If there was a dashboard that could identify potential council failure who would look at it, how often, and what would be on it?
Three people in your organisation are more likely to spot risk than anyone else: the chief executive who should always have the big picture front and centre in their mind; the Section 151 Officer (the numbers person), and the monitoring officer whose focus on conduct and culture is critical.
Currently these statutory officers usually only come together when things have already gone awry. But since failure often has more to do with culture than cash, there is a strong argument for them meeting weekly. Failure often follows the hockey stick curve; little happens for ages and then suddenly, boom.
It’s not the meeting itself but the meeting’s agenda that would help prevent failure. So, here’s a starter for 10.
First item: a regular badgering, interference and bullying report (BIB). Each of these behaviours can signal that business as usual is under pressure (but note, ‘business as usual’ may in fact be culturally unhealthy).
Badgering can happen when staff feel cowed into downplaying some options over others – or pressured to exaggerate positive outcomes where evidence may be scant or non-existent. Badgering can be subtle. But when you hear the phrase staff ‘should know which side their toast is buttered on’ something is clearly amiss.
Interference – political and officer – can itself be symptomatic. It could mean reports are being soft-pedalled by those reluctant to adhere to policy. Equally, it might point to internal consultees being pressured to turn a blind eye to glaring risk. Members may at times direct officers, sometimes out of frustration. Knowing it happens, where and why – and dealing with it – can see off future failure.
Of course, bullying itself should already be spotted, reported and dealt with. Sometimes, though, the bullies are both powerful and successful, a toxic combination. So, it may be harder to deal with. Or even to admit to. Not everyone is comfortable telling unpalatable truths to power. Fear is a great inhibitor.
Next item: failure proxies – little indicators of bigger problems. Late reports might benevolently indicate disorganisation, but they may equally be a sign that officers and members are playing fast and loose with established processes, evading proper scrutiny or encouraging late and unsanctioned changes to previously agreed papers.
Customer complaints are another proxy. It’s not just high-profile instances, those that make the front pages, but emerging trends. Gripes that have been allowed to escalate may say something about the capacity, sensitivity and focus of leading staff. Intolerable things can become tolerable in the wrong culture.
Then there’s the ‘Kill Report’, a note from comms listing all the things they’ve kept out of the media. Almost as interesting is a HR ‘Heads Up’ – cases that have become critical – or well on their way. Sometimes, there’s an overlap.
Next: noise – the stuff staff and members mither about. This can indicate problems bubbling under the surface. But understanding who is creating it, amplifying it and why they’re doing so is equally important; noise can be an instrument of change.
Other business: hot-spots – the first one being governance; a monthly review of the use of delegated powers. Are standards and protocols widely understood? Do those operating under such powers act appropriately? Are all decisions justified and within the limits? Are failures addressed and reported? The second one being the big cases lawyers are dealing with. The three statutory officers may be able to see patterns and connections others may miss – or want obscured.
Final business: monthly end to end reviews of key projects, especially successful ones. Winners often avoid scrutiny. But since the desire to get things over the line can foster inappropriate or unhelpful behaviours, it’s often worth having a closer look.
Success exceptionalism can poison the culture and cause the spread of negative and dangerous behaviours. Nobody wants to rain on the achievers’ parade but not tackling poor practice can say that ends matter far more than means. This can mean adversely affected staff suffer in silence while those who speak out are shown the door, sometimes with accompanying NDAs.
Each end to end review could be published so that lessons learned are widely promoted, and adopted across the organisation as well as shared across the sector. Leadership teams that have access to others’ reviews would be all the stronger and wiser for it.
The more authorities can share real intelligence and insight about their near-miss failures, the fewer there will be – provided senior leaders are humble enough to learn from others’ errors. While some might see this approach as potentially embarrassing, it’s far less so than full blown meltdown and external intervention. Those tempted to hide behind plausible deniability may be taking the first steps towards their own exit.
How to avoid failure: The MJ insider’s guide will be published later this year, available to The MJ subscribers. To subscribe now, go to https://subscribe.themj.co.uk/