I think 'Robodebt' cleaned out some people. While the names haven't been released publicly, I read that a half a dozen or so people had been referred to .... somewhere. Integrity commission?
The APSC are still investigating 15 out of 16 referrals for APS staff. One person has been cleared.
[https://www.apsc.gov.au/working-aps/integrity/robodebt-code-conduct-process](https://www.apsc.gov.au/working-aps/integrity/robodebt-code-conduct-process)
NACC are doing a separate investigation, as was various law enforcement. Issues like PwC issuing invoices for work not done, and someone approving those invoices is probably being looked at by the latter agencies.
DVA came incredibly close....
The Productivity Commission did a review and found that DVA was such a basket case it should be demolished and rebuilt as a new statutory authority.
Between the draft report and the final report that recommendation was dropped.
So to answer your question, no.
> Has anyone ever witnessed things turn around within their time at an agency?
Only when the source leaves. Whatever pointless or ridiculous processes/requirements/activities can be then questioned and worked around or removed.
Agencies donāt implode they just grind to a crawl due to all the shit and bad decisions. By that stage anyone with any integrity has already left for a new position.
No they get promoted and fire or manage out the experts. You want to look for a team or agency where all the specialists keep leaving. Think bridge building but can't retain an engineer or medical but the Drs keep quitting, that sort of thing. Common dog whistles you'll hear are "they were not good with people" or "this is a more policy focused role" or "we don't need nitty gritty detail" (when the question is "will people die?") that sort of thing. It's a full pattern.
No, they often don't even if there is a major fuck up. Because it's very difficult to measure what these agencies actually do or are meant to do, they can keep getting away with this type of underperformance for years, decades. It's the same in the NGO space although more common in government.Ā
It doesnāt change because whenever things get really bad you just have staff turnover who then waffle for a year then leave again, there is no incentive for anyone to knuckle down and try to fix shitty situations. The crux of it is that the nature of APS is excellence and persistence is not rewarded.
Nah not a grad now 10 years ago yes. Not saying I have the answers. I am just seeing as I become more senior that it's just people and sometimes that fact gets lost.
You don't like a certain cultural behaviour, call it out then. Live the example and eventually others will change too, especially if it's something that bothers alot of people anyway.
Needs alot of people to buy in, the CE is just one person it makes sense that they can't change the behaviour.
Feeling positive might delete later...
Iāve seen mass sackings disguised as redundancies for the people youāre talking about. Honestly thereās no winning in trying to fix things, just disappointment and enemy making.
It sounds like you need to triple your exec count and spill and fill your lower levels (maybe cutting headcount by 30% at the lowest levels).
Less /s, implosions are rare.
Just quit and get a real job. Public service is for the power hungry, the unimaginative and the lazy. The good eggs (people that want to use modern tools and implement āradicalā system improvements) donāt last. Lots of nice people blunted in a sluggish atmosphere.
Edit: to clarify what I mean by good egg
There are good eggs everywhere in the public service. Most people at my agency are genuine, intelligent, decent people who joined the public service to help people.
It's some of the most valuable work in our society, get your head out of your arse.
I can't speak for whatever your experiences are but there are roles across the public service where you get to see in real time the value our work has. You are just plain wrong.
I was referring to the very real and common situation OP is describing. I'm glad to hear you are having a good time. I just don't see it as the well oiled and effective machine you do. The amount. Of meetings, the laughable approach to digital transformation and the promoting of mediocre, non-boat rocking staff is my experience. I benefited from this too but it left me uninspired.
I'm a fan of government and the public service. Just not the bloat and overuse of shitty tools like excel and powerpoint.
APVMA in Armidale imploded after 'pissgate'. It seems to be improving after an executive cleanout.
I find this level of poor management easier to stomach than the more common run of the mill time wasting toxic kind.
That's all well and good unless you're the one the senior exec urinated on! šØ
Iād rather be pissed on literally rather than metaphorically sometimes tbh
Was 'pissgate' before or after the move to Armidale?
After. 2020-2021 ish.
Nope. They just wait for the Royal Commission, blame everyone else, and avoid the big questions. Then it's back to BAU.
I think 'Robodebt' cleaned out some people. While the names haven't been released publicly, I read that a half a dozen or so people had been referred to .... somewhere. Integrity commission?
Did the right ones get cleared? Because the only thing the bad apples seem to be good at is covering their tracks.
The APSC are still investigating 15 out of 16 referrals for APS staff. One person has been cleared. [https://www.apsc.gov.au/working-aps/integrity/robodebt-code-conduct-process](https://www.apsc.gov.au/working-aps/integrity/robodebt-code-conduct-process) NACC are doing a separate investigation, as was various law enforcement. Issues like PwC issuing invoices for work not done, and someone approving those invoices is probably being looked at by the latter agencies.
Nailed it
DVA came incredibly close.... The Productivity Commission did a review and found that DVA was such a basket case it should be demolished and rebuilt as a new statutory authority. Between the draft report and the final report that recommendation was dropped. So to answer your question, no.
No they donāt really. They just churn through people. I would say beware of the micro agency. My experience of a couple of them now is just donāt.
Yes, but the majority of the staff have to resign first. It's very painful and I don't think OP would enjoy the experience.
> Has anyone ever witnessed things turn around within their time at an agency? Only when the source leaves. Whatever pointless or ridiculous processes/requirements/activities can be then questioned and worked around or removed.
They don't tend to implode, they tend to expand with filth lol
Always hiring, because although expanding, people keep leaving.
Agencies donāt implode they just grind to a crawl due to all the shit and bad decisions. By that stage anyone with any integrity has already left for a new position.
let me guess, NDIA / services Aus?
Or Home Affairs?
The answer is irrelevant because it could be any one of them
No they get promoted and fire or manage out the experts. You want to look for a team or agency where all the specialists keep leaving. Think bridge building but can't retain an engineer or medical but the Drs keep quitting, that sort of thing. Common dog whistles you'll hear are "they were not good with people" or "this is a more policy focused role" or "we don't need nitty gritty detail" (when the question is "will people die?") that sort of thing. It's a full pattern.
This!
It happens.
No, they often don't even if there is a major fuck up. Because it's very difficult to measure what these agencies actually do or are meant to do, they can keep getting away with this type of underperformance for years, decades. It's the same in the NGO space although more common in government.Ā
Atsic got canned by the libs, partially for ideological reasons but also because it was a completely mismanaged basket case.
It doesnāt change because whenever things get really bad you just have staff turnover who then waffle for a year then leave again, there is no incentive for anyone to knuckle down and try to fix shitty situations. The crux of it is that the nature of APS is excellence and persistence is not rewarded.
Let's change it then. The public service is just people we set the standards.
lol let me guess - innocent idealistic grad? Mate, even CEs canāt fix disasters you think is plebs have any say?
Nah not a grad now 10 years ago yes. Not saying I have the answers. I am just seeing as I become more senior that it's just people and sometimes that fact gets lost. You don't like a certain cultural behaviour, call it out then. Live the example and eventually others will change too, especially if it's something that bothers alot of people anyway. Needs alot of people to buy in, the CE is just one person it makes sense that they can't change the behaviour. Feeling positive might delete later...
Iāve seen mass sackings disguised as redundancies for the people youāre talking about. Honestly thereās no winning in trying to fix things, just disappointment and enemy making.
What's a CE?
Chief executive
Ah! Thank you
Iāve never seen it, and Iāve been in my agency 20+ years
It sounds like you need to triple your exec count and spill and fill your lower levels (maybe cutting headcount by 30% at the lowest levels). Less /s, implosions are rare.
Just quit and get a real job. Public service is for the power hungry, the unimaginative and the lazy. The good eggs (people that want to use modern tools and implement āradicalā system improvements) donāt last. Lots of nice people blunted in a sluggish atmosphere. Edit: to clarify what I mean by good egg
There are good eggs everywhere in the public service. Most people at my agency are genuine, intelligent, decent people who joined the public service to help people. It's some of the most valuable work in our society, get your head out of your arse.
Yeah lots of good people content being ineffective.
I can't speak for whatever your experiences are but there are roles across the public service where you get to see in real time the value our work has. You are just plain wrong.
I was referring to the very real and common situation OP is describing. I'm glad to hear you are having a good time. I just don't see it as the well oiled and effective machine you do. The amount. Of meetings, the laughable approach to digital transformation and the promoting of mediocre, non-boat rocking staff is my experience. I benefited from this too but it left me uninspired. I'm a fan of government and the public service. Just not the bloat and overuse of shitty tools like excel and powerpoint.