CHISHOLM ON... OUTCOME DELIVERY PLANS

“I’m really optimistic about those. The original basis for the Single Departmental Plans [which ODPs are replacing] was solid, but they were done very differently between different departments and that made it difficult to make comparisons and limited external transparency and accountability. And they also tried to do too many things – they became long lists or compendiums of activity. ODPs are more selective, they’re more consistent, there’s been a real effort to join up the allocation of resources against those declared priorities and plans. There are much clearer metrics than we’ve had before, which are related much more to outcomes achieved rather than just outputs.

“This is year one; I bet we can do better in year two. We also need to make sure that people walk the walk as well as talk the talk, but I think it’s a far better framework for trying to prioritise government activity. All of us who work in the civil service know that one of our tendencies is to throw ourselves into situations and we do tend to overcommit. That also can be a tendency in the political process as well. So using these plans to try and be very disciplined about what we deliver against those promises – seeing things through on time, on budget and making sure that all the essential work gets done – that will make a huge difference, especially when it’s measured by the gains to the end user in society, our fellow citizens, and not just by conformance with an output plan.”