Public Sector
POOR ACCOUNTABILITY
LOW TECHNICAL SKILL
CONTINUOUS TINKERING
The broken operating model of the New Zealand public sector Trustworthy AI How New Zealand buys - public sector procurement
Get a head start on your public sector career
Nau mai, piki mai! Join the Hāpai Public New Professionals Network to develop connections across the public, private, and not-for-profit sectors, and to learn from public professionals who are good at what they do.
Hāpai Public New Professionals is for kaimahi in their first ten years of working in, or with, the public sector.
To upskill and connect with like-minded public professionals:
➝ Join the Hāpai Public New Professionals Network here
➝ Follow us on LinkedIn
➝ Get in touch at newprofessionals@hapaipublic.org.nz
On the importance of core strength
Much has been said recently about “what is wrong with the public sector”. Inefficiencies, too many meetings, too much bureaucracy, too much focus on risk.
In his speech to the New Zealand Economics Forum, the Public Service Commissioner said there were too many “... hard-wired elaborate systems and processes to ensure a whole of government or system perspective is brought to bear”.
But where did these elaborate hard-wired systems and processes come from? Answer: from the central agencies.
Interdepartmental executive boards, interdepartmental ventures, joint operational agreements, functional chief executives, system leaders, and departmental agencies. Treasury budget planning and reporting approaches that begin earlier, finish later, and differ every year from the year before. And now three new monitoring bodies, each of whom will no doubt require additional reporting from agencies.
When did the business of the core agencies, particularly the Public Service Commission, shift from a laser focus on accountability and performance to a primary focus on coordination? Identifying and catalysing performance improvement aligned with key strategic outcomes is an essential role of central agencies. Yet, in all of these conversations about what’s wrong with the public sector, I have heard very little about the role of the central agencies in public sector performance and reform.
Performance across the public sector is uneven, with some agencies significantly underperforming for years. Where the central agencies get involved, it tends to be at the point of failure. Cave Creek, Abuse in Care, and Novopay inquiries spring to mind. Failure cannot be our major diagnostic tool. And managing the narrative to limit the damage is not a recipe for improved accountability.
The Public Service Commissioner was appointed with an overriding brief to improve the performance of the system and deliver better outcomes for the public of New Zealand. In this, he has my full support. However, achieving a sustainable trajectory shift will require more than a collection of ideas – it requires a practical, evidence-based strategy. This is even more critical if changes to the Public Service Act 2020 are being considered.
Sir Brian is a man of action. His job over the next short while, as he says, is to position the Public Service so that it is fit for purpose to face the future. This must include a focus on ensuring the central agencies themselves are fit for purpose. Are they prepared to turn the spotlight on their own operating model?
H Ā PAI PUBLIC PRESIDENT
Liz MacPherson
PUBLISHER
Hāpai Public | Institute of Public Professionals Aotearoa New Zealand PO Box 5032, Wellington, New Zealand
Email: office@hapaipublic.org.nz
Website: www.hapaipublic.org.nz
ISSN 1176-9831 (Online)
The whole of the literary matter of Public Sector is copyright. Please contact the editor if you are interested in reproducing any Public Sector content.
EDITOR
Kathy Young editor@hapaipublic.org.nz
CONTRIBUTORS
Barbara Allen, Sally Champion, Amy Dove, Kim Humlicek, Kathryn Jackson, Barry Knight, Arne Larson, Liz MacPherson, Charlie Mitchell, Athira Nair, Annika Naschitzki, Zaira Najam, Geoff Plimmer
JOURNAL ADVISORY
GROUP
Barbara Allen, Ayesha Arshad, Kay Booth, Liam Russell, Stefan Speller, Kathy Young
ADVERTISING
Email: office@hapaipublic.org.nz
CONTRIBUTIONS
Public Sector welcomes contributions to each issue from readers. Please contact the editor for more information.
SUBSCRIPTIONS
Hāpai Public welcomes both corporate and individual membership and journal subscriptions. Please email office@hapaipublic.org.nz or visit www.hapaipublic.org.nz to register online.
DISCLAIMER
Opinions expressed in Public Sector are those of various authors and do not necessarily represent those of the editor, the journal advisory group, or Hāpai Public. Every effort is made to provide accurate and factual content. The publishers and editorial staff, however, cannot accept responsibility for any inadvertent errors or omissions that may occur.
01
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE
04
LEAD STORY
The broken operating model of the New Zealand Public Service
Leading public sector researchers share their perspectives on why the operating model of the Public Service may need a fundamental rethink.
08
REFLECTIONS
From IPANZ to Hāpai Public: New name, same mahi
Liz MacPherson, President of Hāpai Public | Institute of Public Professionals Aotearoa New Zealand, explains the evolution of our Institute with public sector members very much front and centre.
10
INSIGHTS
Survivor syndrome in public sector restructuring
Kim Humlicek and Geoff Plimmer at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington and Kathryn Jackson from Career Balance look at what can be done to address the impact of redundancies on those left within an organisation after restructuring.
13
INSIGHTS
Measuring what matters for non-profit organisations
Barry Knight, Adviser to the Global Fund for Community Foundations, explains why the current Social Return on Investment (SROI) methodology requires reform.
16
INVESTIGATION
Build trust to realise the promises of AI
Amy Dove and Athira Nair at Deloitte outline how building trust in AI governance is vital for New Zealand’s public sector to innovate responsibly at speed.
18 INSIGHTS
How New Zealand buys
Barbara Allen at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington outlines how government purchases goods and services, and how recent reforms will serve to improve public procurement performance.
24
ACC provides rongoā Māori services for all injured New Zealanders
Sally Champion finds out more about this award-winning ACC service.
22
FOCUS
Learning to work with a new government
Hāpai Public New Professionals’ Co-chair Zaira Najam reviews one of Hāpai Public’s recent webinars: Learning to work with a new government.
26
JOBS YOU’VE NEVER HEARD OF
Inside New Zealand’s Honours Unit
Editor Kathy Young talks to those responsible for administering one of the nation’s most prestigious recognition programmes.
28
REFLECTIONS
Hāpai Public prize winner
We spoke with the recipient of the 2024 IPANZ (now Hāpai Public) Prize in Public Administration – Arne Larsen.
30
BOOK AND PODCAST REVIEW
Hāpai Public New Professionals’ Co-Chair Zaira Najam reviews an episode from Three Gals One Beehive podcast and the recently published book Tairāwhiti: Pine, Profit and the Cyclone by Aaron Smale.
31 DID YOU KNOW?
About the role of the Speaker of the House
Five fascinating facts about the Speaker of the House of Representatives (Te Mana Whakawā o te Whare).
KAIMAHI MAKING A DIFFERENCE
The broken operating model of the New Zealand Public Service
Leading public sector researchers in the field of public sector capability and performance share their perspectives on why the operating model of the Public Service may need a fundamental rethink.
AUTHORS
Associate Professor Geoff Plimmer
Annika Naschitzki
Dr Charlie Mitchell
In a November 2023 briefing paper to the Hon Nicola Willis, then Minister for the Public Service, from Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission (PSC), the current Public Service operating model was described as a “highly aligned, highly devolved system”. It went on to say that over the last decade, the current model has used mechanisms such as “whole of system leadership”, having “more collaborative policy and delivery across agency boundaries”, a “more productive and aligned workforce”, and “centralised and aligned common functions across agencies”. However, while the PSC recognised room for further improvement, especially in digitisation, the briefing paper presented an overly positive view of the system.
Fortunately, more recent comments by Sir Brian Roche, the Public Service Commissioner, indicate a more realistic view: that the public service system is not fundamentally flawed but requires refinement to be fit for purpose. The new Commissioner has usefully identified some problems, including excessive risk aversion, inefficiency, duplication, inadequate responsiveness, too many meetings and layers of management, insufficient use of data, and assumptions about the Treaty of Waitangi. He has also made some hard-hitting comments about public confidence and trust in the Public Service in response to findings of the inquiry into the protection of personal information.
The idea of operating models is a crucial one. It fundamentally sets out how a system is supposed to function. Beneath the formal veneer of the still intact 2023 operating model for the Public Service is a deeply ingrained informal operating model of unstable organisations with low accountability, poor technical skill, risk aversion, and micromanagement; continuous tinkering with
organisational structures and internal models that exacerbates these problems; and poor genuine collaboration between agencies that limits real accountability and hinders performance.
Organisational instability
Change and instability are unavoidable and, in some instances, even advantageous. Some changes, including contentious ones, may ultimately prove essential and beneficial over time. However, when does change become excessive? A system where a quarter of organisations replace their chief executives annually, more than half alter half their priorities over a decade, and frequent restructuring is the norm, hardly embodies stability. Considering the well-documented negative impacts of instability, it is difficult to argue that such conditions are beneficial.
Why this instability is promoted may be partly because many senior managers lack sector expertise to manage the organisations they run and so resort to generic management solutions – such as restructuring – to address any perceived problems. The lack of regard for technical and sector expertise is contrary to the findings of widespread leadership studies since the 1950s. Leaders need technical knowledge of the sector and its body of knowledge. They need to know what they are talking about.
These changes may happen because ministers or executives think something about the setup of the organisation is wrong, or because the actions of managers are not right. However, that raises the question – if all the previous changes did not work, why would the next one? One cynical response is that we keep changing because we do not have the skills or knowledge to know what else to do. This may be due to managerial incompetence, or perverse incentives. For example, restructuring can avoid difficult performance management of incompetent staff, and it can also look good on the CVs of those who initiate it. Dependence on outside consultants eager to sell a change initiative might also be a reason. For all these potential reasons, restructuring becomes a stand-in for real action.
Continuous tinkering of internal structures and models
A doctoral study at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington’s Te Kura Kāwanatanga School of Government (publication forthcoming) documented 488 instances of internal restructuring in the 61 organisations that comprised the Public Service between 2018 and 2021. The frequency of such instances has possibly increased since then. The introduction of a new operating model or
the ‘alignment’ of internal structures to a newly adopted strategy are the most common drivers for restructuring, as described by their leaders.
Institutional theorists talk about a state of “organised hypocrisy” when they observe that the grander an organisation’s announcement of a transformation programme is, the less likely it is to achieve what it set out to do. And that, in their interpretation, is no accident: it’s easy to start reforms and hard to actually fulfil them. But by talking about change, referring to all the current buzzwords (eg, agile, customercentric, co-design) and by investing resources, organisational leaders can be seen to take action without having to follow through.
Out of 488 restructures, there were 11 instances that were followed up with a formal assessment as to whether restructure objectives were met. Most of these diagnosed unintended practical consequences, such as loss of institutional knowledge instead of successful change. This echoes meta-studies from the world of organisational change management that place
Out of 488 restructures, there were 11 instances that were followed up with a formal assessment as to whether restructure objectives were met.
the failure rates of internal change projects between 70 and 90 per cent.
With broad, ambiguous goals, no objective measures or financial accountability, it becomes difficult to see how this form of institutional change meets public sector values like fiduciary responsibility, accountability and long-term stewardship. In states such as within Belgium and Germany, organisational restructuring events are subject to approval by local treasuries, as they are considered a substantial financial investment whose efficacy deserve fiscal scrutiny.
This approach to change and improvement is, however, a characteristic of the current
Public Service operating model that has been described as “project-ified”. When more and more of what the public sector does takes the shape of a project, measured in broad red-amber-green status, and working towards a finite ‘delivery’ each time, long-term thinking, collaboration and discovery lose out to risk-based, short-term budget quibbles and ‘strategic’ prioritisation. The destructive power of this combination is that it steadily erodes the trust of both public servants and citizens that the public sector can change at all. This radiates far beyond the pains of internal restructuring: when the public sees their executive and administrative leaders continuously announcing strategies, action plans, blueprints, and operating models as the panaceas for concerns that have real impacts on their lives, and public sector managers do not translate these declarations into tangible practice, public servants’ words become increasingly hollow.
Poor collaboration
Public service agencies still exist within their own ‘silos’. This is despite much talk saying
IMAGE BY KATEMANGOSTAR ON FREEPIK
When the public sees their executive and administrative leaders continuously announcing strategies, action plans, blueprints, and operating models as the panaceas for the Public Service concerns [ … ] their words become increasingly hollow and irrelevant.
otherwise, and a multitude of meetings and papers being generated. Ultimately, very little is achieved. There is little incentive to work collaboratively. The Public Service Act 2020 was, in part, designed to remedy this, focusing on new structural forms designed to enable collaboration and collective accountability. However, incentives for chief executives still require them to think ‘vertically’ about their own agency performance rather than horizontally across the system.
Fear of public and ministerial displeasure exacerbates the problem and means low risk tolerance. The system of public accountability – that deters risk-taking and innovation – and lack of sustained support from the authorising environment works against collaboration.
Multiple studies, both in New Zealand and overseas, confirm that working collaboratively is practically difficult despite its theoretical appeal. Some collaboration does, of course, exist, such as during the Covid-19 pandemic. However, these collaborative endeavours are rare, and they are outliers rather than standard and intrinsic features of the system. To suggest that our public management system is “collaborative, aligned and high performing” is incongruous with the world as it really is.
Recognition first
These problems are self-reinforcing: unstable organisations lead to continuous tinkering to try and fix problems. The resulting disorganisation makes it hard to build collaboration, in part because of incentives but also because jobs are not stable enough to build trust with peers in other organisations. High turnover means accountability for substantial issues is usually impossible, and generic managers do not know what good performance looks like anyway. In this environment, impression management (creating a perception of progress) matters more than skill. Risk-averse unskilled managers adopt micromanagement.
Positive Thoughts for 2025!
To address the above problems, an honest recognition and discussion of the problems is needed. This is a change from the PSC’s past habit of seeing substantive problems as primarily communication issues. We invite the PSC and its new Commissioner to have such a conversation.
Geoff Plimmer is an Associate Professor at the School of Management, Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington, where he teaches and researches public sector capability, leadership, and change.
Annika Naschitzki is a Doctoral Candidate and Research Fellow at the School of Government, Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington, with an interest in organisational change, digitalisation and public management.
Charlie Mitchell is a Research Fellow at the School of Management, Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington, with a PhD in management. He has an interest in public value, collaboration and strategy.
The H2R team are channelling positive thoughts for this year for our clients and candidates, and it seems to be paying off with a flurry of activity to start the year. In saying this, predictions about Aotearoa’s economy and talent market are still a bit ‘doom and gloom’ for the first half of 2025, with unemployment set to peak at 5.5% in June. Our H2R Change Team has never been so busy over the December and January period - and it’s not expected to slow down over the coming months.
March Market Update
At H2R, we’re seeing high demand for top talent in the market as always. Clients are wanting to secure innovative, change oriented leaders and specialists who can support the transformation of their business. We have seen demand for Change Managers, HR Specialists, Policy Specialists, Finance Business Partners, Community and Engagement Managers, and Coordinators across disciplines. Additionally, we have seen an increased demand for temps and contractors on a short term basis to provide support during structural changes, cover for employees on leave and to help manage higher workloads. There are lots of talented professionals in the market, so if you are looking for support, please do not hesitate to reach out.
Visit www.H2R.co.nz/meet-our-team for the contact details of our recruiters or feel free to contact Eugene Ng, Katerina Makarios or Shane MacKay - Wellington: 04 4999471 / Auckland: 09 3687300
Another driver has been the power of language. Operating as ‘IPANZ’, the acronym for the Institute of Public Administration New Zealand, we increasingly found people didn’t know what ‘public administration’ means (it’s about serving the community to advance the common good and achieve constructive change, by the way). Our name was no longer serving us well.
Hāpai Public perfectly describes who we are and what we do, as the independent national body for public sector professionals in New Zealand.
We are all about supporting our members We serve our members by building a
community of learning and practice about public service. Constant over time has been our focus on the activity of public service; on delivery for the people, by the people.
Public service is the work of public servants –yes, but not solely! Our members also include private companies who support the work of the public sector as well as communities, universities, and individuals who also, in their own ways, pursue public service. What ties us together is a passion for public service and a curiosity for exploring new ideas.
So what are we doing for you, our members?
• A new, improved website, so your
WHO ARE OUR MEMBERS?
Ninety-two percent of people working in the Public Service are members through their organisation’s corporate membership of Hāpai Public.
Our members comprise:
• 31 public service agencies
• 25 wider public sector organisations
• 26 private sector companies
• 24 not-for-profit organisations
• 19 individuals.
Nearly 15,000 people are on our database.
Are you a member?
Find out from our website https:// hapaipublic.org.nz/become-a-member
Want to receive emails about our events and stay informed?
Sign up at https://hapaipublic.org.nz/ become-a-member
engagement with us is much easier.
• New event series to bring you highly relevant topics facing the public sector.
• Going digital-by-default to make our events more accessible.
• Continuing to offer in-person networking events, connecting you with forwardfocused ideas and people.
• Strengthening our voice in the media to offer our independent opinion on matters critical to the public sector.
We have a new set of clothes, but our heart and hands remain firmly focused on providing a community of learning and practice about public service. Come and join us – sign up at www.hapaipublic.org.nz.
Hāpai Public is about supporting a community of public sector professionals to make connections, upskill, and stay informed.
Survivor syndrome in public sector restructuring
Kim Humlicek and Geoff Plimmer look at what can be done to address the impact of redundancies on those left within an organisation after restructuring –the “survivors”.
AUTHORS
Kim Humlicek
Associate Professor Geoff Plimmer
With thousands of public sector roles cut in 2024, organisations now face the critical challenge of supporting their remaining staff. While significant attention naturally focuses on staff leaving, the impact on remaining employees, sometimes called “survivors”, can profoundly affect both individuals and organisations. During these times, decisionmaking often becomes concentrated at senior levels, stifling local innovation. Staff may
become change-resistant, often in response to poorly thought through change proposals and a failure by people leaders to listen to concerns. Information sharing typically decreases as people focus on protecting their positions. Both staff and the wider organisation default to familiar routines rather than take risks or collaborate.
These survivors frequently experience what’s known as survivor syndrome, a range of psychological challenges that can undermine morale, productivity, and the core values of public service. The reactions from survivors can include guilt about keeping their jobs, anxiety about future security, and uncertainty about new responsibilities. In the public sector, where staff are often driven by a strong sense of duty and public service, their reactions can be particularly complex as the job is often more than just a pay cheque, but a way to serve the community.
Immediate challenges
Public sector organisations face several pressing issues when supporting remaining staff.
1. Workload management: As teams shrink, remaining staff often inherit additional responsibilities without adequate resources or preparation.
2. Team cohesion: Restructuring often
The Recovery (Tertiary Interventions)
Managing the transition (Secondary Interventions)
• Managing Workloads
• Support from Colleagues
• Addressing Psychological Contract Breaches
Prevention where possible (Primary Interventions)
• Open Communication and Psychological Contract Redefinition
• Training for People Leaders
• Inclusive Decision-Making
• Individual Support and Development
• Rebuilding Work Culture
• Rebuilding the Psychological Contract
breaks up established teams and working relationships. Rebuilding these connections while maintaining service delivery requires careful attention.
3. Career uncertainty: Survivors may fear further job cuts, affecting their engagement and motivation.
4. Service continuity: Core public services must be maintained while teams adjust to new structures and responsibilities. This often creates tension between immediate operational needs and longer-term capability building.
5. Knowledge transfer: Critical institutional knowledge needs to be captured before departing staff leave. This is particularly crucial in specialised policy areas or longrunning programmes.
External pressures intensify the challenge
Public sector restructuring occurs within a complex external environment that can intensify survivor syndrome. Government priorities shift with political changes, creating
ongoing uncertainty about job security and organisational direction. This uncertainty is amplified by media attention and public scrutiny, where remaining staff often feel pressure to justify their roles and people leaders needing to justify the restructuring itself.
Financial constraints frequently limit the support available (eg, mental health support, training, and professional development support) during these transitions, while public expectations for service quality remain unchanged or even increase. Remaining staff must maintain high levels of service delivery and responsiveness despite reduced resources and disrupted teams.
Practical solutions
Managing survivor syndrome requires a structured approach. The public health model offers a useful framework (see p10), which includes primary, secondary, and tertiary interventions to address the issue at different stages of the restructuring process.
Primary interventions focus on people leaders helping the prevention of survivor syndrome ie, emphasising open communication through regular team updates, clear workload prioritisation systems, comprehensive people leader training, and inclusive decision-making. These measures help to reduce anxiety, build trust, and provide a sense of ownership during restructuring. Secondary interventions for people leaders involve addressing the transition, focusing on practical workload management to prevent burnout, and peer support systems for emotional wellbeing. It’s also important for people leaders to remedy any breaches of the psychological contract, with transparent explanations and clear, achievable goals that acknowledge the changed circumstances to help teams adjust to new realities.
Tertiary interventions are about people leaders supporting long-term recovery through targeted career development and progression pathways. This encompasses building crossteam collaboration opportunities, involving
IMAGE BY FREEPIK
employees in redefining organisational goals and values, and establishing regular feedback mechanisms to identify emerging issues.
These strategies aim to help employees adapt, regain purpose, and maintain a positive organisational culture.
Common challenges include working with limited resources, maintaining momentum beyond the initial response, and balancing immediate operational needs with longer-term capability building. Success requires sustained commitment from leadership and regular adjustment of support measures based on staff feedback. It is crucial, however, to ensure ongoing support for employee wellbeing beyond the immediate crisis.
Kim Humlicek is an HR professional and is studying Psychology and Human Resources at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington.
Geoff Plimmer is an Associate Professor at the School of Management, Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington, where he teaches and researches public sector capability.
WHAT “SURVIVORS” CAN DO TO REMAIN RESILIENT IN THEIR CAREERS
1. Protect your battery
Restructures can be emotionally and mentally draining. Pay attention to your energy levels every day. On days when your tasks energise you, take note – this might reveal a new career path or growth opportunity. On tougher days, focus on recharging your battery by spending time with supportive friends, pursuing your favourite hobbies, or reflecting on the positives still in your life. Protecting your wellbeing in this way can help you to more easily get through the days, weeks, and months ahead.
2. Extend your connections
Restructures often bring opportunities to meet new people. Stay connected with former co-workers (you might be inspired by how their careers evolve) and proactively build new relationships within the restructured team. A strong network can be energising and might even help to open unexpected doors for your career in the future.
3. Build your adaptability
Flexibility is key during times of change. Being open to new roles, responsibilities, and ways of working signals to your employer that you
can handle transitions like this positively. Since change is inevitable in life and work, showcasing your ability to stay curious and positive during this time can help to position you as a valuable member of the team.
4. Polish your brand
Take this time to sharpen your skills. Explore online courses or training programmes that align with your career goals, engage with professional networks, and above all, update your CV. These simple actions can boost your confidence and ensure you’re prepared for any future challenges.
5. Trust your supporters
If you notice that your mental health takes a tumble (and your inner voice is bringing you constantly negative news) make time to lean into the supportive people in your life. This might include your trusted friends, your company Employee Assistance Programme (EAP) programme or Mental Health First Aid team, your doctor or a national Healthline like the team at 1737 in New Zealand. Remember that it’s perfectly normal to be feeling excited, uncomfortable, restless, nervous, angry, frustrated, and energised.
Kathryn Jackson is a leadership coach with a reputation for positively disrupting the way we navigate workplace challenges. She is the author of several books including Resilience at Work: Practical Tools for Career Success, a finalist for Best International Business Book (London), and the Australian Career Book Awards (Melbourne), and the designer of the awardwinning programme, The Great Recharge www.careerbalance.co.nz
Measuring what matters for non-profit organisations
Barry Knight, Adviser to the Global Fund for Community Foundations, explains why the current Social Return on Investment (SROI) methodology for non-profit organisations requires reform in order to meet standards of “inclusive rigour” and encourage the development of a healthy civil society.
AUTHOR Dr Barry Knight
In mathematics, the number 42 has many interesting properties. It is a pronic number, an abundant number, a practical number, an admirable number, and a Catalan number. For science fiction novelist Douglas Adams in The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, it is “the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything”. This conclusion emerged as the sole finding from 7.5 million years’ work by an enormous computer called Deep Thought. However, after even deeper thought, the computer admitted that the answer might be meaningless because the beings who instructed it never understood the question.
You may be wondering what this has to do with measuring the value of non-profit organisations in Aotearoa New Zealand. This is because the Social Return on Investment (SROI) evaluation methodology used by government has a similar problem. A single ratio to measure added value without publishing the algorithm behind it means there is no way of checking what the question is. How do we check the results against underlying reality or work out the meaning of the answer?
A single ratio to measure added value without publishing the algorithm behind it means there is no way of checking what the question is.
GDP should not be used as a proxy for societal wellbeing.
The use of simple indicators measured from the top-down is a common cause of failure in government programmes. In Seeing Like a State, James C. Scott explains that such programmes tend to disregard the values, desires, and objections of local people and lead to “an incapacitated civil society” (p.5). It is small wonder that people across the world have lost trust in their governments.
Single indicators can be misleading and harmful
Using a single indicator to measure a complex system commonly produces misleading results. For example, when competition between hospitals was introduced in the British health system, a study evaluated the effects on waiting times for admission, and found significantly positive results. However, it also found that quality-of-care deteriorated and deaths following emergency admissions increased.
To take another example, the reliance on Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to measure economic performance has produced a highly distorted world. Invented in 1934 by Simon Kuznets as an aggregate measure of economic output, the 1944 Bretton Woods conference held to plan peace decided that GDP should guide economic development across the world. However, as Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz has pointed out, GDP takes no account of environmental degradation, resource depletion or the rise of inequality – all factors that have driven the current polycrisis. Kuznets himself understood these limitations and warned that
The use of simple indicators measured from the top-down is a common cause of failure in government programmes.
Consultations with civil society
Findings from my visit to Aotearoa New Zealand suggest that the Agency, with its single measure of social return on investment, is reproducing these mistakes. In 13 different talks and group sessions, participants consistently disliked the approach because, by treating development processes as a function of financial transactions, there is almost no effort to capture the substance, complexity and nuances of the work.
International confirmation
Findings in Aotearoa New Zealand mirror those of a major international consultation on Measuring what matters. This consultation found a gap between what funders require and what people doing the work think is important. While funders typically use linear logic models that compare inputs and outputs on narrow indicators, local people want to see a holistic and collaborative approach that accommodates visions of community, respects nature, supports change, delivers social justice, and addresses the wellbeing of communities who live on the edges.
The measurement system people want How can we build a measurement system that people want that delivers good results? The answer is a hermeneutical framework that includes topics to be studied; who is to be involved; methods used; opportunities for learning; pathways to better performance; and benefits to society.
In developing the framework, it is important to understand that society is an unpredictable ecosystem that cannot be fully understood or controlled. There are no magic interventions.
The best hope is to influence systems, or – in the words of Donella Meadows – “learn to dance with them”.
This means that our approach must be humble and provisional. Modern physics teaches that “objective detachment” is impossible, and we must embrace “disciplined subjectivity”. As physicist Fritjof Capra puts it in The Turning Point:
Quantum theory has changed the classical view of science considerably by revealing the crucial role of the observer’s consciousness in the process of observation and thus invalidating the idea of an objective view of nature (p.416).
This means that to reach “inclusive rigour” we must use all our faculties – intellectual, imaginative, aesthetic, moral, emotional, somatic, spiritual, and relational, and enter into people-based enquiries. As anthropologist Tim Ingold in Anthropology – why it matters puts it:
All study calls for observation, but in anthropology we observe not by objectifying others but by paying attention to them, watching what they do and listening to what they say. We study with people, rather than making studies of them.
Practice
A useful text that both addresses these concerns and fosters the development of civil society is Michael Quinn Patton’s Developmental Evaluation). This takes account of issues of uncertainty, nonlinearity, emergence, and shows how measurement can drive effective development.
The Global Fund for Community Foundations has learned much from this approach. In its work as a grassroots grantmaker, it combines quantitative and qualitative data analysis with a participative approach so that the emerging field of community philanthropy can learn from different experiences across the world. Quantitative data is analysed statistically using multivariate techniques such as factor analysis and hierarchical multiple regression analysis. Qualitative data takes pride of place and organisations in receipt of grants are encouraged to report honest stories of their progress – including achievements and hurdles in a learning community.
This process has yielded impressive results. Over 15 years of learning, a narrative has emerged on what makes for successful communities across different cultures. Three overlapping factors are involved:
• Assets (resources that communities have, such as money, skills, and experience).
• Capacities (local people working together to achieve their goals).
• Trust (relationships that build harmony).
Grant partners show remarkable creativity in measuring their work. One particularly significant innovation has emerged from Indonesia for Humanity, which has invented a new word based on local etymology called “Pemakna”. This means “the act of giving meaning”. With a long-term focus on people-led change, the approach is:
A reciprocal process of dialogue that builds a contextual understanding, provides affirming recognition and engages with critical-constructive observations regarding efforts initiated by partner organisations and their respective communities with the overall intention of strengthening, in reflective and strategic ways, the potential of success for achieving transformative change by social movements.
This focus on meaning, which is almost completely overlooked by the monitoring and evaluation industry, bridges the epistemological gap identified by Tim Ingold:
At no time in history has so much knowledge been married to so little wisdom.
Consider what the world would look like if we focused more on the question “What gives life meaning?” Would the answer be 42?
Barry Knight is Adviser for the Global Fund for Community Foundations. He is a social scientist who has worked for the UK Government, held positions at Cambridge University, and advised international foundations. Barry takes a particular interest in the issue of measurement in social science and was honoured with a doctorate from Staffordshire University for his work on combining statistical, qualitative, and participatory methods of research that led to “excellence in research on poverty”.
“At no time in history has so much knowledge been married to so little wisdom.”
Build trust to realise the promises of AI
Amy Dove and Athira Nair at Deloitte outline how building trust in AI governance is vital for New Zealand’s public sector to innovate responsibly at speed.
AUTHORS
Amy Dove
So far this year, the New Zealand public sector has made concrete steps to increase Artificial Intelligence (AI) use with the release of the Public Service AI Framework and the Responsible AI Guidance for the Public Service: GenAI.
In July 2024, the AI Blueprint for Aotearoa New Zealand released by the AI Forum made the call to action that “in five years it will be too late to start this journey. We will have lost the advantage our globally valuable assets provide. We need to start NOW and at SPEED” (AI Forum New Zealand, 2024, p.8). To achieve that speed, we need to trust the AI we are adopting. This article explores how agencies can build AI trust through governance.
What we know
AI has the potential to significantly transform the public sector, offering a major opportunity to enhance productivity and improve public service delivery. The government sees this opportunity – a higher level of trust in AI outputs reported by 56 per cent of public sector organisations lead to increased usage of AI solutions (54 per cent) and a faster deployment (48 per cent) as outlined in a Deloitte Asia Pacific report, ‘AI at a crossroads: Building trust as the path to scale’.
Trust goes beyond the technology itself, encompassing the processes and people behind its development and implementation. Ensuring that AI is deployed responsibly and transparently is key to unlocking its full potential in the public sector.
Build trust with effective governance Trust is fundamental for a successful adoption of AI, particularly in the public sector. The Deloitte report highlights that 72 per cent of public sector organisations are ‘in progress’, while only 10 per cent are ‘ready’ for Trustworthy AI (referring to AI systems that are designed to be transparent, robust and
respectful of data privacy). This result highlights the significant room for improvement in AI governance.
“Trust isn’t just a nice-to-have, it is essential for AI to be embraced and used to its full potential.”
Deloitte’s Trustworthy AI framework identifies seven dimensions necessary for organisations to have trust in their AI solutions. The principles of Trustworthy AI must also be guided by Te Tiriti o Waitangi (the Treaty of Waitangi) principles and underpinned by te ao Māori values, especially in the public sector.
Specific actions for public sector organisations
AI cannot and should not be a “black box”, unknowable tool. AI should be implemented, used, and monitored by humans. There are specific actions organisations can take to build trust and move at pace on their AI journey.
1. Prioritise AI governance to realise returns from AI: Clear, well-defined governance processes streamline the path to implementation. When everyone knows the process and their role, organisations can reach production (and productivity) faster.
2. Invest in people and skills: Education and capability development across the organisation will create trust and confidence in the tools and better alignment of risk mitigation activities to specific implementations.
3. Communicate AI readiness across the organisation: Effective communication about an AI strategy reduces misunderstandings, accelerates decision-making, and increases overall effectiveness by helping everyone to work toward common goals.
By embedding trust in every element of their AI strategy, from governance to risk management and employee training, public sector organisations can foster greater confidence in AI, ensuring its sustainable, responsible, and impactful use for the public good.
“In five years it will be too late to start this journey [ ... ] We need to start NOW and at SPEED.”
Athira Nair
Overcoming challenges and misconceptions
Overcoming challenges and misconceptions in AI implementation requires a clear understanding of both its potential and limitations.
1. Balancing innovation with risk: Many organisations fear that rigorous risk controls could slow down AI progress. However, a well-structured risk management framework is essential for enabling public sector organisations to grow safely and responsibly in their AI journey. Setting guardrails and continuously assessing risks will ensure AI development progresses in the organisation without compromising safety.
2. Addressing over-confidence: AI offers many benefits, but organisations must recognise the need for detailed understanding and ongoing improvement in AI governance. This includes not only developing systems that work but also ensuring that they evolve with emerging technologies and regulatory standards. If AI governance procedures are in place but are not effectively implemented, understood by staff, or well-tailored to the business context and strategy, trustworthy AI outcomes may not be achieved.
Looking ahead
Building trust in AI is crucial for the public sector to unlock its potential and mitigate risks.
Frameworks such as Deloitte’s AI Governance Maturity Index and the New Zealand Public Service AI Framework provide valuable roadmaps, emphasising clear policies, ethical guidelines, and effective risk management to ensure AI is transparent, secure, and accountable. Central to these frameworks are human-centred values such as privacy, data ethics, and human oversight, which are essential for maintaining public trust.
Prioritising AI governance, risk management, and education will help public sector organisations lead the way toward a future where AI drives innovation and productivity.
Amy Dove is a forensic partner at Deloitte with over 25 years of experience in legal technology and analytics. She is Deloitte’s Trustworthy AI Lead in Aotearoa New Zealand and leads the Pasifika Services Group – Pås Peau. She leads teams supporting some of New Zealand’s largest organisations to manage data and respond to litigation and regulatory disclosure requests. She advises clients and
frequently speaks on safe, ethical, responsible and trustworthy Artificial Intelligence use and implementation. She is an Executive Council member of the
Forum.
Athira Krishnakumar Nair is a Senior Consultant at Deloitte with a passion for data science and solving business challenges through datadriven insights. She specialises in data analysis, dashboard development, and is an active member of the Trustworthy AI group.. Holding a Master’s in Statistics and Data Science, Athira has a deep understanding of analytics and modelling. Her goal is to help businesses unlock the full potential of AI and data through accurate, high-quality solutions that foster growth.
AI cannot and should not be a “black box”, unknowable tool. AI should be implemented, used, and monitored by humans.
How New Zealand buys
Barbara Allen, Associate Professor in Public Management and Policy at the School of Government Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington, outlines how government purchases goods and services, and questions whether recent reforms will serve to improve public procurement performance.
AUTHOR
Associate Professor
Barbara Allen
Public procurement. Bear with me as you say, ‘Seriously, what? This article is about procurement?’ Indeed it is. Keep reading.
Did you know that:
1. New Zealand government agencies’ spend was approximately $51.5 billion in 2023/24.
2. In OECD countries, public procurement accounts for about 13 per cent of GDP.
3. New Zealand has an international reputation for solid procurement but also suffers from considerable ‘conflict of interest’ issues.
4. Strategic Procurement is offered in the Masters of Public Policy/Masters of Public Management at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington.
If none of that is news or impresses you, think about what is currently happening in the United States and how lack of oversight will ensure only the richest companies and individuals profit in the next few years, and the distress caused by contracts cancelled without due process.
There is much complaining generally about procurement processes such as ‘they are too slow’, ‘too bureaucratic’, ‘they stifle innovation’, and ‘they shut out small to medium-sized enterprises’. However, the processes are critical to ensuring accountability for public money. Procurement certainly has much to improve, in all countries, yet effective procurement is about getting the balance right between cost and impact. Both public value and social impact are also found in excellent procurement.
This short article has two objectives. First, the article provides some key information about public procurement in New Zealand, and second, the article questions the extent to which recent reforms and policy changes will serve to improve overall public procurement performance.
What is procurement?
If you are new to this topic, let’s define public procurement. The New Zealand government’s definition of procurement is:
The term ‘procurement’ covers all aspects of acquiring and delivering goods, services and works (refurbishment and new construction).
Procurement starts with identifying the need and finishes with either the end of a service contract or the end of the useful life and disposal of the asset. As the procurement rules themselves say, much of the procurement focus is on sourcing (the front end), but equally important is the contract management and disposal activities, which are often overlooked for the excitement of the next big project.
Government buys a lot. From the recently acquired P-8 Poseidon aircraft to Community Connection Service, from systems to map productive land to pens for public employees – most things you can think of and many you cannot – the government probably buys them.
We’ve come a long way from the days when all anyone thought about when they heard the word procurement, was invoices (and cue rolled eyes). That’s still important, of course, but procurement is finally recognised as a strategic activity that can make or break an organisation. Make no mistake, it can. From an individual public official’s point of view, nearly every public servant is involved in procurement and contracting at some point in their career, whether they are making choices about where money will be spent and in what mode of delivery (through a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) or maybe commissioning health services), arranging contracts, and dealing with market issues or suppliers.
We usually only hear about procurement when something appears to have gone wrong, such as news stories about the iReX ferry procurement, Gumboot Friday, Transmission Gully or Serco prisons. Large projects are almost always highly political – this is fundamentally a part of public procurement because there are huge sums involved, significant interests from many directions and a lot to gain or lose for individuals and companies, as well as the sponsoring politicians. In the middle of it all are the relationships between the public sector, the private sector, and often the voluntary and community sector; the messy middle where policy meets implementation.
Procurement is a strategic activity that can make or break an organisation. Make no mistake, it can.
IMAGE BY KATEMANGOSTAR ON FREEPIK
New Zealand’s procurement policy is not a single policy. It is made up of principles, regulations in the form of rules, procedures, and best practice guidelines, all of which sit under an umbrella of trade agreements and domestic law. With no explicit procurement law, there are still a range of relevant laws that must be followed. These include commercial law legislation (eg, Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017, Construction Contracts Act 2002), public law legislation such as the Public Service Act 2020, Public Finance Act 1989; sector-specific legislation such as the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Act 2000, and of course the Treaty of Waitangi obligations in legislation such as Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987.
Soft regulation, in the form of the Government Procurement Rules, is the main source of direction for all procurement in New Zealand. Public Service departments and State Services (1 – innermost circle) are ‘required’ to apply the rules, State Services (2 – next level out) are ‘expected’ to apply the rules, and the wider State Sector and Public Sector are ‘encouraged’ to apply the rules. The Rules constitute good practice for the entire public sector but there is varied capability in terms of implementation beyond pure cost objectives. As a member of the World Trade Organisation, Agreement on Government Procurement, and a myriad of other trade agreements, New Zealand operates in a complex global environment where the fundamental principles of non-discrimination and transparency provide the foundations for our involvement in the world economy.
Recent reforms
The reform programme ‘Procurement for the Future’ was announced in 2022 and included three pillars: Unlocking value, Working together, and Data and transparency. This direction supported a significant incremental work programme involving:
- reviewing the Procurement Rules (new version due imminently)
- a focus on Broader Outcomes, a target-based approach with priority outcomes such as New Zealand business access to government procurement, and
- supporting the transition to a net zero emissions economy (procurement can be used to drive positive societal
Large projects are almost always highly political [ ... ] with huge sums involved [ ... ] and a lot to gain or lose for individuals and companies.
change, such as requiring contractors to meet various environmental and social conditions).
Broader Outcomes was New Zealand’s way of relatively gently levering procurement to drive positive social change, such as weighting tenders in such a way as to reward organisations that are able to show local employment outcomes. This kind of policy, implemented through tenders and contracts is now common around the world. In some places like the European Union (EU), sustainability is directly embedded in EU tenders with overarching directives ‘requiring’ it by law.
Progressive procurement policy was specifically about ensuring that 8 per cent (initially 5 per cent) of agencies’ annual contracts were with Māori businesses. The current Coalition government rescinded that policy entirely and moved towards a policy that would not include any equity-based or preferential procurement approaches.
The Public Service Act 2020 defines the public service principles to include ‘open government’. New Zealand is signed up to the Open Government Partnership (OGP), an international agreement by governments to
create greater transparency, increase civic participation, and use new technologies to make their governments more open, effective, and accountable.
New Zealand’s Fourth National Action Plan included Commitment Six, ‘Improve Government Procurement Transparency’. This has involved improvement to the Government Electronic Tender Services (GETS) to better capture spend data, establishing a data governance framework eventually leading to integrated data systems, and developing a digital data platform moving towards full alignment with the Open Contracting Data Standard. The ‘Ready Buy’ tool is up and functioning, helping those who need to purchase get the information they need more quickly. As in many areas of procurement, evaluation of this new tool will be needed in terms of who is using it, how, and whether it is really meeting its objectives of making departmental procurement easier. From the supplier side, the Department of Internal Affairs’ (DIA) marketplace was established to assist New Zealand and international businesses more easily offer their products and services directly to New Zealand government agencies.
Academics at Victoria University are currently
looking at the Marketplace in terms of whether it is meeting its original objectives. Both tools are part of the wider reform that is hoped to make procurement easier for all. The incremental improvements to GETS are positive; however, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) data is only as good as the agencies provide. New Zealand’s procurement system has little to compel good or timely reporting.
Room for improvement
Despite there being many minor changes to the ecosystem of public procurement in the last five or six years, changes to procurement policy and uncertainty as to the speed of data governance improvements mean that it is still very difficult to fully grasp how well public money is spent through the strategic use of procurement in New Zealand. The system of oversight and integrity that includes the Controller and Auditor-General, the
[ ... ] it is still very difficult to fully grasp how well public money is spent through the strategic use of procurement in New Zealand.
Procurement System Lead (MBIE), the Public Service Commission, the Ombudsman, the Department of Internal Affairs, and the Serious Fraud Office has a critical role to play in ensuring that public money is spent well. This system will need to be more proactive than ever in ensuring public value is pursued through a balance between efficient public spending and levering social value through intelligent strategic procurement.
Given that New Zealand taxpayers will be covering contract break fees and sunk costs spent on iReX of at least $300 million, getting procurement right is not only good for society, but just good business.
Barbara Allen is Deputy Head of School and Associate Professor in Public Management and Policy at the School of Government. She is an international expert in public procurement and public contracting, with sub-specialties in performance and digital government. Barbara researches vexing questions around public spending, public procurement, performance improvement, and digital transformation.
Let our team help you BUILD YOUR TEAM
AoG Provider and Recruitment
When building a team, it’s important to get three things right: People, Skills and Dynamics.
The Johnson Group has worked across the public sector since 2005. A member of the All of Government Recruitment Panel and regarded for our expertise in public sector recruitment, our consultants are specialists who understand the very specific skill sets required of public sector professionals as well as the intricacies of the Wellington market
We know our candidates well - from what drives or interests them to how they fit into your team to deliver excellent outcomes
Michelle Thomas Senior Consultant Permanent Marissa Taylor Principal Consultant
Clive Horne Managing Consultant Permanent
James Atkin Principal Consultant Contracting
Learning to work with a new government
Hāpai Public New Professionals’ Co-chair Zaira Najam reviews one of Hāpai Public’s recent webinars: Learning to work with a new government.
This webinar focuses on how public servants can navigate the challenges of working with a new government. It features two distinguished speakers – Sir Bill English, former Prime Minister, and Rebecca Kitteridge, Deputy Public Service Commissioner. The session provides valuable insights through offering both ministerial and public service perspectives. The presenters lay out some of the core principles for us to learn from in an engaging way, garnered from their hard-earned experience.
Sir Bill shares personal anecdotes from his extensive political career, reflecting on how public servants manage the emotional and professional tensions that arise when a new government takes office. He highlights key moments of policy change he experienced, which he says were challenging at the time, such as the dismantling of the Health Funding Authority that he established. Sir Bill emphasises the importance of professionalism in the face of public service policy shifts.
Sir Bill points out that the public sees the Government of the day and public servants as one entity, a decision-making machine. After a change of government, it is about how quickly public servants get around issues, and resolve uncertainties so that the next investment decision can be made. The public is concerned about how public servants feel about the Government. As Sir Bill says, the role of a public servant is as important as the role of a politician.
Rebecca Kitteridge, drawing from her vast experience in the Public Service, discusses the importance of public servants maintaining their political neutrality. She shares stories of transitioning through government changes, including the Mixed-Member Proportional
(MMP) shift in 1997 and the 2008 changeover to the John Key-led government. Rebecca underscores the importance of the public service’s impartiality, noting that it is essential for building trust across political lines and ensuring the smooth functioning of government, regardless of its political ideology.
She reflects on the words of a former secretary of the Cabinet made during the time of the first MMP government, “I expect you to apply exactly the same amount of professionalism and proactive support across both of those parties.” Rebecca highlighted this political neutrality as a fundamental tenet for all public servants. She describes her role – indeed that of any public servant – as being about advising on, and then implementing, the policies of the Government of the day.
Rebecca highlights some of the fundamentals of the Public Service:
1. Adapting to a newly elected Government is part of our democratic cycle.
2. The Public Service is part of the Executive, and our work is directed by the Government of the day. By doing our best to implement their policies, we give life to the will of the people.
3. We can and we should give free and frank advice, but we have no mandate to push our own political agenda in opposition to the Government of the day.
Rebecca also offers reflections to those who are struggling with adjusting to the direction of a new Government.
First, it’s normal to give free and frank advice that gets rejected.
Second, if you are thinking it’s a matter of your own personal integrity, what I suggest you do is just take a step back, because by implementing the policies of the Government of the day, you show respect for democracy, for the will of the people, and you support the importance of an apolitical public service, which is absolute gold.
Regarding finding the balance between responsiveness to the minister’s immediate objectives and the public service representing long-term interests, Rebecca highlights the
By implementing the policies of the Government of the day, you show respect for democracy, for the will of the people, and you support the importance of an apolitical public service, which is absolute gold.
AUTHOR Zaira Najam
The public sees the Government of the day and public servants as one entity, a decision-making machine.
importance of the stewardship principle of the Public Service, saying we always need to be mindful of our longer-term responsibilities to the country. It is imperative that the longer-term implications of policies are properly explored when they are being considered and drawn to the attention of the Government. However, making sure that they are evidence-based and well-researched.
Sir Bill is critical of the Public Service for not learning – but rather thinking of itself as a vast reservoir of permanent knowledge. “You also need a public service that doesn’t keep forgetting what it knew.”
Both speakers stress that adapting to a new Government is a normal and essential part of the democratic process. Public servants must implement Government policies while providing honest and politically neutral advice. This commitment to professionalism will ensure the integrity and continuity of New Zealand’s Public Service, fostering trust with the public and the politicians they have elected.
You can watch the full webinar here
Zaira Najam, Co-chair of the Hāpai Public New Professionals Network, holds a background in Economics. She came to Aotearoa New Zealand from Pakistan to pursue her PhD at the University of Waikato and was captivated by the beauty of Aotearoa New Zealand. She made a heartfelt decision to stay in New Zealand and contribute to the public sector, striving to enhance the lives of people in Aotearoa New Zealand. With a fervour for community development and a strong advocacy for equal rights, her commitment extends beyond professional expertise, embodying a genuine passion for fostering inclusive growth and social justice.
“You also need a public service that doesn’t keep forgetting what it knew.”
SIR BILL ENGLISH AND REBECCA KITTERIDGE SPEAKING AT THE RECENT WEBINAR: LEARNING TO WORK WITH A NEW GOVERNMENT
ACC provides rongoā Māori services for all injured New Zealanders
Sally Champion finds out more about this ACC service, which recently received a Te Hāpai Hapori Spirit of Service Award from Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission.
AUTHOR Sally Champion
Māori and non-Māori New Zealanders are increasingly using Accident Compensation Corporation’s (ACC’s) rongoā Māori service and finding the holistic approach effective for rehabilitation.
Rongoā Māori incorporates a kaupapa Māori approach to wellbeing that includes ā-tinana (physical), ā-wairua (spiritual), ā-hinengaro (mental and emotional), and ā-whānau (family and social) aspects.
Eldon Paea, ACC Head of Māori Health Services, says, “Injury often involves trauma, stress, and changing circumstances for families and communities. Addressing these issues
through rongoā helps get people in balance and provides a strong platform for healing.”
He says, “Services are now provided by more than 200 accredited rongoā practitioners from Kaitāia to Rakiura (Stewart Island) who work in rural and urban areas. Since services started in June 2020 the number of practitioners has grown steadily.”
“Rongoā can stand alone or be combined with modern medical treatments. Often practitioners will encourage their clients to use other treatments as well to enhance healing and prevent future health issues.”
Why the rongoā Māori service was introduced
“It was identified that Māori, when injured, were proportionally [to the rest of the population] using ACC services less. It was obvious there were issues of equity and we needed to find out what was needed,” says Eldon.
“We surveyed Māori communities in 2019 about what services they wanted ACC to provide, and overwhelmingly they asked for services that reflected tikanga Māori.”
“We listened and then we worked to operationalise the rongoā Māori service.” While the service was initially set up in response to this request by Māori communities, the service is available to everyone.
The process to operationalise the rongoā Māori service
Eldon says the development of the rongoā Māori service comes from the knowledge held
RONGOĀ MĀORI IS TRADITIONAL MĀORI HEALING. IT INCLUDES MIRIMIRI AND ROMIROMI (BODYWORK), WHITIWHITI KŌRERO (SUPPORT AND ADVICE) AND KARAKIA (PRAYER).
within Māori communities by tohunga rongoā (healers who use traditional Māori medicine to treat illnesses and injuries).
“To help us engage with Māori communities and practitioners we set up a group of tohunga (rongoā experts) and a kaumātua as our ACC Rongoā Māori Advisory panel.
“We ask the panel questions to steer the service into the future and discuss issues to keep our work on track.
“We also work with other government agencies and organisations who provide rongoā Māori services like Te Puni Kōkiri, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Social Development, Corrections and the Cancer Society.”
Markers of success and remaining challenges
Eldon says, “Our rongoā Māori service has supported over 13,500 clients and currently 43 per cent of service users are non-Māori New Zealanders.
The latest ACC-managed client survey shows that 85 per cent of respondents who used the rongoā Māori service had high levels of satisfaction. The survey also showed that 82 per cent of respondents found the service was effective in supporting their recovery goals, and 96 per cent of respondents who have used the service say they would use it again. ‘Managed clients’ are clients that have received entitlement payments from ACC recently and are managed by one of the client recovery teams.
“We still have more work to do to bring more Māori to ACC when they are injured,” says Eldon. “That work includes improving the range of options available, lifting their experience and
delivering better outcomes for whānau.”
Māori ACC claim numbers decreased significantly during the Covid-19 impacted period and are yet to fully recover to the preCovid-19 levels, despite rongoā being created as an option.
“Client satisfaction is our most important marker of success,” says Eldon. “But of course, a big part of our work is to promote the existence of the service and an understanding of it, so in May 2024 we held our first ACC Rongoā Māori Conference.
“Our Advisory panel guided us through the journey, and we brought together over 400 people in Rotorua – medical practitioners and rongoā Māori practitioners. Places sold out very quickly and there was a lot of interest in the work of our practitioners.
“One general practice chief executive told me that she was going to ask her staff to learn about rongoā and see if they could make rongoā Māori services available to patients through their local practice.”
Last September the ACC Māori Health team was recognised by Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission for setting up their rongoā Māori service country-wide. They won an award, called Te Tohu mō Whai Ratonga | Māori Crown Award, for their services to advancing equity for injured Māori and upholding Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
Eldon says, “The award was a huge honour for our team and the many people who helped us build our rongoā Māori service.
“All cultures and ethnicities in New Zealand have ways of looking after their own. I’m very
ELDON PAEA, HEAD OF MĀORI HEALTH PARTNERSHIPS SAYS: “OFFERING RONGOĀ AS A REHABILITATION SERVICE IS PART OF OUR CONTINUING EFFORTS TO DELIVER EQUITY FOR MĀORI.”
interested to look into those in the future, to see how we could incorporate a range of rehabilitation approaches to help injured New Zealanders regain and maintain their wellness.”
Te Hāpai Hapori Spirit of Service Awards recognise initiatives that deliver great outcomes for New Zealand and New Zealanders. Two categories also recognise exceptional individuals. Entries for this year’s awards close on 23 May. Visit Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission website for more information.
Sally Champion worked in communications in the public service and the voluntary sector for over 20 years, primarily in social service areas. She now works as a freelance writer on a parttime basis.
ACC HAS BEEN OFFERING RONGOĀ MĀORI AS AN OPTION IN PEOPLE’S RECOVERY SINCE JUNE 2020, AND THE GROWTH IN THAT TIME HAS BEEN SIGNIFICANT.
Inside New Zealand’s Honours Unit
From community heroes to national icons, the team behind New Zealand’s Royal Honours system plays a crucial role in recognising exceptional citizens. Editor Kathy Young talks to those responsible for administering one of the nation’s most prestigious recognition programmes.
AUTHOR Kathy Young
Sitting within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet lies a small team with a hefty responsibility: managing New Zealand’s Royal Honours system. This dedicated unit, reporting to the Deputy Secretary of the Cabinet (Constitutional and Honours), serves as the guardian of a long-lasting tradition.
“In its most simple terms, our honours system is a formal way for New Zealand to say thanks to those who have served and those who have achieved,” explains David Williams, Senior Advisor Honours. “Such recognition enlivens and enriches our society.”
A Kiwi tradition
While the current system proudly reflects New Zealand’s identity, it wasn’t always this way. Starting in 1848, New Zealand initially shared the British-based honours system, until 1995 when we adopted our own Honours.
A comprehensive review in 1995 marked a turning point, establishing a range of distinctly New Zealand Honours, including the New Zealand Order of Merit and the New Zealand Bravery and Gallantry Awards. These replaced all British honours, creating a system that more accurately represents our nation’s values and identity. Honours lists are issued on the occasion of the New Year, the King’s Birthday and in Special Lists (eg, for Gallantry and Bravery Awards), as required.
Behind the scenes
The Honours Unit’s work goes far beyond administration. The team processes between 800 to 1,000 nominations annually, preparing detailed citations for each candidate. They provide policy advice to the Prime Minister, manage the Cabinet Appointments and Honours Committee process, and coordinate with Government House for investiture ceremonies.
David shares a particularly moving example of his work: “My favourite New Zealand Royal Honour is the King’s Service Order. An example that always stands out for me is that of a husband and wife honoured a few years ago for having been foster carers for over 24 years, providing care for 11 children with high and complex needs. Those are the sorts of people I think of as the ‘heartland-heroes’ of the honours lists.”
The selection process: balancing merit and diversity
The selection process is rigorous and confidential. For each regular honours list, the Cabinet Appointments and Honours Committee meets over 3-4 weeks to consider
SENIOR ADVISOR HONOURS DAVID WILLIAMS (RIGHT) AND COLLEAGUE SENIOR ADVISOR HONOURS GRIFFEN RITCHIE (LEFT)
hundreds of nominations. Only about 190 make it onto each list.
Anyone can nominate a person; nominations should be made while the nominee is still active in their field. They require at least two letters from people other than the nominator who can provide further information about the nominee’s contributions and achievements and who support the nominee receiving a New Zealand Royal Honour.
“Nominators are asked to describe what is special about the nominee’s achievements and what they have done to deserve an honour – to tell the story of how they have made a difference in their community or field of work,” says David.
The committee evaluates contributions across multiple dimensions: innovation, outstanding achievement, selfless voluntary service, and improvement of others’ lives.
A changing face of recognition
Recent years have shown promising progress in recognising New Zealand’s diverse communities, particularly in gender representation. The 2018 Queen’s Birthday list achieved 57 per cent women across all levels of honour, marking a significant milestone in the year that celebrated 125 years of Women’s Suffrage. This positive trend continues, with recent lists maintaining healthy gender balance.
“In its most simple terms, our honours system is a formal way for New Zealand to say thanks to those who have served and those who have achieved.”
OF THE ORDER OF NEW ZEALAND | DEPARTMENT OF THE PRIME MINISTER AND CABINET (DPMC)
“The Honours Unit is sometimes asked why there aren’t more women, Māori, or minority communities on the honours lists”, says David. “But for example, women usually only make up 30 per cent of the nominations received for each list. Our honours system relies on public nominations, and we encourage people to nominate deserving people they know or hear about in the community.”
Ceremony and symbolism
The investiture ceremonies at Government House represent the culmination of the Honours Unit’s work. These events provide a formal stage for public recognition, where recipients receive their insignia from the Governor-General in front of family and friends.
The insignia themselves tell a story of New Zealand’s cultural heritage, combining English medallic design with Māori motifs and colours. As David says, “Looking at the insignia you see crosses and koru patterns, gold and silver but also green enamel representing pounamu, breast stars formed out of stylised fern fronds, and badges made to look like a stylised representation of a mānuka flower.”
SENIOR ADVISOR HONOURS DAVID WILLIAMS (RIGHT) AND COLLEAGUE SENIOR ADVISOR HONOURS GRIFFEN RITCHIE (LEFT)
INSIGNIA OF THE KING’S SERVICE ORDER AND KING’S SERVICE MEDAL | DEPARTMENT OF THE PRIME MINISTER AND CABINET (DPMC)
INSIGNIA
Navigating challenges and opportunities
Arne Larsen (Ngāti Pākehā) is the recipient of the 2024 IPANZ (now Hāpai Public) Prize in Public Administration for the top student in PUBL 311 Critical Thinking in Policy and Management at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington School of Government. Here, Arne answers some questions about his study and career and what challenges he sees facing the public sector today.
AUTHOR
Arne Larsen
What have been your study and career highlights so far?
When I first moved from Auckland to study at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington, I intended to study to become an architect. It was only when I started my summer job at the McGuinness Institute that I first learned about public policy, and shortly afterwards I changed my degree to a Bachelor of Arts majoring in both Public Policy and International Relations.
My six years with the McGuinness Institute have been an incredible experience for me in my studies and career. First, and most importantly, my time as a research analyst for the Institute helped me to discover my love for public policy. It provided me with a space to take what I learned in the classroom and put them into practice in the real world. It has opened many doors and has allowed me to meet so many amazing people in the public policy space, both in Aotearoa New Zealand and around the world.
Another highlight of my career thus far is the three months I spent with the Strategic Foresight Team of Defence Futures in the United Kingdom. Defence Futures is the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence’s think tank. My time with the team was an amazing experience, and I learned many lessons from working alongside so many talented individuals.
What inspires and motivates you in your work?
I am inspired and motivated by all of the talented and amazing people I have had the opportunity to meet and work alongside. These opportunities have been instrumental in my growth, both personally and professionally. There have been many lessons I have learned, perhaps one of the most important being to stay curious.
What do you see as some of the challenges facing the public sector? (and how to overcome them?)
Some of the biggest challenges facing Aotearoa New Zealand, and the public sector, are simply too complex for single entities to solve, and will require cross-sector collaboration. To achieve this collaboration, effective, and transparent strategies must be enacted.
Climate change will impact Aotearoa New Zealand in many different ways across all sectors. While it is vital that individual sectors and the entities within them have their own strategies, these would be much more effective if there is an all-of government understanding of what a strategy should look like and contain. This would allow for more opportunities for the strategies to be integrated alongside one another in a cost-effective manner, building public trust in the process.
This could be achieved by setting a clear goal that goes across the public sector, as well as a framework for what a good strategy looks like, including ensuring that lessons from previous strategies are incorporated. This could be done by reviewing several scenarios for what the future could look like, determining what scenario is preferable to Aotearoa New Zealand, and identifying key actions that could drive us towards that preferred scenario.
The outcome of this would foster an ecosystem where collaboration between entities is encouraged to achieve the shared goals at the individual entity level, as well as at the all-of government level. The Climate Change Strategy (July 2024) is a good starting point, but more specific goals would allow for other sectors to more effectively support the strategy. The only thing that is certain about the future is that it will change. Having an effective strategy will enable Aotearoa New Zealand to steer towards a more desirable future.
What are your plans and aspirations?
Some of the biggest challenges facing Aotearoa New Zealand, and the public sector, are simply too complex for single entities to solve, and will require crosssector collaboration.
In the short term, I am looking forward to spending some time backpacking across Europe. I am enjoying the opportunity to experience the differences and similarities, both in everyday life and in the history and culture of European countries. In the longer
term, I will return home to Aotearoa New Zealand to use the knowledge that I have acquired throughout my travels, whether through work or postgraduate studies. I am excited for whatever the future holds.
Final note
I am incredibly grateful to be the recipient of the 2024 IPANZ (now Hāpai Public) Prize in Public Administration. I am thankful to all the staff at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University of Wellington, the fantastic people at Hāpai Public for this honour, and finally, my family and friends who have supported me throughout my journey.
The only thing that is certain about the future is that it will change.
Contributions Please
Public Sector journal is always happy to receive contributions from readers. If you’re working on an interesting project in the public sector or have something relevant to say about a particular issue, think about sending us a short article on the subject.
Contact the editor Kathy Young at editor@hapaipublic.org.nz
Book and Podcast review
Hāpai Public New Professionals’ Co-chair Zaira Najam reviews Three Gals One Beehive podcast and the book Tairāwhiti: Pine, Profit and the Cyclone by Aaron Smale.
Zaira Najam
PODCAST
The Three Gals One Beehive podcast, launched in May 2023 by Georgina Stylianou, Brigitte Morten, and Holly Bennett, offers weekly 30-40-minute episodes that provide candid and insightful commentary on the New Zealand political landscape. With their experience working in the Beehive, the trio draws on their past roles with various ministers to offer an insider’s perspective on current political happenings. Their podcast keeps listeners updated on current political news, blending informed opinions with humour and banter. They aim to make politics engaging and accessible. Their tagline is, “Buzzing through the spin, the jargon and the pointy-heads of New Zealand politics so you don’t have to.”
The hosts provide a detailed introduction to themselves in the first episode, giving listeners insight into their backgrounds. All three have worked extensively in the public sector and have experience of working in the Beehive.
I recommend the podcast series to public sector New Professionals – indeed, anyone working in or with the public sector in New Zealand. It offers an enjoyable way to grasp the nuances of New Zealand’s political scene. It’s perfect for those seeking to better understand the political environment with a mix of expertise and entertainment.
BOOK
Aaron Smale’s book Tairāwhiti: Pine, Profit and the Cyclone delves deeply into the complex issues that the Tairāwhiti region of New Zealand is facing, specifically the catastrophic consequences of recent cyclones, the long-
lasting effects of colonial land confiscation, and extensive pine plantations. The author calls for a more sustainable future for the area and highlights how these factors have affected local communities and the environment. The book uses critical analysis, interviews, and personal stories to convey a complex depiction of the region’s struggles caused by the decisions made for them without involving them. The vast pine plantations are criticised in the book, which also examines their detrimental effects on biodiversity, waterways, and the area’s ability to withstand natural calamities like cyclones. The book also highlights the significance of inclusive and evidence-led decision-making, which is a hard learnt lesson from Tairāwhiti region’s sufferings. Whenever actions are undertaken solely for financial gain, the resulting negative societal effects are felt by future generations.
Tairāwhiti: Pine, Profit and the Cyclone makes the case for a change to more environmentally friendly land management techniques that give local people more control over their destiny.
Zaira Najam, Co-chair of the Hāpai Public New Professionals Network, holds a background in economics. She came to Aotearoa New Zealand from Pakistan to pursue her PhD at the University of Waikato and was captivated by the beauty of Aotearoa New Zealand. She made a heartfelt decision to stay in New Zealand and contribute to the public sector, striving to enhance the lives of people in Aotearoa New Zealand. With a fervour for community development and a strong advocacy for equal rights, her commitment extends beyond professional expertise, embodying a genuine passion for fostering inclusive growth and social justice.
AUTHOR
Did you know? About the role of the Speaker of the House
The Speaker of the House of Representatives (Te Mana Whakawā o te Whare) plays a critical role in the New Zealand Parliament. Here are five fascinating facts about the Speaker’s role.
ELECTION OF A SPEAKER
The Speaker is elected by members of the House of Representatives upon the assembly of each new Parliament and is usually a member of the majority party of the incoming government. Often this election goes uncontested, with only six votes since 1854 having more than one candidate. In these scenarios, members vote in the lobbies for their preferred candidate, or a roll-call vote is conducted.
It is important that the elected Speaker is impartial and not biased towards any political party, setting aside any party affiliations to ensure every member of Parliament has an equal chance to contribute.
MAINTAINING ORDER IN THE HOUSE
The Speaker’s primary role is to preside over parliamentary proceedings, maintain order, and ensure fair and proper conduct of debates in the House. They have the power to discipline Members of Parliament (MPs) who breach the rules, such as calling MPs to order or even removing them, if necessary. The Speaker’s job is to make sure that debates are conducted respectfully and follow the guidelines of the Standing Orders (the rules under which the House operates). This helps protect the democratic process. Words deemed ‘unparliamentary’ are still recorded. Entries from Hansard include some colourful language: “His brains could revolve inside a peanut shell for a thousand years without touching the sides” (1949), “Shut up yourself, you great ape” (1966) and “Ditch the bitch” (1980). In 2024, Speaker Rt Hon Gerry Brownlee referred four MPs to the Privileges Committee for their involvement in a haka in the House during the vote on the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill. This raises the question on how tikanga Māori should be dealt with in the House.
ACTING AS LANDLORD
RT HON GERRY BROWNLEE IS THE CURRENT SPEAKER
CHAIRING MEETINGS OF THE HOUSE AND SELECT COMMITTEES
The Speaker chairs meetings of the House, including for three select committees: the Business Committee, the Standing Orders Committee, and the Officers of Parliament Committee, as well as chairing the Parliamentary Service Commission.
INTERNATIONAL DUTIES AND REPRESENTATION
Beyond the walls of the New Zealand Parliament, the Speaker of the House plays a role in international parliamentary diplomacy. As the representative of New Zealand’s Parliament, they often attend international meetings, build relationships with other parliamentary leaders, and represent New Zealand’s interests in global discussions. This role as a diplomatic figure underscores the Speaker’s importance not only in national governance but in fostering international cooperation and enhancing democracy.
The Speaker is the landlord for all of Parliament’s grounds and buildings: Parliament House, the Parliamentary Library, the Beehive, and an office building on Lambton Quay. This part of the Speaker’s role was highlighted during the 2022 occupation of Parliament. The Speaker at the time, Trevor Mallard, issued a statement stating protests were vital for democracy but that certain expectations for the use of Parliament grounds must be upheld. The Speaker is responsible for allocating office space in these buildings, and for regulating access by the media and public to the buildings. The Speaker gives approval for some visitors to have access to public areas within the parliamentary precinct, without having to go through security clearance each time they visit.
INNOVATIVE IDEAS AND PRACTICES FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE
HIGHLIGHTS FOR 2025
■ Flexibility to tailor your learning to your interests, career objectives, and work–life balance
■ Places available for recent graduates
Gain a qualification in public management or public policy from Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington; New Zealand’s leading education provider in public services. Study full time or at your own pace while you work.
Master of Public Management: Upgrade your skills and competencies for leading and managing people and resources, and for implementing innovative change and effective public services.
Master of Public Policy: Develop your skills and competencies for analysing, designing, and evaluating policy, and preparing policy advice in public and non-governmental sectors.
Wellington School of Business and Government holds the following international accreditations.