Item:
IT Organisation Design – Decisions from
Consultation
To:
ELT
For:
ELT meeting 19 NOV 2024
Prepared by:
Aaron Tasker, Chief Information Officer
Recommendations
It is recommended that ELT:
1.
note the IT Change Proposal Decision Document
2.
agree the disestablishment of 20 positions within the IT team.
3.
agree the establishment of 20 positions within the IT team and their associated position
descriptions.
4.
note the risks and mitigations related to the change.
5.
endorse the implementation of the final decisions and impacts following consultation on
the IT Organisation Design to Board approval.
6.
agree the recommended approach to salary offers for disestablished staff being offered
new positions.
Purpose
7.
The purpose of this paper is to seek ELT approval and endorsement of final decisions
following consultation on the IT organisational design.
Background
8.
The Commission’s board agreed on 11 September that we proceed to consultation on
proposed changes to the IT team
9.
The ELT agreed on 1 October that the CIO, supported by People & Culture release the
consultation on changes to the IT team, positions and processes for change.
10.
The IT consultation for change was distributed as a proposal on 16 October and
feedback submissions closed on 1 November after an extension to initial feedback
timelines.
11.
The changes proposed disestablishing 20 positions, including vacant positions, and
significantly impacting 12 staff.
12.
The changes proposed establishing 20 new positions, and processes for significantly
impacted staff to be redeployed into appropriate positions.
Discussion
Feedback on the Consultation
13.
Staff across the Commission provided more than 30 pieces of feedback during the
consultation period.
14.
With support from P&C, we identified these key themes.
14.1
Overall rationale and need for change
Page 1
14.1.1 Support for the proposal recognising IT team needed review and
change
14.1.2 Agreement on need to address current capability gaps
14.1.3 Support for utilisation of temporary staff to uplift capacity for electoral
events
14.2
Position descriptions and responsibilities
14.2.1 The need for greater specificity regarding electoral event
responsibilities
14.2.2 Concerns that position descriptions are too generic
14.3
Salaries and remuneration
14.3.1 Concerns regarding position sizing and remuneration bands,
especially for those being offered lower banded positions.
14.3.2 Perceived undervaluing of institutional knowledge
14.3.3 Discrepancies perceived between proposed salary bands and similar
roles within the Commission
14.4
Team structure and capacity
14.5
Support for the overall management and team structure
14.6
Support for introduction of Security Operations Centre (SOC)
14.7
Feedback on requirements for specific positions
14.8
Suggestions for additional capacity in specific areas
Changes made from consultation feedback
15.
We modified the proposed changes based on the feedback received. These have been
included in the IT Change Proposal Decision Document in Appendix A and outlined
below.
Changes to position titles
Original title
New title
Manager, IT Infrastructure
Manager, IT Infrastructure & Operations
Records Administrator
Records Officer
Infrastructure Architect
Infrastructure & Cloud Architect
Infrastructure Engineer
Infrastructure & Cloud Engineer
Technical Support Analyst
Systems Administrator
Senior Technical Support Analyst
Senior Systems Administrator
Changes to position descriptions
Position
Summary of changes
Records Officer
Minor updates to position description to
incorporate feedback, including additional
knowledge and experience requirements
Cyber Security Engineer
Updated terminology, added information
management and changes to security-related
responsibilities
Manager, Applications
Detail provided regarding the position’s
budget responsibilities
Test & Release Manager
Clarified position scope regarding leadership,
testing responsibilities and team relationships
Page 2
Solutions Architect
Changes to role to focus on oversight rather
than preparation of technical plans, clarified
strategic planning and collaboration
responsibilities
Infrastructure & Cloud Architect
and
Updated responsibilities to better reflect cloud
Infrastructure & Cloud Engineer
focus and cross-team collaboration
Senior Systems Analyst
and
Clarified responsibilities regarding electoral
Systems Analyst
events and product ownership and updated
technical requirements and role scope
Manager, IT Infrastructure & Operations
Detail provided regarding the positions’
budget responsibilities and replaced strategic
planning with product management, and mad
changes to experience, knowledge &
qualification requirements.
IT Operations Lead
Added knowledge management
responsibilities.
Lead Architect
Minor clarifications & terminology
Senior Systems Administrator
and
Additional technical skillsets added to
Systems Administrator
experience and qualifications, and changes to
the role purpose to include build &
deployment
16.
Final position descriptions for all roles to be established have been included in Appendix
B.
17.
Position descriptions with significant changes have been submitted for sizing by Korn
Ferry and have not yet returned.
Changes to structure
Area
Summary of changes
Senior Systems Administrator &
Replaced one of the proposed Systems
Systems Administrator
Administrator positions (2) with a Senior
Systems Administrator.
IT Infrastructure Team
Renamed to the IT Infrastructure &
Operations team.
Risks
18.
We identified medium inherent risk associated with this change to the capacity &
capability of the IT team and knowledge retention for key person risk.
19.
With planned mitigations, one risk remains at a medium rating to the knowledge
retention of the IT architecture team. This risk has already been realised, due to recent
resignations and limited tenure in this area.
20.
Salary impacts to kaimahi temporarily increases the current key person risk. The
likelihood of this has increased from the change proposal you approved. This is most
significant in the Applications Team, where the most tenure and IP currently resides.
21.
While the risk is temporarily increased, the changes to the IT organisation will mitigate
the risk in time by improving the structured approaches to knowledge retention and
capacity.
22.
Detail of the risk analysis is included in Appendix C – Change risk analysis.
Salary offers approach
23.
Kaimahi are significantly concerned about the proposal to offer at 100% of the grade
where an offered position was sized at a lower than current grade than their current
position.
Page 3
24.
Their feedback highlighted that this would encourage kaimahi to leave the organisation
and this would realise known single point of failure risks and impact the Commission’s
ability to undertake election events.
25.
The Manager People & Culture and Chief Information Officer considered multiple
options for salary offers that could mitigate these risks.
26.
The approach taken for salary offers to the IT team may impact other proposed and
future changes within the Commission, as consistency would be expected from the
Commission in how it applies these decisions.
Page 4
Approach
Description
Benefits
Risks
Manager P&C Comments
Salary bands are correct for
Potential Increased turnover,
positions.
increasing the likelihood of realising
Appoint at max of 100% of
Supports continuing with this
Pay equality across new positions
key person risk.
Continue with
the new position band when
approach, subject to risk
for current and incoming kaimahi.
Productivity impact to remaining
proposed approach
a lower salary band is
mitigation of knowledge IP
Aligns with the Commission’s
kaimahi.
offered.
transfer
remuneration policy.
Potential increase in financial risk
Remains within FY24/25 budget.
due to redundancy.
Allow for more than 100%
point in range (PIR) in new
Potentially decreased impact of
Allow for salary
positions for existing
change on current kaimahi
Supports appointment above
offers above 100%
kaimahi. This could be
Pay equality across new positions
Ongoing limitations on pay increases 100% (up to 110%) if
appointment of new
based on a measurable
for current and incoming kaimahi.
for existing staff if at higher PIR.
applying consistent
range
input(s) such as tenure in
Aligns with the Commission’s
measurement rationale.
(recommended)
similar position and/or
remuneration policy.
competency
Apply an equalisation
Creates a discrepancy between
payment on an ongoing
Highest alignment for current
current and new kaimahi, and
basis until the new band
kaimahi requests and does not
potential gender pay gaps.
Apply equalisation -
Does not support
intersects with current
decrease current salaries.
Long term and unknown budget
indefinitely
equalisation indefinitely
salary. No pay increases
Reduces the likelihood of impacts
implications.
until new band and current
caused by turnover.
Ongoing limitations of PIR.
salary aligns.
Overinflation of roles.
Supports time-bound salary
equalisation up to six
Apply an equalisation
months.
payment for an agreed
Creates a short-term discrepancy
period (3/6/12 months) or
Moderate alignment with feedback
between current and new kaimahi,
Would require
until the new band
from Kaimahi
Apply equalisation -
and potential gender pay gaps.
acknowledgement of impact
intersects with current
Provides some reduction in the
time bound
Increased financial expenditure for
on other change proposals,
salary.
likelihood of impacts caused by
FY24/25.
requirement for consistency,
No pay increases until new
turnover.
and recognition of risk
band and current salary
elsewhere
aligns.
Page 5
Approach
Description
Benefits
Risks
Manager P&C Comments
Offer new salary bands but
make a one-off payment
Increased financial expenditure for
equivalent to the difference
Provides some reduction in the
FY24/25.
Does not support without
in current and new salary
likelihood of impacts caused by
Apply equalisation -
Unlikely to encourage retention of
further evidence to suggest it
over a given time period
turnover.
one off payment
staff over time.
would appropriately mitigate
(e.g. 3/6/12 months).
Reduced likelihood of financial risk
Not requested specifically in
risk.
No pay increases until new
of redundancy.
feedback and complex to implement.
band and current salary
aligns.
Maintains potential historic incorrect
sizing and misalignment with the
Aligns with feedback and requests
Maintain current
market.
Discard Korn Ferry sizing
from Kaimahi, highest likelihood of
Does not support maintaining
bands and salaries
Does not follow the Commissions Job
and apply a slotted or other
mitigating turnover risk.
bands and salaries - negates
for new positions
Evaluation policy, decreases
band to the position.
No discrepancy between current
benefits of change
and current Kaimahi
consistency and undermines the
and future people in the team.
remuneration framework.
Ongoing financial/budget impact.
Discard Korn Ferry sizing
Discrepancy between current and
and apply a slotted or other
new kaimahi.
band to the position for
Aligns with feedback and requests
Maintain current
Does not follow the Commissions Job Does not support maintaining
existing people.
from Kaimahi
band for kaimahi
Evaluation policy, decreases
bands and salaries - negates
Korn Ferry sizing applies to
Increased likelihood of mitigating
only
consistency and undermines the
benefits of change
new appointments and as
turnover risk.
remuneration framework.
soon as positions become
Ongoing financial/budget impact.
vacant.
New salaries applied at
No change from proposal in
differing time periods based approach.
Manager P&C supports
Apply salary changes on implementation
Financial impact if implementation
Salary changes are aligned with
maintenance of salary
over an extended
milestones or other
periods are extended
other changes to responsibilities.
through transition and
implementation
outcomes, e.g. New
Increases dependency on other
Management of this can be applied
implementation for a finite
period
managers or teams being
activity being successful.
on a per team/position basis in
term
set up once recruitment
alignment with risk.
takes place.
Page 6
27.
We recommend that you agree to allowing appointment above 100% of the new position
grade, utilising the provision in the remuneration and reward policy for this to occur with
the Chief Electoral Officers approval.
28.
We would initially offer staff the position at 100% of the grade, subject to a good faith
negotiation process where kaimahi can make submissions as to why they should be
placed at a different level.
29.
The CEO would consider this information and make decisions based on the skills,
experience, knowledge and performance of the kaimahi.
Budget
30.
The IT personnel budget is not expected be impacted by the changes to positions.
31.
If the recommendation for considering offers above 100% to kaimahi who are offered
positions at lower bands, this is forecast to be an additional $53,650 with the
assumption that we would not offer above 110% of bands.
32.
Changes to bandings of positions that are currently being reassessed may further
increase the budget impacts.
Next steps
If approved and endorsed by the ELT, the CIO will undertake the following next steps.
Date
Activity
27 NOV
Board approval sought
28 NOV
Communication of decision
29 NOV – 13 DEC
EOI & redeployment processes
16 DEC
Communication of outcomes
27 JAN
Change implementation date
The CIO will begin recruitment for critical vacant roles in early 2025.
Appendices
A. IT Change Proposal Decision Document -
IT Change Proposal Decision Document - November
2024.docx
B. Final position descriptions – IT Change Final Position Descriptions.zip
C. Change risk analysis -
Change Risk Analysis.xlsx
Page 7
