Capacity needs in terms of skills and resources in the Public Service Nkhabele Marumo Clinical Psychologist Consultant from Siyeluleka
Capacity, skills and resources • Why is “lack of capacity” a recurring theme in the public service? – Research findings “ Capacity” • National Development Plan • MPAT - Ability? • Our own • Why are available resources not - Availability of resources? helping? – HR systems - Willingness to – Competency assessment act? – Training
Training as a resource to improve capacity Khaedu Development Programme by PALAMA, directly Skills Development Act linked to the Core Management Skills Development Levy Competencies for SMS Workplace Skills Plan members = “compulsory, customised NEW: National School of solution and development/ Government orientation programme” Our finding : Only 20% of SMS had completed Why is this resource not being used? this programme – most at Director level 3
Our findings: Skills development strategy • Lack of follow through in strategic plans – “Lack of capacity” Rollover for 3 years in a row given as the reason for – Whole year devoted to “identification of training needs” non-delivery of multiple items in progress reports to • No focus on areas of priority Parliament – Critical skills Key vacancies – • WSP – “Wish list” from PDPs – no way to interrogate real needs • HRD “hoped that individuals had been given feedback and they would include what they needed in their own PDPs” • General focus on technical training – no insight into personal development needs – Attention to those with scores less than 100 in PAs – to avoid possible labour disputes later – Plan vs actual – little resemblance – Multiple errors in submissions to SETA and DoL – Need for audit of actual amount spent on training Consequence? Accountability?
“Management Performance MPAT report Assessment Tool” “ State of management practices in the Public Service: Results of management performance assessments for the 2012/13 financial year.” Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, July 2013 Measures only whether a Department can actually deliver against basic legal/regulatory standards • Eg financial management & supply chain management standards set by NT • HRD standards set by DPSA Purpose: • Information to be used by departments to • note challenges, • initiate corrective actions and • inculcate a culture of continuous improvement.
MPAT results Levels: 1: Not compliant 2: Partially compliant 3: Fully compliant 4: Going beyond compliance Human Resource Management 73% of all Departments did not meet minimum requirements
HR Management elements • HR planning • HRD planning • Recruitment and retention practices • Performance Management Systems ND’s that met none of the min requirements Military Veterans • Organisational design and Public Works Traditional Affairs implementation Water Affairs • Pay sheet certification Women Children and Persons with Disabilities • Management of diversity • Management of disciplinary cases
MPAT results for sample ND MPAT: Overall performance for sample ND Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 1 100% 50% 43% 33% 22% 0% -11% -20% -43% -67% -67% -50% -14% -80% -100% Strat Mng Accountability HR Mng Fin Mng Note: 100% below the line for HR Management
Our findings for same sample ND • Poor HR systems • Poor recruitment decisions • Poor HRD planning and implementation • Poor self awareness / denial in SMS Overall non delivery against strategic objectives Very poor report from Auditor General Constant bad press for non delivery
Our findings: Poor HR systems Poor data credibility: Job descriptions a. Out of date Training reports Organogram b. Confusion re post names a. Wrong version submitted to SETA a. Multiple versions c. Match with PAs? b. Differing budget amounts b. Process? EXCO approval? c. Errors Management reports eFiling protocols? “I just delete the Management report when it comes.” EXCO member Missing data for SMS: CV's* Competency “Non -compliance by Assessments managers” 58% 65% % missing 26% of Performance Agreements outstanding *for SMS appointments since 2010
Our findings: Poor recruitment decisions Position: CD Projects Appropriate Qualification: No No recruitment policy Appropriate Experience: No Competency Assessment: Not at required level Decision: Appointed as CD Projects % of SMS that do % vacancy rate not meet Appointments in HR selection criteria DG’s Office 33% 25% Department Dept A 22% 44% 50% Dept K 40% 22% 45% 38% 38% Projects 43% 23% 40% 35% Dept I 0% 40% 30% 25% Dept E 23% 33% 25% Policy 25% 17% 20% 15% Corporate 45% 14% 10% Services 5% Finance & SC 14% 50% 0% Both appropriate Either qualification Neither COO's office 60% 22% qualification and or experience qualification nor experience experience Regions 32% 32% Total 33% 29% Combination of poor skills and high vacancies
Our findings: SMS appointments don’t meet requirements for management competencies N recruitment policy Ave for management competencies - by job level Current Ave Required Ave 2 3 4 5 3.7 DDG 4.5 3 CD 4 2.8 Director 3 At date of appointment Note : When asked to rate themselves on management competencies ALL rated themselves as meeting requirements
Personality profiles - ND What is the impact of these profiles on productivity and teamwork? 13
Our findings: SMS rating of their performance Distribution of SMS assessment scores n = 97 assessment scores received 60% 52% Expectation from DPSA: Approx 15% to 20% 50% 40% above 130 40% 30% 60% are above 130 20% 8% 10% 0% 100 - 129 130 - 149 >150 (Outstanding) (Significantly above ave) Lack of self awareness? Arrogance? Delusion? Lack of accountability? 14
What can we do about this? Improved capacity will lead to better service delivery Improved service delivery requires better decision making Basis for good decisions is judgement Starting point for developing judgement is critical self awareness 15
Competency assessments as a resource to improve self awareness “This circular serves to remind “The SMS competency all Heads of Department of assessment battery is used for Cabinet’s decision, of 26 -28 July developmental purposes. 2006 regarding the compulsory However it can also be used at implementation of competency recruitment/selection to identify assessments for the Senior the developmental needs of an Management Service (SMS) by individual prior to appointment .” December 2008.” Why is this resource not being used? 16
Competency assessments – what do they tell us Measured Thinking/Decision making levels Senior Managers (reqd level = 3) Public Sector Company S 60% 52% 50% 40% 34% 27% 30% 24% 22% 92% have the potential to reach the 17% 20% 14% 10% required level 10% 0% 0% 0% Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Potential Thinking/Decision making levels Senior Managers (reqd level = 3) 76% of Public Sector participants below Public Sector Company S required level for senior management 80% 71% 70% 60% 50% 37% 34% 40% 27% 30% 14% 20% 7% 7% 10% 2% 0% 0% 0% Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 17
Choices… Resist / deny / ignore assessment findings OR Use the findings to intervene and improve capacity 18
Our findings: Resistance to competency assessments by HR Assessments are done for compliance Reports are not given to managers only as there might be discrimination against some Affirmative Action appointees on the basis of the results Can’t take this up with DPSA as you never know who in DPSA is involved in ownership of the Reports are often appointed service poorly written and providers. seem to just be “cut and paste” exercises that can’t be trusted Comments from CD: HRM
Our findings: Problem areas in the use of competency assessments 1.Assessment results not being used for recruitment for development 3. Assessment results are not made known The individual does not get feedback The HRD unit does not get to know what the results were Cannot add to skills 2. Inconsistency development plans for transfers in and promotions Managers don’t receive the reports or not done where appointments are feedback “political” sometimes done only after appointment – so not used for appointment decisions
An example – Company S Full Thinking/ decision making EQ psychometric Personality / behaviour Development assessment of “required 360 assessment 12 factors in specially developed Competency Model and profiles” and 360 questionnaire cut-off points Individual Feedback Manager (individual and HR organisational) MD Development HRD interventions, including training, appointment of coaches, special placements and projects reports After a year Re-evaluation Deliberate steps to • Recruit and select against required profiles • Address current weaknesses 21
Recommend
More recommend
