Measurement of the NZDF’s  Performance

The NZDF needs to measure two major areas of its performance. First it must measure the performance of its day-to-day business - its business as usual, and second, it must measure its performance in achieving its Strategic Objectives.

The day-to-day business that needs to be measured includes the following:

• Most importantly, we need to measure the preparedness of the force elements of the Navy, Army and Air Force to achieve the directed level of operational capability (DLOC) for use on operations; Operational Preparedness.
• We need to measure our ability to effectively and efficiently manage a large and complex business (Corporate / Organisational Preparedness) including:
  • the achievement of our major projects and programmes; and
  • the achievement of our Main and Intermediate Defence Outcomes, cumulatively, over the longer-term.

The measurement of the NZDF’s performance in achieving its Strategic Objectives is directly related to measuring, overtime, its Strategic Initiatives.

In many respects, all of these individual performance measurement requirements are inter-related, and when taken together lead to an overall assessment, at any one time, of the health of the NZDF.

The system used to measure the performance of the NZDF is multi-faceted. The overarching system that the NZDF uses to measure its performance is the Defence Performance Management System (DPMS). The DPMS amalgamates information from the operational preparedness reporting system (OPRES), personnel management systems, financial management systems and programme management systems. The key characteristics of the DPMS are:

• alignment of NZDF organisational performance and activities with the NZDF strategic and short-term plans;
• measurement of the performance of both strategic priorities and operational imperatives;
• integration of the reporting requirements of performance management, programme management, risk management and capability management;
• sufficiently flexible to adapt to changing business requirements;
• provision of a basis to effectively manage the current and future level of organisational change; and
• performance measures are valid, reliable, timely and materially complete.

The DPMS consists of the following two formal measurement systems:

• OPRES. The NZDF carries a latent capability in that it often functions in potential rather than in actuality. While this can complicate the process of evaluation and measurement, it is necessary to assess the ability of the NZDF to respond to events that have not yet occurred. Traditionally, the NZDF has placed considerable emphasis on achieving specified and agreed levels of military preparedness - based on careful assessment of military capability requirements, performance on exercises and performance on actual operational deployments. The NZDF OPRES continues to be the key measurement system for the preparedness of the force elements of the NZDF to undertake operations that the Government may call on it to perform. In other words, OPRES provides robust feedback to the Executive Leadership Team (ELT) and the Minister of Defence on the ability of the NZDF to deliver military capability. The OPRES, which is being continually enhanced, will remain the backbone of measurement and evaluation within the NZDF. The measures involved in OPRES are covered in the NZDF’s Statements of Service Performance within the Supporting Information to the Estimates of Appropriations. Suffice to state here that the system involves the measurement of all Force Elements of the Navy, Army and Air Force against the four Elements of Preparedness (Readiness, Combat Viability, Deployability and Sustainability)², and, within each of these, looks at detailed Key Performance Indicators relating to Personnel and Equipment. While OPRES provides a robust measure to inform internal decision-making on operational preparedness and military capability and helps to inform the overall health of the NZDF, it does not inform on how well we are managing the actual business of defence or achieving our Strategic Objectives; OPRES is not designed to do this.
• Balanced Scorecard (BSC). As stated earlier, the NZDF uses a BSC system to measure its progress in achieving its Strategic Objectives. The NZDF BSC approach was developed and implemented in 2006/07 in conjunction with the production of the first NZDF Strategic Plan. The NZDF BSC approach is a comprehensive performance management system; not just a measurement system. Together, the four Perspectives of the NZDF strategy (Our Stakeholders, Enabling Processes, Resources, and Learning and Growth) comprise the NZDF BSC which is used to implement and measure a range of aligned NZDF Strategic Objectives and associated Strategic Initiatives.

BSC Measures and Indicators. The NZDF BSC tracks the progress against the Strategic Objectives areas using two types of measures - lagged and leading indicators. Lagged Indicators are measures that focus on whether the ultimate objective is being achieved. Leading Indicators provide an early measure about whether or not strategy is being implemented successfully to achieve the ultimate objective.

The combination of lagged and leading indicators selected will illustrate the cause-and-effect logic underlying the NZDF’s strategy. Each Strategic Initiative is based on an assumption that it will improve performance in either the short or long-term; essentially to “close the performance gap”. Several measurement principles have been developed to ensure that the NZDF BSC measures will effectively track the success of our strategy. Lagged and Leading Indicator measures for each NZDF Strategic Objective area have been developed.

A Whole of Government³ approach to Defence Outcomes. The achievement of Defence Outcomes under the Whole of Government approach is, generally, reliant on the contributions from a large number of government departments and agencies that have an interest in wider defence and security issues. In order to adequately measure the wider security outcomes, higher-level indicators and impact measures need to encompass input from all relevant sources. The MoD, DPMC, MFAT, NZ Police, NZ Customs Service, Ministry of Fisheries, the Immigration Service, and other departments and agencies involved in the greater “security of New Zealand and its people”, and actual decision-making by the Cabinet⁴, all have a significant part to play in determining the overall results for Government - the Defence (NZ Security) Outcomes. While it will be some time before a robust, truly Whole of Government approach on this can be achieved, the Ministry of Defence, in conjunction with the NZDF, is promoting moves in this direction⁵ and will continue to identify the indicators and impact measures that are applicable to Defence contributions to national security - in its widest sense. The actions expected by the Government under the recently issued “Framework for NZ Inc Operations Offshore Charter” re-emphasise the benefits of maximising opportunities and minimising risks for New Zealand through whole of government approaches for advancing national interests and national identity offshore. NZDF Defence Attachés and Advisers are aware of this and will work closely with their respective Heads of New Zealand Missions to advance this approach.

Measurement of Achievement of Defence Main and Intermediate Outcomes. As explained earlier, the NZDF Strategic Plan cascades, within Strategic Themes, from Strategic Perspectives, through Strategic Objectives, to Strategic Initiatives. Like Defence Outcomes, the Strategic Perspectives, per se, are too high-level to measure successfully. At the other end of the scale, the Strategic Initiatives are too low-level as they are really annual or short-term priorities. The NZDF Strategic Objectives, on the other hand, are objectives that are set for the mid-to-long term and will not alter, with any significance, from year to year. They, together with the results of OPRES, therefore seem to provide the most appropriate gateway through which the NZDF can measure its overall performance in achieving the longer-term Defence Main and Intermediate Outcomes (the longer-term results required by the Government for the people of NZ). Further work resulting from the DCAMP recommendations will determine the final direction that this may take in future.

Notes

³Whole of Government denotes government departments and public service agencies working across portfolio boundaries to achieve a shared goal (or outcome) and an integrated government response to particular issues or situations. Whole of Government expects the State sector to work like a single, integrated organisation, rather than a collection of seemingly independent service providers. Whole of Government approaches work on the assumption that responses (to problems) will be more effective if we combine the efforts of all relevant agencies into a single coordinated strategy.

⁴For example, a decision by Cabinet to contribute NZDF force elements to various operational missions.

⁵In this regard, the Defence Capital Asset Management Practice (DCAMP) Review (completed in late 2006) recommends that a Whole of Government Approach for the security sector of New Zealand should be pursued.

Previous |  Contents | Next