Changes in the Australian Commonwealth departmental machinery of government 1928-1982

The Commonwealth departmental machinery of government is changed by using Orders in Council to create, abolish or change the name of departments. Since 1906 governments have utilised a particular form of Order in Council, the Administrative Arrangements Order (AAO), as the means to reallocate functions between departments for administration. After 1928 successive governments from Scullin to Fraser gradually streamlined and increasingly used the formal processes for the executive to change departmental arrangements and the practical role of Parliament, in the process of change, virtually disappeared. From 1929 to 1982, 105 separate departments were brought into being, as new departments or through merger, and 91 were abolished, following the merger of their functions in one way or another with other departments. These figures exclude 6 situations where the change was simply that of name alone. Several hundred less substantial transfers of responsibilities were also made between departments. This dissertation describes, documents and analyses all these changes. The above changes can be distilled down to 79 events termed primary decisions. Measures of the magnitude of change arising from the decisions are developed with 157.25 units of change identified as occurring during the period, most being in the Whitlam and Fraser periods. The reasons for the changes were assessed and classified as occurring for reasons of policy, administrative logic or cabinet comfort. 47.2% of the units of change were attributed to policy, 34.9% to administrative logic, 17% to cabinet comfort. Further conclusions are drawn from more detailed analysis of the change and the reasons for the changes.

Using performance measurement models for benefit realization with enterprise systems: The Queensland Government approach (Case Study)

A range of influences, technical and organizational, has encouraged the wide spread adaption of Enterprise Systems (ES). Nevertheless, there is a growing consensus that Enterprise Systems have in the many cases failed to provide the expected benefits to organizations. This paper presents ongoing research, which analyzes the benefits realization approach of the Queensland Government. This approach applies a modified Balance Scorecard. First, history and background of Queensland Government’s Enterprise Systems initiative is introduced. Second, the most common reasons for ES under performance are related. Third, relevant performance measurement models and the Balanced Scorecard in particular are discussed. Finally, the Queensland Government initiative is evaluated in light of this overview of current work in the area. In the current and future work, the authors aim to use their active involvement in Queensland Government’s benefits realization initiative for an Action Research based project investigating the appropriateness of the Balanced Scorecard for the purposes of Enterprise Systems benefits realization.