Governing the City State - Chief Minister and Treasury Directorate ...

Zealand Public Service, but entirely applicable to the ACTPS, New Zealand’s Review of theCentre noted:Fragmentation makes coordinated service delivery more complicated, adds to the costs ofdoing business, and blurs accountability for some issues. Structural fragmentation meansmany small agencies, spreading leadership talent and other skills more thinly and increasingthe risk of weak capability. Fragmentation means Ministers need to build relationships withmultiple agencies, and at times reconcile conflicting agency positions at an excessivelydetailed level. Fragmentation can make alignment more difficult. 102Under the recommended structure, there would be a single agency responsible for supportingthe government of the day across a number of service delivery lines. This model suits theunique nature of the ACT and consistently reflects how the citizenry and stakeholder groupsexpect to deal with the ACT Government – as a single and unified entity. It facilitates greatercohesion and coordination, enhances alignment and cohesiveness, and creates opportunitiesto unlock the benefits of the ACT’s small scale.This structure mirrors the arrangements put in place for bushfire recovery and the stimuluspackage on a larger and ongoing scale.Perhaps above all, this structure allows the ACTPS to be agile, uniting it behind a clear set ofshared and commonly understood priorities, providing a mechanism for navigating theuncertainties that the ACT will continue to face, and facilitating flexible responses tochanging circumstances. It reduces fragmentation and opportunities for coordination tounravel resulting in people and issues falling through the cracks.Of course, structural change on its own is not the answer to enhancing service delivery or thequality of strategic advice provided to the Government. Putting different organisationstogether does not prevent silos forming and reforming. These issues are discussed in moredetail below, and in subsequent chapters, but in combination with cultural change, systemsenhancements and the creation of institutional imperatives, supported by high qualityleadership by Ministers and senior officials, these weaknesses can be overcome.In this context, the Review considers that strong leadership, particularly at the seniorexecutive levels, is crucial to the task being faced. Despite it being raised in a number ofstaff round tables, the Review has concluded that a reduction in the number, quality,experience and skill base of senior executives would be a false economy. That is not to saythat there is no room for individual officers to do better, or that change will succeed withoutsignificant support of officers at all levels, and those in leadership positions in particular. Itdoes, however, reflect the argument that the answer to enhancing the performance of theACTPS lies in fostering alignment, sharing a common purpose and facilitating agileresponses to emerging issues, rather than in simply reducing the number of SES andincreasing the number of staff at lower levels within the current structure.102 State Services Commission (2001) p.4.Governing the City State: 74