15622 Enhancing Local Government Service Delivery
Warning: The information on this page is indicative. The subject outline for a
particular session, location and mode of offering is the authoritative source
of all information about the subject for that offering. Required texts, recommended texts and references in particular are likely to change. Students will be provided with a subject outline once they enrol in the subject.
Subject handbook information prior to 2025 is available in the Archives.
Credit points: 6 cp
Result type: Grade and marks
Requisite(s): 15604 Local Government Principles and Practice OR 49460 Local Government Management Principles and Practice 1 OR 15608 Organising and Managing in Local Government OR 49277 Corporate Planning and Management
These requisites may not apply to students in certain courses.
There are course requisites for this subject. See access conditions.
Description
Local government service delivery has transformed significantly over recent decades. Councils in Australia have moved beyond a traditional emphasis on service to property towards broader objectives to promote the social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of the communities of which they are part. Community expectations of local government have increased. Higher tiers of government have devolved various functions to local government, and subjected other of their functions to increased legislative requirements, especially as regards asset management and strategic planning.
The overall effect is that councils must provide a greater range of services while endeavouring to meet higher standards. At the same time, the costs of providing services and maintaining infrastructure have increased considerably faster than increases in generated income. Financial pressures placed on councils have contributed to the increasing complexity of local government service provision.
This subject has been designed to help local government practitioners to meet these challenges, through building knowledge, enhancing consideration of values, and developing practical skills. After completing the subject, participants are better able to assist their councils to improve service outcomes for their local communities.
Subject learning objectives (SLOs)
On successful completion of this subject, students should be able to:
| 1. | Expanded their conceptual understanding of service delivery at the local level. |
|---|---|
| 2. | Developed the ability to link service delivery with the principles and practices of public value, local governance, and public organisation and management. |
| 3. | Explored methods for reviewing and enhancing local government services, including tools for a comparative analysis of local government service delivery. |
| 4. | Considered and discussed innovations in local government service provision and alternative service delivery models. |
| 5. | Engage in group discussion and collaborative working on issues relating to local government service delivery. |
Course intended learning outcomes (CILOs)
This subject also contributes to the following Course Intended Learning Outcomes:
- Reflect on personal views and values in the development of professional judgement and practice (A.3)
- Communicate and engage effectively with people from diverse perspectives and cultures across multiple platforms, acknowledging the status of Indigenous peoples to develop cross-disciplinary strategy (C.1)
- Develop critically informed and innovative approaches to understanding local government and intergovernmental issues in domestic and international contexts (I.1)
- Apply and lead creative, evidence-based approaches to complex, real-world issues in local government and related organisations (I.2)
- Apply processes of organisational practice and review for a broad range of policy fields across diverse types of organisations, relating to local government (P.1)
- Consider, analyse and evaluate complex arguments and multiple interests within specific contexts, particularly as they pertain to local government and intergovernmental relations (R.1)
- Conduct independent applied research to develop a deep understanding of complex policy problems and innovative, cross-disciplinary solutions pertaining to government and its stakeholders (R.3)
Teaching and learning strategies
The program is delivered through a combination of self-study using online support; facilitated discussions; presentations; workshops; and group activities. It blends theory and principles with practical techniques, case studies and debates.
Self-study with online support – well in advance of the face-to-face component, students are presented with a comprehensive Subject Description and Guide to Readings which is designed as a guide for their independent studies, and as a companion to the discussion, group work and further input they receive in class activities. They make use of the material presented on the interlinked themes to guide their reading, reflect on the issues and complete their assignments.
Face-to-face component – Students have three days of face-to-face contact with staff and peers at the University of Technology Sydney. These teaching/learning sessions include facilitated discussions, presentations, case studies, workshops and group problem-solving activities. The first facilitated group discussion will take place on the first day of face-to-face sessions and will test students self-directed learning.
A successful teaching-learning experience for students in this subject requires them to engage in disciplined self-study, to read widely, to participate fully in discussions, presentations, workshops and group activities, and to complete and submit their written assignments on time.
Content (topics)
The interlinked themes for the subject are as follows.
Why focus on local government service delivery? An exploration of service provision begins with having a better understanding of local government itself, including historical debates on its role in enabling more appropriate, effective and efficient tailoring of local public goods and services to the needs and preferences of local communities. Ideas and debates on networked community governance, place-shaping and the promotion of citizen wellbeing, a public value orientation and the politics of service decision-making, provision and evaluation are seen to lie at the heart of the role of local public servants. It firmly locates the focus on services and service delivery as the search for improved outcomes for communities.
What is local government service delivery? - Local government services and modes of service delivery are diverse and locally specific. We look at the diversity evident among Australian jurisdictions, not only in terms of the services they provide, but also they ways in which they provide these services. Consideration is given to questions of effectiveness, efficiency and productivity as key to improved outcomes for communities. Since local infrastructure and public assets are particularly important as an aspect of service delivery, we focus on these in some detail. A model for infrastructure and assets reporting is put forward and applied.
We consider the value of adequately describing and communicating the services provided by local councils, not only to local communities, but also to other tiers of government and other service providers.
Service modes and models - All local governments are required to make – and justify – decisions as to how they will deliver a specific service or range of service in order to match their specific circumstances. Knowledge of alternative approaches is useful in this dynamic decision-making process. We put forward a comprehensive approach for describing service delivery models, and discuss in greater detail local government working together across boundaries through shared service provision; commissioning services through tender; and models such as arm’s length entities, Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) and business enterprises set up by councils themselves.
Service delivery challenges - Challenges for local government include responding to increasing community expectations of local government; issues relating to multi-level governance and intergovernmental relations; local government functions being subject to increased legislative requirements; and the increasing costs of providing services and maintaining infrastructure relative to income. Further insights into the challenges faced by local governments are provided, with a focus on challenges arising from the nature of local government assets; reluctance to change production modes; partnership working, including the need to respond to privatisation trends; and questions on the role of local government in promoting local economic development.
Improving outcomes for local communities - Having laid the principles and knowledge foundations, we consider ways in which challenges can be addressed and service delivery improved for the benefit of communities. In addition to performance management, we look at a range of tools that have been developed in recent years, including workshopping how to conduct service delivery reviews, drawing on a well-received model developed by the Australian Centre of Excellence for Local Government (AECELG) at the University of Technology Sydney.
Innovations - We consider innovation as a means to shift service delivery to a new level. Innovations can relate to, amongst others, styles of management; coproduction of services; integrated service delivery; economic development and broader community development; and placing a focus on the creativity of leaders and managers.
Bringing it all together - We conclude by putting forward a synthesis framework for public administrators, managers and leaders seeking to improve local government service delivery for the benefit of local communities. It suggests that there is value in:
- Understanding and appreciating the theoretical scope of local government service delivery
- Being locally specific – linking the portfolio of services provided by any given council to its strategic goals and to the needs and priorities of local communities
- Regularly monitoring services and the outcomes of service delivery, focusing on appropriateness, effectiveness and efficiency
- Seeking to enhance local government service delivery, drawing on a wide range of mechanisms
- Considering innovation as a means to shift service delivery to a new level
- Ensuring that decisions, inputs, processes, outputs and outcomes relating to services and service delivery are regularly and accurately communicated to citizens in the LGA, to higher levels of government, and to other service providers.
Assessment
Assessment task 1: Online Discussion Post
| Objective(s): | This task addresses the following subject learning objectives: 1, 4 and 5 This task also addresses the following course intended learning outcomes that are linked with a code to indicate one of the five CAPRI graduate attribute categories (e.g. C.1, A.3, P.4, etc.): A.3, C.1 and R.1 |
|---|---|
| Type: | Exercises |
| Groupwork: | Individual |
| Weight: | 10% |
| Length: | 10 - 15 minutes in duration |
| Criteria: | Criterion 1.1 – CILO C1 - weighting 30% The student demonstrates the ability to Communicate and engage effectively with people from diverse perspectives and cultures across multiple platforms, acknowledging the status of Indigenous peoples to develop cross-disciplinary strategy. The students’ exploration of local government service provision is based on a sound understanding of local government itself, including historical debates on the role and value of local government; partnerships and networks; and debates on the value of tailored local services. Criterion 1.2 – CILO A3 - weighting 30% Reflect on personal views and values in the development of professional judgement and practice, especially as they relate to issues in service provision. Criterion 1.3 – CILO R1 - weighting 40% Consider, analyse and evaluate complex arguments and multiple interests within specific contexts, particularly as they pertain to local government and intergovernmental relations. Identifies why a focus on service delivery is important and the main controversies surrounding service delivery. TOTAL 100% (contributing 10% of the overall mark for the subject) |
Assessment task 2: Essay
| Objective(s): | This task addresses the following subject learning objectives: 1, 2 and 4 This task also addresses the following course intended learning outcomes that are linked with a code to indicate one of the five CAPRI graduate attribute categories (e.g. C.1, A.3, P.4, etc.): P.1, R.1 and R.3 |
|---|---|
| Type: | Essay |
| Groupwork: | Individual |
| Weight: | 40% |
| Length: | 2500 words. |
| Criteria: | Criterion 2.1 – CILO P1 - weighting 30% The student demonstrates the ability to consider service and service delivery issues from the point of view of their implications for local communities and the role of local government in the multi-level system of government. Consequently, the students’ exploration of local government service provision is based on a sound understanding of local government itself, including historical debates on the role and value of local government; place-shaping and the promotion of citizen wellbeing; governance, partnerships and networks; and debates on the value of tailored local services. Criterion 2.2 – CILO R1 - weighting 30% The student demonstrates scholarship:
Criterion 2.3 – CILO R3 - weighting 40% Drawing on research evidence and debates in the literature, the student critically explores the unique position that local governments have: being closer than other levels of government to their communities and having insight into local and community needs regarding public goods and services. The students competently describes how local governments keep abreast of local needs and requirements, as well as with state and territory legislation, and how this knowledge guides the service and service delivery decisions they make on behalf of the communities in their LGAs. TOTAL 100% (contributing 30% of the overall mark for the subject) |
Assessment task 3: Local Government Service Delivery Case Study
| Objective(s): | This task addresses the following subject learning objectives: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 This task also addresses the following course intended learning outcomes that are linked with a code to indicate one of the five CAPRI graduate attribute categories (e.g. C.1, A.3, P.4, etc.): A.3, I.1, I.2, P.1 and R.3 |
|---|---|
| Type: | Case study |
| Groupwork: | Individual |
| Weight: | 50% |
| Length: | 3500 words. |
| Criteria: | Criterion 3.1 – CILO A3 – weighting 20% The student provides evidence of integrating self-reflection with values, skills and knowledge in order to enhance local government service delivery. The case study presents an engaging description of the challenges and opportunities associated with delivery of a given area of council functioning. The student considers implications of the case study description and analysis for improvement of his/her own work. Criterion 3.2 – CILO P1 – weighting 20% The student’s exploration of local government service provision via the case study is based on a sound understanding of local government itself, including historical debates on the role and value of local government; place-shaping and the promotion of citizen wellbeing; governance, partnerships and networks; and debates on the tailoring of local services and how best to achieve valued outcomes for local communities. Criterion 3.3 – CILO R3 – weighting 20% The student puts forward informed arguments and rationales relating to current issues in local government service provision (the impact of historical trends, current priorities and challenges and debates on alternative models and innovations) and applies these competently to the service delivery case study. Criterion 3.4 – CILO I3 – weighting 20% The students demonstrate evidence of developing new perspectives on local government services and service delivery. He/she does so by drawing on a competent analysis of the current situation as well as on the literature that describes innovative models. There is evidence in the written-up case study of an engaging progression from description, assessment and critique, towards putting forward recommendations for change. Criterion 3.5 – CILO I2 – weighting 20% There is evidence in the assignment of the student’s capacity to:
TOTAL 100% (contributing 50% of the overall mark for the subject) |
Minimum requirements
Students must meet attendance requirements and overall must obtain at least 50% of the total marks.
Required texts
Australian Government, 2015, 2013-14 Local Government National Report, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Chandler, J. 2010, A rationale for local government, Local Government Studies, 36 (1): 5-20.
Dollery, B., Akimov, A. and Byrnes, J. 2009, Shared services in Australian local government: Rationale, alternative models and empirical evidence, The Australian Journal of Public Administration, 68(2): 208-219.
Grimsey, D., Jones, B.C. and Hemingway, G., 2012, Strong foundations for sustainable local infrastructure: Connecting communities, projects, finance and funds, Ernst & Young, Australia.
Hunting, S.A., Ryan, R. and Robinson, T. 2015, Service delivery review: A how to manual for local government 2nd edition, ACELG, Sydney.
Independent Local Government Review Panel, 2012, Service delivery and infrastructure: Background Paper, Report prepared for the NSW Government, Sydney.
Lamothe, S., Lamothe, M. and Feiock, R.C. 2008, Examining local government service delivery arrangements over time, Urban Affairs Review, 44(1): 27-56.
Osborne, S.P., Radnor, Z. and Nasi, G. 2013, A new theory for public service management: Toward a (public) service-dominant approach, The American Review of Public Administration, 43(2): 135-158.
Rees, J., Mullins, D and Bovaird, T. 2012, Third sector partnerships for public service delivery: An evidence review.
Working Paper 60, Third Sector Research Centre, Birmingham.
Somerville, D. and Gibbs, M. 2012, Legal and governance models for shared services in local government. ACELG, Sydney.
Walker, G. and Gray, M. 2012, Service delivery reviews in Australian local government, ACELG, Sydney.
Watt, P.A. 2006, Principles and theories of local government, Economic Affairs (Journal of the Institute of Economic Affairs), March 2006: 4-10.
Williams, I. and Shearer, H. 2011, Appraising public value: Past, present and futures, Public Administration, 89 (4): 1367–1384.
Recommended texts
Alford, J. and O’Flynn, J. 2009. Making sense of public value: Concepts, critiques and emergent meanings. International Journal of Public Administration, 32: 171-191.
Bovaird, T. 2007. Beyond engagement and participation: User and community coproduction of public services. Public Administration Review, September/October 2007: 846-860.
Cannadi, J. and Dollery, B. 2005. An evaluation of private sector provision of public infrastructure in Australian local government. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 64(3): 112-118.
Colebatch, H.K. and Degeling, P.J. 1986. Understanding local government: Action, linkage, outcome. Canberra College of Advanced Education, Canberra.
Foster-Fishman, P.G., Berkowitz, S.L., Lounsbury, D.W., Jacobson, S. and Allen, N.A. 2001. Building collaborative capacity in community coalitions: A review and integrative framework. American Journal of Community Psychology, 29(2): 241-261.
McKinlay, P., Pillora, S., Tan, S. and von Tunzelmann, A. 2011. Evolution in community governance: Building on what works. ACELG, Sydney.
Office of Local Government. 2014. Comparative information on NSW local government: Measuring local government performance. NSW Government, Sydney.
Pollitt, C. 2013. The logics of performance management. Evaluation, 19(4): 346-363.
Productivity Commission. 2008. Assessing Local Government Revenue Raising Capacity. Productivity Commission, Canberra.
Rablen, M.D. 2012. The promotion of local wellbeing: A primer for policymakers. Local Economy, 27(3): 297-314.
Stoker, G. 2006. Public value management: A new narrative for networked governance? The American Review of Public Administration, 36(1): 41-57.
Warner, M.E. and Clifton, J. 2014. Marketization, public services and the city: The potential for Polanyian counter movements. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 7: 45-61.
Aulich, C., Gibbs, M., Gooding, A., McKinlay, P., Pillora, S. and Sansom, G. 2011. Consolidation in local government: A fresh look – Volume 1: Report. Australian Centre of Excellence for Local Government (ACELG), Sydney.
Benington, J. 2009. Creating the public in order to create public value? International Journal of Public Administration, 32(3-4): 232-249.
Campbell, G. 2011. Delivering local government projects: Effective partnerships with the private sector. Presentation to 2011 LGMA National Congress and Business Expo, Cairns Convention Centre, 22-25 May 2011.
Duniam, M. and Eversole, R. 2013. Social enterprises and local government: A scoping study. ACELG, Sydney.
Flinders, M. 2005. The politics of Public-Private Partnerships. BJPIR: Journal of the Political Studies Association, 7: 215-239.
Grant, B. and Fisher, J. 2011. Public value: Positive ethics for Australian local government. Journal of Economic and Social Policy, 14 (2): 1-19.
James, O. 2011. Managing citizens’ expectations of public service performance: Evidence from observation and experimentation in local government. Public Administration, 89(4): 1419-1435.
Kernaghan, K. 2009. Moving toward integrated public governance: Improving service delivery through community engagement. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75(2): 239-254.
Lyons, M. 2007. Place-shaping: A shared ambition for the future of local government – Executive Summary. Report produced for the Lyons Inquiry into Local Government, Office of Public Sector Information, London.
Morton Consulting. 2014. Local Government Association of Queensland (LGAQ) 2013 Community Satisfaction Tracking Study. Prepared for LGAQ, Brisbane.
Stoker, G. 2011. Was local governance such a good idea? A global comparative perspective. Public Administration, 89 (1): 15-31.
Vosselman, E.G.J., Bossert, J. and Jellema, P.J. 2014. Effective service delivery through governance of the back office. Het Zijlstra Center, Free University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.