Title

Steve Leach reports on research he recently completed into the relationship between council chief executives and their leaders It has been a high-profile year in the media for chief executives of English local authorities, But senior managers have long-received higher salaries than their political counterparts. There has always been an element of ‘voluntary service to the community' in becoming an MP or a local councillor, which justifies the discrepancy in salary levels. Local authority chief executives have overall responsibility for managing multimillion-pound businesses with the complication, not shared in the private sector or other parts of the sub-national public sector, of dealing with elected members who have a different and sometimes-conflicting perspective. The salary levels currently enjoyed by chief executives are, in these circumstances, justified. The view that, if a council leader wants to get rid of a chief executive, this somehow represents failure on the part of the latter is, of course, a gross simplification. If there is a breakdown of relations, it is just as likely to be as a result of unreasonable behaviour on the part of the council leader as it is of some kind of failure on the part of the chief executive. The job of operating in a political environment has long been a challenging one, particularly at times of polarised politics (the 1980s) or severe budgetary cutbacks (2009 onwards). My new book* explores these challenges in depth, drawing on interviews with 30 chief executives over the past five years. The reality is that the problematical relationships which hit the headlines are the exception, rather than the norm. Of the chief executives I interviewed, a large majority were either extremely positive about their relationship with the leader, or were managing ‘reasonably satisfactorily' with occasional disagreements – or crises – which had been successfully resolved. Less than one-fifth were experiencing long-term and persistent problems, in their relationship with the leader. The main challenge for chief executives is to recognise the difference between ‘political logic' and ‘managerial logic', and to find ways of resolving the tensions which will inevitably occur as a result of these different perspectives. For example, there is, in certain circumstances, political logic in operating with a relatively vague or ‘inclusive' corporate strategy, in political immersion in issues of implementation, or in changing budgetary priorities in a pre-election year, all of which are arguably difficult to reconcile with the managerial imperatives of an explicit strategy with selective priorities, a clear policy/implementation division of labour between offices and members, and a consistency in the application of strategic priorities in budget setting. As my book illustrates, all chief executives have to become ‘political animals' in one sense or another, if they are to operate effectively in a political environment. But what does this role involve? Should it embrace advising a leader – at his or her request – on who he or she should appoint to the cabinet? The chief executive, faced with this request, wisely declined to provide such advice. Should it involve taking part in discussions about different political administration options, when an authority becomes hung? Most chief executives would accept the need to do so, but there are different interpretations of what kind of help should be given, ranging from ‘honest broker' to ‘facilitator'. Should it involve trying to persuade a leader that a course of action he or she proposes is, ‘not in the longer-term interest of the area'? Some chief executives – but not others – have stuck their necks out in this way. The problem is always, how far to push the disagreement. Should it involve insisting on providing briefings for opposition groups, when there is a resistance on the part of the majority group to doing so? Some chief executives have made this a ‘bottom line' issue, typically relatively soon after appointment. There are many other potential grey areas, including help in drafting a party manifesto; judging when it is necessary to report a councillor for misconduct; dealing with inappropriate behaviour from – some – members to officers; and suggesting additions to a new administration in developing its manifesto into a corporate strategy – for example, ‘You really should have something on partnership working' – especially when a poor or weak CPA judgment was imminent. There will inevitably be disagreements and tensions in the relationship which occur from time to time, stemming from the differences between political and managerial perspectives. In this context, the familiar axiom that, ‘All you need is trust' is unhelpful. While mutual trust is undeniably important, other ingredients are essential. In particular, there is a need for a clear differentiation of roles and responsibilities between leader and chief executive, and the establishment of robust and effective mechanisms for identifying and resolving the differences of view and potential conflicts when they do arise. Most of the chief executives I interviewed found their job both challenging and rewarding, and anticipated moving on when it suited them to do so. Those who felt obliged to seek employment elsewhere, typically under political pressure to do so, were in a small minority. But, of course, it is such cause celebres which hit the headlines of the The MJ and – more rarely – the national press, creating something of a misleading impression. There are important choices to be made in the future designation of the chief executive role which my book acknowledges and discusses, for example, possible re-designation as ‘managing directors'; the case for political appointments, and a move away from the notion of ‘serving the whole council'; the case for fixed-term contracts; and the most appropriate mechanisms for dealing with the breakdown of relationships. However, there was no sense of a major crisis identifiable from my research – rather a landscape in which, by-and-large, chief executives were managing effectively enough in their political environments, albeit with some interesting differences as to how this could best be done. Managing in a political environment : The life cycle of local authority chief executives, published by Palgrave Macmillan in November 2010 Steve Leach is professor of local government at De Montfort University

Title

WHITEHALL

Fisticuffs are still a rarity

SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING