Awareness: The current and future state of decision making and the value, stages, and philosophy of BDBO including its need for a community of action

Current state

The current state of decision making is reflected in my summary of government announcements about decision making since March 2022 here (below) which consistently flags major shortcomings including:

  • poor-quality business cases hinder informed decisions by Cabinet and Ministers.

  • weak agency capability, over-reliance on consultants, and inadequate strategic and investment planning

  • the need for more coordinated, long-term, and evidence-based planning — using tools like the Better Business Case (BBC) framework, Living Standards Framework, and CBAx.

  • the lack of transparency, value-for-money assurance, and alignment between goals, and public outcomes.

  • unclear investment goals, compounded by fiscal pressure, declining public trust, and fragmented planning across agencies.

It calls for a joined-up, capability-driven, and accountable public investment system that links strategy, planning, and measurable public value.

So, what will it take for Public leaders to develop a joined-up approach to provide free and frank medium to long term advice (strategic thinking and tactical planning) to address problems or achieve vision, with trade-offs using Treasury CBAx and Living Standards Framework?      

More specifically:

  1. How to draw on local intelligence, not just top-down approaches by having those difficult conversations about what the problem is and what the options are that could solve the problems?

  2. How to enable central and local government Public Leaders to think in a joined-up way to provide free and frank medium-to-long-term advice to consider options to achieve their vision for their district, region and nation:

    • economic (e.g. primary, secondary, tertiary, quaternary and quinary)

    • environmental (e.g. minimum, moderate or maximum standard)

    • social and cultural (e.g. provider centric or citizen centric)      

  1. How to encourage and enable central and local Government Public Leaders to make decisions on those options with limited resources to maximize the delivery of more effective services and provide medium to long term public value benefits?

  2. How to encourage and enable central government Public Leaders to provide free and frank medium-to-date-med-term advice on those options (based on section 32 of the State Sector Act) and to provide that advice with trade-offs and using Treasury CBAx not just Living Standards Framework?

  3. How to encourage and enable central and local Government Public Leaders to measure and publicly report economic, environmental, social and cultural benefits, based on the NZ Treasury Living Standards Framework and CBAx, to ensure the options invested in are on track to achieve the outcomes/benefits and therefore their vision for their district, region and country?

Future state

The future state of decision making needs to address the why, what, when, how and who of decision making, firstly by imagining:

·         Imagine a vision of “Resilient relationships and good decision making enabling resilient suburbs, organisations, districts and regions” (The Why)

·         Imagine a business case that describes a compelling vision (strategic case), describes the best value option to achieve the vision, (economic case), and describes how the preferred option can be procured well (commercial case), is affordable (financial case) and will be delivered well (management case). (The What)

·         Imagine staged decision making…Starts with a vision (Policy) comprising Programmes (to each achieve an outcome) and the constituent Projects (for service improvement) for a “start-up” decision. Then for project/s an “initiate” decision to formally approach the market.  Then for project/s an “implement” decision to  Procure and proceed to implementation. (The When)

·         Imagine decision makers setting a vision, outcome or service improvement needed being confident there is the capability to think through the development of the business cases in a holistic, systematic  and relational way (The How)

·         Imagine clear communication of the vision, outcome or service improvement from decision makers who lead, steward, and  coordinate with courage. Imagine commitment and capability of those involved in the “How” to be open and transparent, navigating ambiguity with courage, collaborating with and learning from others, and intentionally communicating etc.(the principles). Imagine clear public reporting and accountability that the investment will achieve benefits because of improving services, improving outcomes or achieving the vision  (The Who)

 

 WE need to think in a joined-up way to think medium-to-long-term how to achieve  vision for an organization, a district, region and country:

WE need a decision system that enables government to participate with the public who are part of a resilient community to achieve vision by thinking together using their different strengths, resulting in measurable benefits that will reduce demand on government criminal justice, benefits and mental health, and eliminate systemic poverty. Government needs to consider its role in building resilient communities so those communities can in turn speak with their voices into decision making. That approach needs to be holistic, systematic, and relational. WE need to courageously and transparently navigate the ambiguity of difficult conversations by intentionally leaning in to listen and learn from each other, to build trust and confidence, to set a vision and identify the best value, affordable and achievable way to achieve that vision.

The system needs to shows clear decisions stages across the phases of the Policy, Budget, Public Investment and Procurement decision making processes. The decision stages are start up, initiate, implement, manage and review, all to achieve the vision. 

The components of the Public Investment Management System are summarised below with leadership, capability, lifecycle, principles and accountability.

BDBO addresses the why, what, when, how and who of decision making in the think phase.   The 5 BDBO stages carefully set out the importance of engaging the right people in the right way (who) to think together to develop a business case (what) to inform a startup decision (when) that gives confidence the vision can be achieved (why).

1.      Governance and alignment, to confirm alignment of decision makers to agree to and how to think in a holistic, systematic and relational way for the medium to long term for the development a Portfolio Business Case to inform start-up decision (and alignment to other decision-making processes) and agree a vision. A community of action!

2.      Capability Development: Provide an overview session for decision makers, an Awareness session for those attending the workshops and a Knowledge content session for the business case team to tailor the strategic and economic cases of the generic portfolio business case to inform the workshops and a Knowledge application session for the business case team so they all know how and when their capabilities will be needed and how they can be involved early.

3.      Portfolio development and identification: Strategic Case workshop to test the strategic case of the portfolio business case and Economic case workshop for each programme including identification of preferred programme and how best to consolidate programmes at Portfolio Level.

4.      Portfolio creation and prioritization. Confirm Portfolio Options (Survive, Revive, Thrive) and discuss CBA on short listed Portfolio options, preferred option and way forward.

5.      Plan and finalise: For preferred option develop outline Commercial Case, Financial Case and Management Case

Summary and analysis of announcements made about decision making:

  1. In March 2022 NZ Treasury stated that “relatively few investment proposals coming through the central government investment management system are well-planned and the use of business cases to support investment decision-making is variable.” (refer to The Treasury Investment Management Statement here on page 53)

 

  1. In May 2022 NZ Treasury stated “if there is a high risk of projects being funded without a rigorous assessment based on sound analysis, the Treasury advised that the Government should set a lower debt ceiling. (refer to The Treasury’s “analysis and recommendations for fiscal rules” here on page 1.)

 

  1. The Treasury’s 2023 Wellbeing Report highlighted the need to develop wellbeing solutions drawn from local intelligence and not just top down: focusing on medium-to-long-term planning with trade-offs and using Treasury CBAx as well as the Living Standards Framework.

 

  1. In December 2023, the Auditor General released his report that Ministers did not have enough information to be sure that decisions supported value for money and agencies developed investment options for Ministers within extremely tight time frames.

 

  1. In February 2024, the Secretary for the Treasury said publicly a joined-up approach is needed across the public sector to make decisions that will result in measurable increases in benefits for New Zealanders within a system that supports coordinated and considered decision making. here

 

  1. In March 2024 Government released its Budget Policy Statement including the following statements:

●       Its goal is to build a stronger, more productive economy; more efficient, effective, and responsive public services; get the government’s books back in order and restore discipline to public spending.

●       funding high quality investments that provide benefits to New Zealand over time,

●       building a sustainable pipeline of investments and capital investment decisions based on robust asset management and investment planning, including the presentation of high-quality business cases.

 

  1. In August 2024 Treasury released its Quarterly Investment Report March 2024 https://www.treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2024-07/cabinet-paper-eco-24-sub-0110.pdf stating:

    • In Government there is a lack of long-term planning and poor strategic thinking and inconsistent application of investment management rules and requirements. (e.g. business cases are not completed adequately, or at all, in seeking funding)

    • they commenced a review and update of the investment planning (Better Business Case) and assurance (Gateway) frameworks to ensure these are fit for purpose and are delivering value for Ministers and Cabinet, to deliver shorter and faster business cases that have the key information needed for Ministers and Cabinet to make well-informed, timely decisions throughout the investment lifecycle.

    • there are opportunities for agencies to collaborate on investments to reduce individual investment risk, support more coordinated and efficient procurement practices, and develop capability across agencies.

 

8.      In September 2024 Minister of Infrastructure Chris Bishop warned Cabinet that Investment proposals are coming to us for approval before they are ready, and without sufficient evidence to support our decision-making," "This will ultimately slow the ability to deliver our infrastructure and investment priorities." "Treasury has started providing us with indicators to inform us about agency investment planning and delivery performance," he said. In large part, Bishop now is reliant on Treasury, which had oversight of the previous flawed system. In turn, Treasury depends on oversight through a blurred lens across both new projects, and old assets; reports note how agencies tended to underinvest and "sweat assets for as long as possible".

 

9.      In December 2024 Treasury told Minister of Infrastructure Chris Bishop that many agencies lack understanding about planning large infrastructure projects, and this was "exacerbated by skills and capability gaps and poor asset planning and management". New projects planning was fraught, and building them was fraught, and so were existing assets, it said.

 

10.  On 15 May 2025 The Minister for Infrastructure said “We want to strengthen the infrastructure system to lift asset performance and service outcomes for New Zealanders, ensure there is adequate investment in planned asset maintenance and renewal activities, ensure new investment decisions can be made within the overall context of agencies’ asset management plans, and improve accountability, capability, and oversight of our infrastructure. Article is here

 

11.  On 1st July 2025 the outgoing Auditor General’s reflections here were:

o   the public’s trust in democratic institutions is declining.

o   Public organisations need to carefully consider how they build and maintain relationships with the diverse communities they serve.

o   The public sector needs robust systems to support the integrity of what it does.

o   The public sector is not short of strategies and plans but there is a lack of integrated and enduring planning, preparation, and investment for the future.

o   It is difficult to get answers to important questions like: What are a government’s goals? How is it planning to achieve them? How does government spending connect to these plans? And what has been achieved for the money spent?