Home page
> Management Advisory Committee > Employment of people with disability > Cultural change > Next: Access to APS employment
‹ Previous page

Last updated: 30 August 2006

Employment of people with disability in the APS

Chapter 2 Cultural change

APS organisational and structural changes over the past two decades have been characterised by the devolution of management responsibility and employer powers to individual agency heads; increasing contestability of public services; a greater emphasis on innovation and service delivery; and increased demands for flexibility, responsiveness and performance improvement.⁴⁰ The resulting performance culture in this environment places increased importance on individual and agency performance and productivity.

According to APS managers consulted during this review, that performance culture requires them to demonstrate they can ‘do more with less’, and requires staff ‘who are able to give 150%’. As a result, many managers are reluctant to accept the risk that a person with disability may not achieve the same outputs as a person without disability.

2.1 Dispelling misconceptions APS performance culture cannot embrace diversity

2.1.1 The APS performance culture

The misconception that people with disability cannot fulfil the obligations imposed by the APS performance culture is a significant barrier to APS employment opportunities for people with disability. It fails to acknowledge that employing people with disability is an investment organisations make in people for sound business reasons.

Thus, an important component of any strategy to promote employment opportunities for people with disability in the APS will be to dispel misconceptions about the capabilities of people with disability and to dispel misconceptions that the APS performance culture cannot accommodate and support their employment.

2.1.2 APS Merit Value

Central to APS employment is the Merit Value:

The APS is a public service in which employment decisions are based on merit.⁴¹

Merit has been important in establishing the APS performance culture. Engagements made on merit and open to competition from outside the APS have contributed to the growing professionalism of the APS. APS employment opportunities filled by engagements have increased from 33.7% in 1995–96 to 47.6% in 2004–05.⁴²

2.1.3 The merit selection process

Under the Public Service Act,⁴³ a merit-based decision relating to engagement or promotion requires an assessment of the relative suitability of candidates for the duties of a position, using a competitive selection process, where:

the assessment is based on the relationship between the candidates’ work-related qualities and the work-related qualities genuinely required for the duties
the assessment focuses on the relative capacity of the candidates to achieve outcomes related to the duties
the assessment is the primary consideration in making the decision.⁴⁴

Significantly, ‘relative suitability’ is subject to interpretation, depending on the perspective of those tasked to make a recommendation to the agency head. The view of a selection committee (where formed), that does not include people with disability or people who are ‘disability aware’, can be limited by the qualities committee members see in themselves and limited to the manner in which they achieve the outcomes demanded of the position. This narrowing of perspective can deny outcomes that can be achieved by other means.

It can also fail to contemplate the ‘reasonable adjustments’ that Australia’s anti-discrimination legislation has long recognised as necessary to foster a workplace free from discrimination. The Disability Discrimination Act 1992 requires employers (including the APS) to make reasonable adjustments to selection processes, workplaces and work methods, that will enable applicants with disability to demonstrate they have the work-related qualities genuinely required for the position.⁴⁵ That obligation is not intended to ‘advantage’ applicants with disability or require that the selection process be undertaken other than on merit. The comparative assessment on merit remains. Applicants with disability are simply afforded a level playing field.

What is needed is to acknowledge that the existing APS performance culture does embrace disability and, indeed, diversity in all its forms.

2.2 what it takes to achieve cultural change

The steps to embed that culture are those identified by the Australian Public Service Commission’s publication, Embedding the APS Values, namely: commitment, management and assurance.⁴⁶

2.2.1 Commitment (or ‘leadership’)

Leadership

It is not easy to change culture. The collective and individual leadership of agency heads and managers is the first step. Organisations successful in developing a culture which recognises the contribution of people with disability (including IBM and Telstra) demonstrate that change only happens when it is led by the head of the organisation.

Agency heads have successfully encouraged and established the APS performance culture. They have an equally valuable role in communicating to their organisation, particularly managers, how that culture embraces diversity.

At its most effective, the message would be twofold. First, it would promote the business benefits to the agency of employing people with disability. Second, it would commit the agency to take a concerted approach in upholding the APS Values of a workplace free from discrimination and promoting equity in employment for people with disability.

Supporting package of measures

The APS-specific Senior Executive Leadership Capability Framework acknowledges the importance of modelling the APS Values. However, modelling alone is not enough. APS agencies that have been more successful in employing people with disability demonstrate that leadership needs to be accompanied by a commitment to practical strategies to address the employment disadvantage people with disability face.

The more effective practical strategies are outlined in Chapters 3, 4 and 5 of this report. They are collated in the section entitled ‘Better Strategies to Promote the Employment of People with Disability.’

2.2.2 Management (or ‘mainstreaming’)

The second step to achieving cultural change—management—is to mainstream policies promoting the employment of people with disability into an agency’s organisational policies, guidance material and training programmes, so that they are an integral part of day-to-day planning and decision-making.

Mainstreaming

Virtually all agencies have workplace diversity programmes⁴⁷ and many also have disability action plans. At their most effective, these programmes and plans are integral to the way the agency operates. Stand-alone workplace diversity programmes and disability action plans that are seen as the responsibility of HR staff and that staff refer to only when a ‘disability’ issue arises are less effective.

An evaluation of workplace diversity programmes carried out by the Australian Public Service Commission in 2004–05 found that, while people with disability were one of the two groups most frequently addressed in workplace diversity programmes, with specific measures included to address their employment and retention, there was no clear correlation between those measures and increased representation for people with disability. However, there was a link between the overall quality of the workplace diversity programme and Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) representation.⁴⁸

This suggests that strategies developed under programmes to promote the employment of all EEO groups (including people with disability) should be hardwired into the materials all staff have resort to in their day-to-day activities, including agencies’ human resource policies, corporate plans, collective agreements, AWAs and Chief Executive Instructions (ceIs).

Kick-starting cultural change

The results of the evaluation also suggest that a broad approach to workplace diversity may have come at the expense of specific strategies aimed at particular EEO groups.

This does not mean the broad approach to workplace diversity should be abandoned. However, a particular focus on strategies to address the employment disadvantage of people with disability would be appropriate, as part of a concerted programme to kick-start cultural change.

Training

Training is also a valuable component of any cultural change programme. Cultural change cannot be achieved simply through training; however, training can instil an awareness of how the APS employment framework differs from that of the general workforce. Training can also promote an understanding of how merit embraces diversity, and offer examples of how that can be achieved in real life situations.

Under the devolved APS employment framework, individual agencies are responsible for tailoring their training programmes to their individual needs. As much of the content is common across agencies, the Australian Public Service Commission has also developed better practice guides and training materials that agencies can access and modify to their own circumstances as they choose.

The Australian Public Service Commission and individual agencies are encouraged to review their existing training programmes and materials to ensure they ‘mainstream’ issues that are particular to the employment of people with disability. For example, the Commission’s training materials for embedding the APS Values, Values Resources for Facilitators: Being Professional in the Australian Public Service, could be supplemented with scenarios raising issues around the employment of people with disability and the application of the APS Values to those scenarios.

The training materials could also usefully incorporate workshops that help participants identify their personal values and recognise how these affect their attitude towards people with disability. Such workshops should involve the participation of people with disability, where possible.

2.2.3 Assurance (or ‘accountability’)

The third step in achieving cultural change—assurance—is to effectively use accountability mechanisms to assess the performance of agencies and all APS employees in bringing about that change.

Cultural change requires that words espousing values such as commitment to a diverse workforce be matched by corresponding action: management should not say it values one thing while it measures and rewards something else. Presently, it is clear to managers that performance is valued and rewarded. It is less clear to them, however, that their endeavours to develop a diverse workforce will be equally valued.

Thus, leadership could be reinforced by embedding obligations to develop a diverse workforce into individual development plans, performance appraisal arrangements, collective agreements and AWAs. This will give a consistent message that behaviour in accordance with the Values is expected and will be rewarded.

Agencies’ performance will continue to be monitored through the State of the Service Report.⁴⁹ Quality assurance mechanisms, such as staff surveys, could also be used to monitor agency performance in becoming a ‘disability confident’ workplace.

2.2.4 ‘Disability confident’ agencies

Undertaking a change programme of this kind takes time (at least three years in IBM’s experience).

The aim is to create a ‘disability confident’ APS that will:

view people with disability as important stakeholders in the Australian community the APS serves
naturally include people with disability as part of a truly diverse workforce
no longer accept the old way of looking at disability—which often results in discrimination because of assumptions about what people with disability can and cannot do
acknowledge that employing people with disability makes good business sense
be skilled in making reasonable adjustments and be more responsive to the abilities and potential contribution of every employee.⁵⁰

Management Advisory Committee 2003, Organisational Renewal, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, p. 1.
Paragraph 10(1)(b) of the Public Service Act 1999.
Australian Public Service Commission 2005, State of the Service Report 2004–05, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, p. 24.
Section 10(2) of the Public Service Act 1999.
Section 10(2) of the Public Service Act 1999.
The obligation to make reasonable adjustments, while not expressly imposed by the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, arises as a consequence of the operation of section 6 of that Act relating to indirect discrimination. See a discussion of the obligation to make reasonable adjustments and the form those adjustments should take in the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission’s guide, Employment and the Disability Discrimination Act <http://www.humanrights.gov.au/disability_rights/faq/Employment/employment_contents.html>
Australian Public Service Commission 2003, Embedding the APS Values, p. 9 <http://www.apsc.gov.au/values/values8.htm>. See also Australian Public Service Commission, Embedding the APS Values Framework and Checklist <http://www.apsc.gov.au/values/framework.htm>
Agency heads are required by section 18 of the Public Service Act 1999 to establish workplace diversity programmes.
Australian Public Service Commission 2005, State of the Service Report 2004–05, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, p. 191.
See the discussion in Chapter 6 of this report.
Adapted from The Employers’ Forum on Disability 2005, The Disability Standard 2005: Benchmark Report Summary, ‘What Does “Disability Confident” Mean?’, London, p. 7 < http://www.employers-forum.co.uk/www/index.htm>

Downloads:

Contents

On our website:

Site help

Site menu