S t r a t e g i c l e a d e r s h i p o f p u b l i c s e c t o r r e f o rm Commonwealth Governance Handbook 2013/14 65 Networked government and stewardship of reform The literature and award programmes confirm the importance of networks in innovation and reform. A New Synthesis3 consolidates research and thinking on the millennial shift towards ‘networked government’. Collaboration emerged as the preferred approach to reform, building upon trends in ‘joined-up government’, ‘whole-of-government’, and ‘horizontal management’. ‘Collaborative leadership’ now predominates in thought and practice over the ‘transformational leadership’ of the New Public Management era. Governments cannot afford the politics of acting alone as commander and controller to solve complex, horizontal problems with vertical solutions. It has come to rely increasingly upon a vast array of non-governmental partners to govern by network. In this model, the role of government is transformed from direct service provider to generator of public value, with benefits – flexibility, speed, innovation, citizen focus. Governments must figure out how to manage networks to get the results citizens expect. Public servants are responsible for searching high and low for efficiencies and innovations, collaborating and learning from every likely source. New ideas and synergies can come from anywhere – front-line operatives, middle management, top leaders, the private sector, not-for-profit organisations and academia. Core competencies need to shift from managerial skills to networking, facilitation and negotiation with partners and stakeholders arrayed horizontally in networks. Innovation and learning are important in times of uncertainty. Innovation is front and centre again as a core element of the solution for countries struggling with low growth and austerity measures. The public policy starting point for reform is contextual. That context is now pervasively global and profoundly changing. There is an increasing focus on stewardship in public sector reform to meet modern challenges. The difference for leaders goes beyond context or style. Stewardship is a function of leaders and their organisations. Stewards are catalysts of innovation who have leadership roles in mobilising time, talent and resources. They must navigate precariously between the dangers of inflexible bureaucracies while remaining true to public goals and good practice. This necessitates exercising discretion and teamwork. The Treasury Board of Canada has institutionalised stewardship in the management accountability framework4 as one of ten leadership competencies for chief executives. Reform: Coupling sound theory and good practice Sylvester Obong’o (sylvester.obongo@uon.edu.au) works in public service transformation in Kenya’s Ministry of Devolution and Planning, and is doing doctoral research at the University of Newcastle (Australia) on the role of leadership in public sector reform. He is an example of new-generation African public servants who are championing reform by coupling sound theory and good practice. He offered the following reflections on reform from research in progress. Critical study of reform shows that developed countries with strong and stable bureaucracies set out in the initial stages to reform those bureaucracies. They focused on developing suitable structures and then sought to reform management by looking at managers’ performance. They realised that structure alone does not deliver results. In most cases, these two processes occurred simultaneously and often overlapped. The first phase of reforms focused on public sector institutions and structures, while the second phase focused on public service, which encompasses the products or services produced by the public sector. With the advent of the New Public Management, public services were coproduced and co-delivered increasingly with private sector and civil society organisations. Given its non-linear nature, reform became an iterative process of developing more efficient structures while improving service performance. Governance was a key ingredient overlooked in these early reforms. Developing countries followed the developed country model of dealing with organisational structure, systems and process, while hoping service delivery would improve. Reforms first and foremost needed to alter relationships among politicians and public servants. Tending to the political-administrative interface enabled new structures to function as envisaged. Failure to manage these relationships led to patronage appointments and corruption in new institutions. In view of the daunting challenges across the public sector, reform initiatives retreated to small sectoral approaches with minimal impact. Slicing reforms this way diluted the original idea and created new problems. Rather than a solution, it paved the way for commissioning academic research to prove specific ideas and cases as part of a ‘seek and thou shall find’ approach to public sector reform. In the case of developing countries, three phases of reform are suggested: 1) moderate the political-public service relationship to mitigate political influence over public sector management; 2) introduce innovative structures to deliver better services; and 3) develop systems and processes to continuously improve service delivery. Implementation can take place concurrently, but the distinct objectives of each phase must be respected.
CGH13_ebook
To see the actual publication please follow the link above