11
The changes implied by these opportunities would be fairly radical, and the issues they raise warrant a considerably wider and deeper analysis than we have given them in our study so far. We therefore only outline the problems here and suggest the form the solutions might take. On the more immediate of these problems we will be working with Government to reach more specific
recommendations.
Reallocate Department Responsibilities
If Government is to get full benefit from the new approach recommended in Section 2 - to manage departments in terms of their results rather than the resources they use responsibilities for each required result must be clearly identified. Some organisational adjustments will therefore be
necessary.
The reorganisation could take a number of forms:
-
Creating new departments as is being currently contemplated for Housing
Merging department responsibilities, as has been done under the new Information Secretary
Reorganising departments internally so that responsibilities reflect tasks more closely - for example, the recent reorganisation of U.S.D. on geographic rather than functional lines.
Group Departments
Into Mangerial Units
In the present organisation structure, the heads of some 40 or 50 departments and of the majority of Secretariat branches report directly to the C. S. or D.C.S., creating a span of control that makes effective management difficult. The span could be reduced by one of several alternatives
e. g., grouping departments under "super directors" as in P. W.D.; changing the role of Secretariat branch heads so that they become middle managers between department heads and D. C. S.; creating additional posts above Staff Grade A level to share the D. C. S. responsibilities.
Change Secretariat Policy Branch
Responsibilities
The need to extend and formalise programme plans was discussed
One of the difficulties associated with their development and
earlier.
McKinsey & Company, Inc.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.