Bad culture led to past crises. So how do you change it?

For example, two reform documents published nine years apart - the Blueprint for Reform and Independent Review of the APS - both emphasise the need for a culture of collaboration, high performance, continuous improvement, evaluation, innovation, openness and trust.

The fact they focus on the desire for the same cultural types suggests cultural change has not been achieved.

It is not surprising that cultural change has not been realised, as culture is incredibly difficult to change. This is because it is deeply embedded, underpinned by a stable system of values, beliefs and assumptions, learnt over time as ways to meet environmental demands.

However, not changing presents immense risk for the APS; arguably, a culture that does not value openness and trust led to the robodebt scandal.

Professor Edgar Schein was a pre-eminent organisational psychologist who was an expert in organisational culture.

His work is particularly useful to identify problems with how organisational culture and cultural change are portrayed in the APS.

If these problems are not addressed, the APS is unlikely to change in the way required to gain public trust and avoid other crises.

Professor Schein's work also informs recommendations for how to support behavioural change and cultural evolution at the department, agency and subunit levels.

Three problems with how organisational culture and cultural change are portrayed in the APS

There is a focus on establishing a unified APS-wide culture. This is almost impossible to achieve and would not be beneficial. Professor Schein argued that culture forms when a group frequently encounters similar problems that emerge from environmental demands.

Within the APS, departments and agencies span across policy, operational, specialist and regulatory functions and face different environmental demands. They also have different stakeholders who generate these demands, including governmental ministers, citizens, industry groups, peak bodies, regulatory authorities and unions and employee representatives.

Consequently, focusing on developing a unified APS culture is problematic, and potentially distracting when alternative approaches might enable change more effectively.

The desire for cultural change across the APS centres on leaders role modelling and encouraging desired behaviours. There are three issues with this.

First, there is an assumption that desired cultures apply universally across the APS. However, its diversity means that what is required in one department or agency - and subunits - may not be appropriate in another.

Second, cultural change is unlikely when existing cultures are dramatically different from the desired state. Professor Schein argued that cultural change is only realised if there is some compatibility between the desired culture and the group's cultural DNA; that is, beliefs, values and behaviours that have historically enabled success.

READ MORE:

Third, the role of leaders in cultural change is all-encompassing. Professor Schein argued this role comprises what leaders pay attention to, measure and control (including their emotional outbursts); reactions to critical incidents and crises; how they allocate resources; and who they appoint, promote and reward (and excommunicate).

Additionally, organisational culture and leadership are intertwined, with leaders shaping and transmitting culture, while also being socialised into an extant culture. This can present difficulties for realising cultural change, as leaders are tasked with changing the very culture they have benefited from.

Focus on APS-wide cultural change means that claims for how to achieve it are general and high-level. The APS-wide focus means that desired behaviours are not identified; however, Professor Schein advocated for clearly identifying specific behaviours that are required for effective cultural change. Once specific behaviours have been identified, support structures and practices can be reconfigured to encourage and reinforce them.

To address the three problems identified above, I suggest the APS implement the following recommendations:

Recommendation 1: focus on high-level principles for conduct across the APS, rather than a unified APS culture. This could support the realisation of aspirations without relying on cultural change as a precursor to change.

Recommendation 2: focus on evolving existing cultures at the department, agency and subunit levels where there is compatibility between existing and desired cultures.

Recommendation 3: enable cultural evolution by supporting behavioural change through undertaking the following steps:

This enables the consistent encouragement and reinforcement of desired behaviours, making it safe for employees to change.

These steps highlight that cultural evolution is a significant and multi-faceted process. When desired behaviours are consistently reinforced and enable improvements and success over time, they can become embraced as social norms and values. When employees see the benefits of these norms and values they become collectively internalised, with shared expectations about appropriate attitudes and behaviours. That is, they become embedded in organisational culture.