Evaluation of the Reorganization of the PPSC Human Resources - December 2021

Internal Audit and Evaluation Division

As recommended by the Executive Council, subject to the approval of the Director of Public Prosecutions, on January 13, 2022.

Approved by the Director of Public Prosecutions on March 3, 2022.

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2022.

Cat. No. J79-13/2022E-PDF
ISBN: 978-0-660-42366-1

Table of Contents

• 1.  Introduction
• 2.  Background
• 3.  Evaluation Objective
• 4.  Methodology
  • 4.1.   Evaluation Approach
  • 4.2.   Methodological Limitations
• 5.  Findings
  • 5.1.   Evaluation Performance: Effectiveness and Efficiency
  • 5.2.   Performance Indicators
• 6.  Conclusion and Recommendations
  • 6.1.   Outcome Achievement
  • 6.2.   Recommendations
  • 6.3.   Management Response and Action Plan
• Appendix 1: Key informant interview questionnaires
• Appendix 2: Client survey

1. Introduction

The purpose of the Human Resources (HR) Reorganization evaluation was to assess the reorganization's effectiveness and efficiency and more specifically in providing HR services to its clients and providing staff with more support and opportunities for career progression in the HR Directorate of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada (PPSC). The assessment included both qualitative and quantitative data. The evaluation covers April 2020 to April 2021.

2. Background

The Director General (DG) of the HR Directorate requested a review to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the reorganization and, more specifically, the need to re-organize some responsibilities to improve service delivery, improve client interface, and enhance internal and external efficiencies and effectiveness.

The Directorate originally had five (5) major organizational components:

Three (3) Centres of Expertise:

• Classification and Labour Relations; Resourcing; and Human Capital Strategies, each headed by a Director at the PE-06 group and level.

Two (2) other units:

• An AS-06 Manager headed one unit (Corporate Compensation and HR Systems) and an AS-04 Team Leader headed another unit (Human Resources Administration Unit).

Prior to the launch of the reorganization, the turnover of staff was high and the ability to attract new staff (partly due to career progression issues) was problematic. In addition, several other concerns were expressed, including clarity of roles and responsibilities, as well as organizational considerations, such as span of control, span of management, overlap and workflow matters. There were functional relationship issues regarding which activities belonged together for the best program delivery (i.e. was Labour Relations and Classification a good or logical union). In addition, the Directorate was facing increasing workload responsibilities due to the increasing complexities of the work that were taking time away from the most senior levels due to the organizational structure in place and there was a perceived imbalance in the delivery of the administrative support functions.

To address continuing and increasing pressures on the attainment of service priorities, and to deal with any organizational shortcomings and determine plausible solutions, the DG launched an organizational review process and hired a consultant to lead the undertaking. To address these issues, the directorate undertook a review of the current situation with a view to finding solutions to the growing challenges in providing service to a wide array of clients at Headquarters and in the regions. There was a perceived feeling of the need for more central coordination and a better focus to handle these increasing work challenges.

The prime focus of the consultant was to determine the need for modifications to the organization, dedicated to client service in the delivery of assigned responsibilities. The consultant noted that the priority was to restructure the organization to reduce the span of control of the DG and Directors and ensure effective use of resources. The consultant proposed several organizational options with their implications and offered a preferred option put forward as the best model. The majority of the HR Directorate voted this as the preferred option.

For the 2020–21 reorganization implementation phase, the HR Directorate focused on the following objectives:

• Improve service delivery;
• Improve client interface;
• Enhance internal and external efficiencies and effectiveness (within HR, within the PPSC, and with external partners such as central agencies);
• Clarity of roles and responsibilities;
• Career progression and retention issues; and
• Organizational considerations, such as span of control, span of management, overlap, and workflow matters.

3. Evaluation Objective

The objective of the HR Reorganization evaluation is to measure the impact of the reorganization to the HR Directorate as part of the implementation of the reorganization plan.

In addition, the evaluation also sought to understand the effectiveness and efficiency of the reorganization over the evaluation period and how it might be improved in both the short and long term.

4. Methodology

This section provides a brief description of the methodology used to measure the impact of the reorganization of the HR Directorate as part of the implementation of the reorganization plan.

4.1. Evaluation Approach

The evaluation assessed the extent to which the reorganization contributed to the expected outcomes.

To address the reorganization's six (6) objectives, we used some existing data and information collected throughout the reorganization's implementation and ongoing management. Additional evidence was collected through a document review and key informant interviews.

Conducted interviews with 11 HR Directorate employees and HR clients: 5 HR staff, 2 HR managers, and 4 HR clients. In addition, 54 PPSC management/executives received a survey with a 78% response rate (42 respondents). See appendix 1 for the key informant interview questionnaires and appendix 2 for the client survey.

Both the data collection and analysis conducted as part of this evaluation align with the overall framework provided by the Government of Canada's Policy on Results, which expects evaluation to support ongoing accountability, inform government decisions on resource allocation, and support the ongoing management and improvement of the Program.

All research activities undertaken as part of this evaluation were in accordance with normal practices in the field of evaluation.

4.2. Methodological Limitations

Broad outcomes of the Reorganization

The main limitation was the broad nature of the six (6) reorganization objectives. Specific outcomes were difficult to measure because performance indicators were not clearly established. For example, most respondents believed there was enough evidence to determine that the reorganization had contributed to the effectiveness and efficiency of the HR services but most did not have the quantitative statistics to verify their assumptions.

Similar responses from respondents

The interviews with key informants have the possibility of self-reported response bias. This occurs when individuals are reporting on their own activities and answer questions with the desire to affect outcomes. In order to mitigate these limitations, triangulation was used to check findings against other sources and perspectives. The evaluation was able to demonstrate how the reorganization was used and assessed results in general terms, by using evidence from the document review, and the views expressed by key informants.

Limited amount of data-related statistics for the evaluation period

HR statistics were limited because certain quantitative statistics, such as the number of daily HR client files responded to by HR advisors, are not available. Having these quantitative statistics may have provided more evidence of the increased effectiveness and efficiency of HR services; however, more reliance was placed on qualitative statistics.

5. Findings

5.1. Evaluation Performance: Effectiveness and Efficiency

Data collection Issues

Most of the data collected for this evaluation were derived from the survey. The HR Directorate does not collect internal statistics that would demonstrate an overall increase in effectiveness and efficiency from the reorganization. One example was the objective to improve service delivery. This broad objective would have benefitted from having related statistics tracked, such as speed of service. It was noted that files are different from one another but some similarities in files could have been noted.

Most respondents in the interviews mentioned that monitoring performance on outcomes is difficult to obtain without a client survey.

Human resources issues

All HR Directorate respondents mentioned that human resources were limited and that many had little resources to provide service to clients.

5.2. Performance Indicators

Performance indicators were not originally linked to the HR Reorganization objectives. Nevertheless, these objectives provided the basis for the evaluation questions which were then linked to performance indicators. The following are the performance indicators and their linked objective(s).

5.2.1. Percentage of PPSC clients who have seen improvements since the reorganization (Improve Service Delivery and enhance internal and external efficiencies and effectiveness).

Respondents noted some change in service improvement in all the six (6) HR services since the reorganization. Clients saw some improvement in the response time to their inquiries/questions with Staffing, HR Program and Learning, and Occupational Health and Safety (Table 1). They also noted some improvement in the delivery of HR services for Classification and HR Program and Learning (Table 2).

The following tables demonstrate the above description.

HR management noted that service delivery improvements were more noticeable for larger units and that there were no real difference in smaller units. One manager noted that the addition of an extra team leader permitted the manager to focus on more areas of responsibilities. They also consider the staffing unit as a large portfolio with a staff of four advisors under one PE-05 and that the reorganization benefitted some groups but not all, like staffing.

According to HR managers, internal communication has increased because they report to a Director and not the DG. They also noted better communication amongst HR managers in each group.

5.2.2. Client satisfaction rate with new client interface (Improve Client Interface).

All HR staff interviewed agreed that the extra level in reporting structure helped internally since there is better communication and workflow. They also noted that managers focussed more operationally since they are managing one or fewer groups and that external delivery is standardized.

HR managers saw little or no change except for SharePoint for staffing requests – others go directly to Human Resources Unit (HRU).

Client feedback: three (3) out of the four (4) clients interviewed mentioned did not notice much change. One client mentioned that the change in staffing policy to encourage non-advertised appointments was very beneficial. Competitions are not as long as before.

5.2.3. Redefining roles and responsibilities (Clarity of Roles and Responsibilities).

HR staff noted that individual roles and responsibilities stayed the same. One HR staff stated that there is a bit more confusion on the dispatching of HR requests because HR assistants are no longer in HR staffing team and are now residing with HRU.

HR managers also noted that roles and responsibilities mostly stayed the same and especially for smaller units. One manager stated that there is more clarity of where to go to get answers but also recognized that clients may not have that same clarity.

5.2.4. Reduction of staff turnover (Career Progression and retention issues).

Data Source: PPSC PeopleSoft

All but one HR staff respondents from the interviews noticed career/staffing improvements. Only one respondent noted that lower level positions, such AS-03, were not created. The respondent added that promotional opportunities are more difficult when you are at the lower level since you needed to be promoted two (2) levels up in order to obtain a promotion.

HR managers noted no real changes for smaller groups but they also noted the establishment of the PE development program in 2020 was a big change for the reorganization, which will help in the retention of PEs.

5.2.5. Implementation of organization structure change - Organizational Considerations such as span of control, span of management, overlap, and workflow matters

There was a general consensus among HR staff respondents that the new reporting structure helped with communication.

Before the reorganization, the Directors had a much broader supervisory role which made it difficult to focus on the day-to-day operational issues or questions. In addition, Directors needed to be more generalist because they managed several groups. Now, with the creation of the new Director positions at the EX01 level, each functional area has a manager that is responsible for the daily operations.

HR management noted that the span of management improved since they are reporting to a Director instead of a DG. The overall span of control improved.

6. Conclusion and Recommendations

This section of the report provides a conclusion on the evaluation objective addressed in this report. Where appropriate, recommendations are included.

6.1. Outcome Achievement

During the period covered by this evaluation, we can conclude the reorganization had a positive impact on about half their clients. Nevertheless, the other half of the surveyed clients did not seem to have noticed a change in the HR delivery.

The majority of HR respondents agreed the HR reorganisation did achieve most of its expected outcomes. Increased staff retention and the extra level in reporting structure were all mentioned as positive outcomes. Most respondents interviewed listed anecdotal evidence as proof that the overall objectives were met.

In conclusion, when determining the objectives of the HR reorganization, the creation of performance indicators would have provided quantifiable measures to assess performance. Moreover, objectives need to be attainable and easily measurable in order to ascertain the results.

6.2. Recommendations

In order to increase the accountability, and the ability to assess the performance of the HR reorganisation, the following recommendations are submitted:

1. HR management should develop quantifiable performance measures for the prescribed objectives, collect data as required, and report on overall performance.
   
   In general, the PPSC should ensure that all future reorganisations, strategies and projects develop objectives that are measurable through performance indicators.

2. HR should conduct another HR client survey within the next two years. The survey should be designed to gather data related to the performance measures.

6.3 Management Response and Action Plan

Appendix 1: Key informant interview questionnaires

HR Client

1. The HR reorganization combined classification and staffing together in order to work on forging that relationship as the two parts go together in serving the client. Have you noticed a difference in the service delivery related to these two areas and do you any examples?
2. Have you noticed any other changes in service delivery/client interface since the HR reorganization? Can you list any changes?
3. Have you noticed any improvements in the timeliness of responses? Do you have any examples?

HR Management

1. To what extent has the HR reorganization achieved its expected outcomes? The objectives were: Improve Service Delivery; Improve Client Interface; Enhance internal and external efficiencies and effectiveness (within HR, within PPSC and with external partners such as central agencies); Clarity of Roles and Responsibilities; Career Progression and retention issues; and Organizational Considerations such as span of control, span of management, overlap and workflow matters.
2. What factors are contributing to or constraining the achievement of expected outcomes?
3. Does the HR directorate have in place appropriate methods/systems for monitoring performance and reporting on outcomes?
4. Could the HR reorganization process have been done more efficiently?
5. Are there additional changes required to further improve the efficiency of client service delivery?
6. Are there any best practices or lessons learned in the reorganization of the HR Directorate?

Appendix 2: Client survey

Objective of survey:

To gather information, from a client's perspective, in determining whether the HR reorganization achieved its objectives.

Staffing

Have you used any staffing services in the last 12 months?

Yes_ No_

If yes, check all that apply:

• Advice on staffing policies and procedures.
• Preparing and conducting recruitment and staffing processes
• Advice and recommendations in selecting the choice of appointment process
• Advice and guidance on different types of merit criteria/qualifications
• Reviewing employees' or candidates' qualifications to address redeployment or placement of personnel
• General inquiry
• Other

Have you seen any improvement in the response time to your inquiries/questions or processing of staffing requests

Yes_ No_

Were there any challenges you experienced during the delivery of staffing services?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please explain____________

Did you notice any improvements in the service delivery in the last 12 months since the reorganization of the HR Directorate?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please elaborate __________________

Classification

Have you used any classification services in the last 12 months?

Yes_ No_

If yes, check all that apply:

• Review and update of a position
• Advice on classification policies and procedures
• Change in reporting relationship
• Identifying organization for re-design and offering potential solutions.
• General inquiry
• Other

Have you seen any improvement in the response time to your inquiries/questions or processing of classification requests?

Please check appropriate box:

Yes_ No_

Were there any challenges you experienced during the service delivery?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please explain____________

Did you notice any improvements in the service delivery in the last 12 months since the reorganization?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please elaborate __________________

HR Program (recognition, mental health and wellness, diversity and inclusion) and Learning

Have you used any HR Program and Learning services in the last 12 months?

Yes_ No_

If yes, check all that apply:

• Establishing and facilitating forums and workshops for managers to share leadership experiences and challenges
• Obtaining learning and development advice for employees, team or myself
• Consulting and obtaining advice on tools, programs, policies and regulations
• General inquiry
• Other

Have you seen any improvement in the response time to your inquiries/questions or processing of HR Program and Learning requests?

Please check appropriate box:

Yes_ No_

Were there any challenges you experienced during the service delivery?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please explain____________

Did you notice any improvements in the service delivery in the last 12 months since the reorganization?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please elaborate __________________

Labour Relations

Have you used any Labour Relations services in the last 12 months?

Yes_ No_

If yes, check all that apply:

• Advice and guidance on performance management
• Advice and guidance on the discipline process and conflict resolution
• Advice on employment disability (e.g. duty to accommodate)
• Management preparation and conducting of the grievance process
• Advice on labour relations policies and procedures
• General inquiry
• Other

Have you seen any improvement in the response time to your inquiries/questions or processing of Labour Relations requests?

Please check appropriate box:

Yes_ No_

Were there any challenges you experienced during the service delivery?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please explain____________

Did you notice any improvements in the service delivery in the last 12 months since the reorganization?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please elaborate __________________

Compensation

Have you used any Compensation services in the last 12 months?

Yes_ No_

If yes, check all that apply:

• Advice on pay and benefits for yourself
• Advice on pay and benefits for your employees
• Advice and liaison with pay services regarding compensation, pensions, bonuses, etc.
• General inquiry
• Other

Have you seen any improvement in the response time to your inquiries/questions or processing of Compensation requests?

Please check appropriate box:

Yes_ No_

Were there any challenges you experienced during the service delivery?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please explain____________

Did you notice any improvements in the service delivery in the last 12 months since the reorganization?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please elaborate __________________

Occupation, Health and Safety (OHS)

Have you used any OHS services in the last 12 months?

Yes_ No_

If yes, check all that apply:

• Advice on ergonomic workplace
• Advice and liaison with workplace OHS committees
• Advice on OHS policies and procedures
• General inquiry
• Other

Have you seen any improvement in the response time to your inquiries/questions or processing of OHS requests?

Please check appropriate box:

Yes_ No_

Were there any challenges you experienced during the service delivery?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please explain____________

Did you notice any improvements in the service delivery in the last 12 months since the reorganization?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please elaborate __________________

Are you willing to be interviewed to discuss survey results?

Yes_ No_

If yes, please provide contact information:

Date modified:

2022-05-09