Recommendations: “Citizens not customers – Keep it simple, say what you do and do what you say”

The following recommendations do not represent a commitment by PM&C or the Australian Government to change but have been distilled by the research team for further exploration by the APS. The recommendations have emerged from three sources: interviews with APS leaders, focus groups with Australian citizens and a co-design workshop convened with core stakeholders to translate the research findings in a meaningful way for practice. The recommendations correspond with the key findings that emerge from this research as reflected in the subtitle of our report – “Citizens not customers, keep it simple, say what you do and do what you say”.

We argue, in concluding this report, that public services can be a critical space for trust-building between government and citizen but this requires development of citizen-centric service models that place the language of the citizen at the centre of service culture, design and delivery and embrace the mantra – “Citizens not customers – keep it simple, do what you say and say what you do”. “Citizens and not customers” because the notion of citizenship builds trust. It helps establish a trust system between government and citizen that is based on parity of esteem and creates common ground for transactions to take place. In contrast, given imperfect access to resources, customers are inherently unequal and potentially a force for distrust.

There are at least two other differences in the use of the concept of the citizen and the customer that are germane to our discussion. First, the customer is self-regarding –he/she largely choose what is best for themselves in the marketplace. In contrast, citizens regard others and particularly the needs of society – they choose what is best for society. Or at least they choose their perception of what is best for society. Citizens possess individual rights but recognize their obligations to the community. Second, citizens have broad ownership of the problems of society and have a common responsibility for fixing those problems. Customers expect those problems to be fixed for them. Hence, citizenship is potentially an empowering force and the customer a disempowering one.

A common argument against using the concept of citizen is the claim that many of the people the APS provides services for aren’t Australian citizens. This argument is problematic both from an international legal perspective and because of the issues outlined above with the alternatives. All visitors and residents (temporary or permanent) in Australia enjoy different rights and gradations of citizenship even if they are not full citizens because Australia is a signatory to a range of international laws that ensure equal treatment (including for children under the UN Charter) and has a number of bi-lateral agreements with individual countries that extend certain rights. For example, British tourists have certain healthcare service and working visa entitlements that are reciprocated for Australian citizens in the United Kingdom. In short, the APS serves different types of citizen.

Meeting citizen expectations inevitably requires both a better understanding of the service needs and aspirations of an increasingly segmented citizenry and a service culture that see’s like a citizen and not a customer.

As noted in Section Five, the degree of common ground between citizens and APS leaders on the enablers to a higher quality service experience is remarkable and this has also proven the case with our workshop participants. This has helped us to clarify six iterative and potential pathways to reform for further exploration. These largely align with the constituent elements of the best practice service delivery framework presented in Section Two and Appendix 1.