Organisational productivity

Employee perceptions of productivity

The employee survey asked employees about their perceptions of their own levels of productivity. These perceptions are not a direct measure of actual productivity improvement. Nevertheless, they provide some useful insights into the drivers of productivity in the APS and highlight areas on which the APS can focus in order to improve productivity.

Employee engagement and productivity

Most APS employees are positive about their own levels of productivity. Over half of employees (55%) agreed that their productivity had improved in the last 12 months. APS 1–6 level employees (58%) were most likely to report that their productivity had increased in the last 12 months, followed by SES employees (52%), and EL employees (45%).

Employees aged under 45 years were more likely to report that their productivity had increased than employees aged 45 years and over.

Employees were particularly positive about the levels of productivity of their current work group. Just over three-quarters (78%) agreed that their work group achieves a high level of productivity. Results were again highest for SES employees and employees under 45 years of age. Employees working in service delivery roles were the most positive about their work group’s productivity. Although those involved in research, administrative support and/or clerical jobs, and those exercising regulatory authority roles recorded agreement levels below the APS-wide average these employees were still relatively positive—recording agreement levels of around 70%.

Results were less positive when employees were asked about whether they were working to their full potential, although almost half (49%) agreed that they were. A further 26% neither agreed nor disagreed, while one in four indicated that they were not working to their full potential. SES employees (60%) were most likely to agree that they were working to their full potential and EL 2 employees (41%) were least likely to agree. A higher proportion of employees employed outside the ACT agreed that they were working to their full potential (51% compared to 44% inside the ACT). Employees working in research roles (38%) were least likely to report that they were working to their full potential.

Although employees were not specifically asked in 2007 to outline the key reasons why they felt their productivity had increased, results from the 2006 employee survey show that employees were most likely to indicate that increased knowledge and/or experience on the job and working to realistic performance expectations were important. These results highlight the gains that can be made by investing in employees so they can become even more effective in their current roles. Consistent with the employee engagement literature, good working relationships with colleagues and managers also figured prominently. One- third of employees also reported that access to the information, resources and/or technology they needed to perform their job had helped them increase their productivity.

This year’s employee survey took a slightly different approach to examining the drivers of productivity in the APS, and focused on the link between employees’ perceptions of their productivity and their levels of engagement with their work. Questions relating to productivity were combined to form a productivity index, and in turn, this index was used in a regression analysis with the employee engagement factors outlined in Chapter 3 to determine the key drivers of productivity.³

Satisfaction with four employee engagement factors explains a moderate amount (41%) of the variation in employees’ views about their productivity. This result suggests that, although satisfaction with these four factors is an important influence, other issues also influence employees’ perceptions of their levels of productivity.

The regression model showed that the key driver of employees’ perceptions of productivity was satisfaction with the Current Job factor. Other influential drivers included satisfaction with the Understanding Current Role, Diversity and Senior Leaders factors. Given this result, improving employee satisfaction in each of these areas is likely to have a positive impact on employees’ perceptions of their own levels of productivity and increase the likelihood that they feel they are working to their full potential.

These results are broadly consistent with research conducted by the Corporate Leadership Council (CLC). ⁴ This research highlights the importance of ensuring employees understand their job and how their work links with broader organisational strategy to increase discretionary effort (i.e. the extent to which employees give extra effort to their work) and productivity.

The CLC work also highlights the role that immediate managers play as a conduit in improving levels of employee engagement, which in turn drives employees’ discretionary effort and productivity. Satisfaction with the Immediate Manager factor, in its own right, did not emerge as a key driver of employees’ perceptions of their productivity levels in the APS.

Nevertheless, it is clear that immediate managers can have a strong influence on the other factors that were identified as driving perceptions of productivity, and when asked directly in last year’s employee survey, employees identified good relationships with their managers as being important in increasing individual productivity.

Improving efficiency and effectiveness

One way in which agencies can increase their productivity is to focus on initiatives aimed at improving efficiency and effectiveness. SES and EL 2 employees, in particular, have an important role to play in supporting their agency head and senior management teams in identifying and shaping initiatives that realise efficiency and effectiveness gains.

This year’s employee survey asked SES and EL 2 employees to identify the five most important actions that would assist their agency achieve greater efficiency and/or effectiveness. Respondents were most likely to nominate actions related to process, culture, people and infrastructure issues.

As can be seen in Figure 8.1, over 40% of SES and EL 2 employees indicated that more streamlined administrative processes, better internal communication and the recruitment of high-quality employees were important. It is important that agencies review this information when devising a strategy to yield the efficiency and effectiveness improvements that employees believe are possible.

SES and EL 2 employees were also given the opportunity to provide other ideas about ways that their agency could improve its efficiency and/or effectiveness. Many of the ideas were related to issues covered in Figure 8.1. Some examples of suggestions were:

The quality of SES is still a mixed bag although overall it has got considerably better. SES need to focus on the need for strong and effective leadership that provides a good framework and sets the pace and style of effective change management.

A culture that promotes cohesion—that values and appreciates the differences across the organisation.

New IT infrastructure that is more appropriate to the activities of the agency.

Figure 8.1: SES and EL 2 views about what actions would increase efficiency and/or effectiveness in their agency, 2006–07

Chart: description available below

Figure 8.1 shows the views of SES and EL 2 employees about what actions would increase the efficiency and/or effectiveness in their agency—respondents were asked to nominate up to five actions. Over 40% of SES and EL 2 employees reported that more streamlined administrative processes, better internal communication and the recruitment of high quality staff were important.

Source: Employee survey

Many of the more commonly chosen initiatives and the comments made by employees relate to the effectiveness of agencies’ corporate areas. One employee, for example, said:

Functional areas have received significant funding for expansion during recent years and the corporate area has been required to carry on as usual ... It seriously stretches corporate processes resulting in less than optimal outcomes.

Corporate areas within agencies have a key role to play in streamlining administrative processes—the most commonly identified action to assist agencies to achieve greater efficiency and/or effectiveness. Too many agencies have unnecessary layers of internal process (that are not required by legislation) in recruitment practices or CEIs. These issues were highlighted in the MAC report, Reducing Red Tape in the Australian Public Service,⁵ and will be an ongoing focus of the work of the Red Tape Deputy Secretaries’ Group, which operates as an independent arm’s-length advisory body to agencies whose proposals for regulatory and administrative measures affect Australian Government agencies.

Developing strong capacity in corporate areas that can be drawn on to assist in the development of organisational strategy will allow agencies to devise more effective administrative processes. This can be achieved by investing in the development of capability within corporate areas and ensuring that employees in corporate areas themselves have high levels of engagement with their work, a strong strategic business focus, and understand how their work supports the broader goals of their organisation.

3 The 12 factors were: Senior Leaders, Agency Culture, Immediate Manager, Work Group, Current Job, Governance, Merit, Diversity, Career and Development Opportunities, Learning and Development, Work-Life Balance, Understanding Current Role. Full details of the factor analysis, including details of the methodology and questions used, are set out in Appendix 4.

4 Corporate Leadership Council 2004, Driving Employee Performance and Retention through Engagement: A Quantitative Analysis of the Effectiveness of Employee Engagement Strategies, CLC, Washington, D.C., <http://www.clc.executiveboard.com>

5 Management Advisory Committee 2007, Reducing Red Tape in the Australian Public Service, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, <http://www.apsc.gov.au/mac>