6155 Response to request.pdf

National Headquarters
Level 12
80 The Terrace
PO Box 2133
Wel ington
New Zealand
Phone +64 4 496 3600

11 November 2021

A Boocock

By email: [FYI request #16938 email]

Dear A Boocock

Information Request – Restructure - Redeployment/Reassignment Data

I refer to your official information request dated 29 September 2021. On 28 October 2021 we
notified you of an extension of the time to make our decision, to 11 November 2021. You have
asked for the following information:

How many appointees to the position of Group Manager:
1.  did not meet the requirements of the Confirmation of Relevant Experience (CORE)
interim assessment?
2.  have not recently (for example in the 12 months preceding 1 June 2021) been on a
Senior Officer response roster?
3.  do not have relevant leadership experience at an incident involving a high level of
complexity?
4.  have a leadership tertiary qualification
5.  have a management tertiary qualification, or relevant experience (such as managing
staff along with responsibilities and accountabilities for budget, property, fleet and
plant).
6.  Additionally, the number of 'affected' applicants for the 'new' Canterbury district
Group Manager positions who were band 18 or higher?
7.   a copy of the analysis carried out by any person/organisation, and/or consultants
working on behalf of FENZ, which compared the Group Manager position to those of
Area Managers and PRFOs.
8.  on what date(s) were the Canterbury Group Manager and Community Risk Manager
interviews held for 'affected' employees?
9.  on what date(s) were the interview outcomes for the above assessed and scored?

I also refer to your official information request dated 16 and 17 October 2021 asking for the
following additional information:

1.  The ETP (Final, Jan 2020, para 47, p. 10) states that ". . the organisation wil  clearly set
out who wil  be able to apply and be considered for these [new and vacant] positions,
and in what order”. Please provide the document (and the reference within) which
outlines who could apply for the Group Manager positions and in what order, as wel
as the order of preference for redeployment.
2.  If the ETP did not apply to those on fixed term employment agreements, why were they
not able to apply along with 'affected' employees for the Group Manager roles?
3.  As for #2 above, why were those on fixed term employment agreements then able to
apply along with 'impacted' employees for the remaining GM positions.
4.  Why were those no longer working for FENZ able to apply for GM positions which were
not advertised on the open market? You refer in your response to successful GM
applicants who had "previously worked for the organisation" - this would indicate they
were no longer employed by FENZ at the time of applying.
5.  Did any 'affected' staff who were unsuccessful in the first round of interviews for GM,
then apply again during the second round of appointments?
6.  If so, did their applications proceed to interview and were they successful in being
appointed?
7.  Please supply any correspondence from SLDT or the ELT which provided guidance or
clarity around whether or not 'affected' staff who were unsuccessful during the first
round of GM appointments, could reapply along with 'impacted' and others during the
second round of GM appointments.
8.  If 'affected' staff were excluded from re-applying, please provide the rationale behind
this.
9.  The last two appointees to the new Canterbury District GM roles were of 'impacted' or
other status. I understand one of these was perhaps interviewed outside of
Christchurch?
-  if outside Christchurch, where was this interview held?
-  who was on the interview panel?
-  please provide both sets of interview questions that were specifically put to
these appointees
10. The communication sent to FENZ employees and/or others outside of the organisation
advising them that applications were open for the second round of GM appointments.

Your requests have been assessed in accordance with the Official Information Act 1982 (the OIA).
Fire and Emergency New Zealand’s response to each of your questions is set out in appendix 1 and
2. A smal  amount of information has been withheld under the provisions of the OIA

You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of this decision.
Information about how to make a complaint is available at www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or
freephone 0800 802 602.

Yours sincerely

Raewyn Bleakley
Deputy Chief Executive, Office of the Chief Executive

Appendix 1 - Response regarding appointees to the position of Group Manager
How many appointees to the position of Group Manager:
1.  Did not meet the requirements of the Confirmation of Relevant Experience (CORE) interim
assessment?

There were no permanent appointments to Group Manager positions that did not meet the
requirements of Confirmation of Relevant Experience (CoRE). The individual having passed
CoRE was a prerequisite of being shortlisted and being permanently appointed to a Group
Manager position.

2.  Have not recently (for example in the 12 months preceding 1 June 2021) been on a Senior
Officer response roster?

Nine Group Managers were not on a roster immediately prior to Tranche 2 being stood up.

3.  Do not have relevant leadership experience at an incident involving a high level of
complexity?

Relevant leadership experience was tested through CoRE. As above all permanent
appointments passed CoRE.

4.  Have a leadership tertiary qualification and
5.  Have a management tertiary qualification, or relevant experience (such as managing staff
along with responsibilities and accountabilities for budget, property, fleet and plant).

Fire and Emergency did not specifically collect information on tertiary qualifications as part of
the appointment process as it was not a requirement for successful appointment to the role.
We may hold some information on tertiary qualifications in the CVs provided by candidates,
however candidates may hold qualifications not listed on CVs. The information on CVs will
likely only specify the degree or diploma (and possibly the major) an individual holds. It is
unlikely that Fire and Emergency will be able to identify from this information whether
individuals hold a ‘leadership’ or ‘management’ qualification.

For Fire and Emergency to further consider this aspect of your request we would need you to
specifically identify which tertiary qualifications you are interested in (e.g. which specific
degrees and majors). This will allow us to review the relevant CVs and provide you with the
number of individuals that noted in their CV that they held these qualifications.

Fire and Emergency did not col ect management experience in the format you have requested.
CVs may have listed work experience, short summaries of responsibilities and scope of past
roles. Candidates may not have explicitly identified when roles have had management
responsibility for staff, budget, property, fleet or plant. They were also not asked about these
specific responsibilities at interview.

At this stage, this part of your request is declined under section 18(g) of the OIA, because the
information you have requested (being which individuals have a ‘leadership’ or ‘management’
tertiary qualification or experience managing staff, budget, property, fleet or plant) is not held
by Fire and Emergency.

The interviews undertaken with Group Manager applicants assessed their leadership
competency. The CoRE process confirmed that applicants had leadership experience on the
incident ground.
6.  Additional y, the number of 'affected' applicants for the 'new' Canterbury district Group
Manager positions who were band 18 or higher?

There were four ‘affected’ applicants for the Group Manager positions in the Canterbury
district, that were previously in roles that were band 18 or higher.

7.  A copy of the analysis carried out by any person/organisation, and/or consultants working
on behalf of FENZ, which compared the Group Manager position to those of Area Managers
and PRFOs.

The enclosed Position Impact Analysis compared the Group Manager position with the
Principal Rural Fire Officer, Deputy Principal Rural Fire Officer, Area Manager and Assistant
Area Manager positions.

8.  On what date(s) were the Canterbury Group Manager and Community Risk Manager
interviews held for 'affected' employees?

The interviews for Group Manager and Community Risk Manager positions were held on the
following dates:
•  11 - 12 February 2021 for Community Risk Manager.
•  24 - 26 February 2021 and 8 June 2021 for Group Manager.

9.  On what date(s) were the interview outcomes for the above assessed and scored?

The interviews were assessed and scored by the interview panels at the same time the
interviews took place. Moderation occurred on 1 - 2 March 2021, with a further moderation
session held on 21 June 2021, to account for the additional interviews on 8 June 2021.

Appendix 2 - Additional response to the Second Round of Group Manager appointments
1.  The ETP (Final, Jan 2020, para 47, p. 10) states that ". . the organisation wil  clearly set out
who wil  be able to apply and be considered for these [new and vacant] positions, and in what
order". Please provide the document (and the reference within) which outlines who could apply
for the Group Manager positions and in what order, as wel  as the order of preference for
redeployment.

Please find enclosed the relevant communications that were sent to personnel.

The order for consideration of applications for the new tranche 2 positions was:
•  Round 1: Affected employees only.
•  Subsequent rounds: Any other applicants (with any remaining affected employees who
were held to be suitable for the position being afforded preference).

2. If the ETP did not apply to those on fixed term employment agreements, why were they not
able to apply along with 'affected' employees for the Group Manager roles?

Only permanent employees whose substantive positions have been disestablished hold affected
status (until they have accepted another position). Employees who have fixed term employment
do not hold affected status.

3. As for #2 above, why were those on fixed term employment agreements then able to apply
along with 'impacted' employees for the remaining GM positions?

After the first (redeployment for affected employees) round, other applicants were able to be
considered.

4. Why were those no longer working for FENZ able to apply for GM positions which were not
advertised on the open market? You refer in your response to successful GM applicants who had
"previously worked for the organisation" - this would indicate they were no longer employed by
FENZ at the time of applying.

It was decided that vacant Group Manager positions would only be advertised internally on Fire
and Emergency’s intranet. It was our view that internal advertising would generate sufficient
suitable applicants for the GM position to make external advertising unnecessary for the time
being.  The decision to advertise internally did not preclude people who were able to access those
internal advertisements, such as contractors, volunteers and external secondees, from applying.

5. Did any 'affected' staff who were unsuccessful in the first round of interviews for GM, then
apply again during the second round of appointments?

Some affected staff who were unsuccessful in the first round of interviews for a role did apply in
later recruitment rounds, (including in relation to the Group Manager role).

6. If so, did their applications proceed to interview and were they successful in being appointed?

Yes, if they were shortlisted (not all were).

No, none of the affected staff who unsuccessful y applied for Group Manager positions in the
redeployment round and applied again in subsequent rounds were successful at in being
appointed.

7. Please supply any correspondence from SDLT or the ELT which provided guidance or clarity
around whether or not 'affected' staff who were unsuccessful during the first round of GM
appointments, could reapply along with 'impacted' and others during the second round of GM
appointments.

There was no specific guidance from Service Delivery Leadership Team or Executive Leadership
Team on this matter. This aspect of your request is therefore refused under sections 18(g) and
18(e) of the OIA, in that it is not held by Fire and Emergency and the document al eged to contain
the information does not exist.

8. If 'affected' staff were excluded from re-applying, please provide the rationale behind this.

They were not excluded after round 1 and some did re-apply.

9. The last two appointees to the new Canterbury District GM roles were of 'impacted' or other
status. I understand one of these was perhaps interviewed outside of Christchurch?
- if outside Christchurch, where was this interview held?
- who was on the interview panel?
- please provide both sets of interview questions that were specifical y put to these appointees.

For the last two appointees to the new Canterbury District Group Manager roles, one interview
was held on 8 June 2021, in Wel ington. The panel for this interview was:
•  Mike Grant - Region Manager – Te Kei.
•  Steve Turek - National Manager Community Readiness and Recovery.
•  Troy Turner - Inside Recruitment Consultant.

The other interview was held on 10 June 2021, in Christchurch. The panel for this interview was:
•  Paul Henderson – Region Manager, Te Ihu.
•  Aaron Waterreus – Specialist Response Manager.
•  Philippa Curtis – Inside Recruitment Consultant.

The Interview Questions for Group Managers for recruitment round were as follows:
Question 1  Can you please describe for us your understanding of FENZ’s new way of working and tel  us
how you think things would need to change from how they are now to achieve this.
o  How would you encourage your team to move to the new way of working?
Question 2  Can you please tel  us about a time when you have worked to develop and/ or improve a
relationship with a key stakeholder or stakeholders to successfully achieve an important
organisational goal.
o  What do you think it was about what you did that helped ensure success?
Question 3  Can you briefly outline a recent moderately severe incident you have led? Explain what your
role was and what was complex about the incident. Also indicate how your leadership and
management of the incident utilised and aligned with the command and control policy.
o  Can you describe how you were managing and operating according to
relevant incident management system principles and structures and is there
anything you would do differently?
Question 4  What do you see as the biggest chal enges in achieving unification of urban and rural expertise
in terms of operational delivery?
o  How would the expertise you bring help ensure growing unification of
operational service delivery?

Question 5  If you got this role, what do you see as the main things you would need to focus on as the
manager to grow a high performing team and a positive team culture?
o  What specific chal enges do you see to achieving this in terms of the team this
role would be managing?
Question 6  Can you tel  us your thoughts on what an increased risk reduction focus would mean for
brigades and the work they do?
o  What chal enges do you see in achieving this focus and how would you
overcome them?

10. The communication sent to FENZ employees and/or others outside of the organisation
advising them that applications were open for the second round of GM appointments.

Please see enclosed communications.