BUTTON & LABEL TEXT – change only the words after the colon. This box is hidden on the live page.

Read case study button: Read case study

Case study library link: View in Case Study Library

Back to White Paper link: View in the White Paper →

Case study PDF button: Download PDF ↓

Case study list heading: Case studies in

Case study number label: Case study

Go to case study link: Go to case study →

Expand all button: Expand all

Collapse all button: Collapse all

Priority label: Priority

Search button: Search

Close button: Close ✕

The White Paper

Three pillars

Service Skills System

Conclusion What Happens Next: The Role of IPAA NSW Appendix Acknowledgements References

Explore

Case Study Library Search the White Paper Download the full White Paper ↓

A forward-looking White paper by IPAA NSW

PUBLIC SERVICE 2035: Thinking Beyond, Acting Now.

Service, Skills and System for a future-fit public sector in NSW

enduring pillars

case studies from across NSW

2,034

survey responses

The full White Paper

Download the full White Paper

The complete report — Service, Skills and System, all recommendations and every case study — as a designed PDF you can read, share and cite.

Request the PDF download ↓

Opens the IPAA NSW download request form in a new tab.

Acknowledgement of Country

We respectfully acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of Country across NSW. We acknowledge the spiritual connections and relationships that Traditional Custodians have continued to maintain and strengthen since time began, which will continue well into the future. We pay our respects to Elders past and present. We recognise their cultural knowledge and wisdom have been passed down through generations and will remain present through stories and song lines for generations to come. We extend this respect, acknowledgement and appreciation to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander public servants who helped develop this report and who contribute across the public sector. We recognise their skills and experiences as foundational assets to support the people of NSW.

Strong public institutions do not endure by accident. They endure because each generation chooses to invest in them.— IPAA NSW

Contents

The full structure of the White Paper. Select any heading to go straight to it.

Foreword

Foreword from the President

For ninety years, IPAA NSW has supported the public sector as it has adapted to the changing needs of New South Wales. Since our founding in 1935, our work has been anchored in three enduring pillars: Service, Skills and System. Identified as essential to effective public administration, these principles remain as relevant today as they were nearly a century ago.

Marking our 90th milestone provided an opportunity not only to reflect on that legacy, but to look forward. This White paper has been commissioned to consider how the institutions, capabilities and practices of the NSW public sector must evolve in the years ahead.

The public sector enters this period from a position of strength. Its institutions are well established, its workforce is capable, and its contribution to the state is significant. However, these strengths cannot be assumed to endure. The pressures facing public institutions globally are increasingly visible in Australia, with many jurisdictions across the country and internationally grappling with similar challenges of trust, capability and delivery in a more complex operating environment. This convergence of pressures underscores a common lesson: without deliberate effort, even strong systems can weaken over time.

This White paper therefore takes a clear position: the NSW public sector is strong, but it will not remain so without active stewardship.

The context in which public servants operate has shifted materially. Trust in public institutions is under strain across many democracies, even as expectations of government continue to rise. Technological change is reshaping how work is performed and how decisions are made. Notwithstanding, governments are navigating long-term transitions, from climate resilience to demographic and economic change, while delivering services under sustained fiscal pressure and heightened public scrutiny.

In this environment, maintaining public confidence will depend on a public sector that continues to evolve while remaining anchored to the values that sustain trust: professionalism, integrity, independence and service to the community.

This White paper draws on insights from leaders and practitioners across the NSW public sector. It revisits IPAA NSW’s founding pillars through a contemporary lens, examining how the system of government, the capabilities of the workforce and the experience of public service must develop together. Rather than engaging primarily in constitutional theory, it concentrates on the practical conditions, capabilities and behaviours that shape effective public administration.

History offers a useful perspective. Some of the most consequential institutional decisions in Australia’s democratic system did not appear dramatic at the time. Compulsory voting, preferential voting and the decision to hold elections on Saturdays were all, in their own way, practical choices that strengthened participation and institutional resilience over time.

The choices facing today’s public sector may appear similarly procedural. They concern governance frameworks, capability development, service design and the ethical use of new technologies. Yet decisions of this kind shape the strength and legitimacy of institutions for decades.

Public administration is, in many respects, the craft of thinking beyond the immediate horizon while acting in the present.

The NSW public sector has demonstrated this capacity across generations. The challenge now is to continue that tradition with greater intentionality in a period of accelerating change.

If this White paper prompts reflection and supports decisions that strengthen the system for the next generation of public servants and citizens, it will have achieved its purpose.

Mark WebbPresident – IPAA NSW

Foreword

Foreword from the CEO

At IPAA NSW, our purpose is clear: to support public servants to lead well, serve effectively and strengthen the institutions that underpin public life in New South Wales.

This White paper reflects that commitment. It provides an opportunity not only to recognise the legacy of public administration in this state, but to contribute to shaping its future.

The work has been informed by extensive engagement across the NSW public sector. We began with Department Secretaries to understand how they see the system evolving, where it is performing strongly and where it is under pressure. We also engaged Integrity Commissioners, whose independent perspectives on trust, accountability and democratic governance added important depth.

These insights were complemented by discussions with Deputy Secretaries and Agency CEOs, alongside targeted surveys and broader engagement with public servants across the sector. This ensured the White paper reflects both leadership perspectives and the experience of those delivering public value day to day.

We also drew on subject matter experts, academic research and practitioner literature. An Advisory Panel of senior public servants and academics provided critical guidance, helping to challenge assumptions and sharpen the focus of the paper.

Across these engagements, a clear pattern emerged. While perspectives varied, there was strong alignment on the key challenges and opportunities facing the public sector. These have been brought together under IPAA NSW’s enduring pillars of Service, Skills and System, which provide the organising framework for this White paper.

The process also highlighted the value of periodically stepping back as a sector. Several contributors noted that this kind of reflection should occur more regularly, creating space to assess how the operating environment is changing and where collective effort should be directed. This White paper is intended as a starting point for that ongoing work.

It is not a standalone document. It provides a central spine for continued engagement, including deeper case studies, practitioner provocations and sector-wide dialogue. These case studies are deliberately grounded in the NSW context, illustrating how the principles of service, skills and service are already being applied in practice and where they can be strengthened further. Through its role and programs, IPAA NSW will continue to support this work and contribute to practical reform.

We are grateful to the many leaders and public servants who contributed their time and insight. Their input has ensured this White paper is grounded in practice and reflective of the system it seeks to support.

My hope is that it inspires reflection, encourages constructive challenge and contributes to strengthening a public sector that continues to serve the people of NSW with professionalism, integrity and pride.

Jo RoseCEO – IPAA NSW

Executive summary

Executive Summary

The New South Wales public sector has significant institutional strengths. Strong foundations, a capable workforce and demonstrated resilience provide a solid platform for the future. However, sustaining and building on these will require deliberate attention to whether coherence, discipline and institutional integrity can be maintained in day-to-day decision-making.

The central question is not whether the system is strong. It is whether it is adapting deliberately enough to remain so.

Current Pressures

Three interconnected pressures are converging on the sector. Over time, policy craft has lost ground to the pressures of delivery. Fast implementation cycles, crisis response and operational demands have reduced the space for deep policy design and regulatory thinking. At the same time, institutional knowledge is leaving with experienced staff. Technology is advancing faster than the sector’s ability to interrogate, govern and use it well. Capability is therefore emerging as a defining constraint on long-term performance. The NSW public sector risks becoming quicker at delivery but weaker in judgement – more digitally enabled, but less grounded in the disciplines that make government effective.

Community expectations of public services have also shifted fundamentally. Citizens no longer compare government services with other agencies. They compare them with the best experience they encounter anywhere. For most citizens, trust in government is shaped through their experience of public services. Our survey data identifies lack of transparency and service consistency as the most significant risks to sustaining that trust.

Finally, the conditions that enable frank and fearless advice are gradually eroding. When uncertainty arises about whether difficult messages will be welcomed, behaviour can shift toward caution, responsiveness to short-term pressures and risk avoidance. Over time, this weakens the quality of policy advice and reduces the ability of government to anticipate emerging challenges.

Three Models

These are not separate issues. IPAA NSW has anchored its work in three enduring pillars – Service, Skills and System – which remain as essential today as they were nearly a century ago. This paper examines these three interconnected domains: how they shape how the public sector operates, how its people perform and how it is experienced by the community.

The domains are deeply interconnected, and in practice, many of the challenges facing the public sector cut across all three. Institutional capability, workforce capability and public experience are mutually reinforcing. Weakness in one will constrain performance in the others. Where possible, the paper examines these shared issues through the primary lens of Service, Skills or System to provide structure and clarity.

Three Deliberate Choices

Without more intentional stewardship, capability investment and service redesign, the NSW public sector risks gradual erosion rather than sudden failure. That erosion will be uneven, often difficult to detect and harder to reverse.

Without deliberate effort, even strong systems can weaken over time. The future strength of the NSW public sector will depend on three deliberate choices:

Service

Whether service delivery is designed to strengthen trust, not just efficiency; whether service systems can be recalibrated to place human experience, institutional trust and coordinated delivery at the centre of how government operates.

Explore Service →

Skills

Whether capability is treated as a core system priority rather than an operational input; whether the sector can rebuild policy and regulatory craftsmanship, protect institutional knowledge as a strategic asset, and ensure that technology can support judgement but does not substitute for it.

Explore Skills →

System

Whether institutions are actively stewarded rather than passively maintained; whether the public sector can maintain coherence, discipline and institutional integrity while adapting to increasing complexity, scrutiny and technological change.

Explore System →

Venn diagram illustrating how Service, Skills and System work together to create trusted public institutions. Service delivers human-centred outcomes, Skills develop capable and empowered people and System provides strong governance and stewardship. The overlapping areas show that strong institutions, capable people and effective services reinforce one another to build public trust and better outcomes for communities.

Strategic Priorities

These deliberate choices point to six strategic priorities for the decade ahead:

Strengthen institutional trust and legitimacy

by reinforcing integrity, transparency, democratic accountability and public confidence in government decision-making.

Build a more adaptive and connected system

by enabling collaboration across agencies, aligning effort to shared outcomes and embedding place-based approaches where appropriate.

Renew the craft of public administration

by investing in policy capability, regulatory expertise, ethical judgement and the transfer of institutional knowledge.

Prepare the workforce for a technology-enabled future

by building digital, data and AI capability while ensuring human accountability and professional judgement remain central to decision-making.

Design services around people and place

by improving integration, accessibility and responsiveness, while recognising the diverse needs of metropolitan, regional and remote communities.

Invest in leadership that strengthens the system over time

by developing leaders who can navigate complexity, build capability and steward institutions for future generations.

Specific recommendations are outlined at the commencement of each domain, providing practical actions for strengthening the NSW public sector across Service, Skills and System.

Looking Ahead

The NSW public sector is not at risk of sudden failure, but of gradual drift. The choices made now will shape whether the sector remains capable, trusted and effective in the years ahead. The opportunity is not only to adapt to change, but to do so in a way that strengthens the system for the long term.

The sections that follow examine each of these domains in detail: what is at stake, where the sector is already demonstrating strength, and what capabilities must be deliberately built and protected to ensure the NSW public sector remains trusted, effective and resilient for the decade ahead.

Introduction

Introduction and History of the NSW Public Sector

New South Wales operates at a scale comparable to a small nation. Its public sector is one of the largest and most complex in the southern hemisphere, delivering services across metropolitan, regional and remote communities and responding to significant change with national implications. This creates both influence and responsibility. NSW is not simply a participant in public administration. It is often a system leader.

The evolution of the NSW public sector reflects this role. It has adapted over time through distinct phases, each responding to changing expectations of government and reshaping the capabilities required of the public service. Its institutions have evolved not by remaining static, but by responding to shifts in political, economic and social environments. Each phase built on what came before. The system did not reset. It evolved, layering new expectations onto established institutions.

Today, the NSW public sector faces a period of structural shift. This is not a continuation of incremental change. The context in which public servants operate has shifted materially. Trust in public institutions is under strain across many democracies, even as expectations of government continue to rise. Technological change is reshaping how work is performed and how decisions are made. At the same time, governments are navigating long-term transitions, from climate resilience to demographic and economic change, while delivering services under sustained fiscal pressure and heightened public scrutiny.

In this environment, the task is not to abandon the values that have long defined professional public administration. Impartiality, integrity, accountability and service to the public interest remain the foundation of trust. The challenge is to apply these principles in a more complex and demanding environment while remaining anchored to the values that sustain trust: professionalism, integrity, independence and service to the community.

This White paper examines how the NSW public sector can continue to evolve to meet the challenges of the coming decade. It draws on insights from leaders and practitioners across the NSW public sector, revisiting IPAA’s enduring pillars through a contemporary lens, examining how the experience of public service, the capabilities of the workforce and the system of government must develop together. Rather than engaging primarily in constitutional theory, it concentrates on the practical conditions, capabilities and behaviours that shape effective public administration.

The question is not whether the system will change. It is whether that change is shaped deliberately or allowed to emerge by default.

Pillar 01

Service

The most visible expression of government — where policy intent becomes lived experience and public trust is either strengthened or weakened.

Service at a glance

For most citizens, trust in government is shaped through their experience of public services.

Key themes explored in this chapter include:

The changing expectations citizens bring to public services, increasingly influenced by experiences outside government.
The need to design services around people, place and lived experience rather than organisational structures.
The importance of balancing efficiency, empathy, fairness and professional judgement.
The role of service integration in reducing fragmentation and improving citizen outcomes.
The growing significance of place-based approaches for addressing complex and persistent community challenges.
The contribution of frontline staff, enabling back-office functions and leadership to service quality and public trust.
The opportunities and limitations of technology in improving access, responsiveness and service experience.

Central challengeHow can the NSW public sector deliver services that are accessible, responsive and efficient while maintaining trust, equity and human-centred support?

The recommendations that follow focus on citizen-centred design, integrated service delivery, frontline capability and improving outcomes for communities across NSW.

Service: Key recommendations

Design services around real experience

System leaders

Shift governance and investment to prioritise citizen experience over organisational structure.
Establish mechanisms for frontline and community to inform service design.

Managers

Ensure frontline expertise drives how services are configured and improved.
Create space for your teams to surface what citizens need and what are roadblocks.

Individuals

Bring what citizens need into how services are designed and delivered.
Speak up about gaps between what citizens experience and what systems assume.

Strengthen trust through service delivery

System leaders

Embed transparency, accountability and human judgement into system design.
Make trust in government a core measure of service performance.

Managers

Model decision-making grounded in fairness, transparency and clear reasoning.
Support your teams to exercise judgement not just follow processes.

Individuals

Treat every citizen interaction as an opportunity to strengthen public trust.
Communicate clearly about decisions and be consistent in how you apply them.

Shift from response to prevention

System leaders

Align funding and accountability to reward long-term prevention outcomes.
Invest in understanding root causes across the system, not just managing symptoms.

Managers

Identify patterns that point to preventable problems and escalate them.
Shift team focus on early intervention where you have influence.

Individuals

Notice and flag emerging issues before they become crises.
Contribute your frontline perspective on what prevents problems.

Enable place-based and community-led approaches

System leaders

Devolve decision-making authority to regional and local levels where context and community knowledge matter.
Design funding and governance to enable place-based adaptation, not standardised delivery.

Managers

Build relationships with your communities and adapt your approach based on their needs and context.
Champion regional and community knowledge as equally valid to central policy.

Individuals

Engage respectfully with your community and adapt how you deliver based on what you learn.
Recognise that one-size-fits-all approaches don’t serve diverse communities equally.

Introduction

Service is the most visible expression of government. It is where policy intent becomes lived experience and where public trust is either strengthened or weakened.

Community expectations have shifted rapidly. Citizens no longer compare government services with other agencies. They compare them with the best experience they encounter anywhere. Accessibility, clarity and responsiveness are now baseline expectations.

However, services are judged by more than convenience. Citizens also expect fairness, transparency and sound judgement in decisions that affect their lives.

Meeting these expectations will not come from incremental improvement. It requires a deliberate recalibration that places human experience, institutional trust and coordinated delivery at the centre of how government operates.

The task for the NSW public sector is therefore to continue to recalibrate how services are delivered. This means efficiency must be matched with empathy. Innovation must be matched with accountability. Digital capability must strengthen human judgement, not displace it.

The future of service delivery will depend on whether these balances can be maintained consistently across agencies, regions and communities.

Service must be understood as a system that shapes long-term outcomes, not a set of transactions that respond to demand.

This requires three shifts.

First, from standardisation to contextualisation.

Services must respond to different community contexts, particularly in regional and place-based settings.

Second, from measurement to design.

Metrics remain important, but greater focus is needed on how services are structured, including personalisation, transparency and co-design.

Third, from agency delivery to system delivery.

Citizens experience government. Services must be designed accordingly.

Without these shifts, service systems risk becoming faster but more fragmented.

NSW’s position as a leading jurisdiction in service delivery will depend on its ability to integrate technology, capability and community insight into a coherent system.

Explore the themes

Community Expectations from Service

Community expectations of public services have changed fundamentally. Citizens expect services that are intuitive and responsive, while still capable of exercising judgement and protecting vulnerable people.

This dual expectation creates a more demanding operating environment. Services must be easy to navigate and efficient, while maintaining fairness, accountability and professional integrity.

The response cannot rely on isolated improvements within individual agencies. Community experience is shaped by how services operate across the system. When services align, outcomes improve and trust grows. When coordination fails, citizens encounter duplication, delay and fragmented responsibility.

The challenge is therefore systemic. Human-centred design, transparent decision-making, balanced performance measures and equitable access must become standard operating principles across the NSW public sector.

The focus is not to modernise services in isolation, but to redesign service systems so they strengthen trust, improve outcomes and remain sustainable over time.

Human-centred Service Delivery

Related case study: Service NSW ↓¹

Human-centred service delivery is not simply a design preference. It is a governance requirement.

Delivering on this requires structural alignment. Funding, governance and performance measures must reflect citizen experience, not organisational convenience.

Public services often engage with citizens at moments of vulnerability. Yet many systems remain organised around institutional boundaries rather than lived experience. As a result, citizens must navigate multiple services simultaneously. Housing, education, health and welfare systems intersect in ways that are rarely visible from within individual agencies.

When systems operate independently, the burden of coordination falls on the individual.

Human-centred design reverses this logic. It begins with the journeys people experience and aligns policy, digital tools and frontline processes around those journeys.

This requires closer integration between policy and delivery. Policy design is strengthened when decision-makers engage directly with frontline environments, observing how services operate in practice and how choices affect outcomes.

Performance measurement must also evolve. Efficiency remains important, but it is no longer sufficient. Services should also be assessed by whether they reduce administrative burden, improve day-to-day experience and enable people to navigate government with dignity.

Digital transformation should support this shift. Technology can remove friction and allow professionals to focus on human engagement rather than transactional processing.

Human-centred design must therefore inform how services are authorised, funded and evaluated.

Trust and Transparency in Service

Trust underpins effective service delivery. Citizens must have confidence that public services operate with integrity, fairness and competence. Ethical conduct, professionalism and accountability are therefore operational requirements, not aspirational values.

For most citizens, this confidence is formed through service interactions. Poor service design will undermine it, regardless of policy quality.

Innovation in service delivery must be accompanied by clear safeguards. As technology becomes more embedded in decision-making, privacy protections, security controls and transparent governance must be built into systems from the outset.

Organisational culture also plays a critical role. A public sector that reinforces professional pride, accountability and continuous improvement strengthens legitimacy through everyday interactions. Clear accountability, visible oversight and consistent standards are essential to sustaining confidence.

Trust must therefore be treated as a performance outcome. It should be measured, monitored and actively managed as part of agency performance.

Balancing Efficiency and Empathy

Related case study: Homes NSW ↓²

Efficiency is essential to effective service delivery, but it is not sufficient on its own. Fiscal constraints require agencies to operate with discipline. Processes must be streamlined and digital tools used intelligently to reduce cost and improve access. Integrated service platforms demonstrate how coordinated design can simplify how citizens interact with government.

However, many public decisions carry consequences that extend beyond efficiency metrics. In areas such as child protection, corrections and regulatory enforcement, decisions affect people’s lives in profound ways. In these contexts, fairness, legal integrity and the protection of vulnerable individuals must remain paramount.

Balancing efficiency with empathy requires attention at both the system and practitioner level.

Empathy at the system level involves designing services around the lived experiences of citizens rather than organisational structures. It recognises that people experience government as a connected system and often navigate multiple agencies, programs and life events simultaneously. Services that are designed with this perspective can reduce complexity, minimise duplication and improve outcomes.

Practitioner empathy relates to the judgement, understanding and professionalism exercised by frontline staff. Public servants must be equipped to apply consistent standards while recognising individual circumstances, particularly where decisions affect vulnerable people or involve significant discretion.

Improved coordination across human services is also critical. Earlier collaboration between agencies can prevent complex problems from escalating and reduce long-term costs. This reflects both system empathy, through more joined-up service design, and practitioner empathy, through better support for people with complex needs.

Efficiency and empathy must therefore operate together as core design principles in service delivery. Efficiency without judgement creates risk. Empathy without consistency creates inequity. Effective service depends on both.

Equity and Regional Inclusion

NSW includes metropolitan, regional and remote communities with distinct economic, social and geographic circumstances. Equitable service delivery must recognise and respond to these differences.

People should be able to access high-quality public services regardless of where they live. However, the experience of accessing government services can vary significantly across the state. Distance, workforce availability, transport connections, digital access and local service capacity all influence how services are experienced.

Improving equity therefore requires a stronger focus on service experience, not simply service availability. Services should be designed around the realities of different communities, ensuring they are accessible, responsive and practical for the people who rely on them.

Regional public servants often have deep knowledge of local communities and understand how services are experienced on the ground. Their insights should inform service design and continuous improvement, helping ensure that policies translate into effective local delivery.

Digital channels can also improve access by reducing travel requirements and extending service availability beyond traditional operating hours. However, digital delivery must remain inclusive. Not all citizens have reliable connectivity, digital confidence or access to technology. Alternative pathways and human support must remain available.

Equity also requires services that reflect the needs of diverse communities, including Aboriginal communities, culturally diverse populations, people with disability and those experiencing social or economic disadvantage.

Equitable service delivery is not achieved through uniformity. It is achieved when people can access services that respond appropriately to their circumstances and enable comparable outcomes, regardless of where they live.

For the NSW public sector, the goal should be a service system that combines statewide consistency with local responsiveness, ensuring communities experience government as accessible, relevant and effective in their own context.

Case study 01 · Service

Service NSW

From Silos to Seamless: A Blueprint for Integrated Public Service Delivery

Service NSW was established to fundamentally reshape how public services are delivered. Previously, citizens and businesses navigated a fragmented system of agencies, each with separate shopfronts, websites and processes. Services that should have been connected were delivered in isolation, creating duplication, delays and a poor user experience.

In 2013, the NSW Government created Service NSW as the front door to government, opening its first centre in Kiama. The objective was clear: simplify access, improve efficiency and design services around users, not institutions. This required more than channel consolidation. It demanded a system-wide shift in how services were structured, coordinated and delivered, supported by a culture of partnership, agility and accountability for outcomes.

Service NSW integrated hundreds of services into a single model spanning digital platforms, contact centres and a statewide network of service centres. This omnichannel approach ensured consistent access across metropolitan, regional and remote communities. In parallel, the agency worked with partner agencies to redesign over 800 service journeys using human-centred design, reducing complexity and improving usability.

Equally important was the establishment of shared capabilities in service design, data and customer insights, alongside governance arrangements that supported consistent, cross-agency delivery.

The impact has been material. Service NSW now processes around 2.5 million transactions each week, most completed digitally. It brings together more than 1,300 transactions across 70 agencies into a single, integrated model. Services are faster and more consistent, duplication has reduced, and customer trust and satisfaction remain high.

Beyond operational gains, Service NSW has redefined how government engages with citizens. It demonstrates that a centralised, customer-focused model can deliver both efficiency and experience at scale. Its position within government has also enabled an expansion into more complex and high-need service areas, including targeted outreach to vulnerable communities. This customer care model has been central to the state’s response to natural disasters over the past five years.

The next phase will deepen this integration. Greater use of data will enable more proactive and personalised services, further reducing the effort required to interact with government.

Download case study PDF

Case study 02 · Service

Homes NSW

Reforming the NSW non-market housing and homelessness system

Stable, affordable housing provides significant individual and community benefits. The NSW government, through Homes NSW, plays two important roles in the delivery of housing and homelessness services.

First, it is a system steward – shaping the policy, regulatory and contract environment for the delivery of non-market housing and homelessness service provision.

Second, it also directly delivers public housing and temporary accommodation for those in need. It does so alongside community housing providers, Aboriginal community housing providers and specialist homelessness services.

The non-market housing and homelessness system is a broad term used to cover housing and accommodation that is provided at a subsidised rate to people on low to moderate incomes experiencing housing insecurity. It covers social housing, affordable housing, crisis and transitional housing.

As the housing crisis has deepened, demand for housing and homelessness support has increased. This places pressure on a system that has previously experienced low funding levels and fragmented service delivery.

Homes NSW was established in February 2024 to bring together the NSW Government’s focus on the non-market housing and homelessness services system in one branch of the Department of Communities and Justice. Its work is guided by two new long-term strategies: Homes for NSW 2025-2035 and the whole-of-government NSW Homelessness Strategy 2025-2035.

With a vision to deliver quality homes and services that change lives and end homelessness, key areas of reform include:

Customer-centred services – focusing on quality customer service standards across the housing and homelessness system and strengthening tenant voice in service delivery and policy development.
Increasing and improving housing – The Building Homes for NSW program and Building Crisis Housing Plan include over $6.6 billion for 8,400 new social homes, up to 1,200 affordable homes, around 33,500 upgrades of existing public housing properties, and at least 200 new crisis accommodation beds for people experiencing homelessness. Quality design and accessibility are a focus.
Strengthening prevention – Developing a Housing First Framework to the way that we respond to homelessness, expanding affordable and key worker housing, and reviewing tenancy policies to enhance stability.
Supporting place-based delivery – Establishing Local Collaboration Networks to guide our responses to housing and homelessness, strengthening collaboration with Councils, and improving the use of local data and outcomes measurement.
Strengthening partnerships – Coordinating action and accountability across Government agencies, working collaboratively with sector partners to have a voice in policy design, supporting growth of the Aboriginal and mainstream community housing sector, and extending contract arrangements for homelessness services.
Building capability – Improving standards across housing and homelessness providers, workforce capability, data systems and performance monitoring.

The establishment of Homes NSW is an example of how structural change and investment can align to drive real system reform and positive outcomes for our community.

Download case study PDF

Evolving Role of Service

Public service delivery is no longer confined to implementing policy or providing transactions. It has become a central mechanism through which government supports communities, manages transition and strengthens institutional trust.

As NSW confronts economic transformation, demographic change and environmental pressures, service systems must do more than respond to demand. They must also contribute to long-term stability and resilience.

Well-designed services strengthen confidence through experience, reinforcing citizens’ day-to-day perceptions of government capability.

The role of service is therefore expanding. It must provide reliable support to citizens today while helping government respond effectively to the challenges of the future.

Stewardship of Public Value through Service Experience

Public value is most visible in how government services are experienced. For most people, interactions with schools, hospitals, transport systems and emergency services shape their understanding of government more than policy frameworks or institutional arrangements.

These interactions are not neutral transactions. They are moments where public value is either realised or diminished. Reliability, timeliness, accessibility and clarity all influence whether government is experienced as capable and responsive.

The central task is therefore one of stewardship: ensuring that services are designed and delivered in ways that consistently translate policy intent into meaningful outcomes for the community.

Many reforms have focused on improving individual services. The next step is to strengthen how services operate as a system. Citizens often navigate multiple agencies to resolve a single issue. When services are fragmented, even well-performing components can result in a poor overall experience. Stewardship requires aligning services around citizen journeys rather than organisational boundaries.

Clarity is also critical. Government services often involve complex rules, eligibility criteria and processes. When these are not communicated clearly, the burden shifts to citizens to navigate the system. Good service design reduces this burden by making pathways visible, decisions understandable and support accessible.

Workforce capability remains central. Frontline staff translate policy into practice in real time, often in high-pressure or emotionally complex situations. Their ability to exercise judgement, communicate effectively and respond to individual circumstances directly shapes service quality.

Stewardship of public value also requires sustained attention to outcomes over time. Short-term efficiency gains must not come at the expense of service quality or equity. The focus must remain on whether services are meeting community needs consistently and accessibly.

For the NSW public sector, the priority is to ensure that public value is not only designed in policy but delivered in practice. This requires treating service experience as a core system outcome, not a by-product of policy implementation.

Designing Services for Prevention and Response

Current service systems are structurally biased toward response rather than prevention. This reflects funding models, performance frameworks and political cycles more than deliberate intent.

Effective service systems must do both: reduce harm before it occurs and respond quickly when it does. When prevention and response are treated as separate functions, demand grows, pressure on frontline services increases and opportunities for early intervention are missed.

The starting premise should be clear: many long-term outcomes are shaped early, and demand for crisis services is often predictable. Early intervention, universal access and life-course support should therefore be embedded into service design, particularly where disadvantage compounds over time.

This is most evident in complex, cross-cutting challenges. Transitions such as decarbonisation, or efforts to improve outcomes for Aboriginal communities or vulnerable children, require sustained coordination across policy, infrastructure, workforce and community systems. In these contexts, service delivery is not simply transactional. It helps shape long-term economic and social outcomes.

Strong response capability remains essential. Crisis services, targeted interventions and enforcement functions are critical when risks materialise or urgent needs arise. However, where preventive capability is weak, demand for these services continues to escalate.

The challenge for government is therefore not to choose between prevention and response, but to align them more effectively. This requires:

funding models that support long-term investment alongside immediate service needs
shared accountability across agencies for reducing demand as well as delivering services
integrated data and early-warning systems that identify emerging risks sooner
service pathways that support people across the life course rather than through isolated programs

For the NSW public sector, the priority is to create service systems that balance early intervention with strong response capability. Investment, governance and accountability must align to this objective. Without this shift, demand will continue to outpace capacity. With it, government can improve outcomes, reduce long-term pressure on services and build a more sustainable system.

Unifying Sense of Purpose and Pride

Public service remains one of the most demanding professions in society. It requires intellectual rigour, ethical judgement and a sustained commitment to public value.

However, prolonged operational pressure and constant scrutiny can weaken the connection between daily work and the broader mission of public service. Reinforcing this connection is essential. Public servants must understand how their work contributes to fairness, stability and opportunity across the community.

Leadership plays a central role. Recognising contributions, celebrating cross-agency achievements and articulating a shared purpose strengthens motivation and collective identity.

Purpose must also be supported by sustainable working conditions. Extended periods of crisis-level intensity place significant strain on individuals and teams, affecting both performance and retention.

Purpose and pride are not symbolic concepts. They are strategic enablers of a capable and resilient public service.

Case study 03 · Service

NSW Housing Pattern Book

A New Blueprint for Housing Delivery

NSW is facing sustained housing pressure, with affordability, supply and planning delays shaping one of the state’s most pressing challenges. While much of the debate has focused on density, the deeper challenge has been how to deliver more homes without compromising design quality, liveability or community confidence.

The NSW Housing Pattern Book emerged from several years of policy experimentation and design research led by Government Architect NSW. Earlier projects demonstrated that well-designed low and mid-rise housing could increase supply while improving walkability, tree canopy and public amenity. Importantly, communities were more receptive to medium-density housing when presented with well-designed examples rather than abstract planning concepts.

The initiative was designed to make good housing easier to deliver. The NSW Government sought to reduce planning uncertainty, accelerate approvals and provide homeowners, smaller builders and community housing providers with access to high-quality, architect-designed housing. Rather than being simply a design catalogue, the Pattern Book combines policy reform, planning controls and practical delivery tools.

The Pattern Book combines standardised, architect-designed housing typologies with streamlined planning pathways to reduce uncertainty, time and cost. Covering terraces, townhouses, dual occupancies, manor homes and small apartment buildings, it provides downloadable pattern packs, subsidised drawings and planning identifiers that simplify the journey from concept to approval. Government’s decision to secure licensing rights to the designs has also created a reusable model that is attracting interest from other jurisdictions.

Early results have been encouraging. The initiative has generated nearly one million website views, significant downloads of pattern packs and early development applications. Approval times are averaging around 40 days, substantially faster than traditional pathways. Public and industry interest has been strong, with positive media coverage and growing uptake among builders, developers and prefabrication providers.

The broader significance of the Housing Pattern Book lies in its ability to reframe housing reform from a debate about density to one about quality, certainty and accessibility. It demonstrates how design can be used as a policy tool to build public confidence, reduce friction across the planning system and lower barriers for smaller market participants.

While the model is still evolving, it offers a compelling example of systems leadership in practice. By combining design, regulation, communications and market activation, the Housing Pattern Book shows how government can make complex reform more tangible, trusted and easier to implement at scale.

Download case study PDF

Case study 04 · Service

SharkSmart Program

SharkSmart: Integrating Technology to Improve Public Safety

Communities along the NSW coastline benefit from access to some of the world’s most breathtaking beaches. This marine environment is shared with a diverse array of marine life, including sharks. To help mitigate the risks associated with shark interactions, the NSW Government has developed the largest and most advanced shark monitoring program in the world.

The NSW Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development’s SharkSmart program uses a range of technologies including SMART drumlines, Shark Listening Stations and a comprehensive drone surveillance system.

Developed in partnership with Surf Life Saving NSW and Surfing NSW, the NSW Drone Surveillance Network operates drones at more than 80 beaches to quickly identify high-risk shark species. This early warning system enables UAV pilots to alert swimmers and surfers in real time. DPIRD is also working with academics and technology companies to maximise the use of artificial intelligence and automation to expand drone coverage at low cost, with the potential for drones to replace and supplement other shark mitigation activities over time.

The program also includes more than 300 SMART drumlines (Shark Management Alert in Real Time), which alert boat crews and DPIRD scientists when a shark takes the bait. Teams respond within 30 minutes to tag and release the shark or other marine animal. In addition, 37 satellite-linked Shark Listening Stations detect tagged White, Bull and Tiger sharks, providing valuable data to help researchers better understand shark distribution and migration along the NSW coastline.

The SharkSmart app brings these technologies together by providing real-time reporting on shark detections from drone surveillance, Shark Listening Stations and SMART drumlines. This enables users to stay informed about shark activity in their local coastal area. The program also improves public education about sharks and beach safety while contributing to international shark research.

By integrating multiple technologies into a single program, SharkSmart demonstrates how digital tools can improve situational awareness, provide timely information to the community and support evidence-based decision making. As artificial intelligence and automation continue to develop, the program is well positioned to further expand its monitoring capability and strengthen public safety outcomes.

Download case study PDF

A Future-fit Service

The future of public service delivery will depend on how effectively government integrates technological capability with institutional maturity.

Digital tools offer significant opportunities to improve efficiency and accessibility. However, technology alone will not determine outcomes. Success will depend on whether these tools are deployed responsibly, while strengthening collaboration, empowering frontline professionals and engaging communities in service design.

The challenge is not simply innovation. It is disciplined innovation that improves service quality while reinforcing public trust.

Ethical Use of AI and Technology

Related case study: NewGen Matrix ↓⁵

Artificial intelligence and digital technologies are changing how citizens experience government. Used well, they can make services more accessible, timely and responsive to individual needs. They can reduce administrative burden, simplify navigation of complex systems and enable more tailored support.

However, their impact is ultimately judged at the point where government meets people. This is where questions of fairness, transparency and trust are most visible.

Many digital reforms to date have focused on digitising existing processes rather than redesigning them around citizen needs. Realising the full value of AI will require more fundamental shifts in how services are structured, how decisions are made and how responsibility is communicated.

AI can support tasks such as eligibility assessment, triage and service navigation, improving consistency and access. However, these applications also carry risks if decisions are not understood or cannot be challenged.

Accountability must therefore remain clear and visible at the service interface. Individuals should be able to understand decisions that affect them, seek clarification and access human support where needed. Systems that are efficient but opaque risk undermining trust, particularly for vulnerable communities.

The focus must remain on service outcomes, not technological inputs. AI should enhance the quality, accessibility and fairness of services, not simply increase speed or reduce cost.

For the NSW public sector, the priority is to ensure that technology improves how government is experienced. When implemented thoughtfully, it can strengthen trust and equity. If not, it risks creating services that are efficient in design but disconnected from the people they are intended to serve.

Integrated Cross-agency Delivery

Many of the challenges facing NSW require coordinated responses across multiple parts of government. From disaster recovery to social services and regional development, citizens often interact with several agencies to resolve a single issue. The effectiveness of government is therefore increasingly determined by how well services operate as an integrated system.

The focus must shift from coordination to delivery. This requires organising work around shared outcomes rather than agency responsibilities. Models such as joint missions, place-based initiatives and time-bound taskforces can align effort around clearly defined objectives and deliver results at pace.

Clarity of mandate is critical. Cross-agency initiatives must have defined outcomes, clear accountability and decision-making authority that matches their objectives. Without this, collaboration risks becoming consultative rather than outcome driven.

Integration depends on practical enablers. Data must be shared in ways that are timely, secure and usable across agencies. Systems and processes should support coordinated action rather than reinforce fragmentation. Governance arrangements must provide visibility of progress and enable rapid adjustment as conditions change.

From a citizen perspective, the expectation is straightforward: services should feel coherent, even when delivered by multiple parts of government.

The priority for the NSW public sector is to design services that operate seamlessly across organisational boundaries. This requires embedding integrated delivery as a standard way of working, not an exception.

Central coordination must provide clarity and alignment. Local delivery must retain flexibility. Effective systems require both.

Co-design and Community Engagement

Effective service design increasingly depends on meaningful engagement with communities.

Citizens and frontline professionals hold critical insight into how services operate in practice. Engaging these perspectives early improves the likelihood that systems reflect real needs.

Engagement must move beyond consultation. Communities should be involved in defining problems, identifying priorities and shaping solutions. Transparency is essential. People should be able to see how their input has influenced decisions.

A workforce that reflects the diversity of the communities it serves further strengthens inclusive service design.

For future-fit public service delivery, co-design should become routine practice rather than an occasional initiative. This requires supporting community-led approaches through flexible funding and shared accountability, particularly where local knowledge is critical to addressing complex challenges.

Frontline Empowerment and Support

Frontline interactions shape public perceptions of government more powerfully than any policy announcement.

As automation reduces administrative workloads, frontline roles are becoming more advisory and judgement based. Professionals in health, education, policing and social services must balance risk, fairness and compassion in complex situations.

Customer experience and employee experience are closely linked. Overburdened staff cannot consistently deliver empathetic or effective service.

Effective service delivery also depends on a strong relationship between frontline teams, enabling back-office functions and organisational leadership. Frontline staff provide insight into community needs and service realities. Back-office teams provide the systems, processes, data and operational support that enable effective delivery. Leaders set direction, allocate resources and create the conditions for sound judgement and continuous improvement. When these elements operate in alignment, services are more responsive, consistent and resilient.

Empowerment must therefore be deliberate. Staff need clear guidance, decision frameworks and organisational support to exercise professional judgement with confidence.

Leadership culture is critical. Staff must know that reasonable decisions made in good faith will be supported, particularly in complex or high-pressure environments.

Frontline capability must be treated as essential infrastructure. Without it, even well-designed systems will fail at the point of delivery.

Case study 05 · Service

NewGen Matrix

Building a More Connected Emergency Care System

For two decades, the NSW Ambulance Patient Allocation Matrix has guided paramedics in determining the most clinically appropriate destination for patients based on their condition and location. As demand on emergency departments continued to grow, NSW Health identified an opportunity to modernise the system to better support patient flow, expand statewide coverage and provide clinicians with richer, real-time information.

The result is the NewGen Matrix, a major upgrade that transforms the original allocation tool into a more connected, system-wide capability. By equipping paramedics with enhanced clinical information and real-time visibility of hospital conditions, the NewGen Matrix helps ensure patients are transported to the right location, at the right time, for the right care. In doing so, it supports more equitable patient distribution across the health system, improves operational efficiency and helps reduce pressure on busy emergency departments.

A key innovation is the improved flow of information between ambulance services and hospitals. The platform provides emergency department clinicians with advance visibility of a patient’s condition before arrival, enabling earlier clinical decision making, more effective resource allocation and greater continuity of care. At the same time, paramedics have access to enhanced operational information, including emergency department delays and broader destination options, allowing them to make more informed transport decisions in real time.

The project is being delivered in phases to support progressive transformation across the state. The first phase, implemented in 2025, extended the system into rural and regional NSW while introducing enhanced visibility for emergency department clinicians. A second phase, expected in late 2026, will deliver further system-wide enhancements to strengthen patient flow across NSW.

More broadly, the NewGen Matrix demonstrates how digital platforms can strengthen coordination across complex service systems. Rather than improving a single part of the patient journey, it connects ambulance services and hospitals through shared information, enabling better decisions across the health system and supporting more responsive, integrated care for patients across NSW.

Download case study PDF

Case study 06 · Service

Gateway to Innovate

Unlocking Productivity: A New Model for Infrastructure Innovation

Australia’s infrastructure sector is under increasing pressure to deliver more with less. Workforce shortages, rising project complexity and declining productivity have challenged governments and industry alike to find new ways of working. While innovative ideas are often developed on project sites, they can be difficult to test, validate and scale across the broader system.

To address this challenge, Transport for NSW established the Gateway to Innovate (GtI) program in 2024. The objective was clear: create a structured pathway for industry to trial new technologies, tools and processes on live projects, accelerating innovation while delivering measurable productivity improvements. Rather than innovation occurring in isolation, GtI sought to connect new ideas directly to project delivery and create opportunities for successful solutions to be adopted at scale.

As Australia’s first program of its kind, Gateway to Innovate brought together Transport for NSW, contractors, suppliers and innovators within a shared-risk environment that encouraged experimentation and learning. They were challenged to identify practical innovations that could improve productivity, efficiency and safety across the infrastructure lifecycle. The response was significant, with more than 3,000 industry participants engaged and 66 applications submitted despite no direct funding being offered for trials.

Three innovations were selected and tested on live Transport projects. FatigueTech (Ethos Health) used real-time fatigue monitoring and automated compliance processes to improve workforce productivity and safety. ClaRFI (Aurecon) applied artificial intelligence to streamline Requests for Information, demonstrating potential savings of more than 1,100 hours and $100,000 across a project lifecycle. Intellitag® (Altus Traffic Group) replaced routine site inspections with digital monitoring, avoiding 125 vehicle trips and more than 1,600 kilometres of travel during the trial while improving safety and compliance outcomes.

The program results demonstrated that relatively targeted innovations can deliver substantial benefits in complex infrastructure environments. More broadly, the program shifted how innovation is approached across the sector. It strengthened collaboration between Transport and industry, created visibility for promising ideas already emerging within projects, and established innovation as a practical, supported activity rather than an ad hoc exercise.

Beyond the technologies themselves, Gateway to Innovate highlights the importance of leadership, culture and governance in driving productivity improvement. By creating a safe environment to test ideas and learn from experience, the program has shown how governments can reduce barriers to innovation while maintaining accountability and oversight.

As the program evolves, the focus will be on expanding participation and creating continuous pathways for testing and scaling innovation. In doing so, Gateway to Innovate offers a model for how governments can unlock productivity, strengthen partnerships and accelerate the adoption of new ideas across the infrastructure sector.

Download case study PDF

Case study 07 · Service

School Experience Program

From Policy to Practice: Building Stronger Connections Between Support Staff and Schools

The NSW Department of Education is Australia’s largest public education provider, supporting more than 2,200 schools, 775,000 students and over 128,000 teachers and school-based staff. Yet for many of the department’s 8,000-plus Education support staff, their understanding of school operations was often limited to their own experiences as students.

In 2023, Secretary Murat Dizdar launched the School Experience Program to bridge this gap. The objective was simple but powerful: ensure Education support staff develop a firsthand understanding of how schools operate and the realities faced by teachers, principals and school-based teams. By strengthening this connection to the classroom, the department aimed to improve collaboration, build empathy and ensure corporate functions remain closely aligned to the needs of schools.

The program provides new Education support staff with a week-long placement in NSW public schools early in their employment. Participants observe teaching and learning, school administration, leadership activities, assemblies and co-curricular programs, gaining direct insight into the complexities of school operations. Building on the program’s success, the department expanded the initiative to include one-day team visits for existing staff, executive school visits and opportunities to support major arts and sporting events.

The approach reflects a broader commitment to breaking down organisational silos and creating stronger links between policy, administration and frontline service delivery. Teams are encouraged to visit schools that align with their work and, where possible, experience regional, rural and remote settings to better understand the diversity of educational contexts across NSW.

The impact has been significant. Since launching in July 2023, more than 1,700 Education support staff have participated in the program, including over 700 new employees and more than 200 team visits. Feedback consistently demonstrates stronger understanding of school operations and greater appreciation of the challenges faced by school-based staff. Among new starters, 93 per cent reported a stronger understanding of the operating rhythms and complexities of schools, while 95 per cent said they would participate again. Team visits have also been highly valued, with all participating teams reporting that the experience reinforced the value and purpose of their work.

Beyond individual learning, the School Experience Program is helping build a more connected and responsive education system. By giving support staff direct exposure to the environments they serve, the initiative strengthens the department’s ability to design policies, programs and services that are grounded in the realities of schools.

As the program continues to expand, it offers a model for how large public sector organisations can strengthen understanding between frontline and corporate functions. In doing so, it is building a culture where decisions are informed not only by policy expertise, but also by lived experience of service delivery.

Download case study PDF

Notes

Please refer to Case Study: Service NSW in this section. ↩
Please refer to Case Study: Homes NSW in this section. ↩
Please refer to Case Study: NSW Housing Pattern Book in this section. ↩
Please refer to Case Study: SharkSmart Program in this section. ↩
Please refer to Case Study: NewGen Matrix in this section. ↩
Please refer to Case Study: Gateway to Innovate in this section. ↩
Please refer to Case Study: School Experience Program in this section. ↩

Pillar 02

Skills

A capable public service does not happen by default. It is built through the capabilities a system chooses to value, strengthen and protect.

Skills at a glance

The capability of the public sector workforce remains one of the strongest determinants of government performance.

Key themes explored in this chapter include:

The importance of renewing core public administration capabilities, including policy development, regulation and stewardship.
The role of democratic literacy in strengthening professional identity and public sector effectiveness.
The need to preserve institutional knowledge, professional standards and organisational memory.
The growing importance of digital, data and artificial intelligence capability across all workforce cohorts.
The complementary roles of specialist and generalist expertise in addressing increasingly complex challenges.
The importance of leadership capability, workforce development and knowledge transfer in sustaining long-term performance.
The challenge of balancing permanent capability with the strategic use of contingent workforces.

Central challengeHow can the NSW public sector attract, develop and retain the capabilities required for effective government in a rapidly changing environment?

The recommendations that follow focus on workforce capability, professional development, leadership, institutional knowledge and future workforce readiness.

Skills: Key recommendations

Rebuild policy and professional craft

System leaders

Invest in internal policy and regulatory capability as a strategic priority.
Reduce over-reliance on external providers for core policy judgement.

Managers

Create space for deeper policy thinking alongside delivery pressures.
Connect policy teams with frontline experience.

Individuals

Strengthen your ability to frame problems, test assumptions and evaluate options.
Seek exposure to both policy design and implementation.

Develop socio-technical capability

System leaders

Ensure digital, data and AI capability is embedded across the workforce.
Establish clear accountability for technology-enabled decisions.

Managers

Build multidisciplinary teams that include policy, technical and ethical expertise.
Encourage critical engagement with data and algorithmic outputs.

Individuals

Develop working literacy in data, technology and AI.
Question outputs and understand their limitations before acting on them.

Protect and transfer institutional knowledge

System leaders

Treat institutional knowledge as a strategic asset.
Invest in structured mentoring, handovers and knowledge systems.

Managers

Pair experienced staff with emerging leaders.
Capture lessons from major projects and decisions.

Individuals

Share insights and lessons learned with peers.
Actively seek out institutional context, not just immediate information.

Expand capability across the full workforce

System leaders

Extend capability development to all staff, including contingent and non-permanent workers.
Broaden access to leadership and policy development pathways.

Managers

Include all team members in capability development, regardless of employment type.
Provide feedback and development opportunities consistently.

Individuals

Take ownership of your development, regardless of role or contract type.
Build capability that is transferable across roles and contexts.

Introduction

A capable public service does not happen by default. It is built through the capabilities a system chooses to value, strengthen and protect.

For the NSW public sector, that choice is now urgent. Government is operating in an environment that is more complex, more technologically mediated and more demanding than before. Simultaneously, some of the capabilities that underpin sound public administration are weakening. Policy craft has thinned in places. Institutional knowledge is leaving with experienced staff. Technology is advancing faster than the sector’s ability to interrogate, govern and use it well.

If this continues, the sector risks becoming quicker at delivery but weaker in judgement. More digitally enabled, but less grounded in the disciplines that make government effective.

Capability is therefore emerging as a defining constraint on long-term performance. Not because the workforce lacks talent, but because the system has not been sufficiently deliberate about what capabilities it builds, how it builds them and who it builds them in.

Three layers of capability matter most:

Technical and professional capability, including policy design, regulation, digital capability and institutional knowledge
Human and relational capability, including judgement, trust, collaboration and cultural understanding
Leadership and stewardship capability, including the choices leaders make to build, transfer and protect capability over time

These layers are interdependent. Technical expertise without judgement produces brittle decisions. Relational skill without craft leads to good intentions with weak execution. Leadership without stewardship allows capability to erode quietly until the system is forced to relearn old lessons at high cost.

Rebuilding capability requires action across three dimensions.

Rebuild core disciplines Policy, regulation and institutional knowledge must be treated as strategic assets, not residual capabilities.
Develop socio-technical capability Public servants must be able to work across policy, technology, ethics and data, rather than within isolated domains.
Expand access to capability Capability development must extend beyond traditional cohorts to include frontline workers, regional staff and the contingent workforce.

Without this shift, the sector risks becoming more operationally efficient but less intellectually capable. The challenge is not that capability disappears, but that it becomes uneven, fragmented and insufficient for the demands ahead.

Explore the themes

Technical and Professional Capability

The first layer of capability is the craft of public administration.

Government depends on specialised disciplines such as policy design, regulatory judgement, digital and data capability, and the institutional knowledge that enables the system to learn rather than repeat itself. When these disciplines are strong, government can respond to complexity with confidence. When they weaken, decision-making becomes reactive and reform becomes fragile.

In recent years, effort has tilted toward delivery, crisis response and operational execution. Much of that shift was necessary. However, it has also crowded out the disciplines that enable government to design effectively, regulate consistently and learn over time.

That drift now needs to be reversed. Rebuilding these disciplines is not a technical exercise. It is a precondition for an effective and resilient public service.

Reclaiming Policy and Regulatory Craftsmanship

Policy capability sits at the centre of effective government. It is how public priorities are translated into workable interventions. Over time, however, policy craft has lost ground to the pressures of delivery. Fast implementation cycles, crisis response and operational demands have reduced the space for deep policy design and regulatory thinking.

The risk is cumulative. Weak policy capability does not always fail loudly. It emerges through poorly framed problems, limited options, predictable unintended consequences and reforms that do not endure. This matters even more in an environment shaped by emerging technology, complex markets and rising public expectations.

Effective policy work extends beyond analysis. It requires judgement across finance, law, technology, operations and community impact. Strong practitioners can work across these domains, connecting strategic intent with implementation reality. They also recognise that the policy process itself creates value by building legitimacy, alignment and shared understanding.

The same applies to regulation. Effective regulation anticipates behaviour, responds to evolving risks and adapts as markets change. When it is weak, the consequences are rarely immediate. Instead, they appear over time through loopholes, friction or perverse incentives that are difficult to correct.

The NSW public sector must restore policy and regulatory craftsmanship as a core professional discipline. This requires stronger capability pathways, closer integration between policy and frontline delivery, and a renewed recognition that policy design is not administrative process, but a primary instrument of government effectiveness.

Capability must be built through practice, not training alone. Real-time learning from implementation should be treated as a core component of policy development, not a secondary activity.

Future-fit Digital, Data and AI Capability

Related case study: NSW EduChat ↓⁹

Technology is reshaping how government understands problems, delivers services and manages risk. Digital, data and AI capability can no longer sit at the edge of the system within specialist teams. These capabilities are now foundational to public administration.

However, technical capability alone is not sufficient. Public servants must be able to interrogate technology-enabled advice rather than absorb it uncritically.

Algorithms can generate insight at scale. They can also embed bias, strip out context and produce outputs that appear authoritative without being well understood. Responsible use therefore depends on sceptical intelligence: the ability to question assumptions, test outputs and interpret data in context. This must sit alongside baseline digital and data literacy across the workforce.

The objective is not to turn public servants into technologists. It is to ensure they can work confidently with technology while retaining professional judgement. Digital and data literacy must become standard across roles, supported by practical training embedded in real work.

Accountability remains unchanged. Leaders are responsible for decisions, regardless of how those decisions are informed. Technology can support judgement, but it cannot substitute for it.

There are also implications for workforce development. Entry-level roles are changing as routine tasks are automated. If these roles diminish, so too does the training ground for future leaders. Capability pathways must therefore be redesigned deliberately so early-career public servants continue to develop judgement, context and professional craft.

Without this balance, the sector risks becoming more automated but less accountable.

Institutional Knowledge and Professional Standards

Capability depends not only on skills, but on memory. Public institutions accumulate knowledge through experience: what has been tried, what failed, what worked and how systems behave under pressure. When that knowledge is lost, the organisation pays twice. It loses judgement in the present and repeats mistakes from the past.

This risk is increasing. Workforce mobility is higher; recruitment patterns are shifting and reliance on external expertise has grown. External input can be valuable, but when critical capability sits outside the institution, the public service loses the context and continuity that enable informed judgement over time.

The next leadership transition will sharpen this risk. As senior cohorts retire, accumulated knowledge may leave faster than it is transferred. This cannot be left to chance. It requires deliberate effort to capture, share and treat institutional knowledge as a strategic asset.

This also requires a clearer distinction between explicit and tacit knowledge. Explicit knowledge can be documented through records, handover notes, decision logs, project reviews, policy histories and communities of practice. Tacit knowledge is harder to capture because it sits in judgement, relationships, pattern recognition and lived experience. It is often passed on through exposure, mentoring, shadowing, structured reflection and working alongside experienced practitioners on real problems.

Practical measures therefore need to go beyond documentation. Strong induction, mentoring, sponsorship, purposeful mobility and structured handovers all contribute to knowledge transfer. Alumni networks can also play a role by maintaining connections and preserving access to experience beyond formal employment.

Institutional memory is not nostalgia. It is operational strength.

Its loss is not simply a workforce issue. It is a system risk that affects decision quality, policy continuity and organisational learning.

Democratic Literacy and Induction

Public administration rests on democratic foundations that cannot be assumed. A growing risk for modern public services is weak civic understanding, both in the community and, at times, within the workforce itself. Confusion about the role of public servants, the relationship between ministers and departments, and the obligations of impartial administration can erode trust in institutions. This makes democratic literacy a core professional requirement, particularly for new entrants.

A sector-wide induction should provide staff with a clear grounding in the parliamentary accountability and the ethical obligations that shape public decision-making. This learning should go beyond compliance modules. Scenario-based discussion, case studies and engagement with experienced practitioners are more likely to build judgement in practice.

A shared curriculum would also support mobility across agencies and reinforce a stronger professional identity across the sector.

Democratic literacy is not peripheral knowledge. It is a core requirement of a public service career and should be treated as such across all levels of the workforce.

Case study 08 · Skills

Expert Advisory Network

Connecting Expertise Across Government

Governments are increasingly required to solve complex policy and delivery challenges that cut across portfolios and disciplines. At the same time, agencies often duplicate capability or rely heavily on external consultants despite significant expertise already existing within government.

The NSW Premier’s Department established the Expert Advisory Network (EAN) in 2025 to create a more connected model of capability sharing across the public sector.

The EAN operates as a ‘front door’ to more than 50 specialist teams across government, enabling agencies to access expertise in areas including policy, service design, evaluation, stakeholder engagement, technology, environmental services and data analytics.

Rather than building standalone capability within each agency, the EAN enables expertise to be shared and applied across the system through strategic advice, project delivery, peer review and capability uplift.

A core principle underpinning the EAN is that public sector expertise carries institutional knowledge and contextual understanding that external providers often cannot replicate. The model strengthens collaboration between agencies while reinforcing and growing capability from within.

One example is the Office of the Children’s Guardian’s review of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012.

Through the EAN, the Office partnered with expert teams from the Department of Customer Service and Multicultural NSW to strengthen community consultation through:

survey design
digital engagement
translation and culturally diverse community outreach
promotion and communications
data analytics and insights.

For a smaller agency, the EAN provided access to capabilities and platforms that would otherwise have been difficult to assemble at scale. The process also strengthened relationships, enabled knowledge transfer and built internal capability.

The EAN demonstrates a different model of capability development within government, one that treats expertise as a shared system asset rather than something confined within agencies.

This approach supports:

stronger collaboration and knowledge sharing
improved access to specialist expertise
reduced duplication of capability investment
greater retention and circulation of institutional knowledge.

As policy challenges become more interconnected, models such as the EAN demonstrate how governments can strengthen internal capability while building a more integrated and adaptive public sector system

Download case study PDF

Case study 09 · Skills

NSW EduChat

Co-Designing AI for Safe, Ethical and Scalable Learning

The rapid emergence of generative artificial intelligence in late 2022 presented a significant challenge for education systems worldwide. Students gained instant access to tools capable of generating text and answers in seconds, raising concerns around academic integrity, critical thinking and safe use. While many jurisdictions responded by restricting access, the NSW Department of Education took a different approach: exploring how AI could be harnessed safely, ethically and in ways that support learning outcomes.

The objective was not simply to manage risk, but to create a purpose-built AI platform aligned to the values and requirements of NSW Public Education. This required a multidisciplinary effort bringing together technology specialists, educators, legal experts, privacy professionals and policy teams to design a system with security, transparency and human oversight embedded from the outset.

The result was NSW EduChat, a department-governed generative AI platform developed specifically for NSW schools and education staff. Designed through extensive co-design and testing, the platform supports teaching, learning and school operations while maintaining strict safeguards around privacy and responsible use. Rather than acting as a shortcut to answers, EduChat’s student mode incorporates Socratic questioning techniques that encourage students to explain their reasoning, test ideas and deepen their understanding.

The platform was refined through an almost two-year trial involving teachers, students and support staff. This iterative process generated valuable insights not only into the technology itself, but also into the organisational capabilities required to adopt AI successfully. Feedback informed ongoing enhancements to the platform and shaped targeted professional learning programs to build AI literacy and confidence across the workforce.

The impact extends well beyond education. NSW EduChat demonstrates that innovation and strong governance are not competing priorities. By bringing together technical, legal, privacy and educational expertise, the Department established a model for responsible AI adoption that balances innovation with public trust. Early evaluations found that 74.7 per cent of users reported time savings when completing administrative and routine tasks, allowing greater focus on higher-value activities. Common benefits included improved quality of work, increased efficiency and more time for teaching and learning.

Beyond productivity gains, NSW EduChat provides a blueprint for how government can adopt emerging technologies responsibly. It shows that human-centered design, ethical guardrails and continuous oversight can enable innovation at scale while protecting the interests of users and maintaining confidence in public institutions.

Download case study PDF

Human and Relational Capability

Technical capability alone does not produce effective government. Public decisions succeed only when they are understood, trusted and workable in the communities they affect.

This second layer of capability is relational. It includes judgement, communication, collaboration and cultural understanding. These are not soft skills sitting beside the real work. They are how public work holds together in practice.

As government becomes more digital and data-enabled, these capabilities matter more, not less. Technology can increase scale and speed. It cannot replace judgement, empathy or the ability to navigate disagreement. If the public service neglects these capabilities, it may become more efficient while becoming less trusted.

Human-centred Practice and Ethical Judgement

As routine tasks are automated, the distinctly human elements of public work¹⁰ become more important.

Public servants are required to make decisions where stakes are high, information is incomplete and the right course of action is often unclear. This involves interpreting ambiguity, balancing competing interests and recognising when an apparently neat output should not be accepted at face value.

Ethical competence therefore cannot be treated as rule compliance alone. It is an active professional discipline, requiring judgement, courage and the willingness to question assumptions when something does not sit right.

Human-centred practice strengthens this discipline. Public servants must remain attentive to the lived experience of people interacting with government, often in moments of stress, vulnerability or uncertainty. This perspective helps ground decisions in real-world impact, not just procedural correctness.

These capabilities increasingly sit at the intersection of disciplines. Effective practice requires public servants to operate across policy, technology, ethics and community contexts, integrating technical insight with human judgement.

They will not be built through values statements alone. Recruitment, development and performance systems must reinforce practical ethical reasoning through case-based learning, peer discussion and leadership modelling.

The standard should be demanding: a workforce able to move with speed without losing moral clarity.

Collaboration across Portfolios and Sectors

Collaboration is not new. It is newly critical. Without it, complex problems will continue to be addressed through fragmented responses.

Many of government’s most significant challenges do not sit neatly within organisational boundaries. Addressing them requires public servants who can work beyond formal structures, integrate perspectives and navigate competing priorities. Collaboration is therefore not just a structural issue. It is a core professional capability.

Effective collaboration begins with how individuals think and operate. Systems thinking enables public servants to understand how different parts of government interact and where interventions will have the greatest impact. Curiosity supports engagement with unfamiliar domains, while the ability to translate across disciplines helps bridge differences in language, priorities and expertise.

Influence is equally important. In cross-portfolio environments, authority is often distributed. Progress depends on the ability to build alignment, negotiate trade-offs and maintain momentum without relying on formal hierarchy. This requires strong communication, emotional intelligence and the confidence to engage constructively with diverse stakeholders.

Collaboration also depends on judgement. Public servants must balance competing objectives, manage ambiguity and decide when to escalate, adapt or persist. These are not procedural tasks. They rely on experience, perspective and professional confidence.

These capabilities must be developed deliberately. Exposure to cross-agency work, multidisciplinary teams and complex problem-solving should be a routine part of professional development. Leaders play a critical role in modelling collaborative behaviour, reinforcing shared purpose and creating environments where constructive challenge is welcomed.

Without these capabilities, structural efforts to promote collaboration will have limited effect. The priority for the sector is to build a workforce that can operate effectively across boundaries, not just within them.

Cultural Intelligence and Cross-community Competence

Public services now operate in a more diverse and complex social environment. Understanding the communities that government serves, is therefore a core professional capability.

The NSW Capability Framework already recognises this through its inclusion of cultural capability as a foundational expectation of the workforce. This provides a strong starting point. The task now is to ensure this capability is consistently developed and applied in practice, rather than remaining an articulated standard. When embedded effectively, cultural capability does more than improve service interactions. It contributes to social cohesion by enabling government to engage with communities in ways that are inclusive, respectful and responsive to diverse experiences.

Cultural intelligence helps public servants engage across differences. It improves the quality of engagement, strengthens relationships and supports more informed decision-making.

This is especially important in frontline services, where interactions frequently occur when people are under pressure. In these settings, technical knowledge is not enough. Effective engagement depends on empathy, communication and the ability to build trust quickly.

Cultural competence should be embedded through recruitment, mobility and everyday professional practice, not treated as a niche specialism. Secondments, community engagement and place-based work can widen perspective and improve judgement.

When cultural intelligence is consistently practised, not just defined, it becomes part of mainstream professional identity. This is what enables the public service to design and deliver services that work for more people, while strengthening the social fabric it serves.

Communication, Influence and Constructive Challenge

Much of government operates through influence rather than formal authority.

Public servants must communicate clearly with ministers, stakeholders and communities while operating under scrutiny and in complex environments. This takes more than technical clarity. It requires emotional intelligence, active listening and the ability to adapt a message without losing substance.

It also demands constructive challenge. Healthy institutions improve through informed disagreement. Decisions are stronger when competing views are surfaced early, before positions harden. Too often, however, this is muted, particularly in hierarchical settings or where communication is increasingly mediated through digital channels.

This capability must be practised, not presumed. Staff should have opportunities to observe experienced practitioners, participate in difficult conversations and receive clear feedback. Leaders must create environments where raising concerns is both safe and expected.

A public service that cannot challenge itself will eventually be challenged by its circumstances.

Case study 10 · Skills

Climate Change Preparedness

Building Capability for a Climate Risk Ready NSW Public Sector

Climate Change is no longer a future policy challenge. It is a present-day risk affecting government assets, services, infrastructure and financial decision-making. With the introduction of mandatory climate-related financial disclosures, NSW Government agencies faced a significant capability challenge. Levels of preparedness varied across the sector, creating risks for consistent implementation and decision-making.

To address this, the NSW Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) established a whole-of-government approach to build climate preparedness and embed climate risk management into everyday business. Through the Climate Preparedness Team and the Climate Change Risk Officer (CCRO) Network, DCCEEW combined central expertise with embedded support across agencies.

Working with key partners and government entities, DCCEEW developed common tools, guidance and learning pathways. A cross-government working group ensured the approach reflected the practical realities of implementation across portfolios.

At the same time, Climate Change Risk Officers were embedded across government portfolios through a hub-and-spoke model. These officers worked with agencies to integrate climate risk into governance, investment decisions, risk registers and business planning, while remaining connected to a central advisory function. This balanced consistency across government with flexibility for individual agency needs.

The impact has been significant. The CCRO network has engaged 121 government entities and delivered more than 600 tailored workshops to over 1,200 staff, including 162 senior executives. As a result, 88 per cent of participating entities have identified and articulated their Climate Change risks, while climate risk considerations have been embedded into governance and enterprise risk management frameworks across portfolios.

The program has strengthened agency capability in climate-risk management. Agencies receiving tailored coaching produced more complete and higher-quality disclosures, while shared learning across preparers, auditors and portfolio experts improved consistency and confidence across the sector. Agencies increasingly view climate risk management not simply as a compliance obligation, but as a strategic capability that supports better decisions and greater resilience.

Beyond these outcomes, the initiative has created enduring capability. It has established a trusted network of climate risk practitioners, strengthened collaboration across government and built institutional knowledge that will support future reforms. The model demonstrates how coordinated capability building can drive system-wide change and strengthen the resilience of government services for the communities they serve.

Download case study PDF

Leadership and Stewardship Capability

Capability does not sustain itself. It compounds when leaders build it deliberately and it erodes when they do not. That makes leadership a decisive factor in the future strength of the NSW public sector.

Leadership is not only about delivering current priorities. It is about leaving the institution stronger than it was found. That is the work of stewardship.

Redefining Public Sector Leadership

Public sector leadership roles have become more complex, more exposed and more demanding.

Executives now operate under intense scrutiny, rising stakeholder expectations and increasingly volatile policy conditions. The demands of the role have expanded, but the systems that support leaders have not always kept pace. When leadership becomes harder to sustain, the pipeline weakens. Over time, this becomes a capability risk for the entire system.

Leadership pathways must therefore broaden. Capability cannot remain concentrated within traditional cohorts or career trajectories. Without this shift, the system risks reinforcing its own limitations.

Strengthening leadership requires more than development programs. It requires clearer recognition of the complexity of leadership work and stronger institutional support for those undertaking it.

Modern public leaders must act as system stewards. They need to navigate complexity, align organisational effort with government priorities and maintain trust across competing interests. Situational intelligence is central to this role: the ability to read the environment, anticipate risk and make sound decisions under pressure.

Stewardship, Resilience and Adaptability in Leaders

Sustaining strong public institutions over time depends on the quality of leaders and stewardship. This requires leaders to operate across two-time horizons simultaneously: responding to immediate pressures while strengthening the system for the future.

This tension is now a defining feature of public sector leadership. Political cycles are short, public expectations are immediate and scrutiny is constant. Yet many of the challenges government must address unfold over years or decades.

Resilience is therefore a core leadership capability. It is the ability to maintain judgement, uphold standards and sustain focus in the face of pressure, ambiguity and competing demands. It requires composure, discipline and clarity of purpose.

Adaptability complements this. Leaders must be able to learn from experience, adjust course as conditions change and encourage constructive challenge within their teams.

Stewardship brings these capabilities together. It involves investing in people, reinforcing professional standards and making decisions that support long-term capability, even when short-term pressures suggest otherwise.

These capabilities must be developed deliberately. Exposure to complex environments, opportunities to lead through uncertainty and structured reflection are critical to building leadership depth.

There is also a clear link between wellbeing and performance. Leaders who are able to sustain their own effectiveness, and support the wellbeing of their teams, are better positioned to maintain judgement, resilience and long-term focus.

Without strong stewardship, institutions risk gradual erosion through reactive decision-making and underinvestment in capability. With it, they can adapt to changing conditions while maintaining integrity and effectiveness.

Specialists versus Generalists

The relationship between specialist and generalist capability has long been a recurring feature of public sector workforce debates. At different points in time, the balance has shifted in response to changing priorities, operating environments and reform agendas. Periods of complexity and technical change often increase demand for specialist expertise, while periods requiring coordination and system-wide leadership tend to elevate the value of generalist capability.

The future public sector will require both.

Generalists bring the ability to work across boundaries, connect disparate issues, navigate complexity and align competing priorities. Specialists contribute deep expertise, professional judgement and technical credibility in areas such as policy, regulation, service delivery, data, technology and finance.

Neither capability is inherently superior. Their value depends on context and on how effectively they are combined. Complex policy and service challenges increasingly require multidisciplinary teams that draw on both deep expertise and broad system perspectives.

Leadership pathways should therefore avoid presenting breadth and depth as competing alternatives. Strong leaders often develop both over the course of their careers. Some begin with specialist expertise and broaden into enterprise leadership. Others develop broad experience before building deeper knowledge in particular domains. What matters is that leadership capability is supported by sufficient professional grounding and an understanding of how different forms of expertise contribute to public value.

The challenge for the NSW public sector is not to choose between specialists and generalists, but to build a workforce and leadership pipeline that values both and creates opportunities for them to work together effectively.

Contingent Workforce

The balance between permanent and contingent workforces has long shifted in response to changing government priorities, fiscal pressures and capability needs. In recent years, governments have increasingly relied on contractors, consultants and other contingent staff to provide specialist expertise, surge capacity and support for major programs. More recently, attention has turned towards rebuilding internal capability and reducing reliance on external resources where critical expertise can be developed and retained within the public sector.

Both approaches have merit. Contingent workforces can provide flexibility, specialised skills and rapid access to expertise that may not be readily available internally. However, sustained reliance on external capability can create risks if critical knowledge, relationships and decision-making expertise become concentrated outside public institutions.

This creates a broader workforce challenge. The objective is not simply to increase or decrease the use of contingent labour, but to ensure the balance supports long-term capability, institutional memory and effective service delivery.

Where contingent staff are engaged, they should be integrated into the professional environment of the public sector. Induction, capability development and professional expectations should extend to these cohorts where appropriate. This includes grounding them in the values, obligations and operating context of the public service, not just the tasks they are engaged to perform.

There are also implications for capability retention. When critical knowledge sits with contingent staff, it may not be transferred into the organisation. Over time, this can weaken institutional memory and reduce the system’s ability to learn and adapt.

A more deliberate approach is therefore required. This includes:

using contingent expertise strategically to complement, rather than substitute for, core capability
ensuring knowledge transfer is built into engagements
integrating contingent staff into team-based learning and development where appropriate
applying consistent professional and ethical standards across all workforce cohorts

The long-term objective should be a workforce model that combines flexibility with institutional capability, ensuring external expertise strengthens rather than diminishes the public sector’s capacity to deliver for the community.

Leading Augmented and Multidisciplinary Teams

Technology will continue to change how teams operate. Increasingly, leaders will manage environments in which human expertise is supported by digital tools and automated systems. This can improve performance, but it also introduces new risks around accountability, transparency and over-reliance on outputs that appear more certain than they are.

Responsibility must remain with people. Leaders require sufficient digital fluency to ask informed questions, interrogate outputs and ensure that human judgement remains central to decision-making.

In addition, public sector teams are becoming more multidisciplinary. Policy, service delivery, regulation and data expertise are increasingly brought together to address complex problems. Leadership in these environments depends on translation. Leaders must bridge different professional languages, align distinct forms of expertise and maintain focus on a shared purpose.

Effective teams will increasingly include policy experts, technologists, ethicists, behavioural scientists and privacy specialists. The challenge for leaders is not only to assemble this expertise, but to integrate it. This requires creating conditions where diverse perspectives are actively used, tensions are surfaced constructively and decisions reflect both technical insight and public value.

Leading augmented and multidisciplinary teams is therefore not a technical adjustment. It is a core leadership capability for a more complex operating environment.

People Leadership and Capability in Hybrid Work

Hybrid work has improved flexibility, but it has also changed how capability is developed.

In more office-based settings, much professional learning occurred informally through observation, proximity and conversation. In hybrid environments, these moments are less automatic. This requires a more deliberate approach. Coaching, mentoring and feedback can no longer be incidental. They must be designed into the work.

Leaders play a critical role in this shift. They must create structured opportunities for learning, ensure visibility of work and provide timely, actionable feedback. Without this, capability development becomes uneven and dependent on individual initiative.

Emerging leaders should be given exposure to complex decisions, demanding projects and direct feedback. Knowledge transfer must also be more structured, supported through mentoring, communities of practice and disciplined handovers.

Flexibility should strengthen workforce sustainability, not come at the expense of leadership depth. The task is to ensure that new ways of working continue to build capability as effectively as they enable flexibility.

Inclusive Leadership

Inclusive leadership improves institutional performance by broadening the range of insight that informs decisions. Inclusion is not only about who is present. It is about who is heard, who can challenge and who is able to shape outcomes.

Leaders set the conditions for this through the environments they create. Psychological safety, respectful debate and transparent decision-making are essential to enabling genuine inclusion in practice.

Diverse perspectives can improve policy development, strengthen program design, enhance problem-solving and help public institutions better understand the communities they serve. In complex and rapidly changing environments, drawing on a wider range of experiences and viewpoints can reduce blind spots and improve the quality of decisions.

Recruitment, promotion, retention and employee experience data remain important measures of organisational inclusion. However, they should be understood as indicators rather than end goals. Inclusion becomes real when it moves from aspiration to impact. It must be reflected not only in workforce composition, but in the quality of decisions, the design of services and the public value institutions create.

Continuous Learning and Professional Development

Capability cannot be built through periodic training alone. It must be reinforced in the flow of work.

Formal learning remains important for establishing shared language and foundational knowledge. However, development becomes meaningful when learning is applied through live projects, mentoring, reflection and feedback.

Consistency is also critical. Shared standards, tools and expectations make it easier to build capability across agencies, rather than in isolated pockets.

Learning should be embedded in real work and assessed through outcomes. The measure of capability is not participation in training, but the quality of decisions and delivery it enables.

Capability Requirements for 2035

Source note¹²

1. Technical and Professional Capability

The craft of public administration

Policy and regulatory designFrame problems, design viable options and anticipate consequences
Digital, data and AI literacyInterrogate outputs, understand risks and apply technology responsibly
Socio-technical integrationWork across policy, technology, ethics and data
Institutional knowledgeRetain, transfer and apply system memory
Democratic literacyUnderstand governance, accountability and professional obligations
Adaptive system designTest, learn, scale and adjust based on evidence

2. Human and Relational Capability

How public servants think, engage and decide

Judgement and ethical reasoningMake decisions under uncertainty and challenge assumptions
Human-centred practiceApply lived experience to policy and service design
Collaboration and systems thinkingWork across boundaries and integrate perspectives
Communication and influenceExplain decisions, engage stakeholders and enable constructive challenge
Cultural capability and inclusionEngage diverse communities and contribute to inclusive environments
Trust-building behaviourDemonstrate professionalism, consistency and credibility

3. Leadership and Stewardship Capability

How the system is sustained over time

System stewardshipBalance short-term delivery with long-term system health
Leadership in complexityNavigate ambiguity, risk and competing demands
Capability buildingDevelop, transfer and retain workforce capability
Leading multidisciplinary and augmented teamsIntegrate diverse expertise and maintain human accountability
Cross-system alignmentDrive collaboration across agencies and shared outcomes
Workforce design and inclusionBroaden pathways and integrate contingent workforce
Resilience and adaptabilitySustain performance and adjust to changing conditions
Public communication and legitimacyBuild trust through clear, visible leadership

Notes

Please refer to Case Study: Expert Advisory Network in this section. ↩
Please refer to Case Study: NSW EduChat in this section. ↩
Milburn, Josh and Declan Gaffney, The Relational Public Service Can Tackle Hardship in Neighbourhoods, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2024. https://www.jrf.org.uk/neighbourhoods-and-communities/relational-public-service-can-tackle-hardship-in-neighbourhoods (opens in a new tab) ↩
Please refer to Case Study: Climate Change Preparedness in this section. ↩
21st Century Public Servant, Challenges Facing the Public Sector: Literature Review, University of Birmingham, 2023. ↩

Pillar 03

System

The performance of government is inseparable from the strength of the system that underpins it — institutions, governance, professional norms and stewardship.

System at a glance

The strength of the NSW public sector depends on institutions that are trusted, adaptable and capable of supporting effective democratic government.

Key themes explored in this chapter include:

The importance of democratic stewardship and maintaining the conditions for frank and fearless advice.
The need to sustain public trust and institutional legitimacy in an environment of heightened scrutiny and rising expectations.
The growing complexity of policy challenges that cut across agency, portfolio and sector boundaries.
The limitations of governance, funding and accountability structures designed for more siloed ways of working.
The role of collaboration, place-based approaches and shared outcomes in addressing complex challenges.
The opportunities and governance risks created by artificial intelligence and emerging technologies.

Central challengeHow can the NSW public sector remain trusted, legitimate and effective while adapting to increasing complexity, scrutiny and technological change?

The recommendations that follow focus on strengthening institutional resilience, democratic governance, cross-sector collaboration and public confidence.

System: Key recommendations

Make stewardship an active responsibility

System leaders

Define what stewardship means in your context and make it a performance expectation.
Protect the conditions for frank and evidence-based advice, particularly under pressure.

Managers

Create environments where risks, trade-offs and long-term implications are openly discussed.
Reinforce professional standards through everyday decisions, not formal statements.

Individuals

Present evidence and risks clearly, even when it is uncomfortable.
Maintain professional independence while supporting government priorities.

Align systems to shared outcomes

System leaders

Shift funding, governance and accountability toward cross-agency outcomes.
Remove structural barriers that reinforce siloed behaviour.

Managers

Build relationships across agencies and portfolios.
Align team objectives with broader system outcomes, not just local deliverables.

Individuals

Seek opportunities to collaborate beyond your immediate role.
Understand how your work contributes to wider system outcomes.

Strengthen trust through visible behaviour

System leaders

Treat trust as a system condition, not a communications issue.
Ensure transparency in decision-making processes, not just outcomes.

Managers

Model ethical behaviour and consistent decision-making.
Support staff to raise concerns early and safely.

Individuals

Act in ways that demonstrate fairness, integrity and professionalism.
Communicate decisions clearly and explain the reasoning behind them.

Build a more open and inclusive workforce

System leaders

Expand entry pathways beyond traditional graduate models.
Prioritise socioeconomic, regional and experiential diversity.

Managers

Create development opportunities for non-traditional and frontline staff.
Support mobility across roles and agencies.

Individuals

Engage in learning opportunities beyond your immediate discipline.
Share knowledge and support others entering the system.

Introduction

The effectiveness of the NSW public sector rests on the strength of the institutional system that supports it. Institutions, governance frameworks, professional norms and workforce capability collectively determine whether government can respond to complex challenges while maintaining public trust.

The system is not failing, but it is being tested in new ways. The challenge is less about capacity to respond in moments of crisis and more about whether coherence, discipline and institutional integrity can be sustained in day-to-day decision-making. Fragmentation across portfolios, short-term pressures and uneven incentives risk weakening the conditions that enable good judgement and coordinated action over time. The risk is not that the system cannot respond, but that it cannot do so consistently and coherently over time.

These pressures reinforce a fundamental reality: the performance of government is inseparable from the strength of the system that underpins it.

A capable public sector requires more than skilled individuals or effective programs. It depends on institutional arrangements and stewardship that sustain good judgement, support democratic accountability and enable government to act with confidence in uncertain conditions.

The challenge for NSW is to reinforce institutional foundations while adapting them to meet contemporary demands.

This section examines three interrelated questions:

how stewardship of democratic institutions must evolve
how trust in public institutions can be sustained in a contested environment
how the public service system must adapt to remain effective in the decade ahead

Explore the themes

Evolution of Stewardship

Stewardship has always been central to public administration. Traditionally, it referred to the sound management of public resources and effective program delivery. Today, it carries a broader meaning. It encompasses safeguarding democratic institutions, protecting the integrity of public administration and sustaining the long-term capability of the public service.

Stewardship operates at two levels.

Public service stewardship focuses on the capability, integrity and professionalism of the workforce. System stewardship extends beyond this to include the design of institutions, the alignment of incentives and the conditions that enable government to function as a coherent whole.

Both are required. Neither is sufficient on its own.

In a more contested and complex environment, stewardship requires leaders who can uphold institutional norms while navigating technological disruption, political pressure and heightened scrutiny.

The task is not simply to preserve established traditions, but to actively reinforce them so they remain resilient under modern conditions.

Democratic Stewardship and the Westminster System

Source note¹⁴

The Westminster system depends on a clear distribution of responsibility between elected government, Parliament and the public service. Public servants provide evidence-based advice and implement the decisions of the elected government. Parliament provides scrutiny and democratic accountability. Ministers determine policy direction, while departments provide the professional capability to translate that direction into action. When these roles are clearly understood and respected, government functions with both legitimacy and stability.

However, these conditions cannot be taken for granted. Public expectations are evolving rapidly, political debate is increasingly polarised, and technological change is altering how decisions are made and scrutinised. Modern governance is also shaped by continuous media cycles, social media amplification, interjurisdictional comparison and heightened reputational pressures on governments and ministers. Decisions are often contested publicly in real time, creating pressure for immediacy, certainty and visible delivery.

In this environment, one risk is the gradual erosion of the conditions that enable public servants to provide frank and fearless advice. When uncertainty arises about whether difficult messages will be welcomed, behaviour can shift toward caution, responsiveness to short-term pressures and risk avoidance. Over time, this weakens the quality of policy advice and reduces the ability of government to anticipate emerging challenges and long-term consequences.

Stewardship therefore requires more than administrative competence. It requires leaders who actively protect the norms, behaviours and institutional relationships that underpin democratic governance.

Public servants must retain the confidence to present evidence, identify risks and articulate long-term implications, even when doing so is uncomfortable. Ministers must be able to rely on advice that is rigorous, honest and grounded in the public interest. This relationship is most effective when it operates as a genuine partnership: ministers bring the authority to set direction and drive outcomes, while public servants contribute the expertise to shape how those outcomes are best achieved, informed by a longer-term, non-partisan perspective¹³. Increasingly, this also includes equipping ministers with the evidence, clarity and implementation confidence needed to communicate and defend policy decisions publicly in a highly contested environment.

Protecting the public sector’s legitimacy and political neutrality is critical to sustaining both effective government and public trust.

Maintaining this balance requires deliberate reinforcement through leadership behaviour, institutional culture and a shared understanding of democratic roles.

Governance as Strategic Capability

Governance frameworks across the NSW public sector have evolved in response to major disruptions over the past decade. Natural disasters, public health emergencies and economic volatility have tested both the strengths and the limitations of traditional arrangements.

Historically, governance systems have focused on compliance, risk control and administrative oversight. These functions remain essential, but they are no longer sufficient. Governance must also anticipate emerging risks, enable coordinated decision-making and support governments to act in uncertain and time-critical environments.

This shifts governance from a control function to a strategic capability.

Governance should enable decisions, not delay them.¹⁵ Systems that over-index on process can slow government at precisely the point where speed and judgement are most required.

This requires a shift from compliance to capability, supported by:

leaders who can make risk-informed decisions under uncertainty
frameworks that enable coordination rather than reinforce silos
accountability that is shared where outcomes are shared

Public Confidence and Institutional Resilience

Public confidence in institutions is becoming increasingly fragile across many democracies. While Australia continues to maintain comparatively stronger levels of institutional trust than some international jurisdictions, this position cannot be assumed to endure. Findings from sources such as the Edelman Trust Barometer¹⁶ point to declining trust globally, alongside growing scepticism toward institutions, expertise and established authority.

Confidence in public institutions is shaped not only by policy outcomes, but by whether governments are perceived as competent, fair, transparent and acting in the public interest. When trust weakens, institutional legitimacy can erode gradually, even where formal systems remain stable.

Public debate often focuses disproportionately on failure while overlooking institutional success or long-term stewardship. Over time, this can distort perceptions of government capability and weaken confidence in public administration. Criticism and scrutiny are essential features of democratic systems. However, sustained narratives that portray institutions as ineffective, politicised or disconnected from community expectations can contribute to declining trust.

International experience demonstrates how quickly confidence can deteriorate once these perceptions become embedded.

Protecting organisational resilience therefore requires deliberate effort in support of public confidence. Resilience is not only about operational continuity during disruption. It is also about sustaining institutional credibility, legitimacy and public trust over time.

This depends in part on reinforcing the professional identity and public value of public administration and making these visible in practice. Institutions strengthen confidence when they communicate purpose clearly, explain policy trade-offs openly and demonstrate competence through consistent delivery and effective governance.

Resilience is strongest when institutions are understood as professional, reliable and acting consistently in the public interest. When this understanding weakens, even capable systems can experience declining public confidence.

For the NSW public sector, maintaining trust must therefore be treated as a long-term institutional responsibility rather than a communications exercise or a by-product of policy success alone.

Building Trustworthy Public Sector Institutions

When communities have confidence in public institutions, policies gain legitimacy and reforms are more likely to endure. When that confidence weakens, even well-designed initiatives struggle to gain acceptance.

Public trust is shaped by multiple factors. Integrity frameworks, ethical leadership, transparency, technological governance and the professionalism of public servants all contribute to how institutions are perceived.¹⁷

However, trust cannot be sustained through structures alone.

It is built through consistent institutional behaviour. What matters is not only what institutions intending to do, but how they act over time.

The focus must therefore shift from trust as a sentiment to trustworthiness as a system property.

Global Democratic Pressures

While NSW currently benefits from strong institutional stability, global trends demonstrate how quickly trust in democratic systems can weaken.

Across many jurisdictions, rising political polarisation, the spread of misinformation and declining confidence in public institutions have placed sustained pressure on democratic systems. In some cases, these pressures have led to reduced trust in public administration, increased contestation of expert advice and a blurring of boundaries between political and administrative roles.

These developments are not distant or abstract. They highlight how quickly institutional confidence can erode if the norms and practices that sustain democratic systems are not actively reinforced.

For NSW, the implication is clear. Institutional strength must be maintained deliberately, not assumed.

Public servants play a critical role in this. They must remain firmly anchored to democratic processes, respecting the authority of elected governments while upholding their responsibilities to Parliament, the public and integrity institutions.

This requires more than adherence to formal rules. It requires consistent professional behaviour.

Public servants must:

provide advice that is evidence-based, impartial and responsive to the public interest
maintain clear boundaries between political direction and professional judgement
uphold transparency and accountability in how decisions are made and implemented

Professional integrity, political neutrality and respect for democratic accountability are not static principles. They must be practised consistently, particularly in periods of heightened pressure.

Sustaining these behaviours is central to maintaining institutional legitimacy in an increasingly contested environment.

Integrity and Ethical Culture

NSW has a well-established integrity system, including institutions such as Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), oversight bodies and legislative safeguards. This architecture, reflected in the NSW Integrity Framework, provides a strong foundation for accountability and ethical conduct across the public sector.

However, integrity cannot be sustained through frameworks alone. Its effectiveness depends on how consistently it is enacted in practice. A pro-integrity culture¹⁸ requires public servants and leaders to move beyond compliance and actively reinforce ethical behaviour in everyday decisions.

This shifts the focus from avoiding misconduct to demonstrating integrity in practice.

Three qualities are particularly important.

Trust operates in two directions. The public must be able to trust public servants to act in the public interest and exercise authority responsibly. Ministers must be able to rely on public servants to provide independent, evidence-based advice, including where that advice is challenging.
Respect is expressed through behaviour. Public servants must respect the authority of elected government to set direction and make decisions. Ministers, in turn, must respect the professional expertise of the public service and its obligation to provide candid advice.
Courage enables the system to function effectively. Public servants must be willing to present risks, trade-offs and long-term implications, even when doing so is uncomfortable. Leaders at all levels must support and protect this behaviour in practice.

A pro-integrity culture is strongest when these behaviours are visible, expected and consistently reinforced across the system. In this environment, integrity is not only upheld through oversight but embedded in how the public sector operates day-to-day.

Together, these qualities enable principled decision-making in complex and uncertain environments.

Role of Integrity Agencies

Integrity agencies play a critical role in maintaining trust in public institutions.

Their work extends beyond investigating misconduct. Through education, prevention and system reform, they contribute to strengthening governance across the public sector.

It has been noted by the sector leaders that most public servants enter the profession with a strong commitment to ethical conduct. Integrity risks often arise not from deliberate wrongdoing, but from uncertainty, inexperience or poorly designed systems.

For this reason, prevention is central to the role of integrity agencies. By working with organisations to design corruption-resistant processes, build awareness of ethical risks and strengthen internal controls, they reduce the likelihood of misconduct occurring in the first place.

A strong ‘speak-up’ culture is also essential. When public servants feel confident raising concerns without fear of reprisal, potential issues can be identified and addressed early.

Integrity agencies therefore function not only as watchdogs, but as partners in strengthening institutional capability. Their role is not simply to respond to failure, but to support more resilient systems.

Approachability is critical to achieving this. Excessive fear of integrity agencies can discourage reporting and weaken oversight. When public officials view these bodies as accessible and supportive, engagement increases and ethical decision-making is strengthened.

NSW benefits from strong and respected integrity institutions, supported by clear checks and balances. Their continued effectiveness will depend on maintaining their independence, strengthening engagement with agencies and ensuring that prevention and education remain as central as enforcement.

Media Scrutiny and the Information Age

Clear communication is increasingly central to effective governance.

Digital platforms and social media have transformed how government interacts with the public. They provide opportunities for direct engagement and improved transparency but also accelerate the spread of misinformation²⁰ and often favour simplified narratives over nuanced policy debate.

In this environment, communication becomes a strategic capability.

Governments must operate in conditions of constant scrutiny and rapid information flows. This requires stronger digital literacy, more deliberate engagement with media and a more confident articulation of public value.

Clarity is essential. Policies, decisions and outcomes must be explained in ways that are accessible and transparent. This includes communicating not only what decisions are made, but why they are made and the trade-offs involved.

When done well, communication strengthens public understanding and reinforces trust in institutions.²¹

Artificial Intelligence and Public Trust

Artificial intelligence and advanced data systems are reshaping how government exercises authority. Their potential is significant, from improving insight and anticipatory capability to enabling more responsive and coordinated decision-making.

However, these technologies do more than improve efficiency. They change how decisions are made, how authority is exercised and how accountability is understood. In doing so, they introduce risks that go to the core of institutional legitimacy. Automated systems can obscure lines of responsibility, embed bias at scale and operate in ways that are not easily visible or contestable by the public.

The central challenge is therefore one of governance. The question is not whether to adopt AI, but whether existing institutional frameworks are strong enough to govern its use responsibly.

This requires clear accountability for decisions, even where technology is involved. Authority must remain traceable to public officials, and the basis for decisions must be explainable and open to scrutiny. As systems become more complex, frameworks must continue to uphold legality, procedural fairness and transparency.

In practice, this also requires a meaningful “human in the loop” approach. Human oversight cannot become a symbolic compliance mechanism where decisions are effectively automated but nominally approved by officials without genuine review or accountability. Public servants must retain the capability, authority and confidence to interrogate outputs, exercise judgement and intervene where necessary.

Government also cannot outsource risk. While technology vendors and external providers may develop or operate AI-enabled systems, responsibility for decisions, consequences and public trust remains with public institutions. This places greater importance on internal capability, governance literacy and institutional oversight.

Public trust will depend not on the presence of technology, but on confidence that it operates within clear institutional boundaries and under visible human accountability. Where those boundaries are weak or unclear, the risk is not only poor decisions, but erosion of trust in the system itself.

NSW has already taken steps to establish a robust AI Assessment Framework. The next phase is to ensure such frameworks evolve in line with technological change, remain visible to the public and are embedded consistently in operational practice.

The task for the NSW public sector is to ensure that technological capability is matched by institutional strength. Without this balance, adoption risks outpacing the governance required to sustain public confidence.

Case study 11 · System

NSW Integrity Framework

From Compliance to Culture: Embedding Integrity as Everyday Practice

The NSW public sector has long benefited from a strong integrity architecture, supported by institutions such as the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), the Ombudsman and the Audit Office. Yet despite robust oversight arrangements, a persistent challenge remained: integrity was often viewed as a compliance obligation rather than an organisational capability. Policies existed, training was completed, but translating ethical principles into everyday decision-making remained difficult.

During consultation, agencies consistently reported that while employees understood the importance of integrity, many struggled to understand what it looked like in practice.

In response, the Office of the Public Service Commissioner NSW developed the NSW Integrity Framework. The objective was not to create additional rules, but to provide agencies with a practical way to assess, strengthen and institutionalise integrity across their organisations. Grounded in the NSW Ethical Framework values of integrity, trust, accountability and service, the framework shifts the conversation from compliance to culture.

At its core is a structured self-assessment tool that helps agencies evaluate their integrity maturity across five interconnected pillars: policies and procedures, leadership, people and culture, preventing wrongdoing, and oversight and accountability. Rather than asking whether policies exist, the framework encourages agencies to examine whether those policies are understood, used and reflected in day-to-day behaviour.

A key innovation is its focus on organisational reflection. The framework is designed to bring together leaders, governance teams and employees to identify ethical risks, discuss areas of vulnerability and develop targeted improvement plans. In doing so, it recognises that most integrity failures do not arise from deliberate misconduct, but from unclear expectations, competing pressures or systems that make ethical decision-making difficult.

Although still in its early stages, the framework is already being adopted by agencies as a diagnostic and improvement tool. Early feedback suggests its greatest value lies in the conversations it prompts, helping integrity become part of business-as-usual decision-making rather than a standalone compliance activity.

Beyond its immediate application, the NSW Integrity Framework represents a broader shift in public sector stewardship. It demonstrates that integrity is not simply a matter of regulation or oversight, but a capability that must be intentionally designed, measured and strengthened over time. By providing a common language and practical pathway for improvement, the framework is helping agencies build the cultural and systemic foundations that underpin trusted, high-performing government.

As the framework evolves, it is expected to play an increasingly important role in helping agencies navigate emerging ethical challenges, strengthen leadership accountability and build public trust in government institutions.

Download case study PDF

Case study 12 · System

NSW AI Assessment Framework

A New Model for AI Stewardship

As artificial intelligence becomes embedded in government operations, agencies face a growing challenge: how to harness the benefits of AI while ensuring its use remains ethical, lawful and safe. From service delivery and policy design to regulatory and administrative functions, AI is increasingly influencing how decisions are made and services are delivered. The challenge for government is no longer whether to use AI, but how to use it responsibly while maintaining public trust.

NSW was one of the first governments globally to publish an AI Ethics Policy in 2019, followed by an assurance framework designed primarily for technical specialists. As AI became more accessible and moved beyond data science teams into mainstream business functions, a new approach was needed. Public servants across a wide range of roles needed practical guidance to assess risks, understand obligations and make informed decisions about AI adoption.

To address this challenge, Digital NSW developed the NSW AI Assessment Framework (AIAF), a mandatory whole-of-government framework that translates broad ethical principles into practical decision-making tools. Rather than focusing on the technology itself, the framework focuses on how AI is used and whether that use could create risks relating to fairness, privacy, accountability, transparency, safety or community impact.

A key innovation has been accessibility. What previously required specialist expertise and could take up to 40 hours to complete has been redesigned into a guided assessment process that can be completed in approximately 15 minutes. The framework tailors advice to individual use cases, helping project teams, business owners and executives identify risks and understand the safeguards required to deploy AI responsibly.

Importantly, the framework is evolving beyond a governance tool into a broader enablement platform. Future capabilities will connect agencies working on similar AI use cases, provide evidence-based guidance on maximising value from AI investments, and generate insights into emerging workforce and capability needs across government. The aim is not simply to manage risk, but to support better decisions, stronger collaboration and more effective adoption of AI.

The impact is already evident. The framework has simplified and standardised AI governance across government while creating a foundation for greater transparency and trust. It demonstrates that innovation and risk management are not competing objectives. By establishing clear guardrails and shared accountability, agencies are better positioned to experiment with new technologies while maintaining public confidence.

Download case study PDF

Building a More Effective Public Service System

Ultimately, the strength of public institutions depends on whether the public service system can translate policy intent into real outcomes.

Meeting future challenges will require stronger collaboration across government, more adaptive governance systems and greater investment in workforce capability.

Adaptive and Resilient Systems

Related case study: FuelCheck ↓²⁴

The operating environment of the NSW public sector is becoming more complex, uncertain and fast-moving. Challenges such as climate change, technological disruption and demographic shifts cannot be addressed through static policy settings or rigid administrative models. They require systems that can adapt, learn and respond over time.

Recent experience has exposed the limits of traditional bureaucratic approaches that rely on standardised processes and fixed structures. While these models support consistency and control, they are less effective in environments where risks evolve quickly, and solutions must be tested and refined.

Adaptive systems require a different set of capabilities. They must enable continuous learning, support experimentation and draw on expertise across government and beyond. This includes the ability to adjust approaches in response to evidence, scale what works and move away from what does not.

Resilience depends not only on flexibility, but on depth of capability. High workforce mobility and increasing reliance on external expertise can weaken institutional memory, limiting the system’s ability to learn from experience. Deliberate investment in leadership capability, knowledge sharing and learning systems is therefore essential.

Structural settings must also support adaptation. Collaboration across agencies remains critical for addressing cross-cutting challenges, but it must be enabled through aligned outcomes, coordinated governance and practical mechanisms for joint action, rather than relying on informal or ad hoc arrangements.

The NSW public sector must treat adaptability and resilience as core system capabilities. This requires embedding learning, strengthening institutional knowledge and aligning structures to support coordinated action. Without this shift, systems will struggle to keep pace with change.

Funding and Structural Reform

Governments are increasingly required to address policy challenges that cut across portfolios. However, funding and governance arrangements continue to be organised around agencies, programs and short-term accountabilities. This creates a structural misalignment between how problems present and how the system is designed to respond.

The consequence is not simply inefficiency, but fragmentation. Issues that require coordinated, sustained effort are addressed through discrete initiatives, limiting impact and diluting accountability for outcomes. For example, place-based challenges such as regional disadvantage or complex social needs often require coordinated responses across health, housing, education and justice. Climate change and environmental sustainability need long-term system-wide reform instead of short-sighted changes. Yet funding flows, reporting lines and success measures typically remain portfolio-bound, making sustained collaboration difficult to maintain beyond specific initiatives.

This misalignment becomes more consequential as governments are asked to deliver on interconnected objectives such as productivity, inclusion and long-term fiscal sustainability. These are not separable goals. Progress in one domain depends on coordinated action across many parts of the system.

Addressing this requires more than incremental adjustment. Funding models, governance structures and accountability mechanisms must be reoriented toward shared outcomes rather than organisational boundaries. This includes creating clearer incentives for collaboration, aligning investment to long-term priorities and enabling decision-making at the level where system-wide trade-offs can be managed.

Without this shift, cross-agency collaboration²⁵ will remain contingent rather than routine, and reform efforts will continue to be uneven.

Alignment between funding, governance and outcomes is therefore not a technical refinement. It is a precondition for a system that can act coherently on complex, long-term challenges.

Place-based Government

Place-based approaches are increasingly central to effective government. Complex challenges do not present uniformly across the state. They are experienced differently across metropolitan, regional and remote communities, and require responses informed by local context.

Issues such as social disadvantage, health outcomes, education access and economic transition are shaped by place-specific factors, including demographics, geography, service availability and community networks. Standardised policy settings and centrally designed programs are often insufficient to address this variation.

Place-based government recognises that effective solutions require decisions to be informed by local knowledge and local circumstances. It brings together government agencies, community organisations and local stakeholders within governance arrangements that enable coordinated action around shared outcomes.

This does not diminish the role of central government. Rather, it requires a different balance of responsibilities. Central agencies set strategic direction, establish accountability frameworks and ensure consistency where necessary. Local systems are given greater flexibility to adapt delivery and investment decisions to community needs.

Embedding place-based government requires deliberate system design. This includes:

flexible funding models that allow resources to be allocated according to local priorities and emerging needs
governance arrangements that support collaboration across agencies, sectors and levels of government
delegated decision-making authority where local communities and leaders are best placed to respond
mechanisms that incorporate community perspectives into planning, investment and evaluation

Without these conditions, place-based approaches risk remaining isolated initiatives rather than becoming a durable feature of government.

For the NSW public sector, the challenge is to move from pockets of place-based practice to a more systematic model of place-based governance. This means creating a system that combines statewide coherence with local flexibility, allowing decisions to be made as close as possible to the communities they affect.

Public Sector as an ‘Employer of Choice’

Institutional capability ultimately depends on the people who work within the system.

To attract and retain talented professionals, the public sector must offer meaningful work, clear development pathways and credible leadership.

Workforce expectations are evolving. The public sector has a compelling value proposition²⁸: the opportunity to contribute to outcomes that affect the wellbeing of the entire community. However, this proposition must be clearly articulated and supported by strong leadership, organisational stability and a positive culture.

A significant opportunity lies in better highlighting the breadth and flexibility of public sector careers. The system offers the potential for ‘portfolio careers’ that span agencies, roles and disciplines. This capacity for mobility, continuous learning and the development of transferable skills presents a strong proposition for individuals seeking variety, growth and long-term impact.

Concurrently, structural factors such as executive dismissal provisions and perceived instability in senior roles can discourage talented individuals from pursuing leadership careers. A more balanced approach to accountability and employment security may be required to sustain a strong leadership pipeline.

A credible workforce proposition must also be inclusive by design. Entry pathways should reflect socioeconomic diversity, regional representation and non-traditional career trajectories. Without this, the system will continue to narrow its own talent base.

The public sector must also better connect those who design policy with those who deliver it. Frontline staff often have the clearest understanding of how systems operate in practice and how services are experienced. Creating deliberate pathways from frontline roles into policy and leadership positions will strengthen decision-making and improve system performance. This includes secondments, targeted development programs and recognising operational expertise as a foundation for leadership.

Finally, being an employer of choice requires workplaces that are psychologically safe, accessible and inclusive. This includes conscious support for mental health, disability and diverse workforce needs, ensuring that all employees can contribute fully and sustainably across their careers. Without a credible and inclusive workforce proposition, capability gaps will widen. The competition for talent will not wait for the public sector to respond

Case study 13 · System

FuelCheck

FuelCheck: From Transparency Tool to Crisis Response Platform

FuelCheck was originally launched by NSW Fair Trading in 2016 as a consumer transparency initiative, designed to help motorists compare fuel prices before leaving home. Through a mobile app and website, users could identify the cheapest fuel nearby, compare prices across locations and plan journeys more efficiently. Over time, the platform developed strong public trust, supported by high user engagement and widespread adoption.

During the recent fuel supply crisis, however, FuelCheck evolved into something far more significant. Rather than building a new system from scratch, the NSW Government rapidly repurposed existing digital infrastructure into a real-time crisis response capability. The platform was adapted to monitor fuel availability and pricing across approximately 2,400 service stations, providing government with critical operational intelligence while keeping the public informed during a period of uncertainty.

This shift required policy agility, operational coordination and rapid digital enhancement. Fuel retailers were directed to report fuel outages, supported by amendments to the FuelCheck order, upgrades to system functionality and strengthened reporting requirements. The platform was enhanced to display fuel shortages clearly and provide government with daily reporting dashboards showing fuel availability, pricing trends and consumer usage patterns. These insights enabled ministers and agencies to communicate accurate, statewide information in near real time during the crisis.

At the same time, NSW Fair Trading significantly expanded compliance activity to maintain public confidence in the system. Inspectors conducted more than 4,250 site inspections and issued over 250 fines to ensure prices displayed on the app matched prices at the bowser. To further strengthen enforcement, the government launched the “Bowser Busters” initiative, enabling consumers to report pricing discrepancies directly via the website and app through geo-tagged photographic evidence. This effectively transformed the public into a distributed compliance network, dramatically extending the reach and speed of regulatory action.

The impact has been substantial. During the fuel crisis period alone, FuelCheck recorded more than 22 million platform views and over 360,000 app downloads. Beyond helping consumers manage cost-of-living pressures, the initiative demonstrated how trusted digital infrastructure can be rapidly adapted during disruption to support crisis management, regulatory oversight and evidence-based decision-making at scale.

More broadly, FuelCheck demonstrates how government platforms designed for service delivery can evolve into system-wide operational capabilities.

The next phase of FuelCheck is expected to expand beyond traditional fuel monitoring. Future possibilities being explored include integrating electric vehicle charging locations and pricing data, alongside greater use of AI and automation to strengthen compliance monitoring, predictive analysis and real-time market intelligence.Top of Form

Download case study PDF

Case study 14 · System

Sustainability Bond Programme

Mobilising Sustainable Finance for Real Impact

Global capital markets are increasingly focusing on environmental, social and governance (ESG) outcomes. Investors are placing greater scrutiny on how their funds are used, seeking evidence that their capital contributes to meaningful social and environmental impact. For the NSW Government, this presents both an opportunity and a challenge: how to access growing pools of sustainability focused capital in a way that supports its ESG commitments while maintaining transparency and alignment with evolving investor expectations.

In 2018, the NSW Government established the Sustainability Bond Programme in response to these evolving market conditions. The Programme – under which the NSW Government can issue green, social, and sustainability (GSS) bonds – provides a mechanism for investors to contribute capital supporting a range of NSW Government sustainability related initiatives that are aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Unlike regular bonds, which are used to fund NSW Government general purpose expenditure, the proceeds of GSS bonds are used to refinance eligible assets and projects which contribute to NSW Government environmental and social objectives and provide positive and measurable environmental and/or social outcomes.

The Programme is delivered through a cross-agency governance model, bringing together NSW Treasury, Treasury Corporation (TCorp) and the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW). Combining policy, financing and technical expertise, the three entities work closely with delivery agencies and State-Owned Corporations to identify projects eligible for the Programme and report back to investors annually on the outcomes achieved. The Programme is guided by the NSW Sustainability Bond Framework, which is aligned to global standards and principles and is third-party assured.

Since inception, the Programme has mobilised more than $17 billion in sustainable funding, diversifying the NSW Government’s investor base. This has been driven by cross-government partnerships supporting projects that deliver positive environmental and social outcomes, including clean transportation, sustainable water and wastewater management, access to essential services, affordable basic infrastructure, and affordable housing.

Download case study PDF

Case study 15 · System

Outcome-Based Contracting

Shifting Focus from Activities to Outcomes for Impact

Governments are facing increasingly complex social and environmental challenges within tight fiscal constraints, necessitating approaches that improve accountability for outcomes, strengthen service effectiveness and measurable impact.

Outcome-based contracting provides an approach to support this shift. It involves defining and agreeing on clear and measurable outcomes, linking funding to the achievement of those outcomes, and then tracking performance throughout service delivery. Data is used to provide timely visibility of progress and identify where adjustments are needed, enabling continuous improvement rather than relying solely on end-of-program evaluation. Funding linked to outcomes instead of activities gives service providers more flexibility to adapt their delivery models, supporting responsive and person-centred services.

Foyer Central, facilitated by NSW Treasury’s Office of Social Impact Investment, demonstrates an outcome-based contracting approach in practice.

Located in Chippendale, Foyer Central is a purpose-built accommodation and learning centre supporting young people aged 18 to 22 who exited statutory out-of-home care and are experiencing or are at risk of homelessness. The program provides a stable, affordable home for up to two years, alongside individual coaching that supports young people to build skills and confidence as they transition to independence.

The initiative brought together NSW Treasury, the Department of Communities and Justice, service delivery partners Uniting and St George Community Housing, impact investors who provided working capital, and the Commonwealth Department of Social Services, which contributed funding and outcome measurement data. This partnership aligned incentives around achieving meaningful outcomes for participants. Foyer Central Partners

In its first five years, Foyer Central received around 800 referrals and supported more than 150 young people. More than 40 per cent of participants sustained independent housing, education and/or employment outcomes 12 months after leaving the program. Performance data has also informed continuous improvements, including a stronger focus on culturally appropriate support and more tailored post-program pathways.

Beyond the outcomes achieved by participants, outcome-based contracting enables adaptive practice to support better service delivery and strengthens the evidence base to inform policy decisions. By linking funding to measurable impact rather than prescribed activities, it creates stronger shared incentives to deliver lasting results.

Download case study PDF

Case study 16 · System

Creative Communities Policy

Whole-of-Government Stewardship: Reframing Creativity as a Public Value

In 2023, the NSW Government launched Creative Communities, the state’s first Arts, Culture and Creative Industries Policy. The policy marked a significant shift in how government understands and supports creativity. Rather than treating arts and culture as the responsibility of a single agency, it positioned the creative industries as a whole-of-government priority, recognising their role across education, health, justice, tourism, regional development and economic growth.

The objective was clear: place culture at the heart of government decision-making and create a framework that supports both traditional arts and the broader creative economy. This required a new model of stewardship, one that looked beyond individual programs and funding streams to the health of the entire creative ecosystem.

A defining feature of the policy was its development through extensive consultation and co-design. Industry leaders, artists, creative businesses and communities were engaged throughout the process, shaping both the policy itself and the sector strategies that followed.

Creative Communities also broadened the focus of government investment. Alongside support for artists and cultural organisations, the policy prioritises audience development, creative participation, First Nations communities, regional and Western Sydney initiatives, and pathways for future generations to engage with arts and culture. The emphasis is not simply on funding creative activity, but on strengthening the conditions that allow creative communities to thrive.

The policy reflects a broader public sector shift towards stewardship and long-term thinking. By adopting an ecosystem approach, government is considering how arts, culture and creativity contribute to the wellbeing of communities and the future prosperity of NSW. This includes recognising the role of creative participation in education, community connection, rehabilitation, cultural identity and economic development.

To support accountability and long-term measurement, the NSW Government has legislated a Creative Statement to Parliament every three years. This will provide a regular assessment of the health of the sector, levels of investment and opportunities for future growth.

The next phase will focus on implementation and measurement. As new sector strategies are delivered and baseline data is established, the policy will provide a platform for tracking the growth of NSW’s creative economy while strengthening the cultural and social outcomes that benefit communities across the state.

Download case study PDF

Case study 17 · System

Youth Justice Reform

Maruma-Li Walaay: Place-Based Youth Justice Reform in Moree

Moree has long faced complex youth justice challenges, including high rates of young people on remand, limited accommodation options and fragmented service responses. For many young people, particularly Aboriginal young people who are disproportionately represented in the justice system, the lack of suitable local bail accommodation created barriers to complying with bail conditions and increased the likelihood of remaining in custody.

To address these challenges, the NSW Government adopted a place-based approach to youth justice reform focused on early intervention, diversion and community-led solutions. Central to this approach was a commitment to co-design, Aboriginal leadership and genuine partnership with the local community.

The result is Maruma-Li Walaay, meaning “Heal Camp” in Gomeroi language. Developed through collaboration between government agencies, Aboriginal organisations and community stakeholders, the initiative places decision-making power with the community and embeds cultural authority and local ownership into service delivery.

Youth Justice NSW worked closely with Education, NSW Police, Health, TAFE NSW, the Office of the Children’s Guardian and local service providers to create a coordinated response. Aboriginal Elders, young people, families and community organisations were actively involved in shaping the program, ensuring it reflects local priorities and needs.

Maruma-Li Walaay provides a service previously unavailable in Moree: 24/7 structured bail accommodation in a family-style, culturally safe environment.

Young people receive wraparound support, including assistance with bail compliance; health and wellbeing services; education and employment pathways; transport support, and opportunities to reconnect with family, culture and community.

The reform also invests in local capability. Through a partnership with TAFE NSW, 21 community members commenced specialised youth work training, creating employment pathways while building the workforce needed to sustain the initiative.

Implementing the model required overcoming challenges, including workforce recruitment, securing suitable accommodation, building community trust and establishing culturally appropriate governance arrangements.

Although the program only commenced operations in March 2026, it is already delivering important system improvements. It provides a safe alternative to custody, strengthens coordination between courts, police, Youth Justice NSW and community providers, and demonstrates how Aboriginal-led service delivery can support better justice, health and social outcomes.

Maruma-Li Walaay shows how place-based reform can address complex social challenges through community leadership, cultural knowledge and cross-agency collaboration, creating a more connected and responsive system for young people in Moree.

Download case study PDF

Case study 18 · System

Government Shared Services

One Platform, One Public Service: Building the Foundations for a More Agile NSW Government

Successive Machinery of Government (MoG) changes exposed a persistent challenge within the NSW public sector. Smaller and frequently restructured agencies often relied on fragmented payroll, finance and HR systems that had evolved through temporary arrangements, manual workarounds and agency-to-agency agreements. Even relatively small organisational changes could take months, and sometimes years, to fully implement operationally, creating inefficiencies and limiting the public sector’s agility.

In response, the NSW Government launched the PATH (Process and Technology Harmonisation) Program in 2020. The objective was to establish a common operating platform across government by harmonising back-office processes and consolidating agencies onto a shared Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system. This was not simply a technology upgrade. It was a whole-of-government reform designed to improve mobility, reporting, efficiency and resilience across the public sector.

Between 2020 and 2024, approximately 60,000 public servants across 60 agencies were migrated onto a shared SAP-based platform known as MyWorkZone. Agencies adopted a common chart of accounts and standardised finance, payroll and HR processes, creating a consistent transactional backbone across government. In 2024, the Secretaries Board approved a second phase, extending the platform to a further 20 agencies and bringing previously outsourced payroll and accounts payable services back into government. Going forward, around 80,000 public sector employees will operate on the common platform.

The results have been significant. One of the original drivers for the reform was to simplify Machinery of Government changes. Historically, moving an agency between departments could take up to 18 months to complete from a back-office perspective. Today, agencies can be transitioned in days rather than months. The Office of Sport, for example, was successfully moved in just three days, while larger organisational restructures have been completed in weeks rather than years.

The initiative has also improved workforce mobility across government. Employees now retain a single employee identity, with leave balances, payroll records and employment history moving seamlessly between participating agencies. This creates a more consistent employee experience and reduces administrative barriers to working across the public sector.

Beyond workforce benefits, the common platform has strengthened financial visibility and reporting by enabling agencies to report on a consistent basis. It has streamlined transactional services, improved the experience for suppliers and vendors, and created opportunities for automation of routine administrative processes. Bringing these services in-house has also created more than 100 new public sector jobs, many in regional NSW.

Perhaps most importantly, Government Shared Services demonstrates how reform of enabling systems can strengthen the capability of government, as a whole. By standardising processes, improving cross-system collaboration and creating shared foundations for service delivery, the initiative has increased the public sector’s capacity to respond to organisational change while reducing complexity and duplication.

As Government Shared Services continues to evolve, opportunities are being explored in areas such as enterprise ICT, procurement and further automation, building towards a more integrated and efficient operating model for government.

Download case study PDF

Notes

NSW Public Service Commission, Westminster System, Senior Executive Fundamentals, NSW Government. ↩
Mulgan, Richard, How Much Responsiveness Is Too Much or Too Little?, Australian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 67, no. 3, 2008, pp. 345–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2008.00592.x (opens in a new tab) ↩
Bagley, Nicholas, The Procedure Fetish, Michigan Law Review, vol. 118, no. 3, 2019, pp. 345–414. https://doi.org/10.36644/mlr.118.3.procedure (opens in a new tab) ↩
Edelman, 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer: Trust and the Crisis of Grievance, Edelman, 2025. https://www.edelman.com/au/trust/2025/trust-barometer (opens in a new tab) ↩
OECD, Trust in Government, OECD. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/drivers-of-trust-in-public-institutions-in-australia_28a876c2-en.html (opens in a new tab) ↩
Please refer to Case Study: NSW Integrity Framework in this section. ↩
Independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Commission (Victoria), How to Build a Pro-Integrity Culture in Public Sector Organisations, IBAC (Victoria), 26 June 2025. ↩
OECD, Disinformation and Misinformation, OECD. https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/disinformation-and-misinformation.html (opens in a new tab) ↩
OECD, Government Communication, OECD. https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/government-communication.html (opens in a new tab) ↩
IBM Center for The Business of Government, Pathways to Trusted Progress in Artificial Intelligence, IBM Center for The Business of Government. https://www.businessofgovernment.org/report/pathways-trusted-progress-artificial-intelligence (opens in a new tab) ↩
Please refer to Case Study: NSW AI Assessment Framework in this section. ↩
Please refer to Case Study: FuelCheck in this section. ↩
Please refer to Case Studies: Sustainability Bond Programme, Outcome-Based Contracting and NSW Creative Communities Policy in this section. ↩
Ansell, Chris and Alison Gash (eds), Collaborative Governance, ANU Press, Canberra, 2018. https://press.anu.edu.au/publications/series/anzsog/collaborative-governance (opens in a new tab). ↩
Please refer to Case Study: Youth Justice Reform in this section. ↩
Please refer to Case Study: Government Shared Services in this section. ↩
NSW Public Service Commission, NSW Employee Value Proposition, NSW Government. https://www.psc.nsw.gov.au/workforce-management/recruitment/employee-value-proposition (opens in a new tab) ↩

Conclusion

Stewardship has always been central to public administration. Today it carries a broader meaning. It encompasses safeguarding democratic institutions, protecting the integrity of public administration and sustaining the long-term capability of the public service. In a more contested and complex environment, stewardship requires leaders who can uphold institutional norms while navigating technological disruption, political pressure and heightened scrutiny.

The future strength of the NSW public sector will not be determined by a single reform. It will be shaped by the accumulation of decisions made across the system: decisions about governance, workforce development, technology adoption and service design. Many of these choices may appear incremental. Decisions about capability, leadership, governance and service to the community rarely attract attention when they are made. Yet over time, they shape the strength and legitimacy of institutions.

This White paper has examined how three interconnected domains – Service, Skills and System – shape that strength. It has identified where the sector is already demonstrating excellence and where deliberate action is required. The NSW public sector has demonstrated its capacity to adapt across generations. Its institutions have evolved alongside changing economic conditions, technological advances and shifting community expectations.

The challenge now is to continue that tradition in a period of accelerating change. The NSW public sector is strong, but strength cannot be assumed to endure. Without deliberate effort, even strong systems can weaken over time. The choices made now will shape whether the system remains capable, trusted and effective in the years ahead. The opportunity is not only to adapt to change, but to do so in a way that strengthens the system for the long term.

That future will be defined by the quality of stewardship exercised today.

In supporting this work, IPAA NSW is positioned to play a critical enabling role. As the professional association of the NSW public sector, IPAA operates across agencies, portfolios and disciplines. This system-wide vantage point, combined with its independence and non-partisan mandate, allows it to engage with the sector with credibility, continuity and perspective.

IPAA NSW can strengthen sector-wide professional identity and democratic literacy through shared induction and capability development. It can build capability as a system, not in silos, by connecting practitioners, surfacing real experience and reinforcing professional standards across the sector. And it can act as a system integrator and trusted convener, bringing together leaders, practitioners and emerging talent to foster informed challenge, shared learning and cross-agency alignment.

By connecting insight, capability and practice across the system, IPAA NSW supports the public sector’s work to shape its future.

What happens next

What Happens Next: The Role of IPAA NSW

What Happens Next: IPAA’s Role in This Work

IPAA NSW is the keeper of collective intelligence on how NSW public institutions can strengthen themselves. This whitepaper is evidence of that role. Grounded in lived sector experience and supported by rigour, it establishes what matters for public service capability, stewardship and performance.

As the professional association of the NSW public sector, IPAA operates across agencies, portfolios and disciplines. This system-wide vantage point, combined with its independence and non-partisan mandate, gives it the credibility and perspective to shape how the sector understands itself and prepares for the future.

The work ahead creates three core opportunities for IPAA NSW to strengthen that role.

First, establish sector-wide professional standards and shared identity.

A coordinated approach to induction across the NSW public sector would reinforce democratic literacy, clarify the professional role of public servants and support mobility across agencies. This must extend beyond traditional cohorts to include contingent and non-permanent staff, establishing consistent professional standards across the entire workforce. IPAA NSW is uniquely positioned to lead this work.

Second, build and protect capability as a system.

Capability does not sustain itself. It requires deliberate, sustained investment. This whitepaper identifies what matters – policy craft, institutional knowledge, leadership capability, socio-technical literacy. IPAA NSW can bring these insights to life by connecting practitioners, surfacing real experience and establishing what professional excellence looks like across the sector. By doing this work visibly and rigorously, IPAA NSW strengthens professional pride and attracts talent to public service.

Third, lead system-wide conversations about what public administration requires.

By convening leaders, practitioners and emerging talent, IPAA NSW creates the space where informed challenge, shared learning and cross-agency alignment happen. These conversations do more than facilitate collaboration – they strengthen coherence across the system and reinforce public administration as a profession that thinks deeply about its own practice.

This is not an adjunct role. It is central to the sector’s capacity to shape its own future.

There is a deeper opportunity too. Public administration is often most visible when it falters. Yet every day, almost half a million public servants deliver services, develop policy and steward institutions that support the community. This whitepaper elevates that work. It acknowledges the complexity. It reflects what happens on the ground.

IPAA NSW can continue this work. Not through promotion, but through the credibility that comes from rigorous thinking grounded in lived experience. By elevating practice, acknowledging complexity and fostering genuine professional reflection, IPAA NSW strengthens trust, clarifies professional purpose and attracts the next generation to public service.

The sector expects IPAA NSW to play this role. Our survey data shows the public sector looks to IPAA NSW for professional standards, leadership development and research that reflects real sector experience. It is a vote of confidence in IPAA NSW’s authority as a thought leader on public administration.

By connecting insight, capability and practice across the system, IPAA NSW shapes how the sector understands itself and prepares for what’s ahead.

28 graph ipaa.jpg — Role of IPAA NSW in strengthening the public service profession in the next decade. Responses suggest IPAA NSW is expected to play a primarily developmental and enabling role over the next decade, with greater weight placed on building individual capability and system-wide advocacy. The relatively even spread across leadership, professional standards and research points to a profession seeking coherence and maturity. Source: IPAA NSW Sector-Wide Survey 2026

Closing reflection

The future of public service in NSW will not be determined by a single reform. It will be shaped by the accumulation of decisions made across the system: decisions about capability, leadership, governance and service to the community.

That future will be defined by the quality of stewardship exercised today.

IPAA NSW is uniquely positioned to strengthen that stewardship – by bringing rigorous thinking to bear on real sector challenges, by establishing what excellence looks like, and by ensuring the public sector’s own voice shapes how it understands itself and its role in the community.

Appendix

Definitions

This paper uses the term public sector to reflect the full system through which government delivers outcomes, while recognising the distinct stewardship role of the public service within it.

For clarity, the following definitions are used throughout:

Public service refers to the professional workforce that supports government through policy development, regulation and service delivery.
Public sector refers more broadly to the system of agencies, institutions and partners that contribute to delivering public value.
Public service system refers to the institutional arrangements, governance structures and workforce settings that enable the public service to operate as a coherent whole.

Two further concepts underpin the analysis.

Stewardship refers to the active responsibility of leaders to protect, strengthen and adapt institutions over time, rather than simply manage them in the present.
Public value refers to the outcomes government creates for the community, including trust, fairness, stability and opportunity.

These definitions are not merely descriptive. They shape how the public sector understands its role and how it acts in practice.

Recommendations

The recommendations in this White paper are directed to practitioners across the NSW public sector.

They are not instructions to government. They are intended to guide decisions and behaviours within the system.

The recommendations are structured across three levels of practice:

System leaders (Senior Leaders)
Managers and team leaders
Individual practitioners

Each level has a distinct role in shaping system performance. Sustained change will depend on coordinated action across all three.

Survey

This White paper draws on insights from the IPAA NSW Sector-Wide Survey, which attracted 2,034 responses from public sector employees across New South Wales. The survey provided one of the most comprehensive snapshots of workforce perspectives informing this research and helped identify the opportunities and challenges explored throughout the paper.

Acknowledgements

This paper has been shaped by the insights, experience and contributions of many people across the NSW public sector and beyond. IPAA NSW gratefully acknowledges the individuals and teams whose perspectives informed its development.

Our Advisory Panel

The Advisory Panel provided guidance throughout the development of this paper, offering critical feedback and helping ensure the arguments, insights and recommendations remained grounded in the realities of public sector leadership.

We extend our sincere gratitude to members of the Advisory Panel:

Mark Webb (Chair)Chief Executive – NSW Department of Parliamentary Services, Board Chair & President – IPAA NSW
Jo RoseCEO – IPAA NSW
Janet SchorerSafeWork NSW Commissioner, Deputy Chair & Director – IPAA NSW
Kathrina LoNSW Public Service Commissioner, Councillor – IPAA NSW
Janine O’FlynnDirector – Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU
Martin Stewart-WeeksFounder & Principal – Public Purpose, Practice Fellow Digital Government Strategy & Leadership – ANZSOG
Vafa GhazaviSenior Lecturer – Political Science and Public Policy, University of Sydney
Danielle ElstonManaging Director – Good Government Advisory
Rick WilliamsSenior Manager – Regional Survey Project Services, Co-Chair – Young Professionals Network at Transport for NSW

NSW Public Sector Senior Leaders

Hundreds of senior leaders from across the NSW public sector including Department Secretaries, Deputy Secretaries, Integrity Commissioners, Agency Heads and Chief Executives generously contributed their time, experience and strategic insight through interviews and discussions that helped shape the analysis and recommendations in this paper.

The Secretary Board (in alphabetical order)

Anthony Lean
Elizabeth Mildwater
Graeme Head
Josh Murray
Kate Boyd
Kiersten Fishburn
Melanie Hawyes
Michael Coutts-Trotter
Michael Tidball
Murat Dizdar
Simon Draper
Steve Orr
Susan Pearce

Integrity Commissioners (in alphabetical order)

Anina Johnson
Boya Oyetunji
John Hatzistergos
Paul Miller
Rosalind Croucher
Sonia Minutillo

Senior Leaders (in alphabetical order)

Adam Berry
Annie Tennant
Anthony Wing
Ashley White
Brett Whitworth
Camilla Drover
Chloe Read
David Gainsford
Dawn Routledge
Denise Ora
Emma Skulander
Famey Williams
Greg Wells
Jason Darney
Jody Grima
John Tansey
Kenna Ackley
Kylie DeCourteney
Lisa Harrington
Liz Baxter
Liz Livingstone
Lucy Hartas
Luke Sloane
Lyndal Hayward
Mandy Young
Mark Beaumont
Martin Graham
Michael Gadiel
Michael Rodrigues
Natasha Mann
Paul McKnight
Paul O’Reilly
Rachel Connell
Rebecca Pinkstone
Sally Webb
Samara Dobbins
Scott Perugini Kelly
Shaun Ruming
Simon Hunter
Sonya Campbell
Susan Lee
Trudi Mares

Case Studies Contributors

NSW Integrity Framework – Kieran Gregory, Tianna Jaeschke (Office of the Public Service Commissioner NSW)
NSW AI Assessment Framework – Daniel Roelink (Digital NSW)
Fuel Check – Natasha Mann, Andrew Floro (Fair Trading NSW)
Sustainability Bond Programme – Aleksandra Simic, Mikey McCarthy (NSW Treasury)
Outcome-Based Contracting – Aleksandra Simic, Miranda Lee, Rosa Choe (NSW Treasury)
NSW Creative Communities Policy – Lauren Judge, Rebecca Dean, Aimee Foster (Create NSW)
Youth Justice Reform – Jodie Scott (Department of Communities and Justice)
Government Shared Services – Catherine D’Elia (Government Shared Services)
Expert Advisory Network – Melinda Sukhla, Tania Hyde (Premier’s Department)
EduChat – Jess Young, Lauren Crockford (Department of Education)
Climate Change Preparedness – Baharak Sahebekhtiari, Tiffany Correggia, Matt Adams (Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water)
Service NSW – Greg Wells (Service NSW)
Homes NSW – Renee Wirth, Suzie Hatherly (Homes NSW)
NSW Housing Pattern Book – Abbie Galvin, Paulo Macchia (Government Architect NSW)
SharkSmart Program – Adam Tyndall (Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development)
New Gen Matrix – Joanne Edwards, Jessica Marciante, George Lumaris, David Ananin (NSW Health)
Gateway to Innovate – Kamal Cheema (Transport for NSW)
School Experience Programme – Melinda Haskett (Department of Education)

Executive and Support Teams

IPAA NSW also acknowledges the executive and support teams who coordinated schedules, facilitated discussions and supported engagement with senior leaders throughout the development of this paper and the case studies.

NSW Public Sector Participants

More than 2,000 public servants from across NSW contributed perspectives through the IPAA NSW sector-wide survey and LinkedIn polls. Their insights provided an important cross-sector view of emerging challenges, workforce sentiment and future capability needs.

Internal Communications and Engagement Teams

IPAA NSW also thanks the internal communications and engagement teams across government who supported the promotion of the sector-wide survey within their portfolios and agencies, helping ensure broad participation and a diverse cross-section of views from across the NSW public sector.

Insights from Sector Engagement

This work has also been shaped by practical insights gathered through IPAA NSW’s events, its sector-wide learning programs, and the thousands of ongoing conversations with public servants across roles, agencies and career stages.

Private Sector Partners

We acknowledge and thank our private sector partners, Deloitte and Accenture, for generously sharing their sector insights and experiences, which have contributed valuable case studies to this White paper.

IPAA NSW Team

Finally, we acknowledge the IPAA NSW team for their commitment, expertise and sustained effort throughout the development of this White paper. From convening contributors and managing stakeholder engagement to supporting research, drafting and delivery, their work has been instrumental in bringing this project to fruition.

References

Public Administration, Stewardship and Public Value

Mulgan, G. 2009, The Art of Public Strategy: Mobilizing Power and Knowledge for the Common Good, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Noveck, BS 2021, Solving Public Problems: A Practical Guide to Fix Our Government and Change Our World, Yale University Press, New Haven.
Levi, M 2022, ‘Trustworthy Government: The Obligations of Government and the Responsibilities of the Governed’, Daedalus, vol. 151, no. 4, pp. 215–233, https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_01952 (opens in a new tab)
O’Flynn, J 2025, ‘Foundations for a More Human(e) Government: Reflections at a Transitional Moment’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, pp. 1–6.
Mulgan, G 2026, Advanced Introduction to Public Sector Innovation, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham.
Mulgan, G 2026, What Next for Public Innovation?, Australia and New Zealand School of Government (ANZSOG).

Trust, Democracy and Institutional Resilience

O’Neill, O 2018, ‘Linking Trust to Trustworthiness’, International Journal of Philosophical Studies, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 293–300, https://doi.org/10.1080/09672559.2018.1454637 (opens in a new tab)
Muirhead, R & Rosenblum, NL 2024, Ungoverning: The Attack on the Administrative State and the Politics of Chaos, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Moon, K 2024, ‘Exploring Integrity in Australian Public Services’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 83, no. 4, pp. 723–735.
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet 2023, How Might Artificial Intelligence Affect the Trustworthiness of Public Service Delivery?, Long-Term Insights Briefing, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

System Leadership, Collaboration and Complexity

Lowe, T, et al. 2020, ‘Responding to Complexity in Public Services’, Public Money & Management, vol. 41, no. 7, pp. 573–576.
Falk, S, Römmele, A & Silverman, M 2019, ‘The Promise of Digital Government’, in S Falk, A Römmele & M Silverman (eds), Digital Government: Leveraging Innovation to Improve Public Sector Performance and Outcomes for Citizens, Springer, Cham, pp. 3–23.
Needham, C, et al. 2025, ‘New Development: System Diplomacy—An Alternative to System Leadership’, Public Money & Management, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 523–527.
Equity Economics 2024, Place-Based Approaches to Tackling Community Challenges in Australia, Equity Economics.

Public Sector Capability and Workforce

OECD 2017, Skills for a High Performing Civil Service, OECD Publishing, Paris.
van der Wal, Z 2017, The 21st Century Public Manager, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
van Meerkerk, I & Edelenbos, J 2019, ‘Becoming a Competent Boundary-Spanning Public Servant’, in H Dickinson & H Henderson (eds), The Palgrave Handbook of the Public Servant, Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Snow, T 2019, ‘Here Are the 7 Skills You Need to Collaborate in Government’, Apolitical, 9 September, viewed 9 June 2026, https://apolitical.co/en/articles/here-are-the-7-skills-you-need-to-collaborate-in-government. (opens in a new tab)
21st Century Public Servant 2023, Challenges Facing the Public Sector: Literature Review, University of Birmingham.
Needham, C, Mangan, C, McKenna, D & Lowther, J 2024, Revisiting the 21st Century Public Servant, University of Birmingham.
Diversity Council Australia 2024, Class at Work: Does Social Background Matter in Australian Workplaces?, Diversity Council Australia, Sydney.
NSW Premier’s Department 2025, NSW Workforce Megatrends: Summary of Mega-Trends Research to Inform Workforce Planning for the Public Sector, Strategic Workforce Development, NSW Government.
Indeed Australia & The Mandarin 2025, Broken Trust: Inside the Public Sector’s Crisis of Confidence – The Mandarin Frank and Fearless Survey, Indeed Australia.
Honig, D 2024, Mission Driven Bureaucrats: Empowering People to Help Government Do Better, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Digital Government, AI and Emerging Technology

OECD 2020, The OECD Digital Government Policy Framework, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Liquid Interactive & The Mandarin 2023, Let’s Get Real About AI: Insights from the First National Survey on Public Sector Attitudes Towards AI, The Mandarin.
Mergel, I, Dickinson, H, Stenvall, J & Gascó, M 2023, ‘Implementing AI in the Public Sector’, Public Management Review, pp. 1–11.
OECD 2025, Compendium of Best Practices for a Human-Centered Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence in the World of Work, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Intermedium & Dynatrace 2025, From Cloud Chaos to Citizen Trust: The Unified Observability Advantage.
Eggers, WD et al. 2026, Government Trends 2026, Deloitte Center for Government Insights.
Ipsos 2025, The Uneasy Decade: Reshaping Society, Technology, and the Global Economy, Ipsos.
Klein, E & Thompson, D 2025, Abundance, Avid Reader Press, New York.

Service, Citizen Experience and Public Trust

NSW Government n.d., State of the Customer, NSW Government, viewed 9 June 2026, https://www.nsw.gov.au/nsw-government/state-of-customer. (opens in a new tab)
Public Sector Network 2024, Innovate NSW Takeaway Cheat Sheets, Public Sector Network.

Knowledge bank

Case Study Library.

Eighteen initiatives from across the NSW public sector, showing Service, Skills and System in practice. Filter by pillar or search by name.

The full White Paper

Download Public Service 2035.

The complete report — Service, Skills and System, all recommendations and every case study — as a designed PDF you can read, share and cite.

Request the PDF download ↓

Opens the IPAA NSW download request form in a new tab.

PUBLIC SERVICE 2035: Thinking Beyond, Acting Now.

Download the full White Paper

Acknowledgement of Country

Contents

Front matter

Service

Skills

System

Close

Foreword from the President

Foreword from the CEO

Executive Summary

Current Pressures

Three Models

Three Deliberate Choices

Service

Skills

System

Strategic Priorities

Strengthen institutional trust and legitimacy

Build a more adaptive and connected system

Renew the craft of public administration

Prepare the workforce for a technology-enabled future

Design services around people and place

Invest in leadership that strengthens the system over time

Looking Ahead

Introduction and History of the NSW Public Sector

Service

Service at a glance

Service: Key recommendations

Design services around real experience

System leaders

Managers

Individuals

Strengthen trust through service delivery

System leaders

Managers

Individuals

Shift from response to prevention

System leaders

Managers

Individuals

Enable place-based and community-led approaches

System leaders

Managers

Individuals

Introduction

First, from standardisation to contextualisation.

Second, from measurement to design.

Third, from agency delivery to system delivery.

Explore the themes

Community Expectations from Service

Human-centred Service Delivery

Trust and Transparency in Service

Balancing Efficiency and Empathy

Equity and Regional Inclusion

Service NSW

Homes NSW

Evolving Role of Service

Stewardship of Public Value through Service Experience

Designing Services for Prevention and Response

Unifying Sense of Purpose and Pride

NSW Housing Pattern Book

SharkSmart Program

A Future-fit Service

Ethical Use of AI and Technology

Integrated Cross-agency Delivery

Co-design and Community Engagement

Frontline Empowerment and Support

NewGen Matrix

Gateway to Innovate

School Experience Program

Suggested Reading for Service

Notes

Skills

Skills at a glance

Skills: Key recommendations

Rebuild policy and professional craft

System leaders

Managers