Transcript CoE Conference on Performance Evaluation of the Judiciary

Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
CoE Conference on Performance Evaluation of the Judiciary
Analysis of Judges Workload
Dr Axel G Koetz
Ankara 25 March 2011
This Document is complete only together with the oral presentation;
use of isolated pages might lead to misunderstandings.
Questions: Dr Axel G. Koetz, Managing Partner, KPI Management and Policy Consultants
Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne, axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com, Tel/Fax +49 (0)221-9411801 / 05
1
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
Caseload versus Workload
Caseload:
Workload:
Number of cases
to be completed
The work capacity needed
to complete
- By a Judge
- By a Court
- By the judges/courts in
a region
- Nationwide
-
2
a case
all cases on the judges table
all cases in the court
all cases in the courts of a
region
- all cases nationwide
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
The „Caseload“ concept leads to
mismanagement
Caseload computes the
numbers of cases
irrespective of complexity.
Adding all cases and basing
policies on this leads to
severe problems
as we are „adding
pumpkins and cherries“
3
Many „order cases“
Many „administrative offenses“
Lead to
High completion numbers
„productive“ judges
Many complex criminal cases
Lead to
Low completion numbers
Unproductive judges
Differences Unweighted/Weighted Cases
Demonstrates Importance of Complexity
Analysis
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
4
NW
3,5
W
3
2,5
2
1,5
1
0,5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Comparison of deviation from average (1) in caseload and workload per Judge
in 33 Courts of a region, weighted (w) and not weighted (cases)
4
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
Determinants of Workload
Court Work Structures
Workflow and IT
CASE WORKLOAD PER CASETYPE
Case Complexity
Quantitative
Aspects
5
Qualitative
Aspects
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
Case Complexity Determinators
Quality:
Case Type
Procedural Law
Existing Standards
Size:
N of involved parties /
defendants
N of witnesses
N of needed hearings
Quantity of Documents
6
Simplified:
Case Type plus
Size Indicator
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
Case Type Modeling
Minimalistic Model/s
Concentrates on a small number of consolidated
case types
Model
Alternatives
100% Model/s
Tries to identify (almost) all potential cases,
Following the §§ of the law(s)
Key Indicator Model/s
Based on a substantial number of relevant case
types
7
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
Think in A-B-C Categories
A = Vital information
B = Important information
C = Unimportant information
Make sure that „A“ level
information is not buried
under „C“ level information
100%
90%
80%
Explanation
Instead of killing people with
megabytes of Data, follow
the ABC model
A
B
20%
C
40%
Information
8
100%
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
Sample Key Indicator Model:
PEBB§Y
• Identification of key case types, inter alia
based on an ABC Analysis
• Identification of case complexity and related
workload
• Detailed analysis of „A“ case types and
selected others
• Correction factors and other instruments to
cover the non-key case types (C, partly B)
• Please note: The following sheets show an
9
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
PEBB§Y Goals
• Key Goal: Identify the need for Judges /
prosecutors posts on state level and define the
budget accordingly
• Second Goal: Ensure a just distribution of
posts across the courts
• Third Goal: Create transparency and
acceptance amongst stakeholders
• No Goal: Establish a legal right of judges not
to work more than given by the set indicators
10
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
-
„Courts have to be equipped adequately
with personnel and other resources;
details are specified by law“
(Constitution, Hamburg, Art 62 – similar in other constitutions)
11
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
Case type Selection (P1)
• 48 case types in local courts
• 20 case types in lower appellate courts
• 22 case types in higher appellate courts
• Other case types and administrative work taken into
consideration via correction factors
• Also „Training“, „Administrative Functions“ and
„other Tasks“ included, also numerous registers
(German speciality) at local courts
12
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
-
Sample Judge Workload per Case
Types
for general civil cases
150 minutes
for civil claims from car accidents
170 minutes
for divorce cases
200 minutes
for small criminal cases
170 minutes
for major criminal cases
510 minutes
for punishment orders (comparable
to administrative offenses)
22 minutes
- for economic and environmental crime 970 minutes
- Appeals to Lower Appellate Court
430/910 minutes
- Cassation Cases, higher Appellate Court 660 minutes
13
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
Computing the Need for Judge
Capacity
(Simplified)
• Judges work capacity per year
minutes
• Sample „car accident case“
minutes
• Cases per Judge per year
N of cases x case weights
Judge work capacity
14
+/-
correction
factors
102.240
170
601 cases
=
N of posts
for Judges
Development of the 1st PEBB§Y 1
Model
2001
2002
About 40 courts and Prosecutors Offices
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
•
•
•
•
•
7 German States
About 1.900 Judges and Prosecutors
About 900.000 case cards analyzed
External project executed by a consulting /
accounting firm
• In addition, a PEBB§Y 2 model was developed to get
data for the non-judicial staff.
15
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
PEBB§Y Steps
A Process of a Decade (by now)
• 2001:
PEBB§Y 1 (General Courts –Judges,
Prosecutors)
• 2001/2 PEBB§Y 2 (General Courts Secretaries +
Support Staff)
• 2005
PEBB§Y Fach (Judges in Specialized
Courts
for Labor, Tax, Social,
01
02Cases)
03
04
05
06
07
08
00
Administrative
P2
• 2008
PEBB$Y UpdateP Fach
Analyses: 1,2,Fach
P1
16
P Update
09
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
Need for Participation...
... and permanent updating
• States, Courts, Judges, Prosecutors intensively
involved
• Numerous workshops, meetings and so on
• Intensive cooperation and involvement of the
judges associations
• Consideration of specialities in the different
states
• Check for realism and determination of the
final results in workgroups
17
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
Don‘t forget the civil service
Structures
• PEBB§Y 1 was accompanied by PEBB§Y 2
• PEBB§Y 2 covers the workforce needs in the
field of civil service
–
–
–
–
Secretaries
Typists / Note takers (if still existing)
Court guards
Other professions in the court
– Capacity needs for some professions still determined outside the
PEBB§Y system
18
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
From Cases to Staff to Budget
From Budget to Staff
• Workload from weighted cases defines Staff
need
– Per single court
– Per region
• Accumulated staff needs determine overall
number of judges
• Overall number of Judges determine Financial
Budget for Judges
• New judges have to be hired accordingly (or
posts have to be made free)
19
Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D-50939 Cologne Germany, e-mail axel.koetz @ koetz-ag.com
Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011
Use of PEBB§Y Date in Budgeting
Parliament
Government
Min of Finance
Min of Justice
Weighted Case
Data per Region
Weighted Case Data
Lower Courts
20
Staff List
High Courts
Staff Lists
Low Courts
Does it work this way...
or not ?
Most hopefully
But not all the time