Executive Summary

Written responses from 228 employees were received. Over two thirds of responses were written by front line staff: case managers, work brokers and Community Employment staff.

The key issues raised were:

• The role of the case manager;
• The culture of DWI;
• Staff morale;
• Staff turnover;
• Information technology;
• Key performance indicators;
• The impact of the integration of services on Employment Services; and
• Community employment.

The analysis of responses indicated a number of benefits resulting from the integration of services:

• The 'one stop shop' concept;
• Being part of a team with improved emphasis on placing beneficiaries into work; and
• Improved level of professionalism in the delivery of services.

Conversely there was also concern expressed that a number of issues arising from the integration of services had been understated or ignored and respondents made suggestions for improvements. The following issues were raised and suggestions made:

• Case manager workload and the complexity of the information required by an individual to provide an accurate service needs to be reviewed;
• Some type of specialisation for case manager and work broker positions should be considered;
• The culture of the organisation must be able to recognise diversity of thought and allow honest feedback;
• The need for a single, national Information Technology infrastructure that is owned by DWI;
• Key Performance Indicators need to recognise quality of work alongside placement numbers;
• Further work is required on enhancing the proactive role of DWI to help job seekers find employment and to work proactively with employers; and
• Community Employment work requires urgent attention to examine its place within DWI and to ensure it is currently delivering the Government's objectives.

Context

In December 1999 a Ministerial Review Team was set up to examine the current activities and the future direction of the Department of Work and Income. Submissions were called from both from the public and from employees. The deadline for departmental responses was 20 March 2000. A number of late responses were received and these were included in this report. Purpose

This paper summarizes the responses from employees. The paper outlines the nature of responses and the key issues raised by respondents. It also provides a breakdown of the number of respondents by stated job type and location.

The analysis of the responses revealed several common themes and this report outlines the positive and negative issues raised by respondents.

Categories of Respondent

Responses covering 228 employees were received². The majority of responses were from individual employees. Fourteen responses were from groups of two or more and these group responses accounted for 134 staff.

Over two thirds of responses were written by front line staff; Case Managers, Work Brokers and Community Employment staff. A number of responses were also received from support staff, from the Benefit Crime team and from line managers. Some respondents provided no details on their position in the organisation (see Attachments One and Two for a breakdown or respondents by position).

The majority of respondents were based in the North Island. A number of respondents gave no indication of their location (see Attachment Three for a breakdown of respondents by location).

Categories of Response

All respondents expressed strong views. In almost all instances staff indicated a personal commitment to delivering the best service possible to their clients. However there was a range of opinions on the introduction of specific policies and the change of delivery approaches.

A small number of respondents were unqualified in their support for the changes that had occurred in DWI since the integration of services. The majority of respondents expressed qualified support with specific recommendations on how to make the current organisation and work processes operate more efficiently and more effectively for staff and clients. A smaller number of respondents expressed qualified opposition to changes and a handful stated outright opposition to the merging of the four functions into one department.

Summary of Issues

The key issues raised by respondents are grouped under the following headings:

• The role of the Case Manager
• Information technology
• The culture of DWI
• Staff morale
• Staff turnover
• Key Performance Indicators
• The impact of the integration of services on Employment Services
• Community Employment.

i.    The Role of the Case Manager

'The sizing of Case Managers' role is far too big.'

'The role of the case manager now encompasses such a large description of duties that it is now too large for one person to be able to complete the job to a satisfactory level'.

The role of the Case Manager was the most frequently raised issue. All respondents who identified as Case Managers had a view on the new role and most front line staff commented on the expanded role of the Case Manager. All expressed qualified support of the 'one stop shop' concept but most front line staff wanted significant changes to their workload and content so that their role can be managed in a way that better delivers services to the client.

A key issue was caseload. Staff commented that the maximum case load of 195 was misleading as it only counted the primary applicant and did not account for partners which frequently raised the case load to 260. A number of respondents argued for caseloads of 80 -120.

The complexity of the knowledge of products and services that was required by the Case Manager was raised. It was commented that complexity combined with workload adversely effected the accuracy of information delivered to clients. A number of respondents argued for a simplification of current policy and some made specific recommendations to streamline processes either operationally, by policy or by legislative change.

There was a general view expressed that benefit work tended to dominate the work of the Case Manager. Front line respondents commented that time was not available to provide quality time for employment placements and that the urgency of providing benefit assistance tended to dominate.

While there was widespread support for a 'one-stop shop' the majority of front line respondents argued for a level of specialization. Some explained that this was already happening in their office and a degree of specialization worked well. There were suggestions that Case Managers could differentiate between work tested and non-work tested clients. Other respondents suggested a specialist Case Manager could deal with certain groups of benefits.

An issue raised a number of times was the level of administrative support, particularly the need to have a receptionist to ensure adequate support to staff and clients.

ii.    Information Technology

'Much of the IT of the department is in disarray'

'On a day to day basis, this has been one of the most frustrating for me personally

'An internal issue for staff is having to duplicate loading customer information onto the two separate systems being Income support's SWIFTT and the Employment Service's SOLO.'

Information systems were raised across the board. A number of respondents regarded this issue with extreme frustration while others identified it as the next key process to be addressed by the organisation. Staff identified lack of training, downtime, lack of integration between the two systems and unnecessary duplication of information as key problems. The current situation is described as unwieldy and some respondents recommended that DWI should have its own information system to replace the existing systems.

Respondents who commented on the Community Employment Group all identified a lack of access to information systems and problems arising from the run down of PRISM.

iii.    Culture of DWI

'Things have not worked out, notably the lack of integration of two cultures.'

'Staff at all levels are scared to speak out as it could result in a loss of employment or affect performance based payments.'

'It's more important to be seen to be doing a job rather than actually achieving a measurable result.'

All respondents were aware of a change in desired organisation culture with the establishment of DWI. A number of respondents described the positive impact that the CEO had brought into the new organisation. Some respondents described the change as a culture of personality, some viewed this positively and others negatively.

The culture was seen as alternatively empowering and highly prescriptive. Those in the front line tended to regard local management as lacking in flexibility to adapt to local needs. A number argued that 'one approach did not fit all' and that local teams should have the ability to structure their work to meet local conditions.

Some respondents commented on attitudes within the organisation that threaten to derail the current managerial direction. Two common themes from respondents were; a lack of trust and the inability of senior managers to cope with diverse views within the organisation.

Many front line respondents commented that senior management did not welcome feedback that differed from the current policy direction. There was comment that you "towed the line or you left". This seemed to offend a number of respondents who expressed a dedication to their job and felt that their suggestions if acted on would be beneficial to the department.

iv.    Staff Morale

'I am extremely proud to work for WINZ'

'Constant negative reporting has a serious effect on staff morale'

The analysis of the responses showed that there were many positive comments about working for DWI. However the majority noted that morale had been effected by the bad publicity that DWI has attracted. The majority argued that the negative publicity did not fairly reflect the commitment of staff. Some respondents indicated that as a result of bad publicity some clients and the public had felt justified in abusing staff verbally. A number suggested that comments to the media from Ministers did little to enhance the credibility of DWI.