Page 1940 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 16 June 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The response rate on the survey was extremely good, comparatively, and to some extent it belies the pessimism of the survey results themselves. Put simply, departmental managers, I am told, would have been more worried if people had not responded, because this would have suggested that they believed that it simply was not worth the effort and that nothing would change. The response to the survey and to the meetings, particularly the last meeting, was again extremely high by any standard. It can indicate only that staff believed that management would institute changes and that they could individually contribute to and influence the nature of those changes.
The next step is to implement the change management plan that was jointly agreed by staff and managers and to conduct another survey in November. As you can see from this description, my department has committed itself to an ongoing process of management improvement participatively with the staff. The process did not stop with the first report and it will not stop with the next survey. I understand that the next survey will trigger a similar participative process as managers and staff work together in strengthening the department.
The department's process of consulting staff through surveys is similar to that of many other departments. However, I am advised that the subsequent process of consultation is close to a first in Australian public sector management. As well as providing the survey results, the department has involved the staff in changes in the working environment by negotiating the changes that they and the managers would like to see. I, for one, am prepared to praise my department for several reasons. Firstly, as I said, I believe that they have had to cope with more change than perhaps any other department, with greater levels of disruption. That the managers were prepared to seek the views of staff about the department, I think, is praiseworthy. (Extension of time granted)
Secondly, I believe that the department ought to be praised because the staff responded positively. If you look at the results rationally, and I know that that is a challenge for Mr Stevenson, it is quite evident that for every negative comment staff had a positive suggestion about how to improve things.
Debate interrupted.
ADJOURNMENT
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! It being 4.30 pm, I propose the question:
That the Assembly do now adjourn.
Mr Berry: I require the question to be put forthwith without debate.
Question resolved in the negative.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .