The need or desire for what we now know as public services will not go away. In response to economic changes, public services are necessarily being scaled back to reflect budget constraints. This short-term strategy will buy some time as a survival strategy, but service cuts alone will not address what is really required. A competitive transformation in thinking and doing is necessary for all public sector agencies to avoid being hollowed out, or disappearing. Leaders recognize that changes need to happen soon.

The public sector is faced with increased competition. If the political will exists, many public services will be outsourced or privatized over the longer term. For some agencies and municipalities, this may be unavoidable and even sensible especially if economic conditions continue to stagnate or erode. When pressed, taxpayers won’t be willing to pay a premium to a municipal worker when a private employer, or the agency in the next town, can get the work done for less and perhaps even faster. Insightful and broad-minded union leaders recognize that many public service jobs may be transformed from union to non-union very quickly if the taxpayers decide to go in that direction. If that were to happen, only a small group of public sector project managers overseeing contracts would be needed. Very few public services are immune to this kind of transformation. Currently, less than 12% of the U.S. workforce belongs to a union. Regardless of where, or for whom one works, it is important to remember that union efforts were responsible for important changes and benefits that are found in all workplaces today. Unfortunately the continued erosion of union jobs over time might likely have an adverse affect that would eventually be felt by all workers.

I believe that the public sector can be proactive and transform itself, rather than choose to be change-averse, reactive and defensive in preserving the status quo. The key question that public sector leaders should ask, and be willing to act on, is, “How can we continue to stay relevant and provide value to those we serve?” I believe the answer can be found by following three courses of action right now – Collaborate, Innovate and Automate.

Collaborate

Everyone is busy and many feel they have too much work and not enough help. However, is everyone busy doing what is important and meaningful most all of the time? If not, there is an opportunity to refocus the work being done in order to stay relevant and valuable. Collaboration needs to be more than a buzzword. It has to be part of the way people work together to insure that individual and organizational goals remain focused and aligned. If an “Us vs. Them” mentality is allowed to overshadow “We”, the public sector’s value and effectiveness will continue to diminish. Managers need to be collaborating with their employees to understand from them what they, along with their clients and customers, need and expect. Organizations need to be regularly collaborating and engaging with those same clients and customers to help continually find better, more valuable solutions to their service needs. The result should be organizational goals that support changing needs. When the right goals are pursued at the right time, everyone involved in providing services can refocus their efforts in order to remain current, relevant and valuable. People should be busy doing the right things by design, not by accident.

Innovate

We know for sure that everything around us is moving faster and changing even faster. Every organization, especially those in the public sector, must continually assess and redesign their work processes to keep up with demands and expectations and the need to be increasingly cost-effective. This key may be the most straightforward approach. Every public service employee, regardless of role or classification, needs to be asking, “Is there a better and/or cheaper way for us to do this?” Every public sector leader, up and down the organization should be encouraging these questions and listening to the answers. Leaders also need to have the willingness to implement the sensible answers, quickly. In a competitive environment, agencies that are continually innovating have an opportunity to positively influence how they are viewed or branded by their customers, and the taxpayers that fund them. Even though change has been allowed to occur more slowly in the public sector, that slow pace can’t continue any longer if public service is to be performed by public servants in the future.

Automate

Although many public services require high-touch, in-person interaction to remain valuable, many don’t and those services need to continue to be automated if possible. There are many more opportunities to invest and expand e-government at every level, and across every agency or function. As smart phones continue to get in the hands of people at all levels of the socio-economic strata, all public service consumers will expect that on-line public services should have the same features and be accessed just as easily as commercial services. That means fast. Despite tight budgets, technology investments will need to be made now along with proactive decisions about how best to train and deploy the work force and achieve the right balance of high-touch and high-tech. If public sector agencies can’t or won’t keep up with the public’s evolving service and convenience expectations, the longer-term consequences for public agencies may be more than just missed opportunities. They may not survive in their current form.

To support innovation, there are also many other potential benefits of employing the right, cost-effective technology to streamline work processes internally. In many cases, some of that technology already exists and has been paid for. The problem is that it is not always being used effectively. As an example, how many really understand how to use or are even aware of all the features they already have in their Microsoft Office programs? If more did, is it possible that productivity could increase without any additional investment? There are additional opportunities for public sector workers to benefit from the use of collaboration and video conferencing software to work with each other and interact with customers. Public sector IT professionals should be on the leading edge in search of new technological solutions that incorporate the advantages of cloud computing and balance them with privacy and security challenges.

Every organization, private and public, is faced with the competitive need to respond in effective and meaningful ways to changing customer expectations. Public agencies need to focus on what it currently means to be relevant and valuable in their present form. How individual agencies respond will determine who thrives and survives.

© 2011 Jim Delia

A good coaching and leadership practice is to focus on readiness, before moving forward with exploring ideas for improvement. Despite the fact that people may express a rational desire to accept new methods or approaches, the degree to which they are emotionally bound to the way they are currently operating will determine what they actually do to follow-through with the change.

When we work with people, before focusing our attention on what and how something could or should be done, we might want to spend time digging at and helping to remove the emotional roots of their old ways. These may be the real obstacles to acceptance that are reinforcing their habits, not our lack of persuasive skills or their lack of understanding of the potential benefits.

Some good questions to ask are:

• How is what (or how) you’re doing working for you?
• What problem(s) do you see in the way you are doing things?
• What would have to happen for you to consider making a change?
• What are your doubts and concerns?
• What are you unsure about when you think about making a change?
• What happened the last time you tried a similar change?
• What new knowledge or skills do you need to change?
• What are the current (or anticipated) demands on your time and attention?

Previous experience, work and personal, will strongly influence how ready people are to accepting and adopting any new approach, regardless of its merits. The more we can learn about that experience and how it may influence their current choices, the more effective we can be as we try to help.

© 2011 Jim Delia

It helps to have a long memory for successes and a short memory for failures. Failures are useful if we can incorporate the learning quickly and move on and through the problems, without slowing down to dwell on the experiences. Focusing on previous successes can help bolster confidence and provide insight while working through the problem at hand, especially during the period of peak discomfort.

Personality preferences, and not just cognitive understanding, will greatly influence the degree to which an individual is more or less comfortable with being uncomfortable. For leaders who are conflict avoidant, adopting this mindset will take time, practice and a strong desire. When we see that working through problems and not around them eventually leads to more effective solutions, we might be more willing to be uncomfortable more often. The unexpected result will likely be more overall success and comfort in experiencing it.

© 2011 Jim Delia

When this type of change is contemplated, whether it is at a unit level or across the company, paying attention to the culture is wise. Culture is shaped by the beliefs and values of the people within it and it affects how people interpret experiences (change) and behave, individually and in groups. Understanding what people affected by a restructure expect can help guide how to involve them, and this can have a significant effect on the success of implementation.

Be clear about your purpose and vision. Some good initial questions are:

• Why is the restructure necessary?
• What is the overall goal or target? (What is the problem that needs to be solved?)
• What customer or client needs are driving, or will drive, the decisions?
• What financial (budgetary) assumptions are driving, or will drive, the decisions?
• What personnel changes are driving, or will drive, the decisions?
• What organizational values and priorities need to be maintained? Changed?
• What is the desired future state for the organization?
• Who should be included in the planning? (Cross-section of staff, external stakeholders?)
• How and when will the communication begin?

When formulating a project plan to manage the assignments and activities for restructuring and a transition plan to lead the people through the change, consider these cultural dimensions and the degree to which they apply to your organization.

Directness. Are people conditioned to receive messages that are to the point or are implied messages the norm?
Hierarchy. Do people expect to follow orders from leadership (centralized) or are decisions encouraged and expected to be made at all levels (decentralized)?
Consensus. Do people expect to have their opinions heard and understood before decisions are made or is conflict and disagreement generally discouraged?
Individualism. Are people driven more by self-interest or are they more focused on the organization’s needs?

Remember to see before you do.

© 2011 Jim Delia

When it comes to managing information, leaders should recognize the importance of discretion, for a number of reasons. Two reasons in particular come to mind. First, practically everyone is wired, typically in more ways than one. The recurring problem is overload. To remain effective people need more than just e-mailed messages, forwarded documents and web-related links, despite the fact that they may be rich in useful content. Leaders should take more time to determine how and why the information may be useful to the recipients before hitting the send button.

Second, leaders need to be prudent with information that relates to change, like potential restructuring. Responding to change is always personal and usually involves some level of emotion. Some leaders, with positive intent, believe that sharing any and all information with employees will always result in more effectiveness. Although that may occur in some situations, the reality is that unfiltered information can actually create more anxiety, mental distractions and fear because of the different ways people react to change at a personal and emotional level. Leaders should consider timing, current events, and the current level of morale to determine how and what to share about what is known and what is unknown about changes that may affect their employees.

It’s clear that there is more information available, to more people, in more ways, with more speed than ever before. Organizations, beginning with senior leadership, can usually do a better job of managing it. By “manage”, I don’t mean “censor.” When managing information effective leaders are aware of both the content and the implications of what they are sharing and are clear about their purpose for sharing it – before they share it.

Some good questions to consider before communicating important information are:
• Is the information I have the most current?
• Why am I sharing this information?
• What are the benefits? What are the risks?
• What is the best method for communicating the message?
• Is this the best time to deliver this message?
• What questions may arise and do I have answers?
• How do I want people to feel after receiving the message?

Leaders can also set an example and encourage others in the company to work on managing the information around them. Using organizational tools like on-line, collaborative workspaces can help (see www.huddle.net). Leaders who manage communication effectively use good judgment and sensitivity as they try to be mindful and understand the context in which their message is being sent. This usually results in getting the desired response and outcomes from those receiving it.

When we are part of an organization, any organization, one of our basic human needs as social beings is to feel secure and accepted by those around us. If we feel vulnerable and don’t quite fit in, we can get distracted and eventually become demotivated, regardless of our pay package or how intrinsically interesting the work might be.

Each organization has a unique formula for creating these motivational conditions based on its mission, culture and the composition of its individual employees. Motivational leaders continually work to discover and apply that unique formula to engage and support their workforce to be more connected to the organization and its goals.

A good starting point is to maximize transparency. Share as much information with employees as possible about the economic situation, financial imperatives, competitive threats and progress toward achieving strategic goals without sending them into information overload.

Continue by streamlining ways to receive input and feedback from them about decisions that are being made. Regularly solicit ideas for what employees need to improve how they are working and what they are working on.

Lastly, don’t just simply create teams; create collective competition within the organization. Collective competition, like all competition, is goal-oriented which can result in greater focus and increased creativity and innovation. However, it’s different from the more traditional type of competition where success is defined strictly by a bottom line win or lose outcome. Traditional competition creates more losers than winners and often results in organizational dysfunction, despite positive intent by the leader. Success in collective competition is measured by real, tangible cooperation within and across units and divisions. Cooperation, along with level of effort, and demonstrated growth and learning is what gets rewarded in healthy, collective competition.

For organizational success what a “win” and “team” is may need to be redefined and reinforced until it becomes part of the cultural fabric. An organization should be viewed and treated as one team. The individual units should only claim and, most importantly, be rewarded for a win when the larger team also wins. This becomes more challenging for leaders in larger organizations. We are often more familiar with individual competition or smaller team vs. team competition that is focused on narrow sales or revenue targets. Although there may be short term benefits, over the longer term siloed thinking and unhealthy competitive behavior is typically a negative result. This is the main reason why emphasizing internal competition within organizations is often perceived to be counterproductive.

Team members taking part in healthy, positive, collective competition, by definition, are encouraged to be inclusive, to share information, and to help each other learn and develop skills. This type of internal competition can be positive for the overall organization and for the individuals working within it. Rather than pit one member against another, the conditions created by leaders that reward cooperation can increase the chances that individuals will find their own reasons to be motivated.

The first is the technical realm which involves whether or not employees “can do” their jobs at the level required. Does each worker have the skills or competence necessary so that they can do their job? Would they benefit from additional training, direction or other developmental assistance?

The second area of importance is the realm of “will do”. Does each worker have the necessary motivation and attitude so that they will do their job and be a positive contributor? Are there obstacles in their way that are preventing them from being fully committed while they are at work such as personal issues, problems with co-workers, fear of change, coping with shrinking resources, or frustration with the current work process?

The root of all workplace problems does not always stem from employee issues directly. These people problems can sometimes be symptomatic, with the underlying cause traced to the third “how do” realm. The “how do” realm is defined by the business processes along with the reporting structure. Is the work organized so that people can work smart? Are all of the tasks necessary? Do the policies and procedures in place still make sense? Are more policies and procedures necessary to help achieve more consistent outcomes? Involving employees in examining work flow design and in making the right changes may result in helping individual workers better use their strengths and abilities. This can support increased motivation and commitment to the work as well as to customers and co-workers.

Keep in mind that workplace problems, like most problems we encounter, are often interrelated with no clear indication of where they originated. The best solutions can be in finding ways to prevent problems from occurring in the first place. This is particularly true when making the most important decisions a manager makes – who they should hire.

The hiring process is the time to determine the level of importance to be placed on the “can do” vs. the “will do” realms. Traditionally, employee selection practices have placed an over emphasis on technical experience and not enough on screening for interpersonal characteristics, motivation, and positive attitude. Yet the most common and difficult employee relations problems typically involve misconduct or misbehavior and not lack of job knowledge and skill. No one wants to hire an incompetent worker. However, is it easier to train an employee to do a particular job task or is it easier to train them how to take initiative and be flexible?

Good managers support their employees by paying attention and asking good questions. By understanding the interconnection between these realms, managers can develop and apply more targeted, timely and effective solutions in response. Step one is hiring the right people, for the right jobs, at the outset. When this happens managers also benefit as units and teams develop faster and are able to solve many of their own problems. This allows for more time to spend addressing the strategic issues that frequently get neglected.

Typically, if we start on what we want to “fix” first, our fight or flight response is triggered and that leads us to behave defensively, or we quickly find excuses to avoid the effort. We get uncomfortable and we are less open to feedback, and soon lose commitment to making the change. Coaches can help the personal change process by helping to identify the positive reasons for making the change and building on personal strengths in order to achieve some small wins. Once those small wins are achieved, motivation can build, along with a desire to then address weaknesses.

Good leaders are good coaches. They create trust, not fear, and help those they lead find positive, personal reasons to move toward change. This approach is much more effective, particularly as an early change strategy, than demanding quick fixes to personal weaknesses. However, it also takes time and patience to achieve real results. The process starts with a leader’s recognizing and understanding the level of readiness of the individual being coached. By starting where they need and want to begin, the coaching effort can be much more productive for both parties.

For all of the potential benefits to good coaching, there can be an unforeseen challenge to incorporating it as a management practice in the workplace. That is, everyone may not view coaching as a positive. I was reminded of this recently while working with a client and discussing the topic of performance management and the supportive role of coaching. I asked about the word “coaching” and how it was viewed in their organization and I was told that the word has a negative connotation for some because it is associated with problem performance. We are shaped by our experience.

The idea of being coached can be viewed as a positive or negative based on influential experiences, some beginning at an early age. A close family member had a high school sports coach who would pull each and every player out of the game right after they made a mistake. They were then derided and made to sit on the bench and reflect on what they did wrong. Conversely, when they did something right, it was ignored and taken for granted by the coach. Consequently, whatever growth and improvement occurred for the various team members happened very slowly, if at all, because the level of fear and lack of trust that existed kept morale and motivation low. I can’t help but wonder how those individual players will view and respond to coaching by their managers when they eventually enter the workforce.

Leaders, even with positive intentions, may want to accept the fact that viewpoints can differ regarding coaching. The potential impact of the language and labels leaders use and take for granted, may not always be understood. Even a helpful word (to me) like “coaching” may trigger a negative response even before it begins.

With a few exceptions, technology usually works as advertised. When it doesn’t, it might require an upgrade or replacement. We learn, often through trial and error, what keys to press and what commands to give to get the results we want. Each time I sit in front of my laptop and click the Word icon, it loads and I can create a document the same way I did yesterday or last week. Once I learn how to operate the “program” it may not work as intuitively as I would like, but it does respond consistently. There can be a downside. How often do interpersonal problems occur because we unconsciously expect that our co-worker, our boss, a friend, or family member will respond as consistently as the technology we use? When they don’t, we devalue them.

People are “buggy” software. Dealing with them is often unpredictable and even messy. One day they are in a positive mood, another day they are not. One hour they are incredibly productive, the next they are staring out the window. As skilled as some of us may be in operating and even programming our computers and cell phones, we ourselves are buggy. We have moods, with different abilities to communicate that other people have to respond and adapt to.

The lesson for leaders is to remember that managing people is not the same as managing an Outlook calendar. A lot more patience and flexibility is required to prevent constant frustration that will spill over to people around them. This frustration can contribute to dysfunction in the workplace. I am not suggesting that standards be lowered. I am suggesting that we recognize the benefits of each of the resources we work with, particularly the human variety. Focus on how to maximize all resources, as well as accept their limitations. Let’s remember that even when people meander, a big advantage they can have over technology is their problem solving ability, judgment and creativity. When people feel valued they can apply those abilities and deal with ambiguity, particularly during challenging and uncertain times like these. Computers can’t. At least not yet.

There remains a lot to look forward to in the future. I’m still planning new business ventures, meeting new friends, planning and creating memories with my family and most of all continuing to learn. For me the learning is not just focused on acquiring professional knowledge. That never ends. There is always some new approach or concept about people and how we behave to read about, or some new situation or challenge in the workplace that catches my attention. However, some of the most universal learning for me comes from developing my skills in sailing and music, two pursuits that bring me a lot of joy and pleasure, along with pain sometimes.

As I am still rehabbing my “sailing elbow”, I’ll offer more thoughts about the impact of sailing in a future post. Focusing on music, I have always been a big fan of rock drums and have followed various drummers throughout their careers since my early teens. John Bonham and Steve Gadd were a couple of my icons, Regrettably, although I saw Gadd a few times, I never got to see Zeppelin play live. At rock concerts, I was one of those few in the crowd to jump up and applaud after a killer drum solo.

I learned a lesson when I was persuaded by a friend to take up playing the drums 2 ½ years ago. We were at a break at a Steely Dan concert talking about music and I was lamenting that I had never learned to play drums, even though I have been a huge fan of the instrument. His message was simple, “why not start now?” So I did. He plays bass guitar and as it turns out, he started playing bass around the middle of his life as well. A few drum lessons were followed by practice sessions in my garage, where we have since added some other players and now can proudly call ourselves a garage band.

Here’s the kicker, so to speak. The real lesson was that learning something new and fun remains a humbling experience. My ego is continually challenged when I can’t play a beat or a drum fill in the way I hear it on the recording. I had to accept the fact that I was incompetent and that I would fail a lot – until I didn’t. For a while it would have been easier to stop. I am improving (so my band mates tell me). Still, learning is not easy, despite the rewards. Professionally I am continually working to persuade people to learn new skills and develop new habits, and my journey to learn to play drums is a useful reminder of how demanding learning can be, especially for adults.

My bass player friend that inspired me to learn got me tapped into the joy and benefits I could receive by investing the practice time and applying real effort. Most importantly he was patient and realized that I had to start when I was ready and at my level of ability. Despite the perceived benefits, an attractive goal or objective can best be reached when we are willing to accept that fact that quick successes are not always realistic when the desired change is significant. As each of us marches (or plays) to our own drummer, if we can be patient and keep our ego from getting in our way, we have a much better chance of leveraging the learning.