This is from the 2015 HMRC staff survey (click on the image for a bigger version):
Overall HMRC only managed a 30% positive rating on competence from its staff (well over half of whom took part, and they are, presumably the motivated ones). I would rate this as dire.
I keep saying that HMRC's management needs to be fundamentally reformed, from the top down. It seems like its staff agree with me.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
It’s far worse than the presentation seeks to show by concentrating on only the positives. If you look at the difference between stated disagreement and stated agreement you see that the only areas in which the senior management is praised in any way is very marginally and in cosmetic exercises whereas in the key assessments they have lost the confidence already of the majority of their own staff (response rates of 65% are clearly indicative of the majority view in the organisation).
When the worst indicators are heavily negative (that the change process is mishandled, in the wrong direction, lacks buy-in and involvement from below and leads to an overall assessment of the quality of management that is so bad) normal organisations would take notice. I’m sure HMRC will not.
Question Balance indicator %
B40 -22
B41 +2
B42 +2
B43 +6
B44 -22
B45 -35
B46 -30
B47 +9
B48 -26
B49 -12
Well at least HMRC are still (forced?) to publish such a survey, Richard. I suspect that once the FoI has been gutted, as I’ve no doubt will be the outcome of the review by the “great and good anti FoI panel” this sort of transparency will be next to go.
And given that the positives for responses B45 and B46 are 22% and 21% respectively (or -30 and -35 as AllanW points out) any belief that anyone has (does anyone?) in HMRC managements’ ability to deliver their particularly version of “digital by default” tax collection has to be treated as someone’s idea of a sick joke. Mind you, there’ll be plenty of dosh to be made by the usual suspects “bought in” to try to sort that particular mess out.
Agreed
Apparently many of the experienced tax specialists in the current local office structure will be too far away to travel to the new national hubs proposed. In addition many of them will be due to retire soon so in a few years there will be a dearth of knowledge in HMRC that will impinge on tax compliance
I am convinced this is a major issue of concern
And not one that HMRC management aren’t aware of, I’m sure. So we might ask, what is the thinking behind this? Or to put it more bluntly, what is true purpose of these proposals – accepting there may well be more than one.
The true purpose of HMRC reform is to shrink funding for the state and to pass the burden of taxes onto wages and straightforward consumption
It is already a major concern because of changes to the training, so I am told. Far fewer have full training so that they understand how the tax system fits together as a whole. The issues you raise will compound an already extant problem
No – absolutely not.
Did Lin Homer receive her “gong” for services to “Common Purpose”?
https://autonomousmind.wordpress.com/2013/11/02/david-cameron-hid-personal-links-to-common-purpose/
Perhaps some of this can be laid at the door of “Common Purpose” and their brand of “training”?
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/lin_homer
Once our public institutions are wrecked from the inside then the likes of Oliver Letwin can get to work and start putting a privatisation programme in place as the “cure”!
“The Hegelian Dialectic” anyone?
I think the evidence so obscure to have no relevance at all
Sorry Richard we’ll have to agree to disagree on this on.
UK Column have done some good work in this area…
I have no idea who they are