cross country comparison of reforms the view of top executives in 11 european countries preliminary...

Cross Country Comparison of Reforms

The View of Top Executives in 11 European Countries

Preliminary Results from the COCOPS Executive Survey

Gerhard HammerschmidSteven Van de Walle

HRWG / IPSG EUPAN Meeting4th April, Dublin Castle

EUPAN Meeting, 4th April 2013, Dublin (Preliminary Results – Please do not cite!)

• EU FP 7 project together with 10 university partners in 10 EU countries: Coordinating for Cohesion in the Public Sector of the Future (2011-2014)

• Seeks to comparatively and quantitatively assess the impact of New Public Management-style reforms in European countries

• Systematic analyses of citizen survey data, budgetary/employment statistics, reform evaluation documents (database)

• Largest EU wide executive survey on the impact of management reforms

• www.cocops.eu

COCOPS Project


Reforms in EuropeThe COCOPS European-wide survey

• Survey sent to more than 22.000 executives in 11 European States

• Comparative sample covering top executives from both central government ministries and agencies/subordinate bodies plus additional executives in employment and health

• Online Survey with different country versions (translated to national languages)

• Per March 2013 survey completed in 11 countries with answers from 5185 executives (overall response rate 23.1%)

• In 4 more countries in progress

• Sample for the current presentation:central government top executives(n=3460)

14,0%

9,0%

16,1%

12,1%6,6%

4,7%

5,7%

8,5%

8,3%

8,3%

6,6% Austria

Estonia

France

Germany

Hungary

Italy

Netherlands

Norway

Portugal

Spain

UK


Use of Instruments in Organization

Question: To what extent are the following instruments used in your organization?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Performance related pay

Decentralisation of staffing decisions

Decentralisation of financial decisions

Internal steering by contract

Service points for customers (e.g. one stop shops)

Cost accounting systems

Risk management

Benchmarking

Customer/user surveys

Quality management systems

Codes of conduct

Management by objectives and results

Business/strategic planning

Staff appraisal talks/performance appraisal


Question: To what extent are performance appraisals used in your organization?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Spain

Hungary

Italy

Austria

Portugal

Germany

Norway

Estonia

France

United Kingdom

The Netherlands


Question: To what extent is business/strategic planning used in your organization?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Hungary

Spain

France

Italy

Germany

Austria

Portugal

The Netherlands

Estonia

Norway

United Kingdom


Question: To what extent is mangement by objectives/results used in your organization?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Spain

Hungary

Estonia

Germany

France

Austria

Portugal

Italy

The Netherlands

Norway

United Kingdom


Question: To what extent is performance related pay used in your organization?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Portugal

Spain

Austria

Hungary

Norway

Germany

Estonia

The Netherlands

France

United Kingdom

Italy


Question: To what extent are quality management systems used in your organization?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Hungary

France

Germany

Italy

Spain

Portugal

Austria

Estonia

United Kingdom

Norway

The Netherlands


Question: To what extent is benchmarking used in your organization?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Hungary

Spain

Norway

Germany

Austria

France

Portugal

Italy

The Netherlands

United Kingdom

Estonia


Question: To what extent are customer/user surveys used in your organization?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

France

Spain

Italy

Austria

Germany

Hungary

Norway

Estonia

Portugal

The Netherlands

United Kingdom


Question: How important are the following reform trends in your policy area?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)

Relevance of Reform Trendsin Policy Area

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Privatisation

Creation of autonomous agencies or corporatization

Extending state provision into new areas

Contracting out

Citizen participation methods/initiatives

Mergers of government organisations

Flexible employment

External partnerships and strategic alliances

Treatment of service users as customers

Internal bureaucracy reduction / cutting red tape

Focusing on outcomes and results

Public sector downsizing

Transparency and open government

Digital or e-government

Collaboration and cooperation among different public sector actors


Question: How important is public sector downsizing in your policy area?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Norway

Italy

Portugal

Austria

Hungary

Spain

Germany

The Netherlands

Estonia

France

United Kingdom


Question: How important is digital/e-government in your policy area?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Hungary

France

Germany

The Netherlands

Austria

Spain

United Kingdom

Norway

Estonia

Italy

Portugal


Question: How important is flexibilisation of employment in your policy area?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Hungary

France

Spain

Austria

Germany

Norway

Portugal

United Kingdom

Italy

The Netherlands

Estonia


Question: How important is customer orientation in your policy area?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

France

Norway

Italy

Spain

The Netherlands

Germany

United Kingdom

Austria

Hungary

Estonia

Portugal


Question: How important is citizen participation in your policy area?(1 = not at all; 7 = to a large extent)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

France

Hungary

Spain

Norway

Austria

The Netherlands

United Kingdom

Italy

Germany

Estonia

Portugal


Assessment of ReformsSuccessfull and Enough?

Question: Public sector reforms in my policy area tend to be successful vs. unsuccessful; tend to be too much vs. not enough (both scale 1-10)

UK

DE

FR

ES

IT

EE

NO

NL

HU

AT

PT

3

4

5

6

7

8

3 4 5 6 7 8

Not

dem

andi

ng e

noug

h (1

) To

o de

man

ding

(10)

Unsuccessful (1) - Successful (10)


Impact of ReformsOverall Development of Public Admin.

Question: Compared with 5 years ago, how would you say things have developed when it comes to the way public administration runs in your country? (1-3 = deteriorated; 8-10 improved)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Spain

United Kingdom

Germany

France

Portugal

Austria

Italy

Hungary

Norway

Estonia

The Netherlands

Improved Deteriorated


Impact of ReformsPerformance Changes

Question: Thinking of your policy area over the last five years how would you rate the way public administration has performed on the dimension cost and efficiency?(1 = deteriorated significantly; 7= improved significantly)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Spain

France

Hungary

Estonia

Portugal

Italy

Austria

Norway

Germany

The Netherlands

United Kingdom



Question: Thinking of your policy area over the last five years how would you rate the way public administration has performed on the dimension service quality?(1 = deteriorated significantly; 7= improved significantly)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

France

Spain

Italy

Hungary

United Kingdom

Germany

Estonia

Portugal

The Netherlands

Norway

Austria



Question: Thinking of your policy area over the last five years how would you rate the way public administration has performed on the dimension policy effectiveness?(1 = deteriorated significantly; 7= improved significantly)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Austria

Germany

France

Spain

Italy

Portugal

Estonia

Norway

United Kingdom

Hungary

The Netherlands



Question: Thinking of your policy area over the last five years how would you rate the way p.a.has performed on the dimension staff motivation and attitudes towards work?(1 = deteriorated significantly; 7= improved significantly)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Portugal

France

Italy

Spain

United Kingdom

Estonia

Austria

Germany

Hungary

The Netherlands

Norway



Question: Thinking of your policy area over the last 5years how would you rate the way p.a. has performed on the dimension attractiveness of the public sector as an employer?(1 = deteriorated significantly; 7= improved significantly)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Portugal

United Kingdom

France

Hungary

The Netherlands

Austria

Estonia

Spain

Germany

Italy

Norway


First Conclusions and Points for Discussion

• Success Factors with regard to own organization• Strategic/business planning, target/result orientation, performance appraisal• Clear targets• Policy and budgetary autonomy

• Success Factors with regard to policy field:• Administrative reform with high public involvement, top-down, consistent

and with a focus on service improvement (vs. cost-cutting and savings)• Content focus on citizen participation, reduction of red tape, transparency &

„open government“• Good cooperation among government bodies and with other sectors

• We are especially interested in – Your comments, interpretations and conclusions?– Areas of interest for further analyses?– Recommendations for a policy brief we can draw from this?


Further Information and Results

• Homepage: www.cocops.eu• Working Paper Series• Policy Briefs• Research Results (Deliverables)• Events• Newsletter

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement No. 266887 (Project COCOPS), Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities.

Contact us:

Gerhard Hammerschmid Steven Van de Walle

Professor for Public and Financial Management Professor of Public AdministrationHertie School of Governance Erasmus University RotterdamFriedrichstr. 180 PO Box 1738, room M7-1210117 Berlin 3000 DR RotterdamT: +49 30 259219201 T: +31 10 408 [email protected] [email protected]

cross country comparison of reforms the view of top executives in 11 european countries preliminary...

Documents

organization slide

large extent slide

policy area slide

dublin castle slide

dublin preliminary results

organization question

cocops project slide

walle hrwg ipsg eupan