TITLE:

“Public value management: A case study of transitional change in disability sector reform in

Western Australia”

ABSTRACT

This paper contributes to the study of Public Value Management (PVM). PVM is

distinguished from other approaches to public administration in its focus on establishing

community networks and collaborative capacity building for the creation of public value. We

explore PVM through a case study of a public-community sector partnership strategy called

the Positive Behaviour Framework (PBF), a state government initiative designed to transform

services for people with disabilities. The development and implementation of the PBF is

analysed via a transitional change or ‘sector awareness’ model. Each phase of the model is

illustrated through ‘positive stories’ which depict key moments in the change process and in

the activities that public sector managers employed to raise awareness, build capacity and

promote collaboration. We discuss the implications of the study for disability sector change

management and for the further study of the PVM approach to public sector administration.

KEY TERMS:

public sector administration, public value management, strategic management, disability

services, positive behaviour framework

INTRODUCTION

Since the 1980’s, public service organisations’ political and institutional environments have

shifted from a welfare-focus that emphasises administrative procedures to a financial-focus

that emphasises market-based efficiencies and individual responsibility (Bryson, Crosby, &

Bloomberg, 2014; Denhardt & Denhardt, 2000; Hasenfeld, 2010). This development, known

as New Public Management (NPM) (Gruening, 2001), seeks a “leaner, and increasingly

privatised government, emulating not only the practices but also the values of business”

(Denhardt & Denhardt, 2000, p. 549). More recently, a further evolution in public sector

philosophy and practice has seen the emergence of public value management (PVM)

(O'Flynn, 2007; Stoker, 2006). PVM responds to demands on government for more

collaborative and participative engagement with the community. Where traditional and NPM

forms of public sector management aim to retain control of reform goals, service objectives

and delivery methods, PVM aims for reform and innovation through networking, dialogue

and shared capacity building between key stakeholders (Stoker, 2006).

In line with these global trends, the Australian public sector has explored new management

approaches to providing public services (Housego & O’Brien, 2012). PVM is part of this

attempt to find a “new balance” (Bourgon, 2008) between government and community-based

delivery of services, between government regulation and self-regulation, between ensuring

service quality and cost effectiveness and between personal choice and public benefit (Greve,

2015). However, as well as creating opportunities for efficiencies, greater consumer choice

and competition, there are also significant risks associated with community and private sector

outsourcing of what have traditionally been regarded as public services. In particular,

individualised funding, marketisation and greater competition can result in greater

uncertainty about service quality and highlight the difficulties in balancing service standards

and value for money (Stewart & Alam, 2000). Research is needed to understand how PVM

deals with these kinds of opposing management demands, especially in policy development

and implementation. While foundational work has been done on defining PVM (Rutgers,

2015) and on comparing its core characteristics with those of NPM (Bryson et al., 2014;

Denhardt & Denhardt, 2000; Stoker, 2006), we know little about the practical impact of

PVM, especially as regards developing and implementing strategies to create public value.

The move towards public administration reform has been particularly noticeable in the

disability sector where funding arrangements, regulatory standards and stakeholder

expectations have been changing rapidly (Dickinson, Needham, & Sullivan, 2014). Change is

an important issue in this sector because individuals with disabilities and their families are in

particularly vulnerable situations where resources and capacities are often very limited.

Public sectors managers are faced with the difficult task of overseeing change but also of

ensuring consistency of service quality. In this paper we explore the relationship between

sector change and the role of value-based public management through a case study involving

a strategic plan developed and implemented in the Western Australian disability sector to

address the issue of “challenging behaviours” (Allen, 2009). This approach, the Positive

Behaviour Framework (PBF), is a strategic plan to support individuals and families dealing

with challenging behaviours through both intensive supports and universally available

services (Disability Services Commission, 2009, 2013). The implementation of the PBF

presents an opportunity for investigating the role of public sector managers in supporting

collaborative networks to address a complex and highly topical social issue.

In the following sections, we first present the paper’s theoretical background and develop a

transitional change model that we call the “sector awareness model”. We use this change lens

to describe and analyse our case study. We present the case as several phases of increasing

development in disability sector awareness and capacity to respond positively to challenging

behaviours. We present a series of positive stories that illustrate the growth in sector

awareness and provide insights into how public service management employ innovative

strategies for supporting that change. We conclude with a critical reflection on the role of

public administration in supporting disability sector reform in a time of rapid change.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

The Evolution of Public Sector Management

One of the defining features of public life over the past three decades has been the pace and

scale of public sector change and transformation (Kettl, 2015). During the 1980s and 1990s

the scrutinisation of public spending and service outcomes saw the emergence of NPM

(Armstrong, 1998; Hood & Scott, 1996) and its characteristic adoption of private sector

values such as individual incentives, user pays principles, financial accountability and

customer choice (Hood, 1991). However, researchers have also noted that the focus on

efficiency and financial performance has come at the cost of communities’ inclusion in policy

development and implementation (Bovaird, 2007). The focus on efficiency and cost cutting

has seen service development and delivery moving increasingly from a government

responsibility to one involving multiple agencies from the community and private sectors

(O’Flynn, Vardon, Yeatman, & Carson, 2011). Similarly, funding models have steadily

shifted from block funding of government agencies to community and consumer-based

approaches (Purcal, Fisher, & Laragy, 2014).

In recent years, however, innovative niches within the Australian public sector have adopted

a more networked, collaborative approach to accountability, replacing the dominant focus on

financial accountability that characterised NPM. O’Flynn has argued that, as the weaknesses

in the NPM paradigm of financial efficiency became more evident, “a new paradigm for

thinking about government activity, policy-making and service delivery may emerge bringing

with it important implications for public managers” (2007, p. 353). As part of this emergent

paradigm, PVM emphasises administrative perspectives that focus on collaborative networks

in identifying common values, developing vision and achieving shared purpose. Table 1

presents a comparison of public sector management characteristics for the NPM and PVM

approaches. Reviews have described many marked differences between the two approaches

on a number of characteristics (Alford, 1998; Bryson et al., 2014; O'Flynn, 2007; Purcal et

al., 2014). However, PVM should not be seen as necessarily opposing but rather as

complementing NPM characteristics with additional principles and applications. For

example, Table 1 describes NPM as emphasising cost efficiencies and PVM as concerned

with on financial costs while also prioritising collaborative relationships with stakeholders.

This complementary aspect of PVM is indicated in Table 1 with the word “PLUS”. In

summary, the move in PVM has been to continue with reform and improved performance and

to do this through developing community resources, public-private partnerships, networking

and cross-sector consultation processes to enhance societal capacities.

PLACE TABLE 1 ABOUT HERE

Transitional Change

Making sense of the public sector change requires theory that not only accounts for the

structural reforms but also the transitional processes that occur when organisations and

individuals shift from one way of behaving to another. The development and implementation

of the PBF in the Western Australian Disability Services is an exemplary case of this kind of

large scale transitioning. To illustrate the PVM approach to supporting community change we

develop a transitional change lens that will be used to analyse our case study. Transition

theories of change describe how organisations move from a current state of little or no

capacity or awareness in a particular area to a new state where the desired knowledge or

capacity is accepted as routine (Langley, Smallman, Tsoukas, & Van de Ven, 2013).

Numerous theories from the organisational change literature provide insight into transitional

processes, and in the following we derive a model of transitional change by comparing and

calibrating seven theories to build a detailed overview of the transitioning process (cf. Elrod

& Tippett, 2002) (see Table 2). We selected theories that have a substantial research base in

the management and organisational literature; that apply to large scale, transformative change

both within and between organisational structures; and that consider the change process

through subjective experience, awareness and personal engagement.

In Table 2 shows the comparison and calibration of selected change models and presents the

resulting 6-phase model of transitioning awareness. We call these phases Non-Awareness,

Preliminary, Growing, Productive, Embedding and Creative Awareness. The initial phase is

one of non-awareness to highlight that there is no formal recognition of the need for change.

At this baseline phase, managers, and organisations operate within standard patterns of

organising, behaving and thinking. At some point, however, events, critical incidents or

anomalies occur which cannot be assimilated into standard practices. These anomalies

accumulate and lead to a public recognition of the problem and the desire for more

information. This is the preliminary awareness phase of recognising deficiencies in the status

quo and of struggling with the ambiguities of wanting to change but not knowing how. In

Table 2 this preliminary awareness phase is referred to as, “embryonic archetype

incoherence” (Greenwood & Hinings, 1988), “conflicts” (Nutt 2003) and “concerns”

(Gehman, Treviño, & Garud, 2013). From this preliminary state opportunities emerge for

investigating adaptive innovations and the “translation” of old practices into new ones

(Bresman, 2013). In this phase of growing awareness, alternatives arise which offer potential

solutions to problems.

PLACE TABLE 2 ABOUT HERE

In the phase of productive awareness, new forms of thinking, behaving, and communicating

gradually emerge and adapt or even replace established practices and methods of problem

solving. A transformation occurs in which there is broad adoption of, and identification with,

the new standards of practice, service design and philosophy. During the phase of embedded

awareness an integration of existing structures, patterns and forms of organising occurs as

new practices become the new order of functioning. Over time, skills, resources and levels of

mastery with the new forms of activity and thinking develop and, consequently, creativity

and innovation within this new status quo increases (Metcalfe, 1993). This is the phase of

creative awareness. This model of developing awareness is not a linear one. Detours,

fixations and iterative loops are possible and the whole process can repeat itself as new

opportunities and challenges arise.

In the following case study we apply this phases-of-awareness schema to illustrate the PVM

approach to public sector management. Using awareness as a means for tracking the various

phases of change and innovation highlights both the human and social process of service and

policy development and implementation. In the following sections we discuss the study’s

research design and methods, and follow this with a presentation of the case study material

and detailed discussion of each of the phases of awareness as they emerged.

THE CASE STUDY

Background - disability services and the Positive Behaviour Framework

The case of the implementation of the PBF by the Disability Services Commission of

Western Australia (hereafter referred to as “the Commission”) is particularly relevant for

exploring PVM. There are several reasons for this. First, disability services in Western

Australia have undergone rapid change to keep abreast with the innovations in service design

and delivery practices of other national and international jurisdictions (Stancliffe, 2002).

Second, the introduction of the new National Disability Insurance Scheme is instigating many

new changes in public sector involvement in service delivery and the monitoring of service

standards. Third, in contrast to the regulatory environments of other states, the

implementation of PBF in Western Australia is being undertaken on a voluntary basis which

highlights the role of community engagement and networking (Cubbage, 2014).

The case also provides an insight into public administration practices associated with the

implementation of PVM by illustrating the changing role of the Commission. While the

Commission continues to provide direct services, it is moving rapidly to focus more on

partnering and collaborating with families, disability sector organisations, businesses and

other stakeholders to develop services for people with disabilities. In its role as a funding

body for disability sector organisations, the Commission aims to ensure that services comply

with the requirements of state and federal disability legislation but also looks to go well

beyond mere compliance to also ensure the availability of innovative, high quality services.

The positive behaviour framework and challenging behaviours

It is within the context of rapidly changing legislative, funding and service provision

environments that the Commission, in consultation with individuals, families and disability

organisations, has developed the PBF strategy for responding to the needs of people with

disability who engage in behaviours that place themselves and possibly others at risk. These

behaviours, often referred to in the disability literature as “challenging behaviours” (Allen,

2009) or “behaviours of concern” (Chan, Arnold, Webber, Riches et al., 2012) are behaviours

that risk the safety or wellbeing of the people who display them or to others who may be

affected (Emerson, 1995). The vulnerability of many people with disabilities who engage in

behaviours that put themselves and others at risk highlights the need for increased service

capacity and responsiveness (Allen, 2009). Challenging and concerning behaviour can be

seen as communicating profound human needs and sometimes indicative of situational

conditions that deny other ways of expressing those needs. Consequently, issues of human

rights and core values become critically important in designing flexible and adaptive services.

All this highlights the need for long-term investments in holistic, sector-wide and positive

strategies.

The PBF aims to achieve two goals. First, it aims to open up positive opportunities through

service initiatives that are tailored to the needs of individual persons. Second, the PBF aims

to safeguard human rights by eliminating restrictive practices. A restrictive practice is “any

practice or intervention that has the effect of restricting the rights or freedom of movement of

a person with disability, with the primary purpose of protecting the person or others from

harm” (Disability Services Commission, 2012, p. 14). Examples of restrictive practices

include the use of helmets, harnesses or medication to restrain people from self-harm. Non-

restrictive practices are interventions that do not impinge on the rights of individuals with

challenging behaviours and, in the case of possible self-harm for example, might include

using methods of supported communication or increasing opportunities for meaningful

participation in occupational activities. The PBF initiative includes an evidence-based

approach to disability service design and delivery called Positive Behaviour Support (PBS)

(Disability Services Commission, 2013). PBS is grounded in safeguarding human rights,

improving quality of life and eliminating restrictive practices through systemic change and is

the core theoretical foundation to the PBF strategy. In short, the PBF is a long-term strategic

plan for collaborating with stakeholders to advance sector-wide change in the delivery of

disability services and supports to address the needs of people with challenging behaviours.

Before describing this case in more detail we will develop and present a theoretical

perspective for interpreting the complex set of activities and initiatives that have occurred in

the PBF’s implementation process.

Philosophical orientation, research design and method

The philosophical orientation of this study takes its lead from positive organisational

scholarship (Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003; Roberts, 2006) and appreciative inquiry

(Cooperrider & Srivastva, 2001; Reed, 2007) which together emphasise critically

appreciative views of organisations and their management. As Cameron and his colleagues

put it, positive organisational scholarship (POS) is concerned, “primarily with the study of

especially positive outcomes, processes, and attributes of organisations and their members”

(Cameron et al., 2003, p. 4). We recognise that this is not a common perspective in public

service management research but in this case study we have taken this approach to highlight

the positive lessons that are emerging from a unique approach to public management within

the disability sector in Western Australia.

We adopted a longitudinal case-based approach (Eisenhardt, 1989) to gain close familiarity

with the form of public sector management used to implement the PBF. As this approach is

interpretive and hence can potentially be subjected to various personal biases, we followed

many of the criteria laid down by Lincoln and Guba (1985) to ensure trustworthiness of our

qualitative data. For example, to ensure the credibility and dependability in the validity of the

findings we made frequent observations from multiple data sources and checked those

observations and insights with key players in the case. Through tracking longitudinally the

emergence of committees, service initiatives, commissioned reports, critical incidents and

strategic planning activities we were able to identify key initiatives in the implementation of

the PBF. The case provided the opportunity for in-depth observations and gathering of

information on the transitional change process. We explored patterns in management and

organisational behaviour to ascertain the kinds of change that occurred across the sector as

the PBF strategy was rolled out. This pattern matching process enabled case study

observations to be compared with theoretical expectations (Bitektine, 2008). Bitektine notes

that comparing “a pattern of observed outcomes … with some pattern of expected values

derived from a given theory” (2008, p. 3) provides an external validity check for the

interpretation of case study observations. In this case study we compared our database of

information and observations about public management involvements in the development and

implementation of the PBF with descriptions of the change phases in our transition model of

awareness. This process allowed us to identify what stages were associated with particular

management initiatives and practices.

Data were collected through: i) meetings with three Commission managers who were key

figures in the development and implementation of the PBF from its inception, ii) attendance

at ten meetings of an interagency community of practice (CoP), iii) interviews with 18 CEOs

or senior executives of service provider organisations and 18 members of the CoP, iv)

documents such as CoP meeting minutes and commissioned reports, and v) attendance at

several other meetings of guiding committees and interest groups. These engagements took

place between November 2013 and January 2015. From these sources we gained a historical

perspective on the sector’s growing awareness of the challenging behaviour and restrictive

practices issues and how PBF implementation guided that awareness.

The data was analysed via an inductive approach (Miles & Huberman, 1994) to identify key

episodes in the development and implementation of the PBF. These episodes were iteratively

referenced to the theoretical framework to find patterns, interpret our findings and check for

alternative interpretations. Subsequent to identifying seminal episodes, narratives were then

developed to provide a rich description of these episodes and so illustrate the development of

sector awareness. The episodes themselves were chosen from many stories and activities

collected during workshops and interviews. They were selected on the basis of their

importance in the transitioning process and on their ability to capture the essential nature of

the particular phase of sector awareness. We then matched these narratives to particular

phases in our theoretical framework and they are presented as “positive stories” in the next

section.

CASE FINDINGS

Transitional Change Phases in Developing and Implementing the PBF

In this section, we trace the development and implementation of the PBF through the lens of

a transitional change or ‘sector awareness model’ outlined above. Adopting a positive

scholarship approach, we illustrate the seminal changes in sector awareness through

describing positive stories that exemplify the different types of transitions that occurred.

1. Non-awareness, avoidance and denial (prior to 2004)

In our case non-awareness marked the period prior to 2004 where sector-wide service

provision in Western Australia had no consistent approach to responding to challenging

behaviours and restrictive practices. Non-awareness can be a passive state of ignorance or an

active state of deliberate avoidance and denial. In this phase restrictive practices were

routinely used to deal with instances of challenging behaviours. Government and institutional

policies and codes that addressed such issues were either non-existent or piecemeal. While

some service providers may have acted more flexibly and positively, such responses were not

widely adopted practices. Public sector management of the issue was sporadic and

characterised by isolated attempts to gather information and develop reactive services. There

were, however, localised initiatives that emerged out of the creativity of individuals and

teams within certain organisations. This is illustrated by the following story of a localised

initiative using PBS. This initiative was not, however, supported by any systemic change and

no general level of public management awareness or consistent response to challenging

behaviours was present beyond small, local experiments.

Positive Story 1 - The Non-Awareness Stage: An isolated collaborative initiative

In the period between 2002 and 2004, Commission staff initiated a collaboration with

another government department to support a person with a mild intellectual disability and an

obsessive compulsive disorder who was engaging in challenging behaviours. The

collaboration trialled a PBS approach to intervention. This involved coordinated meetings

between the public sector departments to assess, treat, plan and review the client’s support

needs. A support worker was employed jointly by the two agencies to support the person. A

consultant psychiatrist and clinical psychology team in mental health and clinical

psychologists at the Commission collaborated to support the intervention. The intervention

resulted in greatly improved quality of life for the person and her family.

2. Preliminary awareness (2004-2007)

In the period of preliminary awareness, events occurred which brought the lack of adequate

service responses to challenging behaviours to broader attention. National media reports

about the abusive use of restrictive practices raised concern across Australia. In response, the

Commission initiated projects which raised sector awareness of inappropriate responses to

challenging behaviour. In 2004 a small initiative began for an emergency response team

which consisted of a clinical psychologist and an intervention officer. In 2006, this initiative

led to a successful tender for funding the Positive Behaviour Team, a specialist professional

team that uses PBS principles and practices for responding to incidents of challenging

behaviour.

In 2007, an inquiry into the general functioning of disability services resulted in the report,

“Western Australian Sector Health Check on Disability Services”. This report looked at the

effectiveness of government resources allocated to the disability sector. Commission

managers developed a suite of initiatives in response to the report with the aim of facilitating

sector-wide learning about challenging behaviours and how to use the PBS approach to

improve service provision (Gatter, Cubbage & Hollick, 2013, p. 1). From this point

awareness grew and Commission managers and senior clinical staff began to develop a vision

for an overall strategic plan that would become the PBF.

Positive Story 2 - Preliminary Awareness Stage: The Challenging Behaviour Consortium

Positive outcomes can flow from acknowledging that a problem exists and that current ways

of responding to the problem are inadequate. In 2005 and 2006 the “Challenging Behaviour

Consortium” was established to support disability sector agencies’ awareness of the need to

address the topic of challenging behaviour. This support led to the development of a training

package called “Smart thinking” and a host of tip sheets for direct care staff. A lasting

outcome of the consortium was the establishment of the Positive Behaviour In Action group.

This group is now an embedded support for PBS “champions” within the WA disability

sector.

3. Growing awareness (2008-2009)

The growing awareness phase is characterised by greater focus on strategy development. As

a result of the Sector Health Check report, the Commission, in conjunction with the peak

body for the disability sector the National Disability Services, established the “Towards

Responsive Services for All” project (National Disability Services, 2009). The project found

that the disability service sector’s capacity to deal with challenging behaviours was very

limited. There was also a Commission initiative to review scientific information about

challenging behaviours, restrictive practices and alternative service responses that took a

positive perspective on intervention (Disability Services Commission, 2008). The review

highlighted the investments required to introduce more effective evidence-based supports.

These projects influenced initial drafts of the PBF strategy document and played a role in the

allocation of resources within the Commission. In 2009, after numerous sector-wide forums

and focus groups, stage 1 of the PBF was launched. This launch brought to the general

attention of the disability sector in Western Australia the need for systemic change on the

challenging behaviour and restrictive practices issues.

Positive Stories 3 - Growing Awareness Stage: Effective Service Design project

A crucial project in the development of the PBF investigated service design in addressing

people’s needs in a positive manner. The Commission initiated a series of consultations with

families, people with disabilities, disability sector organisations and community members in

April 2011. This resulted in a paper “Effective Service Design” based on the principles of

knowing the person well, developing proactive services and focusing on building

relationships and community around the person with the disability. These principles capture

the basis for sector organisations to reform their service focus and provide a platform across

the state for the introduction of PBS strategies.

4. Productive awareness (2010-2012)

Productive awareness is perhaps the key phase in the process of managing change. This

phase saw a shift in the focus of Commission managers from raising awareness to creating

substantive change. More specifically, attention moved from information gathering and

consultation towards taking action to change systems and practices through productive

engagement with stakeholders through the co-creation of support initiatives. Engagement and

co-creation, i.e., the shared responsibility for developing service initiatives, are core aspects

of the PVM approach to public administration. In her discussion of the future of public

service management, Bourgon comments that, “Citizen engagement in service delivery opens

unprecedented avenues for co-design, co-production and co-creation of government services”

(Bourgon, 2008, p. 399).

A critical time in the productive co-creation of PBF initiatives was the establishment in 2010

of a 45-member Guiding Committee. Commission managers facilitated representation from

many DSOs, 6 peak bodies, families and carers and all directorates of the Commission. This

committee, which continues to meet and is chaired by a parent of a young man with a

disability, decides on key priorities, launches pilot projects, and develops service and training

initiatives.

Positive Story 4 - Productive Awareness Stage: Code of Practice for Eliminating Restrictive

Practices

An example of this productive stage was the development and launch of the “Voluntary Code

of Practice for the Elimination of Restrictive Practices” (Disability Services Commission,

2012). This code encouraged disability service organisations to develop operational policy

and guidelines for eliminating restrictive practices. The code was developed by a coalition of

stakeholders from across the disability sector and was facilitated by the Commission.

Support and training for implementation of the code of practice was made available through

the work of the PBF Guiding Committee. Awareness around the need to eliminate restrictive

practices has opened up the opportunity for positive service alternatives to be trialled.

5 Embedding awareness (2013-2014)

In the embedding awareness phase new cultural and operational capacities are routinized in

everyday thinking and doing. Embedding change is inevitably a complex process of

successes, blind alleys, mistakes and surprises. Overall though, awareness grows, learning

occurs and new routines become accepted practice as culture changes. In our case, this

embedding stage saw the trialling of many new initiatives and experiments by the various

partnering committees and groups with guidance and support from Commission managers.

One of the most important for demonstrating the practicality of PBF principles and practices

was the Sector and Workforce Development project (Gatter, Cubbage, & Hollick, 2013). This

trial sparked sector learning and confidence in the potential usefulness of the PBF (Gatter et

al., 2013) and led to involvement of many disability organisations in the PBF strategy. New

measures to support the routinisation of PBS practices are appearing across the sector and in

different service areas.

Positive Story 5 – Embedding Awareness Stage: A community of practice for PBS

consultants

Embedded awareness means that new service approaches are routinised in culture, systems

and structures. As part of the ongoing rollout of the PBF, an important project of the

Commission was to develop and support a voluntary community of practice (CoP) for

professional staff from different DSOs who have designated responsibility for PBF-related

initiatives. These professional staff or PBS consultants, come from over twenty government,

private and community DSOs and they meet every six weeks to further their aims of

promoting change based on the PBF objectives. These regular meetings facilitate learning

and the co-creation of opportunities for members’ personal and professional development.

This CoP has been an important agent for initiating and embedding change and promoting

consistency across the sector.

6 Creative Awareness (2015 – Future)

As new approaches to service design, culture and delivery become embedded in everyday

practices, organisations and their members can divert some resources and energy onto

creative applications of new skills and insights. This is the phase of creative awareness where

the dynamic capabilities of organisations are fully utilised to solve new problems, experiment

with and explore new possibilities and flexibly adapt to changing social, regulatory and

economic environments (Wang & Ahmed, 2007). The creative awareness phase will be

crucial in fully achieving the more aspirational goals of the PBF strategy involving

community engagement and state-wide application of PBS for people with disability and the

community throughout Western Australia (see Table 3 below).

Positive Story 6 – Creative Awareness Stage: “Is There a Better Way”

As the PBF is still being implemented there are currently only some first signs of how this

stage of creative awareness will unfold. One emerging development is the novel use of PBF

by families in the design and delivery of staff development services and training programs.

The “Is There a Better Way” workshop was jointly developed by Commission managers and

families with a lived experience of challenging behaviour. It was developed to assist families

and service providers to come together and explore responses to challenging behaviour by

providing a safe and non-judgemental space for collaborative reflection and problem

solving. This program is now emerging as a core element in family engagement strategies

that are developing around the state.

Describing the implementation of the PBF through these stories illustrates how PVM

characteristics, such as social innovation, community networking and a focus on shared

values, are effective in supporting the transitioning between different phases in the

development and implementation of public policy. PVM strategies can support services,

organisations, groups and communities in moving from a state of non-awareness to states of

productive, embedded and creative awareness in responding to challenging social issues.

Table 3 presents a summary of these findings and describes the public sector management

activities that correspond to each of the transitional phases in the development of greater

sector awareness and action.

PLACE TABLE 3 ABOUT HERE

DISCUSSION

Understanding the ongoing transformation of public sector organisations across the world is a

vital task for organisational researchers and public administration scholars alike. The present

study aimed to improve our understanding of how PVM enables significant change through

examining its impact on the phases of change taking place in implementing a strategic change

initiative. Our study contributes to the theoretical literature, adding to our understanding of

PVM and its implementation in public service delivery. We examined how public sector

management can build community capacity by blending two separate research streams – the

PVM perspective from the public administration field and theories of transitional change

from the organisational change field. Using the transitional change lens we developed a

“sector awareness model” that illustrates different aspects of PVM and how they can be seen

to instigate and support change at different points in the strategy development and

implementation process. The sector awareness model is useful for seeing how transitions

between key points in the development and implementation of public policy are connected

with PVM activities. For example, the collaborative aspect of PVM is closely linked with the

sector-wide changes that occurred in the “growing awareness phase” when agencies across

the sector acknowledge the importance of an issue and commit to taking action to address it.

Our case study has important implications for both the study and practice of public sector

management. The case demonstrates the central role of shared values in developing

productive relationships with community stakeholders. Shared values helped to engage and

focus the energies of diverse stakeholders onto responding to challenging behaviours in

innovative and productive ways. Values such as basic human rights have direct relevance to

many areas of government responsibility. Hence, the question arises, does the PVM approach

have application to other government services, for example, immigration, indigenous services

and correctional services? There is potential here for the cross-sector application of value-

based approaches to public administration like PVM. There are also implications for

management practice in the public service. As shown in Table 1, PVM does not simply

replace traditional or NPM-based management activities and values but has characteristics

that complement and build on existing practices. For example, PVM includes the concern of

improving operational efficiency while at the same time being guided by values-based and

community-directed concerns. This has implications not only for evaluating the performance

of public sector managers but also for how they perceive their own professional roles and

how those roles relate to community interests. For example, the PVM approach of building

community capacity through developing networks and supporting communities of practice is

not only an efficient means for creating social value but also expresses core values of co-

creation and collaboration. This means that public service managers can explore aspects of

their work that go beyond, for example, the narrow pursuit of financial accountability and

market-based competition to a more multifaceted attention to “community values, political

norms, professional standards, and citizen interests” (Bryson et al., 2014, p. 446).

CONCLUSION

Investigating different approaches to policy development and implementation is a vital issue

for researching and practicing public sector management. To contribute to our understanding

of public sector management in general and PVM in particular, we have presented a case

study of policy development in the disability sector in Western Australia. The case study and

the narratives presented are illustrative of a collaborative form of public sector management

that accommodates service reforms within a model of community networking and co-

creation. Change is, of course, a complex and non-linear process and there can be significant

barriers to progressive reforms at any point in the change process. There can also be different

rates and levels of change between different parts of the sector, different organisations and

within different organisational units. But the overall pattern seen here is one of increasing

sector awareness and the building of sector capacity for addressing an important issue within

the disability community in Western Australia. .

In moving from a starting point of sector-wide inaction, our study showed how PVM

approaches enabled community networks to develop and be resourced so that co-created

innovations could be trialled and, where successful, adopted. While there are clearly many

barriers and complexities involved in this co-creative approach to innovation, the focus on

shared values and core human rights provides a basis for continued conversations and

ongoing commitment. We have presented a transitional change model that emphasises the

developing sense of awareness and urgency that underpins the journey of sector-wide

transformative change. This journey has many more chapters to be recorded and written. It is

a positive story of making real changes in the lives of people with disabilities so that we

might all live in more humane and inclusive communities.

REFERENCES

Alford, J. (1998). A Public Management Road Less Travelled: Clients as Co-producers of

Public Services. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 57, 4, 128-

137.10.1111/j.1467-8500.1998.tb01568.x

Allen, D. (2009). Positive behavioural support as a service system for people with

challenging behaviour. Psychiatry, 8, 10, 408-

412.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mppsy.2009.07.001

Armstrong, A. (1998). A Comparative Analysis: New Public Management — The Way

Ahead? Australian Journal of Public Administration, 57, 2, 12-24.10.1111/j.1467-

8500.1998.tb01379.x

Bitektine, A. (2008). Prospective case study design: Qualitative method for deductive theory

testing. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 1, 160-

180.10.1177/1094428106292900

Bourgon, J. (2008). The Future of Public Service: A Search for a New Balance. Australian

Journal of Public Administration, 67, 4, 390-404.10.1111/j.1467-8500.2008.00597.x

Bovaird, T. (2007). Beyond engagement and participation: User and community

coproduction of public services. Public Administration Review, 67, 5, 846-860

Bresman, H. (2013). Changing Routines: A Process Model of Vicarious Group Learning in

Pharmaceutical R&D. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 1,

35-61.10.5465/amj.2010.0725

Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public Value Governance: Moving

Beyond Traditional Public Administration and the New Public Management. Public

Administration Review, 74, 4, 445-446

Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., & Quinn, R. E. (Eds.), (2003). Positive Organizational

Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline. San Fransisco: Berrett-Koehler

Publishers.

Chan, J., Arnold, S., Webber, L., Riches, V., Parmenter, T., & Stancliffe, R. (2012). Is it time

to drop the term 'challenging behaviour'? Learning Disability Practice, 15, 5, 36-38

Cooperrider, D. L., & Srivastva, S. (2001). Appreciative Inquiry in Organizational Life. In D.

L. Cooperrider, J. Peter F. Sorensen, T. F. Yaeger & D. Whitney (Eds.), Appreciative

Inquiry: An Emerging Direction for Organization Development. Champaign IL:

Stipes Publishing.

Cubbage, M. (2014). Code of Practice for the Elimination of Restrictive Practices. perth,

WA: Disability Services Commission.

Denhardt, R. B., & Denhardt, J. V. (2000). The New Public Service: Serving Rather than

Steering. Public Administration Review, 60, 6, 549-559.10.1111/0033-3352.00117

Dickinson, H., Needham, C., & Sullivan, H. (2014). Individual Funding for Disability

Support: What are the Implications for Accountability? Australian Journal of Public

Administration, 73, 4, 417-425.10.1111/1467-8500.12106

Disability Services Commission. (2008). Literature Review: Report and Review of the

Literature on Challenging Behaviour to inform the Report to address the Disability

Services Sector Health Check Recommendation 51. Perth: Disability Services

Commission.

Disability Services Commission. (2009). Positive Behaviour Framework. Perth, WA:

Government of Western Australia.

Disability Services Commission. (2012). Voluntary Code of Practice for the Elimination of

Restrictive Practices. Perth, WA: Government of Western Australia.

Disability Services Commission. (2013). Positive Behaviour Framework: Stage 2 - Statewide

Implementation of Positive Behaviour Suuport. Perth, WA: Government of Western

Australia.

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of

Management Review, 14, 4, 532-550

Elgin, D. (1977). Limits to the Management of Large, Complex Systems: Assessment of

Future National and International Problem Areas (Vol. 2). Menlo Park, California:

Centre for the Study of Social Policy, Stanford Research International.

Elrod, P. D., & Tippett, D. D. (2002). The "death valley" of change. Journal of

Organizational Change Management, 15, 3, 273

Emerson, E. (1995). Challenging Behaviour: Analysis and Intervention in People with

Learning Disabilities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gatter, B., Cubbage, M., & Hollick, J. ( 2013). Evaluation of the Sector and Workforce

Development Project to Promote the Use of Positive Behaviour Support in Disability

Services. Perth, WA: Disability Services Commission.

Gehman, J., Treviño, L. K., & Garud, R. (2013). Values Work: A Process Study of the

Emergence and Performance of Organizational Values Practices. Academy of

Management Journal, 56, 1, 84-112.10.5465/amj.2010.0628

Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1988). Organizational Design Types, Tracks and the

Dynamics of Strategic Change. Organization Studies, 9, 3, 293

Greve, C. (2015). Ideas in Public Management Reform for the 2010s. Digitalization, Value

Creation and Involvement. Public Organization Review, 15, 1, 49-

65.http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11115-013-0253-8

Gruening, G. (2001). Origin and theoretical basis of new public management. International

Public Management Journal, 4, 1, 1-25.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1096-

7494(01)00041-1

Hasenfeld, Y. (Ed.), (2010). Human services as complex organizations (2 ed.). Los Angeles:

Sage Publications.

Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons. Public Administration, 69, 1, 3-19

Hood, C., & Scott, C. (1996). Bureaucratic Regulation and New Public Management in the

United Kingdom: Mirror-Image Developments? Journal of Law and Society, 23, 3,

321-345.10.2307/1410715

Housego, A., & O’Brien, T. (2012). Delivery of Public Services by Non-Government

Organisations. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 71, 2,

211-220.10.1111/j.1467-8500.2012.00765.x

Kettl, D. F. (2015). The transformation of governance: Public administration for the twenty-

first century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Langley, A., Smallman, C., Tsoukas, H., & Van de Ven, A. H. (2013). Process Studies of

Change in Organization and Management: Unveiling Temporality, Activity, and

Flow. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 1, 1-13.10.5465/amj.2013.4001

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Publications.

Metcalfe, L. (1993). Public management: From imitation to innovation. Australian Journal of

Public Administration, 52, 3, 292-304.10.1111/j.1467-8500.1993.tb00281.x

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Anaylsis (2nd ed.). London:

Sage.

Moore, M., & Gergen, P. (1988). Turning the pain of change into creativity and structure for

the new order. In R. H. Kilman, T. J. Covin & Associates (Eds.), Corporate

Transformation: Revitalising Organisations for a Competitive World (pp. 368-392).

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

National Disability Services. (2009). Towards Responsive Services for All! Perth, WA:

Disability Services Commission.

Nutt, P. C. (2003). Implications for organisational change in the structure process duality.

Research in Organisational Change and Development, 14, 147-193

O'Flynn, J. (2007). From New Public Management to Public Value: Paradigmatic Change

and Managerial Implications. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 66, 3, 353-

366.10.1111/j.1467-8500.2007.00545.x

O’Flynn, J., Vardon, S., Yeatman, A., & Carson, L. (2011). Perspectives on the Capacity of

the Australian Public Service and Effective Policy Development and Implementation.

Australian Journal of Public Administration, 70, 3, 309-317.10.1111/j.1467-

8500.2011.00731.x

Purcal, C., Fisher, K. R., & Laragy, C. (2014). Analysing Choice in Australian Individual

Funding Disability Policies. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 73, 1, 88-

102.10.1111/1467-8500.12063

Reed, J. (2007). Appreciative Inquiry: Research for Change. New York: Sage.

Roberts, L. M. (2006). Shifting the lens on organizational life: The added value of positive

scholarship. Academy of Management Review, 31, 2, 292-305

Rutgers, M. R. (2015). As Good as It Gets? On the Meaning of Public Value in the Study of

Policy and Management. American Review of Public Administration, 45, 1, 29

Stancliffe, R. J. (2002). Provision of residential services for people with intellectual disability

in Australia: an international comparison. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental

Disability, 27, 2, 117-124.10.1080/13668250220135079-1

Stewart, L., & Alam, M. (2000). Disability support services in a liberalised economy: A NZ

case study. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 13, 2/3, 186-205

Stoker, G. (2006). Public Value Management: A New Narrative for Networked Governance?

The American Review of Public Administration, 36, 1, 41-

57.10.1177/0275074005282583

Wang, C. L., & Ahmed, P. K. (2007). Dynamic capabilities: A review and research agenda.

International Journal of Management Reviews, 9, 1, 31-51.10.1111/j.1468-

2370.2007.00201.x

Table 1: Comparison of NPM and PVM characteristics (adapted from Alford, 1998; Bryson et al., 2014; O'Flynn, 2007; Purcal et al., 2014)

ASPECTS OF MANAGEMENT

NEW PUBLIC MANAGEMENT (NPM)

PUBLIC VALUE MANAGEMENT (PVM)

Philosophical and Intellectual contextPublic administration Separation of policy development from

policy implementation and service administration

Integration of policy development service administration within community settings – the co-creation of public value and policy

Defining “public interest” Individual preferences are polled and aggregated

Individual preferences PLUS Collective preferences are expressed and integrated

Compete/collaborate Competition at every level in building and implementation of policy

Policy is developed and implemented through Competitive PLUS Collaborative processes

View of key stakeholders Customers, clients, service users, passive recipients of services

Customers PLUS Co-creators and collaborators, active co-creators of

Structure Decentralization and regionalisation Project/service- based teams Management approach

Dominant Model ofAccountability

Upward accountability via performance contracts; outwards to customers via market mechanisms

Multiple accountability systems including citizens as overseers of government, customers as users and taxpayers as funders

Incentives Personnel management (incentives) Maximising incentives PLUS purpose as incentiveMeasurement Performance measurement Performance PLUS value measurementManagement flexibility Freedom to manage (flexibility) Freedom to manage PLUS innovatePlanning Strategic planning, goal setting and

management by objectivesCollaborative partnering, networking and partnerships and communities of practice

Outsourcing Contracting out Contracting out PLUS voluntary engagement Service characteristics

Service provision Separation of provision and production Integration of provision and supportFunding paradigm Fee for service Stakeholders as service user PLUS funderCharacterisation Post-Bureaucratic, competitive

governmentPost-Bureaucratic PLUS Post-Competitive

Dominant focus Outcomes/results-focused Outcomes/results PLUS Relationships focusManagerial Goals Agreed performance targets Multiple goals including responding to citizen/user

preferences, renewing trust via collaboration, networking

Performance Objective Management of inputs and outputs to ensure efficiency and consumer focus

Multiple objectives are pursued including service outputs, satisfaction, outcomes, trust and legitimacy

Preferred System of Delivery

Private sector or tightly defined arms-length public agency

Menu of alternatives selected pragmatically and in collaboration with stakeholder groups

Table 2: Transitional models of change from organisation and management studies

Phases of Awareness

Conditions for Transformation

(Elgin, 1977)

Archetype Tracks (Greenwood & Hinings, 1988)

Transition(Moore &

Gergen, 1988)

Cultural revolutions (Elrod & Tippett, 2002)

Dialectical Development(Nutt, 2003)

Routine Change (Bresman, 2013)

Values Model (Gehman et

al. 2013)

1. Non-Awareness

Status Quo Archetype coherence (A)

Steady-state Steady-state Identification

2. Preliminary Awareness

Procrastination Embryonic archetype

incoherence (A)

Shock Distortions Conflicts Concerns

Crisis Acknowledge crisis

Growing dissatisfaction

3. Growing awareness

Innovations Schizoid incoherence

Adaptation Revitalisation Crisis Translation Knotting

Chaos “back to basics”

Defensive retreat

4. Productive awareness

Embryonic archetype

coherence (B)

Reformulation Revolution Adoption Performance

5. Embedding awareness

Transformation Archetype coherence (B)

Change Routinisation Continuation

Transformation

6. Creative Awareness

Revitalisation New order Circulation

Table 3: Public management activities and PBF development and implementation

Year Phase of Awareness

PhaseDescription

Public SectorManagement Activities

PBF Phase

Prior to 2004

Non-awareness & denial

The issue is hidden or denied. Occasional service innovation.

Sporadic attempts to develop reactive responses through temporary services and isolated policy initiatives

No PBF

2004-7 Preliminary awareness

Awareness emerges through critical incidents

Initial discussion within small management circles, initial research and disseminating reports, developing and drafting preliminary versions of the PBF

PBF Preliminary drafts

2008-9 Growing awareness

Leadership awareness in services begins to grow.

Establishing committees, facilitating the initiation of sector-based information gathering and consultation

PBF Stage 1

2010-12 Productive awareness

Awareness is expressed as active and productive change.

Supporting pilot schemes, developing codes and policy, facilitating and developing sector-wide commitment

2013-14 Embedding awareness

Awareness becomes embedded in cultures and service designs

New services, growing sector initiatives, developing supportive mechanisms, establishing research links

PBF Stage 2

2015-future

Creative/Reflexive awareness

Services are sources of creative solutions. Critical insights are tested.

Supporting and monitoring sector initiatives and ongoing embedding of new practices and service cultures

PBF Stage 3