Agenda item

Business Improvement and Communications Progress Report

 

The Service Director Business Improvement and Communications will submit a report providing an overview of the functions of the Business Improvement and communications Business Unit and related elements of the Annual Governance Statement process in accordance with the Audit Committee work programme.

 

Minutes:

The Service Director Business Improvement and Communications submitted a report providing an overview of the functions of the Business and Improvement and Communications Business Unit and related elements of the Annual Governance Statement process in accordance with the Audit Committee work programme.

 

The report provided a summary of the five broad functions of the Business Unit which was responsible for driving and delivering business improvement and communications in order to ensure that the organisation was customer focussed, modern, efficient and commercially minded Future Council.  It then went on to outline, in detail, the work of the Unit in relation to:

 

·         Performance and Development Reviews;

·         Performance Management;

·         Equality and Inclusion;

·         Corporate Programmes, Projects, Feedback and Improvement; and

·         Other issues affecting Elected Members particularly in relation delivering the Overview and Scrutiny function

 

Appendices to the report provided a summary of the Performance and Development Reviews completed as at 31st March, 2018 by Directorate and Service together with a copy of the Council’s Annual Customer Feedback Report.

 

The following officers attended the meeting to report on their respective areas of service and to answer Members questions:

 

·         Ms K Welbourne – Organisation and Workforce Improvement Manager

·         Mr M Rangecroft – Head of Business Improvement and Inell

·         Mr J Horsley – Equality and Inclusion Manager

·         Mrs K Liddall – Head of Programmes, Projects, Feedback and Improvement

 

In the ensuing discussion, the following matters were raised:

 

·         In relation to Performance and Development Reviews

o   It was noted that PDR’s were no longer ‘programmed’ for a particular time in the year but was now left to individual services as to when they would be undertaken to best meet the needs of that service.  This could explain why the number of reviews completed by the end of quarter 4 was 51.6%.  In addition, some services had been waiting the introduction of the new approach before undertaking reviews.  This was, however, higher than the same quarter last year and it was hoped that the changes to the process would enable a greater compliance rate in the future

o   It was felt that the new PDR process was robust and ‘fit for purpose’ – it was important to note that the role of managers to ensure that PDR’s were undertaken

o   The reasons for undertaking PDR’s and the benefits for both the employee and for the Council was referred to.  It was noted that there was no additional cost to the service in undertaking them

o   In response to specific questioning, reference was made to the range of ‘tools’ available to Managers to deal with employee performance

·         In relation to Equality and Inclusion

o   It was noted that the Equality and Inclusion Team assessed the robustness of Cabinet reports by analysing a sample of reports throughout the year across each directorate and an explanation of how this was undertaken was provided.  This was, in part, to ensure that the Council met its legal obligations.  If there was a potential risk of challenge that the Council was not complying with the necessary legislation appropriate action would be taken.  No complaints had been received since the introduction of the Equality Act 2010

o   Questions were raised in relation to access to buildings (particularly out of hours) and in relation to parking at the Town Hall.  The Equality and Inclusion Manager was aware of issues being raised and stated that such matters would be used to inform the quality impact assessment.  This would draw in evidence submitted by residents and would to inform any reports submitted to Cabinet

·         In relation to Corporate Programmes, Projects, Feedback and Improvement

o   The way in which complaints were received, collated and dealt with was explained.  It was noted that not all complaints were received directly with the Service and, therefore, the Service was raising the profile of how it could facilitate and deal with complaints as well as compliments

o   Whilst it was pleasing to note that the number of complaints had reduced year on year questions was asked as to if this could be because of the difficulties people had in getting through to the Council via telephone.  It was pointed out that there was no deliberate policy to dissuade people from using the telephone, the council was, nevertheless, trying to make residents use online systems as this was the most cost effective approach. 

o   The Executive Director Core Services commented that the number of complaints to the Local Government Ombudsman was also reducing year on year.  Details of the number of complaints to the Ombudsman together with the findings would be provided for Members

o   It was noted that irrespective of whether or not a customer was satisfied with the outcome of a complaint, at track of the entire ‘customer journey’ was kept

o   It was noted that complaints received via the telephone direct to Councillors might not necessarily be tracked.  The Executive Director Core Services commented that he assumed that if the matter was a genuine complaint then that would be passed on to the Team, however, further thought would be given as to how such issues could be facilitated and recorded.  

o   It would also be interesting to track, in the future, if complaints were genuine complaints or merely a request for a service

 

RESOLVED

 

(i)            That the report be received; and

 

(ii)          That officers be thanked for attending the meeting and for answering Members questions.

Supporting documents:

 

A - Z Directory