These cases cover four different types of extension of Centrelink’s role. They involve horizontal extensions into delivery for other agencies, broader public service roles and activities beyond the Public Service, particularly in conjunction with the community. The remaining area vertically extended Centrelink’s influence in the policy process. Much of this was envisaged in the original ideas about the one-stop shop, but it still depended on the organisation’s capacity to craft new roles for itself in practice.

These cases raise questions about modes of inter-agency interaction, process design, innovation and smart practices. There are several elements of positioning and legitimising the agency and defining entrepreneurial and service delivery roles; and about evolving more collaborative inter-agency relationships, as well as functioning as an agency that reflects integration by internalising otherwise separated responsibilities.

The advocacy of Centrelink’s position was important for defining its roles and registering its place. Several themes were consistently promoted: the holistic conception of the individual and how the service delivery agency should respond; intra-agency integration of responsibilities; dealing with numerous clients simultaneously; competing for work (and the alternatives available); pushing policy agendas although a delivery agency; and provision of choice through channel management.

Centrelink was able to define a role within the APS that had hitherto been centred primarily on policy departments. In seeking to position and legitimise the agency, the core aspects were: evolving the service delivery system; consolidating, protecting and enhancing the concept of the one-stop shop and the delivery system; and expanding business through agreements with new clients. Much depended on the capacity of the organisation to define a vision and long-term objectives and then move towards realising them (Vardon 2003c).