Home > Embedding the APS Values > Assurance

ASSURANCE

Embedding the APS Values observed that:

‘In an environment where rules and prescription have been reduced, accountability and assurance mechanisms gain in importance…[A]gency specific accountability and assurance mechanisms can be used to good effect to sustain compliance with the APS Values and Code of Conduct’.²

The Code of Conduct itself is described as an important control mechanism that operates to support the APS

Values in each agency, but to be effective the Code requires a workplace culture in which employees:

• know what level of workplace behaviour is generally expected of them and what type of behaviour is inconsistent with the Code of Conduct in the context of their own work and the work of their colleagues/ manager
• understand the consequences of breaching the Code
• know how and to whom to report suspected misconduct
• understand that it is one of their responsibilities to report such misconduct
• are confident that if they make a report of misconduct they will be effectively protected against any reprisals
• are confident that their report will be dealt with appropriately.

The results of the employee survey that throw light on these factors are discussed in Chapter 6 on personal behaviour. That chapter reveals that:

• the great majority of APS employees are familiar with the Code of Conduct and believe that it is relevant to their workplace
• most employees had also been told how and to whom they could report suspected misconduct
• there is a degree of circumspection amongst employees about whether they would report a suspected breach of the Code of Conduct, with 11% of employees having reported that they had witnessed a suspected serious breach of the Code in the last year and only half of them having reported the suspected breach.

STAFF SURVEYS

Staff surveys that ask questions directly or indirectly about the APS Values and how well they are understood and integrated within the agency provide another useful quality assurance mechanism to monitor adherence to the APS Values throughout the agency and to improve agency practice. The agency survey indicated that 34% of agencies conducted an agency-wide staff survey in 2003—04 (an increase from 26% in the previous year) and another 39% of agencies were planning to conduct one in the next two years. Large agencies indicated the greatest use of staff surveys in 2003—04 (38%, a slight decrease from the 41% reported in the previous year) and small agencies the least use (but still increasing from 27% to 31% over the two years). The proportion of medium agencies that surveyed their staff during the year rose significantly from 12% to 37%.

Twenty-three agencies (26%) had not conducted a survey in 2002—03 or 2003—04, and reported having no firm current intention to do so in the next two years. Of these, a minority of agencies noted that they were considering the issue contingent upon another event such as the launch of a new CA or merger with another organisation. Twenty agencies, six of them large, simply reported that they had no plans in this area. This appears to be a mixed outcome compared to that reported in last year’s survey, in which 26 agencies indicated they had either never conducted a staff survey, or had not done so in the last two years, and 15 of those agencies reported having no plans to do so.

While for some small agencies, formal staff surveys may not be a cost effective way to get staff views, other agencies that do not use staff surveys to assess how the agency is upholding the APS Values may be missing out on valuable information about the culture of the organisation and compliance with the Values and the Code.

2 APS Commission, Embedding the APS Values, August 2003, <http://www.apsc.gov.au/values/values.htm>