I had a very intellectually stimulating conversation during the previous week while facilitating a session on ‘leading change in the public sector” to a group of senior public servants. We discussed a rich case study of a new CEO of a government agency who was seeking to institute a number of key changes in the institution by creating a parallel team of “Special Advisers (SAs)” and making assumptions albeit wrongly about the capacity of the bureaucracy to change, and at the end struggling to get his change agenda to succeed.
The lesson that I believe my participants and all of us need to take away is that succession planning is not necessarily all about identifying and grooming your potential successors, but it is really about creating a culture and systems that ensure the sustenance of your transformational change initiatives beyond your exit. In fact, in a multi-party democracy, it is almost impossible to imagine that you can always determine your successors (this is not even a given when your party is re-elected).
What you can and must determine is that the public servants that you have left behind truly understand your commonly owned vision and have built the capacity to continue to carry on the projects you have jointly initiated regardless of who the Chief Executive is. Almost 95% of CEOs do it in the conventional manner described above, and we can see the results. The question is what is the alternative, and why haven’t they tried?
Even more gratifying for me was that in a conversation with a friend over the weekend, I had the opportunity to read a document “How to Manage and Reform Government Agencies and Parastatals” published by the Bureau of Public Sector Reforms (BPSR) that actually focuses on Harvard Professor, John Kotter’s 8 Step Change Framework and advocates it as a basis for managing change in public sector organizations. I will like to para-phrase John Kotter and the BPSR, as I share some classic mistakes that leaders of public sector institutions make that ensure that they are unable to create and sustain transformational change projects in their institutions.
Firstly, a lot of leaders fail to create a sense of urgency. They do not insist on doing things differently, and often fail to lead by example. So, for example, CEO insists that employees report to work by 8am, but fails to resume at work ahead of 8am or punish those who fail to do so. If people don’t see your visible commitment to change, the change will not work.
Many CEOs also underestimate the power of co-creating the vision. They do not work with the other leaders of the agency to co-create the vision for the organization – often making assumptions that the public servants are either irredeemably corrupt, mischievous or incompetent (often fed by the scary stories that their families and friends tell them). Get the people involved in the thinking as well as the implementation of the new projects and initiatives, don’t be a lone ranger!
Another common mistake is failing to communicate the vision by a factor of 10. Focusing too much on “doing” and spending less time building relationships, listening and communicating, leaders fail to get the buy-in of their people. People do not know the “why” and “WIIFM” behind your initiatives, and your change is often met with resistance. So, do the three Es- EXPLAIN, ENGAGE and then set EXPECTATIONS.
Added to this is the reality that most CEOs come in with their own team of “advisers’ and “consultants” and create a parallel administration that neglects the existing structures, violating Kotter’s principle of creating a guiding coalition. Perhaps you should look for SAs from within the organization, and build capacity and capability through focused learning interventions that address real capacity gaps and leave the public servants stronger and better.
Since actions speak louder than words, CEOs need to pay attention to not only the things they say, but the things that they do. Typically, many CEOs come on the first day promising to be different, but end up even worse than the worst of the bureaucrats themselves. People are watching and once they observe your insincerity, they withdraw back to the status quo.
Change can be long and daunting, so CEOs need to create short-term wins that will inspire people, and prevent them from giving up. While sacrifices are required, people need to see your commitment to making improvements in certain areas. Look for opportunities especially in terms of genuine efforts at staff development, and welfare and keep the hope alive!
Finally, CEOs must ensure that they never declare victory too soon – e.g. because you have installed new systems and processes doesn’t mean your organization has changed. Focus on ingraining these changes in the culture by your personal commitment to leading by example, and instituting a performance management system that measures, tracks, develops and rewards performance.
The biggest challenge I have found with creating change in government is the attitude and actions of CEOs themselves who are either too much in a hurry, or have ulterior motives or are too afraid to do the difficult work that I have just described of building the culture and systems for their projects and influence to live beyond them.
Omagbitse Barrow
