Diagram
The cycle of sustained governance development

A partnership of separate powers—the governing body and top manager
Governing body |
Top manager |
Interviews and hires the top manager. |
Contracted to operate under instructions and delegation from the governing body. |
Accountable to members who s/elected them. |
Accountable to governing body. |
Oversights and reviews the work performance of the top manager. |
Supports the governing body to undertake self-evaluation of their governance performance and to participate in developing governance capacity. Oversees and reviews the work performance of staff. |
Sets the overall strategic direction for the organisation. |
Implements the overall strategic directions. |
Makes and approves governance and other overall policies. |
Supports the governing body in developing policies. Implements policies made by the governing body. |
Provides input into and approves overall annual budget. |
Provides financial information, reports and plans for approval. Operates under delegation for daily authority. |
Provides input into approves business plan. |
Develops and implements the business plan. |
Makes key decisions about major capital expenditure, investment. |
Makes decisions about expenditure and investment under delegation. |
Seeks feedback, consults with and report to members for decision-making and strategic direction. |
Communicates with members and staff on activities, progress and outcomes. |
Snapshot: Some differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous processes for the resolution of disputes and wrongdoing
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander dispute resolution
|
Western dispute resolution |
The close family, elders and wider community work out what the dispute or wrongdoing is about, who it has affected, and how it will be resolved or punished. |
Strangers (external professionals) determine the nature of the dispute or wrongdoing, and how it will be resolved or punished. |
Punishment and peacemaking processes are made by consensus among all participants, according to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander laws and legal precedent. The aim is both personal punishment and restoration of the wider social equilibrium and collective identity. |
Punishment is determined according to formalised laws and legal precedent. Peacemaking and restoration of collective identity are not considerations, although individual rehabilitation is. |
Participants take into account not only the impact on the ‘victim’, but also the wider, critical factors of social and religious impact. |
The impact of the dispute or wrongdoing on the ‘victim’ may be taken into account by the court. |
The people directly involved in the dispute (victims and offenders) are also involved in the customary law process, including determining innocence or guilt and advocating punishment or other restorative solutions. |
External advocates are used. |
Decision making is collective and by consensus, sometimes taking considerable time and negotiation. |
Decision making is hierarchical and formalised through institutions such as courts, hearings, professional members of the judiciary and jury systems. |
A wider group of people may be included in the punishment, peacemaking and compensation. |
Only the ‘offender’ is punished. |
Snapshot: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mechanisms for settling disputes
In general, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture-based mechanisms for managing and settling disputes and wrongdoing are: |
action-oriented and physical. Punishment and sanctions involve law-based and regulated restitution, revenge or injury. |
socially based. Conflicts seep into wider social networks, people ‘in the wrong’ may be sent away by the group, or may initiate their own self-imposed absence from the group or community. |
material and monetary. Restitution and compensation are valued, including the exchange of cash, food, services or commodity goods. |
religious and spiritual. Individuals with legitimate authority and power act as enforcers of punishment, people may participate in cleansing rituals, or the wrongdoer may be excluded from valued religious ceremony and knowledge. |
symbolic and performance-based. Ritualised peacemaking apologies and highly orchestrated reconciliation fights may be performed. |
Snapshot: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander networked governance at work
You can see networked Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander governance at work in the structure and operation of: |
|
Snapshot: Different approaches to governance and development
Standard approach |
Nation-rebuilding approach |
Culture is portrayed as problematic. |
Culture is seen as a strength and asset. |
Decision making is short term, non-strategic and often externally controlled. |
Decision making is able to be longer term, strategic and under the control of the nation. |
External parties set the future direction. |
Future agenda setting is directed by the nation. |
Development is treated as primarily an economic problem and goal. |
Development is seen as an interrelated social, economic and cultural goal. |
Leaders act as hunters and distributors of resources and services, and make ill-informed decisions. |
Leaders act as stewards, nation-builders, mediators and mobilisers, and can make decisions based on plans. |
Accountability is upwards to external parties and focuses on financial administration. |
Accountability is downwards to the nation’s members and focuses on collective goals. |
Governing rules and frameworks are based on external values, standards and concepts. |
Governing rules and frameworks reflect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander political cultures and concepts. |
The result is failed governance and enterprises; politicised decisions; a governance culture that is dependent on external funds and remedial intervention; an impression of chaos and dysfunction; and continued poverty. |
The result is growing governance capacity; consensus decision making; sustainable enterprises and community development; a governance culture where risk is evaluated, managed and diversified; an impression of competence and resilience; and socioeconomic progress. |
(Adapted from S. Cornell, ‘Two approaches to the development of native nations’, Rebuilding Native Nations, University of Arizona Press, 2007)
Weak rules and strong rules – What happens to your governance?
What happens when rules are weak and poorly enforced? | What happens when rules are strong and enforced |
Governance is less effective and legitimate. | Decision making is more transparent, winning support from members and staff. |
Conflict increases and relationships are under stress. | Cooperative relationships and collaboration are increased. |
Members’ rights and interests are overridden or marginalised. | Members’ rights and interests are protected and strengthened. |
Leaders might be encouraged to be greedy and self-interested. | Everyone wants to invest their time, effort and resources. |
Private and public agencies won’t want to invest in economic growth. | Economic growth is more sustainable and partnerships stronger. |
Staff and members are confused and have low morale. | There is high morale amongst staff and members. |
Nations and communities are less able to exercise practical self-determination. | Nations and communities are more able to exercise practical self-determination. |
Your governance culture and environment

This diagram shows the layers of your governance environment.
Different ways to help in the community
Worn Gundidj | has given hospitality to Sudanese refugees in the Victorian town of Warrnambool, held a barbeque and day of indigenous culture activities for children with terminally ill siblings, and formed partnership with local city and shire councils. |
Papunya Tula | has raided more than $1 million for the health center to run a renal dialysis based at remote Kintore in the Northern Territory, and almost $600,000 for a pool to be built in Kintore. |
Yarnteen Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander Corporation | has a long standing partnership with Microsoft and its 'Unlimited Potential' program, compiling a user friendly resource kit, engaging with Aboriginal learners in Information Communication and Technology |
Skills needed for dispute resolution
Good Dispute Resolution |
Good conflict analysis skills |
Good knowledge of the context and related history |
Sensitivity to the local cultural context |
Local language skills |
Technical expertise as required |
Enough status/credibility to make decisions and then act on them |
Good knowledge of people and organisation involved |
Skills in facilitation, mediation, team work and counseling |