1
Review
of the
Operational Activities and Structure
of the
Australian Government Information
Management Office
(AGIMO)
Helen Williams AO
January 2012
1INTRODUCTION
1.1TERMS OF REFERENCE
1.2THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT INFORMATION MANAGEMENT OFFICE
1.3STRUCTURE OF REPORT
1.4METHODOLOGY
2KEY ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
2.1HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
2.2THE INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT
2.3RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHOLE-OF-GOVERNMENT ICT
2.4THE STRATEGIC VISION
2.5GOVERNANCE AND THE ROLE OF SIGB
2.6THE ROLE OF AGIMO
2.7MAINTAINING A PROFILE
3STRATEGIC POLICY CAPABILITY
3.1A NEED TO REFOCUS
3.2LEADERSHIP IN STRATEGIC AND INNOVATIVE POLICY AND ANALYSIS OF EMERGING TRENDS
3.3OPPORTUNITIES FOR WHOLE-OF-GOVERNMENT APPROACHES
3.4A COORDINATED VIEW OF AVAILABLE CAPABILITIES AND FACILITIES
3.5PROVIDING FRAMEWORKS FOR COLLABORATION AND BUSINESS ANALYSIS
3.6AN EVIDENCE BASE OF HIGH QUALITY DATA
3.7PRIORITIES FOR A REFOCUSED POLICY BRANCH
4INVESTMENT IN ICT-ENABLED PROJECTS
4.1BRANCH RESPONSIBILITIES
4.2ASSURANCE ON MAJOR GOVERNMENT INVESTMENTS
4.3THE ASSESSMENT OF INVESTMENT IN ICT-ENABLED PROJECTS
4.4BENCHMARKING
4.5PROGRAM MANAGEMENT UNIT
5ICT SKILLS AND CYBER SECURITY
5.1BRANCH RESPONSIBILITIES
5.2ICT SKILLS PROGRAMS
5.3CYBER SECURITY
5.4REVIEWING THE CYBER SECURITY WORK PLAN
6ONLINE SERVICES
6.1BRANCH RESPONSIBILITIES
6.2GOVERNMENT SERVICES ENVIRONMENT (GSE)
6.3GOVERNMENT 2.0 STRATEGY
6.4WEB ACCESSIBILITY
6.5ONLINE PRESENTATION
7COORDINATED PROCUREMENT
7.1COORDINATED ICT PROCUREMENT
7.2STRATEGIC SOURCING BRANCH
7.3CENTRAL FACILITIES BRANCH
7.4ISSUES ACROSS COORDINATED PROCUREMENT Skills
8NETWORK SERVICES
8.1BRANCH RESPONSIBILITIES
8.2THE INTER-GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK (ICON)
8.3MINISTERIAL COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK AND TELEPRESENCE
8.4BRANCH RESTRUCTURE
9ORGANISATION AND WORKING ARRANGEMENTS
9.1FUNCTIONS AND STRUCTURE
9.2CROSS-BRANCH COORDINATION
9.3CORPORATE FUNCTIONS
9.4SKILLS
9.5COMMUNICATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS
1INTRODUCTION
Over the three years since the Review of the Australian Government’s Use of Information and Communication Technology (the Gershon Review), the Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO) has been heavily involved in discharging the significant mandate for ICT Reform given to it by the Government. It has achieved creditable results in the areas of ICT savings and in implementing some major recommendations of the Gershon Review including, in particular, the introduction of coordinated procurement arrangements, finalising the Data Centre Strategy and developing the Entry Level skills initiatives. At the same time it has worked to develop the ICT policy agenda, for example in the area of cloud computing, and has exploited technology to provide new and improved ways of working for government.
In view of the likely directions of its future work, however, it was considered timely to review whether the skills and operational arrangements that AGIMO has developed in delivering this mandate are the most appropriate for the role that it will play in the future.
1.1TERMS OF REFERENCE
The Review of the Operational Activities and Structure of AGIMO was initiated by the Department of Finance and Deregulation (Finance) to examine AGIMO’s current operational activities, structure, capabilities, work priorities and skills to determine whether there are opportunities for improvement.
The Terms of Reference for the Review (copy at Attachment B) ask that, in reporting to the Finance Secretary, the Review consider:
-the organisational structure of AGIMO to support its current and future work as reflected in the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Strategic Vision;
-the current processes and procedures to support the functioning ofAGIMO in meeting its policy and operational obligations;
-the capabilities of AGIMO’s personnel, skills and resourcing to meet its work program;
-identification of areas with scope for improvement in areas where AGIMOprovides whole-of-government ICT services and assessment of their suitability for AGIMO’s future functions; and
-other matters considered relevant to the Review.
The Terms of Reference draw attention to the context in which the Review is being undertaken, including the likely directions of the Strategic Vision for the Australian Government’s use of Information and Communication Technology (the Vision) which is in draft form, the progress of the Secretaries’ Committee on
Service Delivery, and the Independent Review of the Implementation of the ICT Reform Program by Dr Ian Reinecke (the Reinecke Report).
The Review is specifically directed towards the internal operation of AGIMO and its operational and policy work, currently and for the future, as informed by the draft Vision and work program.
In addition, and since the Terms of Reference were written, the Government has further increased its focus on the need to maintain fiscal discipline in the face of deteriorating global conditions and a weaker near-term outlook for the Australian economy. The Review has therefore taken into account the tightened resource pressures across Finance and the need to prioritise, rather than supplement, resources.
1.2THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT INFORMATION MANAGEMENT OFFICE
AGIMO is a Business Group within Finance and is included under Outcome 2 of the Department:
“Improved Government administration and operations through systems andpolicyadviceon……..theapplicationofinformationand communications technology.”
AGIMO is headed by a Deputy Secretary of the Department who is also the Australian Government Chief Information Officer. It is composed of two divisions, the Policy and Planning Division and the Agency Services Division, that are broadly split along policy/operation lines.
The Policy and Planning Division aims to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the ICT activities. It achieves its aim through analysis of significant proposals, practical guidance to agencies, programs to support ICT skills, support for governance bodies, and responding to emerging technologies and issues. It has three branches:
-the Governance and Policy Branch;
-the Investment Management Branch; and
-the Cyber Security and Skills Branch.
The Agency Services Division coordinates, acquires and supports common, whole-of-government ICT products and services. It has four branches:
-the Online Services Branch;
-the Central Facilities Branch;
-the Strategic Sourcing Branch; and
-the Government Network Services Branch.
AGIMO currently has 229 staff on the ground of whom approximately 45% are either cost recovered or subject to user charging, or Budget funded for a specified purpose and time frame. The Agency Services Division contains two thirds of the staff employed but also includes the majority of the cost recovered or specifically funded programs.
1.3STRUCTURE OF REPORT
The Report focuses first on the role and responsibilities of AGIMO and its place in cross-government responsibilities for ICT more broadly, to provide a background for discussion on how that role is best fulfilled. It also considers the operational relationship between AGIMO and the Secretaries ICT Governance Board (SIGB) as its governance body.
The Report then considers each of the AGIMO branches in turn, noting the relationship of their work to the draft Vision, commenting on the work program and how it is carried out, noting particular skills requirements for the work of each branch, and suggesting areas for possible improvement. Finally, the Report draws together some cross-AGIMO issues concerning its structure and operation.
1.4METHODOLOGY
As the Review’s Terms of Reference focus specifically on the internal administration of AGIMO, with the exception of discussions with some of the members of SIGB, work on the Review has concentrated on material provided by, and discussions with, members of AGIMO. The help and support of AGIMO staff in providing this assistance, as well as in commenting on drafts including their factual accuracy, is gratefully acknowledged.
2KEY ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Successive Governments have recognized the increasing importance of ICT in delivering government policies, information, programs and services, in achieving efficiencies and in driving productivity in the digital economy. In response, they have set up structures to develop and coordinate government action in this area. The issue that has been less clear, as is shown by the changing government responses over time, is the most effective focus and function of such a structure, and the best way to achieve the desired outcome.
2.1HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
National Office of the Information Economy
In September 1997, the then Prime Minister announced the establishment of theNational Office of the Information Economy (NOIE) as an office within theCommunications, Information Technology and the Arts (CITA) Portfolio. Its focus was on policy advice, particularly in the areas of establishing the environment for online activities, facilitating electronic commerce and applying new technology to government administration.
NOIE’s role and functions were expanded in October 2000 when it was established as a separate executive agency within the CITA Portfolio to give it status as an independent cross-portfolio advocate on information economy issues. It also absorbed the Office of Government Online in recognition of the potential for online services to drive consumer take-up.
Australian Government Information Management Office
In April 2004, NOIE was renamed the Australian Government InformationManagement Office. AGIMO remained an executive agency within the CITA Portfolio and took over NOIE’s functions relating to the provision, leadership and coordination of the Government’s policies on the use of ICT to deliver policies, information and programs. The Head of AGIMO was given the title of Australian Government Chief Information Officer. NOIE’s former functions relating to policy, research and programs on the broader information economy were transferred to the CITA Department.
In October 2004, AGIMO was incorporated into the then Department of Finance and Administration, ceasing to be a separate executive agency and becoming a business group within the Department. The title of Australian Government Chief Information Officer was retained by the Department’s Deputy Secretary.
Implementing recommendations of the Gershon Review
The focus of AGIMO’s work altered significantly for the years immediately following the Gershon Review in 2008, when it was given the task of coordinating the implementation of the Review’s recommendations.
These recommendations were broad in scope, covering strengthened governance of ICT expenditure, tighter management of ICT business-as-usual funding, enhanced focus on ICT skills and improvements to market efficiency. However the task of achieving the significant savings to the Budget recommended by the Review meant that the efficiency agenda clearly overshadowed other aspects of AGIMO’s work, as well as reducing the time available for it to focus on other aspects, with a consequent impact on the way it was viewed by agencies.
As was noted in the Reinecke Report (p. iv), AGIMO has “efficiently undertaken the task the Government set for it” but, in doing so, it has “delivered budget savings that have, at times, made it the focus of considerable resentment.” The majority of the Review’s recommendations are now in place and this resentment is becoming less apparent over time. It is something that must be borne in mind, however, when considering the strategic role, operation and working arrangements of AGIMO into the future.
2.2THE INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT
In parallel with this Review, Dr Ian Reinecke surveyed ICT work and structures in overseas jurisdictions that are similar to Australia, including the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Canada.
United States
The focus of the US Government has been on improving the efficiency of ICT as a path to improved productivity. The White House appointed Chief Information Officer has given priority to extracting greater efficiency from public sector investment by establishing a transparent approach to spending on technology and the performance of major projects through the publicly available online Federal IT Dashboard.
Agencies are required to seek savings by examining how a better return on ICT investments could be achieved. As a result, a number of projects have been reconsidered or terminated, and the delivery times of others have been reduced. An Implementation Plan directed towards increasing the operational efficiency of ICT program management has focused, particularly, on the priorities of data centre rationalization, the delivery of services using cloud technology to achieve savings (obliging agencies to explore cloud computing options in all new projects) and generally streamlining the operation of government.
United Kingdom
Similarly, the UK Government has stressed the need to increase the efficiency of its ICT investment, including enhancing system interoperability, and reuse and adaptation across agencies. It has also focused on the opportunity that delivery of better services for less cost presents to release savings for strategic re- investment.
The UK ICT Strategy includes measures, inter alia, to:
-increase central control to ensure greater integration across agencies;
-give central agencies mandatory powers to remove excess capacity, especially in data centres;
-provide greater equity in the acquisition and use of open source software;
-streamline procurement processes; and
-introduce a general presumption against ICT projects with a lifetime capacity of more that $100 million.
The UK Government has established a Major Projects Authority that can initiate intervention in projects at risk and can require publication of project information in the interests of transparency. In addition, lead departments have delivery responsibility for strategic ICT projects assigned to them that are aligned to their core responsibilities.
Canada
Canada sees individual agency-centric approaches to ICT infrastructure and systems as a barrier to greater efficiency and is seeking to develop a portfolio approach to ICT investment.
It has introduced arrangements for greater central guidance to departments, a project management framework including independent project reviews, and increased oversight of major ICT projects. It is introducing a government-wide assessment of risk and is taking action to reduce more than 200 data centres across government to 15.
New Zealand
The NZ approach is to adopt a more directive approach to reforming governmentICT, and chief executives have been assigned specific accountability for implementing government ICT in their agencies, a role reinforced by an obligation on Ministers to ensure that this occurs.
Lead agencies are to be appointed for each major cross-agency project with their chief executives being held directly accountable for delivery, and funding models are to be developed to provide incentives for collaboration across government.
International experience
In summary, Dr Reinecke perceives two key themes flowing from international experience. International peer countries have:
-much greater scrutiny of large ICT projects; and
-more powerful governance arrangements to drive accountability.
The scrutiny of major ICT-enabled projects undertaken by the Australian Government, including the size and scope of projects and measures to scrutinize project risk, is discussed in Chapter 4 of this Report. Chapter 4 also mentions the work that is underway to review the current suite of controls as part of the Efficiency Agenda.
The second theme noted by Dr Reinecke is the comparative absence of strong directive powers in the Australian system to ensure greater consistency, coordination and resource sharing across agencies.
In particular, he is concerned that the comparative absence of strong directive powers will limit the implementation of the draft Vision. He argues that, in the absence of direct accountability for achieving its program of reform, implementation of the Vision is likely to fall to AGIMO and that AGIMO’s status and resourcing would limit its capacity to fulfil that role. Governance of the implementation of the Vision is discussed further below.
2.3RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHOLE-OF-GOVERNMENT ICT
While Finance is given responsibility under the Administrative Arrangements Orders (AAOs) for Government On-line Delivery and Information Technology, and Communications Management, it is by no means the only agency with formal responsibilities in this area.
The AAOs also give specific responsibility to:
-the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy(DBCDE) for National Policies relating to the Digital Economy;
-the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and TertiaryEducation (DIISRTE) for Information and Communications TechnologyIndustry Development and for Business Entry Point Management;
-the Department of Resources Energy and Tourism (DRET) for Spatial DataCoordination; and
-the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) for CyberPolicy and Management.
In addition, there is a range of areas where agencies have particular interests in ICT, including the Department of Health and Aging (DoHA) for the National E- Health Transition Authority, the Department of Human Services (DHS) in its role as Custodian of Best Practice in Benefits Realisation, the Australian Public Service Commission (APSC) for its joint role in preparing the Strategic ICT Workforce Plan, the Treasury for the Standard Business Reporting Program and the Attorney General’s Department (AGD) for Policy on Identity Management.
Finally, an increasing number of agencies have taken on the lead agency role in particular areas, for example, the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) and DIISRTE as joint lead agencies for Authentication Services for business to government, and DHS for Authentication Services for individuals to government.
ICT is increasingly, therefore, being accepted as the responsibility of all areas of government, and this cross-agency involvement and interest represents an encouraging response.
The balance between devolved and whole-of-government approaches should increasingly involve departments other than Finance taking on the role as lead agencies across government, an approach being adopted increasingly in other countries, particularly the UK and NZ.
2.4THE STRATEGIC VISION
The draft Vision refocuses the Government’s ICT agenda by giving priority to improving productivity, recognizing the increasing importance of a whole-of- government approach, and emphasizing the ongoing need to streamline processes and communications to improve efficiency and effectiveness. The Vision itself is that, by 2020:
“ICT increases public sector and national productivity by enabling the delivery of better government services for the Australian people, communities and business, improving the efficiency of government operations and supporting open engagement to better inform decisions.”
The draft Vision has three priorities, each with two strategic actions:
-Deliver Better Services (building capability and improving services);
-Improve the Efficiency of Government Operations (investing optimally and encouraging innovation); and
-Engage Openly (creating knowledge and collaborating effectively).
The Vision is accompanied by an Implementation Roadmap which sets out specific projects, responsible agencies and implementation timelines. When finalized, the Roadmap will do much to interpret AGIMO’s role in the context of whole-of-government ICT by indicating its particular areas of interest, although there is a clear need to prioritise its agenda, as is discussed below.