What is the ideal workforce make-up for the Public Sector?

Every Public Sector organisation across the world is facing the same challenges caused by the current tough economic climate, which means that - as part of wider organisational considerations such as property assets and reducing duplication - workforce make-up is crucial in helping Public Sector organisations to become adaptable/agile and survive economic pressures.

 

Public Sector organisations need to become more aware of the types of employees they employ, including those who can best support the adaptability and transformation needs the organisation needs to consider in becoming more efficient and leaner, and those who are able to help the organisation manage the peaks and troughs of demand, and all this without negatively impacting on service delivery and local economic growth. 

 

There is a trend which has been set by some Public Sector bodies in London in working with Private Sector giants for both back office and community facing service delivery. These giants however face the same challenges as any Public Sector body in managing peaks and troughs. And they have an extra challenge, and that is 'winning business' of other Public Sector bodies in order to achieve local efficiencies through collaboration and partnership working. The question is however: 'Are Private Sector giants best-placed or even interested in supporting local collaborations and partnerships? Plus are they themselves agile and flexible enough to negotiate the same tough economy as faced by the Public Sector?'

 

The answer to sustainability and continuity of high-quality service delivery may be closer to home than first thought, namely the (often hidden) strengths of the Public Sector workforce. Public Sector workforces are often made up of people who live locally, who have worked in the Public Sector for some time and who are willing to be contributors and creators of a stronger local future for all. A great source of local knowledge and strengths!

 

The key is taking time to analyse the perfect workforce make-up for your organisation!

 

There are three types of employee status I would like to highlight in this blog:

• The 'permanent' workforce - Many organisations perceive this type of workforce to be ideal as they undoubtedly work hard and have extensive internal knowledge. They are also willing to work to organisational rules, policies and procedures. In reality this type of employee will only reluctantly offer challenge to something which could be improved upon out as they worry they might lose their job and are mostly driven by job security, stability, money and/or status. These drivers often mean the permanent workforce are less resilient to organisational change/transformation and some may even (wittingly or unwittingly) sabotage transformation initiatives due to lack of objectivity.
  
  
  It is noticeable that organisations who employ high numbers of permanent staff often have to resort to expensive and highly disruptive staff restructures in order to continuously improve and evolve. Moving staff around based on strengths rather than job descriptions is difficult as traditional contracts and consultation policies make it time consuming to change hierarchical management structures. The result is often the creation of more bureaucracy and higher complexity of decision-making processes, slowing down and at times paralysing transformation initiatives and service delivery.
 
• The 'free agent' workforce - This type of workforce has two subcategories. The internal free agent aka the intrapreneur, or the external free(lance) agents aka the entrepreneur. Both are highly committed to creating efficiencies and sustainability by breaking hierarchical silo mentalities. They are self-driven and on the whole take responsibility for their own learning and performance. They are less driven by job security, stability and status, and are not concerned about working themselves out of a job as they enjoy variety and more likely to work from the principle of empowerment of others (the 'teach a person to fish, ...' principle) which means they can step away. The intrapreneurs are often perceived as 'disruptive' by traditional managers as they challenge the status quo and act outside of their job descriptions.
  
  
  In case of the external freelancer, it has been noted that organisations often invite back employees who have worked for them in the past. This may be perceived as expensive by permanent employees, however this is a myth. Freelance staff, while they may be more expensive in relation to pay, actually save organisations a lot of time and money by being a highly flexible workforce, which mitigates the need for costly and highly disruptive restructure programmes. Freelancers bring an objectivity to transformation programmes which require tough decisions which are likely affect the organisational structure, its corporate centre controls and its workforce, and as such help drive the transformation forward. Organisations are better able to attract and where needed switch off knowledge and skills based on fluctuating demand. 

Given the economic pressures and the need to encourage more local economic growth I would argue that the ideal workforce for any Public Sector organisation who seriously needs to consider 'downsizing' is to identify and work with its internal Free Agents, but also with local external Free(lance) Agents. Internally Free Agents make for a highly flexible and resilient workforce and using local Free(lance) Agents utilises local strengths and knowledge, engages citizens into local action for a better future and supports the local economy.

 

So what is your organisation's ideal workforce make-up for surviving tough economic times?

The changing role of Councils

To date, Councils have prided themselves on keeping their communities safe. Their leadership style has closely matched that of a parent creating safety for dependents. In the good times the relationship between Councils and the communities they support has been peaceful and mutually respectful as dependents have felt safe and looked-after. Financial uncertainty has however created some strain in this relationship.

What is needed now however is for Councils to empower their communities to take risks in order to survive the double-dip recession and the impact of an ageing population, which means a signifiant cultural shift and a need to think differently about the Council's priorities. Councils need to embrace the fact that they are interdependent on the support and creativity of the communities they have to date supported to deliver a wider variety of services to meet their own needs. Their role needs to change from 'safety-provider' to 'risk-enabler', a change not to be underestimated (please refer back to the parent-dependent analogy)!

To reduce the risk, it is crucial for Council to be humble, use a more coaching-style of community leadership and be honest, open and transparent in the sharing of information so that communities can make better informed decisions.

What would make Councils feel more at ease with the changes required? I'd really welcome your thoughts and views.

RELATED READING:

Councils' exaggerated risk aversion puts charity contracts under threat -http://www.guardian.co.uk/local-government-network/2012/feb/27/councils-risk-aversion-puts-charity-contracts-at-risk

Letting go: how to set public services free from council control -http://www.guardian.co.uk/local-government-network/2012/mar/14/public-services-council-control

Thought of the day ... on breaking learned dependency

The only way to break 'learned dependency' is to start with a blank sheet of paper, presenting open, transparent and balanced information and collaborate fully with others who are passionate on finding solutions.

In contrast, when a solution is brought to the table by an 'expert', ownership by others is completely lost as:
- no other carries the same passion for the solution
- no other want to step on the expert's toes
- no other will understand the reasons/benefits of the solution in full

Create leaders, not followers!

Question of the day ... on Local Government

Should the Public Sector think and act more like a Cooperative, Charity or Social Enterprise?

I'd love to hear people's thoughts!

Thought of the day ... building accountability

Sometimes personal accountability can only be achieved by a 'tough love' approach. This is not just true in personal relationships, but equally applies to the Public Sector in empowering community action.

Letting go of your best people to support local economic growth

As it stands Local Authorities, by being the sole provider of a service in most cases and by their very size and systems, have installed dependency and ‘learned helplessness’ into the people they serve. In many cases, this high dependency has meant that Councils are looked at to address many of the communities’ needs, putting more pressure on the funds available. As a result, they attract litigation when the service provided does not address the needs identified. 
 
In times of luxury, the impact of the above was never felt and therefore never drawn into question. The double-dip recession, as well as the population’s demographic, has highlighted a need for a drastic change. The question is however why and how to move Councils to a more sustainable future.

WHY?
In order to stimulate local economic growth, Local Authorities have to let go of their best people, the people who have the knowledge and confidence to innovate and set up local businesses, social enterprises, charities or go self-employed/freelance. This would not only create more choice to address the needs of the local communities (moving away from one-size-fits-all solutions), but also better quality services – not through competition, but through closer community collaboration and co-creation.

HOW? And why is it important?
Redundancies are not the best option going forward. The impact could have a long-term negative effect on the local economy.

Hard-nosed selection processes used as part of the redundancy process often mean people leave with ‘a bad taste in their mouth’. Councils have to remember that the people that leave their organisation are the ‘providers of tomorrow’s services’ for the benefit of local citizens. The last things Councils want to invite is negative relationships with the people they will rely upon going forward. Nor do actions like redundancies support a positive ‘brand’ identity for the Council.

So how do Council’s identify and let their best people leave? Redundancy is not the only option. The best outcome for the community is to ensure positive relationships are upheld where possible. This requires a drastic behavioural change.

In order to ensure the best possible resilience levels for all involved is to talk openly about the changes ahead from the earliest opportunity, even when certain aspects may still be uncertain. Also important is to take more of a talent management and strength/career-coaching approach to your one-to-one’s with your staff team. Questions like ‘What are your ambitions for the future?’ and ‘Do you want to re-skill to support the Council of the future?’ are invaluable.

This approach does not necessarily have to come with a pot of money. A career-coaching approach may help identify cost-effective learning solutions such as shadowing or mentoring and help install more self-directed and self-funded learning where deemed necessary.

IF NOT ...?
What if Councils do not let go of their best people? This would leave the economy and communities impoverished of skills, knowledge and experience which are vital ingredients to building a better future.

There may be a further challenge to overcome if Councils decide to hold onto some of their specialists/experts. Holding onto specialists/experts can lead to distrust of external providers who have less knowledge and experience than the in-house specialist/expert. As a result, it is likely that the specialist/expert instigates in-house growth of workforce to deliver the service themselves. This would soon see the Council - not the economy - grow to its former size.

SO WHO DO COUNCILS NEED TO HOLD ONTO?
Councils need to start seeing themselves as the local ‘Think Tank’ and facilitators of continuous positive change, choice and quality. As such, the skills which may benefit Councils who are moving to a Commissioning role need to hold onto Strategic Generalists, Knowledge Analysts and Futurists who enjoy the challenge of uncertainty and local (and global) impact analysis. Specialists and experts in their field can be brought in - on a freelance basis - as and when a community need needs a larger contractual solution with a service provider.

Further blog - Who to Hire? http://thebuildnetwork.com/leadership/management/hire-generalists/

In one of my next blogs I will explore the Commissioning Role for Councils using the 70/20/10 model.