public management watch pmw
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Public Management Watch (PMW)

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 28

Public Management Watch (PMW) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 125 Views
  • Uploaded on

Public Management Watch (PMW). 9 June 2006. Public Management Watch - Aim/Purpose. To be able to preempt the deterioration in management within national and provincial government in order to intervene if necessary. Public Management Watch. Statistical analysis Oversight Departments.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Public Management Watch (PMW)' - briar


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
public management watch aim purpose
Public Management Watch - Aim/Purpose
  • To be able to preempt the deterioration in management within national and provincial government in order to intervene if necessary.
slide3

Public Management Watch

Statistical analysis

Oversight Departments

Need for

intervention assessed

Communication to dept’s

Self-assessment

Qualitative analysis

into department

Re assessment based on

feedback and updated info

slide5

Turnover

  • Professionals & Managers
    • Weight 5%
    • Parameters 7 – 13%
    • Average 11,07%
  • Total
    • Weight 5%
    • Parameters 7 – 13%
    • Average 8,38%
  • Indicates
  • Inability to retain staff
  • Turnover is not just affected by the salaries but also work environment.
slide6

Replacement Rate

  • Professionals & Managers
    • Weight 7%
    • Parameters 90 – 70%
    • Average 141%
  • Total
    • Weight 6%
    • Parameters 90 - 70%
    • Average 125%
  • Indicates
  • Inability to recruit HR Resources.
  • Departmental restructuring
slide7

Vacancies

  • Professionals & Managers
    • Weight 8%
    • Parameters 20 – 35%
    • Average 35%
  • Total
    • Weight 5%
    • Parameters 20 - 35%
    • Average 21%
  • Indicates
  • Inability to recruit HR Resources – Supply, administratively.
  • Read with the spending on compensation of employees
    • Underfunding
    • Unreliable structure
    • Inaccurate data
slide8

Period of vacancies

  • Weight 8%
  • Parameters 6 – 9 months
  • Average 14.9 months
  • Indicates
  • Inability to recruit HR Resources – Supply, administratively.
  • Read with the spending on compensation of employees
    • Underfunding
    • Unreliable structure
    • Inacurate data
slide9

% of posts filled additional to the establishment

  • Weight 8%
  • Parameters 4 – 10%
  • Average 4%
  • Indicates
  • Unreliable structure does not cater for all the mandates of the department
slide10

% of posts filled out of adjustment

  • Weight 8%
  • Parameters 10 – 20%
  • Average 11,3%
  • Indicates
  • Misalignment between posts and employees – unreliable structure
  • Remainder from old rank and leg promotions
slide11

Average days vacation leave credits

  • Weight 9%
  • Parameters Depending of the time within the cycle
  • Average Depending of the time within the cycle
  • Indicates
  • A high number of credits generally/usually reflects poor administration of leave
slide12

Average days sick leave credits

  • Weight 8%
  • Parameters Depending of the time within the cycle
  • Average Depending of the time within the cycle
  • Indicates
  • A high number of credits usually/generally reflects poor administration of leave
  • A high usage of sick leave could also indicate problems within the working environment
slide13

% of service terminations backdated

  • Weight 5%
  • Parameters 8 – 18%
  • Average 12%
  • Indicates
  • Generally/usually indicates poor workflow/administration within a department
slide14

Average period of terminations backdated

  • Weight 5%
  • Parameters 2 – 3 months
  • Average 3,11 months
  • Indicates
  • Generally/usually indicates poor workflow/administration within a department
slide15

% of budget on compensation of employees spent

  • Weight 8%
  • Parameters -5 to 5%
  • Indicates
  • Indicates the funds available for the filling of vacancies
slide16

% of budget on goods and services spent

  • Weight 5%
  • Parameters -5 to 5%
  • Average
  • Indicates
  • Ability of the department to control and spend their funding for goods and services
slide17

% of budget on capital spend (only at the end of the financial year)

  • Indicates
  • Ability of the department to control and spend their funding for capital goods
statistical analysis scoring
Statistical analysis - Scoring
  • Indicators weighted – Relevance is determined in relation to each other
  • Levels of acceptability determined – what is acceptable and what is unacceptable
  • Score calculated – scoring based on weight and levels
  • Departments rated based on scores
statistical analysis in depth information
Statistical analysis – In-depth information
  • Top 10-15 departments selected based on scores
  • In-depth analysis based on: (comparison with sector & province)
analysis by working group
Analysis by working group
  • Composition of working group
    • DPSA, Nat Treasury, Presidency, DPLG
    • National oversight dept’s (where relevant)
      • Education, Health, Social Development
slide21

Public Management Watch

Statistical analysis

Oversight Departments

Need for

intervention assessed

Communication to dept’s

Self-assessment

Qualitative analysis

into department

Re assessment based on

feedback and updated info

self assessment
Self-assessment
  • Areas to investigate
    • Information/data
    • Administration
    • Management
    • Impact on service delivery – Assessment framework developed
    • Identify best practice department (over time) to assist if required
slide23

Public Management Watch

Statistical analysis

Oversight Departments

Need for

intervention assessed

Communication to dept’s

Self-assessment

Qualitative analysis

into department

Re assessment based on

feedback and updated info

slide24

Public Management Watch

Statistical analysis

Oversight Departments

Need for

intervention assessed

Communication to dept’s

Self-assessment

Qualitative analysis

into department

Re assessment based on

feedback and updated info

investigation approach
Investigation approach
  • Team – DPSA, NT & Oversight dept’s
  • Pre-investigation info gathering
  • Briefing of department
  • Analytical framework are being developed by DPSA to identify those factors that influence the effective utilisation of human resources
slide26

Public Management Watch

Statistical analysis

Oversight Departments

Need for

intervention assessed

Communication to dept’s

Self-assessment

Qualitative analysis

into department

Re assessment based on

feedback and updated info

intervention
Intervention
  • PMW would attempt to link up departments that have proven track record of best practice in specific areas with departments in need of assistance
ad