1 CoE Conference on Performance Evaluation of the Judiciary 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 Cologne, koetz-ag.com, Tel/Fax +49 (0) / 05 Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, 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 Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011 Analysis of Judges Workload

2 Caseload versus Workload Caseload: Number of cases to be completed -By a Judge -By a Court -By the judges/courts in a region -Nationwide Workload: The work capacity needed to complete -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 Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

3 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 Many order cases Many administrative offenses Lead to High completion numbers productive judges Many complex criminal cases Lead to Low completion numbers Unproductive judges Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

4 Differences Unweighted/Weighted Cases Demonstrates Importance of Complexity Analysis Comparison of deviation from average (1) in caseload and workload per Judge in 33 Courts of a region, weighted (w) and not weighted (cases) Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

5 Determinants of Workload CASE WORKLOAD PER CASETYPE Court Work Structures Workflow and IT Case Complexity Quantitative Aspects Qualitative Aspects Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

6 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 Simplified: Case Type plus Size Indicator Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

7 Case Type Modeling Model Alternatives Minimalistic Model/s Concentrates on a small number of consolidated case types 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 Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

8 Think in A-B-C Categories Instead of killing people with megabytes of Data, follow the ABC model A = Vital information B = Important information C = Unimportant information Make sure that A level information is not buried under C level information BCA 80% 90% 100% 20%40%100% Information Explanation Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

9 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 extremely simplified picture of the methodology and the results ! PEBB§Y in reality is much more complicated when you come to the details. Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

10 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 Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

11 - Courts have to be equipped adequately with personnel and other resources; details are specified by law (Constitution, Hamburg, Art 62 – similar in other constitutions) Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

12 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 Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

13 Sample Judge Workload per Case Types -for general civil cases150 minutes -for civil claims from car accidents170 minutes -for divorce cases200 minutes -for small criminal cases170 minutes -for major criminal cases510 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 Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

14 Computing the Need for Judge Capacity (Simplified) Judges work capacity per year minutes Sample car accident case 170 minutes Cases per Judge per year 601 cases N of cases x case weights Judge work capacity correction factors N of posts for Judges +/- = Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

15 Development of the 1st PEBB§Y 1 Model About 40 courts and Prosecutors Offices 7 German States About Judges and Prosecutors About 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. Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

16 PEBB§Y Steps A Process of a Decade (by now) 2001:PEBB§Y 1 (General Courts –Judges, Prosecutors) 2001/2PEBB§Y 2 (General Courts - Secretaries + Support Staff) 2005PEBB§Y Fach (Judges in Specialized Courts for Labor, Tax, Social, Administrative Cases) 2008PEBB$Y Update Analyses: 1,2,Fach P 2 P 1 P Fach P Update Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

17 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 Update of results according to chages in laws, jurisdiction, procedures, technology after some years Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

18 Dont 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 Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

19 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) Capacity has to be distributed justly amongst courts to ensure equal workload (Courts with overcapacity lose first the posts, secondly the staff when pensioned or replaced) Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011

20 Use of PEBB§Y Date in Budgeting Weighted Case Data per Region Staff List High Courts Min of Justice Min of Finance Parliament Government Does it work this way... or not ? Most hopefully But not all the time Weighted Case Data Lower Courts Staff Lists Low Courts Dr Axel G Koetz, Managing Partner, Koetz Partner International, Unicenter 2920, D Cologne Germany, koetz-ag.com Court Statistics, Judge Workload Analysis, Quality and Performance Management – Ankara (CoE) 25 March 2011