eu2008.si28 - 29 may 200850th dg meeting ipsg – innovative public services group dr gordana Žurga

28 - 29 May 2008 50th DG Meetingeu2008.si

IPSG –Innovative Public Services

Group

Dr Gordana Žurga

http://www.eu2008.si/info/en/index.html


Date Meeting

18 – 19 Feb 2008 IPSG Meeting I

20 March 2008 CAF Expert group

3 April 2008 CSM Ad hoc group

12 – 13 May 2008 IPSG Meeting II



Quality Management in Public Administrations in the EU Member StatesPurpose:• To provide a comparative analysis of the area

which is central area of operation of the IPSG; • To present the results of comparative analysis at

the 5QC in October 2008 in Paris; • To contribute to improved accessibility of sources

for benchmarking and sharing of good practices, through improved transparency and enhanced accessibility of comparative data/information in the QM area



Quality Management in Public Administrations in the EU Member States

• Comparative Analysis of Quality Management in the EU Member States:– Further elaboration of the report; Publication for

the 5QC; Infoshop at the 5QC

• Upgrade of existing Comparative Review (the matrix):– Checking the matrix’s information, by 27th May;

Publishing the matrix in June 2008



Preliminary Findings (1/5)

Quality as indispensable part of development of Public Administrations

Quality is / should be integrated in all government documents – to assure the best outcomes – as an other side of a coin




Trends reported / detected:

Quality Excellence

Benchmarking Bench learning

Customer Focus Good Governance




Development, Activities & Projects at the EUPAN level have strong influence onDevelopment of Quality Management inPublic Administrations at national level.




Usage of individual QM tools should in principle not be mandatory

Usage of individual QM tool depends also on the level of maturity

Clear message of the governments: the most reccomended QM approaches / tools have the strongest government support (financial, material, expert, …)




Networking

Gaining at its importance

More and more widespread

Includes: formal and informal networks, quality conferences, sharing practices, …



CAF

• Procedure for External Feedback:– 7 principles of PEF;– 50th DG meeting: seeking for aproval of the 7

principles and the roadmap, namely: to announce PEF at the 5QC and to further elaborate it by the 4th CAF Event in 2009

• CAF at the 5QC;

• 4th CAF European Users Event: Romania, October 2009



CAF - Procedure for External Feedback (1/2)

1. PEF is a common European framework, to be implemented according to the national contexts on a voluntary basis.

2. PEF promotes feedback of the implementation of CAF and its effects on the organisation.

3. This feedback is given by external experts and/or peers.

4. The PEF leads to the label of Effective CAF User (ECU) for 2 years, not recognition of accreditation of an excellent organisation.



CAF - Procedure for External Feedback (2/2)5. PEF is build on 3 pillars:

• the process of self-assessment (not the scores)• the process of improvement actions (not the proven

results of the actions)• the TQM maturity of the organisation (the broader

scope of excellence)6. The decision and responsibility for implementing the

PEF on the national level belongs to each MS. The national CAF correspondents are invited to cooperate with the CAF RC and the national EFQM contacts if needed.

7. The CAF expert group will continue to develop the PEF in close cooperation with EFQM, announce PEF at the 5QC and launch it at the 4th European CAF Event.



Evaluation of Public Administrations’ Added Value to the Lisbon Strategy Goals (1/3)

Purpose:

• To investigate the area from the point of view of the IPSG and

• to identify which actions launched within the National Action Programmes for achieving Lisbon Strategy goals related to their public administrations generated the most added value.




• First results were presented and discussed, in three groups and in the plenary;

• Among first findings: Wide range of national cases are connected to BR, RAB, simplification and eGovernment. Some national cases reported results, expressed in numbers;




• Draft report to be further elaborated, to reflect clear intentions / focus;

• Next draft to be presented and discussed at the IPSG meeting in July 2008; together with a proposal on contacting other EUPAN WGs in this regard;

• Finalising the report, printing a publication for the 5QC (October 2008)



European Primer on Customer Satisfaction Management

• Update of the document, on the bases of the discussion; possible additional inputs; EUPAN visibility to be assured;

• The document to be presented at the 5QC, UK reflection to be included;

• At the CSM meeting in Oct 2008, decision on continuation and on the approach to put the document at the political / policy level to be prepared;



Practitioners Handbook on Citizen Charters

• Final draft;

• The document will be prepared as an on-line version; for the 5QC France will provide a certain number ob copies for the conference participants;

• EIPA will consider including the cases into database



5QC – 5th Quality Conference for Public Administration in the EU (1/3)

http://www.5qualiconference.eu/

Plenary sessions Agoras Best Practice Workshops CAF Centre Infoshops Stands



5QC – 5th Quality Conference for Public Administration in the EU (2/3)

• Status report; Country information to be provided; Critical friends

• Call for agoras’ and Workshops’ facilitators;

• Proposal, that Scientific Rapporteurs meet with facilitators in Paris, before the conference



6QC – 6th Quality Conference for Public Administration in the EU, in 2010

• 6QC Host Country;

• 6QC Guidelines: drafted by Slovenian Presidency; relevant evaluations to be included as enclosures; work to be continued by the French Presidency and the 6QC Host Country



Knowledge Management and Sharing Practices

• EUPAN Newsletter;

• EUPAN Website;

• Practical cases at IPSG and subgroups meetings;

• Sharing information between EUPAN Working Groups



IPSG II, May 2008 IPSG I, February 2008

No Topics

No % No % No % No %

1 Decisions taken (adequate, pertinent) 16 55,2 13 44,8 6 28,6 15 71,4

2Debate promoted between participants (necessary, fruitful)

16 55,2 13 44,8 5 23,8 15 71,4

3 Proposals presented (interest, relevance) 13 44,8 15 51,7 6 28,6 15 71,4

4 Documentation (clear, well organized, well presented) 19 65,5 9 31,0 16 76,2 5 23,8

5 Agenda (theme / schedule) 24 82,8 5 17,2 19 90,4 1 4,8

6 Agenda (topics / relevance / support to MTP) 19 65,5 9 31,0 10 47,6 11 52,4

7 Practical information (sufficient, clear) 25 86,2 4 13,8 15 71,4 4 19,0

8E-mail assistance before the meeting (to registration, to respond to your questions…)

28 96,5 1 3,5 16 76,2 5 23,8

9Access to the documentation (reception in due time, channels used)

15 51,7 12 41,4 12 57,1 6 28,6

10EUPAN site of Slovenian Presidency (clear, friendly, adequate)

15 51,7 8 27,6 11 52,4 4 19,0

Total 190 65,5 89 30,7 116 55,2 81 38,6

Evaluation of the two IPSG Meetings:



Thank you very much for your attention!


eu2008.si28 - 29 may 200850th dg meeting ipsg – innovative public services group dr gordana Žurga

Documents