Improving APS workplace culture is an uncomfortable but necessary journey

article-body

The 2019 Thodey Review highlighted the central role of the APS workforce in our national ability to meet the strategic challenges of a new era.

Retention of capable, skilled and experienced people is key. Many tangible factors impact retention, including pay, conditions, workplace flexibility, demand and supply. All of these factors lend themselves relatively easily to crafting interventions and new policies.

Less tangible factors like leadership and culture will require the most creative solutions. The recently released Secretaries’ Charter is transparent about the high standards expected of the APS’s most senior leaders. When consistently modelled and applied, these standards can be expected to contribute to improved APS confidence and capability.

The issue of workplace culture challenges, however, the ability of APS leaders to move from abstract principles to daily behaviours that make a difference. For many employees, complex questions of leadership and culture often boil down to the answer to a very simple question “Do I feel valued here?”

Now, more than ever, the APS needs its people to answer that question in the affirmative.

The good news is that there are a number of APS-wide steps that can be taken to potentially improve outcomes in this space.

Firstly, comprehensive research could be commissioned into APS cultures in different agencies, with benchmarks established. Case studies should be published showing examples of poor culture, examples of positive culture and — most importantly — examples where culture has changed for the better. In this way, key learning can be amplified and extended right across the APS.

When I undertook research on the national security workforce in Australia, it became apparent that there is a very limited evidence base on which to study and draw conclusions about APS people and workforce matters. The APSC State of the Service Report and the APS Census remain major sources of valuable data; however, neither report attempts cultural benchmarking.

A comparatively small number of APS cultural reviews are externally prepared and publicly issued, like the recent study into diversity, equity and inclusion in the Australian Antarctic Division.

There is a body of evidence available from within the APS; however, it is highly dispersed. This data (spanning material across workplace reports, staff surveys, exit interviews, fact finds, internal reviews and consultant advice) represents a wealth of information from which common patterns can be deduced and solutions mined. Even within departments and agencies, there may be a lack of coordination on cultural review.

Firstly, contractors may be engaged whose remit is narrow; they may examine staff surveys, facilitate workshops and present potential solutions, perhaps at the Divisional or Group level. Often, conclusions are assumed to be specific to the work area and findings are not shared more broadly even where the insights may potentially assist other leaders in avoiding common cultural pitfalls

Secondly, the APS needs to better understand the relatively small segment of its workforce comprised of those individuals who generate negative effects on workplace culture. This cohort may have an impact on a workplace culture that is disproportionate to relative numbers; as cited in an Australian study, across all workplaces 1% of staff are estimated to be responsible for 26% of total bullying cases.

Understandably, there is a significant public interest in this cohort; one of the co-authors of that study also published a widely viewed article on the hidden costs of psychopaths at work. We know too that in the APS bullying is significantly under-reported.

But this is about much more than serial bullies; difficult people who lack
self-awareness exist in every work environment. A relatively junior employee who engages in poor behaviours may erode trust and communication in what would otherwise be a well-functioning workplace.

Once promoted to EL or SES positions, their impact on their subordinates can be severe — at best, undermining individuals’ confidence and reducing productivity; at worst, creating psychologically unsafe workplaces, increasing legal risk and causing harm to employees’ health.

Consideration could be given to how to adjust existing APS behavioural frameworks. The aim should be to encourage managers to intervene early and swiftly, with a view to both individual and cultural impacts. Formal performance management and complaint procedures remain cumbersome.

Complaint procedures are only triggered when an individual makes a specific complaint about an incident or incidents. These processes are often unsuited to tackling consistently negative patterns of behaviour that have broader impacts on the workplace; this may include divided workplaces where small groups of employees display poor behaviour towards other groups.

Thirdly, the APS needs to better understand and promote the attributes and characteristics of those individuals who have a positive impact on workplace cultures (as opposed to a neutral or negative effect). Again, this impact can be disproportionate to their relative level or numbers in the organisation.

A good example would be an APS6 staff member who consistently shows kindness and support to colleagues not only within their immediate team but also outside of it, making other employees feel seen and valued. This type of contribution generates beneficial mental health outcomes across workplace culture; this is an increasingly important factor to consider, given the latest evidence on the rise of work-related mental health costs.

Emotional labour has traditionally been devalued in terms of APS career progression, possibly because, like other forms of unpaid labour, it is often associated with women’s contribution to society. Yet, this contribution can be vital to keeping the show on the road in a high-tempo workplace.

The challenge here is for leaders to develop cultures that are favourable to the continued growth and extension of positive behaviours. In discussing how to combat bullying and harassment in the public sector, Professor Gordon de Brouwer notes a key step is to ‘identify and celebrate respect and civility’ as well as to follow through on applicable rewards. In this vein, honours and awards systems could be reviewed to ensure that there is an opportunity to properly recognise those individuals contributing to mentally healthy workplaces.

Finally, it is important to talk frankly about a common cause of cynicism across the APS, which can be summed up as a person appearing to be a good leader rather than being a good leader. They are leaders who promote their commitment to organisational values but are unable to close on the hard decisions to back up those words.

An example of this would be the disability champion who hosts morning teas to raise awareness but fails to provide appropriate work for a person with a chronic illness in their own work area, or the senior leader who states they want to create a safe and effective working environment but procrastinates on taking action on a known bully.

It may be in these instances that leaders perceive the practical or personal cost as too high and the necessary conversations and actions too uncomfortable or
time-consuming. Greater investment in leadership training is important, because good training can encourage participants to form a bias to action, even when the costs appear high and the pay-off is absent or delayed.

A good example of this is the performance management of a difficult employee whose previous supervisors have placed in the ‘too hard basket’. The supervisor who decides to break the cycle usually does so to the benefit of the organisation but at a cost to their own peace of mind at work.

Ultimately, the APS needs to both know more about its workplace cultures and do more to make cultures consistently better across the board. This is a vital body of work. Given it engages deeply human factors around values, emotions and behaviours, it may prove at times an uncomfortable journey.