Personal Policies for LinkedIn

I find LinkedIn a very valuable tool for keeping in touch with a network of contacts from past and present roles.

New modes of engagement need new protocols and there’s always a risk of giving offence as different people have different protocols and expectations.

Because of my current role as a senior headhunter, and Linkedin is increasingly relevant as a tool for headhunters, I’ve given this quite a bit of thought and have reached some personal “policy” conclusions. I’m capturing these here for the wider debate amongst both of my regular readers, but also so that in future I can point to this post as a signal that the application of my policy decision is just that – ie it isn’t personal.

1. I only connect to people with whom I have had some meaningful contact and interaction.

The power of linkedin for referrals, and second and third level networks is immense, and the underlying ethos of connecting only to people you know, and would be prepared to be positive about, is very important.

This doesn’t mean I have to have known someone for years, but I’m not going to connect to people with whom I’ve had no personal contact. This is entirely consistent with LinkedIn rules anyway, but clearly there are some folk who use LinkedIn more like facebook or twitter. That’s their choice. This is my choice. I’m also on facebook if people want to connect more appropriately there, and I can’t stop people following me on Twitter!

2. I don’t do recommendations any more.

Because of my current role, and the prospect that some of the people in my network may be candidates for roles that I work on, there’s an issue of perception were someone to be appointed to a role who I had separately recommended!

Additionally, I find that within-company recommendations of current work colleagues lack credibility.

I’m always happy to act as a referee for people I have worked with, by agreement.

3. I connect with headhunting competitors only if they “share” their network.

Although the default setting is that your network can be seen by your connections, it is possible to set it so that you hide your connections.

For me a significant part of the personal benefit of linked in is positive networking (which is why I only want to connect to people I know). My connections are open. I want people in my network to be able to access others in my network, a place where former work colleagues can find lots of mutual friends when they first sign up to LinkedIn.

In the headhunting world connections and knowledge are a basis for competition. Nevertheless the whole microeconomic theory about Networks show that all gain when networks are shared. So what that adds up to is “I’ll show you mine if you show me yours”. People who I know from competitor organisations (ie still subject to policy 1 above) I will connect with only if their connections can be seen by their other connections.

Others may draw this line in a different place. If I were purely a headhunter, or were working in a research function, then I might decide to keep things closed, indeed people may feel that it would be unethical for connections to see who else you’ve been talking to, but there’s more to my life and career, past and present, than that.

Comments welcome!

Update October 2012

For the reasons stated above regarding recommendations I won’t be “Endorsing” people either.

Advertisements

Notes from the Guardian Public Services Summit 2010

Broad Themes

  • Times are going to be very tough, and it will be a tough time to be a public sector leader … (but)
  • There are tremendous opportunities to do things better, differently …(though)
  • We will need to create space for risk-taking…. (and)
  • Many solutions will rely on the more sophisticated use of the third sector and social enterprises …
  • Which will require a significant rethink of procurement.

Specific Sessions

Paul Martin, formerly Canadian Prime Minister and Finance Minister at the time, between 1993 and 1998 that Canada eliminated a very large public sector debt (which seemed relevant!).  They did this by (a) engaging the public in the reasons for tough choices – ie that it would directly affect them and their future rather than eg because the capital markets were telling them to, and showing that they had a highly credible plan which hit its milestones (b) setting tough targets quickly that were reasonably well informed (Paul Martin got two-three experts in a room and got them to come up with departmental savings targets, which ranged from 10-65%) (c) sharing the pain – no department was ringfenced (interesting to compare this with current political declarations which are ringfencing eg NHS) and anybody who didn’t think their target was fair had to persuade cabinet colleagues to take the cut instead (and there was a degree of dealing around this, at the margins) (d) sharing the beneft – after the savings came through they launched a major education budget, an R&D budget, then tax cuts, then a health programme.  He was very positive about the work that the UK has done around Social Enterprise – he sees that as being a key part of what will help us move forward.

Vij Randeniya, Chief Fire Officer, West Midlands was impressive and inspirational on the topic of leadership.  Talked about the three facets of Leadership, Management and Command, the latter being a new one on the traditional local government view of the world, but very relevant to him.  He wore uniform, deliberately, and said it was time for the experts to reassert themselves professionally – a smart uniform being a part of the mix.

Rob Whiteman, who is shortly off to to be MD of IDeA, spoke well about local leadership in Barking and Dagenham, and is clearly engaging with the wider issue of how we support innovation.  Was clear that if LG waits to be given independence it won’t happen and it has to be grabbed with both hands.  Also had his nice sound-bite in the context of siloes working against corporate interests of “professionals should be on tap, not on top”.

A session on Nannying, nudge or knowledge?  What inspires behaviour change? was very interesting.  Ben Hamilton-Baillie talked about some things that had been done with experimental traffic schemes to change driver and pedestrian behaviour.  Perhaps because that was more tangible, and he had photos, I was better able to cope with that at the end of day.  He basically talked about how humans wre very well adapted to behave sensibly and socially if allowed to do so.  He gave the example of norms that arise on an ice rink, and spoke about schemes such as one at Ashford in Kent where they have deliberately done away with lots of traffic lights, road markings, and so on, and cars and people interact in the town centre much more safely and easily than they did when when there was many thousands of pounds worth of street furniture and signals.

A session on innovation and the media might have been quite interesting but I was too busy catching up on Twitter (ho ho).  The hash tag for the conference is #pss2010 so you can see what people were saying.  Actually the main “wow” statistic I take from that session is that 24m people in the UK had used facebook in the last 30 days.  Over half of the people in the room were on facebook, though there was relatively little tweeting from the conference (in my case this was due to a concern about how twitter works alongside chatham house rules).

The next day had a useful set of talks about what will a post-recession public sector look like?  Philip Blond of ResPublica drove home the points that social enterprise and community engagement are key and that procurement will need to change to unlock benefit.  Said that research showed that the long-run cost reduction from private sector externalisation was only about 12%, and that was before including in costs of managing the contracts.   Craig Dearden-Philips, CE of SpeakingUp drew compellingly on his experience as a CEO of a charity, a front-line carer, and a county councillor to address the topic and to argue that social enterprise and community engagement are key and that procurement will need to change to unlock benefit.  Abdool Kara, now the CE at Swale, also anticipated more community based models – interestingly arguing that we may seem ALMO structures for more services than just housing.

Charlie Leadbetter was brilliant about community engagement mechanisms – “if you ask a question you’ll get an answer to it, so think very carefully about the question first”.  They have folk doing ethnographic studies, ie living for 6 months on estates alongside chaotic families to understand the points at which intervention can and can’t be effective.  Asserted that social workers get 14% face time, 72% admin.  Showed us a photo of a wall where they had mapped one family’s interaction with the public sector over 18 years, at a cost of many millions.

Lastly Jonathan Kestenaum, CE of NESTA spoke well about the difficulty and necessity of creating space for innovation in the public sector.  It is harder than doing it in the private sector, and more necessary.

The Challenge of New Ways of Doing Things

Last week a couple of local authority chief executives, a young entrepreneur leading a future government consultancy and I got together to discuss ideas from the emerging field of social media and – critically – how they could be adopted within local authorities.

The conversation was quite wide ranging, covering some of the tools of social media and (perhaps more significantly) the different approaches which proponents of new media exhibit, such as more instinctive desire to seek wide input, and an inclination towards quick solutions and experimentation.

Some of the ideas are challenging to formal governance. For example a fast-prototyping, exploratory approach to systems development makes fabulous intuitive sense but it is hard to see how a process without a predefined endpoint can be rigorously and cheaply procured, audited and scrutinised. People are clearly testing the edges of this at present. There was also a feeling that such processes are adept at cheap, skunk-works style development that can keep within procurement thresholds. Indeed there was a feeling that constraining people severely in terms of budget is more likely to produce genuine innovation, for example to have people maximising the use of open source software, and take a creative approach for a few thousand or tens of thousands than an approach which expects to spend a million and take two years (and therefore cost two million and four years because it gets so complex).

Another area of challenge for some of the engagement tools of social media is in the way they may cut across the role of the elected member. The new media makes possible very cheap and easy local votes on specific issues, e-petitions, budget allocation consultation “games”, and consultation “jams” in which wide input is sought, discussed and entirely openly debated. There are new ways of engaging with a population that are quick and cheap. There is a danger of members feeling disintermediated. If evidence is gained that they, and the population, are in different places on an issue, does it undermine them? The answer of course is that it shouldn’t, however we see potential for such insights to lead to tension between officers and members if the tools are predominantly in the hands of, and driven by, officers. I concluded that there would perhaps be more power and applicability if the tools were in the hands of members – tools to help them engage with their communities, rather than tools for officers.

The last category of insights came in relation to risk. The political environment is highly adversarial with a press corps eager to jump on any indication of error or waste, and with a very nearby opposition eager to jump on any such issues and draw them to the world’s attention. This is a significant barrier to local authorities taking risks; understandably so. However it is also clear that Local Government needs innovation if it is to manage through significant budget reductions and improve customer service, and true innovation is inherently risky –things are tried, many of them go wrong, but the “one in ten” that works really works, and more than pays for all the other attempts. A lesson from my own experience in the private sector suggests that taking a portfolio approach to this may be useful, and may go with the flow of existing governance mechanisms. If a local authority determines annually what its innovation appetite is, and sets aside a relatively modest budget for it, and then determines how it wishes to deploy that innovation resource, that may prove easier to govern, audit and scrutinise – the question becomes “why this risk?” rather than “why risk?”.

Being in the wrong for getting it right …

I feel that I am starting to detect a grumbling about how there has been an over-reaction to the threat of swine flu.  People refusing to take vaccines, for example.  And of course, whilst there has been an outbreak, the threatened pandemic hasn’t happened yet.

What I would like to see (but I’m not holding my breath) is a public “hey, this is great – we’ve seen this off together by doing the right thing – thank you experts, WHO, NHS, drug companies, local authorities for your action, advice, vaccine development and vaccination campaigns here.  Well done!”.

I suspect we’re more likely to see a “look, those so-called experts got all excited over nothing – the pandemic never happened!”.  And perhaps we’ll be a bit less likely to “catch it, bin it, kill it” next time around.

I am reminded (as we approach the end of this decade) of the fuss and bother around the “millennium bug” (remember that?).  People prophesied apocalyptic societal collapse unless something was done.  And of course no cataclysms occurred.  But that was because something was actually done!  At that time I was a Director in a division of a bank  and I remember asking the IT Director whether the people fixing the bugs in the bank’s system were in fact finding things that would have led to systems falling over.  She said “oh yes, definitely”.

I do hope there’s an opportunity to have a bit of a celebration once the threat of pandemic has passed.  Public honours for the people who led the effort, that sort of thing.

Mistakes on CVs

From one of the interminable amounts of recruitment industry spam emails I get….

“Personal: I’m married with 9 children. I don’t require prescription drugs.

“I am extremely loyal to my present firm, so please don’t let them know of my immediate availability.”

“Qualifications: I am a man filled with passion and integrity, and I can act on short notice. I’m a class act and do not come cheap.”

“I intentionally omitted my salary history. I’ve made money and lost money. I’ve been rich and I’ve been poor. I prefer being rich.”

“Note: Please don’t misconstrue my 14 jobs as ‘job-hopping’. I have never quit a job.”

“Number of dependents: 40.”

“Marital Status: Often. Children: Various.”

RESUME BLOOPERS

“Here are my qualifications for you to overlook.”

REASONS FOR LEAVING THE LAST JOB:

“Responsibility makes me nervous.”

“They insisted that all employees get to work by 8:45 every morning. Couldn’t work under those conditions.”

REASONS FOR LEAVING MY LAST JOB:

“Was met with a string of broken promises and lies, as well as cockroaches.”

“I was working for my mum until she decided to move.”

“The company made me a scapegoat – just like my three previous employers.”

JOB RESPONSIBILITIES:

“While I am open to the initial nature of an assignment, I am decidedly disposed that it be so oriented as to at least partially incorporate the experience enjoyed heretofore and that it be configured so as to ultimately lead to the application of more rarefied facets of financial management as the major sphere of responsibility.”

“I was proud to win the Gregg Typting Award.”

SPECIAL REQUESTS & JOB OBJECTIVES:

“Please call me after 5:30 because I am self-employed and my employer does not know I am looking for another job.”

“My goal is to be a meteorologist. But since I have no training in meteorology, I suppose I should try stock brokerage.”

“I procrastinate – especially when the task is unpleasant.”

PHYSICAL DISABILITIES:

“Minor allergies to house cats and Mongolian sheep.”

PERSONAL INTERESTS:

“Donating blood. 14 gallons so far.”

SMALL TYPOS THAT CAN CHANGE THE MEANING:

“Education: College, August 1880-May 1984.”

“Work Experience: Dealing with customers’ conflicts that arouse.”

“Develop and recommend an annual operating expense fudget.”

“I’m a rabid typist.”

“Instrumental in ruining entire operation for a Midwest chain operation.”

Why don’t more CEOs come out of HR?

I’ve frequently wondered why some professions or backgrounds are more strongly represented at Chief Executive level than others.  Some of it may simply be that some professions offer a better grounding for that job.  However it does seem to me that there may be other factors at work, I suspect that some professions are held back by a lack of feasible routes to the top, and there are issues of both skill and will to move to the top job.

We did some work on this recently in the context of HR professionals.  There are many similarities between what a good HRD has to do and what a good CEO does.  They both need to shape the organisation to achieve strategic aims, manage significant resources, make change happen through people, and face up to tough conversations.  Whilst there are some aspects of a CEO where there’s a less obvious fit with HR, there are some pretty big gaps when you consider other professions such as Finance, Law, IT, Strategic Marketing and so on, yet there seems to be (much) more movement there.

I had the chance to pick the brains of four very experienced HRDs over dinner, and add this to the results of a survey we did.  The survey found that 3% of CEOs had an HR background, and that 20% of HRDs aspired to the CEO position.

How should we interpret the 20% figure?  Clearly for the 80% there is an issue of will.  They don’t want it.  Is this because they don’t think it’s feasible to achieve it?  In other cases it will be because people are content.  There’s no doubt that some HR folk see their role almost as a vocation, or that the people dimension is by far and away the most interesting aspect in any organisation.  In other cases people look upon the demands and uncertain prospects of a CEO role with horror.

However for the 20% who do want to progress, it appears that a small minority are making it.  Why is that?

The discussion suggested a number of factors but perhaps the most significant was the sense of an HR professional silo, which actively discouraged people moving out of HR, and a professional development ethos which explicitly regards an HRD as the pinnacle of achievement.

This ties in to a generally poor perception of HR amongst others within the organisation.  It is said that you can tell how well regarded a profession is by the stridency of its demands to have a seat at the top table as of right, rather than simply getting there because it’s obviously appropriate.  Such demands are pretty strident in HR circles right now.

I’m not sure that it’s expected that HR people will want opportunities to move into more front-line or organisational leadership roles, and such opportunities seem rarely to be created.

There’s also the self-fulfilling point that an absence of high profile and successful role models works against the creation of more high profile and successful role models.

I’ve written a longer article about all this which will (allegedly) be published shortly – I’ll post a link if/when that happens.

But I’m going to be interested to extend the analysis to other professions, too.  And I’d be interested in views – expressed as comments here or at http://www.veredusdebate.co.uk

Careers in and around Local Government

This is an extended and adapted version of a talk for alumni of the National Graduate Development Programme at their first conference 18-19 June 2009.

We’re going to spend a bit of time talking about careers.  If you look in the dictionary you’ll see a definition of career that’s about a purposeful work-based or professional progression in pursuit of specific goals and objectives.  But if you look a bit further down the dictionary you see the definition of the word “career” that says “to move wildly and out of control”.  You can decide which is most accurate.

I’d like to talk to you about four things:

(1) I’d like to congratulate you on your choice of sector to be employed in

(2) I’d like to address the point of: if talent is not enough (the theme of this conference), what are the extra things that you’re going to need, from my perspective

(3) I’d like to talk about planning for your retirement!

(4) And I’d like to talk about Jaffa Cakes.

So let’s see how it goes.

I worked in the private sector for 12 years.  But after a while I did see the light, and moved into LG at Director level as Director of Culture Change at a London Borough, and then as Deputy Chief Executive at Bedfordshire County Council.  After nearly five years of hand to hand change management I fancied a rest so I moved to Veredus where I lead the local government team, helping ensure that each authority we work with gets the right appointment into senior roles, chief executive, director, and AD/Head of Service roles.

I’ll share with you two moments.  In my first week at Lambeth I went round to meet all my staff.  I remember to this day my meeting with the training manager for social services.  Her passion and commitment for helping people do a really a difficult job better was awesome and humbling.  I never saw commitment and purpose like that in the private sector.

The other moment was when a very wise elected member invited this new guy from the private sector along to her surgery, which was held in a really decrepit, cold and crumbling community hall.  One of the people who came to see her was in real distress. Huge sobs, real misery that I hadn’t seen before.  English wasn’t her first language and she was obviously struggling to express herself and had clearly had to summon up a lot of courage to even come.  She sat, trying to control her emotions in front of us and took out of her bag a piece of paper which had been opened, folded, reopened, and refolded so many times that it was starting to come apart in the folds.  It was a letter.  The letter was from the council, the council I worked for, and it had a big word right in the middle, as its subject.  The word was EVICTION.  And she was terrified.  She was our tenant, she’d missed a payment, and our enlightened debt collectors had learned that the best way of sorting things out was to appear to threaten eviction immediately, even though it was the first stage of about ten before that could actually happen, as the councillor sensitively explained.  In the private sector our best customers were the educated well off people who bought lots of our services.  In local government the people who need our services most are incredibly vulnerable.  And it matters so much more.

Two things to take from that.  Get closer to members and understand their experience of the council and the pressures on them.  I have a theory that if you have always worked in a council and progress up the line then the member contact just happens and increases over time.  Paradoxically coming in from outside and spending time shadowing members as part of my induction may have given me better experience of what it’s really like to be a member.  If you can shadow members, do it.

Secondly, you made the right choice.  Congratulations on choosing public service.  You’re in the right place… now what are you going to do with it?

Let’s talk about talent is not enough: what more do you need?

I think the first thing to recognise is that if you look at local authorities today and plan for roles that are in it, and to be like many of the senior folk who are successful now, you‘ll miss the target.  It’s a moving target, and here some of the trends I can see.

“Predictions are difficult, especially about the future”.

When I was your age I read a book by Charles Handy which predicted that the fast track people who were at the core of organisations would work very hard and retire at 40.  So I worked very hard… but the rules changed!

One thing that’s fairly clear is that the model of getting things done is changing pretty fundamentally.  The line management and leadership stuff is going to be there, but the working through partnerships is very important and will become more so.  And working through contracts is going to become more important too, whether that’s commissioning from the third sector, private sector or other public sector bodies, the ability intelligently to specify and manage through contractual arrangements will be key.  I’d suggest that you think about when, over the next five years or so, you’re going to acquire those experiences.

We’re used to thinking about silo mentality in terms of safeguarding versus potholes versus policy officers, and by and large councils are cracking that.  In five years time the silos will be PCTs versus councils versus local policing – it’s clear already and will become more so.  Because local authorities have tackled those issues already, and because we’ve already done shared services – (centralising eg HR support in a siloed organisation is actually shared services, if you think about it), we have a head start.

The next trend I’m seeing is an increasing emphasis on numbers and data.  I see a clear gap between local government and the best of the private sector in terms of use of data, customer insight, data mining, quantitative strategy development.  That gap is going to have to close.  Two things that are interesting:

There’s a business school I know that has a highly regarded MBA and MPA.  They have a really good course on Quantitative methods for strategy.  It was a compulsory core module on the MBA, but an optional module for the MPA.  That made me cross.

We regularly test candidates for senior roles on their verbal and numerical ability, and they are compared to a peer group of senior managers and directors across the public and private sectors.  The pattern which emerges so often it’s embarrassing is that senior local government tend to be quite good on the verbal reasoning stuff… and really poor on the numerical.  It’s a skills issue.  And to the extent that any of you have acquired skills around data analysis, statistics and so on in your studies, hold onto them – you may not need them now but the ability intelligently to read and commission sophisticated analysis will matter increasingly.  We’re going to be so short of cash soon that we’ll need clever segmentation of our customers; evidence-based policy making will become more important, and as a senior manager you’ll need to know enough to check you’re not looking at evidence-based policy making’s evil twin: policy-based evidence-making.

The third thing I want to mention is Governance.  For the last 20 years or so, possibly longer, local authorities have been quite constrained about their structures.  We’re on the verge, through MAAs, total place, prosperity boards and so on, of having some really quite fundamental choices about how we organise local public services.  And as a sector we don’t really have the skills or insights.  There’s some stuff we can borrow form the private sector  where people have thought about how clusters of companies can be brought together to add value, and some serious thought about many different ways in which a corporate centre can add value.  If you’re interested the phrase to google is “parenting advantage”.  The private sector situation can give us a start but our context is much harder and we’ve got some thinking to do.  I worry a bit that we think that “Organisational Development” is actually a posh name for the training team.  Your generation will discover that Organisational Development is inexpressibly more than that, and you’ll have to write the book.

Local government is getting quite good at using management competencies to support development, assess and promote people.  I’m not yet seeing it borrow the concept of Executive Competencies to apply to its top people.  Management competencies talk about coaching staff, for example; executive competencies talk about creating an environment in which coaching flourishes.  High performing executive competencies don’t talk about customer service or consultation, they talk about Empathy.  A really deep empathy with your stakeholders, which makes you hungry to understand and determined to act.  Again, we’re not there yet.

So the key trends to get on top of, if you’re aiming for the future are:

  • Getting things done through contracts and partnership as well as line management
  • Sophisticated and relevant quantitative analysis
  • Governance and organisation at the level of local public services
  • Empathy.

Let’s talk about the third of my four themes: Planning for your retirement ….

As I explained earlier, my retirement plan is four years overdue.

When do you actually expect to retire?  Do you really expect to retire at 60? 70?  75?  Lets take 75 as planning assumption.  You’re probably going to have to work to 75 in some way to keep earning.

Sorry.

Now, that means you’re going to be working for 50 years.

Sorry.

But they are potentially 50 fabulous, fascinating years.

I was talking to someone the other day who was a district council chief executive in his 30s, a unitary CE in his early 40s and he’s about two years into that now.  And he said to me “Jonathan, what do I do now?”.  He can see another few decades stretching ahead, and is really not sure that he’s going to be interested in being a CE for the third or fourth time.  He’s also in a bit of salary corner – to move radically he’s going to have to take a pay cut, which is tricky for his family.

Don’t think about career in terms of the next job then the next one.  Take a step back and look at that fascinating 50 years you’re going to have.

… How much of that time will spend in local government?  All of it?

… How much time will you spend in the corporate centre versus frontline departments?

… Will you spend some time at PCT, Central Government or the private sector –it’ll help with the partnership theme I mentioned earlier on.  The complexity of partnership working means that internal candidates will have a real advantage – they know the people.  But the “internal candidate” for Local Authority CE in the new world may be the CE of the local PCT.

… How much time will you spend in intense stretching development, and how much time will you spend consolidating, perhaps coasting a bit and achieving some of your other life goals?  What phasing on that will work for you, and your family.

… When will you gain non-exec experience, as a school governor, or trustee of a charity.  Being a board member like that is another great way of understanding the experience of a member … feeling driven by “officers” and trying to keep on top of a big agenda in your spare time.

Use a wide angle lens, pace yourself.  Enjoy yourself.

Now, if you’re taking a creative approach to your career you’ll need to move around a bit; which means that you’ll be rubbing up against people like me in a professional capacity.  Let me give you some tips to help you succeed.  You only need to know three things, really.

Firstly, when you’re in an interview, answer the question.  Don’t try to be clever.  It’s not the today programme.  I asked one candidate how did you feel the interview went and he said “great, I got my three key points across” – and he was right, he’d got his three key points across in the answer to every single question, to the exclusion of the information we actually needed, despite much effort on our part.  Don’t try to be too clever.  We had one candidate who started juggling to show how she could balance priorities, and then got some children’s bricks out to build a little wall and take it down to show how she could break down barriers.  Just answer the question.  It’s very simple.

The next golden rule is to prepare.  Really prepare.  Think yourself into the role.  I had one candidate who had done no research before the interview.  So I asked him – what research did you do?  And he said “oh, I only do research once I’ve been invited back to the second interview”,   I couldn’t resist it, I said “do you get invited back to many second interviews”, “no”, he said proudly, clearly thinking he was proving his point about not wasting his time!  Preparation.  I was doing another role, recruiting the CE for a new public sector start-up.  The organisation was quite complex because it had an important regional dimension but also some important functional areas, so we asked the candidates what their thoughts were about an appropriate structure for the organisation.  A surprising number hadn’t begun to think about it.  One guy said “I know, that’s a really interesting one isn’t it; I’ve been kicking this around and my current best option is this one” and he pulled some of his notes of his briefcase and talked us through it.  He’s the one who got the job.

The last rule is to think about what makes you a risky appointment and face up to it, don’t deny it, but think about how you will manage the risk.  For some of you, you may seem risky because you’ll have less experience than other people going for the job.  Show people how you’ve taken on challenges before –show that you had a plan for doing it, your approach to managing people older than you, for example.  Show that your success wasn’t a fluke.  Show that you can adapt your plan to this role.

There’s a lot of complexity to grapple with, so let’s finish by talking about something simple: jaffa cakes.

A friend of mine teaches operations management at a business school, and he gets to visit lots of interesting places.  A couple of years ago he visited the factory in North London where McVities make Jaffa cakes.  They were showing off their incredibly sophisticated computer-driven manufacturing, but my friend saw a corner of the factory where a group of women in white coats were standing around a conveyor belt, prodding at things with little white sticks, so he went over and asked them what they were doing.  The machine’s broken they said, and while we wait for a new one to come from Germany,  we have to prod the orange jam into the base from time to time.  “Oh”, said my friend and started to turn away, but the woman stopped him and said “no, this important, you need to understand.  If the orange jam isn’t securely in centre of the biscuit base, when the chocolate layer is added it doesn’t form a perfect seal.  And that means that some air can get in before all the biscuits are sealed into the polythene bag in the box.  And that means that they will go off a bit sooner.  And that means that we have to put a shorter sell by date on the box.  And when shops are deciding which products they stock they really like things that have long sell by dates. So if we have to shorten our sell by dates shops won’t stock as many, and so we won’t sell as many.” And my friend was gobsmacked.

Someone, a manager, probably quite a junior manager, had taken the 60 seconds necessary to explain to these people why what they were doing was important, why it mattered, and it was clearly sustaining them through days of quite boring activity.

In some ways the challenges we and our staff face are more obvious in terms of why they matter, but the changes we need to go through and lead them through is very difficult, and helping to make a similar sort of sense for people will be critical.  But the leverage from getting that right, and the achievement will be immense.

Another thing I remember from that Charles Handy book is a nice little quote.  The role, he said, of a leader was

“To shape and share a vision, that gives point to the work of others”.

Remember the Jaffa cakes

And good luck.

Jonathan Flowers jonathan.flowers@veredus.co.uk

Partner, National Lead on Local Government

Details of individuals have been changed to prevent identification without losing the thrust of the argument.

(c) Jonathan Flowers, Veredus, 2009