Do you agree with the 2019 Independent Review of the APS assessment that APS classification structures are too hierarchical, impede innovation and agile decision-making. If so why? If not, why?

Yes - I think there are too many redundant layers of hierarchy in the APS. The differences between roles in some classifications are barely distinguishable. In my experience APS1/2, 3/4, 5/6 can be the same role. They are mostly used as goals for career progression (e.g. work booking from APS3->4, broad-banding APS5->6).
The upper classifications (EL2 and above) can be practically invisible to lower level staff. Important decisions are regularly made without input from the actual staff on the ground performing the agency's duties.
I agree that innovation is partially impeded by hierarchy. The biggest blocker to innovation in the APS is the budget driven funding model. Innovation isn’t free.

To what extent do you think of your role in terms of your classification, and how does that affect your work?

To a great extent. I am often expected to complete generic duties seen as a responsibility of my classification that are not part of my role statement.

Do you or does your agency identify people more closely with job titles or classification level?

I have experienced a mix of both. Staff in higher classifications are seemingly more likely to both identify others as, and be identified by their classifications.

In assembling teams do you think managers ask first “what level of person do we need?” or “what skills do we need”? How could we change things so skills and knowledge come first?

I think managers ask both – first what skills, then what levels. They want to create a team with the correct skills then, ensure there is adequate seniority.

The APS response to COVID-19 and ongoing efforts to support economic recovery accelerated change across the APS and many reported a flattening of structures and increased delegations as part of the response. Was this your experience, and are there any lessons we should bear in mind when thinking about APS structures?

When urgent issues like these present themselves, my observations are that senior management will work with staff directly, rather than through the usual 2-3 layers between them. I have not see any increases in delegations.

This is a lesson that there are too many layers involved to operate quickly. This does not mean that the layers are redundant. Something is ultimately sacrificed by their removal (potentially quality). It is a fear of mine if the APS tries to be too ‘agile’. Agility is not necessarily a good thing and I would like APS leaders to spend some more time looking into if this is actually a good direction to go rather than blindly following outdated hype and buzzwords.

Our hierarchy could stand to be flatter than what it is… within reason.

How can the APS classification structure best support the attraction and development of technical and specialist skills, for example data, digital and cyber expertise?

I would like to see technical staff separated from the APS classifications completely.
The APS classifications used for technical and specialist staff are ineffective and disrespectful. For example the ICT stream. It is too generic, so it attracts unskilled staff. Most of the staff within ICT APS classifications do not possess any technical or specialist skills. In turn – technical staff perform duties unrelated to their profession within the technical streams.

If we hire general practitioners as EL2s but, then expect them to manage an office, staff, assets, etc else just because they are an EL2 then there is a problem. This is happening currently with SAP specialists for example.

How can we better empower more junior employees and ensure that decision-making and responsibility is delegated to the lowest possible level in the hierarchy?

I think decision-making should be at the level of the employee best placed to make the decision. That is the employee most informed, usually writing the business case, or providing a recommendation for the decision. If all the receiving manager does is pass that on or even approve the recommendation outright.. perhaps the employee doing the write-up could have approved the decision.