|
Principles Index . Briefings
Home . Revitalise Our Services Index
 Principles
to Revitalise Scotland's Public Services
PerformanceIntroductionIn
April 2003 UNISON Scotland launched its manifesto for Scotland's public services,
Revitalise our Public Services. The centrepiece of that manifesto
was our principles for public service renewal. In this series of briefings we
expand on these principles setting out our positive agenda for the revitalisation
of Scotland's essential public services. BackgroundThe
issue of scrutinising public service performance was one of the key themes in
the coalition agreement ‘A Partnership for a Better Scotland'.
This followed a speech by the First Minister in January 2003 in which he promised
improvements in public services through stricter enforcement of higher national
standards. The partnership agreement commits the Executive to improve quality
and consistency through national standards, inspection and support, with ministerial
intervention as a last resort. Concerns
with Performance MeasurementAlthough the issue of
setting and maintaining specific targets for public service organisations (PSO's)
in themselves is not a concern it is the methods used that may raise problems.
Traditional methods of measuring the performance of organisations
have concentrated on cost accounting methods that may not be entirely suitable
to public services. There is also a concern, as highlighted in the Liberal Democrat's
manifesto, that a scrutiny industry could develop to examine public services.
The English approach has led to such an industry in Whitehall and mirrored in
the PSOs being inspected. The measurements
used to assess performance are often subjective and fairly crude and do not take
into account all the factors involved in providing a service. To compound this
problem league tables are often used to compare the services of different service
providers. This can lead to pressure on PSO's to concentrate on such indicators
to the detriment of the services they provide. There
is also a concern of how open and transparent any scrutiny regime would be, especially
with the growth of Quangos in either the delivery of services or in their inspection.
This highlights problems of accountability. A further concern with the concept
of measuring performance is the threat of intervention and possible privatisation
of services. This has happened in England where private firms have come in to
‘improve' the services of ‘failing' schools. Any
analysis of the performance of public services needs to take into account the
often variable funding levels that public services receive as well as their interaction
with other public service organisations and the possible impact on their service
provision. UNISON
Scotland's ApproachIt is right that public services
are operated on a democratic basis, and are therefore subject to scrutiny. However,
UNISON is clear that public services need the extra investment, support and fair
remuneration for staff, if the scrutiny process is to be equitable. In our experience
it is the contracting out of services through PFI that has resulted in poor performance
and inadequate service delivery. UNISON
pushed for the establishment of an independent Quality Commission during the debate
on the Local Government Bill 2002. We are opposed to any significant increase
in the role and powers of the Accounts Commission and Audit Scotland in this area.
Financial motive must not impinge on effective service delivery, rather the emphasis
should be on the quality of the service delivered. In
scrutinising public services it should be recognised that there is a wide range
of factors which determine the performance of public services. These include the
funding available, access, the service environment and relationships with users
and the wider community. As such the performance management outlook used by the
private sector is not directly compatible with use on public services. The
First Minister mentioned the use of national standards. These can provide a benchmark
for each service and may be used to disseminate best practice. However there needs
to be awareness that too many standards may create a straightjacket for service
providers and may restrict innovation in service delivery. Also, whenever standards
are developed the performance indicators used to assess them need to be carefully
selected and objective, providing a true representation of service delivery. Service
improvement has to be linked not only to the availability of resources but also
the wider social and economic needs of the community. Targets
should be based on inputs, outputs and outcomes together
with process measures. - Inputs:
the resources used to produce a service, which include cost and efficiency.
- Outputs: measure the goods and services delivered.
- Outcomes: indicate the impact or benefit of services.
- Process: measures the manner in which the outcomes are achieved
Financial
systems will also need to be reviewed to be consistent with this approach. It
should also be recognised that assessing outcomes is fraught with the difficulties
of identifying cause and effect and the influence of other policies and organisations.
There is also a concern that, given
the number of inspection bodies, there may be a degree of duplication in the scrutiny
of public services. There should be a co-ordinated approach, with possibly a lead
inspection body for each public service to which all other bodies that require
information can turn to rather than disrupting the work of PSO's. ConclusionThe
public has a right to expect high performance from public services. That performance
should be rooted in a culture of citizenship not consumerism. The customer service
culture is a limited vision for public services that should be based on cooperation
between PSOs and partnership with users and the local community. ContactsKenny
Maclaren -
k.maclaren@unison.co.uk Dave
Watson -
d.watson@unison.co.uk @
The P&I Team
14 West Campbell St
Glasgow G26RX
Tel 0845 355 0845
Fax 0141-307 2572 top | 
Scotland's
public service union 
|
