No organisation, even the smallest and simplest, can manage itself, and every organisation needs some form of management to be effective. A simple defini- tion of management concerns the deployment of resources ( both human and physical resources) in a manner designed to achieve a defined set of objectives.
However, this is far too simplistic a view to be of much use here. It gives no detail of how management should approach the organisation of the resources or how it should encourage or motivate staff.
Larger organisations today will often separate the different roles of man- agement, appointing specialists for roles such as human resource management, while many smaller organisations may retain all management functions in one person. However it is structured, the task of managers is to guide the or- ganisation towards achieving the goals set by the owners or sponsors of the
organisation. But how do managers undertake this task? John Kotter’s work on leadership is often quoted. Among other things Kotter strongly defended the view that management and leadership are different functions and that man- agers do not necessarily undertake the leadership functions. He argued that, instead, managers were responsible for ensuring order and efficiency in the organisation – they ‘ deal with complexity’ – w hile leaders were responsible for having a vision of the future and then encouraging the organisation to adapt to that vision. Forcing through change would endanger the maintenance of order, efficiency, morale, etc. Kotter also put forward his famous eight- stage process of change ( Kotter 2012) which is as follows:
1. Establish a sense of urgency 2. Create the guiding coalition 3. Develop a vision and strategy 4. Communicate the change vision
5. Empower employees for broad- based action 6. Generate short-term wins
7. Consolidate gains and produce more change 8. Anchor new approaches into the culture
At this point, it is important to note that earlier in this book it was mentioned that one of the key features of public services, compared to commercial organ- isations, was the involvement of politicians in public services. Consequently, in public services, one can think about leadership as coming from politicians ( political leadership) and from managers ( managerial leadership). In some cases, one or all of these types of leadership may be thought to be absent which can cause difficulties. Even worse would be a lack of coherence between political leadership messages and those from managers. Both should be “ singing from the same hymn sheet”.
Not everyone would agree entirely with Kotter’s view but the distinction between management and leadership is helpful. The world is changing at an in- creasing pace, and the things we see today are very different from those even 20– 30 years ago. In the commercial world, many companies that a generation ago were considered the bedrock of a country’s infrastructure have disappeared.
For example, ICI, once seen as the flagship firm of the chemical industry in the UK shrank in size until the remnants were purchased by other companies. Mean- while, many of the new giants operate in sectors not even dreamed of a genera- tion ago – G oogle, for example. In the field of public services, we observe similar levels of change. Government departments exist today, which were n on- existent two or three decades ago. Similarly, organisations such as local authorities and NHS Trusts are considerably different in structure, activities and methods of working than they were over a similar period. While some of these changes might be questionable, some are undoubtedly due to changes in societies and changes in the required roles of public services. Also important is the societal context in which public services operate and that often changes substantially over time.
Events that were seen as minor ten years ago might be looked at more seriously in today’s climate.
CHAPTER 5 Leadership, management and decision making 63 Managers are charged with running the organisation and that is an essen- tial role. But if they focus on this, there must be someone else who focuses on managing the dynamics of change, Kotter claims that this is the role of leaders.
However, leadership has the following aspects:
• Leadership is about creating a vision of where the organisation needs to get to and facilitating the journey to that position. In other words it in- volves major strategic change.
• Leadership is not just a quality found in the chief executive. It needs to be identified and developed at all levels in the organisation from chief execu- tive to first level supervisor.
• Leadership approaches need to be determined by the situation the organisation finds itself in. An organisation in crisis may need a differ- ent leadership approach compared to one which is well established and stable.
• While some people are born with good leadership skills, the skills can be developed in others.
In general terms, it is probably true to say that the principles of leadership and management in the public services are broadly similar to that in the private sec- tor. However, certain significant differences can be delineated:
• Value base – it is sometimes argued that managers in public services have a different value base to those in private business. In the private sector, managers will probably be focused on such themes as sales, cost control, profitability, customer satisfaction, etc. Public management values are more oriented towards such things as public interest, public needs and po- litical compromise. As a public service manager, the primary concern is the overall well- being of the people you serve. However, this can be overstated because, clearly, managers in ( say) the private health sector, while con- cerned with revenues and profits, will also be concerned with professional standards and customer satisfaction.
• Objectives – public service organisations tend to have different and more complex objectives compared to the private sector. For the private sector manager, setting goals and measuring success is relatively straightforward, because objectives can usually be clearly defined and measured in financial terms such as revenues, profits and return on assets. The broader implica- tions for competitors, customers and suppliers are not considered in the narrow equation for business efficiency. For the public sector manager, objectives are often abstract, over- arching, somewhat undefined and sometimes exceptionally difficult to measure. That is because in the public sector, goals apply to a much broader jurisdiction than a single business.
They encompass multiple programmes, and their success is measured by the overall betterment of society. Moreover, in the business world it is the case that objectives are set by the business organisation itself. However, in many parts of the public sector it is the case that the organisation has to accept goals that are from outside the organisation most notably by national government.
• The role of service professionals – in simple terms, we can consider public service organisations as being staffed by a combination of people who might be referred to as managers ( e.g. operational managers, financial managers, HR managers, etc.) and people who might be referred to as service professionals who have specific technical skills at delivering public services ( e.g. teachers, doctors, nurses, firefighters). This distinction is not absolute because many service professionals also have a management role in their job and many people holding fully managerial posts were formerly service professionals. Similar situations can occur in the private sector where a company will also employ people who are specialist managers but also people who are technical experts ( e.g. scientists, engineers, lawyers) concerned with the delivery of a product.
• The role of politics – as noted above, the reality is that the delivery of public services is inextricably linked with politics. Consequently, it is inevitable that public service managers always need to keep an eye on political trends when undertaking their roles and pursuing their objectives.
Sometimes, objectives which have been agreed in the past will be over- turned or amended because of the state of national or local politics at the time. It will be the responsibility of public service managers to deal with those changes. While managers in the private sector will sometimes have to respond to political issues of the day, they do not have political masters and the extent of this will not be as great.
• Public accountability – accountability differs largely between public and private organisations. Managers in public organisations are accountable to a much larger group of people – everyone in the governed area – and are always under public scrutiny. Such a strong and palpable public influ- ence plays a significant role in their decisions. Ultimately, a public service manager will attempt to appease as many people as possible while achiev- ing results, adding to the complexity of their position. The private sector operates without the degree of checks and balances of the public sector but while business executives may not escape public scrutiny completely, they remain primarily accountable to a small group of shareholders. Their focus can therefore remain on maximising the bottom- line. Public service organisations are also far more transparent than private ones. In a free society, transparency is government’s obligation to share information with citizens. It is at the heart of how citizens hold their public officials accountable.
• Stability and leadership – leadership is important in any organisation as is managerial stability. Now while there are examples of chief executives and senior managers in the private sector leaving their company after short pe- riods of time in post, the situation does seem worse in public services with average times in post being shorter. Not too long ago, the average tenure of an NHS chief executive was just 18 months. Equally on the political front there are stability problems in relation to public services. Governments might change after a few years, and Government Ministers often only stay in post for a couple of years before moving on to another department or the back benches.
CHAPTER 5 Leadership, management and decision making 65