57 – Some types of thinking observed in local government.

Posted on March 23, 2015 by lancingfarrell

Posted by Whistler 580 words

Convenient thinking. I think this is a preferred way of thinking for many people. It is the easiest. What is the quickest way to deal with this matter? Is there someone else who should be doing it? What is likely to have the least impact on me? Once you start asking these questions, you are well on the way to some convenient thinking. It is most problematic when senior management regularly engage in convenient thinking.

Consequential thinking. This is related to convenient thinking but is more focussed on the possible outcomes from doing something. What could go wrong? Who could be upset? Will it move my career forward? Continue reading →

51 – An ABEF OSA. What is it and do you need one?

Posted on March 13, 2015 by lancingfarrell

Posted by Colin Weatherby 900 words

The Australian Business Excellence Framework (ABEF) provides a systematic way to think about your organisation and its improvement. It identifies seven categories of organisational activity that are systematically analysed when you conduct an organisational self assessment (OSA) to determine the approach, deployment, results and improvement. This examination of approach, deployment, results and improvement is called the ADRI cycle and it is similar to PDCA and other improvement cycles except that it focuses on outcomes not actions. So, that is what it is.

Do you need one? (And, more importantly, what will you get if you have one).

Continue reading →

49 – Rate capping. Four workarounds we can expect to see.

Posted on March 10, 2015 by lancingfarrell

Posted by Whistler 320 words

Image from http://serendip.brynmawr.edu

All the talk about rate capping and the impact on local government services has started me thinking about what happens every time there are legislated changes to the way councils operate. We find workarounds. Rather than putting our efforts into being better at providing the services that communities expect, we put our energy into workarounds to protect the status quo.

Workaround number 1. Service lives for assets will be pushed out unrealistically to reduce the annual depreciation cost. Instead of depreciating assets over 50 years they will be depreciated over 100 years, effectively halving the depreciation cost.

Workaround number 2. Staff numbers will be cut to make budget and agency staff and consultancy costs will rise significantly. A lower cost but permanent part of the workforce will be replaced with a much more expensive but temporary workforce. The over expenditure will be offset by workaround number 1.

Workaround number 3. Asset sales will be included in the budget. This will usually be land determined to be surplus to requirements (probably used as open space at the moment) or the vehicle fleet (which will then be leased). It is unlikely that the land will actually be sold and this will be explained in notes to the annual report as an unforseen problem. Never mind, put them in again next year. I worked at a council that successfully did this for a decade. Selling assets like the fleet will probably realise a loss but provide some short term cash while increasing long term costs.

Workaround number 4. CEO and Executive salaries will be frozen. No Consumer Price Index or ‘performance’ increases. This sounds fine and could be an example of leadership from the front to control wage increases across the organisation. But keep an eye on their contract renewals. Typically this is where top management makes up for any lack of annual increase and the details are usually confidential. No increases for several years and then a big increase on rehiring.

45 – Does your Executive suffer from altitude sickness?

Posted on March 5, 2015 by lancingfarrell

Posted by Whistler 400 words

A colleague has recently started reporting to a Group Manager who is new to local government. Her observations about the workings of local government provide an insight into our behaviour that we either no longer notice or just accept. This post discusses the observations made of Executive budget deliberations.

Over several days her Executive considered the budget prepared by the organisation and they deliberated over the ‘business as usual’ budget and new initiative bids. In this time the discussion alternated between the high level and the detail. The way she described it, the Executive would say that they needed to be strategic and take a ‘helicopter view’, but each time they attempted to do so they felt discomfort at the ‘altitude’reached and choked. They would then dive straight back down into the details of the matter where they would then spend 10 or 15 minutes going over the minutiae before reminding themselves of the need to deal with matters strategically. They then headed back to higher altitude but once there the altitude sickness resumed and they would dive back to the detail. As I heard the story I imagined them each strapped to a Jetpack.

Over successive issues, the available time frittered away and a series of small decisions were made about the numerous budget bids, resulting in a draft budget that lacked any overall cohesion or strategy linking it to the big picture or the long term. Why did this happen?

After talking to others who have worked in local government for a long time, the process described so colourfully is the same process witnessed annually. Every manager has seen it. Despite their best efforts, the Executive frequently fail to take the high level, big picture, long-term view required. I think this is because they are not confident about what the big issues really are or how they should be addressed. In addition, they lack trust in managers to understand the issues. Managers and the Executive don’t share the same experiences of working in the organisation. This is evident in culture survey results. The Executive also overestimate the currency and accuracy of their knowledge of operations. This leads them to think they are capable of dealing effectively with the detail.

Low altitude can also be a safe place for some members of Executives.

44 – The Executive. What exactly is its role?

Posted on March 3, 2015 by lancingfarrell

Posted by Colin Weatherby 700 words

This seems to be a common question. You frequently hear people saying, ‘that decision will need to go to the Executive’, or ‘don’t do that until you have been to Exec’. If asked, the people saying this often can’t say why they have offered this advice and reviewing the terms of reference for the Executive will usually reveal that it is not a decision making body. It is individual members who have the authority to make decisions. So, what is its role? Continue reading →

40 – Unskilled, unaware, or both? The Dunning–Kruger effect at work.

Posted on February 25, 2015 by lancingfarrell

Posted by Colin Weatherby 800 words

One of my favourite sayings is that ‘anything is possible when you don’t know what you are talking about’. I have often wondered why I feel the need to use it so often at work. After a colleague sent me link on the Dunning-Kruger effect I am starting to understand why.

The Dunning–Kruger effect is named after David Dunning and Justin Kruger of Cornell University. They published ‘Unskilled and Unaware of It: How difficulties in Recognising One’s Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments’ in 1999. The title gives you a good idea about the contents. The focus of the paper is;

We argue that when people are incompetent in the strategies they adopt to achieve success and satisfaction, they suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realise it.

Continue reading →

37 – Risk delegation. Who has it at your council?

Posted on February 20, 2015 by lancingfarrell

Posted by Colin Weatherby 480 words

Have you ever wondered who has the formal delegation to accept risk on behalf of the organisation? I know that you probably spend most of your time dealing with systems that seek to reduce or eliminate risk, but what happens when risks must be taken? How do you assess and accept those risks?

My bet is that there is no system to accept risk and that your organisation has little understanding of the risks that are being taken by managers each day. I think that the absence of a system to formally assess and accept risks is the reason there are endless systems to get rid of it. I am not talking about the Risk Register and the big strategic or operational risks that are obvious to everyone. I am talking about the daily risks that arise when something hasn’t worked out the way you would like it to but work must go on. Continue reading →

36 – What did you like and dislike about your previous managers?

Posted on February 18, 2015 by lancingfarrell

Posted by Whistler 430 words

A colleague told me recently that they had been asked, along with the other managers in their branch, to write a list of the things they had liked and disliked about their previous group managers. The intention was for the new group manager to understand how managers would prefer to work with him. The method of finding out was just a little unorthodox.

The list of likes and dislikes had to be submitted typed on plain paper in an unmarked envelope. Each manager’s anonymous list would then be re-typed onto a longer list to be tabled and discussed at a branch meeting. This whole approach made me think about my previous branch managers, so I made my own list. It was a cathartic exercise. I can recommend it. It is also a way to crystallise your own thinking about what works for you in your relationship with your manager.

Here are my lists. Continue reading →

35 – Accountability in local government. Who are we really accountable to and why does it matter?

Posted on February 16, 2015 by lancingfarrell

Posted by Lancing Farrell 650 words

The demands for accountability in local government are continuous. The challenge is that they come from many different places and focus on different aspects of performance. Sometimes they create conflicts. For example, strict adherence to procurement policies can remove the flexibility required to respond quickly and meet complex community needs. But it keeps the Audit Committee happy. A community interest group gains political support for a project that hasn’t been included in the budget. But the councillor and their constituents are happy. I am sure you can think of other examples. Continue reading →

34 – Middle managers in local government: the ‘scrapers of burnt toast’?

Posted on February 16, 2015 by lancingfarrell

Posted by Colin Weatherby 620 words

burnt toast

This is the phrase used by Peter R. Scholtes in The Leaders Handbook to describe the work of many middle managers as ‘expediters or troubleshooters’ in organisations that have yet to eliminate waste and create ‘efficient, smooth, uncluttered flows of work’. He says that in a ‘flat’ organisation the layers of middle management have been removed as part of the focus on eliminating waste. In an efficient system, they are unnecessary and non-value adding roles. I am sure he doesn’t think that middle managers aren’t required. You just need less. It is an interesting idea.

Scholtes says that removing layers as part of improving organisational performance reduces opportunities for promotion. As a result, people leave to find less efficient organisations where their skills in ‘expediting and troubleshooting’ are required to deal with inefficiencies and waste to make the system work. I started thinking about my role and the role of colleagues in middle management, and what we spend each day doing. What do we talk about when we meet in the corridors? Are we mostly adding value or just spending our time making dysfunctional systems work? Continue reading →

Local Government Utopia

Two hundred and fifty (or so) opinions, essays and observations

Category Archives: leadership