Research project AP/25 (Research action AP)
In service organizations, like the Belgian Department of Justice, where the wages of the staff represent a large portion of the total outgoings, the field of personnel planning – when making strategic plans (and the budget proposal which is derived from that) – is of crucial importance. Not only is the total size of the workforce important, but so is an equitable distribution thereof over the respective trial courts and appeal courts. Consequently, a single workload measurement system (WMS), based on objective criteria and applied in a consistent manner to all trial courts and appeal courts, is desirable.
Workload measurement is relevant to processes as well. The way in which and the speed at which a certain case file circulates to people within an organization, is linked to the number of staff required. What’s more – for a WMS to be successful – a mass (or high) acceptance thereof, by the members of the judicial organization – is a crucial factor.
Before focusing the analysis on the Belgian cases, we shall first consider the tools, methods and objectives of workload measurement systems and the problems that have arisen, thus far, during their implementation in various countries. Equipped with an evaluation matrix of potential success and failure factors, distilled from the analysis of existing workload measurement systems, the experiments in the Belgian trial courts and appeal courts can be evaluated and tested in order to highlight relative strengths and weaknesses. Finally, appropriate recommendations can be made, along with certain minimum requirements. A candidate WMS for the Belgian trial courts and appeal courts would have to satisfy these requirements.
Methodology :
The research project is made up of three work packages and 6 phases.
Work package 1: Preliminary investigation
Phase 1: Study the relevant literature and the research topic in greater depth
In this phase, the various methods of workload measurement are analyzed in several countries . We focus mainly on case files in France and the Netherlands, but other foreign WMSs will also pass the review, using the desk research method.
The following aspects will be fleshed out:
- What is meant by workload measurement and what are the underlying objectives (personnel planning, productivity, time management, caseload management, an equitable distribution of the workload over people and business units, etc.)
- According to which norms do they operate? How are the norms formulated and what is their scope of application (general norms per type of law court, norms per type of lawsuit, norms which are directly linked to a specific case file, and norms in the form of fixed and variable percentages)?
- The measurement of the available capacity, to be expressed in which unit of time (the effective number of hours per magistrate, per employee)?
- Which methods of measurement are used?
Phase 2: Elaboration of the French and Dutch systems
In this phase, the commonly used Dutch system Lamicie, and in particular, the recent change therein, as well as the practical experiences with this WMS are charted and chronicled. For France we look at how - under the LOLF (Constitutional bylaw of 1/8/2001 on budget acts), which became compulsory on 1 January 2006, the resources (the number of staff) are assigned on the basis of the objectives and the tasks to be performed. The manpower requirements shall, in other words, be estimated based on the number of cases that a court has to deal with.
Work package 2: Analysis based on fact-finding visits
Phase 3 – Analysis of the Belgian experiments in the target seat
In phase 3 the Belgian experiments are studied and analyzed. The M.U.N.A.S. system and the time recording experiments (for clocking-on and –off) in the appeal courts and the courts of first instance respectively were critically evaluated based on written documents and reports. As a last step, we ask the main players in these experiments for their views (their experiences with the system, the difficulties they had, etc.).
Phase 4 – Analysis of the WMS of the Public Prosecutions Department
In the system of the Public Prosecutions Department (B) which has been implemented already in 6 pilot public prosecutor’s offices, the workload is determined on the basis of a thorough analysis of the processes, the activities relating thereto, as well as the processing time (effective no. of man-hours spent hearing the case) compared to the total activity duration (= the ‘age’ of the case).
The purpose of this phase is primarily:
1. to analyze the WMA;
2. to poll the main players (P3) and people involved in the pilot projects (P4) about the strengths and weaknesses of their respective systems;
3. as to the WMS of the public prosecutor’s offices, to ascertain how – and to what extent - this could be adopted at the target office, while taking the specific aspects of that office into account.
Work package 3: Findings and recommendations
Phase 5 – SWOT analysis (month 5)
In this part, the Belgian applications are evaluated and tested in order to highlight their relative strengths and weaknesses.
Phase 6 – Recommendations (month 6)
Based on the findings of the survey, recommendations will be made on:
- the objectives of a WMA
- specific requirements of a suitable WMA for the target seat
- the required capacity
- methods, tools and the relative strengths & weaknesses
thereof
- a strategy for the design and successful implementation of a WMS at the target seat
- etc.
Both the SWOT analysis and the recommendations will be evaluated by means of a focus group (composed of representatives drawn from the judicial organization concerned).
Etude de faisabilité de la mise en place d’un instrument de mesure de la charge de travail destiné au siège : résumé
Bruxelles : Politique scientifique fédérale, 2007 (SP1825)
[To download]
Haalbaarheidsstudie naar een werklastmetingsinstrument voor de zetel : samenvatting
Brussel : Federaal Wetenschapsbeleid, 2007 (SP1826)
[To download]
