issues at this point in time?<br />
Does your agency use available performance data such as complaints information, customer<br />
surveys, compliance audits, etc. to monitor <strong>and</strong> evaluate the effectiveness of the misconduct<br />
treatment programme?<br />
Does your agency ‘cost’ or quantify the impact of reported misconduct (e.g. resources allocated<br />
to the investigation <strong>and</strong> management of misconduct incidents, loss of resources, impact<br />
on service delivery <strong>and</strong> productivity, damage to agency reputation <strong>and</strong> staff morale, etc.)?<br />
Is this information used for the cost-benefit analysis of your agency’s misconduct treatment<br />
programme?<br />
11
noTES<br />
SignS of SuccESS<br />
Your agency has a comprehensive misconduct risk treatment programme that addresses:<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
All high risk agency functions <strong>and</strong> activities;<br />
The recommended measures for eliminating <strong>and</strong> minimising the impact of these risks;<br />
Assigned roles <strong>and</strong> responsibilities; <strong>and</strong><br />
An ongoing improvement system that includes regular monitoring <strong>and</strong> review, updated risk<br />
assessments <strong>and</strong> performance data.<br />
Your agency policies <strong>and</strong> procedures provide comprehensive coverage of identified high priority<br />
misconduct risk areas/issues, <strong>and</strong> give clear guidance to staff on how to deal with them effectively.<br />
These are periodically reviewed to ensure they remain current <strong>and</strong> relevant in addressing the<br />
day-to-day misconduct risks facing staff.<br />
Your agency has a centralised management system for reported misconduct incidents that:<br />
w Identifies <strong>and</strong> records information about matters across different complaint <strong>and</strong> Human<br />
Resource systems;<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Manages internal <strong>and</strong> external reporting; analyses trends <strong>and</strong> practice issues; <strong>and</strong><br />
Ensures an appropriate <strong>and</strong> consistent response.<br />
Your CEO can go to one point within the agency to learn about the extent of misconduct matters<br />
across the entire agency, how these matters are being dealt with <strong>and</strong> whether external reporting<br />
obligations are being met.<br />
The responsibilities for implementing <strong>and</strong> monitoring the treatment programme, <strong>and</strong> the dayto-day<br />
responsibilities for implementing <strong>and</strong> monitoring individual treatment strategies are<br />
clearly defined <strong>and</strong> shared among managers <strong>and</strong> staff. Adequate resources in terms of training<br />
(investigators, auditors, etc.), funding <strong>and</strong> time have been allocated to the programme.<br />
Your agency collects information about the costs of reported misconduct, which includes response<br />
costs <strong>and</strong> costs to business outcomes, <strong>and</strong> uses this information in its cost-benefit analysis of<br />
individual misconduct resistance strategies <strong>and</strong> its overall approach.<br />
12
THE RIGHT uNdERSTANdING<br />
Your staff <strong>and</strong> managers have a common underst<strong>and</strong>ing of what misconduct is. They<br />
embrace your agency’s st<strong>and</strong> on misconduct, as stated in the agency policy <strong>and</strong> treatment<br />
programme, <strong>and</strong> know how to respond should they become aware of misconduct.<br />
FOCuS QuESTIONS<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Do staff underst<strong>and</strong> what types of behaviour constitute misconduct <strong>and</strong> which of your agency<br />
functions <strong>and</strong> activities have been identified as high risk?<br />
Are staff informed of emerging misconduct risks <strong>and</strong> issues?<br />
Does your agency encourage staff at all levels to get actively involved in all stages of the<br />
misconduct risk identification, assessment <strong>and</strong> treatment planning process; <strong>and</strong> to contribute to<br />
managing risk by developing <strong>and</strong> adopting better controls?<br />
Do staff know about the misconduct treatment programme <strong>and</strong> can they access your documented<br />
treatment plan?<br />
Is there an ongoing communication strategy to ensure misconduct related policies <strong>and</strong> procedures<br />
<strong>and</strong> other treatment strategies are widely distributed <strong>and</strong> understood; has the effectiveness of<br />
these strategies been assessed?<br />
Do the corporate induction programme <strong>and</strong> other staff training programmes include information<br />
about your agency’s misconduct resistance policies <strong>and</strong> treatment programme?<br />
Do staff clearly underst<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> accept their responsibility to report suspected misconduct, <strong>and</strong><br />
does your agency culture support this?<br />
Does your agency map its internal reporting data over time <strong>and</strong> by work unit to identify trends,<br />
<strong>and</strong> does it analyse the data against performance data <strong>and</strong> inherent risk profiles?<br />
Has your agency assessed the level of staff underst<strong>and</strong>ing about misconduct <strong>and</strong> your agency’s<br />
approach to its management?<br />
SignS of SuccESS<br />
Your induction, education, <strong>and</strong> awareness raising programmes provide staff with enough<br />
information to enable them to identify, prevent <strong>and</strong> report suspected misconduct.<br />
Your agency’s internal reporting system is well publicised <strong>and</strong> easily accessible. It encourages staff<br />
to report misconduct <strong>and</strong> reassures them that supporting arrangements will protect individuals<br />
<strong>and</strong> their confidentiality as far as possible.<br />
Your staff know that misconduct will not be tolerated <strong>and</strong>, depending on their level of responsibility,<br />
they are given information about the prevention, detection <strong>and</strong> response measures that are in<br />
place.<br />
Your agency encourages all staff to contribute to agency risk management strategies, to develop<br />
<strong>and</strong> adopt better controls in their work units, <strong>and</strong> to alert management to potential systemic<br />
risks.<br />
Your agency keeps staff constantly aware of misconduct issues through regular communication<br />
e.g. provides updates on changes to misconduct related policies <strong>and</strong> procedures, <strong>and</strong> publicises<br />
information about emerging risks <strong>and</strong> integrity issues.<br />
13
!<br />
IdEAS TO BuILd CAPACITY<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Undertake a misconduct risk identification process within your agency.<br />
Use different methodologies such as independent assessments, internal<br />
misconduct risk surveys or facilitated workshops, customer interviews, analysis<br />
of audit outcomes, or use available misconduct risk checklists.<br />
Allocate misconduct risk coordination responsibility to a person or a committee.<br />
Introduce misconduct awareness training according to staff’s level of<br />
responsibility, with specialist <strong>and</strong> specific training for high risk functions <strong>and</strong><br />
different staff groups.<br />
Establish a misconduct incident register.<br />
Establish internal reporting systems such as anonymous hotlines <strong>and</strong><br />
Whistleblower (PID) Programmes.<br />
Survey your staff, clients, suppliers <strong>and</strong> other stakeholders to assess their<br />
willingness to use available reporting mechanisms.<br />
Establish protocols <strong>and</strong> procedures for external reporting.<br />
Introduce st<strong>and</strong>ardised investigation practices based on established best<br />
practice models.<br />
Review your current agency policies <strong>and</strong> procedures to identify any gaps where<br />
additional guidance may be needed.<br />
Develop policies <strong>and</strong> procedures to address specific high risk functions/activities<br />
where gaps exist.<br />
Conduct staff surveys to assess awareness levels, attitudes to <strong>and</strong> perceptions<br />
about misconduct <strong>and</strong>/or aspects of your agency’s treatment programme.<br />
Develop customer, supplier <strong>and</strong> contractor information guides outlining best<br />
practice in business dealings with your agency.<br />
14
THE RIGHT AGENCY MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT<br />
MISCONDUCT RESISTANCE IS AN INTEGRATED<br />
AND ESTABLISHED COMPONENT OF AGENCY LIFE<br />
Having the right agency culture <strong>and</strong> operational strategies will not by themselves achieve<br />
effective misconduct resistance. To be effective, misconduct resistance must be driven from<br />
the top, embedded in your agency management environment <strong>and</strong> integrated into all agency<br />
business activities. This requires high level commitment <strong>and</strong> ownership, with accountability for<br />
implementation of the misconduct resistance approach being allocated at the senior executive<br />
level, where there is sufficient authority to ensure it is given effect.<br />
Your management environment provides the foundation for how the agency operates. It incorporates<br />
your agency business ethos, systems <strong>and</strong> structures, <strong>and</strong> the assignment of authority <strong>and</strong><br />
responsibility. The right management environment will:<br />
w Instil your agency with an attitude of integrity <strong>and</strong> misconduct consciousness;<br />
w Promote misconduct resistance as integral to your agency’s performance;<br />
w Reinforce the benefits to your general business efficiency <strong>and</strong> effectiveness; <strong>and</strong><br />
w Integrate misconduct resistance so completely into the strategic, tactical <strong>and</strong> operational<br />
business activities of your agency that it becomes a fundamental part of business for everyone.<br />
While agency management systems <strong>and</strong> structures can provide an environment conducive to<br />
building misconduct resistance, the actions of the people charged with relevant responsibilities<br />
will determine whether misconduct resistance objectives are actually achieved.<br />
THE RIGHT AGENCY MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT
When staff have internalised your agency’s misconduct resistance approach <strong>and</strong> become involved in<br />
<strong>and</strong> committed to its achievement, the approach will become an established part of the way things<br />
are done, <strong>and</strong> something everyone knows so well that they no longer have to think about it.<br />
It is important to review <strong>and</strong> evaluate your agency’s misconduct resistance approach to maintain<br />
its effectiveness <strong>and</strong> relevance. Regular review is also a way to monitor the integration <strong>and</strong><br />
performance of your approach.<br />
To document <strong>and</strong> communicate your agency’s misconduct resistance approach, your agency<br />
needs to articulate:<br />
w Why is the approach needed (e.g. legislative requirements, expected benefits to agency<br />
performance <strong>and</strong> business outcomes)?<br />
w How will the agency build misconduct resistance? This entails drawing together all relevant<br />
policies, systems, management practices etc.<br />
w Who is responsible for implementing your agency’s approach?<br />
w What measures <strong>and</strong> performance indicators will be used in assessing performance <strong>and</strong><br />
business benefits?<br />
Informing staff, customer <strong>and</strong> contractor groups about your agency’s st<strong>and</strong> on<br />
misconduct can improve your agency’s reputation <strong>and</strong> community confidence.<br />
Having informed stakeholders can also help prevent practices <strong>and</strong> dealings contrary<br />
to your agency st<strong>and</strong>ards; <strong>and</strong> they are more likely to uncover other situations that<br />
could impact negatively on the integrity <strong>and</strong> effectiveness of your agency.
THE RIGHT pRIORITY<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance is given high level ownership <strong>and</strong> central oversight.<br />
FOCus QuEsTIONs<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Does senior management underst<strong>and</strong> the business benefits of misconduct resistance <strong>and</strong> treat the<br />
risk of misconduct seriously (even in the absence of recently detected incidents)?<br />
Has your CEO given a public commitment to misconduct resistance as an agency priority?<br />
Has responsibility for the implementation <strong>and</strong> monitoring of your agency misconduct resistance<br />
approach been allocated to a position/committee with sufficient authority to ensure it is given effect?<br />
Do those responsible for the agency misconduct resistance approach have access to the appropriate<br />
skills, knowledge, <strong>and</strong> experience to discharge this responsibility?<br />
Is there regular progress reporting to the executive management team against agreed misconduct<br />
resistance objectives, milestones <strong>and</strong> performance indicators?<br />
Are all business units <strong>and</strong> others with delegated responsibilities required to centrally report on their<br />
own progress in implementing the plan?<br />
Does your agency allocate an appropriate level of resources (financial <strong>and</strong> human) to managing<br />
misconduct successfully?<br />
Is information about your agency misconduct resistance approach included in the annual report or<br />
other performance reports?<br />
SIgnS of SucceSS<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance is treated as a top corporate priority with accountability for its implementation<br />
vested at the senior executive level.<br />
Your agency has a mechanism for central oversight of the misconduct resistance approach which<br />
includes a process for centralised reporting on progress back to the corporate executive.<br />
Senior management has an observably high level of ‘risk consciousness’ regarding misconduct <strong>and</strong><br />
has committed the resourcing required to ensure it is effectively managed.<br />
Your agency includes information about the effectiveness of its misconduct resistance approach in<br />
corporate performance reports.<br />
17
THE RIGHT busINEss pRACTICEs<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance is a fundamental part of your agency’s strategic, tactical <strong>and</strong><br />
operational business activities – it’s the way you do business.<br />
FOCus QuEsTIONs<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Does your agency management philosophy recognise <strong>and</strong> promote the link between misconduct<br />
resistance <strong>and</strong> agency performance at all levels <strong>and</strong> in all areas?<br />
Do misconduct resistance issues form an integral part of corporate, strategic <strong>and</strong> operational planning<br />
process <strong>and</strong> objectives, both annually <strong>and</strong> long term?<br />
Are misconduct resistance principles <strong>and</strong> objectives used as a filter <strong>and</strong> applied as part of all project<br />
planning, agency restructure <strong>and</strong> service review processes?<br />
Are integrity <strong>and</strong> misconduct resistance objectives integrated into all business processes (e.g.<br />
embedded in policies, operational procedures <strong>and</strong> guidelines, decision-making criteria <strong>and</strong> processes,<br />
the assignment of authority <strong>and</strong> responsibilities)?<br />
Are all of your agency’s misconduct resistance resources (e.g. Human Resource unit, compliance &<br />
audit functions, legal services, records management, regulatory systems, quality assurance processes<br />
etc.) coordinated in working towards achieving the objectives of the misconduct resistance approach?<br />
Do your agency structures <strong>and</strong> systems support the integration of misconduct resistance activities<br />
across all agency functions?<br />
Have misconduct resistance strategies been implemented in all work areas across your agency?<br />
Is this monitored in any way?<br />
Is performance against misconduct resistance objectives included as part of your business unit<br />
reporting?<br />
SIgnS of SucceSS<br />
All business units are accountable for demonstrating that they are implementing your agency’s<br />
misconduct resistance strategies, with misconduct resistance being incorporated into your agency’s<br />
general business reporting <strong>and</strong> performance measurement systems at the individual, work unit <strong>and</strong><br />
corporate levels.<br />
Your agency has a strategy in place to ensure that the consideration of misconduct resistance<br />
objectives <strong>and</strong> issues is integral to all core administrative, planning, decision making <strong>and</strong> service<br />
delivery business activities.<br />
Your agency’s management environment, as reflected in its management philosophy <strong>and</strong> operating<br />
style, systems <strong>and</strong> structures, <strong>and</strong> assignment of authority <strong>and</strong> responsibility, actively promotes <strong>and</strong><br />
supports the integration of the misconduct resistance principles in all business activities <strong>and</strong> areas.<br />
Staff in all work units view misconduct resistance as a fundamental part of business, something<br />
everyone knows about <strong>and</strong> considers as part of their normal business activities.<br />
18
the right mindset<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> consciousness is a fundamental part of work practices for everyone in your<br />
agency, with responsibilities structured from the top down – it’s a way of thinking.<br />
Focus Questions<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Do staff in all work areas know about, underst<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> support your agency’s misconduct resistance<br />
objectives?<br />
Are your staff members encouraged (in a corporate sense <strong>and</strong>/or at business unit level) to be actively<br />
involved in the development, implementation <strong>and</strong> review of your agency’s misconduct resistance<br />
strategies?<br />
Have responsibility <strong>and</strong> accountability for the implementation of your agency’s misconduct resistance<br />
strategies been clearly assigned, included in agency policies <strong>and</strong> procedures, <strong>and</strong> reflected in job<br />
descriptions?<br />
Are your staff members aware of their responsibilities for implementing, complying with <strong>and</strong> promoting<br />
your agency’s misconduct resistance plan, <strong>and</strong> do they accept these responsibilities?<br />
Are delegations, authorities <strong>and</strong> the supervisory roles of management clearly defined in your agency’s<br />
misconduct resistance plan, <strong>and</strong> are these responsibilities addressed as part of regular performance<br />
reviews?<br />
Does your agency monitor <strong>and</strong>/or assess levels of staff awareness, underst<strong>and</strong>ing <strong>and</strong> compliance<br />
with misconduct resistance responsibilities?<br />
SignS of SucceSS<br />
There is broad based commitment across your agency to the objectives of the agency’s misconduct<br />
resistance plan. Integrity <strong>and</strong> misconduct consciousness are firmly established as the way everyone in<br />
your agency thinks <strong>and</strong> operates, acting as a filter applied to day-to-day core business activities <strong>and</strong><br />
decision making.<br />
Your agency’s structures provide staff, from the top down, with a clear underst<strong>and</strong>ing of the<br />
agency’s misconduct resistance activities, processes <strong>and</strong> outputs for which they are responsible <strong>and</strong><br />
accountable, <strong>and</strong> to whom they must report.<br />
19
the right review<br />
Review <strong>and</strong> evaluation processes ensure your agency’s misconduct resistance<br />
approach remains relevant <strong>and</strong> effective in achieving stated objectives.<br />
Focus Questions<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Is there a plan <strong>and</strong> mechanism in place for reviewing <strong>and</strong> assessing the effectiveness of your agency’s<br />
misconduct resistance strategies against key milestones, stated objectives <strong>and</strong> expected outcomes<br />
using st<strong>and</strong>ardised performance measures <strong>and</strong> indicators?<br />
Do review <strong>and</strong> evaluation processes make use of internal <strong>and</strong> external feedback, <strong>and</strong> information<br />
from misconduct complaints <strong>and</strong> investigations to improve business practices?<br />
Do your agency’s review <strong>and</strong> evaluation processes attempt to measure the extent to which your<br />
misconduct resistance approach has been integrated across different business activities?<br />
Has your agency assessed whether the individual components of the misconduct resistance approach<br />
(i.e. values, leadership, culture, treatment program, structures etc.) have increased or decreased the<br />
incidence of misconduct <strong>and</strong> its concealment?<br />
Has your agency assessed the impact of its misconduct resistance approach against general business<br />
efficiency <strong>and</strong> effectiveness indicators, such as numbers of complaints/customer satisfaction levels,<br />
staff turnover <strong>and</strong> morale, productivity figures, financial loss through theft <strong>and</strong> misuse of resources<br />
etc.?<br />
Have your agency’s misconduct resistance objectives been reviewed <strong>and</strong> confirmed or amended in<br />
light of organisational, environmental, business condition or government policy changes, including the<br />
results from updated risk assessments?<br />
Is business unit <strong>and</strong> corporate performance data consistently collected <strong>and</strong> analysed to inform the<br />
review <strong>and</strong> evaluation processes?<br />
Does your agency use benchmarking as a means of evaluating performance across work units <strong>and</strong><br />
against wider sector <strong>and</strong> industry norms?<br />
SignS of SucceSS<br />
Your agency has an established <strong>and</strong> appropriately resourced review <strong>and</strong> evaluation mechanism to<br />
assess whether misconduct resistance strategies are effective in achieving objectives. The review<br />
<strong>and</strong> evaluation mechanism also ensures that the strategies remain relevant <strong>and</strong> appropriate to your<br />
agency’s operations, <strong>and</strong> accommodate changes in the external operating environment.<br />
The review mechanism has specified timelines, incorporates both internal <strong>and</strong> external review<br />
processes, outlines key milestones <strong>and</strong> objectives to be achieved, <strong>and</strong> details the resources<br />
required.<br />
The results from review <strong>and</strong> evaluation processes are used to benchmark your agency’s performance<br />
(over time <strong>and</strong> across business units) <strong>and</strong> to support continual improvement in your agency’s<br />
misconduct resistance, business practices <strong>and</strong> service delivery, <strong>and</strong> general business efficiency <strong>and</strong><br />
effectiveness.<br />
20
THE RIGHT COMMuNICATION<br />
Your agency misconduct resistance strategies are consolidated into a documented<br />
approach that is widely communicated.<br />
FOCus QuEsTIONs<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Has your agency approach to misconduct resistance, with all its component parts <strong>and</strong> initiatives, been<br />
consolidated <strong>and</strong> documented as an integrated, whole of agency strategy or plan?<br />
Does your documented agency approach clearly articulate the strategies <strong>and</strong> initiatives adopted to<br />
build integrity <strong>and</strong> misconduct resistance; how these will work together; the expected benefits to<br />
performance; <strong>and</strong> the measures of success?<br />
Does your agency have a strategy for ensuring that your misconduct resistance approach, its principles<br />
<strong>and</strong> objectives are well known to all staff? Is the effectiveness of this strategy evaluated?<br />
Does your agency have a customer <strong>and</strong> community awareness strategy that broadcasts your agency’s<br />
no tolerance st<strong>and</strong> on misconduct, <strong>and</strong> the measures you have adopted to detect misconduct <strong>and</strong><br />
encourage suspected misconduct to be reported?<br />
Do your agency’s annual report <strong>and</strong> other publications include reference to your misconduct resistance<br />
approach?<br />
Has the effectiveness of communication <strong>and</strong> awareness strategies been evaluated in terms of<br />
the impact on the behaviour of your different stakeholder groups (e.g. the reporting of suspected<br />
misconduct by your staff <strong>and</strong> customers, the incidence of externally instigated misconduct etc.)?<br />
Is your agency’s documented misconduct resistance approach available to staff <strong>and</strong> do they know<br />
how to access it?<br />
Are contractors <strong>and</strong> suppliers given relevant information about your agency misconduct resistance<br />
approach?<br />
Does your agency survey or in any other way measure customer <strong>and</strong>/or contractor perceptions in<br />
respect to its services <strong>and</strong> business practices/performance? Do these mechanisms include questions<br />
about misconduct resistance issues?<br />
Is performance data such as complaints statistics used in the evaluation of your agency’s<br />
communication strategy?<br />
SIgnS of SucceSS<br />
Your agency’s misconduct resistance approach has been holistically planned, considers your agency’s<br />
position against each of the 12 elements in the <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> <strong>Framework</strong> <strong>and</strong> has strategies<br />
tailored to meet the needs <strong>and</strong> resources of your agency.<br />
Your agency’s misconduct resistance approach has been documented, is promoted by management<br />
<strong>and</strong> widely communicated both internally <strong>and</strong> externally.<br />
There is widespread underst<strong>and</strong>ing <strong>and</strong> support for your agency’s st<strong>and</strong> on misconduct amongst your<br />
staff, customers <strong>and</strong> other stakeholders that has resulted in measurable improvements in areas such<br />
as business practices, customer confidence <strong>and</strong> misconduct reporting.<br />
21
!<br />
IdEAs TO buILd CApACITY<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Establish misconduct resistance as a regular item at meetings of executive <strong>and</strong>/or<br />
the corporate governance group.<br />
Appoint a misconduct resistance committee, chaired by a senior member of executive,<br />
to implement <strong>and</strong> monitor your agency’s misconduct resistance approach.<br />
Include briefings on your agency’s misconduct resistance approach <strong>and</strong> related<br />
issues at senior management meetings.<br />
Use your staff <strong>and</strong> business unit meetings as a forum to actively promote <strong>and</strong> raise<br />
awareness about your agency’s misconduct resistance approach <strong>and</strong> how it relates<br />
to general performance.<br />
Include misconduct objectives <strong>and</strong> performance measures in your operational <strong>and</strong><br />
corporate reporting processes.<br />
Develop a model or template as a guide to the inclusion of misconduct resistance<br />
objectives in your agency policies, processes <strong>and</strong> procedures etc. Use this guide<br />
when policies <strong>and</strong> procedures are being reviewed.<br />
Undertake business re-engineering processes aimed at incorporating your misconduct<br />
resistance objectives into current business processes.<br />
Include misconduct resistance responsibilities in job descriptions <strong>and</strong> performance<br />
management systems.<br />
Monitor the progress of your agency misconduct resistance approach through<br />
data collection in respect of programme activities <strong>and</strong> outputs e.g. statistics on<br />
complaints, investigations, referrals <strong>and</strong> outcomes.<br />
Undertake comparative evaluations of performance between different business units<br />
<strong>and</strong> over time etc.<br />
Perform cost-benefit evaluations.<br />
Use surveys <strong>and</strong> questionnaires to gather information from your staff, customers <strong>and</strong><br />
suppliers.<br />
Use exit interviews to evaluate your agency’s approach to misconduct resistance,<br />
<strong>and</strong> identify any areas for potential improvement.<br />
Benchmark your agency’s approach <strong>and</strong> performance against other agencies<br />
operating in the same business or industry sector.<br />
Publicise your service st<strong>and</strong>ards, performance pledges, code of conduct <strong>and</strong><br />
complaints processes by making them readily available at service centres <strong>and</strong> on<br />
websites.<br />
Develop conditions of business dealings with external parties <strong>and</strong> include these in<br />
‘requests for tender’ <strong>and</strong> other contracting processes.<br />
22
REFERENCES <strong>and</strong> RESOURCES<br />
In the following section you will find a comprehensive list of all of the references used to compile<br />
the <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong>: An Integrated Governance Approach to Protecting Agency Integrity<br />
series of documents. This list has been exp<strong>and</strong>ed to include additional references <strong>and</strong> resources<br />
that you can use to find more information about any of the three outcome areas.<br />
REFERENCES <strong>and</strong> RESOURCES
ThE RighT agENCy CUlTURE<br />
Australian Public Service August 2007, APS Values <strong>and</strong> Code of Conduct in Practice: Guide to official conduct<br />
for APS employees <strong>and</strong> Agency Heads.<br />
Independent Commission Against <strong>Corruption</strong> 2000, What is an ethical culture? Key issues to consider in building<br />
an ethical organisation.<br />
Independent Commission Against <strong>Corruption</strong> April 2001, The First Four Steps.<br />
Office of the Public Sector St<strong>and</strong>ards Commissioner, undated, Ethics <strong>Framework</strong>.<br />
Office of the Public Sector St<strong>and</strong>ards Commissioner, undated, Revitalising your code of conduct: Guidance<br />
notes for public sector agencies.<br />
Office of the Public Sector St<strong>and</strong>ards Commissioner September 2004, Building & Sustaining Integrity –<br />
Integrating Ethics into Everyday Business.<br />
Office of the Public Sector St<strong>and</strong>ards Commissioner February 2008, Conduct Guide.<br />
Office of the Public Sector St<strong>and</strong>ards Commissioner February 2008, Western Australia Public Sector Code of<br />
Ethics.<br />
Office of the Public Sector St<strong>and</strong>ards Commissioner February 2008, Supporting Information: Conduct Guide.<br />
Sampford, C <strong>and</strong> Preston, N with Bois, C-A 1998, Public Sector Ethics – Finding <strong>and</strong> Implementing Values,<br />
Chapter 6 by Stephen D Potts, Ethics in Public Service – An idea whose time has come.<br />
Sampford, C <strong>and</strong> Preston, N with Bois, C-A 1998, Public Sector Ethics – Finding <strong>and</strong> Implementing Values,<br />
Chapter 8 by Colin Hicks <strong>and</strong> Gerald Scanlan, Integrating Ethics.<br />
The Western Australian Integrity Coordinating Group 2006, Taking action on integrity issues.<br />
Western Australian Premier’s Circular 2008/01, Requirement for Public Sector Agencies to Develop Codes of<br />
Conduct.<br />
ThE RighT agENCy OpERaTiONal STRaTEgiES<br />
Australian Research Council, undated, ‘Whistling While They Work’: Enhancing the Theory <strong>and</strong> Practice of<br />
Internal Witness Management in Public Sector Organisations, Australian Research Council Linkage Project -<br />
2005-2008, http://www.griffith.edu.au/centre/slrc/whistleblowing.<br />
Australian St<strong>and</strong>ard 8001:2003, Fraud <strong>and</strong> <strong>Corruption</strong> Control.<br />
Australian St<strong>and</strong>ard DR 06651 (Revision of AS 8001-2003), Fraud <strong>and</strong> <strong>Corruption</strong> Control.<br />
Australian/New Zeal<strong>and</strong> St<strong>and</strong>ard 4360:2004, Risk Management.<br />
HB 436:2004, Risk Management Guidelines – Companion to AS/NZS 4360:2004.<br />
Australian St<strong>and</strong>ard 4811:2006, Employment Screening.<br />
AS ISO 10002 – 2006, Customer satisfaction – Guidelines for complaint h<strong>and</strong>ling in organisations.<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission 2005, Protecting Personal Data in the Public Sector – Report of an Inquiry<br />
into Unauthorised Access <strong>and</strong> Disclosure of Confidential Personal Information Held on the Electronic Databases<br />
of Public Sector Agencies.<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission May 2006, Disclosure of <strong>Misconduct</strong> Reports Made to the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
<strong>Crime</strong> Commission: Guidelines for Principal Officers of Public Authorities.<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission October 2006, Sexual Contact With Children By Persons in Authority in the<br />
Department of Education <strong>and</strong> Training of Western Australia.<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission 2007, Dealing With Conflicts of Interest - Practical Guide for the Western<br />
Australian Public Sector.<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission July 2007, Notification Guidelines for Principal Officers of Public Authorities.<br />
Independent Commission Against <strong>Corruption</strong>, <strong>and</strong> the <strong>Crime</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Misconduct</strong> Commission 2004, Managing<br />
Conflicts of Interest in the Public Sector: Toolkit.<br />
24
KPMG 2004, Forensic Fraud Survey 2004 Australia.<br />
KPMG 2006, Forensic Fraud Survey 2006.<br />
KPMG 2007, Fraud Risk Management in the Public Sector – What are the trends <strong>and</strong> effective strategies to<br />
address fraud <strong>and</strong> misconduct?<br />
KPMG 2007, New trends in identifying <strong>and</strong> mitigating fraud, Forensic Insight May 2007 Issue 10.<br />
Office of the Public Sector St<strong>and</strong>ards Commissioner 2001, Public Sector St<strong>and</strong>ards in Human Resource<br />
Management.<br />
Office of the Public Sector St<strong>and</strong>ards Commissioner 2006, Public Interest Disclosure Act 2003 – Guidelines for<br />
Internal Procedures in Public Authorities.<br />
Ombudsman Western Australia May 2005, Guidelines for conducting administrative investigations.<br />
Ombudsman Western Australia October 2006, Good Record Keeping.<br />
Ombudsman Western Australia, undated, Guidelines <strong>and</strong> Information Sheets: for agencies.<br />
RiskCover January 2007, Western Australian Government Risk Management Guidelines.<br />
The Western Australian Integrity Coordinating Group 2006, Conflict of Interest Guidelines.<br />
Western Australian Premier’s Circular 2004/04, Whole of Government Complaints Management Strategy.<br />
ThE RighT agENCy MaNagEMENT ENviRONMENT<br />
<strong>Crime</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Misconduct</strong> Commission March 2005, Fraud <strong>and</strong> corruption control – guidelines for best practice.<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission February 2007, <strong>Misconduct</strong> H<strong>and</strong>ling Procedures in the Western Australian<br />
Public Sector: Department for Community Development.<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission March 2007, <strong>Misconduct</strong> H<strong>and</strong>ling Procedures in the Western Australian<br />
Public Sector: Department of Consumer <strong>and</strong> Employment Protection.<br />
Independent Commission Against <strong>Corruption</strong> November 2002, The Do-It-Yourself <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> Guide.<br />
New South Wales Auditor-General 2006, Better Practice Guide – Fraud Control Improvement Kit.<br />
The Government of Western Australia, Ministry of the Premier <strong>and</strong> Cabinet 1999, Better Management: Corporate<br />
Governance Guidelines for the Western Australian Public Sector CEOs.<br />
Western Australian Premier’s Circular 2005/02, <strong>Corruption</strong> Prevention.<br />
gENERal REFERENCES<br />
Anechiarico, F <strong>and</strong> Jacobs JB 1996, ‘The Pursuit of Absolute Integrity – how corruption control makes<br />
government ineffective’.<br />
Australian Public Sector Anti-<strong>Corruption</strong> Conference 2007, <strong>Corruption</strong> Prevention for Managers Workshop.<br />
Bartos, Stephan 2004, Public Sector Governance Australia, CCH.<br />
Committee of Sponsoring Organisations for the Treadway Commission 1992, Internal Control – integrated<br />
framework, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Jersey City.<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission 2007, <strong>Corruption</strong>, Integrity <strong>and</strong> the Public Sector, Speech by Commissioner<br />
Kevin Hammond to IPAA 20 March 2007.<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission 2007, <strong>Misconduct</strong> – Is that all there is! Address by Commissioner the Hon<br />
Len Roberts-Smith RFD QC at Edith Cowan University, 30 October 2007.<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission 2008, What does the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission actually do? Speech<br />
by Commissioner the Hon Len Roberts-Smith RFD QC to Western Australian Local Government Association,<br />
22 February 2008.<br />
25
Department of the Premier <strong>and</strong> Cabinet 2008, ‘Training on Accountable <strong>and</strong> Ethical Decision-Making in the<br />
Western Australian Public Sector’, http://www.dpc.wa.gov.au.<br />
Gillman, Stuart <strong>and</strong> Stout, Jeffrey 2005, Assessment Strategies <strong>and</strong> Practices for Integrity <strong>and</strong> Anti-<strong>Corruption</strong><br />
measures: Comparative Overview, OECD.<br />
Johnston, Michael 2005, Syndromes of <strong>Corruption</strong>: Wealth, Power <strong>and</strong> Democracy.<br />
Premier’s Circulars, Public Sector Management, Government of Western Australia, http://www.dpc.wa.gov.au/<br />
psmd/pubs/pubs.html#legislation.<br />
Rose – Ackerman, Susan 1999, <strong>Corruption</strong> in Government: Causes, Consequences <strong>and</strong> Reform.<br />
Western Australia Department of the Premier <strong>and</strong> Cabinet, Administrative Instructions, http://www.dpc.wa.gov.<br />
au/psmd/pubs/pubs.html#legislation.<br />
USEFUl WEBSiTES<br />
Australian Public Sector Anti-<strong>Corruption</strong> Conference 2009 www.apsacc.com.au<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission<br />
www.ccc.wa.gov.au<br />
<strong>Crime</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Misconduct</strong> Commission<br />
www.cmc.qld.gov.au<br />
Department of Local Government <strong>and</strong> Regional Development www.dlgrd.wa.gov.au<br />
Department of the Premier <strong>and</strong> Cabinet<br />
www.dpc.wa.gov.au<br />
Equal Opportunity Commission<br />
www.equalopportunity.wa.gov.au<br />
Government of Western Australia<br />
www.wa.gov.au<br />
Independent Commission Against <strong>Corruption</strong><br />
www.icac.nsw.gov.au<br />
The Integrity Coordinating Group<br />
www.opssc.wa.gov.au/icg/<br />
Office of the Auditor General for Western Australia<br />
www.audit.wa.gov.au<br />
Office of the Public Sector St<strong>and</strong>ards Commissioner www.opssc.wa.gov.au<br />
Ombudsman Western Australia<br />
www.ombudsman.wa.gov.au<br />
RiskCover - Insurance Commission of Western Australia www.riskcover.wa.gov.au<br />
St<strong>and</strong>ards Australia<br />
www.st<strong>and</strong>ards.com.au<br />
State Law Publisher<br />
www.slp.wa.gov.au<br />
State Supply Commission<br />
www.ssc.wa.gov.au<br />
State Records Office of Western Australia<br />
www.sro.wa.gov.au<br />
WESTERN aUSTRaliaN lEgiSlaTiON<br />
Auditor General Act 2006<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission Act 2003<br />
Corporations (Western Australia) Act 1990<br />
Criminal Code<br />
Equal Opportunity Act 1984<br />
Financial Management Act 2006<br />
Freedom of Information Act 1992<br />
Local Government Act 1995<br />
Occupational Safety <strong>and</strong> Health Act 1984<br />
Public Interest Disclosure Act 2003<br />
Public Interest Disclosure Regulations 2003<br />
Public Sector Management Act 1994<br />
Public Sector Management (Breaches of Public Sector<br />
St<strong>and</strong>ards) Regulations 2005<br />
State Records Act 2000<br />
State Supply Commission Act 1991<br />
26
NOTES<br />
27
“<br />
Integrity means earning <strong>and</strong> sustaining the public trust by<br />
– Serving the public interest<br />
– Using powers responsibly<br />
– Acting with honesty <strong>and</strong> transparency<br />
– Preventing <strong>and</strong> addressing improper conduct. ”<br />
WA Integrity Coordinating Group 2005
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS<br />
The <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong>: An Integrated Governance Approach to Protecting Agency Integrity framework draws on the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong><br />
Commission’s own experience; the work of other integrity bodies across Australia; risk management methodology; as well as ethics <strong>and</strong><br />
organisational development literature.<br />
Special acknowledgement is given to the Independent Commission Against <strong>Corruption</strong> in NSW, the <strong>Crime</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Misconduct</strong> Commission in<br />
Qld, <strong>and</strong> the NSW Auditor General’s Office whose work in developing similar integrated corruption <strong>and</strong> fraud models has been drawn on<br />
extensively.<br />
ISBN : 978 0 9805050 4 7<br />
This publication forms part of the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission’s ‘<strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong>’ series, available from www.ccc.wa.gov.au.<br />
Further information about the Commission can also be found on this website.<br />
DiSCLAiMEr<br />
This information does not constitute legal advice <strong>and</strong> the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission accepts no liability for the accuracy of the<br />
information; or for any act or omission done in reliance on the information provided, or for any consequences, whether direct or indirect, of<br />
any such act or omission.<br />
© 2008 Copyright in this work is held by the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission. Division 3 of the Copyright Act 1968 (Commonwealth)<br />
recognises that limited further use of this material can occur for the purposes of ‘fair dealing’, for example, study, research or criticism, etc.<br />
Should you wish to make use of this material other than as permitted by the Copyright Act 1968, please write to the postal address below.<br />
Postal Address PO Box 7667<br />
Cloisters Square<br />
PERTH WA 6850<br />
Telephone (08) 9215 4888<br />
1800 809 000 (toll free for callers outside metropolitan Perth)<br />
Facsimile (08) 9215 4884<br />
Email<br />
Office Hours<br />
info@ccc.wa.gov.au<br />
8.30 am to 5.00 pm, Monday to Friday<br />
Public responsibility concerns aside, misconduct is bad for business.
An IntegrAted governAnce ApproAch to protectIng Agency IntegrIty<br />
HealtH CHeCk<br />
MisConduCt ResistanCe:<br />
an integRated goveRnanCe appRoaCH to pRoteCting agenCy integRity<br />
The puRpoSe of ThiS healTh CheCk<br />
The <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> Health Check is designed to assist Executive Management 1 to monitor<br />
<strong>and</strong> review their agency’s misconduct resistance approach. Experience shows that agencies can have<br />
difficulty implementing <strong>and</strong> maintaining misconduct resistance programmes, so this Health Check aims<br />
to help agencies tackle these problems by examining staff perceptions about misconduct resistance in<br />
their specific work area 2 . The purpose is to identify:<br />
w<br />
w<br />
work areas where elements of an agency’s misconduct resistance approach may need refreshing<br />
or improving; <strong>and</strong><br />
elements of the misconduct resistance approach that may need attention across the entire<br />
agency.<br />
The questions used to assess staff perceptions are based on the 12 key elements that underpin the<br />
<strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission’s <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong>: An Integrated Governance Approach to<br />
Protecting Agency Integrity framework. The Health Check can be used as a strategy to support your<br />
agency’s review <strong>and</strong> evaluation activities under the key element ‘The Right Review’.<br />
Caution:<br />
This Health Check is a quick <strong>and</strong> easy tool that can be used to measure staff<br />
perceptions about your agency’s misconduct resistance approach. The results<br />
are indicative only, <strong>and</strong> should not be relied on in isolation when evaluating your<br />
agency’s performance. The Health Check does provide a useful indication of staff<br />
beliefs about how effectively your agency’s misconduct resistance approach has<br />
been implemented, <strong>and</strong> what action you can take to improve it.<br />
1. Arrangements in agencies will vary. Your agency may delegate a person/committee to be responsible for implementing <strong>and</strong> monitoring your agency’s<br />
misconduct resistance approach. In small agencies, your Executive Team or CEO may retain this responsibility.<br />
2. Work area could refer to business unit, division etc.
WhaT iS MiSConduCT ReSiSTanCe?<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance refers to an agency’s ability to effectively resist <strong>and</strong> manage misconduct. It<br />
relies on creating <strong>and</strong> maintaining the right agency culture, operational strategies <strong>and</strong> management<br />
environment. These outcomes can be achieved by addressing the key elements which underpin<br />
them. The outcomes <strong>and</strong> key elements operate interdependently <strong>and</strong> together they represent<br />
the st<strong>and</strong>ards for measuring the adequacy <strong>and</strong> effectiveness of agency misconduct resistance<br />
approaches.<br />
The RiGhT aGenCy CulTuRe:<br />
Agency culture values integrity <strong>and</strong> is intolerant of misconduct.<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
The right values – Your agency’s communication, actions <strong>and</strong> decisions reflect its values <strong>and</strong><br />
public interest principles.<br />
The right leadership – Leaders within your agency set an example of integrity with their own<br />
behaviour, their communication <strong>and</strong> their responses to misconduct by others.<br />
The right workplace behaviour – Your workplace culture encourages staff to accept personal<br />
responsibility for behaving according to agency values <strong>and</strong> in the public interest.<br />
The RiGhT aGenCy opeRaTional STRaTeGieS:<br />
Agency policies <strong>and</strong> systems support the effective treatment of misconduct risks.<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
The right policies – Your policy platform provides a solid foundation for establishing your<br />
agency’s treatment environment <strong>and</strong> communicates your commitment, values <strong>and</strong> business<br />
practices for misconduct resistance.<br />
The right risks – <strong>Misconduct</strong> risk identification <strong>and</strong> assessment are part of the wider corporate<br />
risk management planning process <strong>and</strong> include all of your agency’s functions <strong>and</strong> operational<br />
areas.<br />
The right treatment – Your misconduct treatment programme is commensurate with the level<br />
<strong>and</strong> nature of risk your agency faces, is comprehensive <strong>and</strong> adequately resourced, <strong>and</strong> is<br />
subject to ongoing monitoring <strong>and</strong> review.<br />
The right underst<strong>and</strong>ing – Your staff <strong>and</strong> managers have a common underst<strong>and</strong>ing of what<br />
misconduct is. They embrace your agency’s st<strong>and</strong> on misconduct, as stated in the agency’s<br />
policy <strong>and</strong> treatment programme, <strong>and</strong> know how to respond should they become aware of<br />
misconduct.<br />
The RiGhT aGenCy ManaGeMenT enviRonMenT:<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance is an integrated <strong>and</strong> established component of agency life.<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
The right priority – <strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance is given high level ownership <strong>and</strong> central oversight.<br />
The right business practices – <strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance is a fundamental part of your agency’s<br />
strategic, tactical <strong>and</strong> operational business activities – it’s the way you do business.<br />
The right mindset – <strong>Misconduct</strong> consciousness is a fundamental part of work practices for<br />
everyone in your agency, with responsibilities structured from the top down – it’s a way of<br />
thinking.<br />
The right review – Review <strong>and</strong> evaluation processes ensure your agency’s misconduct<br />
resistance approach remains relevant <strong>and</strong> effective in achieving stated objectives.<br />
The right communication – Your agency’s misconduct resistance strategies are consolidated<br />
into a documented approach that is widely communicated.<br />
2
hoW To uSe The healTh CheCk<br />
The misconduct resistance questionnaire consists of 12 short <strong>and</strong> simple questions for staff to answer. It should<br />
take less than five minutes to complete <strong>and</strong> all responses are entirely anonymous. The questionnaire is located on<br />
page 5.<br />
Depending on the size of your agency, you can survey all or a percentage of your staff. Surveying 10 – 20% of<br />
your total staff is sufficient, but conducting a higher percentage of surveys is likely to lead to richer data.<br />
The Health Check process is quick <strong>and</strong> easy enough for broad use within your agency, <strong>and</strong> processing <strong>and</strong><br />
analysis are straightforward <strong>and</strong> inexpensive.<br />
Your project manager (or appointed staff member) is responsible for distributing <strong>and</strong> collecting the misconduct<br />
resistance questionnaire. Online survey tools could be useful for surveying large, dispersed agencies, but we<br />
discourage using email in this case because it is very important that the responses be kept anonymous.<br />
As responses are received, your project manager will need to enter them into a report generator spreadsheet that<br />
uses colour coding to highlight the work areas <strong>and</strong>/or misconduct resistance aspects that need attention.<br />
The report generator is available for download from our website at:<br />
www.ccc.wa.gov.au/misconduct _ resistance.php<br />
Please note that:<br />
w<br />
w<br />
You cannot save data to the online version of the generator, so please ensure you save a copy to your<br />
own system.<br />
The report generator uses an underlying formula to generate the dashboard results which cannot be<br />
manually calculated.<br />
hoW To inTeRpReT The RepoRT<br />
The Health Check provides a broad overview of staff perceptions about your agency’s current misconduct<br />
resistance approach. Any problem areas highlighted by the report generator will require further investigation to<br />
determine the exact nature of the concern, <strong>and</strong> whether action is required.<br />
Work areas or aspects of your agency’s misconduct resistance approach may be highlighted for action by<br />
the report. These could reflect systemic problems within your agency, or areas that could benefit from staff<br />
refreshment or training. Either way, action is needed to ensure that any potential problems are clarified <strong>and</strong><br />
appropriate remedial action is taken.<br />
The Commission’s <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> Integration Guide can be used as a reference for a range of possible<br />
actions <strong>and</strong> ideas to build capacity.<br />
The Health Check should be used as a guide to improve your agency’s misconduct resistance strategies <strong>and</strong><br />
approach. In the example on the next page, the report suggests that:<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
Staff in Work Area 4 do not perceive the agency as having effective misconduct resistance strategies in most<br />
areas.<br />
Staff in Work Areas 2 <strong>and</strong> 3 have mixed perceptions about the agency misconduct resistance approach across<br />
a number of areas.<br />
The Right Policies <strong>and</strong> The Right Priority key elements need to be reviewed across the whole organisation.<br />
The Right Workplace Behaviour, The Right Risks <strong>and</strong> The Right Treatment key elements show signs of<br />
weakening effectiveness <strong>and</strong> would benefit from a review.<br />
Your Health Check results should be reported to your Executive Committee/CEO, outlining areas of concern <strong>and</strong><br />
any recommendations.<br />
3
The healTh CheCk RepoRT<br />
This report identifies areas where staff perceptions or awareness of your agency’s misconduct resistance approach<br />
indicate that there may be a problem. Below is an example of a completed report.<br />
key: Good Performance green Action Required orange Urgent Action Required red<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong><br />
Key Element<br />
The Right Values<br />
Overall<br />
Results<br />
Results for Individual Work Areas<br />
Work Area 1 Work Area 2 Work Area 3 Work Area 4<br />
green green green green orange<br />
The Right Leadership<br />
green green green green green<br />
The Right Workplace Behaviour<br />
orange green orange green red<br />
The Right Policies<br />
red orange red red red<br />
The Right Risks<br />
orange green green orange red<br />
The Right Treatment<br />
orange green orange green red<br />
The Right Underst<strong>and</strong>ing<br />
green orange green green green<br />
The Right Priority<br />
red green red orange red<br />
The Right Business Practices<br />
green green green green orange<br />
The Right Mindset<br />
green green green green green<br />
The Right Review<br />
green green orange orange green<br />
The Right Communication<br />
green orange green orange orange<br />
Overall Work Area Results<br />
green green orange orange red<br />
4
An IntegrAted governAnce ApproAch to protectIng Agency IntegrIty<br />
MiSConduCT ReSiSTanCe QueSTionnaiRe<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> generally occurs when a public officer abuses their authority for personal gain or to cause detriment<br />
to another person, or acts contrary to the public interest. Examples include misuse of computers, bribery,<br />
harassment <strong>and</strong> fraud.<br />
Please put a tick in the most appropriate box<br />
1. My agency consistently communicates the importance of acting<br />
in the public interest.<br />
Strongly<br />
Disagree<br />
Disagree Agree Strongly<br />
Agree<br />
2. Our senior executives <strong>and</strong> managers act with integrity.<br />
3. Most staff in my workplace know they should act in accordance<br />
with our agency’s values.<br />
4. My agency’s policies help us to deal with the misconduct issues<br />
that we face.<br />
5. The misconduct risks we face are identified by ongoing<br />
assessment of the activities in my work area.<br />
6. My agency has effective strategies to manage misconduct risks<br />
that arise in the workplace.<br />
7. Most staff in my work area know what misconduct is <strong>and</strong><br />
underst<strong>and</strong> their responsibility to report it.<br />
8. My agency treats dealing with misconduct as a top agency<br />
priority.<br />
9. We consider preventing <strong>and</strong> controlling misconduct in all of our<br />
work activities (e.g. planning, service delivery etc.).<br />
10. Acting with integrity is the way we do things in our agency.<br />
11. My agency reviews the effectiveness of our plans <strong>and</strong> strategies<br />
for preventing <strong>and</strong> controlling misconduct.<br />
12. I believe our customers/contractors underst<strong>and</strong> my agency’s no<br />
tolerance approach to dishonest <strong>and</strong> unethical dealings.<br />
Do you have any general comments you would like to make about the integrity <strong>and</strong> misconduct resistance<br />
environment in your work area?<br />
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................<br />
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................<br />
Name of your work area (NOT YOUR NAME—your response is anonymous): ................................................................<br />
Thank you for your feedback, please send your completed form to: ..............................................................................<br />
5
Who Should Take ReSponSibiliTy foR The healTh CheCk?<br />
Management is responsible for developing, implementing <strong>and</strong> maintaining effective misconduct<br />
resistance, but all staff have a role in integrating <strong>and</strong> monitoring misconduct resistance strategies.<br />
If you are part of your agency’s management team, you need to ensure that your agency’s misconduct<br />
resistance approach is appropriately applied across your entire agency. You should consider tailoring<br />
your use of the Health Check to suit your agency’s specific needs. You should look at:<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
w<br />
the literacy <strong>and</strong> cultural profile of your staff;<br />
the frequency of using the Health Check;<br />
whether the Health Check is used for your entire agency, or applied in sections over a period of<br />
time;<br />
how you will progress recommendations for improvement, including any further investigation or<br />
assessment of areas identified as a potential concern; <strong>and</strong><br />
how you will monitor the implementation of recommended improvements.<br />
You may choose to appoint a project manager to help apply the Health Check within your agency.<br />
When top management fails to send a clear message about the principles <strong>and</strong> values of<br />
the agency, the default message just might be something like ‘who cares?’.<br />
aCknoWledGMenTS<br />
The <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission is grateful for the support of the New South Wales Auditor-General’s Office in allowing the adaptation<br />
of their Better Practice Guide: Fraud Control Improvement Kit in line with the Commission’s misconduct resistance framework.<br />
diSClaiMeR<br />
This information does not constitute legal advice <strong>and</strong> the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission accepts no liability for the accuracy of the<br />
information, or for any act or omission done in reliance on the information provided, or for any consequences, whether direct or indirect, of<br />
any such act or omission.<br />
CopyRiGhT<br />
© 2008 Copyright in this work is held by the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission. Division 3 of the Copyright Act 1968 (Commonwealth)<br />
recognises that limited further use of this material can occur for the purposes of ‘fair dealing’, for example, study, research or criticism etc.<br />
Should you wish to make use of this material other than as permitted by the Copyright Act 1968, please write to the postal address below.<br />
iSbn : 978 0 9805050 5 4<br />
This publication forms part of the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission’s ‘<strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong>’ series, available from www.ccc.wa.gov.au.<br />
Further information about the Commission can also be found on this website.<br />
CoRRupTion <strong>and</strong> CRiMe CoMMiSSion<br />
Postal Address PO Box 7667<br />
Cloisters Square<br />
PERTH WA 6850<br />
Telephone (08) 9215 4888<br />
1800 809 000 (toll free for callers outside metropolitan Perth)<br />
Facsimile (08) 9215 4884<br />
Email<br />
info@ccc.wa.gov.au<br />
Office Hours<br />
8.30 am to 5.00 pm, Monday to Friday<br />
6
An IntegrAted governAnce ApproAch to protectIng Agency IntegrIty<br />
AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION STATUS<br />
the right agency ManageMent environMent<br />
The right<br />
mindset<br />
The right<br />
business<br />
practices<br />
The right<br />
review<br />
The right<br />
communication<br />
10<br />
8<br />
6<br />
4<br />
2<br />
0<br />
The right<br />
values<br />
the right agency culture<br />
The right<br />
leadership<br />
The right<br />
workplace<br />
behaviour<br />
The right<br />
policies<br />
The right<br />
priority<br />
The right<br />
underst<strong>and</strong>ing<br />
the right agency operational strategies<br />
The right<br />
treatment<br />
The right<br />
risks<br />
Based on a 1 – 10 scale (10 = Best practice)<br />
explanation: The wheel map has 12 spokes which reflect the key elements of the misconduct resistance framework.<br />
It is a simple tool to visually capture the status of your agency’s approach to integrating misconduct resistance across<br />
the agency. This visual snapshot can help you identify areas needing attention or provide a benchmark to monitor your<br />
agency’s progress over time.<br />
In the example above, the map indicates that the agency is performing well against the key elements relating to values,<br />
leadership <strong>and</strong> workplace behaviour, scoring between 7 <strong>and</strong> 8 out of 10. It also shows that the agency’s policies, misconduct<br />
risk assessment <strong>and</strong> mindset require further attention, with scores between 2 <strong>and</strong> 4 out of 10.<br />
acknowledgeMent<br />
This tool for mapping the implementation status of an agency’s misconduct resistance approach has been adapted from a model presented at the Australian Public Sector<br />
Anti-<strong>Corruption</strong> Conference 2007.<br />
disclaiMer<br />
This information does not constitute legal advice <strong>and</strong> the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information, or for any act or omission<br />
done in reliance on the information provided, or for any consequences, whether direct or indirect, of any such act or omission.<br />
© 2008 <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission.<br />
This publication forms part of the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission’s ‘<strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong>’ series, available from www.ccc.wa.gov.au.<br />
Further information about the Commission can also be found on this website.
An IntegrAted governAnce ApproAch to protectIng Agency IntegrIty<br />
MAPPING YOUr AGENCY’S PrOGrESS<br />
The right<br />
communication<br />
10<br />
The right<br />
values<br />
the right agency culture<br />
the right agency ManageMent environMent<br />
The right<br />
mindset<br />
The right<br />
business<br />
practices<br />
The right<br />
review<br />
8<br />
6<br />
4<br />
2<br />
0<br />
The right<br />
leadership<br />
The right<br />
workplace<br />
behaviour<br />
The right<br />
policies<br />
The right<br />
priority<br />
The right<br />
underst<strong>and</strong>ing<br />
The right<br />
treatment<br />
The right<br />
risks<br />
the right agency operational strategies<br />
Based on a 1 – 10 scale (10 = Best practice)<br />
how to use: There is no set method for assessing your performance against the key elements, <strong>and</strong> you don’t need to<br />
use the same method for each element. For example, you can use a staff survey to measure workplace culture <strong>and</strong> an<br />
independent audit to review your treatment programme. However, it is helpful to use consistent review methods when you<br />
use the map to benchmark <strong>and</strong> compare your agency’s performance over time. The <strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong> Integration<br />
Guide is one of the tools you can use for assessing your agency’s performance.<br />
Evaluate your agency’s performance against all 12 key elements, assigning a score from 1 to 10 to each element.<br />
Mark the scores on the appropriate wheel spokes, joining them with one continuous line, then shade the inside of the<br />
area you have drawn. This shaded area represents the current status of your agency’s progress across the misconduct<br />
resistance framework.<br />
Refer to the completed Agency Implementation Status diagram as an example.
Monitoring, evaluating <strong>and</strong> benchmarking performance & progress as part of a continuous improvement cycle<br />
‘Agency policies <strong>and</strong> systems support the effective treatment of misconduct risks’<br />
An IntegrAted governAnce ApproAch to protectIng Agency IntegrIty<br />
objective<br />
To recognise misconduct as a significant business risk <strong>and</strong> integrate misconduct resistance with your strategic planning,<br />
corporate governance <strong>and</strong> operational systems in a way that is effective, <strong>and</strong> produces measurable performance benefits.<br />
The right mindset<br />
The right review<br />
THE RIGHT AGENCY MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT<br />
‘<strong>Misconduct</strong> resistance is an integrated <strong>and</strong> established component of agency life’<br />
The right business<br />
practices<br />
The right<br />
communication<br />
The right values<br />
Developing ideas to build capacity in areas of need<br />
Using Focus Questions & Signs of Success<br />
IntegratIng<br />
MIsconduct<br />
resIstance<br />
‘Agency culture values integrity <strong>and</strong> is intolerant of misconduct’<br />
The right leadership<br />
THE RIGHT AGENCY CULTURE<br />
The right workplace<br />
behaviour<br />
The right policies<br />
The right priority<br />
The right<br />
underst<strong>and</strong>ing<br />
The right treatment<br />
THE RIGHT AGENCY OPERATIONAL STRATEGIES<br />
The right risks<br />
<strong>Misconduct</strong> generally occurs when a public officer abuses authority for personal gain or<br />
to cause detriment to another person, or acts contrary to the public interest.<br />
DISCLAIMER: This information does not constitute legal advice <strong>and</strong> the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information, or for any act or omission done in reliance on the information provided, or for any<br />
consequences, whether direct or indirect, of any such act or omission.<br />
© 2008 <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission.<br />
This publication forms part of the <strong>Corruption</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Crime</strong> Commission’s ‘<strong>Misconduct</strong> <strong>Resistance</strong>’ series, available from www.ccc.wa.gov.au. Further information about the Commission can also be found on this website.