Al Staff Day – Workshop Results - 25 November 2019
1. What do I like about the way the primary activity is
2. What do I not like / wil be challenging to implement?
3. How can we overcome that challenge?
described?
Strategy &
Our mission is clear, and our decisions informed.
• How do we collect useful data and not over-collect?
• Road testing ideas
Insights
• How do we measure our effectiveness?
• Remember OPC has staff with huge
• Like it because we need it
• How do we measure success?
industry knowledge, finds way to use it
• Good and broad
• Tools/capacity
• Knowledge sharing initiatives
• Future focussed
•
Second statement
• Echo chamber risk / diversity of though
Decision logs
•
changed to:
Enabling, factual (decisions in the dark)
• Data accessibility / structure
• Tech & expertise
• Info will give us direction
• Competing priorities
• Reducing focus on low value activities,
The Office monitors
• Looks beyond silos=pan office
• Admin overhead
efficiency
trends, develop
• Better data = better decisions – objectively and data
• Implementation / resourcing
• Be proactive not just reactive
insights, conduct
driven
• Need an objective way to assess outcomes
• Build in evaluation at the start
research and report
• Consistent decision making
• Doesn’t mention discretion
• Be flexible
back on it.
• Clear mission
• Trend analysis is really new for us
• Pool knowledge
• Prioritisation
• Do we have the capacity and expertise?
• Contract specialists
• Proactive with our data
• Know when to stop
• More cross-functional work
• Follow through/evaluation
• What are our strategic aims?
• $$$
• Evidence base e.g. budgets – accountability – Public
confidence
• Evidence base back to Central Government
• Clear expectations on how we operate
• Looking for improvements
• Recognises risk
• Evaluation process
• Opportunity to go beyond normal
• Encourages pragmatism
• Anticipating trends/risks
• Al ows out of box thinking
• Not just focussed on the Act – public benefit focus
Dispute
Our process is efficient, effective and enabling.
• Criteria consistently applied
• Technology filter out complaints at the start
Resolution
• Meetings/discussions
• Capture all data (even if it does not meet
• Keep in mind: cases dif erent
• Reports
threshold)
• Innovative outcomes and methods
• Easy way to navigate past decisions
• Support staff
• Add fair and unbiased
• Communicate – personal/individual/public
• Remain human
• People centric
• Have people that process complaints
• Technology: redirect and divert – focus
• Range of processes
• Skil ed triaging to make decisions early
groups
• Innovation, using different tools
• Data to feed to individual and strategic decisions
• Establish business reporting
• Empower staff, flexible
• Manage staff expectations
• Clarify investigations
• Recognise that not everything wil be investigated,
manages expectations
• Responsive
OPC/3201 /A668860
2
Communication
and Education
Our communications promote privacy and empower
• The phrase “stakeholder engagement”
• More language resources – greater use of
individuals.
• “influencing behaviour” isn’t expanded; “give them a
plain English
nudge”
• More graphics – il ustrations/diagrams –
• Like all of it, makes everything else easier
• No focus on smaller agencies, (even 1-2 people)
intelligence led
• “privacy positive” – better than negative
• Engaging with the right demographic including different
• Doing things across-office – more resource,
• Like that we have broad scope in the language we
cultures
targeted resources e.g. for smaller agencies
use
• Promoting privacy friendly technology dif icult in NZ
• Pick your battles e.g. radio is ef ective
• “Audience” rather than stakeholders”
• Servicing different culture
• Evaluation
• Reducing the need for enforcement
• Targeted and tailor-made materials for different
• Priorities
• “friendly enforcement”
audience/channels for right people
• Managing expectations
• Empowering individuals
• Money/resources – build agencies’ confidence on their
• Keep ourselves in a bigger picture
• Concise – good graphics
own analysis
• Partnering with agencies
• Efficiency, greater knowledge
• Reach – how to hit groups we don’t usually
• Leveraging their tools and expertise
• Proactive engagement
• $$$ - we need more!
• Partners – amplify our messaging – use our
• Fostering good privacy culture
• How to get to more people
resources more effectively
• Literacy? How do we hit groups with disabilities?
• Make the website clearer, more user-
• Different levels of knowledge – engaging with
friendly
• Other languages?
• Strategic agreements, work programmes
• Know what the most effective channels to get to groups
• Gathering better info or insights
we don’t currently reach
• Tools that enable us to gather better data /
make process faster
Advice and
Advocacy
Our advice is engaging, persuasive and pragmatic.
• Not diverse ourselves
• Diverse hiring practices
• Evaluation/monitoring of effectiveness of advice
• Advice available in variety of languages
• Emphasis on engagement and advocacy to recognise
• Not just “a role” but “the role” experts in privacy
• Cross Government /agency work to get
independence
• Change Privacy by Degisn to privacy positive behaviour
advice/engagement with wider groups / get
• Emphasis on research and analysis
• Last sentence not active
insights/tools
• Pragmatism of advice
• Doesn’t recognise early intervention role in advice
• Current audit doesn’t reflect effectiveness
• Diverse perspectives recognised
• Resourcing/time
• Legislation changes – report in annual
• Inclusiveness of private sector with model –
• Codes not reflected in high developed – OPC setting
report
recognises future of technology and youth
direction
• Third party research to survey effectiveness
• Future looking/encouraging to continuous
• Regulatory stewardship not reflected
• Cross functional measurement and
improvement e.g. Codes
• Not sure changes to Act should be included in function
reporting e.g. advice – not implantation -
• OPC leader in Privacy space
• Challenge of finding a balance of when to go hard /
complaints
• Positive wording /outcomes
advocate on issue
• Surveying affected individuals
• Simple key messages
• Challenge of having more work than we can handle
• Good advice reporting/ monitoring means
• “Informed” should be in headline summary
more effective interventions
• Struggle to keep up with all topics and best practices
• Know when something is working and when
• Communicate across sectors and departments
it is not – intelligence / strategy
• Measuring effectiveness
• Good relationships
•
• 10/20% getting out of your box
• Resource allocation influenced by public
and political opinion as well as harm
• Using external agencies to work with and
leverage
• SLT/strategy priorities t assist triage
• Strategic about which tool to use whether
advocacy is right one
• Leverage relationships and resource
• External / internal monitoring evaluation of
effectiveness – beginning and end
OPC/3201/A668860
3
Enforcement and
Compliance
Our interventions are effective and investigations
• How to capture broad themes in dispute resolution and
• Potential layered result? Bubble up to other
rigorous.
feedback?
systems to solve.
• Language issue
• Monitoring programme needed
• Like element of independence
• Miss strategy – what’s appropriate? contextual
• Identify good search systems – better meta
• Dispute resolution not always appropriate
• Tacked on – needs resource
data
• Unfair burden – maybe nothing done wrong
• What conditions if split works?
• Know what we are looking for
• First obligation is to conciliate- investigate need to find
• System issues – should be led in, investigating
• Flag – work with other regulators (piggy
out if appropriate
complaints after
back- share skil s as suggested by
• Multi-functional – mindful of BAU language – need to
• Principals stressed, not emphasis on Codes
Commerce Commission speaker
clarify
• Fear we may not be consistent
• Dispute Resolution – structure – just to
• Like all the powers the Commissioner could get,
• Prescriptive – overarching why in a specific – may help
conciliate – could move to a dif erent team –
existing and new
to clear inconsistencies – common goals
could be mindset
• Identifying the systemic issues
• Triaging not always investigating
• Streamline approach – triage massive
• Cross team – identify assessment of systemic issues
• Reference to have discretion on which to investigate
• Continuous improvement
of privacy outcomes of NZ’ers, not just individuals
• Objective, impartial – rigorous not necessarily impartial
• Need to be consistent with compliance
• Covers the range – calls out several – assumes logic
• Investigation not appropriate – investigate than can
enforcement powers – balancing act
• Gives options- allows to analyse best- flexible-
resolve – we should investigate
• Decision tree – enforcement managed
compliance
• Not “have a role” have an obligation – also use more
centrally?
• Good way to express
active language in middle section of poster
• Access
• Using right tools to get best privacy outcomes
• We are only agency in relation to Privacy Act
• Risk to manage – monitor compliance –
• Suggest support first port of call, enforcement – good
intelligence
phrasing
• Will take effort and resource to maintain
• Not just about complaints driven, proactive regulator
• Clear guidelines, decision trees
of compliance
• Resourcing – intelligence analyst
• Focus on systemic issues
• Inter office comms
• “Is this something that can be resolved quickly?”- not
• Strategy should drive
automatically investigated
• Flow of work
• Is this a problem adhoc task force? Or just
leave in investigator who wil ask for help?
• Triage panel so important – weekly
meeting-decision log
• Art not science
• Stay linked in with other agencies
• Clarify language with Dispute Resolution
and Investigator – either / or
OPC/3201/A668860
