WHEN you want to repackage a discussion, diplomats are always good for ideas. Take the north’s civil service.
The issue of structural transformation has long blipped across the political radar.
As a topic of public discussion, it’s not infrequent.
Yet, as a project for progress, it has never caught fire. Last week, the public consultation phase commenced on another Programme for Government.
Undoubtedly major management issues exist in restructuring the executive’s departments. The departure of several thousand civil servants under the voluntary exit scheme also poses challenges.
But the substantial transformation of the civil service – including at senior level – is once again absent from public discussion.
Ultimately the agenda is a decision for the executive. However, at a strategic level, it’s worth a second look.
Recent focus on budgetary issues such as reducing civil service salaries doesn’t negate the need for considering longer-term effective institutional reform.
The problem isn’t so much the ‘what’ or ‘why’. It’s more the ‘how’ and ‘when’.
Twelve months ago in this column, I suggested (again) the need for a transformational agenda, with practical recommendations:
“For example, the number of grades could be reduced. That would flatten and expand the pool of those eligible for selection and promotion to the top tiers.
“Transformational training should focus on improving professional delivery through strategic management skill-sets and on inculcating ethical mind-sets around human rights, equality and sustainable economics.
“These two factors – creating emerging talent pools and ensuring effective career tools – could be brought together in the centre of government through the initiation of bespoke project/programme specialist delivery units.
“These specialist units could be targeted into projects and policies (in any department) to make delivery happen.”
In short, we needed – and still need – an effective transformational focus on reform and representativeness, on doctrine and delivery.
In recent days, some media highlighted the all-male gender composition of the north’s permanent secretaries.
But there was, and remains, little substantive inquiry of systematic mechanisms for future progress and reform.
Very often in life, the biggest problem with communicating a message isn’t what you say, but what the other person hears.
They’ll filter the message through their own experience, biases, knowledge, agendas and ideas. We all do it.
So if a compelling message isn’t getting through, perhaps sometimes the problem lies in the packaging. As in life, so too in politics.
For example, if I talk about my experience working with the senior civil service, some may think I’m having a personal ‘go’ at others. In which case, the message of transformation gets tainted.
If I analyse the historic political context of the civil service, some may dismiss the resulting recommendations as partial. If I interrogate representative inequalities in elite public institutions, some may criticise the conclusions as merely academic.
It may, of course, be that such experiential, political or academic conclusions are entirely valid in proving the need for change.
Case studies, political characteristics and representative equality are all central to the legitimacy of public institutions. That was the central spine of the Patten Report on policing reform.
However, the flip-side is that if the presentation of arguments becomes a diversion (intentionally or otherwise), then perhaps they need to be repackaged.
That’s not about giving ground. Rather it’s about strategically delivering outcomes.
And that’s where diplomats have helpfully added to the professional potential at play.
A couple of weeks ago, Whitehall’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) published a review by former ambassador Tom Fletcher which recommended major transformation of that department.
It’s a compact and fleet-of-foot report, presenting a systematic charter for change.
It hits all the buttons: strategic development in anticipating global change; promoting diversity in representation; effective restructuring of the department – including flattening grade structures.
Its propositions include intensifying the organisational vision; making personnel structures more flexible, responsive and effective; refocusing resources on frontline activities; developing deeper policy expertise and professional skills in leadership; and building both diversity and high performance among the workforce.
A new approach of centrally organised expert project teams is integral to the transformation model.
Now, ally the FCO/Fletcher report with the values outlined in last year’s major ‘Global Island’ strategy document from Dublin’s Department of Foreign Affairs.
It identified the department’s core organisational values as fairness, justice, security and sustainability. Meaningful and effective values which have the potential to frame measurable public policy programmes.
And there you go. In a few paragraphs from London and Dublin, you’ve got the basis of a programme for transforming the north’s civil service – including at senior level.
Focus in on organisational reforms and representativeness. Transform doctrine and delivery outcomes.And manage the presentational package to win maximum consensus. Trust the diplomats, eh?
j.kearney@irishnews.com
