State sector ratings
June 5th, 2012 at 6:00 am by David FarrarJohn Hartevelt at Dom Post reports:
ACC’S miserable run continues with its rating in an annual review of state sector performance sinking like a stone.
The third annual review co-ordinated by political newsletter Trans Tasman also had bad news for Building and Housing Department chief executive Katrina Bach, who was ranked the worst of 38 public sector bosses.
Ms Bach’s rating slumped from 3.93 last year to 2 this year, while the overall performance of her department dropped from 3.75 to 2.86.
The Trans Tasman review, released today, canvassed the views of 19 “opinion leaders” on the performance of state sector leaders, issuing scores of between 1 (bad) and 7 (excellent).
The average ranking for agency performance was 4.1 (down from 4.3 last year) and 4.4 for chief executive performance (down from 4.6).
At ACC, the chief executive’s rating dropped from 4.5 to 3.7 and the agency overall went from 4.4 down to 3.7. …
Others taking a hit in the review included embattled Foreign Affairs chief executive John Allen.
Persistent leaks to the media and Opposition MPs throughout a restructuring process at the ministry have made for a tough few months for Mr Allen.
His score dropped 0.8 to a below-average score of 3.8, and Foreign Affairs as a whole dropped 0.3 to 4.3. The ministry remained well rated for ease of business at 4.6 and quality at 4.4, however. …
Mr Rennie’s score dropped from 4.06 to 3.43 and the commission fell from 3.94 to 3.31, though Mr Rennie was described as hard-working and diligent with a “methodical approach”.
Top performers in the review included Conservation Department chief executive Al Morrison, who scored the highest ranking of 5.41, and Reserve Bank Governor Alan Bollard who was second on 5.35.
ACC, DBH and MFAT scoring lowly is no surprise, when you consider the past 12 months for each of them.
What I think is the more major issue, is that the State Services Commission is rated so low, when you consider it is one of the three central agencies responsible for standards in the state sector.
Related posts:
- And no pay rises for state sector CEOs
- Comparing the MP ratings
- Some state sector reform
- Sutton tops the CEO ranks
June 5th, 2012 at 6:27 am
Persistent leaks to the media and Opposition MPs throughout a restructuring process at the ministry have made for a tough few months for Mr Allen.
Actually, it’s having to be the front man for serial incompetent Murray McCully’s latest disastrous attempt at playing Owner -sorry, Minister – of a govt department that have made it a tough few months for Mr Allen, but I wouldn’t expect TransTasman to put the blame for that where it belongs.
[DPF: The ratings are done by a panel of 17 people, not Transtasman itself, so reflect the average score. The panel includes business, union and community leaders]
Vote:June 5th, 2012 at 8:01 am
ACC just demanded another $1000 bucks from me.
On top of that, they denied a claim for a sporting injury (torn knee ligament, how on earth can that not be an accident? ).
I hate ACC.
Vote:June 5th, 2012 at 8:11 am
wreck1080:
Sounds like ACC pulling your leg?
Vote:June 5th, 2012 at 9:15 am
Katrina Bach should have been fired over the staff manhandling incident. It is simply unacceptable behaviour from any staff member of any organisation let alone a CEO. Add that to a 2 rating and you have to ask why she is still there.
Vote:June 5th, 2012 at 9:36 am
“19 opinion leaders”
No mention who those 19 are nor who’s opinions they lead.
I agree with much of the ratings, particularly that of ACC who are simply thieving scum but do wonder what significance can be attributed to the average of the opinions of 19 people.
Vote:June 5th, 2012 at 10:39 am
Is that the only way they’re rated? No objective performance criteria of any kind? I don’t know how much stock I’d put in that… a few unfriendly news cycles could sink a department’s ratings even while the actual day-to-day running went on much the same as it had in previous years.
Vote:June 5th, 2012 at 12:11 pm
“The more major issue is that the State Services Commission is rated so low….”
Agree. Successive governments have captured, politicised, demoralised and villified the state services. They’ve succeeded to the point that officials are obsessed with managing risk and avoiding at all costs anything that might reflect on their Minister, irrespective of the public interest.
Isn’t that exactly what the SSC is there to prevent? The Commission has become ineffective and largely irrelevant – it should hang its head in shame.
Vote: