Introduction
What are behaviourally anchored rating scales?
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) are a standardised scoring method to distinguish between unsatisfactory, competent and outstanding behaviours within a capability proficiency.
BARS compare an individual’s performance against specific examples of behaviour that are anchored to numerical ratings. BARS allow both established and developing behaviours displayed to be incorporated into assessment and evaluation.
This allows a more accurate assessment of an individual’s performance than more traditional methods where typically only positive behaviours are recorded. BARS also enable fairer and more consistent selection decisions by minimising interpretation and unconscious bias.
BARS can be used throughout the employee life cycle, from recruitment and selection through to performance development and career development.
The Place-based capability framework BARS have been developed to support the implementation of the Place-based capability framework.
BARS have also been developed by the Department of Justice and Community Safety (DJCS) for the VPS Capability framework. The following introduction has been adapted based on the DJCS BARS guides.
How do you use BARS?
BARS have a 4-point rating system which ranges from Unsatisfactory (1) to Exceeds expectations (4) and have specific, observable behaviours as descriptors for each score.
The following table describes the standard of behaviours you would expect to see at each rating.
1 – Unsatisfactory
The behaviours (described or observed) do not meet expectations. Performance/ examples are consistently below the expectations of the role and agreed performance goals / key selection criteria were not met. Performance / example displays considerable and consistent deficiency in work compared to the required standard and significant improvement is required to achieve performance goals.
2 – Needs improvement
Performance / examples regularly did not meet the expectations of the role and achievement of performance goals /key selection criteria was deficient in on or more areas and needs improvement. Sometimes performs /provides examples to the required standard however performance /example is inconsistent tor regularly deficient and needs improvement to achieve performance goals.
3 – Meets expectations
Consistently performs/ provides examples to the required standard meeting all agreed performance goals/ key selection criteria.
4 – Exceeds expectations
Has exceeded one or more of the agreed performance goals/key selection criteria. Performs / provides examples to a standard that consistently produces a high-quality outcome / exceeds the requirements for the role.
Each row of the BARS focuses on a specific behaviour across a capability proficiency level. As you assess each capability, you read across row by row to determine whether the behaviour was evidenced in the candidate’s response (for recruitment) or in the individual’s performance, and if so, whether the behaviour was unsatisfactory, needed improvement, met expectations or exceeded expectations.
In some cases, there will be descriptors that do not best describe the evidence presented by the candidate or reported by the employee. Should this happen, consider an appropriate score based on the capability statement.
Using BARS for behavioural based interviews
Behaviourally based interview questions should be developed with consideration for how they will be scored. For example, take the following behavioural question for assessing working collaboratively:
‘Please describe a situation that required you to consider a different perspective from your own when exploring an issue. How did you approach the situation? What would you do differently next time?’
Some considerations for refining this question might be:
- Does the question itself give the candidate the opportunity to score or ‘hit’ the Unsatisfactory or Exceeds expectations behaviours?
- The above question might not elicit the collaborative aspects of working collaboratively. An alternative might be: In your opinion, please tell us what makes up a successful team culture. How have you individually contributed to a successful team culture/s in the past?
- Does the question target the capability you are asking about?
- The original question might elicit a response to partnering and co-creation rather than working collaboratively. An alternative might be: Can you tell us about a time you worked collaboratively with your team to achieve a goal? How did you contribute to the team’s goals?
N.B. In circumstances where the problem cannot be solved by amending the question, you may need to amend some of the minor wording in the BARS.
Using BARS for observable behaviours
As well as using the BARS to assess a behavioural interview, you can use BARS for performance development with your employee where you directly observe an employee’s behaviour.
When BARS should not be used
BARS are not advisable when:
- Asking hypothetical or questions that assess a candidate’s situational judgement, e.g., ‘what would you do if’.
- None of the assessors on the panel have an understanding of how to use BARS correctly.
- Reviewing reference check or other probity/security information.
Place-based capabilities: Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scales
Knowledge and application of place-based approaches
Capability cluster definition: apply specialised knowledge to establish, support and successfully enable place-based approaches.
Capabilities under this domain include:
- Application of place-based knowledge, tools and methodologies
- Enabling place-based approaches
- Flexible funding models
Application of place-based knowledge, tools and methodologies
Application of place-based knowledge, tools and methodologies – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Researches and discusses the basic principles and stages of place-based and place-focused approaches.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Minimal or no understanding of the basic principles of place-based approaches.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Explains some of the stages of place-based and place-focused approaches.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Researches and discusses the basic principles and stages of place-based and place-focused approaches.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Identifies the stage a place-based initiative is at.
☐ Explains the different stages of place-based approaches to others.
Application of place-based knowledge, tools and methodologies – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Applies knowledge of place-based approaches, tools and methodologies to identify and interpret emerging trends.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to identify emerging trends or trends identified are not relevant.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Limited understanding of place-based approaches, tools and methodologies.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Applies knowledge of place-based approaches, tools and methodologies to identify and interpret emerging trends.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Applies knowledge of place-based approaches, tools and methodologies to identify and interpret emerging trends and articulates how these could impact own work with place-based initiatives.
Application of place-based knowledge, tools and methodologies – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION – Applies in-depth knowledge of place-based approaches, tools and methodologies to address emerging trends and to support community-led work.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Approaches, tools and methodologies not applied or used in own work.
☐ Fails to identify and / or take into consideration relevant trends
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Limited knowledge of how to apply place-based approaches, tools and methodologies to address emerging trends and to support community-led work.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Applies in-depth knowledge of place-based approaches, tools and methodologies to address emerging trends and to support community-led work.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Supports others to address emerging trends by sharing knowledge of place-based approaches, tools and methodologies.
☐ Uses in-depth knowledge of place-based approaches to identify emerging trends and adapt work accordingly.
Application of place-based knowledge, tools and methodologies – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Draws on own expert knowledge of place-based approaches, tools and methodologies to support community-led work in diverse settings.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to apply practical knowledge of place-based tools and methodologies to support community-led work
☐ Uses same approach in different settings without consideration for context.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Uses limited knowledge of place-based approaches, tools and methodologies to support community-led work in diverse settings.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Draws on own expert knowledge of place-based approaches, tools and methodologies to support community-led work in diverse settings.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Shares expert knowledge of place-based approaches, tools and methodologies to support and empower communities to adapt these to their own context.
☐ Uses in-depth knowledge of place-based approaches to identify emerging trends and adapt work accordingly.
Enabling place-based approaches
Enabling place-based approaches – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Recognises when place-based approaches might be useful to a community.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Has limited understanding of when place-based approaches might be useful to a community.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Recognises when place-based approaches might be useful to a community on some occasions.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Recognises when place-based approaches might be useful to a community.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Identifies when place-based approaches might be useful to a community and is able to articulate the benefits of place-based work.
Enabling place-based approaches – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Supports government and community partners to enable the delivery of place-based approaches.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Supports government only in the delivery of place-based approaches.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Tries to lead, rather than support delivery of place-based approaches.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Supports government and community partners to enable the delivery of place-based approaches.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Creates an environment for sharing and collaboration between government and community partners.
Enabling place-based approaches – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION – Enables place-based approaches, proactively modifying the approach or cycling back to earlier stages in the process as needed.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not modify approach.
☐ Lacks understanding of when to cycle back to earlier stages in the process.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Has limited understanding of when to modify approach or cycle back to earlier stages in the process.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Enables place-based approaches, proactively modifying the approach or cycling back to earlier stages in the process as needed.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Coaches and empowers others to identify when the approach should be modified and stages in the process should be revisited.
Enabling place-based approaches – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Identifies local strengths as well as local capability and capacity gaps to ensure the success of place-based approaches.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not support capability and capacity building.
☐ Fails to effectively leverage local strengths.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Identifies only capability and capacity gaps within place-based approaches.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Identifies local strengths as well as local capability and capacity gaps to ensure the success of place-based approaches.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Leverages local strengths to enhance place-based approaches.
☐ Supports plans to build capability and capacity when gaps are identified.
Flexible Funding Models
Flexible Funding Models – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Articulates the importance of flexibility, security, and coordination in place-based funding models.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not understand why flexibility, security and coordination are important in place-based funding models.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Limited ability to articulate or explain why flexibility, security and coordination are important in place-based funding models.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Articulates the importance of flexibility, security, and coordination in place-based funding models.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Articulates and supports others to understand the importance of flexibility, security and coordination in place-based approaches.
Flexible Funding Models – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Identifies opportunities associated with potential funding partners, seeking flexibility and alignment where possible.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to create opportunities with potential funding partners.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Creates funding arrangements without flexibility.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Identifies opportunities associated with potential funding partners, seeking flexibility and alignment where possible.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Actively seeks out opportunities with potential funding partners to create aligned, flexible funding arrangements.
Flexible Funding Models – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION –Proactively partners with funders from other organisations or jurisdictions to influence and align flexible funding agreements.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not engage effectively with funding partners resulting in inflexible and/or misaligned funding agreements.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Partners with funders from other organisations or jurisdictions but fails to adequately influence and align flexible funding agreements.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Proactively partners with funders from other organisations or jurisdictions to influence and align flexible funding agreements.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Coaches others in how to partner with funders and influence and align flexible funding agreements.
☐ Creates opportunities for flexibility.
Flexible Funding Models – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Advocates for changes to government funding systems and processes to ensure best practice flexible funding principles are met
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not identify opportunities to promote changes to government funding to create more flexibility.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Fails to effectively leverage opportunities to promote changes to government funding to create more flexibility.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Advocates for changes to government funding systems and processes to ensure best practice flexible funding principles are met.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Effectively brokers changes to government funding systems and processes, in line with best practice flexible funding principles.
Balancing Power and Sharing Accountability
Capability cluster definition: Understand and utilise power dynamics to share accountability and build trusting relationships with government and community partners.
Capabilities under this domain include:
- Awareness of own power
- Shared accountability and trust
- Flexibility during co-creation
- Awareness of power dynamics
- Balances government and community needs appropriately
Awareness of own power
Awareness of own power – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Identifies own power in each interaction and acts accordingly.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Uses own power inappropriately.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Has limited understanding of own power.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Identifies own power in each interaction and acts accordingly.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Identifies and articulates own power in interactions with others.
☐ Shows consideration of different power dynamics in interactions with others.
Awareness of own power – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Declares own agenda to help make power dynamics more transparent.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Uses own power inappropriately.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Does not declare own agenda.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Declares own agenda to help make power dynamics more transparent.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Declares own agenda to help make power dynamics more transparent and encourages others to do so.
Awareness of own power – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION – Balances dynamics of power to ensure all stakeholders are empowered to make decisions.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Uses power or allows others to use their power to create outcomes which favour some stakeholders over others.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Is unaware of power dynamics in stakeholder groups.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Balances dynamics of power to ensure all stakeholders are empowered to make decisions.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Coaches others on power dynamics and how to balance this to empower stakeholders to make decisions.
Awareness of own power – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Role models effective use of own power to create a culture where power-sharing is expected and embraced.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Uses power or allows others to use their power to create outcomes which favour some stakeholders over others.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Has limited understanding of power dynamics in stakeholder groups.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Role models effective use of own power to create a culture where power-sharing is expected and embraced.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Provides thought leadership and direction on how to share power and create a culture where this is expected and embraced.
Anticipates power imbalances and takes proactive action to address this.
Shared accountability and trust
Shared accountability and trust – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Outlines how transparency and shared accountability can build trust.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to outline how transparency and accountability can build trust.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Has limited understanding of how transparency and accountability can build trust.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Outlines how transparency and shared accountability can build trust.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Is transparent in interactions with others.
☐ Encourages shared accountability with stakeholders.
Shared accountability and trust – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Consistently delivers on commitments to build and maintain trusting relationships.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to deliver on commitments to stakeholders.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Inconsistently delivers on commitments to build and maintain trusting relationships.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Consistently delivers on commitments to build and maintain trusting relationships.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Builds and maintains long-term trusting relationships by consistently delivering on commitments.
Shared accountability and trust – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION – Role-models respectful and trusting relationships amongst stakeholders, encouraging shared accountability.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to build trust with stakeholders.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Inconsistent relationships with stakeholders where trust and shared accountability is limited.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Role-models respectful and trusting relationships amongst stakeholders, encouraging shared accountability.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Seeks input from stakeholders on working relationship with a view to developing trust and respect and encouraging accountability.
Shared accountability and trust – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Fosters a culture of shared accountability and transparency by prioritising community needs to build and maintain trusting relationships.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not share responsibility for outcomes with community.
☐ Is not transparent with stakeholders.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Focuses on government needs above those of the community.
☐ Fails to sufficiently advocate for community needs within government.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Fosters a culture of shared accountability and transparency by prioritising community needs to build and maintain trusting relationships.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Provides thought leadership and direction within government on creating shared accountability and transparency.
☐ Creates long term strategies to develop shared accountability and transparency between communities, government and other stakeholders.
Flexibility during co-creation
Flexibility during co-creation – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Discusses the importance of collaborative engagement principles and how they relate to place-based approaches.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to articulate the importance of collaborative engagement principles and how they relate to place-based approaches.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Has limited understanding of collaborative engagement principles and their relevance to place-based approaches.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Discusses the importance of collaborative engagement principles and how they relate to place-based approaches.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Discusses how collaborative engagement principles relate to own work with place-based initiatives.
Flexibility during co-creation – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Demonstrates openness when working with new ideas or suggestions during collaborative engagement.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Is not open to the ideas of others.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Demonstrates limited openness to new ideas or suggestions during collaborative engagement.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Demonstrates openness when working with new ideas or suggestions during collaborative engagement.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Actively encourages different ideas and suggestions from a wide range of stakeholders during collaborative engagement.
Flexibility during co-creation – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION – Encourages openness and flexibility when collaborating under challenging circumstances.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not engage with stakeholders or is inflexible under challenging circumstances.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Shows limited flexibility when collaborating in challenging circumstances.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Encourages openness and flexibility when collaborating under challenging circumstances.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Uses openness and flexibility as a strategy to navigate through challenging circumstances to seek mutually beneficial outcomes.
Flexibility during co-creation – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Acts as a role model for collaboration by owning mistakes and encouraging similar openness and flexibility in others.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Hides mistakes from others.
☐ Repeats same mistakes in future work.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Fails to take adequate ownership of mistakes or encourage openness in others.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Acts as a role model for collaboration by owning mistakes and encouraging similar openness and flexibility in others.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Creates opportunities for others to learn from their own mistakes and those of others.
Awareness of power dynamics
Awareness of power dynamics – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Articulates and maps intersecting power dynamics.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Is unaware of power dynamics within a place-based initiative.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Shows limited awareness of power dynamics within a place-based initiative.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Articulates and maps intersecting power dynamics.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Articulates, maps and creates transparency around intersecting power dynamics.
Awareness of power dynamics – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Uses understanding of power dynamics to get better outcomes for a place-based initiative.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Shows limited understanding of power dynamics and how they can impact a place-based initiative.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Fails to use understanding of power dynamics to create opportunities for a place-based initiative.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Uses understanding of power dynamics to get better outcomes for a place-based initiative.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Shares knowledge with others about how to leverage power dynamics to create opportunities for better outcomes for a place-based initiative.
Awareness of power dynamics – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION – Supports others to understand power dynamics and their impact on place-based initiatives.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not share information on power dynamics with others.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Fails to support others to understand power dynamics and their impact on place-based initiatives.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Supports others to understand power dynamics and their impact on place-based initiatives.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Supports others to understand power dynamics in place-based initiatives and creates transparency around this.
Awareness of power dynamics – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Holds others to account for the ethical use of power dynamics to achieve effective place-based outcomes.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to hold others to account when unethical use of power dynamics is occurring in a place-based initiative.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Limited understanding of what an unethical use of power looks like in a place-based initiative.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Holds others to account for the ethical use of power dynamics to achieve effective place-based outcomes.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Provides thought leadership across government about power dynamics in place-based initiatives.
☐ Creates policies and/or systems to hold others to account for the ethical use of power dynamics to achieve outcomes in place-based initiatives.
Balances government and community needs appropriately
Balances government and community needs appropriately – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Balances listening with contributing, in order to represent government and community appropriately.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not effectively listen to others.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Takes an overactive role in contributing to government and community discussions at the expense of providing others with the opportunity to contribute.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Balances listening with contributing, in order to represent government and community appropriately.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Has awareness of the right opportunities and forums to contribute and when it is more appropriate to listen and learn.
Balances government and community needs appropriately – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Balances government priorities with community needs and opportunities when making recommendations.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Makes recommendations that are unduly favoured towards government or community.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Inconsistently balances government priorities with community needs and opportunities when making recommendations
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Balances government priorities with community needs and opportunities when making recommendations.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Makes recommendations that create mutually beneficial opportunities for both government and communities.
Balances government and community needs appropriately – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION – Advocates for government priorities while seeking alignment amongst diverse stakeholder groups.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to create alignment between diverse stakeholders.
☐ Unable to get buy-in for government priorities from stakeholders.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Advocates inconsistently for government priorities while seeking alignment amongst diverse stakeholder groups.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Advocates for government priorities while seeking alignment amongst diverse stakeholder groups.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Creates win-win solutions and outcomes for both government and diverse stakeholder groups.
Balances government and community needs appropriately – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Anticipates how changing government priorities may impact various stakeholder groups and manages these relationships accordingly.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to communicate with stakeholders about changing government priorities.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Does not recognise impact of changed priorities on stakeholders.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Anticipates how changing government priorities may impact various stakeholder groups and manages these relationships accordingly.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Scans horizon and strategically influences government priorities to minimise any negative impact on stakeholders.
☐ Provides clear advice on how changing priorities may impact stakeholders and works with stakeholders to manage any resulting issues.
Adaptive and facilitative leadership
Capability cluster definition: Contribute to and foster a culture of iteration and learning from successes and failures.
Capabilities under this domain include:
- Demonstrates adaptive and facilitative leadership
- Helps move groups of people toward a goal
- Promotes a ‘test and learn culture’
- Encourages iterative learning approach
Demonstrates adaptive and facilitative leadership
Demonstrates adaptive and facilitative leadership – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Applies the basic principles of adaptive and facilitative leadership to proactively learn about the viewpoints of various stakeholders.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not take into consideration the viewpoints of various stakeholders.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Has limited understanding of adaptive and facilitative leadership.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Applies the basic principles of adaptive and facilitative leadership to proactively learn about the viewpoints of various stakeholders.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Uses adaptive leadership principles to learn from other viewpoints and apply learnings to own work / perspectives.
Demonstrates adaptive and facilitative leadership – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Appropriately exercises own authority to vary from own organisation's agenda.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Adopts a rigid mindset prioritising only government objectives.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires support to understand authority to vary from own organisation's agenda.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Appropriately exercises own authority to vary from own organisation's agenda.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Acts as an effective facilitator between stakeholders to support an agenda outside government.
Demonstrates adaptive and facilitative leadership – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION – Creates an environment where all government and community stakeholders have an equal voice and contribution to decision making.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Prioritises government or specific stakeholders’ voices over others.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Decisions are made by some stakeholders and not others.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Creates an environment where all government and community stakeholders have an equal voice and contribution to decision making.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Effectively brokers and supports decision making where all government and community stakeholders have an equal voice and contribution.
Demonstrates adaptive and facilitative leadership – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Leads the development and implementation of organisational frameworks and structures that enable adaptive and facilitative leadership to thrive.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Has limited understanding of the organisational frameworks or systems that support adaptive and facilitative leadership.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires support to develop and implement the organisational frameworks and structures that enable adaptive and facilitative leadership to thrive.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Leads the development and implementation of organisational frameworks and structures that enable adaptive and facilitative leadership to thrive.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Champions organisational and government wide frameworks that enable and support adaptive and facilitative leadership
Helps move groups of people toward a goal
Helps move groups of people toward a goal – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Identifies a common goal as a first priority and articulates associated benefits.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Unable to identify common goal.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires significant support to identify a common goal as a first priority and articulate associated benefits.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Identifies a common goal as a first priority and articulates associated benefits.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Supports others to identify common goals and benefits.
Helps move groups of people toward a goal– Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Facilitates diverse stakeholders towards a common goal.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Unable to identify common goal.
☐ Fails to see the needs and perspectives of diverse stakeholders.
☐ Engages with some but not all stakeholders.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires significant support to facilitate diverse stakeholders towards a common goal.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Facilitates diverse stakeholders towards a common goal.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Able to support stakeholders individually and as a group to see the benefits of moving towards a common goal.
Helps move groups of people toward a goal–Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION – Balances diverse group motivations, needs and values to find common ground.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Prioritises the needs of some stakeholders over others.
☐ Unable to articulate common ground for stakeholders.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires support to articulate common ground for stakeholders.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Balances diverse group motivations, needs and values to find common ground.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Understands stakeholder motivations, needs and values and balances these to find common ground and shared goals.
Helps move groups of people toward a goal – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Puts the needs of the group as a whole above the needs of any group member to help move groups of people towards a goal.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Prioritises the needs of some stakeholders over others.
☐ Gives some stakeholders more opportunities for contribution and/or decision making than others.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires support to articulate common ground for stakeholders.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Puts the needs of the group as a whole above the needs of any group member to help move groups of people towards a goal.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Influences stakeholders to prioritise the needs of the group above their own individual needs.
☐ Seeks opportunities to strengthen relationships with individual stakeholders to enhance the overall strength of the group.
Promotes a ‘test and learn’ culture
Promotes a ‘test and learn’ culture – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Develops plans that include possibilities of failure and what the positive outcomes of those may be.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not take risks and fears failure.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires significant support to develop plans that include possibilities of failure and what the positive outcomes of those may be.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Develops plans that include possibilities of failure and what the positive outcomes of those may be.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Turns failures into learning opportunities for self and others.
Promotes a ‘test and learn’ culture – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Creates opportunities for stakeholders to share successes and failures and learn from them.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Discourages sharing of failures with/between stakeholders.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Fails to create opportunities for stakeholders to share successes and failures and learn from them.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Creates opportunities for stakeholders to share successes and failures and learn from them.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Is transparent with own successes and failures so others can learn from them.
Promotes a ‘test and learn’ culture – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION – Creates an environment where people feel safe to “test and learn” and take appropriate risks.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Critical of others’ mistakes.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Fails to take calculated risks when it would be appropriate to do so.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Creates an environment where people feel safe to “test and learn” and take appropriate risks.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Seeks regular feedback from others about culture and how this can support opportunities to “test and learn”.
Promotes a ‘test and learn’ culture – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Fosters a “test and learn” culture by placing value on and promoting innovative approaches, lessons learned and trying new ways of working.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not acknowledge or is critical of failure.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Celebrates success only. Struggles to adopt “test and learn” culture and learn from the lessons of others.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Fosters a ‘test and learn’ culture by placing value on and promoting innovative approaches, lessons learned and trying new ways of working.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Role models and encourages others to share the benefits of creating a ‘test and learn’ culture to promote learning.
Encourages an iterative, learning approach
Encourages an iterative, learning approach – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Uses self-reflection to identify ways to improve the current state.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Blames others for challenges or errors.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Limited self-reflection and identification of ways to improve the current state.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Uses self-reflection to identify ways to improve the current state.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Takes accountability for making changes to own way of working to help improve current state.
Encourages an iterative, learning approach – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Consistently adopts an iterative approach and learning mindset to problem solving and learning.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Gives up when things don’t go according to plan.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Limited application of past learnings to current work.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Consistently adopts an iterative approach and learning mindset to problem solving and learning.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Role models using an iterative approach and learning mindset to solving problems and overcome setbacks.
Encourages an iterative, learning approach – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION – Encourages and participates in regular review discussions to evaluate lessons learned and apply these to next steps.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not undertake review sessions to evaluate lessons learned.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Lessons learned are not applied effectively to next steps.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Encourages and participates in regular review discussions to evaluate lessons learned and apply these to next steps.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Leads review and evaluation sessions to evaluate lessons learned and shares findings with others.
Encourages an iterative, learning approach – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Creates and leads a culture of continuous improvement and learning.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not encourage, value or apply continuous improvement and learning.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Inconsistently values and encourages continuous improvement and learning across team.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Creates and leads a culture of continuous improvement and learning.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Leads and embeds a culture of continuous improvement and learning by being transparent with own lessons learned.
Place-based monitoring, evaluation and learning
Capability cluster definition: Conduct monitoring, evaluation and learning of place-based approaches.
Capabilities under this domain include:
- Application of place-based monitoring, evaluation and learning
- Leveraging lessons learned
- Communicating the benefits
Application of place-based monitoring, evaluation and learning
Application of place-based monitoring, evaluation and learning – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Discusses the importance of monitoring, evaluation and learning when supporting place-based approaches.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not encourage or discuss monitoring, evaluation or learning with stakeholders.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Inconsistently discusses monitoring, evaluation or learning with stakeholders.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Discusses the importance of monitoring, evaluation and learning when supporting place-based approaches.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Coaches others in monitoring, evaluation and learning.
Application of place-based monitoring, evaluation and learning – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Undertakes monitoring, evaluation and learning in a way that is informed by the needs and interests of community stakeholders.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Monitoring, evaluation and learning is not consistently undertaken.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Conducts monitoring, evaluation and learning using standard approach with no tailoring to the needs of the community and stakeholders.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Undertakes monitoring, evaluation and learning in a way that is informed by the needs and interests of community stakeholders.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Supports active engagement and ownership by community and stakeholders in monitoring, evaluation and learning processes.
Application of place-based monitoring, evaluation and learning –Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION – Discusses and develops monitoring, evaluation and learning approaches with a variety of stakeholders to enhance outcomes and to strengthen this capability in others.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Undertakes monitoring, evaluation and learning with little discussion with stakeholders.
☐ Develops monitoring, evaluation and learning outcomes in isolation.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires support to discuss and develop monitoring, evaluation and learning approaches with stakeholders
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Discusses and develops monitoring, evaluation and learning approaches with stakeholders to enhance outcomes and to strengthen this capability in others.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Generates enthusiasm in others to develop collaborative outcomes in monitoring, evaluation and learning.
☐ Creates opportunities for capability development of others in monitoring, evaluation and learning.
Application of place-based monitoring, evaluation and learning – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Promotes monitoring, evaluation and learning practice and approaches that enhance outcomes and responds to local context including the diverse needs of stakeholders.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Stakeholders are not consulted on monitoring, evaluation and learning approaches.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Stakeholders are consulted on monitoring, evaluation and learning approaches designed by government.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Promotes monitoring, evaluation and learning practice and approaches that enhance outcomes and responds to local context including the diverse needs of stakeholders.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Creates high levels of partner engagement in the development of collaborative outcomes in monitoring, evaluation and learning approaches.
Leveraging lessons learned
Leveraging lessons learned – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Carefully listens to and reviews partners’ feedback to identify and address opportunities for continuous improvement.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not consider feedback about areas for improvement.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires considerable support to identify areas for continuous improvement.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Carefully listens to and reviews partners’ feedback to identify and address opportunities for continuous improvement.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Identifies and implements opportunities for continuous improvement based on partners’ feedback.
Leveraging lessons learned – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Proactively and confidently uses lessons learned to identify and address opportunities for continuous improvement.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Adopts an attitude of blame.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Is resistant to self- reflection and identifying when things didn’t go well.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Proactively and confidently uses lessons learned to identify and address opportunities for continuous improvement.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Role models learning from failure or mistakes to create opportunities for improvement.
Leveraging lessons learned – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Shares lessons learned to anticipate community partner concerns and leverage opportunities for continuous improvement.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not share learnings with partners.
☐ Fails to identify opportunities for improvement based on past failures.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires support to adequately identify opportunities for improvement based on past failures.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Shares lessons learned to anticipate community partner concerns and leverage opportunities for continuous improvement
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Addresses community partner concerns and builds support for continuous improvement opportunities.
Leveraging lessons learned – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Leads and promotes a culture of continuous improvement alongside community partners based on lessons learned through monitoring, evaluation and learning.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Creates a culture where people are afraid to make mistakes or fail.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Takes the lead in continuous improvement without adequate input or buy-in from community partners.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Leads and promotes a culture of continuous improvement alongside community partners based on lessons learned through monitoring, evaluation and learning.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Works across government to promote the benefits of working with community partners to identify lessons learned and build a culture of continuous improvement.
Communicating the benefits
Communicating the benefits – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Describes the benefits of monitoring, evaluation and learning for place-based approaches.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Is unable to describe the benefits of monitoring, evaluation and learning for place-based approaches.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Has limited understanding of benefits of monitoring, evaluation and learning.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Describes the benefits of monitoring, evaluation and learning for place-based approaches.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Describes and promotes the benefits of monitoring, evaluation and learning to both government and community partners.
Communicating the benefits – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Clearly documents and communicates monitoring, evaluation and learning outcomes for a variety of stakeholder audiences.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Documentation of monitoring, evaluation and learning outcomes is unclear or incomplete.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Communication of documented monitoring, evaluation and learning outcomes is sporadic or unclear.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Clearly documents and communicates monitoring, evaluation and learning outcomes for a variety of stakeholder audiences.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Clearly documents and communicates monitoring, evaluation and learning outcomes, tailoring these to different audiences and proactively engaging with stakeholders to ensure clear understanding.
Communicating the benefits – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Proactively shares monitoring, evaluation and learning outcomes with the community so that all parties can benefit equally.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not share monitoring, evaluation and learning outcomes.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Only shares monitoring, evaluation and learning outcomes within government.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Proactively shares monitoring, evaluation and learning outcomes with the community so that all parties can benefit equally.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Shares monitoring, evaluation and learning outcomes with the community and explains the learnings, benefits and opportunities this presents.
Communicating the benefits – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Uses evidence gained from shared monitoring, evaluation and learning to advocate the value of lessons learned.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to identify evidence from shared monitoring, evaluation and learning
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Does not advocate the value of mistakes or lessons learned.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Uses evidence gained from shared monitoring, evaluation and learning to advocate the value of lessons learned.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Champions shared monitoring, evaluation and learning across government and the community.
Information and data sharing
Capability cluster definition: Improve information and data quality and sharing in line with privacy standards and other relevant information.
Capabilities under this domain include:
- Information and data sharing / advocacy
- Accessing information and data through others
- Improving data access, quality and relevance
- Adherence to relevant legislation
Information and data sharing advocacy
Information and data sharing advocacy – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Describes information and data sharing requirements and restrictions, and why these exist.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Lacks an understanding about own responsibilities relating to data sharing
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Limited understanding of data sharing requirements and restrictions and the reasons for these.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Describes information and data sharing requirements and restrictions, and why these exist.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Supports others to understand responsibilities around data sharing requirements and restrictions.
Information and data sharing advocacy – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Appropriately accesses and shares information and data internally and externally.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Shares information internally or externally that should not be shared.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Unsure how to seek advice or further information on whether it would be appropriate to access and share information and data.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Appropriately accesses and shares information and data internally and externally.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Anticipates what information is required and accesses and shares this appropriately internally and externally.
☐ Supports others to access and share information appropriately.
Information and data sharing advocacy – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Proactively shares information and data with relevant internal and external stakeholders.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Shares information or data internally or externally that should not be shared
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires prompting and ongoing follow up to share information and data with relevant internal and external stakeholders
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Proactively shares information and data with relevant internal and external stakeholders.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Proactively seeks requests from stakeholders on data and information required and shares this as appropriate.
Information and data sharing advocacy – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Leads or contributes to a culture of greater data transparency and efficiency and influences information and data sharing protocols both within and across organisations and communities.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to encourage and support culture of data transparency and efficiency in own organisation or with communities.
☐ Represents government needs and requirements only
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Does not effectively influence information and data sharing protocols within and across organisations and communities.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Leads or contributes to a culture of greater data transparency and efficiency and influences information and data sharing protocols both within and across organisations and communities.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Champions a culture of data transparency and efficiency across both government and community, influencing information and data sharing protocols at a whole of government level.
Accessing information and data through others
Accessing information and data through others – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Knows how and where to find relevant information and data and shares appropriately.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Shares information or data internally or externally that should not be shared.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires substantial support to find relevant data.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Knows how and where to find relevant information and data and shares appropriately.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Finds new sources of relevant data and determines how to share this appropriately.
Accessing information and data through others – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Confidently works with relevant internal and external stakeholders to obtain, share and interpret information and data.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Shares information or data internally or externally that should not be shared.
☐ Interprets information or data incorrectly.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires substantial support to work with internal and external stakeholders to obtain, share and interpret information and data.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Confidently works with relevant internal and external stakeholders to obtain, share and interpret information and data.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Supports others to obtain, share and interpret information and data.
Accessing information and data through others – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Proactively develops and maintains relationships with government and community stakeholders to build a culture of information and data sharing.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Has limited engagement with stakeholders and community around the need to share information and data.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Does not proactively develop and maintain relationships with government and community stakeholders to build a culture of information and data sharing.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Proactively develops and maintains relationships with government and community stakeholders to build a culture of information and data sharing.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Coaches others to building strong relationships between government and communities to creating information and data sharing culture.
Accessing information and data through others – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Leads, champions or enhances sustainable and ongoing information and data sharing arrangements between government and community data custodians.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to create ongoing data sharing arrangements between government and community data custodians.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Creates information and data sharing arrangements between government and community data custodians that are not sustainable.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Leads, champions or enhances sustainable and ongoing information and data sharing arrangements between government and community data custodians.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Provides thought leadership and direction around sustainable information and data sharing between government and community data custodians.
Improving data access, quality and relevance
Improving data access, quality and relevance – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Recognises the importance of quality and relevance when collecting information and data.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not understand the importance of quality and relevance when collecting information and data.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Information and data collected is of limited relevance.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Recognises the importance of quality and relevance when collecting information and data.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Consults carefully with data custodians to ensure data and information collected is relevant
Improving data access, quality and relevance – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Prepares carefully considered data requests to relevant stakeholders to ensure that data received is appropriate and relevant.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Data requests are incomplete or inadequate to collect data or information required.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires support to prepare data requests to relevant stakeholders.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Prepares carefully considered data requests to relevant stakeholders to ensure that data received is appropriate and relevant.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Supports others to develop high quality data requests to obtain appropriate and relevant data.
Improving data access, quality and relevance – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Identifies data access, quality and relevance issues, flagging concerns or seeking to influence change where possible.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Gives up when it is difficult to obtain data.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires support to identify opportunities to influence or change data access, quality or relevance issues.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Identifies data access, quality and relevance issues, flagging concerns or seeking to influence change where possible.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Proactively partners with stakeholders to improve access, quality and relevance of data and information.
Improving data access, quality and relevance – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Leads or contributes to a culture of continuous improvement in data access, quality and relevance.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to create and build a culture of continuous improvement in data access, quality and relevance.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Maintains the same approach despite the need to make changes to the improvement of data access, quality and relevance.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Leads or contributes to a culture of continuous improvement in data access, quality and relevance.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Identifies champions to create and build a culture of continuous improvement in data access, quality and relevance.
Adherence to relevant legislation
Adherence to relevant legislation – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Describes how seeking and sharing information is impacted by privacy standards and other relevant legislation.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Is unable to describe how seeking and sharing information is impacted by privacy standards and other relevant legislation up when it is difficult to obtain data.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Has limited understanding of privacy standards and/or relevant legislation relating to data sharing.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Describes how seeking and sharing information is impacted by privacy standards and other relevant legislation
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Actively applies understanding of privacy standards and other legislation by sharing information and data appropriately.
Adherence to relevant legislation – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Appropriately applies and communicates privacy standards and other relevant legislation related to own work.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Shares or fails to share information appropriately.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Has limited understanding of privacy standards and/or relevant legislation.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Appropriately applies and communicates privacy standards and other relevant legislation related to own work.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Supports others to apply and communicate privacy standards and relevant legislation as they apply to sharing information and data.
Adherence to relevant legislation – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Complies with privacy standards and other relevant legislation, flagging or addressing concerns.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to comply with privacy standards or relevant legislation.
☐ Shares information inappropriately.
☐ Fails to share relevant information.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Has limited understanding of privacy standards and/or relevant legislation.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Complies with privacy standards and other relevant legislation, flagging or addressing concerns.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Coaches others on privacy standards and legislation and their relevance to data and information sharing.
Adherence to relevant legislation – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Promotes compliance with government standards to create an expectation of legislation-informed practice.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to identify opportunities to promote or encourage compliance with government standards around sharing data and information.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Limited compliance with government standards to create an expectation of legislation-informed practice.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Promotes compliance with government standards to create an expectation of legislation-informed practice.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Champions compliance with government standards to create an expectation of legislation-informed practice at a whole of government level.
Joined up work
Balance government and community needs to delivery effective place-based outcomes.
Capabilities under this domain include:
- Connecting and convening
- Working better in government
Connecting and convening
Connecting and convening – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Identifies the roles of local government and community in place-based approaches.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Does not understand the different roles played by government and community in place-based approaches.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Has limited understanding of the different roles played by government and community in place-based approaches.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Identifies the roles of local government and community in place-based approaches.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Supports others to identify the roles of government and community in place-based approaches.
Connecting and convening – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Acts as a conduit between government and community to ensure the communities’ needs are met.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Has a limited understanding of the community’s needs.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Prioritises government needs over those of the community.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Acts as a conduit between government and community to ensure the communities needs are met.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Supports and coaches others to act as a conduit between government and community to ensure the communities needs are met.
Connecting and convening – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Connects and convenes across government organisations and communities to provide seamless solutions for partners.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Gives up easily when facing resistance.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires considerable support to identify and connect with government and stakeholders.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Connects and convenes across government organisations and communities to provide seamless solutions for partners.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Builds long term relationships by connecting and convening government organisations and communities to provide sustainable solutions for partners.
Connecting and convening – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Uses convening and influencing skills to promote collective buy-in and influence the agenda for how community needs can be met.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Uses own power to create solutions that benefit one stakeholder over another.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Limited use of convening and influencing skills to promote collective buy-in and influence the agenda for how community needs can be met.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Uses convening and influencing skills to promote collective buy-in and influence the agenda for how community needs can be met.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Coaches others to convene and influence to create collective buy in.
Working better in government
Working better in government – Foundational
FOUNDATIONAL - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Identifies the nuances of the relationship between government and community when undertaking place-based work.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Rushes in without taking time to adequately understand the dynamic between government and community in place-based approaches.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Has a limited understanding of the nuances of the relationship between government and community when undertaking place-based work.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Identifies the nuances of the relationship between government and community when undertaking place-based work.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Identifies and can explain to others the nuances of the relationship between government and community when undertaking place-based work.
Working better in government – Applied
APPLIED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Effectively uses organisational politics to achieve effective community-led outcomes.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Is unaware of organisational politics and how they could impact community led outcomes.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires significant support to use organisational politics to achieve effective community-led outcomes.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Effectively uses organisational politics to achieve effective community-led outcomes.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Has a strong understanding of organisational politics and advocates within this for community-led outcomes.
Working better in government – Accomplished
ACCOMPLISHED - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Leverages lateral relationships to achieve effective community-led outcomes.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to identify and build lateral relationships with relevant stakeholders.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Requires support to leverage lateral relationships to achieve effective community-led outcomes.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Leverages lateral relationships to achieve effective community-led outcomes.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Builds strong lateral relationships with key stakeholders across government to achieve lasting community-led outcomes.
Working better in government – Leading
LEADING - CAPABILITY DEFINITION - Effectively breaks down silos internally to improve community-led outcomes.
Behaviourally Anchored Rating Scale
1 – Unsatisfactory
☐ Fails to identify and build lateral relationships with relevant stakeholders.
2 – Needs improvement
☐ Operates in a silo within own department / team only.
3 – Meets expectations
☐ Effectively breaks down silos internally to improve community-led outcomes.
4 – Exceeds expectations
☐ Works seamlessly across government to improve community-led outcomes.
☐ Acts as a role model to others demonstrating how to break down silos across government to achieve community-led outcomes.
Updated