NAVIGATING CHANGE: PRACTICAL STRATEGIES FOR EMPLOYEES
THE POWER OF DATA-DRIVEN SOCIAL INVESTMENT
Now more than ever you need to be prepared to deal with change effectively. When you work with a specialist Skills CDL coach you are helping your people plan for the future - anything from restructuring, redundancy, retirement to a total lifestyle change.
When building a team, it’s important to get three things right: People, Skills and Dynamics.
The Johnson Group has worked across the public sector since 2005. A member of the All of Government Recruitment Panel and regarded for our expertise in public sector recruitment, our consultants are specialists who understand the very specific skill sets required of public sector professionals as well as the intricacies of the Wellington market.
We know our candidates well - from what drives or interests them to how they fit into your team to deliver excellent outcomes
Your First Choice For Public Sector Professionals
Whether you’re seeking a change in 2024 or need assistance in growing your team, we’re here to help.
cdlinsight.co.nz enquiries@skills-group.org
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
Kathy Catton: editor@ipanz.org.nz
CONTRIBUTORS
Judith Aitken
Sean Audain
Chloe Cairncross
Stephen Clarke
Jocelyn Cranefield
Jasmine Harding
Elena Higgison
Jennie Kerr
Liz MacPherson
Jim McAloon
Stu Murphy
Kara Nepe-Apatu
Adithi Pandit
Maddi Rowe
Amanda Wallis
Josh Williams
Sylvia Yan
JOURNAL ADVISORY GROUP
Barbara Allen
Kay Booth
Kathy Catton
Liz MacPherson
Liam Russell
ADVERTISING
Phone: +64 4 463 6940
Email: admin@ipanz.org.nz
CONTRIBUTIONS
Public Sector welcomes contributions to each issue from readers.
Please contact the editor for more information.
SUBSCRIPTIONS
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.
DISCLAIMER
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. 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.
Public Sector is printed on environmentally responsible paper produced using ECF, third-party certified pulp from responsible sources and manufactured under the ISO14001 Environmental Management System.
Navigating change: Practical strategies for employees
Dr Amanda Wallis and Jasmine Harding from Umbrella Wellbeing outline the common responses to change and what we can do about them to feel better.
8 INSIGHTS
Digital twins and the transformation of urban planning
Sean Audain from Wellington City Council and Jocelyn Cranefield from Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington explain how a city’s future can be modelled by creating and working with digital cities.
11 ANALYSIS
The power of data-driven social investment
Adithi Pandit and Sylvia Yan, from Deloitte New Zealand, look at strategies for enhancing outcomes and impact on social investment in Aotearoa New Zealand.
13 INVESTIGATION
AI in the public sector: A focus on trust, ethics, and responsibility
In the third in the series of articles about AI in the public sector, Stephen Clarke highlights the pitfalls of AI in the public sector, and what we can do about them.
17 ANALYSIS
It’s time to set up public policy apprenticeships
Josh Williams, Skills Consulting, argues that government agencies should adopt apprenticeships to build capability within the public sector.
20 HISTORY OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE
Keystrokes per minute: Women in the public service typing pools
Judith Aitken summarises her oral history of women in New Zealand’s public service typing pools and the project and podcast that arose from it.
22 INSIGHTS
He Māori Ahau: A transformative conference empowering Māori success and unity
Find out more about He Māori Ahau, an upcoming conference aimed at empowering Māori excellence in the public sector.
24 HISTORY OF THE PUBLIC SECTOR
From industries and commerce to MBIE: A new super-department
Jim McAloon, Professor of History at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington, summarises how the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment has evolved into what it is today.
26 ANALYSIS
Cutting red tape: Beware ‘Verschlimmbesserung’
Jennie Kerr and Stu Murphy from MartinJenkins look at how efforts to trim New Zealand’s regulatory forest can achieve the intended aims and avoid unintended consequences.
28 BOOK AND PODCAST REVIEW
IPANZ New Professionals’ Network Member Chloe Cairncross reviews the Gone by Lunchtime podcast episode, and the recently published book Te Motunui Epa by Rachel Buchanan.
29 DID YOU KNOW?
About the PSA
Eight facts about the country’s largest trade union, representing workers in the public sector.
IPANZ PRESIDENT LIZ MACPHERSON
There is an old Navy Seals mantra that goes: “Slow is smooth, smooth is fast.” Essentially it means that taking time to think, understand, plan, and execute in a disciplined way is faster and ultimately more efficient and effective than rushing. Rushing leads to errors, missed options, unintended consequences, to waste. The absence of good information and evidence compounds these risks.
Our system of government defaults to rushing. The threeyear parliamentary term incentivises governments to invest in the short term, to rush to do as much as possible in the first two years of office and spend much of the last year convincing the voting public that enough has been achieved to warrant re-election.
At the same time, the way the bulk of the public sector is funded reinforces short-termism. Agencies seek to cover their inflationary cost pressures by bidding for funding for new initiatives. As a result, many agencies’ ‘baselines’ are a much-mended patchwork of time-limited funds propping up eroded ‘real’ baseline funding. Committing to do more to help pay for existing underfunded services is not a sustainable solution.
Evidence of effectiveness, particularly in the social sector, requires long-term investment. Lack of evidence of effectiveness can itself lead to time-limited funding on the basis that if the programme or service is found to be effective, its funding will be extended. The absence of evaluative evidence is also often the reason why effective
programmes and services face fiscal cliffs and conversely why poorly performing but politically popular programmes are so hard to turn off.
We are currently seeing these vulnerabilities playing out in one of the largest course correction events I have seen in my 30-plus years associated with the public sector. These impacts reach far beyond the direct effects on public sector employees.
So where can we start to address these issues? One way is through a real commitment to evidence-informed decisionmaking. To using evidence to make the hard calls on what to prioritise – on what to fund and most importantly what to stop. These decisions will be hard – some choices will be between equally impactful programmes and services. Making these hard calls is the work of the Government. And this commitment must extend to investing in infrastructure and capabilities necessary to support good evidence, including data, research, and evaluation capability. Troublingly, these are just the kind of skills that many agencies are cutting as part of their cost savings exercises.
It is my hope that the recently announced Social Investment approach represents just such a commitment. That it provides the capability and the permission space to think, understand, execute, and deliver in a disciplined, innovative, and impactful way. That it helps us deliver for New Zealand in a way that is both smooth and fast.
Dr Amanda Wallis and Jasmine Harding from Umbrella Wellbeing outline the common responses to change and what we can do about them to feel better.
The impact of organisational change is widely felt. This is true whether change is involving one team or twenty, ten people or ten thousand. It explains why many in the public service might feel impacted by change right now, even when the most recent estimates of job losses may be only directly involving a minority.
The ripple effect includes those whose colleagues, partners, friends, or children have lost their jobs, those who are taking on more work to cover newly vacant roles, and those who are living in fear of future redundancies. Wherever you are in the wave of change, whether you are coping okay or struggling, living with uncertainty can take a toll.
Living with uncertainty is a catch-all for any kind of change that involves some degree of ambiguity (ie, events that are open to different interpretations), novelty or newness (ie, no prior experience to fall back on), or a lack of predictability (ie, it’s unclear how things will turn out). A lot of life events can fit this description – receiving an unexpected medical diagnosis, for example, or starting a new business.
While change is constant in the workplace, and usually happens incrementally, some periods of change can feel more abrupt than others. Some researchers call this ‘discontinuous change’, where there are significant rapid shifts in direction, staffing, or ways of working driven by major internal problems or external forces. Discontinuous change represents a significant departure from how things were done in the past, and it can be received in a few different ways.
“[Discontinuous change is] change which is marked by rapid shifts in either strategy, structure or culture, or in all three”.
Grundy,
T. (1993) Implementing Strategic Change (London: Kogan Page)
There are several research models depicting how people respond to significant change at work. However, putting these aside, the first rule of thumb is that no one person will respond in the same way. Some people will experience change as unsettling and anxiety-provoking, while others will experience the same change as relieving and exciting. For what it’s worth, most research models depict the emotional journey through change as highly variable, usually incorporating some type of shock or resistance, some apathy or depression, before eventual acceptance and integration. Like grieving someone’s death, there is no script
for when these stages occur, or whether they will occur at all.
What we do know is that studies usually find uncertainty to be the hardest part of any kind of change. Uncertainty often leaves us feeling off-balance. We spend our time worrying about the future, which impacts our energy, mood, concentration, and ability to sleep. Conversely, when the change process is transparent, communicated clearly, and involves the workers who it is going to impact – regardless of what it is – we are better able to adapt.
According to data from the Umbrella Wellbeing Assessment, perceptions of poor change consultation increase the odds of psychological distress and poor performance by double, and turnover intentions by nearly triple (compared to perceptions of good change consultation). So, when managed poorly, organisational change can have significant impacts at the personal and organisational level.
On the flip side, new research from the University of Canterbury suggests that these adverse effects can be buffered by team support, good leadership practices, and psychological safety to discuss issues and suggestions openly. In line with research recently published by Umbrella in the New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, we need to have solid workplace resources in place (like social support) to manage workplace demands (like organisational change).
It’s striking that many of the research models depicting organisational change have something in common with models devoted to bereavement. In other words, we experience grief when we go through change at work, just as we experience grief when we lose someone we love. This is especially true for those people who have lost their jobs or are witnessing the loss of jobs in their social network. After all, grief is a normal reaction to upheaval.
If you are wanting to support someone who has lost their job, or it has happened to you, start by validating that it’s normal to feel a range of emotions, because grief is complicated, change is hard, and especially so when it’s out of our hands. Optimism, hope, or gratitude are just as valid responses as anger, despondency, or fear. Most people benefit from emotional validation (“it makes sense that you feel this way”) early in the change process. This helps them to work through the immediate emotional intensity, before their more clear-headed brain can kick in to explore options. It’s also useful to keep in mind that, just as there are varied reactions to change, there are varied ways to cope. Generally, psychologists group these coping strategies into two categories: adaptive and maladaptive. Maladaptive
strategies tend to provide short-term relief – including denial, self-blame, and heavy substance use but can often make things worse in the long term. They’re also much easier to slip into when we are under stress or navigating uncertainty. Adaptive coping strategies, however, include things like seeking support, positive reframing of the situation, using humour, or problem solving. These adaptive strategies generally lead to better outcomes, and they all have their place for different people, and at different times.
Try to match your support with the type of coping you, or the person you are supporting, needs. A classic example of a mismatch is jumping feet-first into looking for solutions (eg, sending job applications) when what someone really needs in the moment is emotional support (eg, a listening ear).
No one person will respond [to change] in the same way.
Coping with your own uncertainty
One of the ways we can look after ourselves during uncertain times is to think back to the times in life in general, or our career so far, where we have adapted to change or uncertainty. What helped us to cope? What did we learn? What could we do again, now, and what would we do differently?
Sometimes this will point us in the direction of coping strategies that work well for us. Adopting a challenge mindset, for example, works for some people as an evidence-based way to reframe tricky situations. Instead of focusing on the threats in your environment (a sure-fire way to activate your stress response), look for the growth opportunities instead. Perhaps recent change has helped bring a laser-sharp focus to what’s most important to you and what kind of work you want to do more of. Or perhaps the restructure has given you more responsibility in your role and a chance to grow your experience towards the next step in your career.
These kinds of strategies are most effective when we apply them to situations that we have some control or influence over. Stephen Covey’s circle of control model is an excellent visual reminder of this.
You might ask yourself, is this thing I am worrying about in my direct control? This includes things like behaviours, decisions, and attitudes. If not, can I exert influence over it,
What
we do know is that studies usually find uncertainty to be the hardest part of any kind of change.
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 Kathy Catton at editor@ipanz.org.nz
for example, in my home environment, my relationships, or my health? And how might I make the most of the situation by adopting a challenge mindset?
Other times, we might notice that we are concerned about something that we can neither control nor influence. In these cases, ‘acceptance coping’ can be a useful tool. This style of coping is precisely what it sounds like – finding a way to accept the situation as it is, even if we don’t like the outcome. It means being okay with the reality that we cannot change this situation as much as we may like to. Importantly, acceptance isn’t a passive process; it’s not simply giving up. Instead, it’s reminding ourselves, “This is how this is right now.” Psychologists often call this ‘active’ acceptance and, in work environments that we have very little control over, research has shown this to be
a particularly useful strategy. For more significant changes in our lives, it can take some time to come to a place of acceptance, and that’s okay.
If you find your mind getting trapped in the wider outer circle of concern, try to notice, and then nudge yourself back into the present, and into the sphere of what you can control. Fortunately for us, the things we have control over tend to have the greatest positive impact on our health.
Most people benefit from emotional validation (“it makes sense that you feel this way”) early in the change process.
As many research articles and theories as there are devoted to coping with organisational change, there is no beating the basics: looking after your physical, emotional, social, and spiritual health.
Think about them as your core pillars of wellbeing –physical, social, emotional, and spiritual – and reflect on how balanced each of them are feeling. Remember to move your body, eat well, rest regularly, and give yourself the opportunity to sleep well, as best you can. Connect regularly and intentionally with colleagues, friends, and family. Notice and acknowledge your emotions and where your mind is wandering. Do more of the things that bring you joy and give you a dose of meaning and purpose – whether that’s nature, faith, relationships, or something else altogether.
The research is very strong that these small actions add up, and are mutually reinforcing, helping make us healthier and more robust to change when the next wave eventually comes our way.
Dr Amanda Wallis leads research, development, and innovation at Umbrella Wellbeing (www.umbrella.org.nz), where she draws on her research experience to uphold scientific rigour across all of Umbrella’s services, helping to create thriving minds, people, and business. Amanda has a PhD in Psychology, a Diploma in Positive Psychology and Wellbeing, and is a regular contributor to industry, media, and academic publications on the topics of workplace mental health and organisational wellbeing.
Jasmine Harding is a registered clinical psychologist at Umbrella Wellbeing, providing one-on-one coaching for clients and facilitating workplace wellbeing workshops. In addition to her clinical experience, including working with people with a wide range of anxiety, depression, and eating disorders, Jasmine has a strong research background, having worked at children’s research centre in the prestigious Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology.
Times are changing and the job market has turned 180 degrees. Significant downsizing has meant H2R’s Career Transition team have been extremely busy providing support to affected individuals We acknowledge this is a challenging time for many public sector staff
Those of us who have experienced a few changes of government will know that usually there is a period of hitting the reset button then balance and normality will resume. The new norm may be in the form of leaner organisations, but things have a way of sorting themselves out.
Contractors – Demand for contractors has declined significantly and this has impacted hourly contracting rates You can view our Contractor Hourly Rate Guide at www.H2R.co.nz/tools-tips which provides an indication of the hourly rates we are now seeing versus rates in July 2023 for a range of Corporate and IT roles.
Permanent and Fixed Term Roles – These are still flat and probably will be until after the budget announcement. However, we are seeing green shoots as new structures are established and roles such as IT, Finance, Employment Relations and HR are still coming to market.
In June 2024, H2R will have been serving the public sector for 20 years through many ups and downs. We’re still here to have a chat about job opportunities and where the market is heading. Visit www.H2R.co.nz for the contact details of our recruiters.
Sean Audain, Strategic Planning Manager at Wellington City Council, and Dr Jocelyn Cranefield, Associate Professor at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington, show how a city’s future can be modelled by creating and working with digital twins.
Kira puts on a headset to stand in a virtual street. For the first time in decades she can’t see over parked cars, and she can’t see or hear the e-scooters. Crossing the street to get to the school is a step into the unknown. Kira is experiencing the city from a child’s viewpoint, helping inform how city infrastructure will need to change to help the thousands of children who are expected to move into the growing inner suburbs. Meanwhile, her daughter Kelly has her hands on a haptic bar. She’s trying to manoeuvre a virtual walker over a kerb. Suddenly she’s thinking about how this crossing might help her mother live more independently for longer.
Understanding city challenges through digital technologies
This scenario illustrates the use of a virtual reality simulation to involve citizens in shaping the future of their city. The simple example of exploring how a pedestrian crossing should be built demonstrates how digital technologies are helping build a better understanding of the multiple interacting systems –natural, cultural, economic, democratic, and historical – that have built and continue to change our cities. The challenge of understanding cities and their systems has become urgent as cities globally grow at unprecedented speed. By 2050, urban areas are expected to house 6 billion people, around 70 per cent of humanity. Cities must plan how to accommodate this growth while adapting to the impacts of changing economies and climates and addressing their ageing infrastructure.
By combining real-time data, such as the movements of buses, bikes, and pedestrians, as well as wind, weather, and tidal patterns, planners can see and understand how a city is really working.
The smart city movement uses emerging technologies, data, and connectivity to gain better insights about cities and help devise well-informed solutions to their challenges. Smart cities combine data from diverse sources, such as IoT sensors that gather real-time data about air quality, energy use, traffic flows, water, waste, parking availability, and citizen safety. In turn, they then analyse this data to help make predictions, guide decision-making, and deliver more effective solutions and services. While cities embark on digitalisation for many reasons, there are common threads of resilience, responsiveness to citizen needs, efficiencies, and sustainability in almost all of their journeys.
Digital twins are an important emerging tool in the suite of
smart city approaches. At its core a digital twin is a fusion of the digital identity and behaviour of something and its physical reality and presence. Digital twins often begin as reflections of reality, such as a city model or an environmental monitoring system. Then, as capabilities grow, they may become an integrated part of the system or thing they represent, with bidirectional flows of information or instructions, such as a ‘smart’ electrical grid or a city guidance system for the visually impaired. Over time, as more single-purpose digital twins are deployed, they tend to converge into market-based digital twins comprising multiple platforms, organisations, and purposes.
At a city scale, digital twins can replicate not only a city’s physical landscape, buildings, and roads, but also its infrastructure and systems in a virtual environment for use in analysis, planning, and consultation. For example, by combining real-time data, such as the movements of buses, bikes, and pedestrians, as well as wind, weather, and tidal patterns, planners can see and understand how a city is really working and how well this matches the assumptions behind decades-old planning and policy decisions.
When combined with a gaming-style environment, digital twins provide a versatile environment for modelling and communicating future city planning, design, and policy scenarios. By visualising data, trends, and potential outcomes, and drawing on artificial intelligence for modelling and prediction, they can help citizens and city decision-makers understand the implications of different choices and policies. This can then help inform how to act on and improve the real-world urban environment. In the example above, a digital replica of the physical street is being experienced in virtual reality, with designs for a future pedestrian crossing overlaid for testing. This digital replica contains data from many different city systems. This means that options gathered from public feedback can be simulated not only to inform the experience and safety of people using the crossing, but also to understand the crossing’s impact on the city’s public transport networks, traffic, and retail spending.
Wellington City Council’s digital twin projects are being used to better measure, understand, and communicate diverse strategic concerns in an interactive way.
In New Zealand, several cities are working with digital twins. Auckland’s Safeswim project models the effects of wastewater discharges into its waterways and informs beachgoers when
it’s safe to swim. Hamilton has invested in understanding transportation patterns, Tauranga in modelling and making decisions on their future council building, and Christchurch in understanding flooding and connecting people with the waterways. Wellington has the oldest and most advanced digital twin programme, with digital twins for climate adaptation, civil defence, urban planning, democratic transparency, and underground utilities.
Wellington’s digital twin –improving resilience and participation Wellington City Council’s digital twin projects are being used to better measure, understand, and communicate diverse strategic concerns in an interactive way. They range from 3D models of the city in gaming engines, which allow people to interact with city data at scale, to market-based twins that will help utility companies better understand, administer, and invest in what is beneath the ground. The city’s digital twins rely on a variety of Internet of Things technologies, such as pedestrian and cycle sensors; AI capabilities, such as visual learning, and automated geospatial processing, such as feature recognition to measure changes in tree canopy; as well as advanced geospatial and game engines that can create realistic environments.
They can wind forward in time to see what Wellington will look like in 2040 when the sea level rises under different prediction models and how planning for buildings will need to change.
Wellington’s digital twins are also helping people understand how the landscape of the capital has changed and continues to change. For example, users can interrogate data from sensors to see how many cycle trips were made in a given period, in what direction, and on which streets, as well as how this pattern changes across the week and seasons. They can wind forward in time to see what Wellington will look like in 2040 when the sea level rises under different prediction models and how planning for buildings will need to change. And they can rewind to 1455 to see how the land looked when
areas of Wellington were last beneath the sea. Working with mana whenua this can help bring mātauranga Māori to life and inform future decisions.
A future digital commons
Digital twins for cities are still in their infancy. With increased investment and focus, there is potential for the world to gain significant benefits from digital cities, nations, and networks of twins. Provided that ethical issues of consent, privacy, identity, and agency are addressed, they hold promise as a new digital commons for addressing long-standing urban problems – as the solutions that came through debates held in public spaces did before them, but providing insights at a far greater scale.
Sean Audain is the City Innovation Lead at Wellington City Council. His career has focused on innovation, smart cities, and the strategic transformation of local government. Sean leads the development of Wellington’s smart city, exploring how technology and cities combine through data, digital twins and strategies to give us a better understanding of places, make better decisions and explore futures. Sean has an Urban Planning Degree from the University of Auckland and has served on a number of international bodies, including the Open Government Partnership Expert Advisory Panel, Digital Twin Taskforce, the World Economic Forum’s G20 Smart Cities Advisory Group, and the Global Futures Council. Sean has been recognised with a number of international awards, including as a Harvard Global Innovator 2020 and Smart Cities Council Leader 2020.
Dr Jocelyn Cranefield is an Associate Professor at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington. Her research centres on understanding the challenges and opportunities arising from technological innovation and digitalisation, to help guide transformation. Areas of interest are smart cities and use of AI for humanistic outcomes. Her research has been recognised with several international awards. She teaches Digital Innovation and Strategy, and is Academic Programme Leader for the Master of Professional Business Analysis.
Adithi Pandit and Sylvia Yan, from Deloitte New Zealand, look at strategies for enhancing outcomes and impact on social investment in Aotearoa New Zealand.
New Zealand is internationally renowned and domestically appreciated as a great place to live, work, and play. However, underneath the surface, we face significant economic and social challenges and persistent inequity that need urgent attention.
This is where the concept of ‘social investment’ comes in, representing an evidence-based outcomes-led investment approach to public policy and resource allocation. This ‘investment’ seeks to intervene proactively in societal issues, resulting in long-term benefits rather than short-term fixes. It involves directing public and private resources to initiatives expected to generate positive socio-economic and environmental returns for the community, the country, and future generations. This evidence-based investment approach is gaining traction through government as it offers a more long-term outcome-focused method of policymaking, which is crucial when organisations are under pressure to deliver more with less.
New Zealand is faced with rising healthcare costs, an ageing population, and poor life outcomes, alongside low productivity growth, education disparities, and a cost-of-living crisis. All these have prompted a refreshed understanding of the social investment approach and how to turn this into policy interventions that would help alleviate these challenges.
Prioritising interventions based on data and evidence
Social investment can help organisations target resources and prioritise focus in an environment full of the complexities of ballooning fiscal responsibilities and
mounting social needs. For social investment to work, it requires a cross-agency, evidence-based and data-driven approach to policymaking. Understanding the drivers and risk factors leading to sub-optimal outcomes would allow organisations to invest in early interventions and preventative initiatives.
For social investment to work, it requires a cross-agency, evidencebased and data-driven approach to policymaking.
Using data and evidence from previous and existing programmes and services enables organisations to be more insightful about managing the challenges and barriers to success. This, in turn, allows them to target their approach and interventions that could result in positive impacts and higher long-term returns on investments.
Using data and analytics is a cornerstone in advancing social investment initiatives. By leveraging data, policymakers and practitioners can improve decision-making processes, enhance the accuracy of predictions concerning social wellbeing issues, improve resource prioritisation, and
deliver more targeted services. Data analytics allows for identifying trends, patterns, and causal relationships that might only have been discovered with cross-sectional and cross-sectoral evidence. With this information, decisionmakers can develop tailored strategies that are more likely to provide positive outcomes for unique communities or population cohorts and discontinue ineffective ones.
While data analytics capabilities have matured in many parts of the public sector, there are still capability and workforce gaps and constraints across smaller and community-based organisations. We must accelerate using digital and data enablers to help advance all-of-government and cross-organisation data exchange and operationalise social investment approaches. It would include an increased focus on data exchange and an uplift in analytics capabilities for all organisations involved, including smaller and community-based organisations. These organisations hold vital information about disadvantaged communities and cohorts who are exposed to risk factors that lead to suboptimal outcomes for generations.
In addition to modernising data and data exchange environments, keeping up with the latest technology is essential to enable more efficient data processing and analysis. Organisations should seek a better understanding of artificial intelligence (AI) to augment our limited human resources, helping them handle and interact with both quantitative and qualitative longitudinal data efficiently and effectively.
AI remains an area that needs to be fully explored, with the need to establish proper data ethics and governance to mitigate risks. It is a fast-growing capability worth considering in the context of social investment, particularly how the breadth of its capabilities can be realised to achieve investment outcomes while also understanding any implications of its use and cross-sectoral accountability arrangements.
Data-driven approaches and investments have been gaining popularity worldwide, and several success stories have emerged that can attest to the potency of this strategy.
In Finland, the use of comprehensive data allowed the
government to substantially reduce homelessness through the Housing First programme, which proved to offer better outcomes in contrast to traditional models.
In the United Kingdom, the Troubled Families Programme harnessed data to identify and assist families in need, preventing social issues from escalating. These examples showcase best practices, such as the necessity of crosssector collaboration, the use of real-time data for ongoing policy refinement, and the importance of setting clear, measurable objectives for each initiative.
The key lies in embracing data analytics capabilities for public sector practitioners who want to maximise their impact. It could involve upskilling in data literacy, investing in robust data collection and analysis tools, and fostering a culture that encourages data-driven decision-making.
New Zealand is at a tipping point, where social investment could help navigate us through looming financial challenges and strengthen our country’s social fabric innovatively and sustainably. As stewards of the public good, policymakers, public practitioners, and all involved in public sector administration must adopt a forward-thinking mindset that recognises data as an invaluable asset in our decisionmaking toolkit. The most logical way forward is to embrace data in our social investment strategies and recognise it as a smart, sustainable, and effective pathway towards a brighter future for our nation.
Adithi Pandit leads Deloitte New Zealand’s public sector practice and leads the Future of Government agenda for Deloitte Asia Pacific. Her passion is for bringing together individuals and organisations to address ‘wicked problems’ at a system level. Adithi has led largescale organisational change in New Zealand, including the redesign of social housing services, welfare payment services, accident compensation services, and childcare and protection services.
Sylvia Yan leads Deloitte New Zealand’s Monitoring and Planning in the Artificial Intelligence and Data practice. She has dedicated 25 years to applying analytics and insights into numerous aspects of the social sector, the health and disability sector, and the public sector. She enjoys helping organisations develop operational frameworks that guide and lift service delivery and outcomes. Sylvia has extensive experience in defining, modelling, and measuring performance. Leveraging technology, she can turn all intelligence into actionable insights from strategic and planning initiatives to the day-to-day implementation and operation of services.
IPANZ will explore the social investment approach further at our 10 July 2024 webinar. For more information, or to register, visit our website.
https://ipanz.org.nz/Event?Action=View&Event_id=1071
STEPHEN CLARKE
In the third of a series of articles for the Public Sector journal, Stephen Clarke, Data, Information and AI Management Consultant and former Chief Archivist, highlights the pitfalls of artificial intelligence (AI) in the public sector, and what we can do about them.
As artificial intelligence (AI) continues its rapid integration into various facets of our lives, its potential to revolutionise public services is undeniable. From streamlining administrative processes to enhancing decision-making, AI promises efficiency, innovation, and improved service delivery. However, this transformative power comes with its own set of challenges, particularly when it comes to trust, ethics, and the potential for bias and discrimination.
We must remember that AI is a tool, and it’s how humans use it that is the real concern. By delegating responsibility to ‘IT’, or the machines themselves, we reduce our critical human agency and, ultimately, our collective responsibility for AI outcomes. This is a dangerous path, which frees the careless and the bad actors from their actions.
AI safety guidelines and guardrails
If we need to implement trust frameworks, where do we look? Here are some useful examples:
IEEE global initiative on ethics of autonomous and intelligent systems
The IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) has developed a set of principles known as ‘Ethically Aligned Design’ to guide the development of autonomous and intelligent systems. The framework emphasises transparency, accountability, and the prioritisation of human wellbeing in the design and deployment of AI technologies.
NIST framework for trustworthy AI
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has developed a comprehensive framework for trustworthy AI, aiming to foster trust in AI systems by addressing the challenges of bias, transparency, and robustness.
EU ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI
The European Union has published ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI, emphasising human-centric AI that respects fundamental rights. The guidelines outline seven key requirements for trustworthy AI for organisations to follow.
ISO/IEC standards
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 42 is the international standardisation committee responsible for developing standards for AI. Several standards under this committee focus on ethical considerations, trustworthiness, and the responsible development and deployment of AI technologies, such as:
ISO/IEC 23894 – Artificial intelligence – Governance of AI trustworthiness: This standard provides guidelines for governing the trustworthiness of AI systems, emphasising ethical considerations, transparency, accountability, and risk management.
ISO/IEC 24027 – Artificial intelligence – Bias in AI systems and AI-aided decision-making: This standard addresses bias in relation to AI systems for AI-aided decision-making.
ISO/IEC 24028 – Artificial intelligence – Overview of trustworthiness in AI: This standard relates to trustworthiness in AI systems, including approaches to establishing trust in AI systems through transparency, explainability, and controllability.
ISO/IEC 24368 – Artificial intelligence – Overview of ethical and societal concerns: This standard focuses on defining wellbeing indicators to assess the societal impact of AI technologies and ensure they contribute to human wellbeing and sustainability.
Some New Zealand examples: https://www.data.govt.nz/toolkit/data-ethics/governmentalgorithm-transparency-and-accountability/algorithmimpact-assessment-toolkit/
https://www.privacy.org.nz/publications/guidanceresources/ai/
Callaghan Innovation and Simply Privacy have also just released a guide on the application of the EU AI Act for New Zealand companies.
I am fortunate to represent New Zealand on the ISO Committee, which is currently developing a new standard for records management for AI. I believe this will be a timely and essential addition to the international regulatory framework.
These frameworks and tools represent important steps towards ensuring that AI technologies are developed and deployed in a manner that is ethical, responsible, and aligned with societal values. However, you still need to adapt and refine these frameworks in response to emerging challenges and opportunities within your own organisational context and within the New Zealand jurisdiction.
Ensure that training data is representative and diverse to avoid reinforcing existing biases.
We may be better placed not to regulate AI itself, but instead regulate how humans use AI and the purposes for which organisations use it. Just as we don’t regulate the behaviour of cars, we regulate the behaviour of drivers. A speed limit isn’t broken by an engine; it’s broken by the driver.
AI is a tool, and it’s how humans use it that is the real concern.
As the drivers of AI, what are our responsibilities and our considerations? What are the pitfalls? This article seeks to set out the primary issues to bear in mind, what we should do to lessen the risks, and provides some practical responses to these challenges.
The pitfalls: Trust, ethics, and bias
Trust is a cornerstone of public sector operations. Citizens must have confidence that AI systems are reliable, transparent, and accountable. However, achieving this trust is challenging, given the inherent complexity of AI algorithms and the potential for unintended consequences.
Ethical concerns surrounding AI in the public sector are complex and intersectional. These range from issues of data privacy and security to questions about fairness, accountability, and transparency. For instance, how do we ensure that AI-driven decisions are free from human biases? How can we safeguard sensitive citizen data from misuse or unauthorised access?
The challenge: AI systems can have profound societal implications, affecting privacy, autonomy, and human rights. Balancing technological advancements with ethical considerations is essential.
The response: Implement ethical guidelines: Develop and adhere to ethical guidelines and principles to guide AI development and deployment, and conduct a Societal Impact Assessment to ensure AI technologies align with our societal values and aspirations.
How do we ensure that AI-driven decisions are free from human biases?
One of the most significant risks associated with AI is the potential for bias and discrimination. If AI systems are trained on biased data, they can perpetuate existing inequalities, leading to unfair outcomes. This is particularly
concerning in the public sector, where decisions can have profound implications on individuals’ lives. We know that information is always created in context and from a point of view, and we don’t always capture that context when it comes to data collection, so when used in a different context from its original purpose, it can be problematic.
The challenge: Biases in data can lead to unfair and discriminatory outcomes in AI systems, perpetuating existing inequalities and biases in society.
The response: Ensure that data used to train the AI model is representative and diverse to avoid reinforcing existing biases. Address biases in data collection methods and sources to prevent skewed or incomplete representations.
3. Inclusivity and diversity of AI teams
Fairness implies that AI systems should treat all individuals equitably, without discriminating based on race, gender, ethnicity, or any other protected minority. Achieving fairness requires careful consideration of the data used to train AI models and continuous monitoring to detect and mitigate biases. Much historical data about individuals and groups may be biased, or unfair in its representation of them, leading to discrimination. We also know the way people, particularly minorities, have been viewed in the past is not how we should represent them now.
The challenge: Lack of diversity in AI development teams can lead to biased algorithms that do not adequately represent or serve our diverse populations, exacerbating inequalities.
The response: Promote diversity and inclusivity in AI development teams and processes to ensure a broader range of perspectives and insights. Adopt user-centred design approaches to develop AI solutions that are inclusive and equitable, addressing the diverse needs and preferences of different user groups.
4. Algorithmic transparency
Transparency ensures that the workings of AI algorithms are understandable and accessible to stakeholders, fostering trust and accountability. Therefore, any automated decision-making must be ‘explainable’, ie, we must be able to reproduce the findings consistently and ‘show our workings’, as my maths teacher used to say.
The challenge: The complexity of AI algorithms can make them opaque and difficult to understand, leading to a lack of transparency and accountability in decision-making.
The response: Provide clear explanations of AI decisions and predictions. Keep records of those. We must ensure that AI models are interpretable, allowing for scrutiny and validation of their behaviour.
To address these intersectional challenges, it is imperative to develop robust ethical frameworks and guidelines governing the use of AI in the public sector and gain clear accountability and oversight for these frameworks. These frameworks should encompass all the principles, such as fairness, transparency, accountability, privacy, and your own organisational culture, and codes of conduct, as referred to in point 1 on previous page.
The challenge: Establishing precise accountability mechanisms for AI decisions and outcomes is challenging due to the distributed nature of AI systems and the involvement of multiple stakeholders.
The response: Define roles and responsibilities for AI development, deployment, and governance by implementing regulatory frameworks and standards to guide responsible AI use and hold organisations accountable for AI-related decisions and actions.
The key to achieving positive outcomes for all these challenges set out above is to implement a robust information management framework. To have any hope of being ethical, repeatable, transparent, explainable, governed, trustworthy, and accountable, we need to maintain full and accurate records of the source or training data, inputs, processes, and outcomes. Otherwise, we just have to take it on trust, which I’m not sure we are ready for yet as a society.
Addressing fairness, bias, and ethical practice in AI is a multifaceted, interdisciplinary challenge encompassing
To have any hope of being ethical, … trustworthy, and accountable, we need to maintain full and accurate records of the source or training data.
technical, societal, and organisational dimensions. It therefore requires a holistic and well-governed response, which requires collaboration across various domains, including Information Management and IT professionals, ethics, law, and social sciences. It must encompass technical innovation, ethical considerations, and stakeholder engagement. Collaborative efforts between technologists, ethicists, policymakers, and civil society organisations are essential to navigate these complex challenges and foster responsible AI development and deployment that upholds societal values and promotes equitable outcomes.
Editor's note: It is also important to note that there are legal frameworks that most New Zealand organisations need to comply with. These include the Privacy Act 2020 if AI is being used to collect or process personal information, intellectual property laws and regulations, and the Fair Trading Act 1986 (misleading and deceptive conduct etc).
Stephen Clarke is a Virtual CDO and Information/Data Management Consultant. Originally from the United Kingdom, Stephen has worked in senior information and data management roles across the New Zealand public sector for the last 15 years. His most recent role was as Chief Archivist, after moving on from his role as Chief Data Officer at the NZ Transport Agency. Stephen has undertaken similar roles in IRD, DIA, Office of the Auditor-General, the Office of the Ombudsman, and Transpower New Zealand Ltd. Internationally, Stephen is known as a standards expert, having developed standards for information management for Australia and New Zealand and internationally for ISO. As an anthropologist Stephen understands human systems, and as a technical expert he understands information systems. Using technology to connect these two systems to get the right information, to the right people at the right time, ethically, is his professional goal.
Josh Williams, Skills Group, argues that government agencies should adopt and embrace apprenticeships to build and look after skills and capability within the public sector.
Iusually like to start such articles with a story – but first things first. The biggest story in the public sector is layoffs – and I want to acknowledge that. Losing a job is horrendous for any household, and particularly hard when people working for the government lose jobs due to government decisions. Vacuums are being created. Some will be obvious right now, especially to those affected, but
many more will be unanticipated. When they emerge, the public sector will be asked to respond with people and skills. This article is about how I think government agencies should build and look after that skills and capability. My argument is simply that apprenticeship – the very oldest education model of them all – should be adopted and embraced as a core attraction and upskilling model for public policy professionals. There would be enormous and wide-ranging benefits, including, among other things, diversity of thought, broader pathways for a wider diversity of people to access policy roles, and a better match between the training for, and the reality of, policy roles.
Apprenticeships ... should be adopted and embraced as a core attraction and upskilling model for public policy professionals.
I could have turned in this article any other time in the last 15 years or so, when Aotearoa has enjoyed historically long periods of low unemployment, or during Covid-19 times when access to skilled labour was seriously curtailed. But here is the immovable object: whether labour markets are tight or loose the situation resolves to the same question. Do we have the skills and people to do the work that needs to be done, and if not, what shall we do? I hope to convince you that apprenticeships could be part of the answer, especially at a time like now.
Why apprenticeships?
Policy teams are no different from other industries; to sustain and grow you must always maintain a balance of people just starting out, those going through the ranks, and a reasonable supply of been-there-done-that gurus.
From my experience and observation, informal apprenticeships already happen in policy. You learn by doing, supported by more experienced colleagues. The tasks and techniques can be described, but the realities, expectations, and frustrations of policy jobs are learned and felt in the office, not in the lecture theatre. The relationships, structures, dynamics, big and small ‘p’ politics – all best developed and demonstrated on the job.
This suggests that apprenticeship would be a fitfor-purpose, effective, and efficient model for skills development for policy jobs. It would also improve and increase the diversity of the intake. And if cost savings is your jam or your CEO’s current riding instructions, apprentices may not be the most productive workers, but they are also not the most expensive, and a great source of future gurus.
By the way, we are way behind the eight ball. Apprenticeships in Aotearoa New Zealand kicked off in 1877 but have been largely confined to traditional trades and services. I lack the word count to regale you with the confluence of historical and operational policy reasons for this, but places like Germany and the United Kingdom have breaking news: apprenticeships are not just for people who wear hi-vis vests to work. Earning and learning on the job, under the wing of experienced practitioners, is equally well suited to people with white collars, or lab coats. Apprenticeships can totally happen in office buildings and hospitals and schools, and would be wonderful up and down The Terrace.
What actually happens elsewhere?
In the United Kingdom, apprenticeships can also happily lead to advanced qualifications, including degrees. Gov.UK reports 70,780 higher-level (bachelors and masters level) apprenticeship starts in their 2022/23 academic year, and
61,100 new apprenticeship starts in the public sector, and a government target for public sector bodies to employ 2.3 per cent of their staff as apprentices. They learn on the job and are released around 20 per cent of the time to undertake their theory, often in the self-same lectures as full-time students.
In Germany, half of all school leavers take up apprenticeships.
In Germany, half of all school leavers take up apprenticeships. Germany recognises a species of worker that is with the company 80 per cent of the time and studying 20 per cent of the time. As a result, youth unemployment remains low at 2 or 3 per cent, even through economic bad times. German apprenticeships famously cover trades and crafts, but also professional, administrative, and legal professions.
What about recruitment shortcomings?
Beyond inherent advantages, policy apprenticeships could also address shortcomings in the way we have traditionally recruited new talent to the public sector. Don’t get me wrong, the stuff at university certainly helps: thinking skills, politics, legislation, logic, writing coherent prose. But the main thing the degree does is get you to the interview room, and I think we should question the necessity and validity of that. I have yet to meet someone who said their degree set them up perfectly well for their policy role, but I have met people with masters degrees that couldn’t write coherent prose.
Just one-third of New Zealand’s school leavers progress to degree-level options. A little over half of those will end up shaking a vice chancellor’s hand. Fewer again complete postgraduate level studies. In my last job at the Ministry of Education, I helped select graduate analysts. I recall 300 applications one year which chief analysts whittled down to 24. I hope the 276 landed on their feet. I never saw their CVs.
Apprenticeships are not just for people who wear hi-vis vests to work. Earning and learning on the job is equally well suited to people with white collars, or lab coats.
The CVs of the 24, it pains me to say, could almost have referred to the same person: Little to no work experience, usually some community service. Amazing grades through
school and bachelors and honours or masters. Their cover letters said they were passionate about education and committed to making a difference. I’m not being cynical –these young people were talented and sincere. But there was not very much to distinguish them from each other. Were they the best and brightest? In an academic sense, empirically, yes. Were we fishing from a very small pond in which the privileged are overrepresented? Also empirically, yes. Is a policy shop solely comprised of straight-A types really the workforce we need to advise ministers on decisions affecting our communities? With all respect to you the reader, and all my erstwhile colleagues, I suspect not.
I know that since my day, things have improved. And amazing things have occurred at the Ministry of Education. A case in point is the Tupu Tai programme, a wonderful multiagency initiative providing internships for Pacific students and recent graduates. It proves the concept and was highly deserving of its New Zealand Diversity Award a few years ago. Let’s have way more of that.
After the Christchurch earthquakes, stakeholders met to discuss a pressing issue: We needed more skilled construction workers to deliver the rebuild. Ruma Karaitiana, CEO of the Building and Construction Industry Training Organisation, said, “Take on your apprentices today.” The firms said, “But the work won’t really ramp up for a couple of years yet; people are still dealing with insurance companies.” Ruma replied, “When the work ramps up, do you want them to be first years or third years?”
The public sector is experiencing a bit of an earthquake right now. When the work ramps up again, do you want them to be first years, or third years? Apprenticeships provide a pathway to have capable, experienced policy advisers ready when needed most.
Josh Williams is Head of Consulting at Skills Group. He was a Support Officer, Advisory Officer, Policy Analyst, Private Secretary, Senior Policy Analyst, Programme Manager, and Senior Policy Manager at the Ministry of Education, then Chief Executive of the Industry Training Federation.
Historian Professor Bettany Hughes says less than 1 per cent of recorded history is about women. Dr Judith Aitken wants to change that, starting with the oral history of women in New Zealand’s public service typing pools.
DDR JUDITH AITKENecades ago, in the then-State Services Commission, there were two staff members to whom one had to ‘suck up to’ to survive: the man who controlled the photocopier and the woman who controlled the typing pool.
Like a hospital matron guarding young nurses, the head typist protected her typists. Shamefully attempted bribes, like sharing cigarettes (almost everyone in the pools smoked), failed, unless the head typist favoured you.
Without these women, no ministerial, Cabinet, or commission document would be timely, no near-illegible draft transformed, no secret budget papers readied to rush over to the Finance Minister for late-night review.
Pool typists’ work was rarely publicly recognised. It was definitely underpaid and gave new meaning to ‘multitasking’. Before the advent of individual desktop computers, pool typists were critical to the workings of government.
After the war, a small number of Māori girls from rural areas were recruited into a paternalistic public service, chaperoned in hostels and worked very successfully in various pools.
Before the advent of individual desktop computers, pool typists were critical to the workings of government.
In modest homemade clothes, school leavers were often accompanied to the initial interview by their mothers. Generally ignoring their daughters’ private ambitions, their
parents saw government work as safe and appropriately premarital. Once employed, the girls’ private lives usually centred around activities with work friends. Their personal modesty, lack of self-aggrandisement, and commitment to high-quality work – rarely recognised in status or pay – were striking.
A team of four retired typists, a website designer, and a historian collaborated voluntarily with me on the recording project. We received grants from the Ministry of Culture and Heritage and the Public Service Commission.We presented at New Zealand Historical Association conferences, conducted radio interviews, enrolled over 100 women on our website, and released a series of podcasts.
Rachel Brown provided a template for structuring the interviews. “These were very much led by the participants and the interviewer’s own experiences. One of the team’s early decisions was to fully transcribe each interview. This paid off as the work developed, and we agreed that transcription is an invaluable element in such oral histories,” she says.
Meg Melvin’s website and podcasts illustrated issues of pervasive sexism, consistently poor pay, and lack of public recognition for women typing in pools.
The project was named Keystrokes per Minute by Rose Melvin. This is how she recalls the history: “[The typists’] early life histories were often highlighted by their experience of the state education system, which shaped their lives and careers. Along with societal expectations about girls’ role in society and parental expectations and ambitions, many were encouraged, sometimes reluctantly, to take commercial courses at school. They entered government typing pools via the commercial streams of high schools and technical colleges. Learning on the job, some progressed through the ranks of typing pools, often moving between government offices or out of the public sector altogether. Some went on to have remarkable careers in fields of their choosing.”
A professional typist, Eth Lloyd, former President of the International Administrators Association, was one such woman. She recalls the powerful stories of many unsung women: “It was extraordinary to realise that so many women in this workforce in the 1950s–1970s had little
control over their education and options. Their parents had fixed and limited ideas of the roles girls could fulfil, but truly damning was the education system which did not allow them to develop and grow. All the women took pride in their work, its quality, their personal achievements, how they had made the very best of the expectations of the times and their often limited opportunities.”
“Listening to their stories brought to life the skills and experience of a forgotten group of public servants, of which I was one.” (Maureen Goodwin)
Maureen Goodwin had been a senior member of the Social Welfare staff and her administrative talents were valued –although not in her pay packet. “Listening to their stories brought to life the skills and experience of a forgotten group of public servants, of which I was one.”
Each interview was unique in character. More than one former pool typist commented: “This is the first time anyone has taken any interest in my work.”
Conclusion
Rachel Patrick, a historian, observed that “although their skilled work was central to the day-to-day operation of government departments, for most of the century female office workers were paid less and received fewer opportunities for advancement than their male colleagues.
This important oral history, based on some 60 interviews, captures the voices and experiences of a core group of female government workers in the second half of the twentieth century, a period of rapid social and technological change during which women’s lives and career options were transformed and those typists adapted readily to the changed nature of office work itself.”
“…for most of the [20th] century female office workers were paid less and received
fewer opportunities
for advancement than their male colleagues.”
Despite long state sector employment, there is still no history of women in the public service. More have become CEOs, but the story yet to be told is of female receptionists, telephonists, typists, secretaries, policy analysts, clerks, tea
ladies, and protocol advisers.
Perhaps this could be a chapter in a new book that honours the thousands of women who have been essential for so long to public administration in Aotearoa New Zealand.
Dr Judith Aitken CNZM, QSO was born and educated in Te Awamutu, Auckland, and four New Zealand universities. She is a former Playcentre supervisor and Polynesian migration centre supervisor, school teacher, lecturer (VUW), TV presenter, editor and newspaper publisher, public servant, local government representative, and farmer. Oral histories she has lodged in national archives and privately include: Women in a Disabling World, Post-War History of Women in the Public Service Typing Pool, The Life and Times of Kitty Hilton, Wellington Citizen, and Bright Sparks: People Who Made the Electricity Corporation of New Zealand. She has written numerous publications on sexism, women, education, politics, and freedom of information.
Te Rau Hihiri is a charitable trust aiming to empower and advocate for Māori working in and with the public sector. This article outlines the concepts behind an innovative conference aimed at empowering Māori excellence in the public service.
At a time filled with challenges and uncertainties, one conference stands out as a beacon of hope, inspiration, and empowerment for Māori across various sectors. He Māori Ahau, set to take place on Wednesday 26 June, 2024, in Wellington, New Zealand, is much more than your typical conference. It’s a call to action, a platform for collective growth, and a celebration of Māori resilience and strength, brought to you by Te Rau Hihiri, and backed by Te Āti Awa and Ngāti Toa Rangatira.
[This conference is] a call to action, a platform for collective growth, and a celebration of Māori resilience and strength.
With over 700 peers expected to attend, He Māori Ahau aims to foster unity and connection among Māori working in and with the public service. From central public servants grappling with job cuts and changing policy directions to regional kaimahi Māori (Māori staff), Māori and iwi seeking to bridge the gap with central networks, this conference is a platform for support and empowerment. It’s about more than just discussions; it’s about finding tangible solutions and pathways forward.
One of the key messages of He Māori Ahau is empowerment through action. Attendees can expect to hear from engaging kaikōrero (speakers) who will ignite the fire in their puku, be involved in hands-on workshops to craft roadmaps for collective success and fill their kete with tangible strategies and mātauranga (knowledge); to be the best they can be for the kaupapa that they serve. This isn’t just about talking the talk; it’s about walking the walk and driving positive change in roles and communities.
…it’s about finding tangible solutions and pathways forward.
Behind He Māori Ahau is a strong foundation of values –kotahitanga and manaakitanga – that underpin its mission to support Māori success as Māori. This conference isn’t just a one-off event; it’s part of a larger movement to empower Māori excellence and acknowledge the unique value they bring to their roles and communities.
…it’s about walking the walk and driving positive change in roles and communities.
For those ready to take their passion and turn it into action, He Māori Ahau is the place to be. We are delighted with our momentum and will keep readers updated here. This is a great opportunity to connect with peers, shape a brighter future, and be part of a movement that’s empowering Māori excellence in the public service.
On the daily,
I’m constantly having to justify the value and investment in our culture.
I’m asked to fit a template not suited to us, not created with us or for us.
Deadlines nearing, pressure rising with a kupu here and there, auē!
On the daily,
I’m asked to write in English to explain the meaning of our culture.
I’m asked to help cultur-ify a report.
I’m expected to front cultural hui.
I’m begged to translate. Our culture is always on call.
On the daily,
I’m told I’m too passionate, I need to step out of my feelings and to pull back on my activist views. They try to keep me quiet but my ancestors won’t let me. This voice will be heard.
I a te rā, i a te rā
On the daily,
I share my cultural intelligence with those willing to listen and those that have no idea. I challenge the system to change. I challenge the people to think of the people, not just the timelines or outputs.
On the daily,
I seek equity and justice. My advice is more than just ticking the box. Our culture is more than a ‘whakatau’. Our identity, language and culture are the foundation to all our solutions. Our culture is our strength, our value add.
On the daily, My cultural hat is unremovable. My whakapapa runs strong. I will fight for the people, be the rangatira our tamariki need us to be and ensure their daily is better than mine. We are the change agents of now.
Ia te rā, ia te rā Tūrou Hawaiki!
- Kara Nepe-Apatu, Chair Te Rau Hihiri
Elena Higgison (Ngāpuhi) has 20 years’ experience working across the government sector, leading policy and strategy development, and then driving execution. Elena’s passion and focus is the Māori economy. She specialises within the nexus of te ao Māori, technology, and government. It has meant she has gained a unique ability to act as a cultural translator and conduit between the government and a wide range of stakeholders.
Kara Nepe-Apatu (Ngāi Tai) is a seasoned public servant with over 17 years’ experience predominantly focused on policy analysis, strategy development through to implementation, and cultural intelligence. She has a passion for imagining our future from a Māori lens and on the daily focuses on supporting the Māori economy, Māori Crown Relations, and exemplary application of He Ara Waiora.
Jim
McAloon, Professor of History at Te Herenga WakaVictoria University of Wellington, summarises the history of how the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment has evolved into what it is today.
Central government oversight and encouragement of trade, industrial development, and economic growth has shifted back and forth over decades. Since 2012, the principal department concerned with these has been the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment (MBIE). MBIE is a super-department. Its responsibilities include building and construction, tenancy and housing, energy and natural resources, employment relations, employment skills, workplace health and safety, consumer protection, regulation of competition, standards, and financial markets, trade and tariffs, intellectual property, digital economy, film, regional development, immigration and tourism, and science and technology.
Where it began
It’s a long way from the Department of Industries and Commerce (IC), established in the 1890s to promote New Zealand’s overseas trade and the development of New Zealand industry. IC prepared a few industry studies, monitored shipping rates, and policed brand integrity in meat and butter. A few trade commissioners promoted New Zealand exports in Britain and elsewhere. From 1910, IC was merged with the Department of Agriculture, and anything other than agriculture was essentially ignored for over a decade.
Wartime changes
The rising cost of living put the wartime government under political and economic pressure, and a small Board of Trade was established in 1915 to monitor prices and monopolies. In 1919, a parliamentary committee issued a lengthy and
wide-ranging report calling for the rapid development of industry, hydroelectricity, and forestry. The report hoped that the populace would “not merely continue to aimlessly muddle along in the old, old way, trusting to Providence to pull us through”.
In 1921, IC was re-established, although through the 1920s, its responsibilities were mostly recording and reporting, and providing advice and information to business groups. The first Labour government, after 1935, had more ambition for industrial development and state-led modernisation. The Industrial Efficiency Act 1936 provided for industry licensing and planning, although wartime meant industrial development was shaped by more immediate concerns. If there was a super-department during the war, it was the Economic Stabilisation Commission, established to oversee the war economy. It had a wide range of tools, including subsidies, limiting supply, specifying (austere) standards, and price control. It also liaised with producer and industrial groups to secure the government’s output objectives by consent.
The rising cost of living put the wartime government under political and economic pressure, and a small Board of Trade was established in 1915 to monitor prices and monopolies.
Industrial development was common ground between the political parties after 1945. IC had responsibility for administering import controls and encouraging new enterprises, as well as continuing price controls.
The department’s profile became very high after 1958. Its newly appointed Secretary, Dr William Sutch, had expansive views of New Zealand’s industrial development and of his department. Sutch remains a controversial figure, but he had an important insight in emphasising the high skill level of New Zealand workers as an asset and the importance of developing that attribute so that exports could compete on quality, not bulk – what, in later jargon, would be called a ‘knowledge economy’. During the 1960s and 1970s, the Department (renamed Trade and Industry
in 1972) encouraged, advised, resourced, and exhorted manufacturing to become efficient and outward-looking, and trade diplomacy remained an important focus.
Sutch remains a controversial figure, but he had an important insight in emphasising the high skill level of New Zealand workers as an asset.
After 1984, the fourth Labour government had clear views about public service restructuring. It was influenced by a number of considerations, among them an approach known variously as the functional approach or the Swedish model, which basically held that separate agencies should do policy advice, regulation, and implementation. The alternative, which had prevailed for many decades, was the sectoral model, where advice and implementation are in the same agency.
The sectoral model was based on the idea that advice would be related to on-the-ground experience (and, arguably, an assumption that public servants were concerned with the public good). The functional approach, drawing on ideas such as public choice theory, assumed that public servants, especially senior ones, sought to maximise their own advantage, that is, the size and influence of their departments, and would be hostile to devolving delivery to private sector entities.
In 1988, the Department of Trade and Industry was
disestablished. Deregulation had already removed some of its functions. Trade policy and diplomacy went to what was briefly known as the Ministry of External Relations and Trade. Trade promotion went to what is now Trade and Enterprise New Zealand, and a new Ministry of Commerce took consumer protection, competition, tariffs, trademarks, and patents.
In 1999, the Labour-Alliance coalition government named Alliance leader Jim Anderton as Minister of Economic Development. A more activist approach to economic development was back on the agenda. When, however, a National-led government was elected after the 2008 election, a good deal of microeconomic reform proceeded, which was intended to assist business development. After the 2011 election, Steven Joyce became Minister of Economic Development, and, as he explains in his memoir, these initiatives were scattered across a raft of departments. Apart from the desire to integrate disparate initiatives, Joyce and the State Services Commissioner both favoured fewer and larger departments. Thus, MBIE was established in 2012 with Joyce as principal minister. It remains a superdepartment, with staffing in 2023 the third largest behind Corrections and Social Development.
Jim McAloon is a professor of history at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington. His research and teaching interests include the political and economic history of Aotearoa New Zealand.
Jennie Kerr and Stu Murphy from MartinJenkins look at how efforts to trim New Zealand’s regulatory forest can achieve the intended aims and avoid unintended consequences.
‘Verschlimmbesserung’ (German, noun) – An attempted improvement that makes things worse
The New Zealand Government’s approach to regulation seems clear: there’s too much, so let’s cut it; establish the Ministry for Regulation to oversee it all, and get it done quickly.
Beware, though: Verschlimmbesserung
Our laws are undeniably a tangle Like any modern democracy, New Zealand’s laws are a tangle of different regulatory regimes cutting across industries, operated by scores of regulators with different strategic priorities, and often with individual regimes overseen by multiple ministers.
In 2014, the Productivity Commission estimated that we have around 200 regulatory regimes (“Regulatory institutions and practices”, June 2014). And, of course, we’ve added a few since then.
Currently, we do have some common standards, but these aren’t consistently applied. A Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) must be produced for all new regulations. But as the Treasury pointed out last year in its Briefing to the Incoming Minister for Regulation, the quality of these is patchy. Similarly, the Government Regulatory Practice Initiative, or ‘G-Reg’, aims to share best practice and build regulatory capability, but not all regulators have subscribed to it.
The Ministry [for Regulation] will need to beware of Verschlimmbesserung – of making things worse through unintended consequences.
The new Ministry for Regulation will be able to fix some of this. It says it’s on track with a new Regulatory Standards Bill to be introduced later in 2024 (LinkedIn, 1 May), and it has also announced that its first sector review will be of early childhood education (Press release from David Seymour, 5 June).
But as it gets further into its work, the Ministry will need to beware of Verschlimmbesserung – of making things worse
through unintended consequences – which is especially a risk for a government in a hurry.
If the Government makes the wrong changes and then has to start again, this will create significant uncertainty, distracting businesses and organisations and discouraging investment – outcomes a government focused on economic growth will, of course, want to avoid.
Removing the wrong regulation also risks regulatory failure, with potentially catastrophic consequences for New Zealanders relying on government to maintain minimum standards.
Take leaky buildings. Our system for regulating the construction of homes was changed dramatically in the 1990s to prescribe how new buildings should perform rather than how they should be built. Those changes are now widely seen as contributing to the leaky homes crisis.
It will be essential to understand how our regulatory systems really work It’s not just black-letter rules that create red tape – it’s also how regulatory regimes operate in practice, including the regulatory strategy, the processes and systems, and the capability and culture of the regulators. All those aspects can create complexity and constraints that businesses and individuals must spend time, effort, and money navigating.
The new Ministry will also need to understand the sometimes complex interactions between different regulatory regimes and how far the regimes affecting a particular sector are together achieving the intended results.
Removing the wrong regulation risks regulatory failure, with potentially catastrophic consequences for New Zealanders relying on government to maintain minimum standards.
For example, there’s a lot of interaction between our consumer-law system and our building-regulation system. This was on show in 2018 when the Commerce Commission fined Steel & Tube Holdings Ltd a record $1,885,000 under the Fair Trading Act for making false and misleading representations about its steel-mesh products, which are used in construction. This is a classic example of a general regulatory system cutting across and tangling with a sectorspecific one. We have a few of these regulatory overlays.
Think from the perspective of the regulated parties Engaging directly with regulated parties is, of course, going to be key. Understanding the cumulative practical effect on
regulated parties from different regulatory regimes will help the Government understand which regulations should be removed. Death by a thousand cuts is real.
The Government clearly has unnecessary overlap in mind with its plan for the financial services sector. It intends to reduce the number of regulators in the sector from three to two, by shifting functions from the Commerce Commission to the Financial Markets Authority. That should provide an opportunity to, for example, simplify licensing requirements for financial institutions.
By engaging with regulated parties in other vital sectors, the new Ministry will be better able to spot the most significant opportunities to reduce excessive compliance burdens that result from overlapping regulations aimed at similar results.
Tidy by category too, not just by sector
No doubt all our regulatory systems need a Marie Kondo, and the Government also wants the tidying done reasonably quickly. This requires thinking about known red-tape issues that cross regulatory systems and sectors.
Early efforts by the Ministry for Regulation could focus on cross-cutting issues, like how to streamline reporting requirements and how to enable digital approaches to compliance. Sector and industry organisations can add a lot of value in helping to identify these cross-cutting problems.
This is an exciting opportunity, albeit a complex one.
There’s an opportunity here to have the job done right
A strong oversight function, in whatever form, can potentially help transform how we design and operate regulation in Aotearoa New Zealand. This is an exciting opportunity, albeit a complex one.
But the oversight body needs to build on work that has already been done to understand the system as a whole and recognise that it probably won’t be as simple as cutting out a few rules.
Jennie Kerr is MartinJenkins’ Lead for Public Policy and has over 20 years’ experience in regulatory stewardship and delivering new laws. She has worked on several legislative reforms from design through to implementation, including in defence, Covid-19, commerce, consumer, financial markets, transport, and telecommunications. Before joining MartinJenkins, Jennie was a policy manager in government.
Stu Murphy is a Senior Consultant at MartinJenkins, specialising in public sector strategy, service design, and organisational design. He enjoys applying these disciplines to a wide variety of challenges, including regulatory system design and operation. He’s passionate about public service and began his career in the United Kingdom.
IPANZ New Professionals’ Network Member
Chloe Cairncross reviews the Gone by Lunchtime podcast and the book Te Motunui Epa, by Rachel Buchanan.
The tūpuna residing within the five wooden carvings (epa) had no inkling of what awaited them in the new world when they emerged from their peaceful slumber within Papatūānuku’s embrace after decades – the turmoil of unjustifiable theft, the sensations of the spotlight in the multimillion-dollar global art arena, and the overwhelming desire to return home …
In November 2023, Gone by Lunchtime won Best Current Affairs Podcast for the second year in a row at the New Zealand Podcast Awards, and it’s easy to see why. Hosted by The Spinoff’s Toby Manhire with Annabelle Lee-Mather and Ben Thomas, this podcast takes a non-scripted conversational approach to discussing the hot political topics of the day.
Given the current downward spiral of public sentiment in New Zealand, you might not think that a politics and current affairs podcast is something you’d want to listen to outside of work hours. However, I found that the cosy and respectful watercooler-style discussions, along with light and inoffensive humourous asides, made the material accessible and easy to digest.
At the time of writing, recent episodes covered important topics like public sector job cuts, AUKUS manoeuvering, and the removal of Section 7AA from the Oranga Tamariki Act. The Gone by Lunchtime team does an exemplary job of concisely reporting the story and then dissecting the topic within the broader contextual positions. This provides valuable bi-cultural perspectives and a dose of balanced reality, revealing details that may not be covered in sensationalised headlines.
Overall, the podcast provides interesting perspectives to ponder with your co-workers and may help you feel more knowledgeable when navigating current affairs. With biweekly releases and episodes averaging around 40 minutes in length, they are easily consumable. Best of all, Gone by Lunchtime is available for free on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.
Te Motunui Epa, written by Rachel Buchanan (Taranaki, Te Ātiawa), takes us on a captivating journey that spans continents and decades, exploring the themes of ownership, provenance, and the significance of cultural property in New Zealand and beyond.
“The epa’s public servants were people of the highest calibre.” Once it was known that the epa had been stolen and were being manoeuvred for trade in the international market, public servants from various departments worked tirelessly in collaboration to reclaim the stolen carvings from art collectors who viewed cultural artefacts as mere collectibles. This was a big swing for New Zealand within the international arena.
The narrative strikes a balance between the pace of a heist story and the heartfelt portrayal of whānau, whakapapa, and Taranaki, notably with the personification of the epa. While commending the government’s involvement in international cultural property law, Buchanan challenges readers to consider the provenance not only of the epa but also of New Zealand itself.
The book reveals the impact of our responsibilities towards collaboration, litigation, and cultural preservation. It’s a must-read for anyone interested in how cross-agency collaboration can achieve successful outcomes, and a timely reminder for enduring partnerships with tangata whenua.
Chloe Cairncross is a Senior Consultant at Deloitte and a member of the New Professionals Leadership Team. She studied English and Art History, and went on to develop her career in the public sector across business units responsible for customer service, regulatory compliance, and digital services, before making the move to consulting. She continues to primaraily work alongside government agencies, helping them to embrace innovative technologies, drive transformational change, and positively impact operations and business processes.
Learn more about the country’s largest trade union, representing workers delivering public and community services.
1
The Public Service Association Te Pūkenga Here Tikanga Mahi (PSA) is the largest trade union in the country, representing 95,000+ members across the motu in the public service, community public services, the state sector, health, and local government. This includes a wide range of occupations – nurses, administrators, care and support workers, government ministry workers, dental assistants, and so many more. The PSA covers workers in public sector agencies, as well as workers in organisations funded by the government.
2
Women comprise 71 per cent of the membership, and the PSA recently hit the milestone of having 10,000 members who identify as Māori.
3
Contrary to popular belief, 55 per cent of the public service is located outside of Wellington! These stats are led by Auckland (20.7 per cent), Canterbury (9.6 per cent) and Waikato (6.5 per cent).
4
The PSA was first established in 1913, after decades of public service workers suffering from unfair working conditions, tenuous job security, and no right to fair or due process. Before the PSA was established, aspiring public servants would sit an entrance exam to enter the public service, but politicians often manipulated the assignments to allow for friends, family, and constituents to serve in their departments. Terms and conditions between departments varied, even for the same jobs, and staff had no right to transfer between departments or right of appeal
against decisions made about their work. It wasn’t until after decades of workers unsuccessfully agitating for a union, that the PSA was founded.
5
In 1914, one of the PSA’s first victories was winning an allowance for workers who used their horses for work. At the time, private cars were still a rarity, and some public servants relied on travelling around their district on horseback.
6
Originally named the Public Service Investment Society, the Co-operative Bank began in 1928 as a ‘money club’ project supported by the PSA – selling everything from toasters to walk shorts. It was set up to ensure that public service workers weren’t preyed on by moneylenders.
7
The PSA has a proud history of social and political activism. To name a few, in the 1950s the PSA rallied against the racial discrimination of Māori, has fought continually for pay equity since 1972, vocalised its opposition to the 1981 Springbok Tour, and submitted in favour of the 1986 Homosexual Law Reform Act that decriminalised homosexuality.
8
The PSA’s member journal used to be titled the Public Service Journal! It is now named Te Mahinga Ora –translated from ‘Working Life’.
■ Flexibility to tailor your learning to your interests, career objectives, and work–life balance
■ Places available for recent graduates
Gain a qualification in 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.
of Business and Government