Agenda item

A presentation will be given to update the committee on the development of the People & Cultural Transformation Strategy.

For the reasons set out in the report Audit & Governance Committee are recommended to:

Receive the presentation and update.

Elaine Jackson, Assistant Chief Executive introduced the report for members and Dean Shoesmith, Chief People Officer gave their People & Cultural Transformation Update presentation to the Committee. Officers agreed to share the progress pillars slides with the Committee. There had been significant activity across the organisation and a recognition of the impact previous culture and the Report in the Public Interest (RIPI) had on staff. Efforts were ongoing to ensure staff felt able to speak out on issues and to build trust from the roots of the organisation.

The Committee queried the governance arrangements in place and how it could have assurance on its effectiveness. Officers advised following the adoption of the new organisational model in July 2021 a review of the council’s governance model had been undertaken. As a result the Equality Diversity and Inclusion and Workforce Internal Control Boards had been established. These encompassed staff from across the council at all levels of seniority, were chaired by the Chief Executive and reported to Corporate Management Team meetings (CMT) each month. Additionally, a Transformation Board had been established in January 2022 to oversee service delivery work programmes. The newly recruited Director of Transformation was working closely with the Chief People Officer to support the alignment of the cultural transformation and programme delivery. Officers advised their attendance and reporting to Audit and Governance Committee would provide assurance and suggested it would be beneficial for the Committee to hear directly from staff in the future.

The Committee was pleased to note best value for residents was included but queried whether any benchmarking data had been utilised. On best value, officers noted that control mechanisms such as the spending control panels were in place but advised that the council was at the beginning of a journey to embed staff ownership of best value. The council had created internal data dashboards for workforce equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) which profiled the workforce and reported to the EDI Internal Control Board. Progress towards greater representation within the workforce had been made. There had been issues with staff non-disclosure of their protected characteristic information which had now improved following internal awareness-raising campaigns. Dashboards for supporting internal data reporting on recruitment were used to monitor recruitment practice improvements. Benchmarking from London Councils which included the Human Capital Metrics datasets which covered a range of metrics e.g., staff turnover, sickness absence and staff EDI profiles analysis was used; however this did not cover all areas.

The Committee noted the presentation had not been made available to Members ahead of the Committee meeting, making it challenging to prepare for the discussion and members of the public wishing to understand the agenda item would not have the detail of the presentation. The Committee requested officers to include a summary of presentations within their reports in future. Officers advised the presentation was internal, but a shareable version could made available.

The Committee asked how the council was ensuring the engagement of all staff particularly those less willing to engage. Officers felt it was inevitable to have some staff who were more engaged; however all staff members were encouraged to engage and inclusivity was prioritised. The success of the culture change work was being measured by engagement, for example in staff and pulse surveys, focus groups and drop-in sessions. An upward trajectory of engagement would suggest cultural improvement, but this was anticipated to take some time. There had been targeted engagement with harder to reach staff, such as those who may not use the intranet regularly. The staff guardians programme, developed in conjunction with The Old Vic to create safe spaces for staff to discuss issues, was in place and had recently supported front line worker engagement.

The Committee asked how new transformation staff appointments were being managed when faced with the historical cultural challenges. Officers advised cultural transformation work was not happening in isolation, any new staff members were embedded and working alongside colleagues as part of teams with clear messaging on delivery plans.

The Committee queried the attendance figures of 1,535 staff at the programme development events and whether this was unique individuals. Officers advised attendance had not been mandatory and was a reasonable sample size to inform change that had been considered.

In response to questions officers advised budget monitoring training for managers had been conducted in teams with a good spread across the council and positive feedback. However, this had highlighted the need for further training. There had also been widespread Housing Revenue Account (HRA) training and following the appointment of the lead officer for Oracle change management, the training for the new system’s implementation would be starting soon. It was noted that all training had been welcomed and received positively by staff.

The Committee asked if a complaint handling system and whistleblowing safety net were in place. Officers confirmed the whistleblowing process had been in place for a number of years and ensured individuals’ anonymity unless their complaint was vexatious. There were several qualified assessors across the council and the Monitoring Officer’s regular whistleblowing update report was due to come to October committee. There had been concerted effort to promote the whistleblowing process to staff. It was noted the ultimate whistleblowing contact was Paul Dossett, Grant Thornton, the external auditor. The Guardians network was also an early opportunity for concerns to be raised in a less formal manner.

The Committee asked officers to explain the performance management policies in place, particularly regarding managers and how non-compliance was dealt with. Officers advised the performance management system had been simplified for the current year’s appraisal round. Monitoring of staff skills and accountability was sporadic across teams at present. Refresher leadership and management training would form an important part of the cultural transformation and improvement work. The performance management capability procedure was in place and utilised when needed. Staff grievance data was recorded and monitored for formal staff complaints. A workplace mediation scheme had recently been introduced as an alternative complaints resolution system based on good practice at other local authorities, and its ability to resolve complaints early and close to the point of origin. EDI data was monitored to identify any disproportionate impacts. Exit survey data from staff leavers was also monitored.

In response to questions officers confirmed the number of staff employed by the council was approximately 3,200 full time making engagement of 1,535 staff around 50%.

The Committee asked how the council’s turnover and absence statistics compared with Croydon historically and with other London councils at present. Officers agreed to provide reporting on workforce data to the committee in future. Croydon was sometimes above average London turnover. However, this needed to be considered in the context of the council’s financial position, subsequent reductions and enforced turnover.

In response to questions officers explained the Reciprocal Mentoring Pilot was a two-way process to for staff to feedback to and receive mentoring from senior leaders.

The Committee queried the impact of Covid-19 on the development of the transformation programme. Officers advised Covid had enabled the council to realise new ways of working. However, there were also challenges with some staff being more isolated. Utilisation of MS Teams promoted greater engagement, for example in online staff ‘Tea Talks’.

The Committee queried whether there had been external input and/or consideration of best practice at other local authorities. Officers advised several external organisations had supported the work including the Local Government Association (LGA), The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA), and London Councils, and that Croydon had partnered with culture change experts Beyond Business School (BBS) on the culture change work. The draft People and Cultural Transformation Strategy had been shared with London Councils and received input from its regional secretary who critiqued the strategy and fed into its development.

The Committee requested future reporting on the implementation of action plan, governance and benchmarking of people and workforce.