Anexo 2 Fortalezas y debilidades reportadas por los encuestados

Professional development of staff has changed and there is now a large focus on leadership and management capabilities to ensure staff have the ability to perform to a competent level. Survey data indicated that generally CDEM leadership is considered satisfactory. It was acknowledged that there are some highly experienced and capable people currently in leadership roles, and that if corporate tools and processes were at an optimal level, then the levels of leadership and management may rise even further. The risk is that without the development of a robust CIMS and a fully functioning EMIS, these good leaders and managers may seek alternative employment as a result of frustration.

Professional development remains a contentious issue within CDEM. This issue is clearly demonstrated within MCDEM (2012b) where only half of the 16 CDEM Groups had a formal professional development strategy. Without strategies and associated implementation plans for professional development, staff are less likely to perform in the heat of crisis management, or alternatively they may become demoralised due to a lack of development input to their careers. Leadership is an area for professional development where tangible benefits can be realised, but providing this is also an additional expense. Within the public and private sector there are a number of courses and programmes that CDEM staff could undertake to enhance their leadership competencies. Potential

courses in the public sector include leadership programmes at the State Services Commission led by LDC, the NZDF’s ILD, and leadership programmes within the NZP. With some negotiation, all of these could be opened up to CDEM staff but resources would need to be allocated from within current CDEM funding, meaning other funding priorities may suffer.

Training systems and the use of technology to retain corporate information are considered to be areas that need greater attention from within CDEM. The concept of a virtual staff college to educate and train CDEM sector professionals in policy, plans and practices has merit, but will involve substantial financial investment. Analysing other government departments that have ventured into this e-learning environment could provide MCDEM with the opportunity to learn best practice and avoid pitfalls other departments have previously encountered. Collecting, storing and imparting knowledge that has been generated over decades is critical to ensuring that mistakes are not repeated. This is highlighted in Chapter 4.4.3 where it refers to a 1987 Christchurch engineering report which was in effect forgotten, with many areas of concern identified in the report becoming a reality in the September 2010 and February 2011 Christchurch earthquakes. Utilising electronic platforms, whether through EMIS or other online training systems, can fulfil a critical need in harnessing the lessons from the past and preparing the CDEM professional for the future.

C2 protocols are occasionally raised as an issue, but with some enhanced discussion amongst organisational heads this matter will possibly dissipate. At times criticism is directed at the NZDF for being slow to react to the demand requirements of the CDEM controller, but research indicates that often this may be more a communication issue than any sort of avoidance. Leaders interviewed from MCDEM and the NZDF were fully cognisant of the legislative arrangements and requirements of each organisation. What is needed is an education process beneath senior leadership to ensure that middle management are aware of the C2 arrangements as set out in the Act and in the National CDEM Plan.

Staff support to senior leadership, particularly in the operational setting of a major disaster event, was a major focus of the analysis and the results confirmed some of the recommendations in the McLean Review and MCDEM (2012a & b). McLean et al (2012) recommended the appointment of a Chief of Staff in a coordinating staff function to ensure that the Controller’s intent and decisions are acted upon. When put to survey respondents this recommendation received a high level of support (92%). Likewise the recommendation to develop a cadre of senior CDEM experts to act in a coaching and mentoring role in an EOC also received high levels of support. A secondary benefit of increasing the collective number of CDEM senior experts will be the increased likelihood of retaining greater levels of corporate knowledge over the long term.

The McLean Review also raised the issue of functional staff appointments supported by staff that rotate on a shift basis. Survey respondents were asked whether individuals should be given functional appointments and provided with support staff. The proposed change in approach to staff appointments within the EOC received a great deal of support from respondents and interviewees. It is also interesting to note that this system of staff appointments, known as the Continental Staff System, is employed by many militaries worldwide and any improvements in this area would have a wide application (NZDF, 2011c).

It is assessed that all three of the initiatives above should be progressed as soon as possible. Although implementing these initiatives will require an increased level of resources, in the long term the benefits will significantly outweigh the upfront resource costs and these initiatives will prove to be a valuable investment for CDEM.