when I started it was a lot more tribal. Loyalty was to your department not to the corporate centre. We were a federation of Servicses all working under the same flag but with freedoms to do what we did in the way we thoughtbest.Dispite the obvious inefficiency we jealously guarded our own HR,IT,Finance,policy and in some cases communications teams.Thing was it worked very well until Local Authorities became more ambitious and sought to go beyond providing services to tackling the big issues,unemployment,homelessness,drug abuse,juvenile crime and raceisum Such strategies recognised no one organisation or agency working in isolation could be effective. When it came to setting up these new strategic partnerships Education,SocialSevices,Housing and Environment all wanted a seat at the table. Much to the confusion of partner agencies the Local Authority could not speak with one voice.All that has changed support services have been drawn together in corporate teams or out sourced,management restructuring has grouped services together for administrative convenience rather than professional links and LA's are Commissioners rather than providers of services. So now there are only two reasons for the persistence of tribalism.A culture in which thinking has not changed dispite the fact that the world has and a reluctance to allow another agency to commit your budget. Which isn't tribalism it's just common sence isn't it?Author of Equipping managers for an uncertain future published by Russell House.
