00

Attention: APSC

To whom it may concern

Please find below our submission for the APS Hierarchy and Classification Review Panel.

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?

We believe that this is more about culture than structures as such, but we recognise that the more classification levels there are, the more likely these challenges would arise.

How can APS classification structures help the APS to operate more effectively as one enterprise?

Similar classification structures across the APS support cross-agency mobility as there is a common language and understanding of expectations at each classification. Current recruitment practices support mobility under the current structure (ie simpler processes for moves ‘at level’). However, APS staff may limit the roles they look at by classification as well. Changes to the classification structure would need to consider implications for rules regarding mobility of staff between agencies.

Our current classification structure allows for differentiation depending on agency size and role, along with work type and geographic location. Can the APS continue to accommodate a common APS-wide classification system?

See above. Noting there are risks and challenges of each approach. If there were agency-specific classifications it would allow for more flexibility (reflecting nature of work, specialist roles, salary ranges), but may make it more difficult to have people move flexibly across agencies and difficult to assess what are ‘comparable’ roles for salary purposes. Work expectations for a classification are generally understood across the broader organisation/APS, which assists when applying for roles across the APS. A new standardised approach to technical streams might allow for more flexibility while keeping general classifications that aid mobility. See also below.

A one size fits all classification model needs to have a nucleus/core of consistency and the ability/flexibility for agencies to tailor the specific outcomes required by the roles that are aligned to the agency strategic outcomes. We also need to consider that each agency requires a different cohort of capability. Our core capability is intellectual knowledge and a majority of our employees are EL1/EL2 which combined with the SES cap creates complexity and blockage to promotions and succession.

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

Classification does play a role – delegations are based on classifications, classifications generally play a part in reporting arrangements and who decision makers are, which is known to the individual, the work area and broader agency. However even if classifications did not exist there would need to be clarity around those elements to be broadly understood by relevant stakeholders.

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

Expect this varies depending on work area and whether roles are specialist. Sometimes job titles reflect classification anyway (eg Director = EL2).

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?

Generally the focus is on what level of person, based on previous team arrangements. Difficult to shift this perspective without leaders prioritising this and/or processes being put in place to force a change.

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?

N/A

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

Technical specialist streams with greater flexibility for pay scales would likely support this. There may be benefit in having technical/specialist classifications (eg IT, data, economics) which may help to attract, motivate and retain these skills in the APS, helping us to be more competitive in the marketplace. We currently use Individual Flexibility Arrangements and while we have policies to ensure consistency, classification structure could do this in a collective and transparent way.

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?

This is cultural, needs to be an ongoing focus, tackled at a range of levels within the agency. Requires agency risk appetite, culture that accepts failure at times, focus on delegations (including reviewing arrangements and questioning status quo) and supported by professional development/coaching/mentoring.

How can we streamline decision-making to improve efficiency and timeliness?

See above. Also making senior managers more focused on leadership and delegate more of the technical work (may depend on agency)

Yours sincerely

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission