Public Sector Journal 44 - September 2021

PUBLICSECTOR PUBLIC SECTOR Journal of the Institute of Public Administration New Zealand Volume 44 • September 2021

DEVOLVING POWER TO TACKLE COMPLEX ISSUES GETTING RESULTS IN HASTINGS THROUGH COLLABORATION

Institute Instituteof of Public PublicAdministration Administration New NewZealand Zealand 1 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

G-REG Building transferable skills and knowledge in the Regulatory Sector Talk to Skills about how G-REG qualifications can improve operational capability, staff engagement, leadership and communication.

0508 SKILLS (0508 754 557) www.skills.org.nz

VOLUME 44 : 3

Institute of Public Administration New Zealand

SEPTEMBER 2021

PUBLISHER The Institute of Public Administration New Zealand PO Box 5032, Wellington, New Zealand Phone: +64 4 463 6940 Email: admin@ipanz.org.nz Website: www.ipanz.org.nz ISSN 0110-5191 (Print) ISSN 1176-9831 (Online) The whole of the literary matter of Public Sector is copyright. Please contact the editor if you are interested in reproducing any Public Sector content.

EDITOR Simon Minto: simon.g.minto@gmail.com

12 Getting results in Hastings

President’s Message

2

In Memory of Ivan Kwok ONZM

3

by John Wilson Analysis

Ben Aiken Guy Beatson Elle Bell Julia Black Andrew Bridgman Christine Cessford Ron Crawford Jacqui Gibson Shenagh Gleisner Diane Joyce John Larkindale Lana Simmons-Donaldson Clyde Smith Lola Toppin-Casserly John Wilson

Devolving power to tackle complex issues

JOURNAL ADVISORY GROUP

Ethical leadership – a panacea?

ADVERTISING Phone: +64 4 463 6940 Email: admin@ipanz.org.nz

Investigation Business and government often want the same things. Guy Beatson outlines a model for business and the government to work together to achieve those things.

Insights Shenagh Gleisner shares insights from the IPANZ co-design symposium.

Case Study

12

Getting results in Hastings through collaboration Collaboration over housing has been happening in Hastings. Diane Joyce explores the results.

Investigation

15

Lola Toppin-Casserly examines the latest literature on ethical leadership.

Interview

18

Addressing racism to eliminate Māori health inequity Lana Simmons-Donaldson talks with Donna Cormack about the dire inequities in Māori health.

Investigation

20

Using data for good Jacqui Gibson finds out what happens when public and private organisations join forces to tackle youth inequality.

Voices of Young Professionals

22

A call to action: The public service futures network Clyde Smith wants younger voices to be heard more in the shaping of our future.

Public Sector welcomes contributions to each issue from readers.

Please contact the editor for more information.

Q&A

SUBSCRIPTIONS

Regulation in a challenging world

Every effort is made to provide accurate and factual content. The publishers and editorial staff, however, cannot accept responsibility for any inadvertent errors or omissions that may occur.

9

Ways of being, knowing, and doing – our co-design symposium

Local government shifts focus to be “fit for the future”

Opinions expressed in Public Sector are those of various authors and do not necessarily represent those of the editor, the journal advisory group, or IPANZ.

6

A new mission for government and business?

Investigation

DISCLAIMER

4

Ron Crawford sees devolution as an answer to policy making in difficult times.

CONTRIBUTIONS

IPANZ welcomes both corporate and individual membership and journal subscriptions. Please email admin@ipanz.org.nz, phone +64 4 463 6940 or visit www.ipanz.org.nz to register online.

Regulation in a challenging world

CONTENTS

CONTRIBUTORS

Peter Alsop Jess Birdsall-Day Shenagh Gleisner John Larkindale Karl Löfgren Liz MacPherson Paula Martin

26

24

Christine Cessford explores some big changes ahead for local government.

26

Shenagh Gleisner talks to Julia Black about the world of regulation.

Investigation

28

A solution to affordable community facilities Elle Bell believes community facilites can be more affordable and effective, and she has a way to make it happen.

Opinions

30

Is working from home the answer?

John Larkindale questions whether working from home is really the best way forward.

Money talks – using procurement to buy our low carbon future Ben Aiken believes we can be bolder in using procurement to reduce carbon emissions.

Reader Contribution

32

Broadening the lens – the value of civilian advice in defence policy There are new challenges to Aotearoa’s national security. Andrew Bridgman examines how we might address them.

Public Sector is printed on environmentally responsible paper produced using ECF, thirdparty certified pulp from responsible sources and manufactured under the ISO14001 Environmental Management System.

1 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE

IPANZ PRESIDENT LIZ MACPHERSON IPANZ PRESIDENT LIZ MACPHERSON

Kāore te kŪmara e kōrero mō tōna ake reka The kumarate does not speak its own mō sweetness Kāore kumara e of kōrere tōna ake reka The kumara does not speak of its own sweetness

He aha te kai a te rangatira? He kōrero, he kōrero, He ahahe te kōrero. kai a te rangitira? He kōrero, he What is the food the leader? It is knowledge, it is kōrero, heofkorero. communication.

What is the food of the leader? It is knowledge, it is Oncommunication.

12 November 2021, IPANZ will be holding its annual

conference. The focus of the conference is on the key challenges On 21the September 2021, IPANZ will be holding its annual facing public service, both current and future.

It is a conference. The focus of the conference is on the key challenges conference designed to provide public service professionals with facing the public service, both current and future. It is a the opportunity to pause, listen, reflect, and learn together. conference designed to provide public service professionals with the opportunity to pause, listen, reflect, and learn together.

The conference begins with an address given by the Hon. Justice Joe Williams, in honour of an exemplary public servant, The conference begins with an address in honour of an Ivan Kwok. The focus of the lecture is on one of our greatest exemplary public servant, the inaugural Ivan Kwok Memorial challenges and opportunities realisingThe a real partnership Lecture, given

by Justice Joe–Williams. focus of the lecture is between Māori and the Crown. on one of our greatest challenges and opportunities – realising a real partnership between Māori and the Crown.

The whakataukī “kāore te kumara e kōrero mō tōna ake reka – the kumara does not speak of its own sweetness” could The whakataukī “kāore te kumara e kōrere mō tōna akehave reka – been fornot Ivan Kwok.

Heown was sweetness” a man of great humility, the composed kumara does speak of its could have warmth, and kindness coupled a sharp intellect, ability been composed for Ivan Kwok.with He was a man of greatthe humility, towarmth, see possibilities rather than constraints, and a desire to and kindness coupled with a sharp intellect, the ability

make a difference. One of the pre-eminent legal minds of his generation, he always gave respect to whomever he was to see possibilities rather than constraints, and a desire to listening to – whether it was a new graduate or the prime minister. make a difference. One of the pre-eminent legal minds of his generation, he always gave respect to whomever he was listening But it is in hisitrelationship with iwior leaders, his work to further to – whether was a new graduate the prime minister. a true partnership between Māori and the Crown, that Ivan provides both challenge hope.his Here was man But it is inus hiswith relationship with iwiand leaders, work to afurther not tangata whenua butand whothe was respected across awho truewas partnership between Māori Crown, that Ivan te ao Māori.

Why? Because Ivanand believed listening provides us with both challenge hope.in Here was a deeply man to understand, in thewhenua true power of conversation, in across engaging who was not tangata but who was respected early, in people process. demonstrated by sitting te ao Māori.

Why?over Because IvanIvan believed in listeningthat deeply down togetherinand each other’s interest at a deep to understand, theunderstanding true power of conversation, in engaging relational level,over the Treaty partners could find new different early, in people process.

Ivan demonstrated thatand by sitting down together and understanding interest atMāori a deep ways of working with each other –each waysother’s that benefited and relational the Treaty find new and the nationlevel, as a whole.

He partners aha te kaicould a te rangatira?

Hedifferent kōrero, he ways of he working kōrero, kōrero.with each other – ways that benefited Māori and the nation as a whole. He aha te kai a te rangitira? He korero, he korero, he korero.

Ivan’s tangi, which was held at Pipitea Marae, was attended by iwi leaders, past and present ministers of finance, and other Ivan’s tangi, Many whichspoke was held at Pipitea Marae, was dignitaries. of Ivan’s “sweetness”, of attended the huge by legacy iwi leaders, past and present ministers of finance, and other of this humble public servant. It is my hope that the Crown– dignitaries.

Manylecture, spoke of Ivan’s ofwill the become huge legacy Māori relations given in “sweetness”, Ivan’s honour, part of servant. is my hopeby that the Ivan Kwok of this this humble legacy –public that the kōreroItgenerated this address will Memorial Lecture series will become partsector of this leaders legacy –as that help sustain a new generation of public we take the kōrero generated by these addresses will help sustain a new on the challenges of the future for the benefit of all. generation of public sector leaders as we take on the challenges of the future for the benefit of all.

Contributions Please

Public Sector journal is always happy to receive contributions from readers.

If you’re working on an interesting project in the public sector or have something relevant to say about a particular issue, think about sending us a short article on the subject.

Contact the editor Simon Minto at simon.g.minto@gmail.com

2 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2 PUBLIC SECTOR September2021 2021

In memory of Ivan Kwok ONZM

Ivan Kwok trained as a lawyer, and after a short period in private practice, he joined the Treasury, where he remained for the rest of his career.

There is an old cliché about there being two sorts of lawyers: those who tell you why you can’t do what you want to do, and those who tell you how to do it. Ivan was emphatically the latter. His wisdom came not from knowing every intricacy of statute or case law, but from a deep understanding and reverence for constitutional and legal principles, a superb capacity to recognise what was really motivating the other parties, and a respect for the facts.

Ivan brought a set of professional qualities to his work, which set an example for his colleagues.

• •

He was driven to get stuff done. If something good was attainable but perfection wasn’t, he would not let the quest for the perfect get in the way of achieving the good.

• •

He was accepting and understanding of the positions of others – and thus able to craft solutions that respected all parties’ needs.

• •

He had a deep understanding of the Ministers. challenges facing ministers.

• •

He knew how to cut a deal – when to hold, when to fold, and when to walk.

• •

He enjoyed working with young people and provided them with wise counsel, as well as coaching and support in the intricacies of public law.

Ivan would be the first to say that his career had many highs and lows. Those experiences helped him better understand others who were facing difficulties, making him always supportive and non-judgmental.

Ivan’s career in Treasury saw him playing a major role in two areas of policy. From the 1980s through to the early 2000s, he played a major role in almost every privatisation or government recapitalisation of businesses. His experience with the partial privatisation of the BNZ – and its subsequent financial problems with the government having to bail it out – seared his views of the risks and roles of government and the private sector in business. Ivan became the repository of knowledge within the Treasury about major transactions between the Crown and the private sector.

The second second area area was was his his work work with with Treaty Treaty settlement settlement The processes, which became his dominant focus in the the latter latter processes, which became his dominant focus in part of his career.

The Treaty settlement process fascinated part of his career. The Treaty settlement process fascinated him, and and it it gave gave him him aa window window into into the the Māori Māori world, world, which which him, he came to love.

By the end of his life, he regarded the Treaty he came to love. By the end of his life, he regarded the Treaty work as the most important work he had done, making our work as the most important work he had done, making our country a better and fairer place. country a better and fairer place.

Ivan Ivandeveloped developedaastrong strongcommitment commitmentto topartnership with Māori (based on respect for restoring mana). partnership with Māori (based on respect for Ivan argued that Pākehā policy makers have restoring mana). Ivan argued that Pākehā underestimated theunderestimated importance of mana policy makers have the in settlements.

That say the Crown importance of manaisintosettlements.

That apology, theCrown movesapology, to co-management, is to say the the moves and the renaming of mountains right up to co-management, and thewere renaming of with the cash settlements in importance. mountains were right up with the cash This was a reflection of his superb settlements in importance.

This was a capacity to see where parties were reflection of his superbother capacity to see coming from. where other parties were coming from.

Ivan was was extremely extremely well-respected well-respected by by Ivan Ministers. The The turnout turnout of of current current and and ministers. former finance finance and and Treaty Treaty settlement settlement former Ministers at ministers at his his funeral funeral was was evidence evidence of of that. Ministers Ministers valued valued his his sage sage counsel. counsel. that.

Oneofficial officialrecalled recalledgoing goingto tosee seeMichael Michael One Cullenwith withIvan.

Ivan.Cullen Cullensaid saidas asthey theycame came Cullen inthe thedoor, door,“This “Thismust mustbe beserious. serious.They’ve They’ve in broughtIvan Ivanwith withthem.” them.” brought Ivanalways alwaysclaimed claimedthat thathe hedidn’t didn’tdo dopolicy. policy.

Ivan That was never exactly true.

He was a model of That was never exactly true. He was a model of the public service advisor, providing Ministers with the public service advisor, providing ministers with shrewd practical practical and and pragmatic pragmatic advice advice on on how how to to achieve achieve shrewd their goals and implement their decisions effectively, while their goals and implement their decisions effectively, while also warning them clearly and politely of the unintended also warning them clearly and politely of the unintended and bad bad consequences, consequences, as as well well as as the the legal legal or or constitutional constitutional and principles. principles.

Ivan was was aa first-class first-class exemplar exemplar of of the the public public service service principles principles Ivan of political neutrality and free and frank advice.

Ivan would of political neutrality and free and frank advice. Ivan would have been reassured to learn that those principles are have been reassured to learn that those principles are reaffirmed in in the the new new Public Public Service Service Act. Act. reaffirmed John Wilson Wilson John

(on behalf behalf of of all all the the Treasury Treasury alumni alumni who who had had (on the privilege privilege of of working working with with Ivan) Ivan) the

3 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

ANALYSIS

DEVOLVING POWER TO TACKLE COMPLEX ISSUES Ron Crawford has contributed to many of the enquiries undertaken by the New Zealand Productivity Commission. Drawing on examples from its research, engagement, and analysis, he explores how a system of devolved policy making could work alongside the traditional, centralised approach.

New Zealand, like many countries, struggles to find effective ways to tackle complex social and economic problems. Progress on issues like reducing disadvantage across successive generations, making housing more affordable, managing constrained health budgets for the biggest impact on wellbeing, protecting the natural environment, and raising the productivity of firms has eluded New Zealand policy makers for decades. New Zealand governments typically adopt a centralised paradigm to choose and implement policy. They downplay the possibility that devolving decisions around choice of interventions and control of resources “closer to the action” will be more effective. Where devolution occurs, it is often tentative, lacking in durability, and under-resourced (with the arguable exception of well-established mainstream areas such as education, health, and local government).

The challenge of complex issues Complexity inevitably arises where outcomes depend on a myriad of choices made by many actors with diverse resources, capabilities, and ideas about what a good future looks like. Complexity makes the effect of interventions uncertain. As the system of interactions evolves, actors adapt their behaviour to reflect emerging outcomes and the behaviour of other actors. Norms of action develop naturally and can be a strong counterweight to formal interventions from outside. The direction of change is path-dependent, so small additional gains or losses can precipitate larger effects in the longer term.

Working with complex issues requires experimental, adaptive approaches guided by widely shared objectives, monitoring and evaluation, and feedback to decision makers. To achieve this, government 4 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

agencies need to find processes and institutions for building consensus and effective ongoing engagement with other players. Exploring possibilities with and building on what already exists is nearly always best.

WHERE DEVOLUTION OCCURS, IT IS OFTEN TENTATIVE, LACKING IN DURABILITY, AND UNDER-RESOURCED. The challenges are immense. Politicians are elected to make a difference and are held to account every three years. They do not want the public to hear that their recently set up intervention is not working.

Departments are risk averse, like to maintain direct control of their resources, and are lukewarm about experimentation and evaluation. They settle on verities about “best practice” that they mandate under their umbrella. This locks the bulk of public resources away from an ongoing search for better “fit-for-purpose” ways to achieve goals.

Periodically, government agencies recognise that siloed policy development and implementation is failing to tackle complex problems. Periodically new initiatives are put in place to improve co-ordination and collaboration. These initiatives sometimes lead to temporary improvements (depending on the skills, character, and authority of those involved) but rarely get to the root of the difficulty – how to put decisions and control of budgets into the hands of those best placed to use them.

Even when devolved administration is the norm, such as in education, health, and local government, the local capabilities, institutions, and processes are often not well-established to tackle complex

problems such as social disadvantage, housing affordability, and environmental sustainability.

Developing the skills and the culture to support a collective, devolved approach is a big challenge. The capabilities and drive of individuals and organisations are the starting point. These could include community agencies, local government, mana whenua groups, and businesses.

Complexity means there is no one right way to cut the cake – forming coalitions for collective action is an experimental process and must agree with the objectives sought. Willingness to participate and to learn and adapt to feedback is key to progress – and to strengthening skills and culture over time.

Some promising approaches In its 2015 inquiry More Effective Social Services, the Productivity Commission found that the Whānau Ora strengthsbased model had many of the features needed to provide effective integrated services. Key elements included the employment of kaiārahi (navigators) to help families identify their aspirations and to access services, devolved budgets and devolved commissioning of services that are not subject to control within departmental budgets, a growing ecosystem of Māori service providers, engagement with whānau and their wider social context, and a developing framework to measure outcomes and provide feedback on what is working to commissioning agencies and service providers.

Whānau Ora has proven to be resilient enough to survive changes in government, drawing on deep roots within te ao Māori and a maturing commitment to a Treatybased approach to devolving services. Yet the Whānau Ora commissioning agencies still channel only a very small proportion

of government spending to foster the wellbeing of whānau, and mainstream government social agencies pursue their own agendas separately.

COMPLEXITY MEANS THERE IS NO ONE RIGHT WAY TO CUT THE CAKE. In the same inquiry, the Productivity Commission found that the Canterbury Clinical Network was an example of an effective approach to co-ordinating local resources and skills to tackle a complex range of factors causing poor health outcomes. Essential features were processes to marshal agreement among participants on objectives and priorities, pooled budgets from which to allocate resources effectively, and the development of clinical protocols to give effect to local priorities. Proposed health sector reforms, with a significant centralising theme, will crucially still need to harness local processes and institutions like this to make the best use of resources in practice.

Having a collective impact Both Whānau Ora and the Canterbury Clinical Network demonstrate key features of a “collective impact” approach in dealing with complex social issues. This recognises that better cross-sectional co-ordination (in contrast to isolated interventions by individual organisations or specialisations) is key to making progress on such issues.

Collective impact works by developing a common agenda, sharing results, maintaining a mutually reinforcing plan of action, prioritising open communication, and resourcing a function that provides the backbone (or secretariat) for collective action.

From a planning perspective, cities may best be regarded as complex, adaptive systems. Planning can only be indicative of city futures, rather than be determinative.

Local and central government are only some of many players that shape outcomes.

A key role for planning is to develop a credible, shared view among diverse actors about how a city should evolve. This helps to shape subsequent choices as future conditions emerge.

national officials, would agree future indicative infrastructure corridors and development areas. At the same time, they would identify bottom lines to protect and sustain the natural environment and Treaty interests. The Resource Management Review Panel (chaired by Judge Tony Randerson) took these proposals further in its recommendation for a new Strategic Planning Act, which the government intends to incorporate into its reform of resource management and urban planning legislation.

Devolving resources Innovation in an economy is a risky process that takes time to mature. A wide variety of capabilities held by firms and embodied in the business, social, and administrative environment shape the rate and direction of innovation. Small, advanced economies like New Zealand develop by finding new areas of specialised production that give firms a sustained competitive advantage in international markets.

In its Frontier Firms inquiry, the Productivity Commission found that governments can contribute to successful innovation through focusing some support (such as in research and development, skills development, and infrastructure) in areas of promise. But governments lack information on conditions for success and, in any case, directly control only a small proportion of resources. As a result, they need to find experimental, adaptive ways of working with businesses, workers, researchers, training institutions, and other interests to elicit information, develop strategies, and harness the energy of stakeholders. Devolving control of resources to self-governing, multistakeholder bodies is one way of pursuing such initiatives.

The Canadian Innovation Superclusters Initiative (ISI) provides an example. The ISI is an experimental approach with devolved administration centred on five areas of technology. Each governing body is a notfor-profit corporation that is composed of stakeholders, including businesses, academic and research institutions, and community organisations. Superclusters administer public and private funding for projects that are consistent with strategic objectives.

GOVERNMENTS LACK INFORMATION ON CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESS. In all these examples, identifying how to “bake and cut the cake” is not straightforward. Approaches need to be tailored to the circumstances, take account of the existing landscape and stakeholder strengths, and develop a workable scope for action. Public sector commissioners of services need to work with community and private sector counterparts to develop shared judgments about what will work and to put strategies in place.

Taking a step back, public sector commissioners also need to understand which issues require a devolved approach and when a more centralised approach is better. The Productivity Commission in its More Effective Social Services inquiry found that some services (such as administration of income support) are best administered centrally, or at least in a standardised way, to take account of economies of scale.

Similarly, the Productivity Commission found in its Frontier Firms inquiry that centrally administered and broadly available tax credits were a complement to a more devolved approach to supporting innovation in emerging areas of promise.

Policy makers must be alert to striking the best mix of centralised services and complementary local services and be willing to make adjustments as evidence accumulates and environments evolve.

In its Better Urban Planning inquiry, the Productivity Commission recommended regional spatial plans for shaping collective expectations for the future and keeping options open as outcomes evolve.

Local and national interests, including mana whenua, community groups, infrastructure providers, and local and Photo credit: Productivity Commission

5 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

INVESTIGATION

Guy Beatson

A NEW MISSION FOR GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESS? Since the arrival of COVID-19, business has put pressure on government to work with it more closely. Guy Beatson suggests this should happen and offers ways that it could.

In an open letter to cabinet ministers, reported on 2 March 2021, a group of senior chairs and directors of major NZX companies called “for more openness and clarity from the government on its plan for getting New Zealand to ‘COVID normal’”. They asked for more detailed information about the government’s long-term COVID-19 strategy, including access to vaccines, testing capacity, and plans to develop the world’s smartest border. In seeking these explanations, the group noted that they were “all keen and committed to bringing [their] collective expertise to assist the government working for the longer-term benefit of New Zealand and look forward to the government’s response”.

suggested that all consumers (94 percent) said it was important that companies they engage with have a strong purpose, with 83 percent stating that companies should only earn a profit if they also deliver a positive impact. However, at the same time, most consumers (63 percent) do not believe that companies have a strong purpose.

IN EMERGENCIES, SUCH AS A GLOBAL PANDEMIC, HARNESSING ALL OF THE AVAILABLE CAPABILITY IN GOVERNMENT AND BUSINESS LOOKS TO BE A SENSIBLE RESPONSE.

Rob Campbell, a business leaders group member, went further: •

•

“There had always been openness at the most senior political level but the ministries, in particular the Ministry of Health but also other government agencies involved, had tended to put their heads down and try and get on with it themselves rather than taking a more open source approach.”

“We are not asking for any special favours for business here ...

Quite often business can be self-serving, quite a lot of the time, but it’s not always, and in these sorts of national emergency situations there is an ability to, I think, draw on the skills and capacities we have.”

In emergencies, such as a global pandemic, harnessing all of the available capability in government and business looks to be a sensible response. However, the open letter from business leaders suggests frustration about this not being taken up.

While this frustration is understandable, it potentially reflects a lack of understanding of parallel developments in business and government that neither sector appears to appreciate or be acting on.

Towards diversity and inclusion There is a significant push towards more diverse and inclusive boards in New Zealand.

The Institute of Directors (IOD) has said that diversity of thought and perspective in the boardroom improves business performance and has found that over 60 percent of directors believe diversity was a key consideration in making appointments in 2014 and 2015.

Beyond shareholders to stakeholders On 19 August 2019, the United States Business Roundtable announced it was moving away from shareholder primacy to a commitment to all stakeholders. In a significant statement, chief executives of 181 major United States companies gave the following commitments: •

Delivering value to our customers

CHANGES IN BUSINESS ORIENTATION

•

Investing in our employees

Business internationally, and increasingly in New Zealand, is changing its focus and orientation.

•

Dealing fairly and ethically with our suppliers

•

Supporting the communities in which we work

•

Generating long-term value for shareholders, who provide the capital that allows companies to invest, grow, and innovate.

Beyond investor returns to purpose The British Academy’s Principles for Purposeful Business report suggests that “a reformulation of our understanding of corporate purpose should be pursued, one that is not solely about profit, but about public purposes that relate to the firm’s wider contribution to public interests and societal goals”.

Data about purpose-driven companies’ performance illustrates the importance of this change. A global study reported by Forbes 6 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

New Zealand companies are moving in a similar direction.

Beyond profit to wider outcomes The 2021 edition of the IOD’s Four Pillars of Governance Best Practice has an expanded focus on sustainability. This expanded

focus highlights an expectation that organisations, particularly in business, will broaden their focus to a wider set of outcomes.

Climate change reporting requirements reinforce this expectation.

On 15 September 2020, the Minister of Climate Change announced changes that “bring climate risks and resilience into the heart of financial and business decision making. It will ensure the disclosure of climate risk is clear, comprehensive, and mainstream.”

CHANGES IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR At the same time, the public sector is evolving in similar directions.

Towards wellbeing and living standards In 2012, in launching the Treasury’s living standards framework, the then Secretary to the Treasury, John Whitehead, said: “Misperceptions of the role Treasury has played during and since the 1980s have limited our ability to be persuasive when talking about what matters most for living standards. Some people have never got beyond believing that we are the root of all New Zealand’s economic evils. Others see us as little more than the defenders of fiscal virtue, obsessed with eliminating deficits and debt – the organisation that knows the price of everything but the value of nothing. But of course the Treasury is about a lot more than just fiscal rectitude.”

The original living standards framework, augmented by He Ara Waiora, was a feature of Budget 2021. Budget documents noted that “this means giving people the capabilities to live lives of purpose, balance, and meaning to them. To do this, we are looking beyond traditional measures of success, such as Gross Domestic Product (GDP), to broader indicators of wellbeing.”

This journey for government is a move from a focus on “hard” financial and economic outcomes to a broader focus on what matters for citizens and stakeholders.

Beyond efficiency to effective delivery of outcomes The 1980s public sector management reforms saw a move away from a focus on inputs to a greater focus on outputs (that is,

services delivered to citizens). The reforms were seen as delivering significant benefits. However, various analyses of the reforms suggest that those benefits focus on the efficient delivery of services and not on the effective delivery of services.

The Public Service Act is premised on addressing these issues while preserving the strength of the public management system.

The new legislation, including changes to the Public Finance Act 1989, is intended to get a greater management focus on outcomes by government agencies and to use new vehicles to work more collaboratively.

According to Te Kawa Mataaho, these legislative changes should make it “easier for [public service agencies] to work together and organise [themselves] around priority issues while continuing to deliver services to New Zealanders”.

The Public Service Act enshrined a spirit of service to the community as a fundamental characteristic of the public service.

These developments point to an intention to focus on the services provided to the New Zealand community and citizens more specifically.

Beyond distributed effort to more focus As well as this wider focus on outcomes, citizens, and communities, calls are increasing for more focus on specific priorities by the public service. There is also a push for focus in areas such as innovation policy as outlined in the recent report by the Productivity Commission. It recommended that “the Government should partner with stakeholders to develop and put in place transparent arrangements for the governance, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of its focused innovation areas”.

In essence, this suggests that governments with the private sector and other stakeholders need to be more focused and purposeful in innovation and industry policy and work together in a way the open letter from business leaders suggests.

BUSINESS AND GOVERNMENT ON SIMILAR JOURNEYS This survey of changes in business and government demonstrates parallel paths and a lack of connection between the two.

7 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

Notably, the similarities, although on different paths, include:

SYSTEMIC CHALLENGES TO OVERCOME

•

A greater focus on purpose and those being served

•

A focus on the longer term

While a mission-oriented approach is attractive, in theory, there are some challenges for business and government to overcome.

•

Better measurement of purpose

•

More focus on adding value and strengths.

Despite this apparent convergence, several questions remain: why hasn’t this been recognised and, if it has, why haven’t better connections been made?

A MISSION-ORIENTED POLICY APPROACH Some of the answers may lie in the absence of an appropriate vehicle to make it happen. Over the past year or so, there has been increasing discussion of mission-oriented policies. Among those suggesting this approach are Callaghan Innovation; the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment’s chief economist; and the Productivity Commission.

Based on work by Mariana Mazzucato, they suggest a new approach with a focus on a core “mission”. Mazzucato asks a series of key questions: •

“Routes and directions: How to use policy to actively set a direction of change? How to foster more dynamic (bottomup) debates about possible directions to ensure enduring democratic legitimacy? How to choose and define particular missions concretely, but with sufficient breadth to motivate action across different sectors and actors in an economy?

•

Organisations: How to build decentralised networks of explorative public organisations that can learn-by-doing and welcome trial and error, with the confidence and capability to lead and form dynamic partnerships with private and third sector partners? How to manage and evaluate progress, learning, and adaptation; and how to use a portfolio approach to balance inevitable failure with success?

•

•

Assessment: How to evaluate the dynamic impact of public sector market-creating investments, going beyond the static ideas embodied in cost/benefit analysis and ideas of ‘crowding in’ and ‘crowding out’ based on a richer conception of public value creation? How to develop new indicators and assessment tools to aid decision-making?

Risks and rewards: How to structure new types of deals between public and private sectors so that rewards are shared as much as risks taken?”

In seeking to answer these questions, she says “mission-oriented policies address societal challenges such as those arising from climate change, technological disruption, and social inequality”.

Callaghan Innovation has also noted that “enduring missions are co-created between businesses, research organisations, and government. They encourage resources across sectors to be aligned around the major shared challenges. Central to this approach is a focus on strategic innovation, rather than relying on a range of firm or sector-based interventions to direct resources into the right areas.”

This mission-oriented approach, initiated by senior leaders in government and business, is another way to make progress in the areas the open letter from business leaders on COVID-19 highlighted. It could also provide a route for a shared purpose between business and government on a specific “mission”.

8 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

Public choice underpinning legislation Trust is required to begin a mission-oriented approach. As noted above, Rob Campbell commented that business was putting selfinterest aside, or at least needed to, for the broader interests of the community. That is consistent with a greater focus on businesses’ purpose beyond a singular focus on profit and “rent seeking” from government.

However, the institutional settings, including legislation, may work in almost the opposite direction. The public sector (in the Public Finance Act, 1989) and business (in the Companies Act 1993) operate with legislation underpinned by assumptions about principals and agents.

In addition to changes to the overall purpose of business, assumptions about corporate governance need to change as well.

Teece and Brown in New Zealand Frontier Firms (2020) comment that with firms run with a focus on principals and agents “the board is so focused on policing managerial opportunism that it can fail to attend to the needs of supporting management’s pursuit of promising opportunities”. They propose a capabilities perspective under which “primary governance challenges are not about solving moral-hazard problems and guarding against opportunism, but rather about assessing, supporting, and sometimes challenging management’s strategic planning and not just shareholder primacy”. Suggestions for legislative change are also made by those seeking to create a better operating environment for social enterprise.

In the public sector, Professor Alan Schick in 1996 commented that the Treasury’s 1987 post-election briefing assumed that those who work for the state “have a tendency to pursue their own goals, to shirk and to featherbed, and to pay insufficient care in the use of resources that are owned by the ‘organisation’ or someone else”.

Moving beyond these assumptions is a stated aim of the Public Service Act. Need for more flexibility, adaptability, and innovation A mission-oriented approach is inevitably more complex than a single government agency or business delivering services. It is likely to require more bespoke services provided to those citizens and customers, with those services changing over time with changes in their needs.

Businesses and government agencies would need to change and adapt to do this. The Public Service Act envisages different organisational arrangements within the public service that permit it to operate more collectively. At present, those arrangements don’t extend to involving the private sector or iwi, hapū, and whānau in the same sort of collective way. In that sense, the changes focus more on how the public service arranges itself, without necessarily having an increased focus on citizens and customers.

However, changes in business to having a wider purpose and a broader set of objectives would see business operate in a way that more closely considers the stakeholders – customers, employees, and the wider community. These are the same stakeholders for government.

As a result, a mission-oriented approach, adopted in areas such as COVID-19 highlighted in the business leaders’ open letter, could harness the common challenges and changes that they are both embarked on for the benefit of customers, citizens, and the community generally.

INSIGHTS

WAYS OF BEING, KNOWING, AND DOING OUR CO-DESIGN SYMPOSIUM In July, IPANZ joined with some very skilled partners to run an online co-design symposium. IPANZ has been privileged to work and learn from them and all the presenters at the symposium. Shenagh Gleisner outlines some of the insights.

Robyn Bailey Allen + Clarke

Desna Whaanga-Schollum Ngā Aho

The aim of this symposium was to inform our members about co-design and to inspire further exploration of this mahi. The symposium attracted our limit of 140 registrations. There were another 45 to 50 on the waiting list. Taking part were 108 public servants from 29 different agencies. Others were from private firms, NGOs, and local authorities.

This article aims to draw out some insights from this symposium and to invite you all into the conversation about where to next for the public sector on co-design.

What is co-design?

Co-design is a range of methodologies for involving people in the design of the services, strategies, environments, policies, and processes that will impact them.

Co-design methodologies are used in many contexts, for example, with industry stakeholders for developing policies or with clinicians and patients to develop health services. The focus of this symposium was on whānau, working with tangata whenua in the context of Te Tiriti.

The title of the symposium “ways of being, knowing, and doing” is important. The symposium was not about imparting a set of skills or providing a tool box or checklist on what to do. Its central message was that through being and knowing, doing evolves.

Why did IPANZ support this kaupapa?

In February 2020, IPANZ contacted The Southern Initiative and the Auckland Co-design Lab to start a conversation about getting co-design understood among public servants. IPANZ then started working with the Lab, Ngā Aho, Tuakana Teina, and Allen + Clarke to create this symposium.

Debbie Goodwin Tuakana Teina

Penny Hagen Auckland Co-design Lab

1. To demonstrate culturally grounded practices. We were aware of how hard it is for the public service to work in partnership with whānau. The Public Service Act strengthened the authorising environment for taking courageous steps to build Māori–Crown relations. Public servants are very keen to learn – the overwhelming response to this symposium was evidence of a desire to do better. But there is a great deal to learn.

2. To stop the misuse of the term “co-design”. The word co-design had become widely used, but we’ve heard it being misused, abused, and not understood. We particularly heard the mistrust that tangata whenua have of the word. According to the report Co-Design in New Zealand, “Co-design has, in some spaces, already become a fancy word for consultation, or to infer a degree of power sharing, participation and partnership that never really existed.”* 3. To support system change in the public service. We knew how hard co-design is within the public service. Co-design requires genuine sharing of power. The outcomes evolve and are hard to specify in advance. The capability to do this work is developing and the system barriers are not insurmountable. We wished to show IPANZ members that it is possible to do co-design – and to do it well.

What did IPANZ learn in developing the symposium?

The journey of preparing this symposium was a profound learning process for IPANZ. We felt that embracing the underlying premise of co-design could enhance public servants’ ability to partner with, share power with, collaborate with, and devolve to Māori – it would be a powerful force to contribute to the fulfilment of the promise of the Public Service Act.

We know that many IPANZ members want to know more about co-design. We had three overriding reasons for wanting to run this symposium.

9 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

What are some memorable insights?

This is a snapshot of some of the gems that IPANZ had taken away.

Meet as people You meet as people, not as an agency. You talk about aspirations, not needs. You ask “not what is the matter with whānau, but what matters to whānau”. You try to “collapse the space” between your agency and whānau. You curate the space where whānau see and feel their culture and values. What does the kawa look like for this whānau in this place? The place is one that is mutually reached.

Some of the starting points might include “How might we …?”

Share power Acknowledge the power imbalance. Be honest about any constraints on the sharing of power. Find small tangible ways of redressing the power imbalance. Start with a whānau-centric model, where the power and the knowledge rests with whānau.

The lived experience is the essence of this, not an add-on. Whānau are used to living in complexity – trust their instincts. Power sharing creates more power (to act and achieve); it does not take away from anyone. The approach can be rigorous, including the use of models, prototyping, and testing, but this work is done with whānau, not to or for them.

Build trust over time While trust is fundamental, you cannot assume that any agency will be trusted. Walking alongside a Māori organisation, or a Māori design partner, might be a starting point to building trust. A Māori organisation can make it “safe to fail”, know how to keep the whānau and you safe, and know how to help you “be” and “do” in a way that creates opportunities for change. So, find someone to work with. All public servants can act as the intermediary within their departments to ensure the partnership is maintained. Don’t waste the precious time of iwi who already have many demands on them.

Incorporate this different way of being and doing into your kete This is a very different public service approach. The outcomes emerge; they are not imposed. It may not turn out as you

It really is a relational

There’s no single path – navigation is

change agenda

important

Trust is vital and it takes a long time to build that

anticipated – it may be better! You are a change agent through relationships, supporting whānau-led aspirations. Scale can be achieved through whānau to whānau connections. You cannot be certain about how long it will take; the pace belongs to all participants. You will need to avoid design processes that put emphasis on process but not on the relationships, people, principles, or values that underpin the process. You may be used to producing quick fixes, but this work is longer term. This is likely to go beyond the capacity of one organisation.

Create helpful authorisation There are parts of the system that create barriers. Get the support of your manager in the first instance. There will be challenges and opportunities to influence system changes, for example, the allocation of time, procurement rules, different types of contracts, new KPIs, and accountability. Try to suggest solutions to your colleagues. Allow whānau to tell stories on the impact on their lives from having participated in the co-design mahi, enable them to tell their stories to more senior people. These stories are powerful and a great start.

Tika, pono, aroha You cannot pre-define codesign, or it is not co-design

Tikanga and design tools a balancing act

Where next for the public sector?

IPANZ appreciates that some of what we have summarised may feel alien. You may be used to defining the problem you are trying to alleviate; you will be accustomed to clarity about the outcomes you are trying to achieve; you may be concerned about time pressure when results are urgently demanded.

This is not about turning away from the principles and values and the spirit of service. It is about having the awareness, the mindset, and the capabilities to apply co-design for the right issue, with the right people in the right place. It is “when” not “if”, and it is “and” not “or”.

Co-design is not a comprehensive approach for all aspects of public service work: no one would claim that it should or could replace all the valued delivery of services. But the status quo is powerful and can block new and different ways of operating that could be more effective in the right circumstances.

* To read the full report, go to https://knowledgeauckland.org.nz/media/1900/co-design-in-aotearoa-new-zealand-a-snapshot-of-the-literature-s-mark-phagen-tsi-june-2020.pdf 10 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

Transformation begins by acknowledging our own power and privilege

Individual actions can make a difference right now In the short term, much is possible

Gradually shifting the authorising environment The longer-term challenge Is it worth establishing a mechanism to pursue this kaupapa? It could be an influential forum, think tank, taskforce, or working group. It would need to be drawn from across the sector and of course engage whānau in the deliberations. It would need to involve senior people with an in-depth understanding of public service systems and processes and the rationale behind them – who also have an open mind about change. This forum would need to be in place for some years to gradually realise the potential for a shift in culture, behaviours, incentives, accountability, funding flows, and governance to help this mahi thrive where it can make a difference.

Questions would be explored, such as: •

In what circumstances should co-design be the predominant approach?

•

How can we adjust the incentives, soft and hard, to support its use?

•

What aspects of our systems and processes create barriers and can be gradually changed?

•

How can we support ongoing evaluative inquiry into the impacts?

•

How can we build the capability to work in this way?

Individual public servants do not have to wait for their seniors to act or for the authorisation to be secure. There are three things that we can all do immediately: 1. Build cultural capability. Public servants are building their capability. Ask “How deeply do I understand the cultural context of the people I am working with?”

2. Shift your mindset. For this type of work, public servants act more as change agents than as service providers. Ensure you are open to these ways of working and look for opportunities to apply co-design methodologies.

3. Notice the unexpected benefits and tell the stories! You will hear stories about how this work assists people to shape the things that influence their lives. Allow those stories to be heard. Step back so others can step forward.

Humility, willingness, honesty

Can’t project manage our way through

Continued Demand for Policy Professionals We are well into 2021 and the market continues to thrive! There is a strong demand for policy professionals across a number of sectors in response to new government initiatives being rolled out. A high volume of priority work programmes and ambitious Ministers means a fast-moving contract market with a demand for seasoned Policy Contractors who can turn their hands to a range of complex policy issues. On the permanent side we have a range of opportunities available for Senior Policy Analysts with an aptitude for cross-agency collaboration and partnership.

Kirsty Brown

At this time of the year demand is high for: • Senior Policy Analysts • Principal Policy Advisors • Policy Managers To have a confidential chat about your options contact Kirsty Brown or Gemma Odams - 04 4999471

Gemma Odams

NZ’s Leading Recruitment and Talent Development Specialists

11 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

CASE STUDY

GETTING RESULTS IN HASTINGS THROUGH COLLABORATION Like many communities, Hastings faces major challenges over housing.

Diane Joyce explains Hastings District Council’s Place-Based Housing Plan, which has collaboration at its centre.

Will the remedy for our national housing crisis come from central government, or will the answers be found at a regional or district level?

A Hastings pilot programme shows that the best way forward could well be a collaboration between council, iwi and hapū, and government, further strengthened by bringing onboard a host of other players from the community who have complementary skills and assets.

Bringing the players together Hastings District Council has won two awards for its Placed-Based Housing Plan and, most importantly, it’s getting results. The key, says Hastings District Council Mayor Sandra Hazlehurst, has been bringing together a range of people and organisations with complementary assets and skills. Critical partners have been Ngāti Kahungunu and Te Tūāpapa Kura Kāinga Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (MHUD).

Ngāti Kahungunu Chairman Ngahiwi Tomoana says it is important to

understand that the success of the District Council’s housing plan is the result of an “extremely good relationship between iwi and Council”.

“A big part of it has been Council being willing to explore papakāinga policy with us over many years and iwi delegating all land claims to hapū so they have the resources to develop papakāinga. The result is that we have the most papakāinga of any rohe in New Zealand.”

Ngahiwi recommended that councils and iwi around New Zealand consider preparing their own place-based housing plan, while acknowledging it takes true partnership and commitment to achieve results. “Where we are today is the product of a very long gestation period, which has given us the experience of working together and holding strong discussions on other projects.”

Te Tūāpapa Kura Kāinga Chief Executive Andrew Crisp says, “To achieve a sustainable improvement in housing, we need to be prepared to think and act differently. The progress that is being made in Hastings reinforces the importance of central and local government, iwi and providers, working together to drive change.

IT TAKES TRUE PARTNERSHIP AND COMMITMENT TO ACHIEVE RESULTS. “The housing and urban development system is complex – and there is no way around that. Essentially the system is a series of jigsaw pieces that don’t always connect well together. And the challenges vary across places due to size and geography, but also socially and economically. Success from the Ministry’s perspective is connecting the different jigsaw pieces in a place and helping other players navigate across those pieces.

“The government chose Hastings because of the high degree of need and because of the willingness of the Council to try working with central government in a different way. A critical success factor in Hastings has been the strong leadership and commitment from central government, Council, and iwi.”

12 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

No easy fixes Sandra says Hastings District Council, in the face of a critical shortage of homes, knew from very early on that it could not solve the crisis on its own, nor could it wait for central government to fix the problem.

“In just a few short years, we had gone from having a stable housing market with no real issues to a housing shortage that was one of the worst in New Zealand.

“In 2017, we had just 57 people registered as needing a home. By 2019, we had 800 people in emergency accommodation and more than 300 people on the housing list.

That rapidly rose to 1,700 in emergency accommodation and more than 2,000 on the housing list. House prices rose by 105 percent and rents by 40 percent.

“We knew that as community leaders we had to find solutions; but we also knew that Council was not a developer and could not physically build homes, nor fund families into them.

“We also did not want to risk the type of development that occurred in the 1980s; cheap, badly built, cookie-cutter homes that would very quickly become unhealthy for our families.”

What Council did have was land – in particular, land with development potential. And it had its hands on the district planning levers, a team skilled at infrastructure planning and development (roads and pipes), experience at preparing successful funding applications to government, and strong relationships with other organisations that could help develop and execute solutions.

Changing the mindset “These are the types of assets and skills that are available to every council in New Zealand; the trick is a change of mindset,” says Hastings District Council Chief Executive Nigel Bickle.

“Councils have typically flown pretty much solo. We believed that to achieve real results we needed to pivot to be the agents of change – facilitators and enablers. Sure, we brought our assets and practical skills to the table, but without a whole range of other parties with their own skills, assets, and connections, we would not be where we are today.”

Wairarapa; New Plymouth has different issues from Hastings,” says Sandra.

The plan was presented to government, and it agreed to do it as a national pilot.

That was a pivotal moment, says Nigel.

“It demonstrated a political will by government to look at a new idea critically and support it. This is not just about councils working differently, it is also central government being prepared to pool their resources with councils and, through them, a wider group, and trusting us to achieve results.”

Getting government support, which came with financial input, saw the go-button pushed. Again, there was a difference from “normal” council process, says Nigel.

“Traditionally, councils are very risk averse – determined to have every ‘i’ dotted and ‘t’ crossed, every possible risk identified with mitigations in place, and the final plan written before getting underway.

Nigel Bickle and Sandra Hazlehurst A broad range of partners, all with the same goal in mind, joined with Council, iwi and hapū, and government, including central government agencies (Ministry of Social Development, MHUD, Kāinga Ora), social service NGOs, Hawke’s Bay District Health Board, and the private sector, to pool resources and develop a practical plan.

They needed to work together to identify every opportunity to make a positive difference, commit to getting it done, and meet regularly to check progress. It would take great communication, commitment, and a shared passion to get the right outcome.

Looking at the causes of the crisis The first step was to look hard at the drivers of the crisis.

“That was critical. While some of our issues are the same as other regions – not enough tradies to build houses fast enough, landbanked subdivisions, and the difficulties iwi and hapū face building on Māori land – we also have issues that are less common,” says Nigel.

“We have (in a non-COVID year) around 5,000 seasonal workers arriving into the region to assist with horticultural harvests, which puts a lot of stress on the rental market. Because we rely on primary produce for most of our economic activity, we can’t risk building on our growing soils. And because we do not have a lot of purpose-built visitor accommodation, it has encouraged the conversion of rentals into high-paying, short-stay holiday lets.”

To get maximum impact, the solution needed to include a mix of housing, including papakāinga, social housing, inner-city living, and build-to-rent,

mixed-model owner-occupier homes, in a variety of styles, sizes, and ownership to encourage diversity – all matched by innovative ways of getting the people most in need into them.

There would also be dedicated accommodation for seasonal workers; a focus on making the existing housing stock in low socio-economic areas safe, warm, and healthy; and, adding yet another layer, a focus on supporting and encouraging trades training.

The new homes would have to be welldesigned and be safe and healthy, and the team had to find a way to ensure the homes were at a price-point and with buying conditions that meant they were available to those who had been shut out of the market – first-home buyers and lower-income earners.

There was also consensus that developments had to engender vibrant, healthy communities, not just be houses “plonked” on sections.

Healthy homes and communities “We want communities with homes that will stand the test of time and that residents will be proud of,” says Sandra.

From the collaboration came the Hastings Place-based Housing Plan. It is firmly focused on Hastings but could be rolled out in other parts of New Zealand. But to work in other locations, it would need to be prepared locally with the intimate knowledge of the people, issues, and potential solutions that comes with being embedded in a community.

“With the best will in the world, a New Zealand-central solution is unlikely to work. Auckland has different issues from

“That is absolutely as it should be for ‘business as usual’, but when you are faced with a crisis, there are other ways of doing things. We still need to take absolute care with ratepayer and taxpayer funding.

But we’re suggesting starting with a quickly formulated short-term plan to get underway, while at the same time looking ahead and working on medium- and longterm strategies.”

THEY NEEDED TO WORK TOGETHER TO IDENTIFY EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A POSITIVE DIFFERENCE. That was the road the housing group went down. Teasing out what could be done within three to six months.

Taking risks The need was so great that taking some calculated risks had to be built into the programme. “We did have tight oversight by an experienced governance group very capable of monitoring what was going on and able to spot any serious risk, but from early on, we knew that we needed to be less risk averse if we were to make any real difference in as short a timeframe as possible,” says Nigel.

One risk was that having such a large group around the table might mean there was not a consistent commitment to the project – too much hui and not enough doey.

That was addressed early on. And fortunately, all those brought in were on the same page.

13 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

“We had – and still have – thousands of people living in motels and cars. I was not prepared to get bogged down in a series of meetings and processes before we even got underway, which would not achieve real outcomes for those people,” says Sandra. “The biggest risk was that getting shovels in the ground could not be achieved within a short timeframe, leading to even more homelessness and increased public frustration.”

through a District Plan change, and Council is actively encouraging the conversion of upper stories in the central city into apartments and in-fill housing in existing suburbs.

Focused fortnightly meetings of the housing governance group maintains a check on the actions of every organisation, using a Better Business Case dashboard reporting system. “To put it bluntly, this provides peer pressure to achieve, and as a group we have and will continue to do so,” says Nigel.

The number of building consents issued in 2020 reached 534, up 46 percent on 2019 and a record for Hastings.

A path involving all the community

TOGETHER, WE ARE MUCH STRONGER THAN OUR INDIVIDUAL PARTS.

The homes being built on Council-owned land are required to be affordable and include a caveat that means the purchaser must live in the home for a minimum of five years. That makes them unavailable to speculators and landlords, opening

them up to first-home and lower-income purchasers. The team is also working with housing trusts on financing solutions that will further assist people into homes.

The advice from Hastings District Council to other districts and regions is to “get going”.

Sandra says waiting would only make the situation worse. “Yes, we could all wait for a market correction or for central government to find a solution, but this issue requires an all-of-community response.

“This is not about any one organisation fixing it. We need to get away from that mindset and realise that solutions and action comes from the whole community.

Together, we are much stronger than our individual parts.”

The battle is not yet won, says Sandra.

“We need many thousands of houses, but they are coming down the pipeline.”

To date, 39 new papakāinga homes have either been built or are under construction; infrastructure for a mixed-model housing development (17 owner-occupier sections and social housing alongside it) is completed and all available sections have been sold; three further council subdivisions for mixedmodel developments have been approved (around 180 homes); a Te Taiwhenua o Heretaunga mixed-model development is under construction (123 homes); and 96 new Kāinga Ora social homes have been completed, with 122 in construction and a further 79 in planning.

Additionally, the private sector has spent around $30 million to date providing accommodation for more than 1,500 seasonal workers, which was enabled

Newly completed papakāinga housing

CAN COUNCIL–GOVERNMENT COLLABORATION WORK FOR OTHER ISSUES? Another example of collaboration is Hastings District Council’s Mahi for Youth programme – awarded highly commended in the LGNZ awards, behind the Hastings Place-based Housing Plan.

Assisting young people who are Not in Education, Training or Employment (NEET) to gain a foothold on the job ladder has positive benefits for the young person and for wider society.

It sets rangatahi on a path that provides them with paid work experience (broadening their future job prospects) and gives them a structure that enables them to be fully engaged in the community as they become adults. Sustainable employment also leads to confidence and financial independence and helps them become role models for whānau and friends.

With a very high NEET population in Hastings and wider Hawke’s Bay (17 percent compared with the national average 11 percent), 14 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

the Council recognised that not being engaged in the community through training or work potentially risked nearly 20 percent of youngsters becoming long-term unemployed and disconnected from society.

Recognising the issue and the potential benefits, Hastings District Council again gathered a broad range of partners into the room, including government agencies, educators, and employers, to share skills and resources and come up with a plan.

Typically the rangatahi the team works with face some tough challenges, from health issues, disability, addiction problems, or lack of housing or family support to simply the lack of decent clothes to wear to an interview or the funds to pay for transport to get there. To date Mahi for Youth has placed 253 young people into permanent employment.

INVESTIGATION

ETHICAL LEADERSHIP – A PANACEA?

Studies of ethical leadership have gained a lot of attention in recent years.

Lola Toppin-Casserly assesses the findings of some recent studies and sees a possibility for a different kind of leadership.

Lola Toppin-Casserly Arguably, ethics in businesses and organisations is becoming more important, with many defining themselves on their ethical values and practices. In the public sector, there have been calls for a “new public ethics”.

Over the past 20 years, there has been increasing academic interest in ethical leadership. But why has this interest come up now? Ethics has been around for centuries. What is going on in our teams, organisations, and groups of people that is constraining ethical environments? And given the extensive scholarly inquiry on the topic for decades, where should research and policy go next?

A history of ethical leadership There has been much scholarly inquiry into ethical leadership, with Linda Trevino being a major contributor.

Much of this inquiry asks what is distinctive about ethical leadership as opposed to other forms of “good leadership”.

Surely ethical behaviour should be foundational for anyone in a position of responsibility. Being motivated by altruism rather than selfishness or using power inappropriately is a key theme.

Further research is required to understand unethical leadership as a construct and whether this can be separated from group processes, social norms, and social contexts, for example, unethical leadership can be a consequence of pro-social behaviour aimed at fulfilling organisational goals.

Existing ethical leadership constructs have not drawn on ethical theory – and should for future research. Gaps in the construct

are evident from the Hippocratic oath in medicine of “first do no harm”, which provides the theoretical and practical ethical basis for medicine. Yet “harm” as a concept is missing in existing ethical leadership criteria. Business ethics literature reveals a predominant emphasis on teleological ethics in organisations (such as utilitarianism), which can result in treating people as a means to a goal and seeing them as simply serving the organisation’s purposes without their consent. Consent is also missing in existing ethical leadership criteria.

The consequences of this are far-reaching. A lack of ethics in our current approaches arguably sits at the root of the challenges we face, with ongoing sexual harassment scandals, bank misconduct, or even climate change. Over decades of economic growth, we have used the environment to serve our purposes, without thinking about the impact on the environment or the impact on future generations. Similarly, ethical conduct applies to the sharing of power. Should one party dominate while other voices are marginalised, disadvantaged, or excluded?

An ethic of care An alternative approach may exist in the concept of an ethic of care. Early work by Carol Gilligan, who began her research by examining ethics from a gender perspective, focused on the ethics of responsibility and care, resting on the premise that no one should be hurt. Research has continued to develop through a non-gendered lens and its application to different settings, including organisations, Māori businesses, leadership, and sustainability. An ethic of care is built on the concept of voice and reflects a concern about how to fulfil conflicting responsibilities when relationships are characterised by inequalities in power and position. The concept emphasises relationships, people’s needs, situational realities where moral dilemmas arise, and a felt concern for the welfare of others. It challenges the dominant moral theory of rational, logical, rulebased approaches.

15 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

An ethical leadership scale How can we put all this together to provide a useful guide for human behaviour?

Ethical leadership scales allow us to apply and measure these concepts in large sample populations. Yukl et al.’s (2013) scale provides a guide to consider the ethical leadership shown in our actions and those of others. (see Table 1) Table 1: Ethical leadership scale (Yukl et al., 2013) My boss: Shows a strong concern for ethical and moral values Communicates clear ethical standards for members Sets an example of ethical behaviour in his/her decisions and actions Is honest and can be trusted to tell the truth Keeps his/her actions consistent with his/her stated values Is fair and unbiased when assigning tasks to members Can be trusted to carry out promises and commitments Insists on doing what is fair and ethical even when it is not easy Acknowledges mistakes and takes responsibility for them Regards honesty and integrity as important personal values Sets an example of dedication and self-sacrifice for the organisation Opposes the use of unethical practices to increase performance Is fair and objective when evaluating member performance and providing rewards

While we may know what ethical behaviour, conduct, and leadership look like, teams and organisations struggle to apply ethical conduct to their processes. One reason for this is that the problem of a lack of ethics in organisations goes deeper than individual leaders. Research shows that teams involve unique cross-level processes that create situations that are inconsistent with individual-level ethical behaviour, and social influence forces team members to commit actions they would not do if they were independent actors. For example, in organisations, the systemic nature of bystanders has been overlooked, but the role of enablers and bystanders in bullying and sexual harassment is starting to receive more attention. What can we do about it?

Group dynamics and politics To understand what constrains ethical leadership, and why unethical conduct persists, research identifies the need to examine group processes.

Team literature shows that dysfunction stems from power, status, and self-interest becoming out of balance in a group.

Organisational politics theory holds that groups can become ineffective when group politics predominates. Politics refers to the exercise of power and influence to secure one’s intended outcomes. While politics is often seen in a negative light, it is around us all the time – at schools, homes, and at work. Thus, in any setting where humans interact, including teams, groups, and decision-making groups, politics will be at play.

Acknowledging, instead of denying, these politics is essential if we want to understand what is going on in groups that struggle to be ethical.

Different measures exist to show the operation of organisational politics, with most measuring political behaviours aimed at self-interest, favouritism, not speaking up, in-group alignment, exploitation of others, and impression management. (see Table 2)

Puts the needs of others above his/her own self-interest Holds members accountable for using ethical practices in their work

An ethic of care could have useful application for navigating relationships with care, compassion, and responsibility.

Yukl et al.’s scale is imperfect, particularly when dealing with trade-offs between different parties, for example, being fair to one group may cause unfairness to another. Yet, if we could see more leaders apply Yukl et al.’s scale, our organisations would be happier places. Ethical leadership has been found by research in 2019 at Te Herenga Waka, Victoria University of Wellington, to be critical in ensuring ethical culture and conduct in organisations and institutions.

At least, as a minimum standard for leaders, ethics should be incorporated into state sector performance management systems, with additional consideration given to monitoring, recruitment, and selection processes.

16 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

Table 2: A simple scale to measure organisational politics (Hochwarter et al., 2003) There is a lot of self-serving behaviour going on: People do what’s best for them, not what’s best for the organisation People spend too much time sucking up to those who can help them People are working behind the scenes to ensure that they get their piece of the pie Many employees are trying to manoeuvre their way into the in-group Individuals are stabbing each other in the back to look good in front of others How does a leader effectively facilitate between different perspectives without causing group dysfunction and ensure ethical decision making? It is challenging and requires extremely well-developed facilitation skills, as well as an awareness of the psychological, behavioural, and cognitive biases at play

(see Table 3). It’s interesting that research finds that ethical champions are often disliked and incur social consequences, particularly when they focus on moral authority.

Training in the biases and group dynamics at play in systemic situations is a pre-requisite for those in leadership roles.

Effective whistleblowing mechanisms are essential.

Table 3: Group dynamics in decision-making groups (adapted from existing literature) Group dynamics – what it looks like

What is going on

Report to X what we think X wants to hear

Psychological and behavioural elements at work, including concealing information

Decision-making biases

Bounded rationality – irrationality in decision making due to unconscious emotions and motivations

Groupthink

Controversial issues or alternative solutions are avoided, resulting in less creativity and independent thinking

“Don’t rock the boat”

Cognitive dissonance – seeking consistency among cognitions; psychologically uncomfortable to hold contradictory views Conformity bias – behaving similarly to other group members

Defensiveness and denial

Motivated reasoning – focus on confirming beliefs, ignoring contrary evidence; drives elaborate rationalisations

“Aren’t we/I great”; chancer culture; rosetinted approach

Over-optimism – tendency to overrate opportunities and underrate risks and liabilities

What’s ahead for ethical leadership?

Could an ethic of care cut through the organisational politics, group dynamics, and systemic issues outlined here? Could this be an approach that achieves more ethical behaviour in the world, including on climate change, sharing power, and eliminating ethical scandals? What are the conditions under which an ethic of care can succeed? What will research tell us about ethics in groups, including future organisations?

If you want details of the references used in this article, contact the author.

SCAN HERE

Creating what matters for future generations

17 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

INTERVIEW

ADDRESSING RACISM TO ELIMINATE MĀORI HEALTH INEQUITY Lana Simmons-Donaldson speaks to University of Auckland Associate Professor Donna Cormack about the dire state of Māori health inequity and her thoughts on the government’s health sector reforms.

Donna Cormack Dr Donna Cormack (Kai Tahu, Kāti Māmoe) says Māori health inequity is a crisis on a par with the COVID-19 pandemic, and she is frustrated by the health reforms and the language around “reducing inequities”. “I don’t want them to be a little bit less …

[We need to] eliminate inequities; they shouldn’t exist.”

She is a researcher and teacher at Te Kupenga Hauora Māori, at the University of Auckland, and at Te Rōpū Rangahau Hauora a Eru Pōmare, in Wellington, and has been involved in collecting ethnicity data in Aotearoa, with a focus on the impacts of racism on Māori health.

She says that, unlike the pandemic, the Māori health crisis is “much longer and slow burning”. It was revealing to her to see what happened during COVID, when the government put in place a whole programme almost overnight. “They can actually move quickly, mobilise, and put things in place.” The Māori health crisis needs the same sort of response.

“We need to do something completely different, change the way we fund services, shift resources across to Māori in a more sustainable way.”

The saying goes that if we don’t do something differently, we’ll get the same result. However, in the case of Māori health inequity, Donna warns, “If we don’t do anything, it’s not neutral – it’s going to be more inequitable.”

The direst inequity for Māori is in life expectancy. “Māori populations on 18 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

average die earlier, about seven to eight years earlier than Pākehā.” She says there are regional variations. “In Tai Rāwhiti (the east coast of the North Island), it’s more like 11 or 12 years earlier. That’s a really stark inequity – that’s lost years, lost time for grandparents with their moko (grandchildren), spaces on the pae (orators’ benches), at marae, in communities.”

What are the deep causes and drivers of inequity?

The Health Quality and Safety Commission’s report, He Matapihi ki te Kounga o ngā Manaakitanga Ā-Hauora o Aotearoa 2019 / A Window on the Quality of Aotearoa New Zealand’s Health Care 2019, outlines five key reasons why health inequities exist between Māori and nonMāori. In summary, they are: 1.

Structural inequity, including colonisation, the Crown’s failure to meet its obligations under Te Tiriti, and institutional racism, which maintains the disadvantage of Māori in health.

2.

Disparities in the distribution of resources and unequal outcomes between Māori and non-Māori.

3.

Different access to healthcare and differences in the quality of care.

4.

Institutional racism, which is reflected in inappropriate action, inaction, and monocultural worldviews.

5.

The “causes”, such as historical acts of taking land and resources and the monocultural health system, having downstream effects on health outcomes.

Donna says Te Tiriti o Waitangi is important to consider alongside the equity discussion. “Sometimes the equity discussion is focused on the end game being for us all to be the same,” she says.

“That is not what it is about. [The Treaty] guaranteed Māori would be able to retain decision making power and resources, ways of being and knowledge systems.

That’s not related to our health needs, that is related to our rights.”

WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, CHANGE THE WAY WE FUND SERVICES, SHIFT RESOURCES ACROSS TO MAORI. Moving beyond just talking about Te Tiriti in strategies and documents, Donna proposes moving into what that would actually look like in terms of power sharing and shifting resources. There needs to be “a commitment to monitoring the inequities you might be producing from your agency. At a minimum, we should be able to monitor who is getting quality or not from the services and programmes being provided. But I don’t think just more data is the answer. We know a lot, but that doesn’t mean that people are committed to doing what we need to change it.”

She says racism is a deep cause of inequity.

In health, it’s clear people are exposed to racism when they are trying to access the things they need to be healthy – healthy environments, safe housing, safe workplaces, enough money, and liveable incomes. She says the Ministry of Health is talking more about racism, “but it isn’t really doing much to address the basic causes. Pretty much across every health indicator there is inequity. Worse outcomes are more common for Māori populations – on average, the quality of care and access to care is lower,” she says.

are going in the health sector. It’s great there is a move to establish a Māori Health Authority, but it is still alongside Ministry of Health models – it’s still not at the highest level of decision making.” She says the reform is focused on only one sector, but “health, justice, and education and housing have to work together”.

She is cynical about the health system reforms. “They are really about reorganising the way health services are funded and investing in the health workforce. We need reforms that require sectors to work together – that create the conditions for people to live healthy, well lives, so in the future you need less resource focused on illness.”

Cultural reform

The main issues are “access, quality, and outcomes. Māori are less likely to get access, or if we get access, it isn’t as timely as it is for other groups,” she says. “Even when we get into services, there is evidence our quality of healthcare is lower and we have worse outcomes.”

She says it feels like we are still spending a lot of time describing the health inequities.

“What is it going to take to get people to shift, to move to doing something different. I am frustrated that people aren’t as shocked as they should be by these statistics.”

What is health inequity?

According to the World Health Organisation, health inequities are “systemic differences in health outcomes. They arise from the social conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work, and age. [They are] unfair and could be reduced by the right mix of government policies.”

THE DIREST INEQUITY FOR MAORI IS IN LIFE EXPECTANCY. Donna says the definition shows that inequity is “avoidable, unfair and unjust.

They are not just simply that people have different outcomes – it’s that those outcomes or experiences are created by our society, the quality of healthcare people get, and the outcomes they experience.”

Data gaps While there is a lot of Māori health data, Donna says there are gaps. A seemingly obvious one is making sure we have information about who is Māori. She says, “Māori are not always being asked if they are Māori, or someone might fill out the

form for them or use data from another source. So we are probably underestimating the inequity – it’s probably worse than what the current statistics show.”

Donna is involved with Te Rōpū Whakakaupapa Urutā (the National Māori Pandemic Group). She says that throughout the pandemic, the Ministry of Health has been slow to report data separately for Māori. “They don’t seem to prioritise Māori ethnicity data. I’m not sure why they aren’t doing it?” She says the ministry is not collecting ethnicity data for the COVID-19 immunisation register (CIR) during its roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccine. “They are using data they already have in the system. We know that data might be wrong, or inaccurate, so it will be hard to know if we are getting equitable access to COVID vaccination.”

Private hospitals are another problem.

“They don’t have to collect ethnicity data, so we don’t really even know what is going on for Māori or Pākehā in those settings.”

She says it’s highly likely that “if we look at income and who has health insurance, that Pākehā are more likely to use private hospital services, so we are probably underestimating hospitalisation inequities.”

Even though data collection is an issue, Donna says health is better than some sectors. However, she says it’s frustrating that “we still need to get information through OIAs, rather than agencies being proactive, wanting to be monitored and audited on whether they are providing a good service for Māori”.

Constitutional reform Donna says there is a need for constitutional reform and restructuring.

“That will involve moving further than we

Donna says the culture of the health system needs to change and the health reforms don’t necessarily address that. She says “even if individuals are doing a lot of work on themselves, if the whole service is set up in a way that makes it difficult to put it into practice, it’s not going to lead to meaningful change.”

IT’S GREAT THERE IS A MOVE TO ESTABLISH A MAORI HEALTH AUTHORITY, BUT IT IS STILL ALONGSIDE MINISTRY OF HEALTH MODELS. A cultural safety programme in nursing developed by the late Dr Irihapeti Ramsden in the 1980s talked about racism and colonisation in a health context. Donna thinks it is still a strong model for the health sector and more broadly. “I remember the backlash when it was introduced into nursing schools, but looking at it now, it still stands.” The Medical Council have been doing some similar work, focused on what they expect from doctors and medical professionals. The premise of the approach is “practising reflexively, thinking about what power you have as a doctor or as a Pākehā or as a health professional and what that means in the way you interact with patients and provide care – acknowledging the context within which you work”.

What can the public sector do?

Donna says that if the public sector wants to engage meaningfully with getting rid of inequities, it needs to think and act differently, fundamentally this means working to support the “return of land and resources – otherwise the system is going to keep reproducing itself”.

19 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

INVESTIGATION

Simon McBeth

Renee Graham

USING DATA FOR GOOD Jacqui Gibson explores some exciting examples of co-design that use Stats NZ data to address some social ills.

When Head of the Vodafone Foundation Lani Evans announced the non-profit wanted to halve youth inequality by 2027, she knew she was in for a challenge. The philanthropic arm of Vodafone New Zealand launched the goal in 2017. It then quickly set about gathering data on the youth communities most in need of support.

Lani says she was surprised to find that Invercargill came out among the most disadvantaged youth communities in New Zealand, alongside Kawerau, Wairoa, and Ruapehu. She was aware of data showing 20 percent of young people aged 12–25 experienced disadvantage and exclusion in New Zealand due to income inequality and material deprivation, but when the figure jumped to 30 percent for Invercargill youth, she was genuinely surprised.

“It’s the kind of insight you can only get with access to good quality national data. It demonstrates you can’t rely on assumptions or what you think you know about the lives of New Zealanders. You really need the evidence in front of you.”

New online tool launched In May, the foundation launched a new online tool called the Thriving Rangatahi Population Explorer, drawing on 2018, 2019, and 2020 data from Stats NZ’s Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI) database.

Developed in partnership with Wellington-based data science firm Nicholson Consulting, the tool allows approved users to log in to see how young people are faring in health, education, and employment by region. It features easy-to-read tables and graphs providing insight into youth housing, cultural identity, justice, wellbeing, and social connection.

IT DEMONSTRATES YOU CAN’T RELY ON ASSUMPTIONS OR WHAT YOU THINK YOU KNOW ABOUT THE LIVES OF NEW ZEALANDERS. Over time, the tool will help users track changes within the rangatahi population as new IDI data comes to hand. Right now, the foundation is using the data to roll out a new $3 million programme aimed at improving outcomes for Invercargill rangatahi over the next six years. Lani wants others to follow the foundation’s lead.

“We’re not interested in keeping this mahi or this tool to ourselves,” she says. “We need everyone pulling in the same direction if we’re going to achieve our goal – 190,000 rangatahi lifted out of inequality and material hardship within the next six years.

Population-level data provides us with valuable information, and when it’s placed alongside qualitative data and insights from those with lived experience, it can help to strengthen service design, delivery, and investment approaches.

“Also, when it’s possible for us to create better opportunities and a more equitable world for our young people, why wouldn’t we?”

This month, Lani’s team is running a series of faceto-face focus groups with young people and social agencies in Invercargill to work out how best to spend the programme’s budget. The foundation plans to use Invercargill as a model for engagement and investment in other regions, while continuing to draw on data within the Thriving Rangatahi tool.

Government data for social good Stats NZ senior advisor Simon McBeth says the foundation’s approach is a good example of what is possible when community leaders use government data such as IDI data for social good.

20 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

“They’re certainly not the only organisation working with Stats NZ’s IDI data. But their work – and the tool they’ve developed – is some of the most innovative we’ve seen. It’s very exciting.”

Simon says two things about the foundation’s tool strike him as particularly innovative. “For starters, the tool they’ve developed is really accessible and easy to use – so it can be used beyond the foundation’s Invercargill project. The way they’re using the data featured within the tool is innovative, too,” says Simon.

“They’re taking a particular set of regional insights and using those insights to engage the community and collaboratively come up with solutions. I’d love to see more of this kind of data-driven, co-design work going on in government and across society.”

To access the IDI database, a user must prove they have the skills and knowledge required to use it effectively and ethically. They must have a social-good project in mind, requiring access to specific IDI data, which adheres to Stats NZ’s Ngā Tikanga Paihere framework. They must also be prepared to undergo training and access the data within a secure Data Lab run by Stats NZ. The primary goal of the Ngā Tikanga Paihere framework, says Simon, is to ensure IDI data is used safely and responsibly and in a culturally appropriate way. He says it’s one way to ensure data collected about Māori is used positively and effectively by IDI users.

Right now, approximately 350 IDI-related projects led by a mix of researchers, data analysts, journalists, and students are hosted in Stats NZ’s Data Lab.

THE TOOL THEY’VE DEVELOPED IS REALLY ACCESSIBLE AND EASY TO USE. For the most part, Simon’s team discusses and vets social-good projects with potential applicants, trains people to access and use the IDI database, and works with agencies to keep IDI data up to date. He estimates about a third of projects are government projects, looking at data across the health, justice, employment, education, and economic sectors.

more than 1,000 people taking part in the national engagement exercise. Findings from the hui showed New Zealanders wanted to better understand how their personal information was used and shared by government agencies. They also wanted the ability to use the data themselves.

IT’S LEADING THE USE OF GOVERNMENT DATA AND IT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BRING ABOUT TANGIBLE SOCIAL CHANGE. People said they wanted government to work more closely with communities, listen to their lived experiences, and show them respect. Hui attendees also said they wanted to be more directly involved in government decision making and service design.

In 2020, the SWA published a guide called Towards better social sector decision making and practice: A social wellbeing approach.

The guide describes a successful IDI-based project where SWA partnered with the Auckland Council’s The Southern Initiative to better understand the maternal, paternal, and whānau needs of South Auckland whānau.

“It’s a great resource,” says Renee. “I’d definitely recommend people read it and use it to guide their practice. I’m certainly not saying there’s one way to do co-design or a single approach for government policy and service design. A lot of the traditional methods, involving gathering best evidence from around the world, commissioning a literature search, and taking options out to stakeholders for consultation, still stand up. They still have their place.

“However, I’d say that advances in big data and what we can do with technology online give us a new set of tools to work with and new ways of doing things. Vodafone’s Thriving Rangatahi tool is an excellent example of that,” says Renee.

Lani says she’d like to see the tool become part of a data-led innovation drive within government and the wider social sector.

Simon agrees.

One project, for example, is exploring the link between the successful breast cancer treatment of Māori women and easy access to culturally appropriate health services. Another is analysing the number of businesses that drew down on the government’s COVID wage subsidy during lockdown.

“The Thriving Rangatahi tool is exactly the kind of project we’re keen to support within the Data Lab,” he says. “It’s leading the use of government data – and it has the potential to bring about tangible social change. Now it’s just up to others to check it out and use it too.”

Several times a year, new data is added to the IDI from nationally significant data sources provided by agencies such as Health, Inland Revenue, Internal Affairs, ACC, Housing and Urban Development, Social Development, Education, Corrections, and Justice. All data has identifying information removed, including names, birth dates, and addresses. In addition, Stats NZ thoroughly checks that any IDI work avoids identifying individuals prior to publication.

Find out more about government data use

Organisations can apply to add new data to the IDI, although all applications will be subject to prioritisation, says Simon. Recently, for example, the Auckland City Mission started contributing data on homelessness.

Social Wellbeing Agency (SWA) chief executive Renee Graham agrees the IDI is an excellent tool for public service co-design, but says, where possible, any use of big data by government should follow the Vodafone Foundation’s example and involve flax-roots community consultation and collaboration.

Public feedback on data use In 2018, SWA held a public engagement exercise to ask New Zealanders how government should protect and use New Zealand population data. Eighty-three hui were held in 27 locations, with

1. Check out the Thriving Rangatahi Population Explorer tool.

The Thriving Rangatahi Population Explorer was developed by the Vodafone Foundation, the Centre for Social Impact, Nicholson Consulting, and Deloitte. To access the tool, go to https:// foundation.vodafone.co.nz/thriving-rangatahi-population-explorer/ 2. Explore Stats NZ IDI work.

The IDI is a large research database hosted by Stats NZ. Find out how you or your team could use the IDI to improve the outcomes of New Zealanders. Check out https://www.stats.govt.nz/integrateddata/integrated-data-infrastructure/ or contact the Integrated Data Team at access2microdata@stats.govt.nz 3. Learn about the social wellbeing approach.

A social wellbeing approach takes knowledge produced from science and data and makes it useful by merging it with the lived experiences of New Zealanders to create new insights. Read a guide to this approach and other information on the topic from the Social Wellbeing Agency at https://swa.govt.nz/publications/ reports/#HaBiSA 21 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

VOICES OF YOUNG PROFESSIONALS

A CALL TO ACTION: THE PUBLIC SERVICE FUTURES NETWORK Clyde Smith sees promise and positivity in recent changes to the public service. But to realise this promise, he wants to see more engagement with younger voices.

Securing wellbeing for future generations is the key challenge facing Aotearoa New Zealand’s public service. Addressing this requires more deliberate thinking about and planning beyond the short term, both for specific areas of policy but also for the public service itself. This is supported by a shift toward stewardship, which is now embedded as a core principle in the Public Service Act. Despite this, there remains a fundamental gap in our stewardship of the future: the inclusion of younger generations.

We need solutions to address this, and we need to do it now. The Public Service Futures Network provides part of this solution – being an employee-led network made up of young public servants who want to have a say in shaping the future.

Ko wai au? Who am I? Before I continue, I want you to know a bit about me. After all, my lived experience has shaped why I am here writing this article.

Growing up in Tūranganui-a-Kiwa (Gisborne), the “public service” was an ambiguous yet prominent entity in my life – but we did not call it the public service. For my whānau, it was CYFS (Child, Youth and Family Services), Housing New Zealand, WINZ (Work and Income New Zealand), the Ministry of Education, the district health board, and so on. I spent my childhood engaging with these services.

Now being a public servant responsible for helping to shape these services, I find myself pondering what a better public service might look like. I believe New Zealand’s public service can and should be an enabler of wellbeing. This curiosity has led me to working in Māori health policy at the Ministry of Health. I have been learning how the public service could be an effective partner with Māori under Te Tiriti o Waitangi. How it could use its influence and resources to improve health equity and wellbeing for Māori. How it could better involve citizens in its decision-making processes or share power with them. How it could better plan and act for the wellbeing of future generations. But addressing these important questions requires some fundamental shifts in how the public service operates.

I realise I have started working in the public service in a time of immense change. These once-in-a-generation changes can determine the wellbeing of current and future generations.

Whether these changes enable and secure that wellbeing is something I am less certain about.

A public service that can plan for future wellbeing The public service has needed to focus on responding to crises and short-term pressures, rather than slow burning and systemic issues. The dominant public management paradigm coupled with short electoral cycles have reinforced this short sightedness.

However, recent changes give us hope of an alternative approach.

22 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

Clyde Smith

The new long-term insights briefings require the public service to be more intentional about taking a long-term view. This is supported by the Living Standards Framework, which aims to weave wellbeing into public policy.

I had the privilege of being involved in Hui Whakaoranga 2021 – a series of hui delivered by the Ministry of Health focused on taking an intergenerational approach to planning for Māori wellbeing.

This has involved looking into the past – building on the gains and overcoming challenges – in order to plan for the future. The kaupapa is summarised as “Whaia te Pae Ora mō ngā mokopuna – Securing wellbeing for the next generation”. Tā Mason Durie, a proponent of futures thinking in the realm of Māori development, supported Hui Whakaoranga 2021 as a keynote speaker.

After reflecting on his own 50 years of experience in Māori health development, Tā Mason challenged participants with the following question: should we be ready to respond to a changing world or should we create the future we want? He acknowledged the latter will require concerted and integrated planning. These remarks were echoed throughout Hui Whakaoranga with an explicit call for more rangatahi leadership and involvement in futures planning.

THERE REMAINS A FUNDAMENTAL GAP IN OUR STEWARDSHIP OF THE FUTURE: THE INCLUSION OF YOUNGER GENERATIONS. The need for intergenerational stewardship The Public Service Act 2020 marks a critical turning point in the history of the public service. The Act is aspirational; it sets out a platform for change but is not the change itself. The process we take to embed the Act’s principles and values will determine how and whether the public service is changed. As Pia Andrews wrote in the July 2021 edition of the Public Sector journal: “The lever is there, let’s use it.”

The Act sets out a suite of changes to New Zealand’s public service, underpinned by several principles and values. Stewardship, for example, has been included as one of the foundational principles.

Stewardship has many definitions, but for me it’s about ensuring the decisions of today account for the interests of tomorrow.

Stewardship therefore requires the public service to collaborate on shared goals and action. The term “intergenerational stewardship” makes this obligation for the future even more explicit.

Requiring participation from younger generations Intergenerational stewardship requires the use of many different tools and resources. Futures thinking, for example, has become

the dominant future-focused tool used in the policy development process. It encourages us to look far and wide for evidence and insights that can generate a number of scenarios beyond what we would normally expect. These insights can help the public service to develop strategies and actions that are better able to deal with unexpected events or trends.

Just as futures thinking requires a broad sweep of evidence, expertise, and engagement to build scenarios, intergenerational stewardship requires the use of a participatory approach, where those who are affected by a problem or opportunity are supported to develop and lead solutions. This requires the inclusion of diverse voices from younger generations.

Involving younger generations in planning for the future There is huge value in trying to understand the perspectives and lived experience of new generations and incorporating their insights when planning for the future. Failing to do so inhibits the public service’s ability to meet its stewardship obligations. After all, who else would be best placed to meet future thinking than those who will be leading the future public service?

Participatory and inclusive futures planning can provide a platform for kōrero across a broad spectrum of stakeholders, perspectives, and worldviews. Each new generation brings a new set of worldviews and lived experiences. These generational differences will only become more distinct as the world changes.

Younger generations should therefore play a key role in designing what the future public service looks like.

An opportunity to put intergenerational stewardship into practice The Public Service Act 2020 presents the first system-wide opportunity to put this new focus on intergenerational stewardship into practice. Parallel to this, the government is about to embark on the biggest reforms to our health and disability system in our generation. The decisions that are being made in these reforms will shape what the public service will look like and how it will function. There is no doubt that these decisions will impact health and wellbeing for generations to come.

To ensure a future-focused public service and health and disability system that can sufficiently respond to the growing threats to wellbeing, the current reforms must incorporate intergenerational stewardship as a guiding principle. These obligations are strengthened by Te Tiriti o Waitangi. A paradigm shift in how we deliver our public services will only be possible if and when intergenerational stewardship is put into practice.

STEWARDSHIP THEREFORE REQUIRES THE PUBLIC SERVICE TO COLLABORATE ON SHARED GOALS AND ACTION. A call to action – the establishment of the Public Service Futures Network With the support of Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission, over the past 12 months, I have had the privilege of contemplating some of these challenges and opportunities with a group of optimistic, intelligent, and passionate young public servants. I use the term “young” hesitantly, as what I really mean is the next generation of public servants.

We were posed the challenge of understanding how young people in the public service can shape its future. We believe young people’s ideas and perspectives are an untapped resource that can help guide the design of the public service, particularly through

the changes set out in the Public Service Act. We want to tap into the valuable diversity of lived experience, worldviews, and perspectives that younger generations bring.

The Public Service Futures Network brings together young people from across the public sector to connect, to share their aspirations for the future, and to carve out a pathway. Our mission is to amplify the voices of this new generation of public servants.

EACH NEW GENERATION BRINGS A NEW SET OF WORLDVIEWS AND LIVED EXPERIENCES. The network has the potential to be a platform for change. It is the next step toward putting into practice what the Act has promised.

A public service with intergenerational stewardship at its core will be better placed to navigate the challenges and uncertainties of the future.

The network is now focusing on further establishing itself as an employee-led network across the public service. This will likely involve engagement activities (focus groups, surveys, networking) to better understand the aspirations of young public servants and the sharing of these insights. We want this network to be designed and led by young public servants.

If you would like to stay informed or be involved as the Public Service Futures Network evolves, please email publicservicefutures@gmail.com My thanks to Deb Struthers, Lu Avia, Rosa Pierce, Brendan Rose, Mary Cooper, Hana Wong, and Alex Williams for peer reviewing this article.

23 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

INVESTIGATION

LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHIFTS FOCUS TO BE “FIT FOR THE FUTURE” Local government is changing. Christine Cessford outlines some major reviews that will have dramatic effects on the local government of the future.

Karen Thomas

Stephanie Pride

Local government professionals are facing new challenges as the government lays out a range of reforms that will shift councils’ focus from infrastructure to people – requiring local and central government to work alongside one another to build a sustainable future.

Major changes are expected as the government initiates Te Arotake i te Anamata mō Ngā Kaunihera, the review into the Future for Local Government, the Three Waters Reform Programme, and the review of the Resource Management Act. The abolition of district health boards and a shift in focus to community health services is also expected to have an impact on the work of local councils, while government housing initiatives are always closely watched.

A lot of balls in the air Taituarā – Local Government Professionals Aotearoa Chief Executive Karen Thomas says these changes represent “a lot of balls in the air – but I think that’s a good thing”.

“This is an opportunity for all the balls to come down the right way – it’s challenging, but it’s an opportunity to get everything right at once. It’s a time of immense change and immense opportunity and we all have to work hard.”

She says local government in New Zealand is historically much more interested in the infrastructure than people, and the proposed reforms are a chance to shift that focus. “We’re out of step with other countries, where local councils are more involved with people’s lives. We do things 24 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

Jo Miller

at seemingly odd levels of government because that’s the way we have always done them.”

She hopes to see councils enabling more local decision making in empowered and interconnected communities. “This becomes as much of our core work as fixing potholes.”

Taituarā wants to support meaningful conversations between local and central government professionals and encourage cohesion in the local government sector.

Key to its response is the Critical Transitions Framework, adopted by Taituarā in 2019 in response to “era-scale” changes. The framework sets out five critical transitions needed to navigate into the new era: 1.

Transition to low emissions living

2.

Transition to living in a disrupted climate

3.

Transition to low waste society

4.

Transition to community interconnectedness

5.

Transition to learning-empowered communities.

The framework’s author Stephanie Pride says it’s important to think across all of these five strands when considering reforms. “It’s not five separate things but changing the social operating system as a whole.”

Change in one area is an opportunity to advance all of the transitions as this process lays the foundations for the new era, rather than just fixing things for today. “We need to lift our eyes to make changes that are fit for a future we haven’t arrived at yet.”

Louise Miller

Sanchia Jacobs

Stephanie says society has been warming up for this era-scale change through issues like moving to a low-emission economy, catastrophic climate events, and the housing crisis, and the framework is being used by many councillors and local government professionals to frame their thinking and approach to these challenges.

The framework uses a “three horizons approach” for change in which each step is an interim step and not the final destination. “It helps us to think beyond the next step to the ones after: making a clear path to the future that we are trying to get to.”

Connecting the whole The holistic approach of the Critical Transitions Framework finds a parallel in the interconnectedness of all aspects of te ao Māori, says Jo Miller, the Chief Executive of Hutt City Council. “Mauri Ora considers not just the health, but the whole of a person, and I’m excited to see how this concept will guide the reform of the local government sector.”

Interconnectedness is evident in the need to move to sustainable energy sources, take much greater care of how we use land and natural resources, reduce our waste, and protect the environment.

“This means that everything will need to be done differently – where and how people live, how and where work happens, how people travel, how food is supplied, and how learning happens.

“This is an opportunity to be fit for the future rather than fit for where we’ve been.”

While this is a global challenge requiring international action, and a national challenge requiring the government to support change, Jo says that above all this is a community challenge.

“Community by community, how and where we live, work, learn, and connect is where impacts will hit home and doing life differently will actually take place. Local government has a pivotal role to play in enabling our people to make these 21stcentury transitions in a way that protects and enhances wellbeing and reduces inequity.”

She would like to see the Resource Management Act reflect the importance of building supportive, sustainable, and connected neighbourhoods, not just houses, and says a big challenge in the reform process is deciding what needs to be done at what level. For example, it makes sense to procure and manage water infrastructure on a large scale, “but supporting communities to connect with each other – is that best done in Wellington or where there is a greater understanding of local needs?”

The potential reforms are an opportunity to break down systemic disadvantage of some groups by shifting local government’s primary focus to people. And building new systems needs collaboration: “No one government department, no single local government can shift the dial on housing, health, and education to change these outcomes.”

Jo Miller has been in Aotearoa for two years, following a career in local government in the UK. She says devolution saw Scotland rearrange its provision of services to regional, local, and community levels, which meant sharing information, ceding power, and working co-operatively at all levels.

“Public service reform fails when we simply rearrange the silos. It succeeds when we break them down.”

New ways that require new skills

to a great outcome for my community?”

Rearranging the provision of services also involves rearranging the working life of many local government professionals.

The sector is already facing challenges in staff retention, training and retraining, and recruitment – and these challenges will intensify as the reforms progress.

She says potential change can’t just be about local government. “It has to be a bigger conversation about how local government fits in with central government agencies and how that will serve our communities.

Louise Miller is Chief Executive at Kaipara District Council and Chair of the Taituarā Workforce Committee. She says local councils need to be preparing their workforces now for what lies ahead.

Specialists, for example, building inspectors, are already migrating from local to central government, the ageing population has resulted in fewer graduates in essential fields like engineering, and Covid-19 means immigration cannot meet the skills shortage.

Louise says the committee is looking at adaptations that can be made now to retain staff. Skill shortages mean local authorities are likely to be sharing resources in coming years. While reform is often hard on staff, Louise says she is reassured by the government’s handling of the workforce transition element of the Three Waters Reform Programme.

“The government’s transition team is looking at what this programme means for the workforce. With Three Waters, people will be transitioned to new entities – they’ve been quick to reassure us.” The reforms also offer great opportunities for young people to work on a major infrastructure project. Local government is going to lose a big chunk out of the balance sheet if it no longer provides water services, but Louise says this also offers a different operating mode and opens the path for the shift from infrastructure to wellbeing.

“Potentially this could really shift the whole way councils work. What are we going to deliver and how are we going to deliver it – is there a better way to deliver it that leads

“It’s going to need some brave conversations.”

Taking change a bite at a time This is an exciting time to be in local government, says Sanchia Jacobs, Taituarā President and Chief Executive at Central Otago District Council. While there is much mahi to be done, “we have the chance to design what the future looks like”.

“It’s easy to feel unsettled by the change – and the volume of change and the workload is outstanding – but there hasn’t been a significant reform of local government in 30 years, and the world has shifted so much in that time.”

She recognises that while she is energised by the change, not everyone feels the same.

“We need to step through it in bite-sized chunks.”

Sanchia says the review into the Future for Local Government offers an opportunity for a holistic look at meeting needs of communities, and it reinforces the key role of the public sector – local, democratic decision making and wellbeing. “Every community is unique and needs to have a voice in what happens, and this is given meaning by all of us working together and understanding the stresses and opportunities of this process.” She says the process will see local and central government stepping towards each other with governance, finance, mandates, power, and decision making.

Sanchia is optimistic the reforms will benefit communities: “Good things happen when people decide to make them happen.”

25 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

Q&A

Q&A Shenagh Gleisner talks to Julia Black about the latest challenges and innovations in the world of regulation.

Is the environment for regulators getting increasingly complex globally? If so, what are the specific factors creating this increased complexity?

Every generation probably thinks that they are facing the most complex challenges ever, but in truth, I’m not sure the complexity is any greater than it has been before. Indeed, in the wake of the financial crisis, austerity, and now COVID, the political environment has become more aligned with the social purpose of regulation. Regulation has never been purely about perfecting markets – if it’s ever been about that at all – it’s about managing risk, creating and protecting rights, and achieving a wider range of social goals. So it’s refreshing operating in a political climate that sees regulation as having some benefits.

On the other hand, the rise of populism and the decline of respect for “experts” means that there is greater impetus to exercise control over what regulators do. Furthermore, the economic and political context is changing rapidly: the new technologies of the fourth industrial revolution are creating new business models, particularly those built around robotics, data, and AI. There are new risks, including climate change, cyber-security, and future pandemics. The geo-political landscape is also shifting, affecting the dynamics of international regulatory standard setting, and in some political quarters, it is increasingly recognised that those who set the standards set the market – and that influencing international standards is as much a part of national security as traditional diplomacy.

26 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

Julia Black

What are the biggest challenges right now impacting regulatory systems and regulators globally?

Each regulator in each country will be facing their own challenges, and clearly, everyone has been impacted by the pandemic. But on a macro-level, I would say that two of the biggest challenges facing regulators are changing technology and climate change.

In one sense, technology is always changing, so this is not a new challenge – the issue is more the form that technological change is taking. The rise of the data-driven business models of “big tech” is forcing competition regulators to re-think what it means to exercise market power and how to deal with data privacy and security. Related to this is the increased use of AI, which has very different challenges depending on the context in which it is used.

The role of AI in driving how Netflix promotes its content to users poses very different risks than the role of AI in facial recognition systems used by the police or in healthcare. AI is a composite of data and algorithms – and regulators have to pay attention to risks that arise from the design and use of each element. More generally, new technologies enable new products and services that inevitably challenge services built around older technologies. For example, consumers can now generate surplus electricity, which they sell back to the grid, up-ending the older business model and the regulatory assumptions around the role of consumers in electricity generation and consumption. New technologies also introduce new actors – such as autonomous vehicles – which introduce new risks. Regulators have not only to gain a deep understanding of the new technologies, but they must also understand how they are changing the business models of those they regulate.

Moreover, there is always a drive from politicians for regulators to facilitate innovation by allowing new technologies to be adopted (and which regulator hasn’t been urged to create a sandbox in the last few years), but very little is said about the increase in risks that such technologies (or associated business models) may pose. As one regulator said to me, “As anyone who has played in them as a child knows, sandboxes can contain a number of creepy crawlies, and at least one person ends up with sand in their eyes.”

The second challenge is climate change. This is being recognised as a “whole of government” problem and not one that is confined to environmental regulators. But putting in place measures that can require industries to become pro-climate is outside many regulators’ expertise, and for some, it is outside their legitimate mandate. Financial regulators and central banks, for example, have faced criticism for focusing on climate risks, and others can expect the same. But climate is a very real and urgent challenge, and the learning curve for regulators is steep – so they will need to work together to learn from one another, and quickly.

What did COVID teach us about regulation in response to a global threat?

COVID has given many insights at both the national and international level. These include how regulatory regimes respond to innovations, how science and policy making interact, how regulations are designed, how fragmentation affects how crises are managed both within and between countries, the role of legal rules and social norms in changing people’s behaviour, and, critically, how there are variable attitudes to risk within and between communities, friends and families, as well as nations.

SO IT’S REFRESHING OPERATING IN A POLITICAL CLIMATE THAT SEES REGULATION AS HAVING SOME BENEFITS. COVID also shows us how nationally based governments and their regulators struggle to cope with issues and crises that transcend national borders. We are seeing similar dynamics in the handling of COVID as we did during the global financial crisis in 2008–09.

Each country initially focuses inwards, handling the crises in its own way. However, exogenous factors link nation states in ways they may not realise, or welcome. In the financial crisis, the global structure of the markets created those interconnections and ultimately the need for international regulatory co-ordination in managing the crisis. In the case of COVID, national governments can reduce transmissibility by acting unilaterally, such as closing their borders, but they remain inevitably connected through the global structure of the supply chain for medical devices and vaccines and other kinds of infrastructure, forcing them to interact.

Just as the global financial crisis turbocharged international regulatory co-ordination in financial markets, COVID may well be the catalyst for similar transformations in how governments and regulators co-operate in future global pandemics. However, for international regulatory co-operation to be effective, there have to be high levels of trust between governments and between regulators, something that is currently patchy at best. Moreover, as we have seen in the highly variable responses of governments in handling the pandemic, attitudes to risk, to risk-risk and riskbenefit trade-offs, and to inter- and intra-group equity are far more socially, economically, and politically contestable than questions of financial stability.

Can you give me one or two examples of positive advances internationally? What are they doing?

Horizons Council in the UK and the Bank of England’s Climate BES (CBES), which represents a move by a financial regulator to incorporate climate risk into their assessments of financial stability through scenario analysis. This work is being co-ordinated at an international level through the Network for Greening the Financial System.

THE RISE OF THE DATA-DRIVEN BUSINESS MODELS OF “BIG TECH” IS FORCING COMPETITION REGULATORS TO RE-THINK WHAT IT MEANS TO EXERCISE MARKET POWER. The Regulatory Horizons Council was created last year to engage with scientists and technologists to anticipate how regulation may need to adjust to accommodate their deployment, whether in government or through the market. (See https://www.gov. uk/government/groups/regulatory-horizons-council-rhc) It’s an interesting way of formalising the horizon scanning function regulators know they need but are not always able to dedicate resources to – the needs of the present almost always detract attention from the possible needs of the future. It is too early to say whether it will be a success – that will depend on whether its advice is integrated into government and regulatory decision making, but it is a potentially interesting new actor in the regulatory landscape, and one worth engaging with.

The second example is CBES. This is aimed at discovering the resilience of the UK financial system to the risks of climate change.

The bank has worked closely with climate scientists and climate economists to develop models of climate change under three different policy scenarios – early policy action, late policy action, and no policy action – and is requiring firms to assess the impact of those scenarios on their balance sheets. That includes requiring firms to engage with their counter parties to assess their risks from climate change. (See https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/stresstesting/2021/key-elements-2021-biennial-exploratory-scenariofinancial-risks-climate-change) The CBES is interesting on a number of levels. It applies a relatively new technique in financial regulation – scenario analysis and stress testing – to probe resilience to risks. It is enrolling powerful market intermediaries to move frontline businesses to proclimate action, while forcing them to recognise the risks their own businesses face from climate change. It is an excellent example of the interaction of science with policy making, of cross-domain and cross-disciplinary working, as the bank uses new sets of specialist knowledge and expertise and changes its way of conceiving risks. Further, the CBES scenarios are built on a foundation of international regulatory co-operation, mutual learning, and sharing of expertise.

What can New Zealand learn from these advances?

One of the main things I think New Zealand, or indeed any regulator in any country, can learn is that many of the challenges they face are not unique to them. Engaging with other regulators to learn how those challenges are manifested in their particular situations, how they are addressing them, and what is working and what is not can be enormously beneficial. Exactly how each country responds will vary, depending on its own political, economic, and social context, but keeping those conversations alive is key to enabling regulators to achieve the social goals that are so integral to regulation.

Following on from the issues of technological change and climate risk, two initiatives that are worth monitoring are the Regulatory 27 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

INVESTIGATION

Elle Bell

A SOLUTION TO AFFORDABLE COMMUNITY FACILITIES Community facilities are wanted more than ever.

Elle Bell sees a way to make them accessible and effective.

Our story starts at Blockhouse Bay Community Centre. It’s creaky and leaky, but it’s a safe and homely part of the local neighbourhood. It hosts weekly fitness classes, school holiday programmes, and countless weddings, birthdays, and events.

But Blockhouse Bay Community Centre has had a problem that plays out in thousands of communities across Aotearoa – making community facilities affordable and accessible. Across Aotearoa, local councils and government agencies have a multimillion dollar portfolio of community facilities ranging from rural halls and community centres to reserves and sports fields, but they are weighed down with bookings and admin.

Community needs Many people often simply need a large space to celebrate a special event with friends and whānau. However, the process of finding local affordable space is hard work. The bookings process

28 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

is even harder if English is not a first language or you’re unable to contact the centre during opening hours.

Oranga Tamariki requires safe, local, and neutral meeting spaces – often hundreds a week across Aotearoa. For the team at Blockhouse Bay, a typical day would involve checking availability, inputting booking data to a book or online calendar, and processing paper forms. Invoicing, payment collection, and receipting is manual and has a high error rate.

The highly manual and inconsistent nature of bookings management means it’s impossible to get a sense of actual usage to determine what the community really needs.

Community centre teams are uniquely positioned to develop new programmes and think up new ways to grow their centres’ impact in their communities. This is the mahi that makes a difference, but there is no time to do it.

One-off solutions and a better way Many organisations have tried to fix the bookings problem by implementing a better process, for example, an online bookings system – and this does bring efficiencies. But these are often expensive, and they don’t solve the bigger issue, which is that communities need a broad range of facilities to choose from.

Instead of every community-led space, council, or government agency coming up with its own way to enable easier bookings, what if they could all jump onto a shared network where all facilities can be found and booked in the same place?

This is not a new idea. Think about how much easier book-a-bach has made finding a holiday rental. A network can provide scale.

Where gaps in facilities exist, new players can jump on board, like a school or sports club. What’s more, such a network means more players can participate so the value of the network grows.

When it takes less than an hour to make a facility or space bookable online, you can rapidly test new initiatives. It also allows facilities to unlock data that can be used for better decision making and to quantify community outcomes, for example, identifying growth in new groups using a facility.

Having a simple way for local businesses or organisations to share space means they can develop new sustainable revenue streams, easing the burden on funding. More people using local spaces means more customers for neighbourhood businesses and collaboration with local vendors such as caterers.

When it’s easy for people to find spaces to start new programmes – they do! Every new space that comes online brings new opportunities for community activity, such as a new yoga class or dance group.

Connecting rather than delivering

Blockhouse Bay have now made all their spaces bookable online and have automated their processes. They are now part of a growing family of facilities that are bookable – there are more than 180 bookable spaces provided by community-led facilities across Auckland.

Now, more than ever, is the time to start thinking differently about how the public sector can become enablers for connecting communities to spaces, rather than just delivering spaces as a service. I believe the problem of improving access to community facilities is one of the most solvable. The assets that communities could use are waiting to be used more. The infrastructure to support a community-led approach is already in place. And now there is a simple technology platform already supporting pioneering organisations across Aotearoa and Australia that can be the glue between the public sector, communities, and spaces.

In just six months, Blockhouse Bay Centre have increased their projected annual revenue by 50 percent. They no longer have to invoice or take bonds, so their time is freed up to work on projects they care about. This is the real mahi that creates positive change.

Elle Bell is the managing director of SpacetoCo New Zealand, a technology partner to local government who want to enable better access and usage of their facilities. To get more information, head to https://spaceto.co/ecosystem

Such arrangements exist and have been co-created by partnerships across Aotearoa and Australia using SpacetoCo, a growing tech start-up.

Making it easier

Intelligence Upskill in using data effectively and improve strategic and operational decision making.

Talk to Skills about how the New Zealand Certificate in Intelligence (Introduction) Level 3 can help.

0508 SKILLS (0508 754 557) www.skills.org.nz

29 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

OPINION IS WORKING FROM HOME THE ANSWER? John Larkindale asks whether working from home is really the best way forward for organisations and employees.

COVID-19 has changed the workplace.

Lockdown in March 2020 forced a number of organisations and individuals to develop new ways of working, in particular, working from home. While many workers have seen no change – tradespeople, surgeons (medical and tree), healthcare workers, supermarket employees – there has nevertheless been speculation that the pandemic has forever changed the nature of work, and working from home will be the new norm – or so runs the argument.

There’s no question that new technologies have enabled much business to continue as normal.

And the enduring impact will be that more and more options will be available to those who wish or need to work at home. That’s great, but will it become the norm? Is the office or other communal workspace a thing of the past? I suggest not.

John Larkindale

First, remote working during the first weeks of the pandemic was largely successful. But, in part, this was because it rested on workplace relations that were already in place, where managers, teams, and other co-workers were familiar with each other.

This will erode over time as staff change, new tasks and teams need to be established, and organisational culture evolves.

Second, the necessity of combatting COVID removed many options; working from home simply had to become the norm. Zoom and similar technologies supported team relationships – but only to a point. Much of the complex fabric that underpins person-to-person meetings is difficult or impossible to replicate in a Zoom context. As personnel change, the risk is that Zoom exchanges become more and more rigid and formulaic.

Third, we work not just to put bread on the table. People are social beings, and much of the pleasure of daily life is interaction with others.

We need direct human contact, including the conflict that often comes with interpersonal relationships.

30 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

Fourth, as has been conclusively demonstrated, people significantly increase innovation in organisations and enhance lateral thinking in the company of others. That is why similar organisations often cluster together. And we shouldn’t overlook the importance of those “over the water cooler” conversations in driving productivity and workplace culture and cooperation.

Fifth, not everyone has the luxury of having a home workspace. Should employers have a responsibility to ensure their staff have safe working conditions at home? And who should pay the cost of outgoings such as heating and power?

Sixth, the types of jobs that lend themselves to remote working tend to involve people from a middle or upper-middle class stratum of society. What are the implications of less mixing of communities if people largely remain within the areas they live? What is the impact on businesses that provide goods and services to those who have traditionally worked in offices?

And, conversely, does the infrastructure exist to accommodate a significant long-term shift to working away from central areas of the city?

In my view, it is too early to know how work patterns will change. But COVID has given us a natural experiment. In New Zealand, where a significant number of office workers have returned to their offices, surveys show that the majority have no immediate plans to change their jobs. By contrast, in New York, where the majority are still working from home, a significant number of employees state that they are seeking to change their jobs.

An obvious hypothesis is that the absence of a shared workspace leads to alienation, a decline of commitment, and, ultimately, job dissatisfaction. Watch this space!

OPINION MONEY TALKS

USING PROCUREMENT TO BUY OUR LOW CARBON FUTURE Ben Aiken sees a huge opportunity in using procurement to reduce carbon emissions, but he also wants to see more boldness and a clearer strategy.

On 2 December 2020, the government

committed to a carbon neutral public service by 2025 and cited procurement as a lever of influence on the private and community sector in reaching this goal. The government wants to lead by example and encourage the private sector to follow suit.

In June 2021, the Climate Change Commission’s “Ināia tonu nei” called for climate change considerations to be mainstreamed into government procurement practice.

As consumers, we have grown conscious of our climate impact across our individual purchasing decisions, from switching to EVs and reducing meat consumption to installing LED lights in our homes. Our collective purchasing decisions help to shape the supply market.

Arguably the most influential New Zealand consumer is the government, spending upwards of $51.5 billion, or around 20 percent of GDP. Essentially the government votes with our taxpayer dollars every day by awarding contracts. These decisions shape our carbon emissions.

Ben Aiken

Using procurement to achieve policy outcomes is not a new concept. New Zealand has been here before – in particular, with the Fifth Labour Government’s 2003 Gov3 and Carbon Neutral Programme, which was subsequently mothballed in 2008.

For its rebirth to be successful, procurement practice must adapt and embed sustainability into its processes, combined with strategic commitments, to reach our carbon neutral goals. This means embedding sustainable procurement across contract life cycles, rewarding suppliers with low carbon impact, and, at the same time, growing sustainable supplier capacity to meet demand.

Money is power. Strategic procurement would give the message to suppliers to adopt low emissions practices or lose government contracts. For instance, the UK government now requires suppliers to commit to being carbon neutral by 2050 and produce Carbon Reduction Reports for bids over £5 million.

Similar commitments would benefit New Zealand procurement to ensure suppliers invest in decarbonisation.

The government’s flagship approach is targeted towards specific carbon reduction initiatives, such as using electric vehicles and eliminating coal boilers. While these initiatives will reduce the public sector’s carbon impact, they are targeted initiatives only. To be effective, low-carbon procurement needs to be mainstreamed across all procurement activity.

Climate considerations are required across business-as-usual procurement through the likes of infrastructure, IT, social, and corporate contracts.

However, embedding carbon considerations into government procurement is not straightforward.

There’s no single room of government buyers sitting in a Wellington office deciding all the public service’s purchasing decisions, but rather, there are many government agencies making those decisions, such as ministries, schools, district health boards, and local bodies.

There is potential for New Zealand Government Procurement (NZGP) as the Procurement Functional Lead to set a climate-friendly operational policy and strategic direction for government procurement. NZGP has delivered helpful guidance to agencies to adopt more sustainable procurement practice, and there are many pockets of success across the public service. Now is the time for government procurement to be bold and set a clear carbon reduction procurement strategy with clear deadlines for supplier compliance.

The market needs to understand what the government wants. There needs to be a collective voice outlining government procurement’s long-term commitment to carbon reduction. Developing an all-ofgovernment procurement strategy would allow for a unified procurement voice to the market.

This needs to be complemented with tangible procurement commitments to enable suppliers to make strategic investment decisions to transition to carbon neutrality.

We don’t want to look back in 10 years and remember the distant memory of the Carbon Neutral Government Programme 2.0, when procurement tried to be sustainable. The time is now for government procurement to be bold and foster carbon neutral markets for a more sustainable future.

31 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

READER CONTRIBUTION

BROADENING THE LENS – THE VALUE OF CIVILIAN ADVICE IN DEFENCE POLICY Andrew Bridgman examines the unique challenges facing Aotearoa’s national security and looks at the positive ways we might address them.

been struck by the broad range of “nontraditional” challenges New Zealand’s defence sector is responding to and planning for.

Andrew Bridgman

But when a crisis or event of significance occurs, sometimes a number at once, no other organisation in New Zealand has the ability to respond with such speed, scale, equipment, and experience.

Collaboration is key

The changing strategic environment When the Ministry of Defence first published Climate Crisis: Defence Readiness and Responsibilities, in close consultation with the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF), we were one of the first defence agencies in the world to explore the potential impacts of climate change on national security.

The initial report in 2018, and a subsequent implementation plan, recognised climate change for the first time as a major driver of military operations in Aotearoa. The report said there will be more humanitarian assistance and disaster-relief operations, as well as search-and-rescue missions in the Pacific region, and the NZDF will be called on more frequently to deal with these challenges.

It also found an indirect but demonstrable link between climate change and conflict as it can bring resource scarcity, biosecurity issues, and health problems, which at worst can trigger community instability and conflict.

The growing threat of climate change on national security comes at a time when we are seeing greater strategic competition in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as resource exploitation, transnational crime, and cybercrime. The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic are likely to exacerbate these threats.

Many of the threats are perhaps not in the “traditional” domain of defence and national security. Indeed, in my first two years as Secretary of Defence, I have 32 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

This new environment demands a holistic, innovative, and all-of-government response. Think of the Christchurch earthquakes, the Samoan tsunami, the Australian bushfires, and of course, COVID-19. Many of these issues cannot be dealt with by one agency, sector, military, or even country.

There are few existing norms or operating procedures to respond to the growing number of “non-traditional” threats. More and more, I believe we will see the need for our defence agencies to work closely with civilian agencies here and overseas if we are to successfully plan for and respond to the challenges we face together.

THE GROWING THREAT OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON NATIONAL SECURITY COMES AT A TIME WHEN WE ARE SEEING GREATER STRATEGIC COMPETITION IN THE INDO-PACIFIC REGION. Perhaps the all-of-government response group, set up in the wake of COVID-19, could provide a model for the future.

The scale of its response has been unprecedented, and the group draws on the expertise and resources of agencies across the public and private sectors. I believe COVID-19 has demonstrated that the public sector can implement, with speed,

successful new innovations, systems, coordination, and leadership models.

Perhaps another relatively new system, designed and implemented jointly by the Ministry of Defence and NZDF, could also provide a model.

It is called the Defence Capability Management System, and in 2018, Sir Brian Roche wrote an independent report saying the system had “successfully embraced the co-design process to support best practice and continuous improvement”. It was set up four years ago by the Ministry and NZDF to ensure the delivery of major military equipment, such as ships and aircraft, is on time, fit for purpose, and within budget.

“There could be lessons for what has been adopted within this system for long term capital planning that would benefit the wider public sector,” Sir Brian said.

A key tenet of the system is the establishment of integrated project teams, which are made up of both civilian and military subject-matter experts, such as project managers, policy advisors, and acquisition leads. NZDF personnel are embedded into the integrated project teams and work side by side with civilians, sharing their knowledge, insights, data, and expertise.

These project teams then report to a dedicated Project Governance Board, which is made up of external and internal advisors, appointed by the Chief of Defence and myself. The project team is required to report back monthly to this board, which has a diverse membership made up of private and public sector experts who might, for example, have business, legal, or engineering expertise.

“Defence now readily draws on in-house expertise, Defence staff, international experts, other government agencies, professional service firms, and defence industry representatives to support ongoing development,” Sir Brian Roche said.

in justice, health, economic development, and the Treaty, the Ministry of Defence has stood out to me as something completely different. It is like no other area of public policy that I have come across.

It is a fascinating role to occupy, as it has one eye fixed firmly on domestic policy and priorities and another on our international partners.

That is why our work to consult with our international partners and the defence industry in New Zealand and overseas is so important.

Andrew Bridgman (centre) on Poppy Day We all know that better decisions are made when there is greater co-operation between organisations and sectors and there’s a diverse range of skills and expertise at the table. In my 30 years in the public sector, I have seen first-hand how diversity in thought and experience brings stronger solutions.

The value of civilian advice on defence matters It could be argued the very founding of the Ministry of Defence is to ensure there is diversity in thought when decisions about Aotearoa’s national security are made.

The Ministry of Defence is a civilian-led agency established in 1990 under the Defence Act. The Act stipulates that the person in my role, the Secretary of Defence, is the principal civilian advisor to the government. The Secretary must formulate defence policy advice in “consultation” with the chief of NZDF and submit “from time to time” a defence assessment to the government. This function necessarily means that a lot of our work is collaborative, forward looking, and strategic.

PERHAPS THE ALLOF-GOVERNMENT RESPONSE GROUP, SET UP IN THE WAKE OF COVID-19, COULD PROVIDE A MODEL FOR THE FUTURE. Under the Act, the Ministry of Defence is mandated to procure or upgrade major military equipment, such as ships, vehicles,

and aircraft, which are sometimes worth billions of dollars. We do this in partnership with NZDF. In Aotearoa, the government makes deployment decisions after considering advice from both civilian and military advisors. In this respect, I believe the role of the Ministry of Defence is very important – it leads the development of analysis and advice to government on where our NZDF personnel should be deployed to, why they should be deployed, and to what end.

Regular consultation with NZDF is critical throughout this process to ensure the government receives fully considered analysis and advice. An important dynamic in our working relationship with the NZDF is “constructive contestability and challenge”, which helps to reflect the core principals of our public service: political neutrality, free and frank advice, open government, and stewardship.

In our new strategic environment, civilian defence advisors provide an assurance to New Zealanders, and to our Ministers and Cabinet, that the necessary checks and balances exist in the development of defence policy and procurement advice.

But there is more work to do. Defence policy as a discipline is not well-defined, and it is often folded-in with foreign policy or trade policy. In many respects, the Ministry of Defence is on a journey to develop its own policy frameworks and is looking to increase its use of data, analytics, and empirical evidence in the development of policy.

Broadening the lens Having worked across a range of public policy domains since 1992, including

So too is the consultative process the Ministry undertakes with other government agencies when it is developing defence policy or procurement decisions. When we are writing the business case for a new naval ship that will operate in the Pacific, for example, we will seek input from our colleagues in the Ministry of Primary Industries or the Department of Conservation, who might transport equipment and staff on the vessel to support the work they are responsible for.

When we are considering a deployment for humanitarian reasons, we might seek input from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade or the Ministry of Pacific Peoples.

Ultimately, these conversations help shape the advice we give to the government.

SUCCESSFUL POLICY AND PROCUREMENT MUST ALWAYS INCLUDE BROAD INPUT AND CO-ORDINATION. This collaborative way of working, across sectors and state boundaries, reinforces to me that no aspect of public policy development is completely independent.

Successful policy and procurement must always include broad input and coordination.

As public sector leaders, we have a responsibility to ensure our policy advice and procurement decisions today are designed to ensure our tamariki and their tamariki are well-equipped to face the challenges of tomorrow.

Secretary of Defence, Andrew Bridgman, is the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Defence, a civilian-led government agency that advises on defence policy and international engagements and procures major military equipment.

33 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

APPLY NOW FOR 2021 STUDY

INNOVATIVE IDEAS AND PRACTICES FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE HIGHLIGHTS FOR 2021 ■ Flexibility to tailor your learning to your interests, career objectives, and work–life balance ■ Places available for recent graduates Gain a qualification in e-government, public management, or public policy from Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington; New Zealand’s leading education provider in public services. Study full time or at your own pace while you work.

Master of Public Management: Upgrade your skills and competencies for leading and managing people and resources, and for implementing innovative change and effective public services.

Master of Public Policy: Develop your skills and competencies for analysing, designing, and evaluating policy, and preparing policy advice in public and non-governmental sectors.

Master of e-Government: Advance your skills and competencies for managing complex technology-based initiatives in the public sector.

 wgtn.ac.nz/sog  04 463 5309  ppo@vuw.ac.nz 34 PUBLIC SECTOR September 2021

The Master of Public Management and Master of Public Policy are accredited through the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration (NASPAA) certification standard in public-service education.

STUDY AT ONE OF THE WORLD’S LEADING BUSINESS SCHOOLS Wellington School of Business and Government holds the triple crown of international accreditations.