An analysis of the management of a public sector project: a systems-based case study

The management of a public sector project is analysed using a model developed from systems theory. Linear responsibility analysis is used to identify the primary and key decision structure of the project and to generate quantitative data regarding differentiation and integration of the operating system, the managing system and the client/project team. The environmental context of the project is identified. Conclusions are drawn regarding the project organization structure's ability to cope with the prevailing environmental conditions. It is found that the complexity of the managing system imposed on the project was unable to achieve this and created serious deficiencies in the outcome of the project.

Water management at the river basin level: challenges in Latin America

Includes bibliography

Development Aid to Water Management in Mali: The Actors, ‘Global’ Paradigms, and ‘Local’ Translations

Development aid involves a complex network of numerous and extremely heterogeneous actors. Nevertheless, all actors seem to speak the same ‘development jargon’ and to display a congruence that extends from the donor over the professional consultant to the village chief. And although the ideas about what counts as ‘good’ and ‘bad’ aid have constantly changed over time —with new paradigms and policies sprouting every few years— the apparent congruence between actors more or less remains unchanged. How can this be explained? Is it a strategy of all actors to get into the pocket of the donor, or are the social dynamics in development aid more complex? When a new development paradigm appears, where does it come from and how does it gain support? Is this support really homogeneous? To answer the questions, a multi-sited ethnography was conducted in the sector of water-related development aid, with a focus on 3 paradigms that are currently hegemonic in this sector: Integrated Water Resources Management, Capacity Building, and Adaptation to Climate Change. The sites of inquiry were: the headquarters of a multilateral organization, the headquarters of a development NGO, and the Inner Niger Delta in Mali. The research shows that paradigm shifts do not happen overnight but that new paradigms have long lines of descent. Moreover, they require a lot of work from actors in order to become hegemonic; the actors need to create a tight network of support. Each actor, however, interprets the paradigms in a slightly different way, depending on the position in the network. They implant their own interests in their interpretation of the paradigm (the actors ‘translate’ their interests), regardless of whether they constitute the donor, a mediator, or the aid recipient. These translations are necessary to cement and reproduce the network.

Human resource management in the Indian public and private sectors:an empirical comparison

This study compares human resource management (HRM) practices in Indian public- and private-sector organizations. The investigation is based on a questionnaire survey of 137 large manufacturing firms (public sector = 81: private sector = 56). The key areas of analysis include the structure of human resource (HR) department, the role of HR function in corporate change, recruitment and selection, pay and benefits, training and development, employee relations and emphasis on key HRM strategies. Internal labour markets (ILMs) are used to make the comparative analysis. The statistical results show a number of similarities and differences in the HRM systems of Indian public-and private-sector organizations. Against the established notion, the results of this study reveal that the gap between Indian private- and public-sector HRM practices is not very significant. Moreover, in a few HR functional areas (for example, compensation and training and development), Indian private-sector firms have adopted a more rational approach than their public-sector counterparts. © 2004 Taylor and Francis Ltd.

Performance measurement and feedback in a public sector program

Establishing a framework for measuring the performance of public sector programs is fraught with dangers. Many public sector organisations are satisfied with measuring activity in programs and fail to see the need for establishing a framework that will meet the needs of participants and measure outcomes as well as activities. This paper explores how a government department in Queensland went about establishing a performance management framework to measure the outcomes and activities in a program that was a public private partnership. Findings indicate that using an iterative consultative approach performance measure can be put in place that are meaningful and assist the participants to review the program.

Dismantling the public sector bastion : evaluation capital works

Purpose: The determination of the most appropriate procurement system for a capital works project is a challenging task for public sector clients considering the array of assessment criteria that are considered and the procurement methods that are available. This is particularly pertinent to the Western Australian public sector where they have had a propensity to use traditional lump sum as the default procurement solution despite knowing that the selection of an inappropriate procurement method may lead to cost and time overruns, claims, and disputes’ on projects. This paper presents a six step procurement method evaluation approach that requires public sector agencies to consider in detail an array of options so as to obtain value for money. Design/methodology/approach: A procurement evaluation approach is developed and is examined using a focus group of 12 participants comprising of a public sector client, project team and key stakeholders. The focus group was used to examine the developed approach in the context of a real-life capital works project. Findings: The procurement method evaluation approach was deemed to be pragmatic and enabled decision-makers to re-evaluate outcomes from previous steps in the process. All focus group participants stated the six step process enabled a recommendation that was grounded in reflection and detailed evaluation. Practical implications: The developed procurement approach has enabled the public sector client evaluate the way in which they view procurement method selection and examine how they obtain ‘value for money’. Originality/value: The six step procurement approach makes use of quantitative and qualitative techniques and is reliant on discourse and reflection in making a procurement method recommendation. Consequently, the approach enables public sector clients to account for the complexities often associated with procurement selection.

Risk management in the Lusoponte concession : a case study of the two bridges in Lisbon, Portugal

The case study of Lusoponte illustrates the concession awarded by the Portuguese Government to finance, design, build and operate two bridges over the Tagus in Lisbon, Portugal. It includes an overview of the project's background and an analysis of the main risk categories stating both the actual risks encountered and the mitigation measures adopted. Throughout the project a great attention was given to whole life cycle costs, and gains in efficiency and cost control. Among the lessons that can be learned from both the public and private sector is that a complete risk management analysis must include not only the technical factors but also a realistic assessment of environmental and social risks. These were the risks that were somewhat overseen and that caused the main problems to the project's development.

Strategic alliances in building construction : a tender evaluation tool for the public sector

Building construction is a highly competitive and risky business. This competitiveness is compounded where conflicting objectives amongst contracting and subcontracting firms set the stage for an adversarial and potentially destructive business relationship. Clients, especially those from the public sector, need broader tender evaluation criteria to complement the traditional focus on bid price. There is also a need for change in the construction industry—not only to a more cooperative approach between the constructing parties—but also from a confrontationist attitude to a more harmonious relationship between all stakeholders in providing constructed facilities. A strategic alliance is a cooperative relationship between two or more organisations that forms part of their overall strategies, and contributes to achieving their major goals and objectives. Strategic alliances in building construction may provide a useful tool to assist public sector construction managers evaluate tenders and concurrently encourage more cooperative relationships amongst construction stakeholders. This paper begins with an overview of the Australian building construction industry, then reviews the existing strategic alliance literature and describes an analysis framework comprising six attributes of strategic alliances for application to construction organisations—trust, commitment, interdependence, cooperation, communication, and joint problem solving. These attributes are currently being used to collect data from 70 building construction firms in Queensland to assess their respective levels of strategic alliance. Given the trend towards broader indicators of construction firm performance, these attributes are proposed as a tool for use in the tender evaluation process for public works.

Evaluation of financial incentives as a quality improvement strategy in the public hospital context : clinician attitudes, design variables, and economic costs

In 2008, a three-year pilot ‘pay for performance’ (P4P) program, known as ‘Clinical Practice Improvement Payment’ (CPIP) was introduced into Queensland Health (QHealth). QHealth is a large public health sector provider of acute, community, and public health services in Queensland, Australia. The organisation has recently embarked on a significant reform agenda including a review of existing funding arrangements (Duckett et al., 2008). Partly in response to this reform agenda, a casemix funding model has been implemented to reconnect health care funding with outcomes. CPIP was conceptualised as a performance-based scheme that rewarded quality with financial incentives. This is the first time such a scheme has been implemented into the public health sector in Australia with a focus on rewarding quality, and it is unique in that it has a large state-wide focus and includes 15 Districts. CPIP initially targeted five acute and community clinical areas including Mental Health, Discharge Medication, Emergency Department, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and Stroke. The CPIP scheme was designed around key concepts including the identification of clinical indicators that met the set criteria of: high disease burden, a well defined single diagnostic group or intervention, significant variations in clinical outcomes and/or practices, a good evidence, and clinician control and support (Ward, Daniels, Walker & Duckett, 2007). This evaluative research targeted Phase One of implementation of the CPIP scheme from January 2008 to March 2009. A formative evaluation utilising a mixed methodology and complementarity analysis was undertaken. The research involved three research questions and aimed to determine the knowledge, understanding, and attitudes of clinicians; identify improvements to the design, administration, and monitoring of CPIP; and determine the financial and economic costs of the scheme. Three key studies were undertaken to ascertain responses to the key research questions. Firstly, a survey of clinicians was undertaken to examine levels of knowledge and understanding and their attitudes to the scheme. Secondly, the study sought to apply Statistical Process Control (SPC) to the process indicators to assess if this enhanced the scheme and a third study examined a simple economic cost analysis. The CPIP Survey of clinicians elicited 192 clinician respondents. Over 70% of these respondents were supportive of the continuation of the CPIP scheme. This finding was also supported by the results of a quantitative altitude survey that identified positive attitudes in 6 of the 7 domains-including impact, awareness and understanding and clinical relevance, all being scored positive across the combined respondent group. SPC as a trending tool may play an important role in the early identification of indicator weakness for the CPIP scheme. This evaluative research study supports a previously identified need in the literature for a phased introduction of Pay for Performance (P4P) type programs. It further highlights the value of undertaking a formal risk assessment of clinician, management, and systemic levels of literacy and competency with measurement and monitoring of quality prior to a phased implementation. This phasing can then be guided by a P4P Design Variable Matrix which provides a selection of program design options such as indicator target and payment mechanisms. It became evident that a clear process is required to standardise how clinical indicators evolve over time and direct movement towards more rigorous ‘pay for performance’ targets and the development of an optimal funding model. Use of this matrix will enable the scheme to mature and build the literacy and competency of clinicians and the organisation as implementation progresses. Furthermore, the research identified that CPIP created a spotlight on clinical indicators and incentive payments of over five million from a potential ten million was secured across the five clinical areas in the first 15 months of the scheme. This indicates that quality was rewarded in the new QHealth funding model, and despite issues being identified with the payment mechanism, funding was distributed. The economic model used identified a relative low cost of reporting (under $8,000) as opposed to funds secured of over $300,000 for mental health as an example. Movement to a full cost effectiveness study of CPIP is supported. Overall the introduction of the CPIP scheme into QHealth has been a positive and effective strategy for engaging clinicians in quality and has been the catalyst for the identification and monitoring of valuable clinical process indicators. This research has highlighted that clinicians are supportive of the scheme in general; however, there are some significant risks that include the functioning of the CPIP payment mechanism. Given clinician support for the use of a pay–for-performance methodology in QHealth, the CPIP scheme has the potential to be a powerful addition to a multi-faceted suite of quality improvement initiatives within QHealth.

Is the public sector ready to collaborate? Human resource implications of collaborative Arrangements

Relational governance arrangements across agencies and sectors have become prevalent as a means for government to become more responsive and effective in addressing complex, large scale or ‘wicked’ problems. The primary characteristic of such ‘collaborative’ arrangements is the utilisation of the joint capacities of multiple organisations to achieve collaborative advantage, which Huxham (1993) defines as the attainment of creative outcomes that are beyond the ability of single agencies to achieve. Attaining collaborative advantage requires organisations to develop collaborative capabilities that prepare organisations for collaborative practice (Huxham, 1993b). Further, collaborations require considerable investment of staff effort that could potentially be used beneficially elsewhere by both the government and non-government organisations involved in collaboration (Keast and Mandell, 2010). Collaborative arrangements to deliver services therefore requires a reconsideration of the way in which resources, including human resources, are conceptualised and deployed as well as changes to both the structure of public service agencies and the systems and processes by which they operate (Keast, forthcoming). A main aim of academic research and theorising has been to explore and define the requisite characteristics to achieve collaborative advantage. Such research has tended to focus on definitional, structural (Turrini, Cristofoli, Frosini, & Nasi, 2009) and organisational (Huxham, 1993) aspects and less on the roles government plays within cross-organisational or cross-sectoral arrangements. Ferlie and Steane (2002) note that there has been a general trend towards management led reforms of public agencies including the HRM practices utilised. Such trends have been significantly influenced by New Public Management (NPM) ideology with limited consideration to the implications for HRM practice in collaborative, rather than market contexts. Utilising case study data of a suite of collaborative efforts in Queensland, Australia, collected over a decade, this paper presents an examination of the network roles government agencies undertake. Implications for HRM in public sector agencies working within networked arrangements are drawn and implications for job design, recruitment, deployment and staff development are presented. The paper also makes theoretical advances in our understanding of Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM) in network settings. While networks form part of the strategic armoury of government, networks operate to achieve collaborative advantage. SHRM with its focus on competitive advantage is argued to be appropriate in market situations, however is not an ideal conceptualisation in network situations. Commencing with an overview of literature on networks and network effectiveness, the paper presents the case studies and methodology; provides findings from the case studies in regard to the roles of government to achieve collaborative advantage and implications for HRM practice are presented. Implications for SHRM are considered.