Variations among the four agency groups

Many of the variations noted among the four agency groups in 2007 have remained.

Public Service Departments

Almost all public servants are familiar with the code of conduct (98%), but their awareness of the Protected Disclosures Act 2000 remains low (38%). Just 51% of public servants say they know how to confidentially report misconduct. Of the 65% of public servants who are aware of integrity training provided by their department, 89% found it useful. Fifty-four percent of public servants say their department has a contact point for getting integrity advice.

Public servants feel better prepared to handle situations that invite misconduct than other State servants. They also report more support from colleagues in following integrity standards than in 2007 (29% strongly agreeing, compared with 24% in 2007).

Other significant improvements since 2007 are the number of public servants who strongly agree their manager disciplines employees who breach standards (22% compared with 15%), and the number who report their manager evaluates integrity and conduct as part of regular performance appraisals (67% compared with 59%).

Crown Agents (excluding DHBs)

Crown Agent employees have a high awareness of the code of conduct (98%) and 84% believe their colleagues set a good example of integrity. Although misconduct is seen at similar levels to other State servants, those seeing misconduct are less inclined to report it (46%) than all State servants (63%). Many respondents are not aware they can report in confidence (59% compared with 50% of all State servants). A high proportion (53%) of staff in Crown Agents who report misconduct are dissatisfied with the outcome because they feel "there was a cover up".

District Health Boards

Ninety-five percent of DHB staff are aware of their agency's integrity standards. There has been a significant increase in awareness among DHB staff of the provisions in the Protected Disclosures Act 2000 (33% compared with 23% in 2007). There has been a significant decrease in the number who say their DHB does not provide integrity training (20% compared with 29% in 2007). Two-thirds of DHB managers evaluate integrity as part of regular performance appraisals.

More misconduct is seen by DHB staff than other State servants, particularly abusive and intimidating behaviour (45% compared with 38%). Where DHB staff report misconduct but are dissatisfied with the result, substantially more than in 2007 say it was because corrective action was not severe or complete enough (93% compared with 50% in 2007).

Other Crown Entities (ICEs, ACEs, Crown Entity Companies, and Crown Entity Subsidiaries)

Other Crown Entities' staff have a good awareness of the code (96%). However, 65% say either their agency doesn't provide integrity training or they don't know about it (compared with 44% of all State servants). Significantly more other Crown Entities' staff report their manager evaluates integrity and conduct as part of regular performance appraisals than in 2007 (67% compared with 42% in 2007).

Fewer staff in Other Crown Entities saw misconduct than all State servants. In particular, Other Crown Entities' staff saw less abusive and intimidating behaviour and less discrimination. Fewer staff believe their environment invites misconduct (20% compared with 35% of all State servants).

Last modified: