Public: Management + Comment | Public

A good leader is much more than 'just a manager'

Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:35:50 GMT

How can public sector leaders foster teams that are motivated, engaged, confident and efficient even in the face of tough challenges? Jennie Harrison explains

The looming public sector budget cuts will likely result in wide-ranging and potentially radical changes within organisations and in the roles of numerous workers. Many employees feel destabilised by change – even if it does not directly affect them – while others may experience increased stress while doing their job with fewer colleagues or resources. So, how can public sector leaders foster teams that are motivated, engaged, confident and efficient even in the face of tough challenges?

Lead from the top

We work with many public sector organisations undergoing changes. One of the key influencers in retaining a stable and motivated team is if those changes come from the top. A good leader is much more than 'just a manager'.

A good leader will master four universal leadership goals that are crucial for a cohesive and successful working environment – increasing trust and communication, managing conflict in a professional way, building organisational capability and driving organisational strategy. Leaders who achieve these goals will be better placed to guide teams through any storm.

An example of optimum leadership in practice took place at the DVLA, when it underwent an organisational change programme a few years ago following a number of senior management retirements. As part of the programme, the agency invested in the professional and personal development of its leadership team, working to redefine the role of leaders and help them understand that managing people was more than a process, or skills checklist.

The programme involved training on aspects such as unlocking potential, managing conflict, and managing relationships. Afterwards, DVLA reported that its people had "a new appetite for development and a focus on unlocking potential."

Knowing me, knowing you

Helping employees understand their own working behaviours will enable them to work more effectively – something crucial to success with reduced teams. Equally crucial is for leaders to also understand their employees' behaviours. Research we carried out last year revealed that more than a third (34%) of public sector workers felt their managers didn't understand their skills, preferences and motivations.

Using accessible psychometric tools to examine and acknowledge what drives your people and where their strengths and talents lie is invaluable in making the most of teams, especially as resources tighten. It also helps indentify how people respond to change, allowing leaders to recognise and mitigate areas of stress that may escalate to conflict. Two years ago, the Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust began using psychometric tools as a way of creating a foundation for getting the best out of people, against a backdrop of funding changes, and during time of a cultural and behavioural shift within the organisation.

Following the use of psychometrics within the Management Development Programme, teams were deemed to be 're-stabilised', as the training had provided a lens to 'explain' how people are different, and importantly, how to build positive interactions with other team members.

The rules of engagement

Any change can make employees feel unsettled, often triggering a drop in motivation and productivity. Rather than bury heads in the sand, it is therefore crucial that employers acknowledge change, and keep staff abreast of developments. The more that staff feel informed about changes being made, and their impact, the quicker they will be able to accept those changes and re-engage with the organisation.

Equally, cutting budgets shouldn't mean cutting important activities like training. Training and development help staff feel appreciated and engaged; meaning if their job description has also changed, they will be more able to keep up and keep motivated.

During times of change it is more important than ever to focus on the people in your organisation. There may be pressures to divert attention into simply getting the job done, but the risks of overlooking employees' needs when times are tough, and funds tight, may well outweigh any cost-saving measures being implemented.

Jennie Harrison is senior consultant at OPP

100 days: how the coalition is shaping up

Wed, 18 Aug 2010 14:23:17 GMT

The chancellor's needless and disorganised policy of 'cut, cut, cut' will cost Britain dear in the future, argues Marc Cetkowski

Tough but fair. Chancellor George Osborne's budget day words in June were delivered like a new parent, eager to stamp authority but devoid of any longer term plan for instilling a sense of security.

Like a naughty child Britain has been sent to bed early with no tea and without any thought for what's going to happen when it wakes up again. This hardly fits with prime minister David Cameron's Big Society vision.

As we come to terms with the severity of public spending cuts - and we won't know the full story until the spending review is published in October - it is clear that the first 100 days of this coalition government are going to be remembered for one thing – creating chaos.

No one is under any illusion that cuts are needed but it is the lack of forward planning that is more than a little worrying. A 'Spending Challenge' website set up to get suggestions from public sector employees on cutting waste received 65,000 responses.

An impressive return but what's the point? Was it a PR stunt or just indicative of a lack of ideas and lack of longer term planning?

One thing is certain. The cuts are causing turmoil among senior civil servants who are flabbergasted that there has been little to no investment in planning and in understanding the longer term consequences of such unexpectedly deep financial cuts. In the budget Mr Osborne announced cuts across all government departments of 25% over four years. It is now emerging that some departments have been asked to cut up to 40%.

Intentionally or otherwise, cut and be damned appears to be the motto for the first 100 days and the consequences of that will be far reaching. Partnership arrangements in particular are under serious threat. Some of these partnerships have taken many years to establish, such as the links between PCTs and Children's Trusts. It's therefore disappointing to see plans being abandoned due to financial pressures with the only real consequence being a drop off in frontline care.

The cost of shortermism

There is also the potential fallout in delivery chains that stand to be severely disrupted as departments crumble, partners disappear and knowledge is drained in staff redundancies. These delivery chains are complex and they sort of work, feeding frontline services with vital materials. Any chink in the chain will cause disruption ultimately leading to a minimum 12 months of costly untangling and re-establishing links. Such is the cost of shortermism.

It's a dire picture and not the one David Cameron would have wanted to paint as he stood in front of Number 10 on 11 May.

It is however not unsalvageable. One solution is whole system commissioning, not procurement but in terms of whole service lifecycle, looking at regional variation and the needs of individual communities and people. A plan, based on requirement and system design, not a broad brush based on balance sheets. It's about using limited resources to the greatest affect and managing those resources through a structure that enables greater accountability.

Ultimately it demands a shift in traditional public sector thinking but this is change worth having as it will form a solid base on which all future strategic decisions can be made, cost-effectively too.

The fear however is that time is running out. The first 100 days of ConDem have pushed us to the cliff edge. The second 100 days could push us over.

Marc Cetkowski is head of government and public sector at project management consultancy PIPC

Sharing the workflow

Mon, 19 Jul 2010 12:55:50 GMT

With the government demanding more collaboration from the public sector, traditional boundaries will have to be torn down - but can managers change fast enough to make the cuts while maintaining services?

How do we maintain anything close to the level of services we have become used to while cutting public spending by 25%?

As yet, no one is quite sure but most are agreed that collaboration will be the key.

Public sector organisations will have to work together in a way they have never had to before, with each other and with new types of organisation such as social enterprises.

Total Place, or place-based budgeting, assumes that local authorities, government agencies and NHS trusts will band together to deliver the cost effective services in a given area, regardless of which organisations own the resources or expertise.

The government is also demanding collaboration in procurement and the sourcing of support services such as HR and IT.

This implies that traditional organisational boundaries will have to be torn down. Public sector workers will have to see themselves as being dedicated to the provision of a particular service, rather than as employees of the local council, or the NHS.

Glacial slowness

The trouble is, with a few exceptions, the public sector's record of working across organisational boundaries isn't good. Anyone who has worked on joint initiatives, even between similar organisations like local authorities, will attest to the glacial slowness of getting agreement to any significant action.

This is hardly surprising; many organisations have enough trouble working across their own internal boundaries. Public sector organisations often operate in professional and departmental silos. These attitudes are deeply ingrained and usually start at the top.

Ask senior managers how well they work with the rest of the team and they almost always talk about themselves and their direct reports, rather than their peers on the executive management team.

Directors and senior managers come to the table not as members of the management team but as representatives of their various departments or professions.

The suggestion that they should be collectively managing and leading the business instead of just looking at their own bit of it is, surprisingly, a revelation to many managers. Usually, it's not because they are being deliberately territorial, it's just that, in organisations defined by silos and specialisms, it hasn't occurred to them to do anything else.

The most effective management teams I have seen are those that spend time working together on business issues. And by that I don't mean sitting around a table commenting on position papers produced by each others' minions. I mean getting together and producing something which the rest of the organisation can work from, be it a strategy, a plan or an idea for a new venture.

There is nothing like grappling with a difficult problem and solving it together for building team cohesiveness and trust. That's when you really get to know each other.

You can spot the teams that have worked in this way. They spend less time on superfluous discussion and get to the heart of the issues they need to discuss much more quickly. Critically, they challenge each other and are less inclined to skirt around uncomfortable subjects.

Developing and leading a cohesive and highly functioning team is only half the battle. The constantly shifting requirements of the next few years will mean that people find themselves in several different teams at once and these teams will be formed, disbanded and re-formed at an alarming rate.

Individuals will therefore need to develop their ability to work in teams. The people who succeed in this environment will be those who can drop into a team and become effective quickly.

There will not be time for team-building at a gentle pace. Tuckman's forming-storming-norming-performing process will have to be turbocharged. The radical changes in public service delivery will require leaders who can rapidly get cross-organisational teams to the point where they are cohesive and focussed.

But this is a long way from the silo behaviour that still prevails in so many public sector organisations. Collaboration between departments can be slow; collaboration between different local authorities or NHS trusts is slower still. Working across the boundaries between different types of public sector organisation and the as yet unfamiliar social enterprises will present a much greater challenge.

If there is to be a revolution in the way the public sector delivers services the cultures of many public sector organisations will need to change rapidly. Can this shift in team-working and leadership style take place quickly enough to make the revolution happen?

Steven Toft is a director of Crucible, a consultancy which helps
organisations to improve performance

Managing expectations

Fri, 16 Jul 2010 09:36:18 GMT

What is the cost of failure in public sector cuts? It's hard to gauge but having an experienced professional at the helm may reduce the risk

Up and down the country, boards and trusts are looking into areas to make savings. Hopefully, they'll look at the impact and risks of the change – not just in the departments affected but along the vertical chain of internal and external suppliers and customers. Let's also hope that they will commit to assured delivery of improvements and savings.

There are three main ways of making savings:

1. Reduce or cut services (and staff).

2. Create an environment where customers (or patients) can help reduce their impact on public sector spend by self help, staying a little healthier, requesting minor support early enough to keep the service need at the lower cost end.

3. Reduce the cost of the service delivery through efficiencies, eliminating waste, working with suppliers to lower their costs and margins.

Reduction in services can result in more serious interventions down the line – at much higher cost.

We must work collaboratively to quantify the fall-out– before there's a cost in terms of money or wellbeing or life.

Point two requires good facilities at the low-cost or generic "entry level", and an acceptance by us, the public that the way we manage our expectation can contribute significantly.

Sometimes ideas about savings are lost through unwillingness to stand up and be counted, or a reluctance to embrace radical change and upheaval.

Don't be surprised then to find that managers and directors who could have made changes but didn't, are subject to a drive to replace them with the brave.

Many of the brave may be experts in business efficiency, turnaround, and particularly in delivering complex and fast-track change against the odds. Enter the professional interim manager. This should be their hour.

In this new era of efficiency, the objective for councils and hospitals to deliver services with higher productivity, lower costs and unquestioned quality is paramount.

Why then would they not ensure that the change is delivered by a professional who has proven track record of change delivery rather than an employee who has not taken the initiative – by grasping or even creating opportunities?

Locally, if a change project has a £100,000 investment but can deliver a £3m, £5m or £10m saving, who would consider putting such a task in the hands of someone inexperienced and with no track record, at a cost of £25,000?

Even if the benefits are only £1m a year, the cost of a 3 month delay could be £240,000, nearly 10 times the fee. Whereas, the cost of a more assured delivery of benefits might be £50,000 but the risk of failure is greatly reduced so the net impact of putting a professional in place could, in that instance be £215,000 less than that of the less experienced implementer.

Hilary Husbands is a practising interim and a director of the Institute of Interim Management

Online help to develop people skills

Fri, 09 Jul 2010 08:57:00 GMT

Stressed and depressed staff can be supported in a way that benefits the entire organisation says Kevin Young, general manager EMEA, SkillSoft

You can't blame anyone in the public sector for feeling down, especially if you are a manager having to implement cuts across a team.

As much as you would like to, it's difficult to be sympathetic to those who complain. Perhaps you've had to fight your corner to maintain the little that remains. And is anyone showing any gratitude? Of course not.

Although, on balance staff may be fortunate to be in work, reductions in spending and a block on recruitment, may also give them reasons to grumble.

But ironically, because of the mood of the times, managers may be less inclined to listen to them.

However, a recent report by MIND estimated that the country loses 70m working days a year due to stress and depression.

There will always be cases that need professional help. But even relatively low to medium levels of stress can seriously affect productivity with high levels of absenteeism compounding the work and worries for remaining staff.

So how can you address this problem in a way that benefits rather than threatens an organisation?

Even before the cuts, an independent survey commissioned by SkillSoft showed that one third of workers were doing jobs they were not properly trained to do and 80% of UK managers said they were being asked to undertake tasks without receiving appropriate training.

When asked to identify who in their organisation was in most need of ongoing training and development, 76% named their line manager.

Behind these statistics lies a story of staff being promoted beyond their capability and with no support, or employees being asked to double up on jobs even though they may be ill-equipped to do so.

Perhaps it's a case of lack of confidence rather than competence? Many feel it's the "people skills" they lack – how do they delegate, or deliver constructive criticism, for example? But, these are often the very courses that are seen as superfluous.

E-learning is ideal for teaching 'soft skills'

Yet providing this support needn't be costly. E-learning is ideal for teaching these "soft skills" because courses can be completed in privacy and in bite-sized chunks – and without having to take a whole day out of the office. A publishing company currently using e-learning told us that because so many courses were being completed, each one was costing them little more than a round of coffees.

There's no reason why the public sector shouldn't take advantage of these methods too – in fact certain parts of the NHS, such as Greater Glasgow and Clyde already have e-learning firmly embedded in their culture.

Also, e-learning is no longer a passive option – interactive courses, live learning events and social networking tools for collaboration are now being included.

Being able to share relevant knowledge with peers helps employees get involved and feel in control of their learning and ultimately their own careers.

So, there is an alternative to making otherwise talented staff run before they can walk and then watching them become stressed and unhappy as they cease to cope.

Wherever there are different personalities, ambition and intelligence, some stress is unavoidable – but giving employees the knowledge and learning they need to do their job can go a long way to alleviate it.

Kevin Young is general manager EMEA, SkillSoft

Big society, needs big ideas and the right people at the helm

Thu, 08 Jul 2010 12:12:00 GMT

While not for profit organisations are being encouraged to deliver more public services, many don't have the knowhow to cope with the new demands - could recruiting more diverse trustees be the answer?

The new coalition government has pledged to place the civil society sector at the heart of its 'Big Society' programme.

Part of its aim, as it devolves power to people, is for not for profit organisations to work more closely with the state and compete with public sector organisations to deliver a greater number of public services.

These are ambitious plans for a sector that is famously under resourced. Some charity leaders have expressed doubts already about the ability of smaller charities to cope with such pressures, questioning if they have the knowhow and resources available to adopt such a role.

There is little doubt the sector is facing an unprecedented level of change and uncertainty and many organisations are suffering still from the impact of the recession and feel threatened by the planned public sector cuts.

In this climate, strong governance and leadership is essential. Recent research from both PricewaterhouseCoopers and interim management provider, Russam GMS highlighted that better financial management and governance is now a top priority for charities and considered vital to get them through these difficult times.

Now is the time for organisations of all sizes to strengthen their boards to ensure they are led by the people who will ensure they have a sustainable future.

A diverse range of trustees

The best boards will include a diverse range of trustees – people from different industry and functional backgrounds with a range of skills, talent, knowledge and experience, which will ensure they make the best decisions about the future of the organisation.

But finding such individuals has been a long standing challenge for the sector, and consequently, there has been an over reliance on personal networks in the past, resulting in boards recruiting in their own likeness.

Some organisations have however, recently tackled this problem by investing in a trustee recruitment service, like Trustees Unlimited, to enable them to tap into a wider pool of potential trustees, ensure trustees are rigorously vetted and that their skills are assessed.

Christian Aid recently enlisted our help to find a new financial expert to join its trustee board. It needed a qualified accountant with strong risk management skills on its board and the tough economic climate, coupled with its desire to expand internationally had highlighted this skills gap.

The organisation had tried several channels to find such a trustee; including using its own network of individuals, but none had produced the right person.

Through Trustees Unlimited, it appointed Tom Hinton, the financial controller of British Gas who as well as being a Christian, is just 30 years old.

Christian Aid sees Tom as a 'breath of fresh air' and hopes that his dynamic approach and strong commercial experience will strengthen its financial and risk management capabilities.

The recruitment service is not just aimed at larger organisations with bigger budgets.

Community Options is a small London-based charity that provides services and accommodation for people with mental health needs. Through us, it recently appointed John Schuster, a marketing expert to its trustee board to raise the organisation's profile and brand and to input into its five year strategic plan.

John has a 20-year track record of delivering marketing campaigns to financial services companies and Community Options is now confident it has the right level of marketing expertise on its board to build its profile successfully.

For too long charities have struggled to recruit the best talent to their boards, and with such uncertainty and change in the sector, this problem can no longer be overlooked. There are plenty of talented people in the market who want to serve as trustees and we are providing a cost-effective recruitment service that will bring trustee/non executive talent into small and large third civil society organisations.

In time, we hope this will help to improve the governance across the whole sector.

Ian Joseph is a board member of Trustees Unlimited

Masters of all trades?

Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:08:00 GMT

Public managers are still being groomed to become experts rather than generalists, and it is time they left their silos for good, says Nick Jankel

Recently I was on a transatlantic flight when, for the first time, I heard that most clichéd announcement: "Is there a doctor on board?"

Having initially trained as a medic I toyed with the idea of responding before mercifully deciding I would definitely fail the Hippocratic Oath if I raised my hand.

However, I think it just as likely that a highly trained medical professional - a consultant in neuropsychology for example - would be stumped by an emergency in an area that they had long since stopped studying. Has the Western focus, perhaps even obsession, with specialisation led us down a blind-alley that detrimentally effects our public services?

And has the urging of HR directors and public paymasters to become technical experts in a particular area an out-dated - and therefore dangerous - phenomenon for society as a whole?

The world is being re-wired

Although we are beset by complexity at every turn, public managers are still being groomed to become experts (hedgehogs in Isaiah Berlin's celebrated analogy) rather than generalists (the foxes that know many things). The latter have been consistently demoted and demotivated, lacking as they do advanced degrees and lettered memberships. But the world is being re-wired - with each tweet and trade agreement - in the form of a giant, globalised neural network.

The old analogue and linear thinking that served the colonial Empire's administrators so well in its conquer of a quarter of the world simple fails to cope in a complex net of social relationships, vested interests and conflicting needs.

Teams within their hushed silos may carry on becoming better and better at their linear tasks; but the service user - slap bang in the middle a noisy and confusing global village as they are - is left in disarray, attempting to join up services that come at them from disparate departments, in distinct languages and tones, with differing values and models of change.

Out-dated Victorian sensibility

I was told at school not to 'spread myself too thin', and at all costs to avoid the perils of being a Jack of all trade and master of none. Well I refute that out-dated Victorian sensibility and call for my colleagues in the social space to celebrate those committed to becoming masters of all trades - the cross-pollinators and mutli-disciplinary thinkers, the mavericks who spot the connections and see possibilities that others do not.

In these especially challenging times we need brilliant technicians, and managers that have enough technical knowledge to converse with them. But we also need leaders at all levels who are deeply talented at thinking digitally.

With a new government now in power there is an opportunity to usher in a fresh and contemporary way of doing business from the Cabinet on down. With it being such a uniquely collaborative effort - full of wildly different political views and beliefs about the human being - it might just have the requisite variety to succeed, in such a profoundly varied land, better than any of its predecessors.

Nick Jankel is chief executive of wecreate

Going on voluntary terms

Mon, 14 Jun 2010 14:06:17 GMT

With the right career transition advice and support the blow from being made redundant can be softened - for both the employee directly affected and those left behind to carry on delivering services

With predictions that job losses across the public sector could run well into the hundreds of thousands, downsizing public sector organisations is set to become a national issue.

The statutory duty to avoid compulsory redundancies means employers will start by offering voluntary terms. But many employees in public service have specialised skills and on average a length of service that exceeds 15 years; they are unlikely to take up voluntary redundancy in an environment of low job prospects and economic instability.

Compounding this, the public sector employees' age profile is significantly older than the workforce average and many jobs have been deliberately located in parts of the UK where alternative employment is scarce, making it even less likely that staff will opt for voluntary redundancy. Those that do will be confident and productive individuals who understand the transferability of their skills and experience. The result could be a drain of public sector talent.

Cutback have to be made

But ultimately cutbacks have to be made and it is crucial to do this with care. Not only can providing the right support to employees through this transition help them come to a decision quickly, and in turn reduce the costs of the redundancy process, but it will also help ensure those made redundant remain in the labour market. It has been proven that early intervention and personalised coaching for someone going through the trauma of redundancy can significantly affect the success of their next step, whether directly back into employment or in a new direction.

It is also worthwhile remembering that 57% of public sector workers are union members; the recent PCS dispute only serves to illustrate how strongly any failure to handle redundancies sensitively will be opposed. And with one in five UK jobs directly dependent on the state, a huge section of the voting public has a stake in protecting the futures of individuals and communities.

If people are supported compassionately and effectively through career change into new jobs, portfolio careers, voluntary work and local enterprise, then perhaps the required savings in public sector employment can be achieved without industrial unrest and voter rage.

But if public servants are left without meaningful support, offered only "self-development" and a list of local job opportunities, the social and political consequences will be severe.

Research has shown that with the right career transition advice and support, the time taken for an individual to achieve a new outcome after redundancy can be reduced by 40%.

Investment in such support can thus achieve savings by reducing the duration and cost of benefits. Helping people gain the confidence and skills to take the plunge sooner means that a large local authority, looking to reduce headcount by some 2,000 people, can save up to £1m a week by improving the take-up of voluntary redundancy.

Financially, this makes business sense, but emotionally, it makes humane sense too. Providing support will help to protect communities from the impact of hardship, family breakup and depression, damaging lives and increasing the demand on public services at a time when resources are at their most stretched; improving support both for employees affected by redundancy and those left behind to deliver public services in leaner structures.

Gary Browning is chief executive at HR consultancy Penna

Permission to speak my mind

Fri, 28 May 2010 10:14:00 GMT

To obtain the most out of employees, managers should be open with staff, explain the thinking behind decisions and make it clear they don't have to agree all the time

If you think staff engagement is about getting employees to accept job losses and a pay freeze don't be surprised if you are met by cynicism and disinterest. If you think staff engagement is about employees' engagement forums, intranet discussion groups or staff satisfaction surveys don't be surprised if staff don't engage or use the opportunity to moan about management.

You can't expect people to tell you what they are really thinking unless they feel it is safe to do so. So how do you create a safe work environment where people feel able to say what they are thinking without fear of being labelled a 'trouble maker' and how do you make it possible for others to challenge these views without finding themselves ostracised?

Open debate between management and staff is not a characteristic of the average organisation. As an indication of just how much self censorship is present in the typical organisation just look at how people chose not to talk about issues of race, faith and sexuality for fear of being labelled racist, homophobic, or alternatively being accused of excessive sensitivity and political correctness. There are few opportunities to discuss these issues openly with colleagues so people do not learn how to express their views without causing offence nor do people learn how to challenge appropriately. It becomes safer to say nothing but of course that doesn't change what people are thinking and what people are really thinking tends to inform their behaviour. So you can't just launch into staff engagement forums or intranet discussion groups.

Permission to say what you're thinking needs to be given from the top. Senior managers need to set the example by being prepared to explain the thinking behind their decisions. It needs to be spelt out that staff do not have to agree with decisions but they have the right to understand why they were made. This has implication for how all managers manage their staff. The real challenge when it comes to engaging staff is that this cannot be a separate exercise from the day-to-day running of the business.

Managing people is difficult. It is much easier to simply expect them to do what you tell them to do because you are the boss. However the point about staff engagement is that frontline staff have a very good understanding of what is really happening at the front end of the service and they have ideas about how things should be done. If we want people to be creative and innovative and we do because this is a way of achieving the goal of doing more with less then we have to accept that managers, even senior managers, don't always know best.

The role of management is therefore not to tell people what to do but help them do it.

Budget management and performance targets

The problem is that we have tended to promote very able professionals into management posts and then emphasised budget management and performance targets. Managers who are good at people management don't need to have a professional background in a particular service to be effective. You don't need to have been a librarian to run a library service, you don't need to have been a teacher to manage children services and you don't need to have been a social worker to manage adult care services.

You do need to be able be able to encourage, to support, to mentor and coach, to explain the bigger picture, to describe to staff at all levels what the future will look like. In addition managers need to make explicit the values that drive the business and challenge where practice does not live up to these values.

If staff engagement is to be more than meaningless mechanisms for getting feedback from staff, if staff engagement is to be more than just an opportunity to moan about "management" and if staff engagement is to be an opportunity to influence thinking and change the way things are done then two things must happen.

The organisation needs to be a safe place to say what you are thinking and the management style promoted needs to be more people focused and less budget and performance orientated. This has implications for management development, for creating opportunities for staff to explore issues and for helping staff and managers learn how to shape and influence thinking, to challenge and be challenged.

Blair McPherson was until recently a senior manager in a large local authority

Kent county council: Not so rosy in the garden of England

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:13:00 GMT

Peter Gilroy, Kent's chief executive talks about a new vision for the authority, but cuts in its schools education improvement service are causing genuine concern with headteachers and staff, says Roger Kline

In last week's special report for Guardian Public, Peter Gilroy, Kent's chief executive, sets out the "challenge to create inspiration". Staff in some parts of Kent's children's services might be forgiven for thinking they live in a parallel universe.

Peter challenges councils to introduce change that "is not about top-slicing but about re-thinking the way in which we can transform key public services with a clear vision."

In his own authority in the garden of England, local headteachers and education improvement staff are in uproar at plans Peter has approved, whose development, rationale and implementation appear diametrically opposed to the vision he claims to espouse.

The cuts to Kent's schools education improvement service are precisely the sort of top slicing his article rightly denounces. They are widely regarded as being retrograde with damaging consequences for children in a county whose education system (dominated by the 11+) is under more scrutiny than most.

Peter further claims that "morale will stay reasonably stable, if senior management and politicians are clear about their vision and what they are trying to achieve against reduced expenditure. The bywords here are innovation and inspiration."

Minimum statutory responsibilities

Kent's "rationale" for slashing its schools education improvement service, decimating its subject specialists and other functions appears to many to be a wish list, providing no explanation as to why, or how, what remains of the service can possibly deliver the revised goals, or even arguably meet its minimum statutory responsibilities to promote the highest possible standards in education.

Staff feel they are between a rock and a hard place - redundancy or a job starved of resources and focus. There is no clarity of vision, only despair; no inspiration, only demoralisation.

When staff sought to influence the proposals before they were announced, they were ignored. Now they are told that neither the budget cut, nor the structure, is open to discussion, only asked "how to make it work".

Moreover, the statutory obligation to equality impact assess the proposals to slash the education improvement service, change the services for disabled children and "mainstream" the service for unaccompanied asylum seeking children, may well have been breached, which is why the Equality and Human Rights Commission has written to ask the council for information about its plans.

As a social worker, Peter may himself query the absence of an impact assessment on the latter proposals.

Some of Peter's principles are welcome, but his own council appears unaware of them. Even at this late stage, I would like to invite him or his successor to meet myself and some of those who provide and use these services, so he can understand the strength of feeling which the breach of those principles has caused, and perhaps start to reconsider them in the best interests of local children.

Roger Kline works for Aspect, the children's service trade union

Slashing public sector consultancy budgets

Mon, 26 Apr 2010 14:21:45 GMT

Are they just another expensive pair of hands, or can consultants offer real value for money, even in these times of financial restraint, asks Emma Dolman

A wise move or a false economy? A pertinent yet deliberately controversial point, following the recent budget announcement outlining among other measures a 50% cut in consultancy spend.

On the surface, a neat solution to billowing spend, and one which shares support across the political divide. But is it really this simple? Have all the implications been considered?

I have been a civil servant in central government for almost 20 years, where I have observed Whitehall use of consultancy, and utilised them myself in a wide variety of roles within my own department.

In my experience, I would contend that consultancy spend when directed effectively can bring real benefits to how business is done across government. Conversely, horror stories abound from ill-conceived and ill-executed use of external consultants.

From a hard accounting perspective the case against the consultants is straightforward: negative examples abound from failed, dependent relationships, resulting in ratcheted up budgets, and huge outflows of money from the public sector to their private sector consultant counterparts.

In these situations, consultants are rewarded for their support in the delivery of over-spent and significantly delayed programmes with little or no skills transfer. No one could disagree with the need to root out these types of consultancy contracts, which are born and survive in a climate of dependency, along with those consultants who become just another pair of very expensive hands.

However, this is not the whole picture. My concern is that making such a radical cut in the budget will adversely impact on delivery at a time when making big efficiencies across government is upon us. Are we so confident that we can deliver these significant savings in-house?

I am currently on secondment at Ashridge Business School. Rather than depending on my own view, I have taken account of some of its research into the area. Ashridge research into the use of management consultants has looked at the matter both from the client and consultant perspective.

Clear goals and outputs

Findings indicate that there is a clear desire on both sides to get relationships right, starting with a solid understanding of why (formally and informally) consultants are being used. Next, there must be a clear brief, with tight and regular management, where both sides are focused on clear goals and outputs. Arrangements also need to be in place to ensure that, through joint working, knowledge is transferred and implementation achieved.

Both the client and the consultancy need to make available skilled staff, who can work closely together to deliver a tailored solution.

My own experience bears this out. Successful consultancy relies on a clarity of purpose and requirement, partnership-working, and tight control over activities and spend.

Recent research at Cranfield has also looked at the use of internal and external consultants within the public sector. Interestingly, this research finds that there is no common definition of 'consultant' and no common view on their roles. The research concludes that external consultants add particular value through engagement in more specialist areas, providing objective approaches, experience, good practice, and credibility.

The findings indicate that clear requirements and good communications are crucial, and that a combination of both external and internal consultants working together can be very powerful.

Management information

In 2006, the National Audit Office reported on the government's use of consultants and discovered that there was insufficient collection of management information, a lack of performance review with consultants, and a lack of relational management.

They introduced a tool kit to support future work, but most change programmes are based on relationships, which are hard to learn from a tool kit. More development and practice is essential to transfer skills to a much wider audience within government.

I believe, unequivocally, that a reduction in consultancy spend is essential. But, as with most things, the devil is in the detail. From leading and managing change programmes, I fully recognise the added value a short volley of "outside the box" thinking can bring.

My experience has shown me that choosing the right methodology for a change programme in discussion with an experienced consultant can often be the key to its successful delivery. Reducing spend full stop will quickly become a false economy, if in doing so we become unable to deliver effectively.

Emma Dolman is a visiting faculty member at Ashridge Business School and is a civil servant with nearly 20 years experience in central government

Everything is illuminated?

Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:50:00 GMT

Dashboard data based on past performance is good for assessing customer satisfaction so far but trying to predict future trends is far more difficult and requires new tools

With the prospect of a public sector squeeze, the emphasis on 'evidence-based management' is stronger than ever.

Difficult decisions become a lot easier to make with information that sheds light on the path ahead. But such illumination is not so easy when we are constantly bombarded by data. The common solution is to set key performance indicators that act as a 'dashboard' for the state of an organisation at any given time. But does reporting on past performance provide the necessary illumination of the future in a period of rapid change, and if it does not, then where do we look?

Of course we can rely on the wisdom of those who have lived through tough times in the past, but in this age of science, perhaps there are new forms of evidence to further improve our decisions?

Take customer satisfaction, for example, which was discussed at a recent GuardianPublic roundtable. Satisfaction is widely used to demonstrate that an organisation is delivering well to its customers. In many organisations, customer satisfaction could only get higher; every year better than the last. Everyone gets a pat-on-the-back (perhaps even a bonus) and the results are published in self-congratulatory headlines: 80% of customers are satisfied - hurrah!

But such measures were designed by the market research industry to meet the needs of PR and marketing. Meanwhile, accountants and finance officers pay scant interest to customer satisfaction because the results have shown no relationship to their financial metrics.

With the great challenge of the current cost-cutting environment it will be harder to justify investment to drive customer satisfaction scores higher.

Transparent about real issues

This is an opportunity to use customer satisfaction in quite a different way. By focusing on 'dissatisfaction' and ways to reduce this, managers can demonstrate that they are being transparent about real issues and re-gain some faith in the metrics that everyone can understand.

With the rise of predictive analytics, which link operational and financial performance, many leading organisation are using customer satisfaction measures to successfully re-engineer their delivery, while containing any damage to customer sentiment.

For example, customer satisfaction measures can help to inform outsourcing decisions around value for money from suppliers.

It may be that the organisation can accept a 5% decline in customer satisfaction in the short-term (while migrating to a new supplier), and can then implement new operational processes that help to drive satisfaction up again.

This is using satisfaction metrics in a smart way, as just one element in calculating return-on-investment. Critically, it enables organisations to manage through a period of change in a sensible way.

It's about limiting the damage, and being able to prioritise investments, to ensure that there is no long-term customer dissatisfaction.

For today's decisions, managers need a tool that helps them to determine the negative as well as the positive impact of change. This demands a sense of realism. Those that succeed will be the ones who have a plan that takes into account the impact of cost-cutting on customer sentiment and manages through this period of change. Those that fail will have either stuck to the old PR exercise, or will have thrown the proverbial baby out with the bath water!

Vincent Golding is account director at customer satisfaction specialist Kadence International

A waste of human resources in the NHS

Thu, 01 Apr 2010 09:39:00 GMT

With many NHS organisations failing to appoint an executive director of HR how can it expect to support transformational change without a strategic focus, asks Paul Beal

The quality, improvement, prevention and productivity (QIPP) agenda in the NHS is the focus for the future to develop services which are fit for purpose; this will require developing clinical pathways for patients and workforce transformation for staff.

This will also present financial challenges through zero growth which effectively means a 5% cut in budgets over the next four years; the NHS will have to deliver more for less, while not affecting patient care and quality. This requires strong leadership and governance at every level in the organisation, every member of staff has a role to play to ensure tax payers' money is spent effectively.

Having worked in the NHS as an executive director of human resources (HR) and organisational development (OD), I left two years ago. Since then I have worked with 11 NHS organisations on change programmes, four of which were to modernise HR services to make them fit for purpose.

I have witnessed a lack of leadership at board level, many organisations not having an executive director of HR, despite at least 70% of the spend being on workforce.

The approach has been transactional with a personnel focus rather than an integrated HR business partner philosophy.

The services have been process driven rather than supporting and facilitating change to modernise services and increase workforce productivity. Partnership working with trade unions is used for staff to run to 'personnel' when their managers start to manage their poor performance.

A recent assignment at Luton and Dunstable Hospital NHS Foundation Trust required me to review the HR service. The diagnostics revealed fundamental flaws in the HR service provision which did not meet the Trust's expectations to support transformational change in relation to workforce productivity.

Capability issues within the service were addressed through the introduction of the principles of the HR business partner model. HR now has a strategic focus and is underpinned by a new set of HR policies and procedures to support the new ways of working, this will be embedded by a management development programme to up skill managers in HR issues.

Many of our managers in the NHS are still not leaders

An additional pressure is the capacity and capability of clinical managers in the NHS to manage their teams effectively. Many clinicians come into management because they are excellent clinical practitioners, despite numerous leadership courses which the NHS has commissioned many of our managers in the NHS are still not leaders.

The recent suggestion on a code of practice for NHS managers is most welcomed to ensure regulation of managers and the NHS Leadership Council should start to address this.

Clinical engagement is vital to achieve workforce transformation, the medical consultant body have been relatively untouched by major change. Medical Consultants play a vital role in the NHS to deliver high quality patient care. However, they are NHS employees and should be managed with clear outcomes and performance management processes.

As a HR & OD practitioner, I look forward to working with the NHS to support the cultural challenges ahead to make the NHS a better service which is value for money to the tax payer.

Paul Beal is the managing director of consulting at 216, a HR & OD Consultancy working into the NHS. He is a fellow of the CIPD

Right people, right skills, right jobs

Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:11:00 GMT

Jobs in the media and creative industries are often obtained on a 'who you know' basis, which means that the most qualified and able applicants sometimes miss out. Government-backed guidelines released by Skillset aims to change all that

As a sector skills council, with a remit to champion skills and training for the creative media industries, one of Skillset's key functions is to conduct extensive research into our sector and use that information to help us determine and address the key issues that are affecting our industries.

Some of the country's most senior and influential creative media figures sit on our boards and committees, providing us with vital guidance and support and driving everything we do.

We exist to help the industry make sure that it has the right people, with the right skills in the right jobs. This means attracting, training and keeping the best and brightest talent the UK has to offer, regardless of their background or the connections they may or may not have within the media.

In order to support this role, we have launched the Guidelines for Employers Offering Work Placements in the Creative Industries. They have strong support from both industry and government, outlining what an employer's responsibilities are around volunteering, work experience, internships, traineeships and apprenticeships.

Our work is absolutely essential to ensuring that the UK creative media industries – TV, film, radio, interactive media, animation, computer games, facilities, photo imaging, advertising and publishing – are provided with the skills and talent to enable them to stay at the top of their game as leaders on the world's creative stage.

They must also remain relevant to all audiences within the diverse cultural landscape that is the UK today.

This function has never been more important as our sector emerges from recession and faces the immense challenges ahead.

Put together by Skillset, in collaboration Creative & Cultural Skills and Arts Council England, and with input and advice fro all parts of our industry, these guidelines clearly set out the law and employment responsibilities in the creative industries, where gaining entry is so often informal and open to a "who you know" culture.

Latest Skillset statistics reveal that almost half of the creative media workforce (44%) said they had carried out unpaid work to get into the industry.

These guidelines are long-awaited and much needed. This is why we need as much buy-in as possible from employers of every shape and size to take them up.

Alan Milburn's Panel on Fair Access to the Professions, which included representatives from the creative industries, published their final report, Unleashing Aspiration, last summer. It had 88 proposals to help make all the professions open and fair.

A best practice code and quality kite marking for internships were among these. Skillset has responded to the call and moved it further by providing information on all forms of entry experience into the industry.

A springboard for opening up roles

This will make sure that much more is being done to promote fair and equitable access to all entry routes, thereby opening them up to candidates from all backgrounds. These guidelines will provide a springboard for opening up roles to a greater number of talented creatives from more economically and ethnically diverse backgrounds who often find it difficult to break into this competitive sector.

As GMTV and Skillset chair Clive Jones says: "Getting a job in the creative industries should be about talent and potential. Yet this can prove challenging, given the sheer numbers who want a job and how informal entry often is.

"We understand that the recession and its impact mean that this is a challenging time for the industry. But by addressing this issue now we are seeking to make sure that the best and brightest talent is given fair access – and securing that talent is one of the best ways that we can ensure our future."

It is the first time such guidelines have been drawn up and an example of what Skillset does best - working with employers, unions, government and other key stakeholders to develop bold, but realistic strategies and action plans which address these issues and challenges.

For the guidelines, as with so much of our other work, we have been the interface between different parts of the industry. We will be working with key industry figures to discuss how they wish to take this forward and start to meaningfully implement these guidelines. We hope they do. The diversity statistics for our sector show we still have a long way to go in reflecting a much broader cross-section of society in our workforce.

Dinah Caine is chief executive of Skillset, the sector skills council (SSC) for creative media which comprises TV, film, radio, interactive media, animation, computer games, facilities, photo imaging and publishing. SSCs are licensed by the government in the devolved administrations to tackle the skills and productivity challenge by sector

More information about Guidelines for Employers offering Work Placements in the Creative Industries can be found here

Deconstructing the cult of the personality

Fri, 26 Mar 2010 09:10:00 GMT

Charismatic leaders are prone to build an organisation around themselves, and the voluntary sector is no different - so what lessons can be learned from the Haiti disaster about succession planning? Good outfits will thrive whoever is in charge, says Daniela Barone Soares

Among the many victims of the recent earthquake in Haiti was Zilda Arns. Mrs Arns was the founder and president of "Pastoral da Criança", an organisation that capacitates and empowers (mainly) women to go door to door, travelling to some of the remotest areas in Brazil and other South American countries to fight malnutrition and infant mortality.

Mrs Arns was short-listed for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006, as her initiative achieved a 50% reduction in infant mortality rates. Her organisation, Pastoral is present in 42,000 Brazilian communities, with 260,000 trained volunteers attending to 1.8 million children under the age of six every year.

In those communities, the infant mortality rate is 11 per 1,000 births; in Brazil overall it is 22.5.

I was in Brazil when her death was announced, and watched with admiration as her second-in-charge took her first interview about the sad news. Even on the occasion of the tragic death of her charismatic founder-leader, Maria Ceiça was able to speak confidently about the plans Pastoral had for 2010 and beyond. Nothing had changed to continue saving many more young lives.

This is very inspirational and often rare in the voluntary sector, where so many charismatic leaders build a charity around themselves without looking at its sustainability beyond their "term", whatever that might mean.

I was once interviewing a chief executive from a social enterprise we were considering for investment, who asked me if at Impetus we would be concerned with succession planning because she was over 60.

Succession planning is not about age or death

I said we would be concerned about succession planning even if she were 35. Succession planning is not about age or death; it is about creating the foundation for perpetuating and growing the impact of the organisation beyond the founder or the person at the top.

In the voluntary sector, where there is often a lack of management development beyond the senior echelons of the organisation (and more often than not, beyond the chief executive or charismatic founder), succession planning can go unattended. The fortunes of the organisation remain tied to the fortunes of one individual.

In our experience investing in and accelerating the growth of high-potential charities and social enterprises, we know that this is not only unwise; it is ineffective and wasteful.

There is no denying that having a strong and visionary leader is critical to the charities we invest in. But that alone is rarely enough, if a social enterprise is to fulfil its potential in society. During our 3-5-year partnership with the poverty-fighting charities in the Impetus portfolio, an important focus of our work is around building this important infrastructure – developing the senior management team and greater financial stability – to create the solid foundations they will need to multiply in size and be able to help more people.

Sadly, the current project-based funding environment in the voluntary sector promotes short-termism and hamster-wheel chasing of money that can prevent the leadership from being able to think beyond the next few quarters.

Long-term planning – including succession planning – often takes a back seat to the demands of staying afloat today. In addition, because succession planning can be uncomfortable for the very people who are tasked to think about it, they may be tempted to avoid dealing with it. For many, there is an intrinsic fear of making oneself 'replaceable' (and this is certainly not a feature of the voluntary sector alone).

More money and support for long-term strategy planning

The voluntary sector could do with more help in planning for succession – both in the area of key posts and people, but also around organisation structure and knowledge management, which encompass the whole organisation and prepare it for change. On another level, we need to find more money and support for long-term strategy planning and capacity building of our best charities, if they are going to be sustainable and equipped to tackle some of our most pressing social issues.

Because individuals are not perpetual, we owe it to society, to these organisations' supporters and above all to their beneficiaries, to build organisations that are independent and can reach beyond the founders' reach.

Hence, paradoxically, because Mrs Arns made herself dispensable, her example is unforgettable and her legacy will perpetuate everything she believed in and fought for.

Unlike many charities that die when the founders leave or die, her name and legacy will live on. And so will the 2 million infants whose lives will be saved every year by Pastoral in the years to come.

Daniela Barone Soares is the chief executive of Impetus Trust, the pioneer of venture philanthropy in the UK. Impetus provides charities and social enterprises with unrestricted grants, management support and specialist expertise, to build their capacity so they can help many more people