As of January 2024, the NSW public sector is in the middle of a significant transformation. Furthermore, the implementation of Machinery of Government (MoG) changes is reshaping how agencies operate, how work is prioritised, and how people understand their roles.
From my direct work with NSW agencies, I have seen that these are not just structural adjustments on paper. Indeed, they are deeply felt shifts that reach into the day-to-day of how teams function. Departments are being reorganised and responsibilities reassigned. In some cases, entirely new entities are being created. One example is the restructuring of the NSW Department of Planning and Environment into the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure. The intent is to streamline decision-making, improve service delivery, and align government structure more closely with community priorities.
The Ripple Effects of MoG Changes
MoG changes carry consequences that extend well beyond government offices. For project teams, the immediate challenge is continuity. However, keeping work on track when the organisational context is shifting takes deliberate effort. Project goals may need to be realigned with new ministerial priorities. Additionally, reporting lines change. Stakeholders who were central to a project may move to different agencies or take on entirely different responsibilities.
In my experience working alongside public sector teams through these transitions, the ripple effect is real. What seemed settled quickly becomes uncertain. Moreover, teams without a clear framework for adapting tend to lose momentum at precisely the moment they can least afford to. This dynamic is closely related to the broader challenge of using PPM transitions as a reset moment rather than simply a disruption to manage.
Adapting Projects: Assessment and Alignment
The first priority when MoG changes are announced is rapid assessment. Specifically, project leaders need to quickly determine which of their current work is affected. Additionally, they need to understand how mandate and ownership may have shifted. They also need to determine what realignment is required to stay connected to the new priorities.
The Australian Public Service demonstrated this capability during the COVID-19 crisis. Faced with an urgent national need, APS teams swiftly restructured to mount a coordinated response. Indeed, that kind of agility is what separates teams that adapt successfully from those that stall. The ability to reorient without losing delivery discipline is a rare and valuable asset.
Agile Methods as a Tool for Navigating Change
Agile project management offers a practical framework for operating through MoG transitions. Shorter delivery cycles and regular reviews make it easier to reprioritise without derailing the broader work. Moreover, these qualities are particularly valuable in environments where the goalposts can shift at short notice.
The Victorian Government’s response to its Department of Health restructure during the pandemic illustrates this well. By adopting iterative methods, the department maintained delivery momentum through a period of significant organisational change. For teams working through similar transitions in the APS, the principles explored in the CPSU Agreement and its impact on APS project management are worth understanding alongside the structural MoG picture.
Stakeholder Engagement and Continuous Learning
Communication becomes critical during MoG transitions. Yet it is often where teams underinvest. When reporting lines change, project sponsors move on, or policy direction gets reframed, strong stakeholder relationships become the most valuable asset a team has.
Service NSW’s transformation into a unified digital service platform is a useful case study. By focusing on customer experience and empowering frontline staff through the change, the organisation achieved strong outcomes. Moreover, it built the kind of internal trust that carried teams through the harder parts of the transition.
Alongside stakeholder engagement, MoG changes consistently create learning and development needs. Consequently, new policies, new frameworks, and new ways of measuring success all require deliberate capability building. Teams that treat this as an investment — rather than an overhead — tend to emerge from transitions more capable and more cohesive than they entered them.
What MoG Changes Ask of Project Leaders
Navigating MoG changes well requires agility, clear communication, and a willingness to reassess what success looks like when the context changes. Nevertheless, that is not a comfortable ask, but it is an honest one.
The public sector entities that handle these transitions most effectively treat structural change not as an interruption to delivery, but as part of the operating environment they are designed to work within. For those who have experienced this firsthand — particularly through the NSW DCS Atlus implementation, which ran through its own period of departmental change — the connection between structural agility and delivery success is not theoretical. It is visible in the outcomes.