|
|
Departmental Staffing Accountability Report, Overview for the 2003-2004 CycleTable of Contents
1. IntroductionAll Deputy Heads, who have received staffing delegation, are required by the Public Service Commission (PSC) to submit an annual Departmental Staffing and Accountability Report (DSAR). Reports must be submitted in a manner prescribed by the PSC to help the Commission assess staffing information, provide feedback to Deputy Heads and use the information from departments to contribute to reporting on the health of the staffing system to Parliament. This overview report provides a summary of the DSARs for the 2003-2004 cycle. This is the fourth reporting cycle that has used performance ratings. The ratings are based on a standardized assessment scale. Seventy-two of the 77 departments and agencies with delegated staffing authority submitted DSARs. The remaining five organizations were not required to report because they were either recently created or they were undergoing a staffing audit by the PSC. Three organizations reported for the first time during the 2003-2004 period:
This year, departments were asked to report on the five mandatory elements defined in the Staffing Management and Accountability Framework (SMAF). The SMAF was introduced in response to the enhanced requirement for accountability that is built into the new Public Service Employment Act (PSEA). The SMAF sets out the PSC's expectations for a well managed appointment system and provides a series of indicators grouped under the following elements: governance, planning, policy, communication and control (see Appendix A). Figure 1 highlights the number of reporting organizations by size (as measured by the number of employees). Figure 1. Number of Organizations by Size
2. Departmental performance under current systemOverviewRisk assessment for each of the five SMAF elements was important in determining the level of departmental performance under the current system. These elements can be placed in order according to level of risk as evaluated through staffing performance and management. More than 20% of departments have at least some area of significant risk. The lowest risk levels in the current system are found for communication and governance. The elements of policy, planning and control however, require more attention. Appendix B provides a visual summary of overall departmental performance with respect to the current system and readiness for implementation of the new PSEA. Summary of Performance for each SMAF element2.1 Governance
Practices
Sub-delegation
Staffing Training
Infrastructure
2.2 Planning
Extent of Human Resource Planning and its usesIn 2003-2004, 36% of the departments had a human resource planning process in place that demonstrated an understanding of the current and future needs of the organization. However, 51% of all organizations have not progressed as far, but have made some effort toward human resource planning. In this environment of limited HR planning, there is a trend towards short-term hiring. Less than one quarter of all organizations demonstrated that their staffing and/or HR priorities were in alignment with their business and strategic priorities. However, 57% of organizations were in the process of aligning their planning priorities. Only 8% of medium and large organizations had demonstrated this alignment, although most were working in this direction. In contrast, 40% of small and very small organizations together had aligned their staffing/HR priorities with their business and strategic priorities. Only one quarter of departments demonstrated recognition of the need to compare actual staffing performance against staffing plans, with smaller departments leading larger departments. Approximately 40% of departments demonstrated either that there is no coherence between their staffing plans and staffing activities, or that they do not have a process in place to assess the success of their staffing plans. These findings are spread fairly evenly amongst small, medium and large departments. Three quarters of very small departments however, have demonstrated correlation between their appointment statistics and their staffing plans. As well, there is evidence that some organizations have formal staffing strategies in place, however, the link was not always evident between these strategies and the HR plans. 2.3 Policy
High Risk Staffing ProcessesOver the past few years the PSC has observed a reduction in indeterminate hiring, and an increase in temporary staffing including the use of casuals, terms, and long term acting appointments. This hiring pattern is relevant to the value of fairness, as many of those hired on a temporary basis are later hired on an indeterminate basis. Also, the reliance on a contingent workforce is a deterrent to persons seeking access to indeterminate employment in the public service. The Commission was able to obtain basic numerical appointment data from the departments. However, when asked to provide information on their use of these processes and on practices implemented to mitigate associated risks, the quality of data obtained from the departments was inconsistent. Some departments indicated however, that departmental guidelines were in place to help guide decisions in the use of casual employment, the management of acting appointments and the hiring of family members While departments were usually able to provide data on staffing results (e.g. promotion, lateral move, etc.), data on how these appointments were made (competition, without competition, etc.) was often unavailable. The types of information departments maintained also varied, making data comparison across departments difficult, and resulting in the use of PSC-held data in various areas. A number of departments cited the current freeze on development of human resource information systems as a factor in their ability to address these challenges. Obtaining a clearer picture on departmental management of high risk staffing areas could therefore be aided by the conduct of studies or audits. Departments were also asked to tell us about their approach to policy review. While only 11% of organizations had completed staffing-related policy reviews by late 2004, 60% of organizations had taken some steps towards becoming ready for such a review. There is still a need for departments to implement policy review mechanisms to ensure that policies are kept current. 2.4 Communication
Over 65% of organizations use a large variety of tools to communicate staffing-related information to stakeholders. The most popular communication tools are Publiservice, intranet, e-mail, information bulletins, bulletin boards and staff meetings. Over 90% of departments and agencies use Publiservice to post employment opportunities. Based on limited reporting, organizations are using the PSC job posting site for recruitment purposes. Over 75% of organizations use intranets to provide their employees with staffing information. 2.5 Control
While 88% organizations have some control mechanisms in place, only approximately 44% of these were given the lowest risk rating. Similarly, 93% of organizations maintain data on staffing processes, but again, data is regularly updated and undergoes quality control in only about 40% of cases. Two thirds of good practices in this regard were found in small organizations and were likely related to manual data maintenance by a very limited number of persons. Although 88% of departments conduct some staffing-related monitoring, only about 20% monitor thoroughly. Medium-sized departments showed the poorest level of monitoring. In general, monitoring staffing activities to prevent political or bureaucratic patronage from influencing staffing processes remains an ad hoc activity. Only a few organizations have implemented more rigorous systematic monitoring with regular reporting to management. While 80% of departments practiced risk assessment, less than 20% did so in a staffing context. While 80% of organizations endeavoured to take corrective measures to improve staffing, 28% indicated that performance information is actually used to manage staffing and make improvements on an ongoing and timely basis. 3. Departmental readiness for the new PSEAOverviewComments in this section build on the points already raised to create a picture of the state of readiness for the new PSEA as it was in early 2005. The list below indicates the number of departments/agencies which had at least one low readiness (at risk) rating by SMAF element:
Summary of Performance for each SMAF element3.1 Governance
While readiness is progressing well for governance, roles and responsibilities for staffing still need to be clearly defined. Approximately 31% of the 72 reporting departments/agencies reported that roles and responsibilities were clearly defined in their departments in the context of staffing and the new PSEA. Sixty-four percent were in the process of discussing the level to which staffing authorities would be delegated. By late 2004, a few departments had not yet started discussions on this issue. 3.2 Planning
Just over one third of organizations reported they have in place a human resource planning process or plan which demonstrates an understanding of the current and future needs of the organization. However, half of all organizations have not made as much progress, but have made some efforts towards human resource planning. Approximately 12% of organizations have no HR plan or process. 3.3 Policy
Over half of all organizations had not begun policy work aimed at the implementation of the new PSEA. Approximately two thirds of large organizations had a higher level of readiness. Half of the medium-sized organizations had started review and development of policies, while about two thirds of the small and very small organizations had not yet started policy work and were awaiting the finalization of central agency policies to either find partnerships or initiate the development of relevant policies. Many organizations lack ongoing and systematic policy review processes. Approximately one quarter of organizations have a structured approach in place, 35% have no mechanism in place, and 40% use an adhoc approach for policy review. Some organizations lack the financial and human resources to complete all policy-related work and train managers. Systems development to integrate the new policy requirements for reporting is also an issue. Another challenge is readiness for the delegation of the Executive group at the EX-1 to EX-5 levels. The trend for small and very small organizations will be to use the services of either their service provider or the Service organization of the Public Service Commission. Approximately 40% of medium-sized organizations indicated that EX delegation would represent a challenge. Some larger organizations also indicated a lack of resources and expertise in this area. 3.5 Communication
Almost all departments provide information to staff on HR and staffing matters and in particular on job opportunities. Information flows vertically and horizontally to inform all relevant stakeholders. Communication methods include staff meetings, informal conversations, e-mail, internet/intranet, information sessions, focus groups and labour-management consultation committees. 3.5 Control
As noted earlier, there is room for improvement in all areas of control. Areas of greatest weakness include the regularity and comprehensiveness of monitoring, the application of risk management to staffing, and the use of performance information relevant to staffing as a basis for corrective action. Nearly 60% of departments were either late in reporting their staffing results to the PSC, or their reports were incomplete or contained generalities. Consequently, the PSC was required to conduct follow-up information gathering. 4. ChallengesOverviewThe DSARs also provided insight into perceived challenges. The following six challenges were raised most often in the DSARs submitted by departments: lack of HR capacity and increased workload, training, EX delegation and sub-delegation, HR information systems, lack of financial resource, and adapting to the new PSEA. 4.1 Lack of HR Capacity and Increased Workload(51 references) This challenge was noted most frequently, and touched on all areas related to staffing, including:
4.2 Training(39 references) Also noted frequently, training was seen as a challenge in terms of:
4.3 Delegation for EX positions and sub-delegation(28 references) Ex delegation and sub-delegation were viewed as challenges from various perspectives including:
4.4 HR Information Systems(27 references) Challenges regarding HR information systems revolved around:
4.5 Lack of financial resources(26 references) This challenge was seen as having an impact on a number of areas including:
4.6 Adapting to the new PSEA(20 references) Challenges cited included:
|
Top of Page |
Updated: 2006-03-28 | Important Notices |