FORUM P.A. (8 – 12 May 2006: Rome)

The Growth of Agencies in Ireland: Trends,

Developments and Implications

Dr. Peter Humphreys

Executive Director: Research Institute of Public Administration

phumphreys@ipa.iewww.ipa.ie

Presentation Structure• Personal Profile• Committee for Public Management

Research• Public Service Modernisation in Ireland• Irish Agencies Research• Main Findings to date• International Perspective• What next?

Personal Profile• Executive Director: Research at the Irish National

Institute of Public Administration (IPA): Dublin• Over 30 years’ experience as senior

manager/public servant and professional researcher at national, regional and local government levels.

• Author/co-author of major studies on public service modernisation.

• Independent Expert Member of Government High-level Policy Committees and Groups

• Irish National Public Service Modernisation Expert to UN, OECD and EU.

Committee for Public Management Research (CPMR)

CPMR established to support Irish Public Service Modernisation Programme and comprises:

• Senior officials from Finance; Taoiseach; Environment, Heritage & Local Government; Transport; Health & Children; Communications, Marine & Natural Resources; Social and Family Affairs; Revenue Commissioners.

• Trinity College Dublin & University College Dublin

• Institute of Public Administration

CPMR Research (www.cpmr.gov.ie) includes and copies available to download free:

• Delivering quality services • Governance and accountability• Management of cross-cutting issues• Performance measurement• Regulatory reform• Strategic & Business Planning• E-government and service decentralisation• Human Resource Management• Long-term policy development• ‘Agencification’

Key goals for Irish public service modernisation: 1994 onwards

• Provide an excellent service to the public• Contribute to national development• Make efficient and effective use of

resources

Source: Delivering Better Government (1996)

Key reference: www.bettergov.ie

Quality Custome

r Service

OpennessTransparen

cyAccountabil

ity

Regulatory Reform

Human Resources Manageme

nt

Information Systems

Management

Financial Managemen

t

Excellent service to Government & Public

Reform of Business Environment

Internal Systems Reform

Source: PA Consulting 2002

Public service modernisation agenda …

the approach to date

Some strands of the Irish Modernisation Programme

• Strategic Management Initiative (1994+)• Freedom of Information Act (1997)• Public Service Management Act (1997)• Quality Customer Service (QCS) Initiative

(1997+), including Customer Action Plans and Charters

• Equal Status Act (2000)• Better Regulation (2004)• Public Service Decentralisation (2004+)

Key elements of Irish approach to date

• National strategy with supporting structures to underpin and help drive forward modernisation

• Specific national/local initiatives to roll-out strategic planning, Quality Customer Service etc.

• Identify and exploit drivers for change, e.g. National Partnership Agreements

• Primarily driven by senior officials themselves• No one size fits all• Consensual/gradualist rather than

radical/political

Some future modernisation challenges• Accountability of public bodies/individuals• Cross-organisational working• Customer focus• Less emphasis on inputs (HR, finance)• Increased focus on outputs/outcomes• Focus on improving and measuring

performance• Continuous quality improvement• Ethics/values• Decentralisation

Irish Agencies Research • Map the development of Irish

agencies over time to obtain a clearer understanding of the range & variety of such bodies, including their corporate governance arrangements

• Place this information within a wider international context and

• Identify and discuss key and/or emergent issues for the future.

Research approach• Develop original database from secondary

sources• International research/evaluation review• Web-based survey of national-level, non-

commercial bodies (1st. Phase): 2004/5• Regional/local agencies (2nd Phase): 2005/6• Commercial agencies (3rd Phase): 2006/7• Case-studies: 360oapproach• Cross-national comparisons

What is an ‘agency’? There is no widely accepted definition of

what exctly constitutes an ‘agency’. For our research an ‘agency’ is defined as public sector organisation that has some:

• Structural differentiation• Capacity for autonomous decision-making• Expectation of continuity over time• Public function• Personnel and• Financial resources.

What is it not? For this research exercise, agencies do not include:• Departments/Offices with Cabinet Minister• Local/regional branches of larger bodies• Defence Forces (Military)• Judiciary• Garda Siochana (Police)• Individual hospitals/education establishments• Tribunals of Inquiry• Cooperative societies and Non-Governmental

Bodies.

Main features of Irish agencies

• 14 line departments legally quite strong (departmentalism) & Finance de facto very powerful

• Circa 610 agencies (incl. subnational); c. 210 national non-commercial agencies

• Circa 80 agencies commercial• Agencies established often without clear legal

definitions• Vast majority set up since 1990 but oldest 1708• Mainly health, natural resources, justice and

education, sometimes in response to ‘crisis’• 50% service delivery, 25% advisory, 23% regulatory• No general policy on agencies (mainly ad hoc)• Some influence of general reform programs and of

code of practice. • EU influence significant

Irish Agencies research is being undertaken for the CPMR but as part of a wider international research network:•Australia•Belgium•Germany•Ireland•Italy•Norway•Sweden•Netherlands•USA

Autonomy of public agencies: A three country comparison

of Norway, Ireland and Flanders

Prof. dr. Koen Verhoest, drs. Bram Verschuere, Dr. Anne Marie Mc Gauran and dra. Kristin Rubecksen

Brief overview

• Norway – Flanders – Ireland• Focus upon autonomy and accountability

in 3 main areas: Human Resource Management (HRM), Financial Management and Policy

• 3 surveys conducted: similar questions lead to comparable variables

• Describing, comparing, starting to explain• Focus is on ‘similar’ agencies from a

governance, operational, financial and legal perspective to optimise comparability

HRM autonomy: main findings

• Norway: high levels of HR autonomy because of abolishment of generic detailed personnel statute and general limits on numbers (even for salary levels)

• Ireland: mixed levels with some autonomy for softer issues, but with strict case-by-case controls by Dep. of Finance on salary/numbers: rather ‘meaningless’ autonomy

• ’Flanders: no strategic autonomy/no-high operational autonomy because of generic ‘personnel statute’ and ‘framework’

Main findings financial management autonomy

• Taking loans • Norway: not allowed (no legal identity)• Flanders and Ireland: less than half may

take loans within limits or after approval

• Shifting budgets over years• Norway: because of budget reform

overall ability to shift budgets over years (5%)

• Flanders and Ireland: less than half may shift budgets within limits or after approval

Main findings: policy autonomy

• High levels of policy autonomy: most decisions concerning policy instruments taken by agencies with some to little involvement of minister/department

• Similar levels between countries: ‘policy implementation’ involves important policy decisions

Main international findings

• Difference in levels of management autonomy related to existence of generic input controls (finance/HR)

• Overall: highest management autonomy in Norway (except loans)/ policy autonomy quite high in all countries

• Management autonomy relates to size (but some differences between countries e.g. concerning board )

What next internationally?

www.publicmanagement-cobra.org

Over to you ….. any questions?