Presentation on theme: "1. what’s next? The Australian Tax Office (ATO) will be leading an agency consortium pilot of Fix-it Squads to see how they work on a real problem. The."— Presentation transcript:
what’s next? The Australian Tax Office (ATO) will be leading an agency consortium pilot of Fix-it Squads to see how they work on a real problem. The consortium contact is Judy O’Connell (judy.o’firstname.lastname@example.org). More detail inside: The co-design workshop………………….2 Concept 1: Rapid response squad…………………….3 Concept 2: Systems Squad:…………………………….5 Critical needs as identified by workshop participants…………………..7 Ideas catalogue – further principles and priorities to explore…………………………………….8 Concept-specific feedback from Business……………………………………..9 General feedback from Business……………………………………..10 Background: The problem………………...11 Background: The initial idea………………..12 the solutions The co-design workshops suggested two concepts (possible Fix-it Squad models) to solve the problem. Some features of the concepts were later tested with representatives from businesses and industry associations. concept 1: Rapid Response Squads Through an online forum, businesses and intermediaries can alert the APS to urgent cross- agency issues that need fixing. A seamless approval process sets up the Rapid Response Squad, which includes representatives from business and intermediaries, is immersed in real businesses to see the problem in context and whose findings are implemented across all affected APS agencies. concept 2: Systems Squad Systems Squads tackle systemic problems that span agency responsibilities. Authorised through a formal brief or submission process and resourced through a formal fund, Systems Squads are immersed in businesses to conduct their investigation in context. A permanent Systems Squad Community of Practice, a cross-agency office, implements and communicates the findings and lessons learned. 2 Overview the problem DesignGov’s Lost in Translation report found that a serious problem in business/government interactions is a lack of clear channels for resolving problems for businesses that span agencies and jurisdictions. Often businesses feel that government agencies share responsibility for the problem, but none of them owns the solution. the idea: Fix-it Squads To solve the problem, the report recommended establishing Fix-it Squads: a form of tiger team made up of seconded public servants and/or intermediaries from relevant agencies and organisations, who are charged with investigating issues that span agencies - identified by business and agreed by government. co-designing the solution On 31 October, 19 November and 9 December 2013, DesignGov facilitated co-design workshops with public servants and business representatives to co-design solutions to the problem and make the idea of Fix-it Squads real.
CO-DESIGNING FIX-IT SQUADS Design Tools 3 design tool 1: Brainstorming In groups of 3 or 4, participants initially brainstormed the key aims Fix-it Squads should achieve. Along with a briefing on the findings of DesignGov’s Lost in Translation Report, this guided them in their creation of the Fix-it Squad models with journey maps. Participants drew on these aims, their own experience and the Lost in Translation Report findings to develop the user journey maps. Instructions for use – ideas on how to brainstorm effectively A google search for ‘brainstorming techniques’ will yield good results. See for example: http://www.openideo.com/fieldnotes/openideo-team- notes/seven-tips-on-better-brainstorming. A google image search for ‘brainstorming’ will yield good visual expression of brainstorming ideas. You can find further links on how to brainstorm in the DesignGov Compendium. 31 October co-design workshop 5 x DesignGov staff as facilitators 6 x staff representing: - Attorney-General’s Department, Small Business Commissioner, Department of Human Services, - Australian Tax Office and Department of Industry 19 November workshop 7 x DesignGov staff as facilitators 10 x staff representing: - the Australian Tax Office, - Department of Industry, - Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, Small Business Commissioner - Australian Securities and Investment Commission - and Department of Human Services
4 CO-DESIGNING FIX-IT SQUADS Design Tools design tool 2: User Journey Maps User journey maps get participants to take the ideas and aims drawn from design tool 1 (the intangible why?) and focus on tangibly how we get there – what features, resources, specifications a Fix-it Squad would need. In the same groups of 3-4, participants wrote what features and specifications a Fix-it Squad would need on post-it notes, and then synthesised these in a logical order (the journey). Each group focused on identifying and describing the features and specifications of the fix it-squad model for one stage of the squad’s life-cycle. One group focused on an authorising phase (how the squad would be set up), another on the acting stage (how the squad conducts its investigations and immersion), and another group on the implementation and learning phase. The journey maps allowed us to co-design complete and tangible Fix-it Squad models. Instructions for use – how to create your own journey map A google search for ‘how to do a user [or customer] journey map’ will yield links to sites that explain how to undertake a journey map. See for example: http://www.servicedesigntools.org/tools/8. Also, searching ‘user [or customer] journey map’ in Google images will yield some excellent visual expression of what a journey map is. You can find further links to how to do a journey map in the DesignGov Compendium.
Through an online forum, or drawing on list of problems already identified by industry associations or APS agencies, businesses and intermediaries can alert the APS to urgent cross- agency issues that need fixing. A seamless authorising process managed by the permanent Cross-Agency Red Tape forum sets up a Rapid Response Squad that includes representatives from business and intermediaries. The Squad investigates the problem while immersed in real businesses to see the problem in context. Its findings are implemented across all affected APS agencies. authorising phase: Business and intermediaries can alert the Australian Public Service Red Tape Reduction Register - a one stop website/forum that is accessible even to small businesses to identify cross-agency problems Drawing on the information on this site, a new Cross-Agency Red Tape Forum, a body with senior SES staff from across the APS, which meets to select issues for Fix-it Squad intervention. The body also agrees a sponsor and champion agency, as well as funding Once an issued is selected, the Fix-it Squad Office is the core base of permanent staff that brings together the Fix-it Squad team and organises the resources and training to ensure the team is ready to investigate the issue acting phase: Representatives from business and intermediaries join the squad to ensure their voices are heard during the investigation and to increase squad’s credibility. They assist in communicating developments and findings (ongoing during the acting phase) Working with stakeholders, the team first rearticulates the problem if necessary, to ensure the squad is focusing on the real issue as seen by business Squad then commences investigations proper, immersing itself in relevant businesses to observe the problem in context, and using more traditional problem-solving methods e.g. a consultation process and research The team drafts and delivers a report with its findings and recommendations to the Cross- Agency Red Tape Forum implementation and learning phase: Senior squad sponsor advocates the findings at the APS200 and/or Secretaries’ Board Senior sponsor oversees the implementation team that implements the findings in the sponsor agency Other affected agencies implement relevant findings through their corporate divisions Some squad members from the acting phase stay on and rejoin the Fix-it Squad Office for implementation and lessons learned The Fix-it Squad Office develops papers that allow for post evaluation process, surveys and feedback mechanism The feedback is fed into future Fix-it Squads to ensure continuous improvement Business and intermediary representatives on the squad help advocate the findings and recommendations 5 CO-DESIGNING FIX-IT SQUADS Concept 1 - Rapid Response Squads Existence of problem is acknowledged on the Cross-Agency Red Tape Forum, triggering formation of Rapid Response Squad IMPLEMENTATION AND LEARNING AUTHORISING ACTING Rapid Response Squad is authorised, selects the right issue to focus on, with a sponsor, champion agency and base funding established Mixed team structure, with business and intermediaries represented. Problem drives methodology. Report delivered. i Senior sponsor advocates the findings, ensures implementation, passes lessons learned onto next squad. Post-implementation evaluation of outcomes and process. the process the concept
6 CO-DESIGNING FIX-IT SQUADS Rapid Response Squads - Mock Up Explanation of the site’s purpose for businesses Mock up of the Rapid Response Squad’s red tape reduction register site Rapid Response Squad Red Tape Reduction Register Site Rapid Response Squads form in response to businesses registering cross-agency problems on the Red tape reduction register, a Commonwealth Government website. To the right is a snapshot of a prototype of that website. This could be developed after the pilot phase of Fix-it Squads. A typical user finds the website through a google search. On the home page there is information about the red tape register and Rapid Response Squads. The user is invited to register their cross- agency issue for resolution by the Australian Government, or to ‘upvote’ an already registered issue in the cross-agency issue forum. Here businesses can register an issue for possible investigation by a Fix-it Squad the mock up
7 CO-DESIGNING FIX-IT SQUADS Concept 2 - Systems Squads Systems Squads are cross-agency fix it squads that tackle systemic problems –that span agency responsibilities. Authorised through a formal process, and resourced through a formal fund, Systems Squads are immersed in businesses to conduct their investigation in context. The Squad uses design tools to expose decision makers to the user’s experience of the problem in its report. The Community of Practice then implements the report, with particular focus on communications to ensure users are aware of the findings. authorising phase: Formal imprimatur authorises the Systems Squad. (At some stage it may need to go to Cabinet level). The imprimatur defines the problem including who is involved, who is affected and how The Fix-it Squads Community of Practice, a cross agency permanent office that manages the Systems Squad, establishes the squad The Community of Practice ensures collaboration with key stakeholders by including representatives from the three levels of government and has regular networking events with representatives from business and intermediaries. The Community of Practice will work with business to investigate what issues are important in the problem Money for the squad is drawn from the Systems Squad fund, whose resources could be tied to savings achieved and investments and trade-offs The leader of the squad should be a permanent employee of the Community of Practice acting phase: The Systems Squad will have the right mix of staff for the problem at hand The team will establish principles to manage the competing interests of team members coming from different backgrounds/agencies The evidence gathered will need to expose the decision maker to the ‘user’ story/experience, mixed with the economic story The squad will conduct its investigations through immersion with internal and external users such as businesses and intermediaries implementation and learning phase: The Squad will return its report to the Community of Practice. The Community of Practice has responsibility for communications, which will ensure the findings and recommendations are communicated in a language and manner suitable to each target audience. The findings, recommendations and any plan for implementation will be ‘translated’ into language suitable for business The findings and recommendations should be in a form that will not invite cynicism from public servants Community of Practice will undertake an implementation study to ensure that barriers to a successful implementation process should be identified and managed, and that lessons learned are passed to the next squad The Secretaries’ Board will endorse and act on the findings of the squad key risks Key risks: people coming in cold; overpromising and under-delivering; lack of clear reporting back to business; insufficient evidence gathered to change minds; and if an agency that should have been represented is not. the process Existence of problem is acknowledged on the Cross-Agency Red Tape Forum, triggering formation of a Systems Squad IMPLEMENTATION AND LEARNING AUTHORISING ACTING A formal process establishes the Systems Squad. The Community of Practice sets up the squad in collaboration with business Mixed team structure, with business and intermediaries represented. Team is immersed in businesses affected i Community of Practice implements report and communicates findings to the APS and businesses. the concept
8 Submission authorising a Systems Squad Systems Squads are cross-agency fix it squads that tackle systemic problems –that span agency responsibilities. One distinguishing feature of the Systems Squad is the issues they solve. Systems Squads aim to resolve issues that are cross-agency, large-scale and systemic. To solve such large macro-level problems, Systems Squads receive support from the highest levels of government. They may even be authorised by Cabinet and report to Cabinet. Across to the right is a prototype of a departmental proposal or submission that authorises a Systems Squad. The prototype is to give you a sense of what kind of process would establish a Systems Squad. Among other things, a Systems Squad submission also detail what issues the Systems Squad is focusing on, what design tools it will employ, how it will immerse itself in businesses in its investigations and when and who it will report back to. CO-DESIGNING FIX-IT SQUADS Systems Squad – Mock Up the mock up MOCK UP Submission establishing a Systems Squad. Cabinet or the Secretaries Board may be two formal decision-making bodies by which squads are established
critical needs: Systems Squads authorising phase Formal imprimatur and a specific fund should be the mechanism for authorising squads The Secretaries’ Board should endorse and act on the findings of the squad Collaboration with the three levels of government and the business sector will be important The problem definition for the squad should cover who is involved, who is affected and how Deciding which agenc(ies) will be responsible for the squad will be important Unpacking what issues faced by business that the squad is investigating is important Deciding who pays is a key issue Defining the characteristics of the squad’s composition is important There could be a special fund to pay for Fix-it Squads, whose resources could be tied to savings achieved and investments and trade- offs The leader of the squad should be a permanent employee of the body that organises squad Competition could be established between squads to enable access to decision makers to fast track actions acting phase The team will need the right mix of staff for the problem at hand The team will need principles to manage the competing interests of team members coming from different backgrounds/agencies Evidence will need to expose the decision maker to the ‘user’ story/experience, mixed with the economic story The squad should immerse with internal and external users Evidence types are important implementation and learning phase A communications process will be essential to ensure the findings and recommendations are communicated in a language and manner suitable to each target audience For example, the findings, recommendations and any plan for implementation will need to be ‘translated’ into language suitable for business The findings and recommendations should be in a form that will not invite cynicism from public servants Barriers to a successful process should be identified and managed An overarching ‘Community of Practice’ to manage Fix-it Squads would underpin their success, and it should include a mechanism to ensure lessons learned are passed from one squad to the next Implementation should link back to the original decision makers and stakeholder’s priorities when the squad was authorised critical needs: Rapid Response Squads Participants emphasised above all that the problem must be expertly identified and drive the process Resources and training materials Authorising a regulation forum – including the need for a sponsor, champion agency and base funding Creating post-squad evaluation processes, surveys and feedback mechanisms Having a ‘core base’ to facilitate the process. Strong leadership Mandate for authority to implement with a senior sponsor responsible for the outcomes to achieve Sponsor willing to be a strong advocate to maintain momentum Identifying external needs and requirements. One process – problem identification to implementation The website should draw on and use existing models of successful platforms The website should be a one-stop shop for business 9 CO-DESIGNING FIX-IT SQUADS Identifying Critical Needs using co-design to identify needs Besides designing the concepts themselves, workshop participants also identified critical needs for Fix-it Squads, and voted on these. These aims should inform the prototyping and further designing of the Fix-it Squads concept.
Clear problem to work on Cross agency processes and systems Future focused ‘Light touch’ from Canberra, with those on the ground with the power Squads leverage off each other Leader sponsor/agency, who is empowered but not so far up the chain it gets bogged in red tape Costs manageable How to deliver something that our stakeholders value Communication of impact Received in metro and regional areas Meeting needs and expectations of businesses Links business to channels and useful information Well/effectively targeted and understood by stakeholders Driven by external forces – what small business thinks small business needs Expert advice Team understands industry as a whole Some members need business experience Business have better idea of how to comply and where to find info Team consists of relevant government agencies to solve problem Need to clearly communicate the change Team bonding Business are selected with outcome Team has adequate budget to consult. Team is fit for purpose in terms of size Team is able to communicate with business High level or senior champion Team works well together Business is satisfied with the outcome 10 Selling Fix-it Squads to stakeholders (from the business workshop) Squads are aimed at associations, big business and small business advocates Concrete examples of problems and case studies and how things would be different if solved by a FIS would be important Should be managed carefully through associations – small businesses are too small to have time to find out Don’t overpromise – capture the opportunity but don’t oversell the idea or the benefits! Explain who the FIS is – who it is, why it is credible Be clear about the audience: initially, this could be associations, larger businesses, small business advocates and selected bureaucrats Later the audience can be expanded to the public sector more broadly and small businesses Use concrete examples of problems solved by a Fix-it Squad (e.g. from South Korea) Use case studies to explain Have credible organisations running the Fix-it Squad Fix-it Squad aims Whole of government collaboration and partnership – between government, intermediary, business advisers Empowered to make decisions with people who can bind many agencies CO-DESIGNING FIX-IT SQUADS Suggested Aims Participants also identified other principles and priorities for Fix-it Squads. These aims could be used to inform the prototyping and further designing of the Fix-it Squads concept. ideas catalogue
authorising phase Some small businesses are not comfortable with online The training, guides and resources that support the Fix-it Squads should include social media and peer-to-peer features to share knowledge The website could include online questionnaires Investigatory panels could also raise issues and be a consolidated place of information On the website, people could confirm if something is an issue Issues and complaints register is a good idea Crowd sourcing of experts could occur Authorising must work well – sorting it out along the way doesn’t work. Accountability here is key First squads should begin by targeting low hanging fruit issues to establish credibility Registration of issues could be acknowledged with an email within 48 hours, with a reference number that can be cited if the citizen wishes to follow up The website should be friendly – minimum clicks, clear without being patronising Good practice models for the website, the squads and the issues selection should be used to base the issues platform on Fix-it Squads should aim to fix issues that can be fixed reasonably easily i.e. bureaucratic, navigating government issues – not things that require changing legislation which is hard Accountability, expectations management and a proper process for deciding is key at this stage The website should have proper messaging – so people can understand what this is all about, with case studies and examples of what it does Agencies could suggest issues for investigation by a Squad from their own existing register of issues (both agency-only, and cross-agency) acting phase Communications are important at all stages – including explaining why the problem was chosen, listening more than talking. Website with constant updates on progress could allow stakeholders to follow how the problem is being fixed. The squad could include a dedicated communications officer who keeps stakeholders updated Information should be personalised and delivered by phone call /face to face as much as possible Email updates to registered stakeholders would work to provide updates on progress Transparency and building on ideas are important but not result in revealing individual/confidential matters Focus on fixing the problem, rather than broad education of small business sector Decide on methodology based on issue Business want to deal with one person to fix problem – one person could be onsite 6-8 week maximum time limit – should not drag on or ‘touch base’ (but length of time should depends on the problem) There needs to be willingness to participate and listen fast Business associations could provide a part time staff member only to the squad 11 9 December co-design workshop with businesses and intermediaries 10 x representatives from business 5 x association representatives 2 x Australian Tax Office staff 1 x AusIndustry staff 4 x DesignGov facilitators the participants CO-DESIGNING FIX-IT SQUADS Specific Feedback on Concepts
The squad should immerse both in business and the public sector Private sector bodies should be involved in the evaluation process as private bodies will have a different view of effectiveness and success Ensure that the people who originally flagged the problem receive communications they can understand about how it was solved Target markets for findings and recommendations are important: This includes targeting the bureaucrats who will implement so they buy into it Fast failure: If the squad quickly realises there is no solving the problem, finish up and let stakeholders know why Should focus on small businesses’ right people Business and intermediaries should get involved but it is not ‘their’ problem. People may lie on surveys. Intermediaries may be able to administer surveys Internal staff at the agencies experiencing the problem should not be those who deal with the problem daily – as these may have no incentive to make the necessary changes Implementation and learning phase No silence – length of time to implement depends on the problem Can get password to login and check how implementation is progressing Using the website, if the issue is listed on the site people can look there for updates Need to be clear on scope – but business want and need early up front conversation Not a 500 page report – it needs an executive summary with the main detail. The final report could include affirmation or not that the problem exists, options, cost/benefit analysis, user journeys, actionable recommendations and timeframe for implementation It should be therapeutic to read the report – to understand that everyone has been heard The findings should not necessarily aim to appease 100% of stakeholders if this is not feasible The squad could aim to convince stakeholders that businesses trust that its findings and recommendations have been implemented – for example, accounts and intermediaries Personalised communications are best, or through an intermediary 12 CO-DESIGNING FIX-IT SQUADS Specific Feedback on Concepts
After the workshop, participants were asked to share one key takeaway, comment or idea for Fix-it Squads Squad composition is important and needs to be cross-functional, needs proper resourcing There are different groups who need different messages from the Squad Fix-it Squads are about change management Fix-it Squads need good communications and involvement from the start Fix-it Squads need credibility and a Board to which it needs to demonstrate quick wins Associations and businesses need to be involved Fix-it Squads needs to be flexible because it involves different people and different businesses Important who is targeted and who gets on board We should take lessons from other Fix-it Squad type initiatives that have already happened Ensure Fix-it Squads do not add more red tape Fix-it Squads must meet the needs of its different clients, issues can bring up other issues, must determine if it is a 'real' problem Expectations management is important such as language, actions, time frames and perceptions Fix-it Squads solutions are fit for purpose Timeliness of fixing the problems is critical Fix-it Squads makes voices heard Test Fix-it Squads process on existing concerns Trust is an important issues in Fix-it Squads. Don't just pay lip service, credibility can come from having Fix-it Squad people with experience of small businesses 13 Participants were also asked three specific questions about Fix-it Squads What problems should be tackled? Fix-it Squads solve change management problems Squads could deal with crisis problems, e.g. cross-agency problems related to natural disaster management Define what red tape the squad will cut: this will probably be bureaucratic/process red tape, not legislation or policy based red tape (which is much harder to remove) Problem has to be owned Key associations could identify problems Must accommodate state issues Economic/financial/barriers to doing business problems, or where being bounced between agencies has caused problems for businesses Use a decision tree process to select a problem, rather than specific criteria or an arbitrary numerical scoring/ranking Stakeholder management Multilingual service for LOTE stakeholders Explaining what is and what isn’t possible to change is key in stakeholder management Government/ministers should be stakeholders Scope – project dimensions Important who is targeted and who gets on board We should take lessons from other Squad-type initiatives that have already happened Expectations management is important such as language, actions, time frames and perceptions Timeliness of fixing the problems is critical Squad must be perceived to own the issue CO-DESIGNING FIX-IT SQUADS Key workshop takeaways
There is a lack of clear channels for resolving specific problems for businesses that span agencies and jurisdictions the problem the context Steve is not alone. Shared responsibility for the problem with no owner for the solution is a common issue for businesses. DesignGov has identified businesses in the financial services, technology development and chemicals sectors, as well as businesses which provide procurement services to government, which are in the same boat. Problems span agencies and jurisdictions, no-one is wholly responsible, no- one is able to help or take the lead in finding a solution, and there are no definitive answers. businesses need: cross-agency solutions to problems targeted interactions the ability to accommodate exceptions intermediaries need: genuine engagement two-way relationships the opportunity to build relationships public servants need: to add value to policy and services to allow for tailoring to build a base for shared understanding cross-agency solutions Bogged and bounced by bureaucracy The regulatory problems that businesses face often don’t fit into the responsibilities of one specific agency. Often they will straddle a number of agencies and jurisdictions. Meet Steve the tech entrepreneur the needs to address THE CHALLENGE “Work with me to unravel problems” Steve is a composite persona that reflects the needs of dozens of businesses and intermediaries that DesignGov interviewed during the Business and Government Interactions project. For more information, please download the report (http://tinyurl.com/designgovfindings) and prospectus (http://tinyurl.com/designgovprospectus). Steve has an innovative idea for a new ICT startup. Two hurdles remain before he can get started: support and approvals from government. But no single agency has responsibility for this. And no one owns the solution. It spans several agencies and jurisdictions. Steve labours to find out which agency to contact and which form to fill out. But each time he contacts an agency, after a long and frustrating wait, he gets the same response: the agency says they want to help but don’t have responsibility and refers him to another agency. And the cycle continues. He never gets a definitive yes or no for his project. Steve’s frustrated – because his idea is a winner, but if he doesn’t get definitive answers from government soon, he’ll lose his crucial first-mover advantage to overseas rivals with more fluid approval processes 75 national regulatory agencies 2544 departments and agencies 564 local government s 1100 regulatory agencies 9 public sectors STATE GOVERNMENT LOCAL GOVERNMENT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT business seeking an answer 14
the idea Fix-it Squads Tackling priority problems through immersion and observation We are looking to facilitate development of a form of tiger team*, made up of seconded public servants and/or intermediaries from relevant agencies and organisations, who are charged with investigating issues identified by business and agreed by government. * A group of technical experts who also have energy and imagination, who understand and can solve technical or systemic problems. how we get there What must Fix-it Squads be able to achieve? Bring to light and develop processes for managing issues/friction that cut across agency and jurisdictional operations Connect to and develop networks and communities to generate awareness of common issues and facilitate collaboration Train public servants in observation and immersion techniques as part of active problem-solving. assumptions The Fix-it Squad can co-design a feasible solution with the affected business community unknowns What would be the process by which the business problem triggers a Fix-it Squad response? Who commissions the Squad? Who pays for it? organisational challenges Will a single agency or consortium have custody for Fix-it Squad programs? Some of the factors to be considered in our prototyping workshops THE PROPOSITION Prototyping Fix-it Squads FIX-IT SQUADS Business feels the cumulative weight of government requirements IMPLEMENTATION AND LEARNING AUTHORISING ACTING potential benefits businesses benefit by: Experiencing less pain in both time wasted and cost when dealing with a cross-agency problem intermediaries benefit by: Reduced frustration from lack of willingness by government to partner with them to find solutions to identified problems Value adding for their stakeholders by facilitating the Fix-it Squad process public servants benefit by: Being enabled to quickly coordinate cross- agency action on specific and known issues Gathering rich intelligence from the field on specific matters design principles Observation to understand Seek paradoxes/apparent contradictions Surface assumptions Co-design with influencers and those impacted Fix-it Squad is formed, trained and immersed in the problem area Fix-it Squad develops and tests options, recommending possible actions Existence of problem is acknowledged, triggering formation of Fix-it Squad DesignGov will be running a series of workshops aimed at further developing this concept and testing how it might work. If you would like to get involved, contact us through our email (email@example.com) or phone number (02 6125 4974) 15