Minutes
Innovative Public Services Group Meeting
April 25th-26th, 2006, Haus des Sports, Vienna
Actions & Results
Agenda Item / Action / Results- Minutes of the last meeting
- CAF revised version 2006
Presentation of CAF 2006 at the 46th DG Meeting in Vienna
- “CAF works” publication
A new CAF working plan containing the results of the past work as well as the program for the future shall be prepared in autumn.
- Protection of the term “CAF”
- CAF Regional benchlearning project
Analysis of the CAF WG to be presented at the followingIPSG Meeting.
- Benchmarking: Innovative Case Studies
- Eupan.org
- E-gov Database
- Customer Satisfaction
- Answers to the first 4 pages of the questionnaire
- General information on the situation and/or existing models
- 1 -2 good examples if available
- Collection of Best Practices
- Guidelines for developing CS-questionnaires
- Quality Conference Tampere 2006
- Quality Conference Paris 2008
- Resolutions
Participants
Presidency:
Presidency / Mr. / Michael / KALLINGERPresidency / Mr. / Hannes / TIMISCHL
Member States Representatives:
Austria / Ms. / Elisabeth / DEARINGBelgium / Mr. / Jan / DOMBRECHT
Belgium / Mr. / Jean-Marc / DOCHOT
Bulgaria / Ms. / Lilia / IVANOVA
Cyprus / Mr. / Andreas / MYLONAS
Czech Republic / Mr. / Jiri / MAREK
Denmark / Ms. / Tine Vedel / KRUSE
Estonia / Ms. / Karin / NÄREP
Finland / Ms. / Katju / HOLKERI
Finland / Ms. / Johanna / NURMI
Finland / Ms. / Marja-Leena / VIITALA
France / Mr. / Yves / GALLAZZINI
Germany / Mr. / Friedrich-Wilhelm / MOOG
Germany / Ms. / Melanie / VON BREVERN
Hungary / Mr. / Ákos / KOVÁCS
Ireland / Mr. / Brian / MURPHY
Italy / Ms. / Sabina / BELLOTTI
Latvia / Ms. / Inese / VAIVARE
Lithuania / Ms. / Jurgita / DOMEIKIENE
Luxembourg / Mr. / Guy / WAGENER
Malta / Mr. / Charles / POLIDANO
Netherlands / Mr. / Frank / FABER
Netherlands / Mr. / Bartel / STOMPEDISSEL
Poland / Mr. / Grzegorz / LATOS
Poland / Ms. / Anita / NOSKOWSKA-PIATKOWSKA
Portugal / Mr. / Luis / EVANGELISTA
Romania / Ms. / Claudia / LUNG
Romania / Ms. / Cristina / PATRASCOIU
Slovakia / Ms. / Monika / JURKOVICOVA
Slovakia / Mr. / Frantisek / KAJANEK
Slovenia / Ms. / Gordana / ŽURGA
Spain / Mr. / Emilio / CASALS
Sweden / Mr. / Thomas / JOHANSSON
United Kingdom / Mr. / Roy / STEPHENSON
Observer
Norway / Ms. / Marit Skaar / REIERSENNorway / Ms. / Ottil Fasting / THARALDSEN
Organisations:
EFQM / Mr. / Bill / GORMLEYEFQM / Ms. / Lydia / NAGEL
EIPA / Mr. / Patrick / STAES
EIPA / Ms. / Ann / STOFFELS
European Commission / Ms. / Andrea / PETROWSKI
Additional Attendees:
Netherlands,Municipality The Haque / Mr. / Harry / WEDEMA
Netherlands
Municipality The Haque / Mr. / Marc / PRINS
Austria
Customer Satisfaction Expert / Ms. / Eva / NIKOLOV-BRUCKNER
Austria
HR-group / Mr. / Stefan / RITTER
Presidency / Ms. / Martina / NEHYBA
Presidency / Ms. / Barbara / RAPPAUER
Apologies: Greece
Minutes
All documents referred to in the minutes may be found on circa.
A / Opening of MeetingMinutes of last meeting in Vienna
Agenda and Objectives of meeting / Presidency –
Michael Kallinger
Michael opens the meeting and welcomes Ms. Lilia IVANOVA (Bulgaria), Ms. Andrea PETROWSKI (European Commission), Ms. Marja-Leena VIITALA (Finland), Mr. Brian MURPHY (Ireland), Ms. Marit Skaar REIERSEN (Norway) and Mr. Grzegorz LATOS (Poland) as new participants of the IPSG.
The minutes of the February IPSG meeting were approved.
B / CAF revised version 2006 –
presentation of revised version / EIPA – Patrick Staes
see handout (Paper 02a)
At the CAF WG on April 24, 2006, agreement was reached on the scoring, the introductory texts for the (sub)criteria, the glossary and the examples.
A first version will be presented at the DG Meeting at the end of May.
A final CAF meeting regarding CAF 2006 (Final approval of the general introduction and the glossary, guidelines, benchmarking/benchlearning, Validation) is planned on June 23th. The final version of CAF 2006 will be ready to be translated into the national languages by the end of June.
Good Governance elements like ethics, citizen’s participation, innovation and accountability are new or strengthened elements in the revised version. Stressing innovation in this quality management tool for public administrations also presents a clear link to the Lisbon agenda.
Elisabeth thanked all participants of the CAF working group for their extraordinary work and support.
C / CAF brochure “CAF works – better service for the citizens by using CAF” / EIPA – Patrick Staes
see handout (Paper 02a)
All Case studies are based on the CAF 2002 version; however it may also be a testimony and help for new users of CAF 2006.
Frank (Netherlands) raised the question concerning the measurement of results as an indicator of improvement and which examples can be given. Patrick (EIPA) mentioned key performance results like higher efficiency, rapid provision of services as an example.
Elisabeth (Austria) referred to the main challenges in processing the case studies: The measurement of results was the main challenge, as many organisations only described their management tools but did not mention results of the use of CAF. However the main focus of the brochure is to look at results and how they improve, therefore case studies without stating results are not published. The second main problem was theuse of the English language in the case studies.The brochure will be published in English, French and German. A list was circulated for the presidency to know how many copies per country in which language are wished.Emilio (Spain) suggested having a more flexible printer's copy where single pages may be taken out to copy them.
The brochure shall also facilitate the finding of CAF-benchlearning partners within Europe, which is demanded by many organisations. Some organisations also started with EFQM and changed to CAF afterwards. In contrast to the EFQM model the self evaluation process includes all the people working within the organisation. Bill (EFQM) remembered thatthe groupis at the start of using quality management in the public administration and it is a long way to go until excellence in this matter is reached. Elisabeth (Austria) announced that also the OECD Public GovernanceCommittee will use CAF as one method of evaluation.
Sabina (Italy) suggested that the group shall start to thinkabout what the group can do to promote CAF-practice-communities within several sectors. Patrick (EIPA) suggested to have a new strategic CAF plan in October in order to look what was done and what should be done in the next two years. Also the question how other quality models may be involved plays a roll.
Lilia (Bulgaria) informed that Bulgaria is undertakinga quality management pilot project at the moment which includes all administrative levels (central, regional, 2-3 municipalities).
All countries, who have not informed the Austrian Presidency at the meeting about the amount of brochures they would like to have delivered in German, English or French are invited to send an E-Mail with the number of wished copies.
A new CAF working plan containing the results of the past work as well as the program for the future shall be prepared in autumn.
D / Protection of the term CAF / EIPA – Patrick Staes
see handout (Paper 02a)
IPSG requested EIPA to go ahead with the registration of the CAF trademark.
E / CAF regional benchlearning project –
presentation of the results / Slovakia –
Frantisek Kajanek
Monika Jurkovicova
see handout (Paper 05a)
All the organisations went through a CAF self assessment.All presentations and results may be found in a common website on “Caf regional”).
In the cities group the most tangible results have been reached (including the transfer of best practices, leading to better results).
Michael (Presidency) suggested accepting the present results of the first round and mandating the start of a new round at the end of 2006 new round. Friedrich Wilhelm (Germany) raised questions about the perfect number of participants/countries of such a project and if or when another bench learning project should be started.
Sabina (Italy) suggested paying attention to two levels. The first level is the improvement which is directly interesting for the benchlearning group as the result of the project. It is good for the participants to see that others have the same problems and to have the possibilities to exchange experiences and ways to analyse and find solutions for common problems. The second more general level is the one concerning the point of view of the effectiveness of the approach used for managing process of benchlearning using CAF. This is important to be evaluated by the CAF working group . She suggested to have such evaluation, based on a detailed report from the project, before taking decisions for the future.
A reportabout the results and the consequences of the CAF bench learning project will be prepared in the CAF working group in autumn and presented at the next IPSG Meeting. According to Patrick (EIPA) the Key question is: Does theCAF bench learning projectrepresent a methodology that could lead to good results in any bench learning project?
Emilio (Spain) strongly support to continue the bench learning project as there are not many good examples of bench learning between countries.
The group accepts and welcomes the results achieved to date. A next round is planned for the year 2007.
Benchlearning project team to prepare an analysis of the results of the CAF bench learning project.
Evaluation results of the CAF WG to be presented at the next IPSG Meeting
F / Citizen Charters explored:
In-depth presentations and discussions
- Introduction – Bartel Stompedissel
- Presentation Case 1
- Marc Prins (managing director)
- Harry Wedema (quality manager)
- Short review by Karin Närep (Estonia)
- Plenary discussion on Case 1
- Presentation 2
- Charles Polidano
- Plenary discussion on Case 2
- General discussion on the benefits of the Citizen Mark programme in the UK with a kick-off by Roy Stephenson (United Kingdom)
- Conclusions
Frank Faber
See Paper 07a Citizen charters in the IPSG;
Paper 07b Programme Citizen charters explored;
Paper 07c Presentation Parking Department The Hague;
Paper 07d Self evaluation The Hague;
Paper 07e Flyer citizen charter The Hague;
Paper 07f CV Marc Prins/Harry Wedema
Paper 08a Quality Service Charters in Malta
Paper 08b Charter Mark Review UK
Paper 08c Citizen charters in EU
Paper 08d UK IPSG_Charter_discussion
See annexed documentproduced by The Netherlands
G / – results of the DG Troika,
E-gov database / Presidency –
Michael Kallinger
Michael (Presidency) informed that at the DG Troika Meeting in March in Vienna the Director Generals advised the EPAN-Groups to concentrate on the core function of the website, which is publishing the resolutions, studies, surveys and case studies.
Friedrich Wilhelm (Germany) informed the group about a meeting in London concerning Public Sector Benchmarking Service in which Jean Marc (Belgium), Patrick and Ann (EIPA) Friedrich Wilhelm (Germany) and Bill (EFQM) participated. PSBS was thought to be an alternative to the e-gov database.Unfortunately PSBS is on the way of being cancelled. A meeting with the European Commission on 19th April was cancelled as the commission was not able to hold the date. Germany asked the European Commission for a new meeting date proposal.
Andrea (European Commission) informed that the budget of the European Commission has not been adopted yet, therefore they do not want to give promises they cannot deliver in the future. When the budget will be fixed can not be said at the moment.The group agreed that Germany will follow up on this.
The mandate of the subgroup led by Germanyis extended.
H / Customer Satisfaction / Austria –
Eva Nikolov-Bruckner
Paper 09a Presentation
Paper 09b Customer Satisfaction questionnaire
The Pilot study of 4-5 countries was postponed to a later moment because it would come too early at the current stage of affairs. Eva (Austria) proposed a basic research on the current state of CS Measurement in Europe. The target is to regard the issue from a larger perspective as well as having an overview over already existing activities on measuring CS which would provide a profound basis for the next steps.
A questionnaire on the modus in which CS Measurement is working was planned to be sent out after the meeting. The questionnaire includes two parts: a basic part (is there any CS measurement: which sectors, how often, by whom is it performed, who is responsible etc.) and a part with special questions(Model on which it is based, research design and sample, questionnaire, data analysis and interpretation, reporting and publishing). The first results should be ready for the DG-Meeting in May 2006 and for the CS-Meeting on June 14.
Frank (Netherlands), Roy (United Kingdom), Katju (Finland) and Friedrich Wilhelm (Germany)expressed their concerns about the timetable as the answering of the questionnaire in this short period would be too time-consuming. In the United Kingdom there is no general country survey but there are 50-80 different surveys.
Johanna (Finland) added that firstly to set the target for the project and secondly to help answering the questionnaire we should clarify if we are talking about national level barometers or more specified questionnaires. The latter are usually more concrete tools for service development while the general indexes are good in giving an overall picture of satisfaction towards public services. It seems a bit as if we thought the general indexes are not that useful tools...they are but not necessarily very informative as sources of information for organisation level improvement needs. Sabina (Italy) suggested that the focus should be onan analysis from a methodological point of view in the first phase. Referring to the Italian experience she pointed out that can be usefull to collect and compare the best practices in place in many MS with the aim to define common guidelines in the field
Lydia (EFQM) explained that EFQM had some experiences in this field as they have implemented the EPSI methodology within EFQM to monitor customer satisfaction of the delegates to various EFQM events.She would be happy to share this experience with the group. The European Commission was asked whether the Eurobarometer could be a useful tool for CS measurement. Andrea (EC) offered her support answering this question.
UKsuggested concentrating on the best cases instead of summing up all surveys that exist within the countries. He was prepared to provide documents for UK as well as general information what was happening in this field. He also suggested putting some options to the DG’s: A customer satisfaction guide could be the result.
Àkos (Hungary) suggested having guidelines how to elaborate CS services.Thomas (Sweden) suggested getting some more information about EPSI and the Eurobarometer.
Friedrich Wilhelm (Germany) supportedRoy’s idea of having a best practice guide, as different situations demand different solutions. The result should be a bundle of customer satisfaction modells, not just one Common European Index. Jean Marc (Belgium) informed that a general methodology was developed in Belgium, called“satisfaction barometer”.
The following Austrian proposal was finally agreed:
- Aim: get a clear picture what can be achieved
- Philosophy in the current stage: keep the approach broad
- Please deliver in English till 17th of May:
- Answers to the first 4 pages of the questionnaire
- General information on the situation and/or existing models
- 1 -2 good examples if available
- Options for further work to be decided by the DG
- Collection of Best Practices
- Guidelines for developing CS-questionnaires
- Vision: Common European Index
I / Reports from other groups of the EPAN network / Presidency –
Stefan Ritter
Paper 10a Presentation
Stefan Ritter (Presidency) informed about the activities of the Human Ressources Working group, including Cross-Border Mobility of Public Sector Workers, Information on the Structure of the Civil and Public Services of the EU Member and AccessionStates and Decentralisation and Accountability as Focus of Public Administration Modernisation.
J / Quality conferences, 4QC – final programme / Finland –
Katju Holkeri
Johanna Nurmi
Paper 11a 4QCProgressReport
The 4QC secretariat will contact the Best Practise facilitators and presenters in order to get them to plan their sessions together. IPSG members will get information on their cases and facilitators.
Registration started on 21.4. All the Tampere hotels are booked via the web site. IPSG members and DG’s have got an invitation and are pre-registerd by the conference secretariat. An access key to complete the registration will be sent by e-mail later.
The CAF Centre is planned on Wednesday and on Thursday. IPSG will be informed as soon as it is finished.
Finland toprepare information about the CAF Centre for the next CAF working group meeting in Copenhagen.
K / Look ahead to Finnish Presidency / Finland –
Katju Holkeri
Johanna Nurmi
Paper 11b Finnish EU-presidency
The agenda of the first IPSG Meeting in Helsinki will include 4QC preparations
Customer satisfaction (incl presentations of practices) and CAF.
All meetings will be held in Helsinki, except 4QC (Tampere) and HRWG II (Brussels). The evaluation of the Critical Friend Initiative will be discussed as a part of the whole 4QC evaluation scheme at the first IPSG meeting.The actual assessment of the initiative will only be carried in September
- 6- 7 JulyIPSG I
- 17 JulyTroika secretariat
- 11-12 SepHRWG I
- 14-15 Sepe-Gov I
- 27-29 Sep4QC
- 9 OctTroika secret. (TBC)
- 12-13 OctDSIPA
- 16 OctDG Troika
- 26-27 OctIPSG II
- 31 OctHRWG II (TBC)
- 9-10 Nove-Gov II
- 3 DecDG –troika (TBC)
- 4–5 DecDG Meeting
L / Preview 5QC / France –
Yves Gallazzini
The Date of the 5QC had to be changed to November. The meeting will probably take place at the “Palais des Congrès” in Paris or in Versailles. More detailed information will be given during the Finnish Presidency.
M / Any Other Business / Presidency –
Michael Kallinger
Michael (Presidency) informed the group about the rough content of the IPSG part of the resolutions for the next DG-meeting. The resolutions will be sent out per mail during the next week. All delegations are invited to add or comment the document.
Presidency to send out a draft version of the IPSG part of the resolutions for the 46th DG Meeting in Vienna.
Portugal made a announcement of intention to carry out the organization of the 3 European CAF Event, which will be formally announcedat the meeting of DG held in May
Gordana (Slovenia) informed the group, that thequality matrix available on eupan.org, was updated recently.
1