NOT GOVERNMENT POLICY
Performance Management Framework Reference Guide
Better Practice Guideline for
Improving service areas, service standards
and targets reported in the State Budget
Performance Unit, Department of the Premier and Cabinet
in collaboration with Queensland Treasury and Trade
August 2012
1
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
PURPOSE
Annual review of service areas, service standards and
targets
• Provide more relevant and
appropriate performance
information
• Improve alignment between
whole-of-Government direction
and agency service delivery
• Decrease the reporting burden
• Address issues and risks
identified by the Auditor-General
2
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
VALUE CHAIN FOR THE QUEENSLAND PUBLIC SECTOR
Public sector agencies should deliver services that are valued
by clients and other stakeholders
Agency
service
delivery
 Objectives for
 Strategic plan
articulates
purpose, vision
and objectives of
agency
 Services
 WoG priorities
and strategies
informed by
political and
cross
jurisdictional
commitments
 Performance
reported in WoG
reports
 Performance
indicators
measure whether
outcomes
achieve agency
objectives
Governance
C
H
A
I
N
Agency
business
direction
the community –
Getting
Queensland Back
on Track
(pledges)
Governance
V
A
L
U
E
Whole of
government
direction
 Performance
reported in
annual report
Services create value
for clients, stakeholders
and the community
influencing trust and
confidence
delivered using
the agency’s
capabilities (e.g.
human, financial,
information,
physical assets
and ICT)
and business
processes
Governance
Client,
stakeholder and
community
expectations
and opinions
 Performance
measured using
service standards
and other
measures
 Performance
reported in
annual report and
Service Delivery
Statements
Performance Management
Governance
3
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
SERVICE DELIVERY STATEMENTS (SDS)
The Service Delivery Statements play an integral part of the
policy development cycle
Performance reported through the Service Delivery Statements…
Improves decision making
Improves accountability
Useful in evaluating policy decisions and
assessing the extent to which service areas are
achieving their objectives
Useful in examining if government services are
being delivered in accordance with the agency
business direction
Government should be monitoring its service
standards to better understand the outcomes of its
policy decisions, identify areas for improvement
and develop the best and most appropriate
solutions to issues facing Queenslanders.
Government should be regularly assessing whether
a service is being delivered efficiently and effectively
and is being transparent with stakeholders about its
performance.
… form an integral part of the policy development cycle.
4
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
SERVICE AREAS
An exemplary service area will have a clear purpose and deliver
outputs and outcomes that will help the agency achieve its objectives
Agencies must develop the following key elements for each service area when a new service structure or a new service area is
proposed:
 the purpose (objective) of the service area (explaining how the service area contributes to the achievement of agency objectives)
 supporting contextual information for each service area (such as related services and stakeholders and their information needs)
 a balanced set of service standards and targets.
be aligned to the agency’s
objectives
clearly state its purpose (objective)
and identify its clients and other
stakeholders
Services areas should…
deliver service outputs
(i.e. the products and engagements*
the service will deliver)
be named so it is easy for
clients and stakeholders to
understand the purpose of the
service area from its name
* Engagement: Interactions, connections and relationships developed between Government and its stakeholders (including clients).
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
5
SERVICE STANDARDS
A successful service standard will measure ‘the right thing’ and
‘measure it right’
Service standards are set with the aim of defining a level of performance that is appropriate for the service and is
expected to be achieved.
Service standards provide information on whether the government is ‘doing the right things’ through measuring
how efficiently and effectively it is delivering its services to its clients and stakeholders. This information also
provides evidence that the government is doing the things it said it would do, and ‘doing it right’.
However, for this to occur, there is a need to ensure that the government is ‘measuring the right things’ and
‘measuring it right’.
Are we measuring
the right things?
Are we measuring
it right?
Service standards work best when there is clarity about what is being
measured and why. The right things to measure will be ultimately
influenced by client and stakeholder expectations, which informs the
whole of government direction and the agencies’ business directions.
Public sector performance in Queensland has often been measured in
terms of what the government has done (e.g. measures of input,
process and activity), but better results can be achieved by including
service standards measuring the efficiency and effectiveness of its
services.
Communicating
this information
to the community
is critical
Service standards work best when there is clarity about what is
being measured and why.
6
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
MEASURING THE RIGHT THINGS
To properly measure ‘the right things’, there must be a clear line of sight
between the sources of ‘the right things’ and the measures of ‘the right things’
Sources of
‘the right things’
• Client and
stakeholder
expectations and
consultation
• Whole of government
priorities and
strategies
• Ministerial Charter
Letters
• Cross jurisdictional
commitments
through COAG
• Benchmarks &
industry standards
•
(Results, process
or better practices)
The agency business direction is informed by ‘the right things’. Operational plans describe the services needed to
deliver the agency’s objectives. Service standards should measure how well the agency has delivered the services.
Measures of
‘the right things’
• Relevant to what the
agency is aiming to
achieve
• Attributable –
capable of being
influenced by the
agency’s actions
• Comparable – with
either past periods or
similar measures
elsewhere
• Well-defined and
easy to understand
• Reliable, credible and
able to be measured
consistently
• Measurable – clear
and transparent
standard of success
• Timely –
performance data
can be produced
regularly and quickly
• Achievable – aim for
improved standards,
but remain attainable
• Cost-effective in
terms of gathering
and processing the
data
• Credible – supported
by stakeholders,
research and/or
industry standards
Source: Boyle, R. (2009). ‘Performance reporting: Insights from international practice’, IBM Centre for The Business of Government.
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
7
MEASURING IT RIGHT
To successfully ‘measure it right’, service standards should be primarily
measures of efficiency and effectiveness
 Input / Output focused

 Outcome focused
 Efficiency: Measures of efficiency reflect how
capabilities (inputs/resources) are used to produce
outputs, expressed as a ratio of capabilities
(inputs/resources) to outputs. Efficiency measures
generally assess how well an agency uses its
available capabilities (resources) to deliver its outputs.
 Effectiveness: Measures of effectiveness describe
the quantifiable extent of the effect of the service on
recipients (i.e. the outcome experienced by them), as
a result of the level and quality of the service
provided. Standards of effectiveness include “cost”
effectiveness (cost to provide the desired outcome)
and “service” effectiveness (how well the service
achieves its stated purpose [objective]).



Activity: Measures of activity measure the number of
service instances, service recipients, or other activities
for the service. They demonstrate the volume of work
being undertaken. They can often be converted into
efficiency measures by combining them with input
measures.
Process: Measures of process measure throughput, or
the means by which the agency delivers the service,
rather than the service itself. It demonstrates how the
agency delivers services, rather than how effectively
services are delivered.
Input: Measures of input measure the resources
consumed in delivering a service, either as an absolute
figure or as a percentage of total resources. Input
measures demonstrate what it costs to deliver a service.
Quality: Measures of quality measure how well a
service is being delivered using specific criteria such as
timeliness, client/stakeholder satisfaction, etc
Service standards should measure both the efficiency of the
output and the effectiveness of the outcome.
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
8
SERVICE PROCESS
The Report on Government Services (RoGS) ‘service process
framework’ demonstrates how efficiency and effectiveness is
measured
External influences
Service Area
Service objectives
Input
Process
Output
Outcomes
Efficiency
Cost-effectiveness
Service effectiveness
Adapted from Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision. Report on Government Services 2012, Productivity Commission, Canberra. (Ch. 1, p. 13)
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
9
TARGET SETTING
Setting appropriate targets is equally as important as developing the
service standard itself
Target checklist:
 Target does not promote adverse results (e.g. efficiency improves to a level that substantially
decreases quality)
 Target indicates the desired movement of performance (e.g. > x or < x)
 Target is challenging, but achievable
 Target is a clear and quantified measure against which the agency can assess performance
 Target is expressed as an absolute number (i.e. avoid use of words), a range, percentage, or ratio
 Target is congruent to objectives and targets set in other government publications
 Target is at or above minimum regulatory standards and benchmarks
 Service standards that measure regulatory/policy compliance should be reviewed and agency’s
should consider removing
Refer to A Guide to the Queensland Government Performance Management Framework for more information on setting targets.
10
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
1
2
3
4
5
6
Principles
Principles to assist agencies when reviewing service areas,
service standards and targets
1. Provide more relevant and
appropriate performance
information that highlights the
efficiency and effectiveness of
agency service delivery
2. Increase alignment between
the Government’s objectives
for the community, strategic
plans and agency services
6. Allow for trend analysis
PRINCIPLES
5. Encourage high quality data
management
3. Decrease the reporting
burden on agencies
4. Improve consistency across
agencies
11
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
1
2
3
4
5
6
Efficiency and effectiveness
Provide more relevant and appropriate performance information that
highlights the efficiency and effectiveness of the agency service
delivery
External influences
Service Area
Service objectives
Input
Process
Output
Outcomes
Efficiency
Cost-effectiveness
Service effectiveness
Adapted from Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision. (2010). Report on Government Services 2012, Productivity Commission, Canberra. (Ch. 1, p. 13)
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
Clear line of sight
Increase alignment between Government objectives for the
community, agency strategic plans and agency services
Agency
service
delivery
 Objectives for
 Strategic plan
articulates
purpose, vision
and objectives of
agency
 Services
 WoG priorities
and strategies
informed by
political and
cross
jurisdictional
commitments
 Performance
reported in WoG
reports
 Performance
indicators
measure whether
outcomes
achieve agency
objectives
Governance
C
H
A
I
N
Agency
business
direction
the community –
Getting
Queensland Back
on Track
(pledges)
Governance
V
A
L
U
E
Whole of
government
direction
 Performance
reported in
annual report
Services create value
for clients, stakeholders
and the community
influencing trust and
confidence
delivered using
the agency’s
capabilities (e.g.
human, financial,
information,
physical assets
and ICT)
and business
processes
Governance
Client,
stakeholder and
community
expectations
and opinions
 Performance
measured using
service standards
and other
measures
 Performance
reported in
annual report and
Service Delivery
Statements
Performance Management
Governance
13
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
1
2
3
4
5
6
Decrease the reporting burden
Decrease the reporting burden on agencies
Existing measures of efficiency or
effectiveness already collected
and reported by the agency for
other purposes…
COAG
agreements
Report on
Government
Services
Service
standards
External
benchmarks
By increasing alignment with
existing measures, the
reporting burden will be
decreased.
Industry
standards
14
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
1
2
3
4
5
6
Consistency
There is a need to improve consistency across agencies in the SDS
Inconsistencies
Issues
Mitigation strategies
 Client satisfaction: Encourage agencies to measure
clients’ and stakeholders’ satisfaction with the overall
service, and the service’s timeliness, ease of access, staff,
quality and outcome. Agencies should refer to the
Performance Management Framework Reference Guide
Measuring Client Satisfaction, published by the Department
of the Premier and Cabinet.
 Presentation and sub-headings: Permitting only one level
of sub-headings under each service area (i.e. no sub-subheadings).
 Common terms: Ensuring agencies use consistent
language (e.g. “people with disabilities”, not “the disabled”).
 Technical language: Minimising the use of overly complex
or technical language that potentially confuses the readers.
 Excessive text: Encouraging the use of the notes to
provide context and understanding for the reader, rather
than having overly descriptive service standards. Treasury
has agreed to providing additional space for notes.
 Regulatory timeframes: Service standards that measure
the “delivery of XYZ service within regulatory timeframes”
are not measures of efficiency and are suggested for
deletion or amendment (e.g. into a measure of efficiency).
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
Data management
High quality data management is necessary for improved
performance reporting
A data dictionary is required from every agency and should be modelled on the recommendations made in:
QAO Better Practice Guide: Performance Reviews, July 2010
Elements of relevant and robust performance information:
• Relevant, appropriate and align with externally reported measures
• Accurate, reliable and readily-accessible to managers
• Information is presented clearly with a basis for comparison provided for all data
• Performance measures are regularly reviewed.
ABS Data Quality Framework (No. 1520.0), May 2009
- Seven Dimensions of ‘Quality’:
• Institutional environment: Collection agencies should build a culture that focuses on quality, and an emphasise on
objectivity and professionalism. Consideration of the institutional environment associated with a statistical product is
important as it enables an assessment of the surrounding context, which may influence the validity, reliability or
appropriateness of the product.
• Relevance: To be relevant, the collection agency must stay abreast of the information needs of its users.
• Timeliness: These aspects are important considerations in assessing quality, as lengthy delays between the reference
period and data availability, or between advertised and actual release dates, can have implications for the currency or
reliability of the data.
• Accuracy: This is an important component of quality as it relates to how well the data portray reality, which has clear
implications for how useful and meaningful the data will be for interpretation or further analysis.
• Coherence: The use of standard concepts, classifications and target populations promotes coherence, as does the use of
common methodology across surveys. Coherence is an important component of quality as it provides an indication of
whether the dataset can be usefully compared with other sources to enable data compilation and comparison.
• Interpretability: The availability of information to help provide insight into the data. Interpretability is an important
component of quality as it enables the information to be understood and utilised appropriately.
• Accessibility: The ease of access to data by users, including the ease with which the existence of information can be
ascertained, as well as the suitability of the form or medium through which information can be accessed. Accessibility is a
key component of quality as it relates directly to the capacity of users to identify the availability of relevant information, and
then to access it in a convenient and suitable manner.
16
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
1
2
3
4
5
6
Trend analysis
Consistent reporting of service standards over time enhances
transparency and provides a clear assessment of achievements
PERFORMANCE
Informs policy
analysis, development
and evaluation
TIME
17
Department of the Premier and Cabinet
CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
The Auditor-General is expecting significant improvements to government’s
performance information so that it highlights value to clients and stakeholders

While crediting the government with improvements, the Auditor-General has criticised the low
proportion of service standards that are measures of efficiency or effectiveness.

The Auditor-General has indicated in previous reports that he expects significant improvements to
performance information once the PMF is fully implemented (i.e. September 2011).

Report No. 4, 2007 – “Better performance information is needed for the department, the Minister
and all stakeholders, including Parliament, for a more informed government”

Report No. 1, 2008 – “Failing to answer questions such as Has the agency achieved what it
intended to do? Is this better than last year? Is this good enough? Were these activities needed
in the first place? Could they have done this for less money?”

Report No. 7, 2009 – “A comparatively small number of measures in the agencies’ 2009-10 SDS
could be considered measures of efficiency or effectiveness”.
As a general principle it is suggested that the Service Delivery Statements become a more focused, succinct document reporting
on fewer, yet more meaningful targets of performance.
Service Delivery and Performance Commission 2007, Report on Strengthening Performance Management in the Queensland Government
18
Department of the Premier and Cabinet