This issue

– does performance measurement drive improvement? 
– roadmap to reopening 
– a new design framework 
– focused innovation policy 
– counting culture 
Plus what I'm reading.

Research brief: Does performance measurement improve public sector performance? 

A paper in the Australian Journal of Public Administration investigates whether performance measurement drives performance improvement in Australian government agencies. The paper also examines how results against targets can influence performance. Read our brief on the paper.

Roadmap to reopening ​

How can Australia re-engage with the world in the era of COVID-19? How can Australia strengthen its social foundations as it does so? These questions are at the heart of a new report from Sydney Policy Lab. The report outlines a pathway to: 

• reopening Australia 
• rebuilding for Australia’s future success. 

The strategy 

The report argues a ‘zero COVID’ strategy is incompatible with global reintegration. Instead it proposes reopening in a controlled and staged way, supported by the delivery of an effective vaccine program and a regime of monitoring and isolating those with infection. 

A zero COVID approach traps us in suspended animation in contrast to a securely reopened and effectively vaccinated approach. This would allow us to live with COVID in a way that minimises both direct and indirect harm. 

The roadmap 

• The roadmap is based on the following: 
• a comprehensive and successful vaccination program 
• sector and place-specific pilot programs to reopen prior to the conclusion of the vaccination program, supporting industries critical to Australia’s economy including tourism and creative industries, farming and international education 
• a certification scheme across these programs 
• improved border protection measures involving rapid testing 
• new risk-weighted quarantine measures complementing the maintenance of hotel quarantine for those who come from high-risk countries, refuse testing or test positive on arrival.  

A new design framework ​

This blog post outlines how the UK Design Council’s Systemic Design Framework came to be. It is an evolution of the Council’s Double Diamond which has become widely accepted as a cornerstone for design thinking. 

The Systemic Design Framework 

The new framework: 

1. Keeps the core premise of the Double Diamond with its focus on divergent and convergent thinking. However it recognises that these ways of thinking are not linear when working on complex challenges. 
2. Recognises the importance of the ‘invisible activities’ that sit around the design process. These are orientation and value setting, continuing the journey, collaboration and connection, and leadership and storytelling.  

Features of the framework 

Key elements of the new framework include:  

Six principles for systemic design which can be used to help people to develop or adapt new design methods and tools from their own practice. The principles are:  

• people and planet-centred 
• zooming in and out 
• testing and growing ideas, inclusive and welcoming difference, collaborating and connecting 
• circular and regenerative. 

Four key roles for designers to play when tackling systemic issues: 

• system thinker: someone who has the ability to see the big picture 
• leader and storyteller: someone who can tell a story about what might be possible and why this is important 
• designer and maker: someone who understands the power of design and innovation tools 
• connector and convenor: someone who has good relationships and can create space for people to come together. 

Four types of design activities: 

• explore: determining the root cause of the issue 
• reframe: reframing the problem in different ways to act as a springboard for new ideas 
• create: thinking big and creating new ideas and interventions 
• catalyse: prototyping and testing ideas to see what develops. 

Focused innovation policy is a means for governments to work with industry, knowledge institutions and other stakeholders to realise the potential for productivity growth and export success in chosen areas of the economy. 

A working paper from the New Zealand Productivity Commission - Te Kōmihana Whai Hua o Aotearoa outlines what can be learned from international experience. Countries include Finland, Netherlands, Sweden and Singapore. 

Policy design 

Implementing an effective, focused innovation strategy requires political and stakeholder leadership and capable administration. Focused innovation strategies need to have several features: 

• experimental, adaptive, collaborative processes 
• a focus on innovative activity with clear measures of success 
• a commitment to action shared across government and other parties 
• transparency, evaluation and review 
• high-level multi-stakeholder governance 

Common themes from country experience 

1. Scope and scale of focused innovation policy 

Countries vary considerably in how selective they are in choosing areas for focus. They also vary in the scope of policy instruments being used. Some are centred on support for R&D while others use a broader range of policies such as skills, regulation, and international relations. 

2. Governance of research and innovation policy 

The governance of broad innovation policy sets the context for the governance of focused initiatives. Some countries have peak bodies which bring together government leaders, industry experts and researchers to prioritise areas of the economy. 

3. Societal challenges 

All of the countries have moved in recent years to adopting mission-oriented, government-led innovation strategies to tackle societal challenges. These may take the form of an innovation focus in particular areas of the economy of importance to the mission. An example is a focus on low greenhouse-gas-emissions technology in the energy sector. 

Counting culture 

New research from the Diversity Council Australia has developed a standardised approach for defining, measuring, and reporting on workforce cultural diversity in a respectful and inclusive way. 

This research drew on a literature review, a consultation survey, eight think tanks, a pilot survey and expert panel consultations with experts from industry, government and academia. 

What is cultural diversity? 

The research defines cultural diversity as having a mix of people from different cultural backgrounds. It can include differences in cultural/ethnic identity (how we identify ourselves and how others identify us), language, country of birth, religion, heritage/ancestry, national origin, and/or race and colour. 

The approach 

The Counting Culture approach is designed to be: 

• practical for employers, even if they have limited in-house resources and expertise to count cultural diversity 
• inclusive for employees, i.e. experienced as respectful and meaningful. 

Three core measures are recommended. These are supplemented by two additional measures where space and resources allow. 

Core measures are the minimum required to get a basic understanding of an organisation’s workforce and include: 

• cultural background 
• language 
• country of birth. 

Additional measures enable a more detailed understanding and include: 

• religion 
• global experience. 

When starting to count cultural diversity, organisations should first include a stand-alone question about workers’ Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander background. This emphasises the centrality of Indigenous issues to any diversity and inclusion work.  

1. Why Boris Johnson is recreating Tony Blair’s “delivery unit” 

In 2001 Tony Blair established a delivery unit that translated policy ambitions into measurable goals. Michael Barber led the unit’s establishment. An article in The Economist reports that Barber is recreating the same unit for Boris Johnson. The new unit will report directly to the Prime Minister, providing him with a line of sight into departments. The unit will have a broad remit which will cut across departments and be a source of tension. 

Last month, the Deputy Prime Minister in Aotearoa New Zealand announced the establishment of an implementation unit in the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. The unit will monitor and support implementation of critical initiatives, particularly those involving multiple agencies. 

2. The gatekeepers who get to decide what food is “disgusting” 

A New Yorker article describes how the Disgusting Food Museum in Sweden has been accused of reinforcing cultural prejudices. There are eighty-five culinary horrors on display, both ordinary fare and delicacies from thirty countries. Exhibits include surströmming (fermented herring), durian and kale pache - an Iranian soup made from a sheep’s head and hooves. It has been said the museum reinforces prejudices by oversimplifying the customs of other countries and reducing their foods to clichés. 

Read past issues of The Bridge email and Research Briefs here.  

‘Til the next issue

Maria Katsonis