Page 1939 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 16 June 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
our Government. The days are gone when it was appropriate for almost half of our work force to be employed under terms and conditions that had been set by another government. The separate public service, I believe, will make it easier, not harder, for us to set standards for our managers.
I should say that our managers are already expected continuously to improve the quality and effectiveness of their management. I make no bones about that. They do not need my permission to go ahead and take action to do that. They know that it is their job. They have been expected to make those improvements for many years. The staff attitude survey has occurred in the past and it will occur more frequently in the future. I believe that we ought to encourage our managers to seek out problems. We ought to be concerned only when managers avoid or choose not to address those problems.
My department chose to pilot the concept of a staff attitude survey. It did so partly because it is the centre for management improvement, but mainly because the managers of my department are genuinely committed to doing the best job they possibly can. Surveys elsewhere suggested that the results would show staff to be critical of managers and sceptical of the purpose of the survey itself. You have only to look at surveys conducted in the Civil Aviation Authority, the Housing Trust and a number of other areas to see the same sorts of results. However, experience has shown that, where staff have felt empowered to become active participants, this is a powerful change management tool and it has the potential to refocus an organisation on the maximum efficiency, effectiveness and enthusiasm in the discharge of their duties and their responsibilities. So the department expected those sorts of findings, and they accepted the resulting challenge to change things for the better.
Mr Stevenson: Expected? Why? Why would you expect that?
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The Chief Minister has the floor.
MS FOLLETT: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. The survey form was designed as an action document. Management's intention was to draft questions in a way that action could be taken on the answers in each area. As Mr Stevenson said, over 62 per cent of staff replied to the survey, and the results were then available to them before last Christmas. I am advised that this is the quickest turnaround of survey results in Australia to date. For members who may not have seen the report, I would like to table the document prepared in the department. It contains details of the process, the questionnaire, the findings and the actions to date. Members are free to study that at their leisure. While this material has not been the subject of a press release, it has been widely available within the public service and interested areas. For example, the survey result has been in the ACT Government Library since Christmas, so you could have looked it up in the library.
The secretary had meetings of staff before Christmas to talk about the results of the survey and to outline the steps that would now be taken to respond. The concern that the results would not be taken seriously was addressed specifically, as you would expect. I am advised that the staff who attended those meetings left with assurances that their comments would not be ignored. The secretary made commitments about follow-up meetings in the new year, and these commitments were honoured. The last meeting occurred in May and 43 per cent of staff attended.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .