TOPIC 2.3: How are Government Delivery Structures designed for responsiveness?

Organising government to deliver services

If someone is responsible, it might be argued, the chances then are that there will be more responsive behaviour. In this sense, perhaps, ministerial responsibility still delivers. But responsiveness does not rely on one individual alone: it requires a responsive administrative wing, which is in touch with the electorate and able to draw readily upon delegated power to deliver appropriate services. These delivery structures are examined in this topic.

Government has to organise itself in order to deliver services. It can use various organisational structures to improve responsiveness, to generate efficiencies and to demonstrate political ‘will’. Some structural boundaries have created limits to service, and attempts to make boundaries more permeable, through collaborative efforts across jurisdictions, are increasingly being utilised. Increasing public expectation of service delivery in a digital age has seen an increased emphasis on integrated, online service delivery. The Service NSW model, reporting to a Minister for Customer Service, has influenced the creation of Services Australia at the Commonwealth level and reflects the recognition of the increased importance of service delivery in the public service.

In this topic, two aspects – Machinery of Government (MoG) and Whole of Government (WoG) – are discussed.

Machinery of Government: Overview and Activity

‘Machinery of Government’ refers to the way that government departments and ministers are structured and organised. More formally, they are known as ‘Administrative Arrangements’ and while designed by the government they are technically regulations made by the Governor or Governor-General.

MoG organisational arrangements are designed to make government more responsive and efficient. Consequently, arrangements to ensure a department better faces the communities it serves (e.g. Regional focus), or creates synergy between two previous specialist areas (e.g. science and technology); or focuses services to special interest groups (e.g. people with a disability); or attracts efficiencies (shared services), are put in place.

Cynics may also notice political arrangements in MoG, which have to do with designing the organisation around Ministerial interest, around popular versus unpopular areas (bad news), and around political reward and dissension.

Whole of Government

Another strategy that is designed to better deliver holistic solutions and services is Whole of Government or ‘joined up’ approaches, where various jurisdictions, or departments, work collaboratively. Government has become very conscious of the fact that it needs to work holistically if it is to have any impact on a number of the major issues facing the community and government in particular.

One example of this approach is creating whole-of-government catchment management plans rather than having separate, unsynchronised, individual approaches to agriculture, water, vegetation, fire control and urban encroachment. Another good example is Closing the Gap, which requires working across numerous agencies and with all tiers of government (Commonwealth, State and Local) as well as transforming the way that governments work with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. These are just two examples of ‘whole-of-government’ work, as you will see if you put the term into an internet search engine.

Most of you will be aware of Whole-of-Government initiatives undertaken by your workplace or jurisdiction. Local government participants might find the concept of ‘total place’ funding of interest.