No more 'unknown unknowns'

Donald Rumsfeld called them things about their jobs they weren't aware they weren't aware of, and the same can be said of developing political awareness in local government officials. Kent county council hope to change the status quo

Eifion Rees
Public, Wednesday 28 July 2010 11.58 BST

Educating local government officials in how to support their politicians is an idea that points up an interesting fact: until now it seems they haven't known much about it.

Or nothing official, at any rate – with no formal framework for training the senior leaders of tomorrow in managing the environment in which they will have to operate, in the past it's been a case of listen and learn, trial and error.

Kent county council may are looking to change this premise with the trial of a project aimed at increasing its officials' political literacy, knowledge and awareness.

'Managing in a Political Environment' is being run by University of Sheffield politics professor Matthew Flinders, and close monitoring by Local Government Improvement and Development (formerly the IdEA) and the Local Government Association suggests it could be the first wave in a national sea change.

Two half-day training sessions have so far taken place, identifying among attendees what in Rumsfeldian parlance might be termed "unknown unknowns" – things about their jobs they weren't aware they weren't aware of.

In April and June respectively, senior IT leaders and director-level members of the executive leaders' programme were given pragmatic advice and explanations about both their roles and those of their political masters.

Mutual understanding

Using case studies, role play and input from politicians themselves, the project is aimed at fostering a mutual understanding of what it is both sides do. Hugh Martyn, the council's learning account manager for leadership and originator of the scheme, says officials need to engage in a process of influence and negotiation, advising and guiding though from a professional distance, while politicians must maintain good relationships with officers if they are to move their policies forward.

Improved communication is timely, he adds, given the challenges currently facing the public sector.

Flinders says part of the reason no such official training exists in local government is because senior managers and councillors have historically been scared of being accused of attempting to politicise their officials.

"As a result there was an assumption they would pick up a sufficient level of political awareness and knowledge through osmosis and simple day-to-day experience.

"The sessions have allowed officials and some councillors to explore their relative roles and responsibilities and, most importantly, where their roles potentially overlap and how this creates both opportunities and challenges. Even the simplest questions have opened-up quite complex debates about managing in a period of growing public expectations but diminishing fiscal resources."

Martyn says the new training will create more equality of opportunity. "Potential senior leaders and officials have tended to learn about the political environment through mentors, experienced directors who give them the opportunity to access and engage with politicians – without mentoring it's unlikely that individuals will succeed either in achieving their career aspirations or in driving forward the performance of local government."

Kent county council is currently working out how to insert the training into its leadership programme to deliver practical results.

"We want to be investing time and effort into people who can make a difference in their leadership, rather than simply creating a management qualification," says Martyn. "Once we've found a model that works we hope to get more people engaged in learning more about the political environment."

Comments in chronological order (Total comment)

Comments are now closed for this entry.

Staff

Mcpherson

28 Jul 2010, 12:35PM

Local government managers are required to be politically sensitive. This means recognising that councillors are elected to represent local people and that local government services are accountable to local people via their local councillor.
Councillors are accountable to their constituents. They are accountable to their local party colleagues who nominate and support them, to their Council leadership, and at the same time must have regard to their national party line. Ultimately they may feel themselves to be accountable to their own conscience. This can result in some subtle conflict. They are very media sensitive, they seek the photo opportunity, they desire good press, and they want local people to see what they are doing for them. However, good news doesn't sell news papers. The local press and radio also see themselves as champions of local causes for local people often; it appears, in opposition to their elected representatives. They may be quick to present negative stories usually around well established stereotypes of bureaucracy and red tape, politically correctness gone mad and shocking waste of tax payers money.
Understandably councillors want their often complex policies presented in the best possible light. They may feel frustration or annoyance if slow, unresponsive and inflexible services or clumsy management gives the media opportunities to publicly criticise the council. Managers for their part need to recognise that politicians wear more than one hat. In full committee they may vote for the policy of closing down expensive council run homes for older people. Days later they may come out publicly in support of a local campaign to keep the home in their ward open. They may see no contradiction in taking strategic decisions to benefit the whole community and then representing their constituent's views in opposing the implementation of the strategy at ward level. Another example would be the decision to build a waste incinerator as part of a strategy for removing the reliance on landfill sites but then joining a campaign against citing the incinerator in their ward.
Something a manager may consider trivial, a councillor may consider very significant. A complex partnership agreement woven together over many months of skilful and patient negotiations can quickly unravel if the manager fails to appreciate the significance attached to the size and position of the council's logo. To councillors frustrated that the public often doesn’t realise the council's financial contribution to such partnerships the logo is a powerful symbol not an after thought. This also highlights that councillors must work in partnership and alliances with other statutory, voluntary and community organisations which may have contradictory or even competing aims for example working with faith communities and at the same time providing grants to gay rights groups.
This requires councillors to exercise skills of diplomacy and judgement which the officers who support them need to be aware of.
Councillors in general are motivated by the desire to do things to benefit their constituents. In doing so it is hard to over-estimate the time and effort and courage required to seek and win public election, master complex issues, weigh the balance of interest between competing groups, and retain a sense of social commitment. This can sometimes lead to over enthusiastic representation on behalf of an individual in conflict with the councils own policy concerning eligibility for a tenancy/home help/school place or perhaps putting a little too strongly the case for a grant to a local voluntary group in their ward. The manager must hold the line to maintain a consistent approach and tactfully resist in appropriate pressure.
This is an extract from Managers in a political environment an article in UnLearning management- short stories on modern managment see www.blairmcpherson.co.uk
- Report abuse
- Link