Results Based Strategies & Plans in NZ’s Public Sector
Relevance to ADB & yourselves?
1. Not about a road map2. Not about poverty reduction (in your setting)
0845
Sector Results: Why Bother?
Quantity Quality Coverage
Input
Output
Outcome
REDUCINGPOVERTY (EFFECTIVE
MANAGEMENT)
EFFICIENT MANAGEMENT
Evolution of Governance
BASIC GOVERNANCE
APPROPRIATENESS OF EXPENDITURE
ECONOMY & EFFICIENCY
EFFECTIVENESS & VALUE-FOR-MONEY
· “Knowing what money is spent on”· Sustaining leadership, institutions & systems that give
confidence money will be spent responsibly· Focussing on aggregate fiscal responsibility & outputs
· “Interventions that could meet major needs get funded”· Ensuring money is at least focussed on priorities & real needs· Logical checks confirm intervention mix & targeting matches
needs, & is at least capable of producing the results sought
· “Better manufacturers & technologies get funded”· Trying to maximise capacity to benefit citizens, by funding
quality outputs produced at low cost (may be wrong output)· Measuring / benchmarking input & output costs
· “Most valuable products get funded”· Trying to maximise benefit to citizens, by funding outputs
that can be shown to work & (ideally) are cost-effective· Defining expected results, & showing outputs deliver them· Comparing results of unlike outputs
NZ:
1980s ?
1990s ?
Now
Advice to Leaders & Managers
• Leaders must create demand• Staff must support their work• Evidence trumps opinion every
time (Risk: culture trumps evidence)
• Focus: ‘big’ strategies / interventns • Prioritise, & be pragmatic• Set yourself a challenge
• Organise information & analytic outputs to support ‘big’ decisions & reshape ‘road map’ over time
POLICY &OPERATIONAL
MANAGERS
PLANNERS &BUSINESSANALYSTS
STRATEGIC &OPERATIONAL
PRIORITIES
MINISTERS &SENIOR
MANAGEMNT
PERFORMNCE
MONITORINGEVALUATION
EVALUATIONPLAN
SYNTHESIS ANDRECOMMENDATIONS
Why Bother with Strategy?
• Strategy matters• Some strategies matter more than others• Strategy is the starting point for deriving
appropriate action (not the ‘sum of current actions’)
• Poor structure & evidence base caused us to review strategy design as part of MfR
• Priorities should be evidence based, not discipline based (so beware of some economists!)
Background to NZ’s Strategy Primer
1. Many strategies – priority & links unclear
2. Poorly specified outcomes, results
3. Based on uncertain needs & demand
4. Lacked specificity on actions, timing & cost
5. Limited monitoring of results
6. Few groups with clear mandate to learn from experience & redraft the strategy
Strategy Design & Review
1. Focus on big, tractable issues that dominate the area 2. Target significant change for the poor (evidence of
major need(s); measurable results; tangible goals) 3. Use evidence to justify the big interventions (e.g. of
need, impact and cost-effectiveness) 4. Be clear about what must happen, & when. Plans that:
– Show how major results will be demonstrated– Specify delivery and performance measurement outputs– How major constraints and risks will be managed
5. Lay out clear governance, assessment & feedback processes to adjust the plan
(Further information on each area is on the rear page of the ‘Strategy Primer’)
Proving Strategies & Major Interventions Work
Major ‘Community’ Outcomes (Indicators) Are Improving
First Major Intervention
Second Major Intervention
Other Major Interventions?
MAJOR INTERVENTIONS ‘WELL MANAGED & WORKING WELL’
Reduce Social Cost of Death & Serious Injury from Road Accidents
Improve Roads
(e.g. engineering)
Ends:
Means: Improve Vehicle Mix(standards & testing)
Improve Driving
(licences & enforcement)
MajorInter-ventions:
Dangerous corners
Intersections
Road surfaces
Ease of overtaking
Speed control
Breath testing
Young drivers
Use of seat belts
Import standards
Yearly test standards
Spot checks, helmets, etc
Incentives (e.g. taxes)
Analysis: “Show aggregate results”; “Follow the money”
Funding Major Interventions
Pre-conditions of funding:
1. Address needs that remain relevant (what, where, who?) 2. Ends (outcomes, goals) & means (outputs, coverage) map to #13. Systems to validate performance vs. clear specification
Ongoing funding:
4. Efficient (& cost-effective)5. Meet quantity & quality standards6. Reach & positively influence groups with needs 7. Reduce needs (improve outcomes) used to justify funding
MfDR thus provides ‘funding tests’ & learning opportunities
Basket of measures linking services to user expectations
Inputs
Outputs
Outcomes
Efficiency
Value-for-Money
Effectiveness
PRODUCTIVITY MODEL
Quantity
Quality
Coverage
Near TermResults
IntermediateOutcomes
End Outcomes
Funding
Resources
Economy
AllocativeEfficiency
Equity
Access
LOGIC MODEL
Major Strategies & InterventionsMajor Strategies & Interventions
Policy … Design … Planning for Feedback … then Action
Plan(where do we want to go?)
Measures(how will we know when
we get there?)
Do(to implement the plan)
Report(did we reach our goal?)
The Policy Management Cycle: After Heather Daynard, Prospect Management Enterprises Inc, Canada
Crucial Roles of Senior Managers & Aspirants (2)
• Provide & promote leadership• Demonstrate performance by simplest means• Assess & promote staff based on MfDR
contributions & competencies• Delegate, in return for accountability for delivery• Eliminate activities with weaker value-add• Establish ‘systems’ required to support MfDR
Making Space for MfDR
Input Far less rules-based
Process Scope for negotiation
Product Attributes Strong focus (no savings?)
Systems (Integration) Strong focus (but not a major effort after they have been set up)
Results Focus Strong focus (effort reduces if robust systems in place)
“Accountability, in return for Freedom to Manage”
RESOURCES
Leadership Roles Crucial (1)
• Ensure strategies, CSPs, portfolios, sector plans, etc clarify what needs (outcomes) are targeted for whom, how & why. Ensure strategies, plans, reports & other products work from outcomes (ends) to actions (means).
• Deliver monitoring systems as well as outputs. Summarise key results in time to support leadership decisions on strategy, priorities, output, etc
• Adapt strategies & plans in response to new information
• Focus judgements on contributions to poverty reduction
Inducing Change
Key Principles & Learnings in Main-streaming MfDR
3.00 pm
Organisation & CultureAccentuating the Positive
Accept responsibility for achieving outcomes Renew intellectual capacity & agency creativity Integrated set of initiatives – backed by evidence
(add new initiatives to build on momentum / gains)
Analytical rigour / honesty, not mgmt. paraphernalia
Reduce real complexity to ‘workable dimensions’ Active risk-taking, not passive risk avoidance Build sector-wide knowledge, people, teams
After Tony Bliss, LTSA (NZ) & World Bank
Roles of Senior Management
Accentuating the Positive
Strong leadership - Ambitious vision & targetsManage outcome-output links within limits of
performance. System change to surpass limits (Shifting leadership, system, production & measurement frontiers)
Fund portfolio of investment & near-term outputsBack evidence, esp. vs. conventional wisdomManage productive multi-agency partnerships,
coordinated at senior levels (often CEO to CEO)
Tony Bliss, World Bank
Directors Powerful & Influential• LT & MTS• Policies, subsidiary strategies• Cross country comparisons & priority setting• CSPs, priority setting & monitoring• Sector direction & strategy• Delivering & monitoring portfolios & projects
• Appointment, assessment & promotion• Allocative decision-making (planning & budgeting)
• Project design, approval, management & review• Roles, delegation, accountability vs. freedom to manage • Incentives (rewards, risks, punishments) • Nimble, flexible, responsible, accountable
Making WavesMaking Waves
COMMUNITY OUTCOMES
ORGANISATIONAL OUTCOMES
REGIONAL OUTCOMES
TEAM OUTCOMES
CASELOAD OUTCOMES
CLIENTOUTCOME
(Influencing Actions)
Will MfDR Go Away?No. It will evolve.
WHY? Your Mission
Your ManagersYour Shareholders
10:00 am
Self Assessing Our Progress in MfDR
A tool to help organisations consider their progress in results-based management and identify their
capability development objectives
Goals for an MDB Tool[1] Boards, leaders and managers will be
better able to identify: – where and how well we are managing, and
embedding & practising results-based management at lower levels
– what needs to be done to gain further progress in MfDR
– what our development priorities are
[2] Communicate expectations to our staff
The Tool (1)
• Self-assessment: not accountability mechanism• Results subjective: not comparable across units • Designed to be flexible, adaptable & applicable
at agency, department, division, unit levels • Use iteratively to gauge progress & set goals • KISS: Cannot be all encompassing (e.g. change
management not covered in NZ version)
Likely Structure
• Simple introduction
• Focus on a small number of questions on key dimensions of performance (MfDR)
• Keep questions simple, short, generic• Describe stages of development (scale)
• Overview (pulling the self-assessment together)
• Must cover key aspects of MfDR …
• Directors have helped us identify priorities for the ADB, and added new messages
• Feedback will be used to build MDB tool
• Will evolve on the basis of later feedback from directors & other senior managers
• Learn from others
Tool for the ADB
Assessment Components(NZ Tool)
1. Clarity about ends & means (strategy & plan)
2. Capability required (planning, delivery, learning)
3. Assessing progress in implementation
Big Question for the ADB & MDBs: What bits of the model must be protected, & how must it be adapted.
You will be asked for your opinions shortly …