1 CoE Conference on Performance Evaluation of the Judiciary Dr Axel G Koetz Ankara 25 March 2011 This Document is complete only together with the oral presentation; use of isolated pages might lead to misunderstandings. Questions: Dr Axel G. Koetz, Managing Partner, KPI Management and Policy Consultants Unicenter 2920, D Cologne, koetz-ag.com, Tel/Fax +49 (0) / 05 Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011 Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011 Necessary Elements for a System of Collecting and Analyzing Data

2 From Data Cemeteries to Useful MIS Relevant Automatic Motivating „Drilling Thru“ Start from Existing Systems Leads to the right decisions (e.g.: necessity of proper case weighting) Data generated during the normal work; no additional data collection Short and easy to understand by the decision makers and motivate them Trace nationwide information through all levels down do the individual Base as far as possible on existing data and data collection structures Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

3 Relevance (Aspect 1 of 5) We do not need to count what we can not influence For all other things we need the data In any case, a value analysis of all data collection is necessary For example: Proper case weighting is extremely relevant for all management decisions and a „must have“ for the system. Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

4 Automatic Collection (Aspect 2 of 5) As far as possible, all data should be generated automatically within existing workflows – Case data – Human resources dData – Other resources procurement / register data – Financial data For all data we need integrated collection and storage systems For all data we need clear definitions and clearly defined interfaces Existing workflow software has to be modified or exchanged to software which is able to do it. Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

5 Integration of Workflow Software and Statistical Software becomes a Key Element Workflow System collects inter alia -Case Type -Case Generation Date -Judge Name -Numerous case properties (like n of hearings, n of witnesses, lawyers use, experts use etc.) -Last hearing date -Verdict -Appeal Automatic transfer to the statistical system at any time Automatic forwarding to a national Court Data Base Other Workflows in the Court -HR -Equipment / Maintenance -Finance Regular reports to central / regional / court level / public Reports on demand to all levels, according to needs DB availability for own research to the academic world and the public Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

6 Motivation (Aspect 3 of 5) Data have to be understandable to decision makers Information has to be publicly available No overcomplicated indicators Decision makers have to have the power to act Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

7 Drilling Thru (Aspect 4 of 5) All levels have to have the technical opportunity to compare and track the reasons of problems as well as origins of good practice Top-Down and cross-cutting analyses have to be possible on every level „Drilling thru“ capacities: Analyze individual performance on all levels... This means that ALL individual case data have to be available, retrievable, connectable and analyzable Never „aggregate“ data and give up potential information – nothing is as cheap as data storage Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

8 Pyramid Model to Identify the Souces of Problems... National Regional level Court Level Judge level Which informations come from the national Average ? Where come Differences in regional performance from ? Which courts have problems, Which are fine ? Are there problems of Judges ? Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

9 „Drilling Thru“ and Extended Analytical Capacities Needed JUDGES COURTS REGIONS „Which judges are the most (un)productive nationwide ?“ „Is there a systematic performance difference between City and rural area courts ?“ „Are big courts more / less productive than small courts“ ? Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011