CAN GOVERNMENTS THINK STRATEGICALLY?

The revelations from the official COVID inquiry of the tensions between the various parts of the government machine have been the last straw for the public – which needed little persuasion that the UK government machine was not “fit for purpose” and required a complete overhaul. Such indeed  is the conclusion of no less than 2 reports which hit the press this week - Power with Purpose – final report from the Commission on the Centre of Government (Institute of Government 2024): and The Radical How (Nesta 2024)

I have mixed feelings about the Institute of Government. At one level, it clearly 

produces useful reports but, at another, it so obviously consists of the “Great 

and the Good” who consistently fall into the trap of groupthink. The Nesta 

report seems to reflect a more inclusive style of thinking. As someone with 

16 years of experience of leading and implementing strategic change in a 

huge government body (admittedly finishing in 1990) this post offers some 

tentative thoughts on the challenges involved. More systematic thinking can 

be found in the reading list below

we may have been dealing with more than 2 million citizens but knew that 
the people we needed to persuade numbered in the hundreds – namely 
the officials of such departments as Education, Police and Social Work, but also community activists

As a first step, we simply signalled (in 1975) that dealing with the issue we defined as “multiple deprivation” was our first priority.
It took a year to come up with the first statement of that strategy and a 
further few years to test that and produce in 1982 a Social Strategy for the Eighties which was further tweaked in 1988 dues to the changed political conditions 

Some Dilemmas of Social Reform is a recent article in which I try to explain 

the process in more detail - Rosabeth Kanter is one of the most famous management 

writers and offered, a few decades ago, 10 Commandments for implementing Change1 - 

starting with the need for analysis and, more specifically,

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

I used this checklist as a retrospective test of my own experience, over a 15 year period, of developing and applying a strategy for the West of Scotland -

• 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 - and it certainly did establish and sustain 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

• And community activists were brought into that

• With the implementation plan taking several years to evolve

• and appropriate enabling structures – at both political, administrative and 

community levels 

• Communication was intense and continuous – as you would expect of a 

democratic system

And appropriate structures reinforced and institutionalised the changes

Whether by luck or by design, 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!  

And here's one guy who disputes the Institute for Government analysis 

Recommended Reading

How Institutions Think Mary Douglas 1986 Although an anthropologist, Douglas uses the 
latest thinking on institutional theory to offer a very distinctive and unique presentation

Strategy – a history Lawrence Freedman 2009 A very accessible read by a military historian 
which does justice to both top-down and bottoms-up approaches

The Art of Public Strategy Geoff Mulgan 2009 From someone who has experienced 
both the theory and the practice.
There is no single formula for organizing strategy in public organizations. It can be 
led by specialized strategy teams and units, task forces and commissions; it can grow 
out of the discussions and collaborations of networks that cut across departments; 
it can have its roots in political parties, or in the civil service. It can be open and
inclusive, tapping into the collective intelligence of a society, or it can be closed and 
tightly controlled. But all successful governments have created spaces for thought, 
learning, and reflection to resist the tyranny of the immediate, and any
government or public agency that takes its responsibilities seriously
needs structures and processes to do these things. Otherwise the
competing forces that can be found within government, including party
tacticians, media and public relations experts, cynics, and
time-servers, are even more likely to sacrifice the future for the
present. The costs of strategy need not be high, but the benefits
can be, focusing energieswhere theymatter, and refreshing governments
that otherwise go stale.
Leading Public Sector Innovation Bason 2010 A Danish take

Strategic Thinking in Government Vol I HMSO 2012 A UK Parliament Select Committee 
report
Strategic thinking in Government (Vol II 2012) some written evidence to the Committee
UK govt response  

Matt Flinders ‘ review of “The Blunders of our Government” A superb take-down of an 
over-ambitious book

Leading Public Design Bason 2017 The Dane’s further thoughts

Strategies for Governing – retinventing public admin for a dangerous century 
Alasdair Roberts 2019 A canadian political scientist rethinks PA

Why Governments get it wrong; and how they can get it right Dennis Grube 2022
An Australian public servant now a Cambridge academic takes on the subject with an unusual if  not flippant book

https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/  

WORLDVIEWS

To make sense of the world, we all create patterns of meaning.In my youth it was a tripartite division – conservatives, socialists and liberals. Not for me the Manichean approach of left/right or insider/outsider - there was always a third way. It was only in 2000, however, that I became aware of the four dimensions of grid-group theory which anthropologist Mary Douglas introduced - consisting of four very different “world views” (what she calls hierarchist, egalitarian, individualist and fatalist) which came to be known as “Cultural Theory”. I came across Mary Douglas’ theory thanks to public admin theorist Chris Hood’s “The Art of the State” (2000)

Another approach was that of cultural values – the work of people such as de Hofstede; Ronald Inglehart; Frans Trompenaars; Richard Lewis (of When Cultures Collide fame) and Richard Nesbitt a body of writing which emphasises the distinctiveness of national values most graphically illustrated in the Inglehart cultural map of the world and best explained in this brochure. Multinational companies were funding a lot of this work as they tried to understand how they could weld different nationalities into coherent and effective teams. Other companies had also been funding a lot of this work to try to get into the minds of their consumers - but international charities suddenly realised a decade or so ago could also be used to prise money out of all of us for their more altruistic purposes (see below) – a politicisation of which Adam Curtis' documentaries have made us much more aware

Those were the days when a body of literature called “path dependency ” was raising important questions about how “sticky” cultural values were…viz how difficult national behavioural traits are to change. And, just the other day, I discovered Betti’s argument that there were actually twelve ways of seeing the world (see list below)

Psychologists, sociologists, political scientists and anthropologists have approached this question of perceptions and values completely separately and at different times - making few attempts to engage one another in discussion It's such a critical issue that it's time they reached out to one another - and made the connection with the developing literature on world views

Recommended Reading

BOOKS

- Management development through cultural diversity Ronnie Lessem (1995) 
Lessem is a south african who uses the four lens of the compass to show how the 

environment governs our ways of thinking.
- When Cultures Collide – leading across cultures; Richard Lewis (1996) The book 

which introduced us to the field – and gave us marvellous vignettes of the strange 

habits of almost all countries of the world

- Spiral Dynamics – mastering values, leadership, change; Don Beck and Chris Cowan

 (1996)  with crucial explorations of the very different levels of explanation needed 

for discussions of behaviour and the values which underpin it.

- Riding the Waves of Culture – understanding cultural diversity in business Frans 

Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner (1997) the Dutchman who took on de 

Hofstede’s mantle
 “The Art of the State” Chris Hood (2000)  uses Mary Douglas’ grid-group typology 

brilliantly to help us understand the strengths, weaknesses and risks of these 

various world views.
- The Geography of Thought – how westerners and asians think differently and why; 

Richard Nesbitt (2003) An American social psychologist gives a thought-provoking book
- “Way of life theory – the underlying structure of world views, social relations and lifestyles” 

– a rather disjointed and abstract dissertation by Michael Edward Pepperday (2009) an 

introduction to which is here

- Consumer Shift - how changing values are reshaping the consumer landscape (2011) 

actually much more about values and world views than it is about consumers….
-The Patterning Instinct; Jeremy Lent (2017) how worldviews develop and can change 

history 

- Cultural Evolution – people’s motivations are changing, and reshaping the world ;

 Ronald Inglehart (2018)  a political scientist who has been at the heart of discussion 

about cultural values for the past 50 years – and the book and this article summarised 

that work.
- Twelve Ways of Seeing the World  M Betti (2019 Eng – original German 2001) a 

curious book based on the work of Rudolf Steiner
- The Web of Meaning ; Jeremy Lent (2021) an important follow up to his 2017 book
- Theories of International Relations ed R Devetak and J True (6th ed 2022)
- Foundations of International Relations ed S McGlinchey et al 2022
- The Battle for Britain – crises, conflicts and the conjunctures  John Clarke 2023


ARTICLES
- Wicked Problems and Clumsy Solutions ; Keith Grint (2008) a short very useful article 

by an academic
- Common Cause – the case for working with our cultural values  (2010) 

a useful little manual for charities
- Finding Frames – new ways to engage the UK public (2010) ditto
- A Cultural Theory of Politics ” (2011) a short article which shows how the 

grid-group approach has been used in a range of disciplines
- Grid, group and grade – challenges in operationalising cultural theory for 

cross-national research (2014) is a very academic article although its comparative 

diagrams are instructive

- Britain’s Choice – common ground and divisions in 2020s Britain (More in Common

 2020) a detailed picture of the british people and their values these days

Reassessing one’s World View

Last month I posted about a book which mapped the painful process of someone changing a worldview which he had held passionately and, with some serendipity, a post then arrived from my favourite blogger, Dave Pollard which deserves reproduction (at least partially)

My worldview is a model of the world as I (want to believe I) ‘know’ it, and I am 

seemingly compelled to try to make everything ‘fit’ into that model. And I change 

it reluctantly. I don’t think I’m unusual in this. In this as in many other aspects of 

human behaviour, I am conditioned to believe what I believe — 

• by my personal experiences, 

• by what I’ve been taught by people I trust (or, at least, don’t distrust), 

• by stories that I’ve been told

• by the beliefs of others I know directly or have read or listened to. 

All of this conditioning is filtered through my current worldview. And the 
result — what gets through that filter — is what I purportedly ‘know’….
I used to believe, quite strongly, a lot of things that I no longer believe. My 
worldview has changed, often slowly-and-then-all-at-once, as I found my old 
beliefs simply weren’t tenable. Most recently, I’ve come to understand, to my 
chagrin, that my belief in my country’s (Canada’s) political independence from 
the US Empire was naive. 

• I’ve come to acknowledge that that Empire has been systematically and 

intensively destabilizing and immiserating the lives of most of the world’s 

citizens, if they are unfortunate enough to live in countries 

that aren’t subservient to the Empire’s ideology, and have been doing so for my entire life

• I’ve come to realize that my belief that the PMC are, if ideologically bent, nevertheless relatively informed about the world, open-minded, and inclined to seek collaboration and compromise to solve problems, was completely mistaken. 

• I’ve come to appreciate that our newspapers and other media are not at all committed to seeking and telling the objective truth. 

I suspect that, for many people, realizations that totally undermine one’s worldview 
and belief system would be gut-wrenching. But I’m preoccupied with knowing Why?

Why did my own conditioning lead me to so completely misunderstand what has

 been going on? Why - when there have been such astonishing opportunities for global peace, for redistribution of wealth, for solving the centuries-old problems of poverty and disease, for collaboratively tackling the horrific predicaments that are collapsing our civilization - has our conditioning instead led us to opt for preparations for an un-winnable, global, Empire-vs-Rest-of-the-World war? What madness has gripped our long-suffering species?

More people seem to be talking these days about ”worldviews” (I’m not sure if its one word or two) – so I’m going to develop this theme in the next few posts,