When an organisation attempts a strategy, you never know whether its separate sections are going to manage to work together. And it’s even more difficult for elected municipalities to produce results since they are locked into baronial structures. So how does one measure the success of a municipal or regional strategy – particularly when it’s phased over several decades and, therefore, affected by the vagaries of fate and fashion? In a previous post in this series, I said that Strathclyde’s Social Strategy could be judged a success “at least as far as the process of change was concerned”. Effectively this was drawing a distinction between the outcome of a strategy and its performance
Rosabeth Kanter is one of the most famous management writers and suggested in 1992 "Ten Commandments for Executing Change" worth reading in detail (click on the link)
Analyse the organisation - and its need for change
Create a shared vision and common direction
Separate from the past
Create a Sense of Urgency
Support a Strong Leader
Line up Political Support
Craft an Implementation Plan
Develop Enabling Structures
Communicate, Involve People and be Honest
Reinforce and Institutionalise the Change
This gives us a useful checklist for Strathclyde Region’s “Social Strategy”.
The shocking 1973 “Born to Fail?” report identified the West of Scotland as a UK leader in “multiple deprivation” and a few of us – instead of acting defensively - saw this as an opportunity to ensure that the Region, set up in 1974, recognised this need as its basic priority - thereby establishing and sustaining a shared vision.
“Separating from the past” was easy at one level since the Region was starting from scratch but enormously difficult at another since it was an amalgamation of six large powerful bodies – each with its distinctive style – let alone the strength of the professional cultures to be found in departments such as Education, Police, Water, Fire and Social Work
That indeed had created a lot of potential enemies for the new Region – its very scale made it difficult to defend and its power left a bitter taste in the mouths of the politicians and officials working in the lower tier of local government. There was an urgency in the Region having to prove itself – which gave us the incentive to do things differently.
For the first 4 years, leadership was shared by 2 very different characters – a community minister being the public persona and a miner being the behind-the- scenes deal-maker. It allowed a rare combination of practicality and idealism to flow in the wider leadership
The challenge of community activists was an important element in the work
With the implementation plan taking several years to evolve and ensuring a critical “learning process”
and the appropriate enabling structures – at political, administrative and community levels
Communication was intense and continuous – as you would expect of a democratic system
And appropriate strategic changes reinforced and institutionalised
progress was initially reviewed in 1981 – using community conferences attended by about 1000 local activists
and a draft “Social Strategy for the Eighties” submitted to a final conference
and then to the first Council meeting after the May 1982 Regional elections – to ensure its continued legitimacy
with a further tweaking taking place after another few years with a new dialogue to strengthen partnership with Glasgow District and to exploit the opportunity presented by Margaret Thatcher’s expression of interest as she took power after the 1987 elections in a new deal for the inner cities
The keywords, for me, are uncertainty, experimental, inclusive, participative, legitimacy, community structures, openness.
A couple of years after I had left Scotland I had an opportunity to present the Region’s strategy to an OECD committee and it’s interesting to recall the 5 points I made -
"(a) RESOURCE the Priority Programmes with "MAINLINE" money
Urban Aid money from central government was essential for the strategy – but ran out after 5 years. Senior departmental management did not feel a strong sense of ownership - and the subsequent project management generally had its problems. Not least because of
the relative lack of experience of those appointed
the complex community management arrangements of the projects
the uncertainty about funding once the 5 year point was reached.
"(b) SUPPORT CHANGE AGENTS !
No self-respecting private company would introduce new products/systems without massive training. The more progressive companies will pull in business schools and even set up, with their support, a teaching company. The time was overdue for such an approach from the public sector; for a new type of civic "entrepreneur". And certainly the reaction of much of the public sector in the 1980s to the various threats they faced - not least privatisation - has been to put new life into the public sector. We do appear to be amateurs in many respects compared with the United States as far as managing change is concerned.
Many organisations exist there for training and supporting these, for example, in community economic development corporations. At least 3 levels of training need can be identified for urban development - political, managerial and community. And the most neglected are the first and last, particularly the last.
One of our recent reviews of Strathclyde Region`s urban strategy decided there was a need to give more support to the development of local leaders - for example by giving them opportunities to travel to see successful projects elsewhere - not only in the UK but in Europe. This had multiple aims - to give the local leaders new ideas, to recharge their batteries, to make them realise their struggle was not a solitary one: to help develop links, as Marlyn Fergusson has put it, with other "con-spirators" (literally - "those you breathe with").
Such a venture by an elected agency required some risk-taking - sending community activists not only to places like Belfast but to Barcelona ! - and one too many was apparently taken with the result that it was quickly killed off !
"(c) Set DETAILED TARGETS for Departments to ensure they understand the implications of the strategy for them
Information is power. It is only the last few years that information has been collected systematically about how the local authority resources in areas of priority treatment relate to the needs. Without such sort of information - and a continual monitoring of the effectiveness of action taken in relation to clear targets - any strategy is just pious good intentions.
"(d) Establish FREESTANDING Community Development Agencies
The combination of social, economic, environmental and housing objectives involved in regeneration requires local, free-standing agencies operating from a position of equality and self-confidence: and able, as a result, to challenge the narrowness and inertia which, sadly, tends to characterise normal public bureaucracies.
"(e) Be realistic about the TIME-SPAN the change will need!
The task we are engaged on is the transformation into a post-industrial world: the changes in skills and behaviour - and in organisational forms - cannot be achieved in less than 20-30 years. Hence the need for a learning strategy."
To cut this long story short, the Region got it about right. Our management of the strategy may not have met everyone’s standards but least we were spared Gordon Brown’s infamous target-setting!
No comments:
Post a Comment