The philosophy of New Zealand’s Performance Improvement Framework

1/1/2019

As some of you know, I moved my doctoral study away from Victoria University of Wellington. In doing so, I put aside a review of the system findings of the Performance Improvement Framework (PIF) and what they tell us about the performance of the New Zealand public management system.

This shift does not mean I am not interested in the kaupapa. But, for now, I need to progress a review of free and frank advice from the point of view of decision-makers, i.e., what Ministers think free and frank is, and their role in commissioning it. So, rather than let the work I did at Victoria University go unused, I will use this blog to share the work I was able to progress on the PIF.

Between now and February, this blog will outline the philosophy of the PIF using a paper I presented to the International Research Society for Public Management in Wellington earlier this year.

Before I start, a special mihi to Dr Mike Pratt and Dr Murray Horn, who peer-reviewed the first draft of this paper in 2013. Subsequently, Dr Pratt used my first draft to recommend changes to the PIF domain ontology to make it more corporate-like. e.g., focus on the concept of the citizen as a customer. Those
changes were made after I left the State Services Commission in 2015.

Also, a mihi to the School of Government, Victoria University of Wellington, who nurtured the thinking in this paper as part of a Doctor of Government research proposal completed between 2013-15.

Let’s see where this takes us.

Disclaimer

These are my evolving thoughts, rhetorical positions and creative provocations. They are not settled conclusions. Content should not be taken as professional advice, official statements or final positions. I reserve the right to learn, unlearn, rethink and grow. If you’re here to sort me neatly into left vs right, keep moving. I’m not the partisan you’re looking for. These in...

Ahakoa he iti kete, he iti nā te a …

Kia ora, and welcome I’m starting a blog. I’m as surprised as you are. This is a place to jot down my evolving thoughts about public administration, policy, and delivery in Aotearoa: beneath the surface and between the relays of elected and unelected officials. It will be about the undercurrents. Not the tired critiques or the glossy promises, but the patterns, tensions, compromises,...

Time to Retire “Bad Apples …

A plea from Ōtautahi. Can we stop using the phrase "bad apples" when discussing institutional problems? It is a tired cliché that has outlived whatever usefulness it might have once had. The idiom "one bad apple spoils the whole barrel" initially warned about how quickly rot spreads. Yet in contemporary discussions about institutional accountability, we've flipped its meaning to isolate and ...

Getting Regulation Right: Being Res …

Regulation often gets a mixed reputation. Some see it as unnecessary red tape, slowing things down and making life harder for businesses and communities. Others worry that it's too weak and fails to properly protect people and the environment. What both views have in common is frustration with regulation that seems disconnected from the real world. But good regulation doesn't have...

The Implosion of the US Administrat …

The collapse of the US administrative state is not just an American problem, it carries important lessons for Aotearoa New Zealand. As Washington grapples with political dysfunction and the erosion of public institutions, we should pay attention to how a weakened state apparatus invites economic instability, political turmoil, and diminished democratic control. For Aotearoa New Zealand, th...