commonwealth secritariat (2002) profile of malta

7/28/2019 Commonwealth Secritariat (2002) Profile of Malta

1/102

A PROFILE OF THE

PUBLIC SERVICE

F MALTA

Current Good Practices and New Development

in Public Service Management

JN1 5 8 6

PCOMMONWEALTH SECRET


2/102

Commonwealth SecretariatMarlborough HousePall MallLondon SW1Y 5HXUnited Kingdom

Commonwealth Secretariat, 2002

All rights reserved. N o part of this publ icat ion may be reproduced,stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or otherwisewithout the permission of the publisher.

The author has asserted his moral right to be identified asauthors of this work.

The views expressed in this document do not necessarily reflectthe Commonwealth Secretariat

the Commonwealth Secretariat

Wherever possible, the Commonwealth Secretariat uses papersourced from sustainable forests or from sources that minimisea destructive impact on the environment.

Price 10.95ISBN: 0-85092-703-X

Web site:http// www.thecommonwealth.org
http://www.thecommonwealth.org/http://www.thecommonwealth.org/


3/102

The following organisations within the government of Malta contributedchapters or material for chapters:

Office of the Prime Minister

The Policy and Planning Department, the Employee Relations Department

and the Staff Development Organisation within the Management andPersonnel Office

The Strategy and Planning Directorate within the Off ice of the PermanentSecretary

The Department of Information

The Charter Support Uni t

The Central Information Management Unit

The Internal Audit and Investigations Directorate

The Management Efficiency Unit

Ministry of Finance

The Directorate General (Financial Administration)

The Special Projects Office

The Budget Off ice

The Policy and Planning Directorate

Other bodies

The Ombudsman's Office

The Nat ional Audit Office

Charles Polidano, Director (Strategy and Planning) at the Office of thePrime Minister, co-ordinated the project and edited the Profile.


4/102


5/102

Contents

Foreword to the Country Profiles series vi i

Introduction to the second edition ix

1 Improving People Ma na ge me nt 1

1.1 Reviewing Pay and Classif ication 1

1.2 Improving Performance Management 4

1.3 Delegating Powers of Discipline 6

1.4 Develop ing a Family-fri endly Workplace 9

1.5 Developing th e Abil it ies of Staff 13

1.6 Prospective Changes in People Management : 17

The Decentralisation of Staffing

2 Strengthening Public Service Leadership 2 0

2.1 Developing Clear lines of Accoun tabi li ty : The New 2 0

Top Management Structure

2.2 Paying for Performance 24

2.3 Co-ordinating Change 3 0

2.4 Prospective Changes in th e Area of Leadership: 3 4

Passing a Public Service Act


6/102

3 Delivering Better Services to the Public 38

3.1 Defend ing Citizens' Rights and Promoting Good 38

Administration: The Establishment of the Ombudsman's

Office

3.2 Informa tion on Demand: The Government Informatio n Service 43

3.3 Set ting Service Standards: The Qual ity Service Charter 45

Programme

3. 4 Towards Electronic Government 4 9

4 Improving Efficiency in the Use of Resources 55

4.1 The In troduction of Business Planning 55

4.2 Developing an Internal Au di t Capab ili ty 58

4.3 Stren gthen ing External Audi t 62

4.4 The Delegatio n of Financial Management Responsibilities 68

4.5 Towards Greater Eff iciency in the Use of Resources: 71

Prospective Changes

Further Information on th e Public Service of Ma lt a 82


7/102

Foreword to the Country Profiles series

Since the successful launch of the Commonwealth Profiles series in1995, much has happened. When the Auckland CHOGM of 1995mandated its 'Towards a New Public Administration' Programme,

many Commonwealth member countries, to a greater or lesser degree,were contemplating or already applying the principles of the NewPublic Management (NPM) in their civil services. Since that time, theliterature on the NPM has been burgeoning, the architecture of civilservice delivery has altered dramatically and the debate about therelative success or failure of the NPM continues. In practical terms,the civil services described in the Profile Series back in 1995 are nowoften radically different from the scope, organisation and approachof the same civil services today.

The Governance and Institutional Development Division (GIDD) hasdecided that it is timely to revise and re-issue an updated Profiles Serieswhich attempts both to describe and explain the often tumultuousand controversial public sector reforms of the last seven years as theyhave unfolded in the contributing countries.

We want these updated Profiles to continue to be a readable,accessible and valuable series, especially for practising bureaucrats,and to serve as reference points for diplomatic, bilateral andmultilateral, and political and academic audiences.

Tendai Bare Director,Governance and Institutional

Development Division

Dr Peter FrostSpecial Adviser,Public Sector Reform,Governance and Instutional

Development Division


8/102


9/102

Introduction to the second edition

Administrative reform, it is said, is a journey rather than a destination.The Public Service of Malta is on just such a journey, and it has

travelled a long way indeed. Public officers immersed in the pressingconcerns of their day-to-day work, even those who remember thefirst tentative steps of the journey, may not immediately be aware of this. It is only events such as the compilation of this Country Profilethat compel those involved to take stock, to look back at the distantstarting-point and to appreciate the length of the road travelled.

The journey began in 1988, when the government appointed a PublicService Reform Commission 'to examine the organisation of thePublic Service, and to recommend means by which the Service canefficiently respond to the changing needs for effective government'.As a complementary exercise an operations review of the structuresand administrative facilities of government was also commissioned.

Taken together, the work of the Commission and the operationsreview represent one of the most exhaustive inquiries ever to becarried out into the structure and organisation of the Maltese PublicService. It generated four key documents in 1989 and 1990: thePublic Service Reform Commission presented main and supplementaryreports, both entitled A New Public Service for Malta-, and theoperations review produced a main report and an informationsystems strategic plan for the years 1991-95.

The Commission and the operations review paid tribute to theachievements of the Public Service and its contribution to rapid nationaldevelopment in the post-war period. 'If our nation's citizens are well-fed, well-clothed and well-housed', stated the Commission, 'if they enjoy


10/102

the benefits of education, good health and the protection of the law,if they participate in the creation of the nation's wealth, they owesomething to the ability, dedication and adaptability of the Public

Service'.Nevertheless, both the Commission and the review found much thatwas amiss in the Service. Their recommendations for change can bebriefly summarised:

First of all, the Service needed a major overhaul of its personnelmanagement systems - improved pay, a simplified classificationstructure, mechanisms to recognise talent and reward performance,and a renewed emphasis on training.

Secondly, planning and target-setting mechanisms had to beintroduced to make management more systematic and moreprofessional and to enable managers to be held accountable forresults.

Thirdly, managers needed to be given more powers to managethrough decentralisation and a reduction in the extensivemanagement role played by central agencies.

Fourthly, ministries and departments needed reorganisation toavoid duplication and overlap and better address contemporary

requirements. Finally, a ma jo r investment was needed to improve the facilities

available to government departments, most particularlyinformation technology, to remedy the effects of decades of underinvestment.

This resulted in a huge agenda of change which began to beimplemented in 1990, with the establishment of three central changeagencies - the Management Systems Unit (later to be divided into theManagement Efficiency Unit and Malta Information Technology andTraining Services), the Management and Personnel Office and theStaff Development Organisation.

Of necessity, the initial focus of change was on internal systems and

processes. To briefly mention the major milestones, all of which arediscussed in more detail in this Profile, a system of target-basedforward planning known as business and financial planning wasintroduced in 1992. In the same year, Permanent Secretaries were


11/102

appointed for the first time as chief advisers to ministers and chief executives of ministries. In subsequent years, a new top managementstructure was established with the appointment of Directors General,

Directors and Assistant Directors. In a radical break with the past, alltop managers were appointed on the basis of renewable performanceagreements - a system designed to tighten the chain of command inministries and departments and to bring about genuine accountabilityfor results at senior levels.

At the same time, discussions were also under way with unions on

the reorganisation of the classification structure of the Public Service.An important step forward was taken in 1990 when the paystructure, which had grown by gradual accretion into some 100different salary scales, was replaced by a simplified structure of just20 scales. At the same time salary levels were improved substantially,removing much of the public-private pay gap which had contributedto an erosion of morale among public officers.

Between 1991 and 1995 negotiations with staff unions began on therestructuring of the 60 or so different career streams in the PublicService with a view to introducing mechanisms of career advancementthat rewarded merit rather than length of service. The exercise waslong and difficult but eventually it was brought to a successfulconclusion, albeit with special arrangements conceded for staff whowere in service at the time.

At the same time, major investments in information technology wereunderway in accordance with the information systems strategic plan.The Public Service was brought into the information age: a hugetraining effort got underway to familiarise public officers with the useof personal computers; major corporate and departmental systems

were computerised; and a fibre-optic cable network was laid down tointerconnect ministries and departments. E-mail was introduced in 1995.

A start was also made on the decentralisation of management powersto ministries and departments. Initially, moves in this direction werecautious on account of a concern to ensure that delegated powerswould be properly used. Progress was still made, particularly in the

field of financial management where a major step forward was madein 1996 with the passage of new regulations on public procurement.

To put in place better safeguards against any abuse of public powers,the reform programme was extended in scope. In 1994 codes of


12/102

ethics were launched for ministers, directors of public corporationsand other entities, and public sector employees. The following year,an Ombudsman was appointed with the status of an independent

officer of Parliament. Also in 1995, reforms extended to Parliamentitself with the establishment of five parl iamentary standingcommittees, including a Public Accounts Committee. In 1997 theAudit Office was reorganised, strengthened and re-established as theNational Audit Office with a reporting relationship to the PublicAccounts Committee.

Reform thus went beyond the Public Service to cover virtually everyinstitution of state. It extended to the judiciary with the creation of aCommission for the Administration of Justice chaired by the Presidentof Malta and including the Chief Justice, as well as representatives of other judges and magistrates. The Commission is effectively responsiblefor ensuring that the courts function efficiently and in a manner thatcan retain public confidence. Also, a completely new branch of thestate was established in 1993 when a system of elected local councilswas set up covering the whole of Malta and its sister island Gozo. Itis no exaggeration to say that the whole of the institutionalframework of governance, including, but by no means limited to, thePublic Service, underwent a renaissance during the 1990s.

This did not, however, prevent a measure of public dissatisfactionemerging at the lack of visible results in Public Service reform. Newmanagement systems, new technology and new institutions of statecut little ice with the public in the absence of improvements toefficiency and service quality. In reality, of course, much of the work that had been carried out was a necessary precondition to andfoundation for the delivery of visible improvements, but this could

hardly be expected to placate an impatient public.Delivering visible results was the objective of a new phase of PublicService change, which can be said to have established itself on a firmfooting in 1999 with the launch of the Quality Service Charterinitiative. This involved individual departments or offices publishingcharters setting out what services the public was entitled to receive

and what standards of service quality (expressed in tangible terms)the public could expect. Those standards of service quality wouldbe defined on the basis of improvements obtained through there-engineering of departmental processes.


13/102

The Quality Service Charter initiative was innovative in that itfollowed a department-by-department approach, whereas mostprevious reform measures were implemented centrally on a service-

wide basis. The role of the centre was limited to the provision of advice and support to departments, particularly once the initialintroductory phase was over. This approach allowed more flexibilityin incorporating lessons of experience and dealing with circumstancesspecific to individual departments. Most important of all, it alloweddepartments to assume ownership of change. Responsibility forreform was itself being devolved.

The new approach has succeeded. As the relevant chapter of thisProfile indicates, the Quality Service Charter initiative has taken ona life of its own and new charters are being launched on the initiativeof departments themselves. The government built on this in the springof 2001 with the appointment of a Director (Office of Review) ineach ministry. Each Office of Review is a locus for the internalisationof responsibility for change within its respective ministry. Its role is tomonitor the implementation of change initiatives and to drive themforward on the Permanent Secretary's behalf.

Other recent initiatives have pursued this approach. Electronicgovernment, an ambitious programme aimed at providing publicservices remotely using a variety of delivery channels, willrevolutionise the way in which citizens deal with the government.Electronic government is building upon the information technologyinfrastructure which has been put in place over the past decade. Theelectronic government programme is being driven at a central level bythe Ministry of Justice and Local Government, but once again aninstitutional base for implementation has been set up in each ministry

through the designation of a high-level official to act as 'e-champion'and the appointment of a full-time Information Management Officer.

Other reform initiatives aimed at building on the foundation of theprevious decade of change and delivering visible results are theefficiency review initiative and the public-private partnershipsprogramme, both of which were launched in 2000. The former is

aimed at identifying the potential for efficiency gains and cost savingsin departments through a rolling programme of efficiency reviewsbased on benchmarking against comparable entities in the privatesector. The latter is a scheme to second staff in certain categories of Public Service employment (particularly industrial grades) to private


14/102

contractors for work on government projects. This is aimed at usingthe public sector workforce more productively while saving moneyon the direct labour element of publicly-funded projects.

These initiatives - Quality Service Charters, e-government, efficiencyreviews and public-private partnerships - are key elements in what isnow called the Public Service Change Programme. They are by nomeans the only elements, however. Initiatives carried over from thefirst phase of reform continue to be implemented. Notably, a furthermajor advance has been made in management decentralisation with

the delegation of disciplinary powers to heads of department. Thedelegation of staffing powers is now also within close reach.

Additionally, since 1996 a number of measures have been taken tomake the Service a more family-friendly workplace with theparticular aim of improving retention rates of female public officers.New initiatives aimed at improving internal management processes

continue to be taken: the most far-reaching of these is theintroduction of accrual accounting.

Still more changes are in the offing. The legal framework of thePublic Service is about to be overhauled with the development of anew Public Finance Management Act and a Public Service Act. Thelatter in particular may, if approved, bring about major changes in

the organisation of the Service. It would provide for, among otherthings, the formal establishment of a Senior Executive Service; wideruse of position-based recruitment at lower levels in departments; andthe creation of government agencies, a new form of organisation withmore management flexibility and strong accountability safeguardswhich may take on much of the executive work of government. Allthese initiatives are described in the appropriate chapters of this

Profile.

Already the Service is vastly different from what it was in 1990.Senior officers are accountable for results and can lose their positionsif they do not meet expectations; management has been freed frommuch red tape; ministries and departments boast a first-classelectronic communications infrastructure; managers are confidently

exploiting information technology to upgrade organisationalcapacities and deliver better services; and they are increasinglyaccountable to the public for the provision of those services. Talentedofficers are rising to the top rapidly: senior managers in the Public


15/102

Service are, as a group, younger and better qualified than before.Since 1999, close to a third of new appointees to headship positionshave been in their thirties, including one Permanent Secretary.

The journey goes on. Indeed, the pace is accelerating. It is rightly saidthat reform has no final destination, for new expectations, newrequirements and new circumstances will always compel the PublicService to respond with new change initiatives. But there still comesa stage when one should look back to the now-remote point of departure and ask: did we get to where we needed to arrive? Reform

was instituted with the aim of making the Public Service better ableto respond to the changing needs of effective government. After morethan a decade it is surely pertinent to ask whether this objective hasbeen attained. Indeed, it is legitimate to expect that this objective hasbeen attained.

The Public Service faced a first major test of its ability to respond to

changing needs in 1999, when the European Union (EU) beganactively considering Malta's application for EU membership. Thecircumstances in which this happened meant that Malta had a longway to catch up in relation to other applicant countries. The firsttask was the screening of the entire body of Maltese legislationagainst EU directives and regulations to assess what needed to bedone by way of harmonisation with EU requirements. Some otherapplicant countries had taken over two years to complete thescreening process. Malta could not afford to wait that long. The task fell largely on the shoulders of the Public Service. It was ready in justsix months.

Then began the work of harmonisation itself. This entailed a massiveprogramme of activity including the enactment of new legislation, theestablishment of new administrative structures and procedures andthe development of expertise in a wide range of domestic policysectors involving practically every ministry in the Maltesegovernment. EU requirements reveal their imprint in a few of thesections of this Profile - section 4.2 on internal audit, section 4.5 onthe new Financial Management Act. This is but a minute fraction of

the harmonisation agenda.Again, the work had to be completed within a short timeframe. Likeother applicant countries, Malta had committed itself to havinglargely completed its preparations for membership by 1 January 2003


16/102

in readiness for the enlargement of the EU, which may take place asearly as 2004.

As before, the Public Service has shown that it can deliver the goods.Much remains to be done, but the achievements so far registeredclearly demonstrate that early concerns that the Service would not beup to the task were unfounded. This huge agenda of change, it has tobe remembered, was taken on board along with the change initiativesdescribed in this profile. Public officers rose to the challenge set forthem by the elected government. They have shown that they can hold

their own with their counterparts in any other country - this hasbeen evident in their dealings with officials in Brussels and elsewhere.

To a large extent, the Public Service was able to deliver thanks to thereforms which it had already undergone. The reforms currentlyunderway pose challenges of their own, as no doubt will thosereforms that lie in the future. But the Service's record to date bodes

well for its ability to adapt to new expectations and respond to newrequirements. The Public Service of Malta is rising to the challengesof governance in the twenty-first century.

I wish to thank the thousands of public officers whose dedicatedefforts and abilities enabled the Public Service to make such progress.Any organisation is only as good as its people. This second edition of

the Malta Country Profile is dedicated to them.Joseph R Grima

Head of the Public ServiceOffice of the Prime Minister


17/102

Improving People Management

1.1 Reviewing Pay and ClassificationBefore January 1991, the salary and wage structure for approximately30,000 Public Service employees consisted of over 100 pay scalescovering no less than 500 grades. Given the multiplicity of grades andscales, pay differentials between adjacent grades were small or marginaland therefore offered insufficient inducement for career progression.

Flat-rate cost of living increases applied over several years had alsocompressed vertical relativities between scales to such an extent thatthe Public Service faced difficulties in recruiting and retaining staff inmiddle and senior grades. These difficulties were further compoundedby poorly defined career paths and entry requirements.

The classification and pay structure was central to the concerns of

the Public Service Reform Commission which had been appointed in1988 to review the organisation and structure of the Public Service.In its reports of 1989 and 1990 the Commission recommended that asimplified structure should be introduced consisting of just 20 scalesdivided into four horizontal bands as follows:

Category A (scales 1 to 5): the senior management structure

Category B (scales 6 to 10): professional and managerial grades

Category C (scales 11 to 15): technical and supervisory grades

Category D (scales 16 to 20): clerical and manual employees.

The Commission called for progression from one grade to another


18/102

within a career stream to be more rigorously selective on the basis of merit, particularly where it involved moving from one category to thenext. The Commission felt that the promotion mechanisms then in

place within the Service laid too much emphasis on seniority.

1990-95: The restructuring programme In 1990 efforts began to put these proposals into effect. The task,which amounted to a major programme of restructuring within thePublic Service, was the responsibility of the Management andPersonnel Office (MPO) within the Office of the Prime Minister.The MPO had to agree on the changes with no less than ten unionsrepresenting the various categories of staff in the Public Service.

The initial step was to agree on a preliminary framework withinwhich detailed negotiations on individual career streams would takeplace. This Framework Collective Agreement, which was signed inDecember 1990, provided for the compression of the existing paystructure into the 20-scale structure envisaged by the Public ServiceReform Commission and for the assimilation of existing grades intothe new structure.

In 1991 the MPO began the painstaking process of negotiations onindividual career streams. By 1995, when the process came to an end,nearly 60 classification agreements had been finalised within thefollowing broad occupational groupings:

administrative class

executive class

clerical class

educat ion class medical class

scientific class

engineering class

legal class

nursing/paramedical class

pharmacist class

agricultu re class


19/102

environment class

technical class

industrial/supervisory class.Each agreement stipulated:

a grad ing struc ture pegged to the Service's 20-scale salary s tructure;

entry requirements for each grade;

mechanisms of career progression;

any additional benefits/allowances; and

other special ar rangements , such as concessions in mat ter s of selection and progression for employees in service at the time theagreement was signed.

Broadly speaking, each agreement brought about greateraccountability at upper levels, more accelerated avenues forpromotion on merit at middle levels (together with more outsideentry points), and greater flexibility at lower levels. These objectiveswere achieved even though the agreements necessarily took accountof employees' interests and concerns as articulated by unions. Thenew agreements also resulted in a rationalisation of career paths and

made possible the recognition of newly emerging professions andoccupational groups. They improved the Public Service's ability todevelop and reward its employees' skills and abilities and to deploystaff effectively.

Subsequent collective agreements The December 1990 Framework Agreement represented a break-through not only because of the restructuring which it made possible,but also because it bound the government to review its employees'conditions of service every five years. Accordingly, the first collectiveagreement for Public Service employees (as distinct from classificationagreements covering particular career streams) was signed inDecember 1998. This agreement covered the years 1996-2001 and

was primarily concerned with reopening the vertical relativitiesbetween salary scales: these had become compressed once more as aresult of the continuing practice of awarding flat-rate cost of livingincreases.


20/102

The government and the unions agreed that no radical changes wouldbe entertained in the individual classification agreements that hadbeen concluded during the previous round of negotiations. A

corrective exercise was, however, undertaken to redress minoranomalies that had come to light.

The government and the unions also agreed that future collectiveagreements for Public Service employees would be effective for threerather than five years. The next collective agreement will cover theperiod 2002-2004.

1.2 Improving Performance Management

One of the recommendations made by the Public Service ReformCommission in 1989 was that a new employee appraisal system beintroduced which would allow for the performance of employees tobe assessed against previously agreed targets or standards. Thissystem would replace the then-current Performance Rating Report,which was an outdated trait-based assessment system which had lostcredibility and largely fallen into disuse.

Accordingly, a new appraisal methodology known as the PerformanceManagement Programme (PMP) was designed and, after pilot testingin several departments, it was introduced by the management andPersonnel Office on a government-wide basis in 1994. The design of the PMP encapsulated the following principles:

supervisors should adopt an open and honest management stylebased on two-way communication between themselves and theirsubordinates;

performance should be measured and assessed against jointly-agreed goals;

skills development needs should be identified and addressed so thatemployees could perform more effectively;

employees should receive regular feedback which was specific,constructive and job-related.

To put these principles into effect, the Management and PersonnelOffice established a number of requirements for the operat ion of thesystem:


21/102

at the start of each year a supervisor and his or her subordinateshould jointly agree on the goals and targets which the subordinatewill aim to achieve during the year;

those goals and targets should reflect the employee's normal on-going duties and responsibilities, and they should also be consistentwith organisational objectives;

supervisors should review their subord inates ' performance againstthe goals and targets during the course of the year and carry out aformal assessment at year end;

the assessment involves the award of a rating according to apredetermined scale, but it should also take a qualitative formaimed at assisting the subordinate to improve their performance;

where necessary, training and development needs should be clearlydefined;

employees should also be involved in the appraisal and told whatrating they have been given.

Initially, the PMP did not achieve the expected results as employees,who had been conditioned by their experience of the PerformanceRating Report system, were somewhat sceptical. Increasingly, however,supervisors and employees recognised the benefits of this programmeand the opportunities it offered for both parties to solve or avoid anumber of work-related difficulties. It also helped employees toappreciate their role in achieving departmental objectives.

The system was also linked to the award of increments. In effect,increments are only awarded to those employees who havecompleted the work planning and evaluation form and whoseperformance is rated as 'exceeds job expectations' or 'meets jobexpectations'. Similarly, employees who apply for higher positionsand who are on the programme are generally required to submitrecent evaluation forms for consideration as part of the selectionprocess.

Initially the PMP applied to middle management staff, excludinghealth care staff, teachers and police officers. The scope of theprogramme was gradually extended, and it currently encompassesa target population of approximately 5,000 employees including:

general service grades from Executive Officers (senior clerks)


22/102

upwards to middle and senior management staff who are not ona performance agreement;

corresponding grades in the teaching, medical, technical andprofessional classes.

The Management and Personnel Office regularly monitors theimplementation of the programme through quantity audits of work plansand evaluation forms for public officers. These audits, which are heldthroughout the year and extend to all ministries and departments, are atool to maintain and improve compliance rates with the programme.During the year a number of quality audits are also performed inorder to ensure that required standards are being maintained.

New entrants to a grade covered by the programme are required toattend PMP training/ communication workshops. These workshopsprovide employees with an opportunity to obtain all the informationthey may require regarding the PMP. Special training sessions are alsoorganised for supervisors and trainers who are required to facilitatePMP training sessions within ministries and departments.

1.3 Delegating Powers of Discipline

The constitution of Malta vests authority to discipline public officers

in the Prime Minister, acting on the recommendation of an independentPublic Service Commission (PSC). The constitution permits the PrimeMinister, again acting on the recommendation of the PSC, to delegatethese powers and to attach conditions to this delegation.

Before 2000 disciplinary procedures followed a highly centralised modelwhich was increasingly unsuited to the needs of the Public Service. The

groundwork for change was laid in 1999 when new disciplinaryregulations were passed by the Public Service Commission, with theconsent of the Prime Minister as required by the constitution. The newregulations set out considerably simplified disciplinary procedureswhich could follow either a centralised or a decentralised route, thelatter applying in the case of department heads to whom powers hadbeen delegated. Naturally the decentralised route offered departmentsthe greatest advantage in terms of simplicity and ease of application.

The Prime Minister approved an instrument of delegation to heads of departments in terms of the new regulations in November 1999.


23/102

These arrangements were activated on 1 February 2000 when thenew regulations were brought into effect.

Key provisions of the new regulations Salient points of the new disciplinary regulations are:

Under delegated author ity depa rtmen t heads can issue charges,appoint an independent disciplinary board to hear the case, andapply penalties other than dismissal.

All supervising officers have the power to admonish subordina tes(a means of dealing with minor infringements on the spot) and tokeep a record of the admonishment, which is cancelled six monthsafter it is administered: if three admonishments are given to thesame person in a six-month period, this has to be reported to thehead of the department.

A head of department may issue a wri tten warn ing to officers forminor offences after allowing them the opportunity to reply. Thiswritten warning is cancelled after 12 months in the absence of further disciplinary action, but additional minor offences couldconstitute grounds for dismissal;.

The statement of the charge should indicate whe ther the case isconsidered to be minor or serious or whether it may lead todismissal, and penalties would be awarded accordingly.

Officers wh o absent themselves wi thou t leave fo r ten consecutivedays are considered as having resigned with effect from theeleventh day of absence. This is done after they have been notifiedand no justifiable reasons are received for their absence.

Safeguards on employee rights A successful disciplinary system requires that flexibility and ease of application should be balanced by adequate protection of employees'rights. This has been achieved in the new disciplinary regulationsthrough the following safeguards:

Preparation and training. An extensive training programme onnew regulations was organised for heads of department, humanresource manager s and depa rtmental officers responsible for theprocessing of disciplinary cases. A comprehensive manual to assistheads of department in the processing of disciplinary cases was


24/102

also published. Such training and support continue to be providedto departments.

Consistency of treatment and uniformity. In a large and multi-faceted organisation like the Public Service it is important to ensurea high degree of uniformity and consistency in the treatment of disciplinary cases within different departments. This has beenachieved through the inclusion in the new regulations of anindicative list of offences categorised as minor and serious offences(the list gives due importance to poor performance as well as to the

commission of offences), as well as a progressive scale of penaltiesproviding for a minimum and maximum penalty for each categoryof offence and for increased severity for relapsers.

PSC control over exercise of delegated authority. The newdisciplinary regulations empower the PSC to enquire into allegationsor indications of abuse or misuse of delegated powers by any head

of department. This could lead to disciplinary action or thewithdrawal of delegated powers in respect of that particular headof department.

Right of appeal. The new regulations introduced the possibility of an appeal to the PSC by officers who are found guilty of a seriousdisciplinary offence or who have been given a warning of dismissal.

Officers can also appeal in all other cases where there has been agross disregard of the procedures set out in the regulations.

Adequate means of assistance. The new regulations retain the rightof an employee to be assisted by a union representative or by anyother person prior to and during disciplinary proceedings. Theregulations also retain the right of an officer charged to have access

to all the documentary evidence to be used against him. Composition of disciplinary boards. The officer charged may

petition the PSC if he can demonstrate that a member of the Boardis prejudiced against him.

The improvements to discipline brought about by the new

disciplinary regulations The old disciplinary system required all disciplinary cases to bereferred to the central Management and Personnel Office (MPO).The new regulations have done away with this requirement.Discipline has become a matter for department heads, who deal


25/102

directly with the Public Service Commission where necessary. TheMPO has now assumed the role of monitoring the application of thenew procedures and providing support and advice to line departments

in dealing with disciplinary cases.The new disciplinary regulations have made heads of departmentaccountable for the whole disciplinary process. The responsibility fordiscipline now clearly rests with the departments where it has to beexercised. The delegation of responsibility is also evident in theauthority that has been given to supervisors to deal with minor

infringements immediately after they occur through the system of admonishments.

Another evident improvement in the administration of discipline hasbeen the greater speed with which cases are now processed.Government employees are entitled to a fair and speedy hearingwhich also ensures that offenders are immediately punished. In fact,

a gradual increase in the overall number of disciplinary cases hasbeen noted.

1.4 Developing a Family-friendly Workplace

The government of Malta has had a consistent policy of implementingmeasures to make the workp lace more family-friendly. The PublicService has been a primary focus of this policy. Various initiativeswere introduced within the Service to ensure that female and maleemployees would be better able to balance their work and familyresponsibilities. These initiatives can be grouped in two categories:extended leave for family reasons and flexible employment measures.

Extended leave for family reasons Parental leave

Working women in Malta, as in many other countries, enjoy the rightto 13 weeks' maternity leave on full pay, which is taken partly beforeand partly after childbirth. In March 2001 they became entitled to anextra week of unpaid leave which can be taken immediately before or

after the 13 weeks of paid leave.Of course the demands placed on parents by newborn children gowell beyond the first few weeks after birth. For this reason, a schemewas launched in 1996 whereby public officers could app ly for unpaid


26/102

parental leave to look after their children under five years of age.

This scheme includes two components:

a public officer who becomes a parent can take a year's leave tolook after his or her child, and can take another year for everyadditional child;

in addition, he or she can take a once-only career break of threeyears for the same purpose.

An innovation in this scheme is that it is open to both men andwomen, in recognition of the fact that family responsibilities belongto both. Parental leave can be taken by either the father or themother if both are public officers, and they also have the option of sharing it between themselves.

This scheme offers public officers with young children a means toreconcile their careers with family demands and an alternative toresigning in order to give their young children proper attention - achoice still faced by many women, in particular, in a society whichcontinues to regard using outside help as a second-best option. Byencouraging women to remain in the Service (and encouraging mento take a fuller share of their domestic responsibilities), the schemeshould help increase the representation of women in senior positions.

Responsibility leave

Similar reasoning lay behind the institution in 1999 of unpaid'responsibility leave' for public officers with dependent familymembers (elderly parents, sons and daughters, or spouses whorequire special care and who have no one else to look after them).Public officers in such a situation can take a year's unpaid

responsibility leave, which can be renewed if the need continues.Where the dependent family member is a child, responsibility leavecan be shared between the father and the mother in a manner similarto that of parental leave.

Responsibility leave in the Public Service is in line with the government'spolicy aim of encouraging and assisting families to care for dependent

members or their household. It is also a social reality that manypeople in Malta are cared for in this way. This again can pose achoice to the carer, which this scheme aims to attenuate, betweencareer and family obligations.


27/102


28/102

they are on maternity and parental leave are granted their dueappointment even if they are unable to take up their new postwithin the time limits normally allowed.

Employment on a sessional basis

Another family-friendly policy is that which allows the employmentof some categories of health care employees for limited periods whilethey are on parental leave. In this manner, such employees can respondto the needs of their families while still contributing to the delivery of services to the public.

Casual substitutes on definite contracts

Measures such as parental and responsibility leave gave rise to thepossibility of staff absences disrupting departmental operations.Arrangements were needed to cover for absent staff, yet ministriesand departments could not simply be directed or permitted to recruit

career staff to replace employees who would themselves eventuallyreturn to the department.

In 1999, therefore, following negotiations with staff unions, a schemewas introduced whereby casual substitutes would be employed ondefinite contracts to fill temporary vacancies arising from employeesbeing granted long leave of at least a year's duration. The power to

engage casual substitutes under this scheme was delegated toPermanent Secretaries.

The scheme applies to all grades in the Public Service except forindustrial grades, with the proviso that casual substitutes must berecruited in an external entry grade of the appropriate career stream.Casual substitutes must also meet the eligibility requirements as

defined for that grade in the relevant classification agreement, withthe exception that if recruitment is normally made through a writtenexamination this requirement is waived.

The impact of family-friendly measures on the service In Malta the Public Service has led the way in creating a work etmTotvmetvt tVvax. vs. mote. It'vetv&Vj to empVo^ees

o\A\gat\ons. Such measures are paitiaAarYy important m a societywhere the out-sourcing of family care to outsiders continues to beseen as a second-best option. Nowadays public officers (particularlywomen) with children or other dependent family members have


29/102


30/102

informat ion technology (IT) training

departmental training and finance

con tinuous development and overseas training .Each of these areas is under the direction of an Area Co-ord inato rwho reports to the Director. The organisational structure hasdeliberately been kept simple to allow for a flexible and rapidresponse to newly emerging needs.

Management development The development of leadership and management competencies is akey component of the SDO's training activities. The approach usedhere has been to design activities based on client needs and firmlyplaced within context of the Public Service change agenda. TheSDO's Senior Management Development Programme (designed incollaboration with the Institute of Public Administration andManagement, which was established within the University of Maltaat the behest and with the support of the Public Service) has provedinnovative both in its curriculum and also in terms of the approachused. The programme has also attracted attention abroad and theInstitute of Public Administration and Management has beenappointed to a Commonwealth technical committee to design

management development programmes.The development of competencies at senior management level took on a new dimension in late 2001, when the development of individual competency profiles began with assessments of cognitiveability (using numeric, verbal and non-verbal ability tasks) andpersonality (interpersonal skills). Experts in this field were engaged

to carry out assessments and the information will be used to addressindividual development needs. If successful, this profiling exercisewould be a breakthrough for the Public Service and would eventuallybe used for recruitment and team-building purposes.

EU-related training The SDO has been very active in providing support to ministries and

departments in their fulfilment of the commitments emerging fromMalta-European Union (EU) membership negotiations. The SDO hasassisted ministries in drawing up training strategies and has, with thehelp of its international contacts, organised several activities aimed at


31/102


32/102

to ministries and departments. In August 1999 the SDO published its Manual on Staff Development in the Public Service. This manualcontains service-wide guidelines on matters related to every aspect of

the training function of the Public Service, besides updated internaldirectives.

The scene was thus set for the decentralisation of training onoperational or technical matters specific to ministries anddepartments. Today ministries and departments are expected to takeprimary responsibility for the organisation and delivery of this type

of training, and they are expected to act without reference to OPMor SDO except in the case of EU-related training.

At the ministerial level, the training function now falls under theaegis of the Corporate Services Departments. Some ministries havetaken this function very seriously and with the support of the SDOand the Management and Training Services Division (MTSD) of the

Commonwealth Secretariat, they have undertaken training needsanalysis. Several priorities have been identified and the SDO isassisting ministries and departments in the design and delivery of training activities to address those priorities.

Continuous development and overseas training The Staff Development Organisation aims to ensure that all publicofficers are exposed to training, at least at key stages in their career.This objective is met partly by organising induction and refresherprogrammes for officers (particularly those in general service grades)who are newly recruited or who are promoted.

The training strategy of the Public Service also extends to universitydegree courses. The flagship programme in this regard is the annual

sponsorship of five public officers each year to read for MBAs orrelated programmes at master's level. In addition, the Institute of Public Administration and Management runs a diploma programmein public administration with a time-table specially adapted tofacilitate participation by public officers. Many mid-career officersfind this programme a valuable introduction to university studies and

a stepping-stone to higher degrees.Public officers are also sent on a variety of other external trainingprogrammes, including stages (placements) with the institutions of the European Commission in Brussels. A substantial number of


33/102

Maltese public officers have taken part in stages, and this has enabledthe Public Service to build up a valuable reservoir of understandingof, and direct familiarity with, the operations of the European Union.

Conclusion In spite of the emphasis placed on decentralisation, the volume andbreadth of the SDO's activities have increased. This is a reflection of the ever-increasing complexity of government as well as the challengesposed by centrally-driven initiatives such as the introduction of Quality Service Charters, accrual accounting, e-government,sponsorships for further studies and secondment or placement schemesfor public officers. These initiatives have all required, and continue torequire, central support through training.

Since 1990, the SDO has been able to observe and assess theeffectiveness of its training approaches and activities. Its experienceserves to confirm that the effectiveness of training is dependent on:

whether trainees have an incentive to use their newly-acquiredskills;

whether train ing is pa rt of a con tex t in which the new skills,knowledge and attitudes are applied.

These requirements have generally been met thanks to the closeconcertation between training and the implementation of reform. Asa result training has, on the whole, achieved its aim of building upthe organisational capacity of the Public Service and enabling it tobetter respond to the requirements of governance in the twenty-firstcentury.

1.6 Prospective Changes in People Management:The Decentralisation of Staffing

The decentral isation of staffing powers has been on the agenda of Public Service change since 1989, when the Public Service ReformCommission called for the delegation of authority to recruit andpromote staff to heads of departments.

The constitution of Malta effectively assigns responsibility for staffingto the independent Public Service Commission (PSC). The delegationof staffing powers to heads of departments requires a recommendation


34/102

to this effect by the Commission to the Prime Minister. Some progresshas been registered: in 1998, for example, Permanent Secretaries weredelegated the power to confirm employee appointments on the

conclusion of their probationary periods, and in 1999 PermanentSecretaries were also given the power to engage casual substitutes ondefinite contracts (see section 1.4). Work also began on a moregeneral delegation of staffing powers, but this only picked up a moresustained pace following the coming into force of the newdisciplinary regulations in February 2000 (see section 1.3).

The PSC set the ball rolling in May 2000 when it presented to theHead of the Public Service two new sets of draft regulations, whichwere intended to replace the current Public Service CommissionRegulations of 1960. This was a preliminary step before the PrimeMinister's consent was obtained for the issue of new regulations asrequired by the constitution. After considering the drafts, the Officeof the Prime Minister submitted feedback to the Commission and thisresulted in the presentation by the PSC of revised drafts in June 2001.

The first set of new regulations, the draft Public Service Commission(General) Regulations, defines the role and powers of the Commissionand sets out general principles governing its work. Additionalprovisions concern the internal workings of the Commission.

The second set of regulations, the draft Public Service Commission(Appointments Procedure) Regulations, contains provisions governingthe manner in which selection criteria are established, calls forapplications issued and selection boards appointed. These draftregulations follow the model of the new disciplinary regulations byproviding for two alternative procedures for appointments - one tobe followed by heads of departments to whom authority to make

appointments has been delegated, and the other to be followed byheads of departments in the absence of delegated powers. Oneventual issue of the regulations, the 'delegated' procedure would beactivated through an instrument of delegation made by the PrimeMinister on the Commission's advice. As a safeguard, the instrumentof delegation would allow the Commission to withdraw the delegationof powers from any head of department if it considers that he or shehas abused his powers.

Heads of department would continue to make appointments underdelegated powers in accordance with the eligibility criteria set out in


35/102

the classification agreement pertaining to each career stream of thePublic Service, unless and until alternative arrangements are broughtinto effect following passage of the Public Service Act (see section 2.4).

As of May 2002 the Commission is considering feedback from thegovernment concerning the revised draft regulations. Discussions willcontinue until a combination of simplicity of procedure and adequacyof safeguards can be arrived at which satisfies both sides and respectsthe provisions of the constitution. Subsequently it would be possibleto seek the Prime Minister's consent for the issue of the new

regulations.


36/102

2 Strengthening Public ServiceLeadership2.1 Developing Clear Lines of Accountability: The New

Top Management Structure

In the early 1990s a new top management structure was put in placeas part of the ongoing Public Service reform programme. It is aunified structure consisting of four basic levels (Permanent Secretary,Director General, Director and Assistant Director) with a number of

distinctive features, notably the use of renewable contractualappointments and the setting of annual performance targets linkedto a system of performance bonuses.

The senior management structure was developed in response to anumber of problems which had been identified by the Public ServiceReform Commission in 1989:

senior managers lacked a clearly defined sphere of managementauthority and responsibility;

many senior management positions were incorporated withinspecialised departmental career streams, effectively creating 'closedshops' which limited the field of selection for senior positions andimpeded lateral mobility;

many ministries lacked an institutionalised organisational structurewith clearly defined reporting relationships. Although the constitutionprovided for the appointment of fully-fledged Permanent Secretaries,this had never been brought into effect and in most ministries thepermanent head was a 'Secretary' whose remit and authority were

20


37/102

uncertain. Departments tended to deal directly with the minister orhis personal staff;

there was a lack of focus on performance and results th roug houtthe system.

The category structure In its 1989 report, the Public Service Reform Commission proposed asimplified classification structure for the Public Service consisting of 20 levels and divided into four horizontal bands as described in

section 1.1. The top band, known as Category A, represented thenew senior management structure, which was to incorporate allsenior management positions.

An important foundation for the new system was laid in February1991 when the Prime Minister issued a circular letter delineating theroles of ministers, parliamentary secretaries (junior ministers),

ministers' private secretaries, Permanent Secretaries and heads of department. The circular laid down the roles and responsibilities of each actor and defined the administrative and managerial competenceof Permanent Secretaries and department heads.

The Category A structure began to be put in place in 1992 when aPermanent Secretary was appointed in each ministry. The following

year the process of appointing directors general and directors gotunderway in accordance with an organisational structure that hadbeen defined and agreed for each ministry. The latter two levels havesuperseded the old category of 'head of department' for practicalpurposes. Directors general are responsible for ministerial divisions(large departments), which may consist of several directorates eachheaded by a director. Smaller departments are also headed by directors.

The final building-block of the basic structure was put in place inJanuary 2000 with the appointment of assistant directors.

Whereas previously top managers in the Public Service used to beappointed by direct nomination, under the new system all Category Apositions other than those of Permanent Secretary are advertised

through internal calls for applications open to eligible officialsthroughout the Public Service. Directors general and directors areselected by a standing Senior Appointments Advisory Committeeunder the chairmanship of the Permanent Secretary, Office of thePrime Minister (who is also head of the Public Service). The


38/102

committee shortlists and interviews applicants and formally advisesthe Prime Minister once it has identified the person it considers mostsuited for a particular position. The Prime Minister also consults with

the Public Service Commission prior to making appointments.Assistant Directors are selected by ministry selection boards chairedby the respective Permanent Secretary.

All Category A appointees retain tenure in their substantive grade.However, they are appointed to their position on the basis of aperformance agreement that runs for five years in the case of assistant

directors and three years for all higher levels. Performance agreementsare not renewed automatically on expiry. Incumbents have to justifyrenewal and indeed, below the level of Permanent Secretary, theyhave to reapply for their positions in competition with othercontenders. There have been a number of instances whereperformance agreements were not renewed.

All performance agreements provide for the setting of annualperformance targets and for the payment of a performance bonusaccording to results. Further information about this is provided insection 2.2.

The system reinforces the chain of command in that each officer'sperformance agreement is signed by his or her superior on behalf of

the government. The officer's superior also determines the officer'sannual bonus award (subject to confirmation by the PermanentSecretary) and makes a key input in the decision as to whether theofficer's performance agreement should be renewed or not.

Developing the organisation of ministries Along with the implementation of the Category A structure, theposition of Director (Corporate Services) was created in eachministry. The Director (Corporate Services) is responsible to thePermanent Secretary for the overall allocation and management of the ministry's human and financial resources. The role of the Director(Corporate Services) is to:

initiate and co-ordinate the ministry's business planning and

budgeting process;

ensure that the plans and budgets developed by divisions,departments and parastatal entities within the ministry forma coherent whole;


39/102

maintain reliable accounts and personnel records and develop amanagement information system;

advise and support divisions and departments on administrativematters;

manage staff training and development, either through the centralStaff Development Organisation or directly through providersengaged by the ministry;

provide other administrative support services.

In a few large divisions a Director (Finance and Administration)carries out much the same functions on behalf of the divisionalDirector General. Even here, however, the ministry's Director(Corporate Services) retains an overall co-ordinating role in relationto planning, finance and human resources.

In a number of ministries the position of Director (Policy andPlanning) was also created with the aim of developing a greatercapacity for policy analysis and development with a ministry-wideperspective. Broadly speaking the Director (Policy and Planning)carries out long-term strategic planning within the ministry, notnecessarily through a formalised process, whereas the Director(Corporate Services) is responsible for medium-term operational

planning and allocation of resources. Of course, the precise allocationof functions to both positions will vary from ministry to ministryaccording to changing needs and circumstances.

In 2001 a Director (Office of Review) was appointed in eachministry. The Director (Office of Review) acts as the ministry'schange manager, overseeing the implementation of an extensive

programme of change resulting mainly from ongoing Public Servicereform initiatives, as well as the harmonisation of laws, regulationsand administrative procedures with EU requirements in preparationfor Malta's eventual membership. The Director (Office of Review) isdirectly responsible for:

monitoring the implementation of change projects;

reporting on progress to the Permanent Secretary and to centralauthorities;

helping to ensure that the ministry meets its commitments underthe change programme.


40/102

Towards the end of 2001 Information Management Officers (IMOs)were also appointed in several ministries. Each ministry's IMO will:

develop ministries' capacity to plan and prog ramme theexploitation of information technology;

manage and suppo rt IT projec ts in ministries and take forward thee-government programme;

implement and enforce government-wide IT standards;

help managers to make better use of in format ion as a resource.

All of these positions have different roles and functions. However,they have a common aim of strengthening the permanent structure of ministries. In particular, the Director (Corporate Services), theDirector (Office of Review) and the Director (Policy and Planning)constitute major building-blocks of an institutionalised capacity forco-ordinated policy and resource management within each ministry.This support structure will better enable the Permanent Secretary tofulfil his or her role of leadership and co -ordina tion at the apex of each ministry. Permanent secretaries will also be in a better positionto offer the minister policy advice and to ensure that governmentinitiatives and priorities are carried into effect.

Already the Category A structure has generated substantial benefitsin terms of tighter and more clear-cut reporting relationships withinministries. All Permanent Secretaries are now at the head of a well-defined organisational chain of command in which senior managersat each level are accountable for the delivery of results.

2.2 Paying for Performance

Performance agreements were introduced as an integral element of the Category A structure as from 1992. They are intended to makesenior managers in the Public Service directly accountable forperformance and to link their tenure in office to the results that theyattain.

Position-based Appointments versus Substantive Appointments The old system of lifetime tenure in senior management positionsmade it difficult to hold senior managers accountable for results. Onthe other hand, however, it was in the national interest to maintain a


41/102

career Public Service capable of providing continuity followingchanges of government. The new system accommodated thisrequirement by making a distinction between positions and

substantive grades and applying the concept of renewableappointments to the position rather than the grade. A public officerwho is appointed to a senior management position in Category Aretains tenure in his or her substantive grade and would revert to thisgrade in the event of non-renewal of the performance agreement.

Furthermore, on first appointment to Category A an officer is offered

a substantive appointment as Officer in Grade 5, a grade whichcarries the same salary as an assistant directorship. In this way asalary 'floor' is established beneath which the officer could not fall.Officers who spend an extended period in higher-level positions areable to gradually advance to higher substantive grades, for exampleOfficer in Grade 4 which is pegged to the same salary as adirectorship position).

This system of parallel appointments serves two important purposes.First of all, in a context where public officers had been used toretaining full career tenure at the highest levels of the Public Service,it demonstrates that senior appointments still confer a 'permanent'career benefit. The system enhances the attractiveness of seniorpositions in the eyes of potential applicants, yet without appreciablydiminishing the incentive to perform that is built into eachperformance agreement.

Secondly, the system avoids the anomalies that might otherwiseemerge in a structure where long-established practices and procedurescontinue to evolve gradually. One such anomaly would be that of anofficer in a middle management grade who is promoted to aCategory A position and spends the remainder of his or her careerin successively more senior positions, yet all the while remaining'frozen' in the same substantive middle management grade.

Another potential anomaly would be that of assistant directors whoare substantively in a middle management grade and, as a result,being ineligible to apply for directorships or higher positions. This

situation could come about since eligibility for senior positions isdetermined by one's substantive grade, and the minimum eligibilitylevel for directorships and above is higher than that for assistantdirectorships. Until such time as the entire Public Service can be


42/102


43/102

Service. Any further direct intervention by the centre - for instance,requiring officers at lower levels to submit their plans for centralclearance - would be both unwieldy in practice and undesirable in

principle. This has, however, led to a search for appropriate qualitycontrol mechanisms to ensure that performance plans at all seniormanagement levels contained enough detail and specificity to fulfiltheir role as mechanisms of accountability for results. The result hasbeen a gradual refinement of the performance planning process.

Thus in 2001, once the above-mentioned database of change projects

was developed, it began to be used in vetting the performance plansof Permanent Secretaries. Subsequently, Permanent Secretaries wereencouraged to do the same, with the help of their change managers,in relation to their subordinates. The database serves as a readyreference to senior managers in the development of their performanceplans; it also offers a means of verifying the relevance and specificityof those plans. Indeed it is now a central requirement that relevantprojects in the database should be identifiably reflected in the formof targets in the performance plans of senior managers.

Building on this, as from 2002 a cascading approach was introducedwhereby performance plans for officers at each level of the CategoryA structure are drawn up ahead of those for the next level down.Previously all senior managers drew up their performance planssimultaneously. The cascading approach will better enable PermanentSecretaries to ensure that the contents of their own plans, as agreedwith the centre, is reflected as appropriate in the plans of theirsubordinates. This serves to push responsibility for importantgovernment initiatives down the line and to reinforce adherence tothe requirement for detail and specificity in plans.

The emphasis on change projects could, however, lead to thedownplaying of day-to-day management, which is a central role of most Category A positions. In 2001, therefore, standard key tasksand performance targets were introduced for each level of theCategory A structure. These standard targets related mainly togeneral management responsibilities as well as service quality

improvement and the attainment of efficiency gains.Naturally, officers drawing up plans retain the latitude to leave outstandard key tasks or performance targets that do not apply to them,as well as to elaborate on or further develop targets where this is


44/102


45/102

performance. The rating is linked to a performance bonus which canrange from 0 to 15 per cent of salary, as follows:

unsatisfactory: 0 per cent

satisfactory: 1 -3 per cent

commendable: 4 - 7 per cent

superior: 8 -12 per cent

exceptional: 13 -1 5 per cent.

This preliminary rating is forwarded to the Permanent Secretary of the ministry, who may vary it in order to ensure consistency of treatment across the ministry. The Permanent Secretary is alsorequired to ensure that the pattern of distribution of bonus awards tosenior managers in the ministry follows parameters established by theHead of the Public Service. The latter monitors bonus awards by the

various ministries to ensure that these parameters are observed, andto ensure that similar rating standards are observed in ministrieswhere the number of senior management staff is too small for theparameters to be meaningfully applied.

As with the performance planning process, the review process hasbeen refined over the years. Initially the award of bonuses was

carried out centrally by the Head of the Public Service, but thisproved unwieldy and it was delegated to Permanent Secretaries in1998. At the same time the distribution parameters for bonus awardswere put in place to ensure that different ministries continued toapply similar standards, and to emphasise the point that the bonusesrepresented a reward for performance rather than a salarysupplement that could be expected as of right.

Efforts were also made to reduce the time lapsing from the end of one year to the payment of bonuses for that year. Most ministriessuccessfully finalised their bonus awards for 2000 within fourmonths, that is by the end of April 2001. Such efforts continued in2002, with a three-month target being set for the finalisation of 2001bonuses.

As additional experience is gained in the use of performance-basedappointments, the system will continue to be refined and developed.Already it has yielded important benefits as a means of holdingsenior managers accountable for results.


46/102

2.3 Co-ordinating Change

Any country undertaking a programme of public service reform mustput in place strong mechanisms to direct and co-ordinate reform at acentral level. At the same time the centre must avoid assuming soleownership of reform. It must ensure that line departments continueto own change and retain the leeway to take initiatives of their ownthat complement the overall thrust of reform. This is a delicatebalance which is not easy to find or to keep. The quest for suchbalance may require periodic adjustments to the mechanisms of co-

ordination of reform.

Malta's experience has been no different. The apparatus currentlyused to co-ordinate change initiatives has evolved in the light of theexperience accumulated over more than a decade of reform. In thefirst phase of reform in the early 1990s, it is fair to say thatresponsibility for reform was seen to be concentrated at the centre of

government. This hampered efforts to foster a sense of ownership of reform within line departments.

Various measures were taken to counteract this. In 1997 the governmentreallocated its budget for information systems development from thecentre to line ministries, effectively putting the latter in the drivingseat. The agency that handled information systems development

began to operate on a semi-commercial cost recovery basis. When theQuality Service Charter initiative was launched in 1999 (see section3.3), it was designed in such a way as to give departments a leadingrole in the identification of services and the development of charters.The primary role of the centre in this initiative was that of supportingdepartments. Subsequently, Offices of Review were set up to serve as,essentially, a seat of responsibility for change initiatives within lineministries.

An overview of the mechanisms which are currently in place for thedirection and co-ordination of reform is given below.

The central change agencies The Management and Personnel Office (MPO) was created in 1990through a restructuring of what was then known as the EstablishmentsDivision, the central personnel office for the Public Service. WhereasEstablishments was preoccupied primarily with day-to-dayadministrative casework, the MPO has been gradually delegating


47/102

such functions to ministries and departments and taking on more of astrategic human resource management role. The MPO consists of four directorates: Resourcing, Employee Relations, Policy and

Planning, and the Staff Development Organisation. The MPO islocated within the Office of the Prime Minister, as was itspredecessor.

The Staff Development Organisation (SDO) was set up in 1990 andgiven overall responsibility for training and development activitieswithin the Service. Subsequently it was designated as one of the

MPO's four directorates. It has played a key role in supportingreform initiatives and in equipping public officers with the skillsnecessary to operate in a changing environment. The SDO organisesa wide range of training activities each year, some in conjunctionwith the Institute of Public Administration and Management at theUniversity of Malta. Further information on the SDO's activities isfound in section 1.5.

The Management Efficiency Unit (MEU) is a consultancy unit withinthe Office of the Prime Minister which offers its services to the othercentral change agencies, line ministries and departments and publicauthorities and other entities. It has been involved in a wide range of activities including policy development, the drafting of legislation,business process re-engineering and the implementation of organisational change.

Malta Information Technology and Training Services (MITTS) Ltdis the government's information systems development agency. It is agovernment-owned company whose board of directors is chaired bythe Head of the Public Service. MITTS provides systems developmentand maintenance services to ministries and departments on a fee-for-service basis. It also maintains the government's electroniccommunications network, and it is closely involved in the electronicgovernment initiative.

The Central Information Management Unit (CIMU) was set upwithin the Office of the Prime Minister in 1999 to provide an overalldirection for information systems development within the PublicService and to set common IT standards for ministries anddepartments. CIMU also supports the Ministry of Justice and LocalGovernment in the implementation of the electronic governmentprogramme, and it manages the main Internet service delivery portal.


48/102

The Charter Support Unit (CSU) provides overall direction for theQuality Service Charter programme. It assists departments in identifyingand restructuring services in preparation for the launch of charters

and in defining the service delivery standards to be incorporated ineach charter. It also exercises a monitoring role in relation to themaintenance of charter standards by commissioning periodic audits.

The Ministry of Finance has taken on a growing change managementrole as financial management reform has come to the fore in the PublicService change programme. The ministry has overall responsibility for

budgeting and the government financial management framework andit is currently overhauling much of the latter. The ministry is leadingkey initiatives such as the development of new legislation on financialmanagement, the introduction of an accrual accounting system andthe public-private partnerships initiative (see section 4.5).

The Ministry of Justice and Local Government has taken the lead in

the implementation of electronic government (see section 3.4). It hasalso played a role in service quality improvement initiatives relatingto e-government. The minister is also involved in the overall directionof public service change.

The overall co-ordination of reform is handled by two committees atdifferent levels. At the administrative level, there is a Public Service

Change Programme Steering Committee which includes the Head of the Public Service, the Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Financeand the heads of MEU, CIMU and MITTS. The steering committee ischaired by the Ministe r for Justice and Local Government , wh oeffectively deputises for the Prime Minister on matters relating topublic service change.

At the political level there is also a Cabinet committee on the PublicService which is chaired by the Prime Minister. It includes asmembers the Ministers for Social Policy, Finance, and Justice andLocal Government; the Head of the Public Service; the PermanentSecretary (Finance); and the Personal Assistant to the Prime Minister.

Holding ministers responsible for reform

As mentioned earlier, it must always be clear that line ministries anddepartments, rather than the central agencies, are responsible forbringing about reform. Mechanisms are needed to hold line ministriesresponsible for change.


49/102

Traditionally there has tended to be an imbalance in that whereas thecentre would have substantial numbers of people working full-timeon reform, staff in line ministries would have to juggle reform along

with many other responsibilities. The creation of an Office of Reviewin each ministry (see section 2.1) represents a breakthrough in thatministries now have their own full-time change management unitsto monitor reform and drive it forward on behalf of PermanentSecretaries. As also mentioned in section 2.1, in several ministries theOffice of Review has been reinforced by an Information ManagementOfficer who will take direction of information systems developmentand the implementation of electronic government with his or herministry.

Central monitoring of progress takes place through, among otherthings, a database of change projects that was developed by theManagement Efficiency Unit (MEU) in 2000. This containsinformation on projects stemming from harmonisation with EUdirectives, public service change initiatives including the launch of quality service charters and e-government, and ministry-specificinitiatives. It allows for the regular inputting of status updates onthe implementation of each project.

The database was developed to facilitate co-ordination amongdifferent activities, ensuring for instance that resources would not bedevoted to developing a quality service charter for an activity thatwas due to be wound up in keeping with EU harmonisationrequirements. The database was also intended to facilitate theprioritisation of departmental requests for MEU assistance.

The database is also used as a mechanism of project monitoring andaccountability. Each Director (Office of Review) is responsible forupdating his or her ministry's segment of the database andforwarding it to MEU every quarter. MEU consolidates theinformation and produces reports which are reviewed at the centre of government. As mentioned in section 2.2, the information in thedatabase is also incorporated in the annual performance plans of senior managers.

Permanent Secretaries and Directors (Office of Review) meetregularly once a month in separate fora. The meetings of both thesegroups are chaired by the Head of the Public Service. Many of theitems discussed at these meetings relate to public service change, and


50/102


51/102

act. It goes well beyond this, however. The act also aims to strengthenthe leadership of the Service; to introduce additional flexibility in themanagement of government departments; to create new organisational

options within the public sector; and to establish a stronger framework of ethical values and guidelines of conduct. Indeed, in this respect theact aims to regulate not only the Public Service but practically theentire public sector.

Strengthening Public Service leadership

The draft act aims to strengthen the leadership of the Public Servicein a number of ways. It provides for the appointment of a Chief Permanent Secretary who would act as head of the Public Service.The chief Permanent Secretary would be responsible for theorganisational and managerial framework of the Public Service, aswell as for the definition of ethical standards and guidelines. He orshe would be responsible for the performance of the Service as an

institutional whole.The draft act also clearly defines the powers and authority of Permanent Secretaries in relation to department heads. It goesfurther in extending the jurisdiction of Permanent Secretaries tonon-departmental entities - a matter on which the constitution issilent, notwithstanding the growing importance of such bodies within

the Maltese government.The draft act also provides for the establishment of a SeniorExecutive Service, thus putting the senior management of the PublicService on a statutory footing and creating a unifying element withina more decentralised organisation.

Introducing more management flexibilityThe draft act includes several provisions giving heads of departmentin the Public Service more managerial autonomy and flexibility.Among other things, department heads would be able to create andabolish positions and to classify those positions in accordance withdirectives and guidelines issued by the Chief Permanent Secretary.Heads would also be able to negotiate terms and conditions of

employment with staff, subject to the approval of the Minister of Finance. These functions are currently centralised.

Staff employed in the Public Service after the coming into effect of the act would be appointed directly to positions rather than grades,


52/102

meaning they would have no guarantees of tenure and would haveto compete for career advancement through appointment to higherpositions. Staff already in service would continue to enjoy the rights

inherent in their grades as defined in the collective agreementsrelating to their respective career streams.

The creation of agencies

The draft act provides for the establishment of agencies, which wouldbe bodies regulated by the act and within the jurisdiction of the Chief Permanent Secretary but outside the Public Service proper. Eachagency would be headed by a chief executive and would be requiredto enter into a performance agreement with its parent ministry whichwould relate to funding and the setting of goals and targets.

Agencies represent a valuable addition to the options currentlyavailable for the organisation of public functions. To date, functionswhich are not considered appropriate for government departmentsbut which do not warrant the establishment of a statutory authorityhave been entrusted to government-owned limited liability companiesor to foundations. However, concerns have been raised about theadequacy of the accountability mechanisms applying to such bodies.Agencies would embody the necessary flexibility of application todiverse public functions while incorporating stronger accountability

safeguards.

A stronger ethical framework

The draft act includes various provisions aimed at strengthening theethical framework of public sector management. It incorporates a setof 'public service values', as well as a fully-fledged code of ethics, andit makes the Chief Permanent Secretary responsible for issuing

directives and guidelines to operationalise the values and ethicalstandards. The d

commonwealth secritariat (2002) profile of malta

Documents