Monday 4 March 2024 – Meta-feedback

Which is better: a combative approach to corporate and political relevance by telling other services in one’s directorate that the Leader put you in charge, lecture them on their job and what they’re good at, go behind their backs and talk to local businesses contradicting their message, and hold back on providing any policy guidance so that they have to wait for you so that you are in control in the meantime, or a collaborative approach where each team in a directorate specialises in what they are good at and contributes these specialisms to common objectives; these goals and inputs directed by the Executive Director?  There’s only one way to find out: FIGHT!!

Harry Hill’s tried and tested method of establishing which of two things is better: have them fight it out.

Well, the Executive Director thinks there may be a better way and arranged an away-day for all senior staff in his directorate to explore how we can all collaborate better together.  This may have come as a bit of a surprise to our Assistant Director who had been instructed by the Leader to take the more bellicose approach but, along with the other team ADs (for Housing, Property, Planning and he for Economic Development), he was the facilitator for the day, just for today siding with collaboration.

In his opening remarks, the Executive Director apologised for not having done this earlier and introduced the councillor responsible for the Economy portfolio.  It was interesting to hear the councillor’s plans and ambitions because this was news to me: an officer in the service responsible for delivering them.  Why our residents pay the salaries of our Assistant Director, who talks regularly and extensively to the councillor but hasn’t told us any of this and needed the Executive Director to apologise for not having brought us together earlier to hear what his plans are, I don’t know, but, after telling us, I’m not sure I understood what the councillor’s plans were anyway.

We have economic “opportunities” in West London he told us.  Successes like Canada Water in the Docklands, or Granary Square in Kings Cross, “don’t happen organically” he suggested, they happen through collaboration.

I thought we thought they did happen organically?  I thought, if you build things, they (businesses, opportunities, jobs, skills) will come.  That’s the established theory anyway.  Entrepreneurialism will find the most efficient outcome.  There has to be infrastructure of course, and industry sectors do tend to cluster together, but all government organisations have to do is sell our land, hurry up with the planning permission process and get out of developers’ way.  They build things, sell them (do the “inward investment”) and then these new businesses create jobs which dictate the skills needed by their workers and the next generation.

That’s the theory, but, I mean, it doesn’t work.  The free economy is broken.  Businesses cluster around London regardless because this is where the international businesses are.  Sheffield or Preston may build their own buildings but that doesn’t mean Microsoft, Google, Citibank or Disney are going to set up there.  There will always be demand for property in London no matter what the local council does.  Salaries do not reflect or attract the skills needed in sectors.  The construction sector alone is completely dependent on foreign workers despite how well it pays and how much construction work is happening in London.  The care sector, which doesn’t pay anywhere near as much, relies on an immigrant work visa scheme tearing the Tory Party apart yet, despite being clawing control freaks about it, still can’t manage immigration fraud.  Yet, when the brightest and best have to be attracted with fat cat salaries to run the richest companies and infrastructure such as the railways, our water suppliers, the Post Office, BP and Arcadia Retail Group, their success of managing what was already a healthy business seems to be no more certain than flipping a coin.  As for jobs in general, there is glaring inequality in job opportunities between white and black workers and applicants, and for women’s pay.  No-one can quite work out why, but the market certainly isn’t equalising it through forces of demand and supply.

And didn’t Canada Water and Canary wharf happen organically?  A new theory in a BBC drama suggested that investment in the Docklands was kickstarted by Eastend gangsters laundering gold stolen from the Brinks-Mat robbery at Heathrow in 1983.  When the then Business Secretary, Michael Heseltine, eventually got involved and designated it an Opportunity Area, Canary Wharf office space remained mostly empty for years after his intervention.  It was Margaret Thatcher’s deregulation of the British finance markets followed by Tony Blair’s scepticism of joining the Euro and maintaining financial transaction fees from London that inadvertently spurred international banking to cluster in the City and overspill to Poplar.

So, what does the councillor suggest we do that the Executive Director (albeit now apologetically) and the AD have never attempted to tell us, never mind direct?  “The Industrial Strategy on education is interesting”, he told us.  “Development in cities around the world has always caused polarisation.  Some citizens benefit and others are excluded.  It’s hard to bring in groups of people who wouldn’t otherwise be included in that opportunity.  If we can crack that nut, then everyone can benefit.”

It's a nice thought.  A bit enigmatic.  Maybe something a Miss World contestant might suggest if she has solved World peace and was looking for something new to move on to.  We’ve not seen the Industrial Strategy of course, because it has not been written we were told.  It’s certainly not published so maybe he knows something we don’t, but he didn’t let on any further.

From this, the supporting act, our AD, opened up the discussion to the floor: “What’s stopping us collaborating now?” was the discussion point.  I don’t know.  You?  Not having an Industrial Strategy?  Are we supposed to organise ourselves?  Is this like the filth collectors in the anarcho-syndicalist commune in Monty Python’s Quest for the Holy Grail (see Selecting Our Leaders)?  Can you or your director suggest something?  Isn’t that what you’re paid the big bucks for?

Field of Dreams (1989): If you build it, they will come.

They didn’t have any input for the whole day beyond compering.  Discussion points were given and discussed on tables of randomised officers from the four teams, scribes were nominated on tables and flipchart pages filled up with ideas ranging from thoughtful and insightful to jargon.  These were presented back to the group as a whole by each scribe (people really should resist the instinct to reach for a colourful marker pen like a child does with crayons because they always end up doing all the work all afternoon).

It's an interesting management style: give nothing away.  The Maslow HR textbook tips for managing are:

1.    Hire the best

2.    Measure the performance of employees regularly

3.    Communicating openly is key

4.    Encourage employees to share their opinions

5.    Set clear goals

6.    Reward hard work

7.    Ensure that employees enjoy working

So that would be zero for seven.  I mean, it’s not not enjoyable, but, perhaps, the word “working” in point 7 is a bit strong.  And they are at least trying to sort of communicate today.  Let’s call it three quarters out of seven.

I am attracted to Maslow’s management approach here, if perhaps for no other reason than I would welcome any experience of being managed, but I can see it might be a bit didactic and dry.  As an alternative, can I recommend Tina Fey’s Rules of Improvisation That Will Change Your Life in her book, Bossypants (2011), which maps across well to Maslow’s rules.  Simply transfer the word “improvising” in the below to “managing”.  She says:

“The first rule of improvisation is AGREE.  When you’re improvising, this means you are required to agree with whatever.  So if we’re improvising and I say, “Freeze, I have a gun,” and you say “That’s not a gun.  It’s your finger.  You’re pointing your finger at me,” our improvised scene has ground to a halt.  But if I say, “Freeze, I have a gun!” and you say, “The gun I gave you for Christmas!  You bastard!” then we have started a scene because we have AGREED that my finger is in fact a Christmas gun.

“Now, obviously in real life you’re not always going to agree with everything everyone says.  But the Rule of Agreement reminds you to “respect what your partner has created” and to at least start from an open-minded space.  Start with a YES and see where that takes you.

“As an improviser, I always find it jarring when I meet someone in real life whose first answer is no.  “No, we can’t do that.”  No, that’s not in the budget.”  No, I will not hold your hand for a dollar.”  What kind of way is that to live?

“The second rule of improvisation is not only to say yes, but YES, AND.  You are supposed to agree and then add something of your own.  If I start a scene with “I can’t believe it’s so hot in here,” and you just say, “Yeah…” we’re kind of at a standstill.  But if I say, “I can’t believe it’s so hot in here,” and you say, “What did you expect?  We’re in hell.”  Or if I say, “I can’t believe it’s so hot in here,” and you say, “Yes, this can’t be good for the wax figures.”  Or if I say, “I can’t believe it’s so hot in here,” and you say, “I told you we shouldn’t have crawled into this dog’s mouth,” now we’re getting somewhere.

“To me, YES, AND means don’t be afraid to contribute.  It’s your responsibility to contribute.  Always make sure you’re adding something to the discussion.  Your initiations are worthwhile.

“The next rule is MAKE STATEMENTS.  This is a positive way of saying “Don’t ask questions all the time.”  If we’re in a scene and I say, “Who are you?  Where are we?  What are we doing here?  What’s in that box?” I’m putting pressure on you to come up with all the answers.

“In other words: Whatever the problem, be part of the solution.  Don’t just sit around raising questions and pointing out obstacles.  We’ve all worked with that person…  It’s usually the same person around the office who says things like… “I felt menaced when Terry raised her voice.”

I do make suggestions to my managers.  Admittedly I don’t always suggest things and just go ahead and do it, but that’s because when I do suggest things, my Assistant Director doesn’t AGREE.  (My manager just says he’ll ask the AD.)  Things haven’t ground to a halt because nothing has been started for a long time now.  “Here are social value measures we can ask for from our suppliers that our frontline services want and need”, I initiate.  “That’s not a gun” is the reply.  Nothing starts.  No-one respects my opening.  No-one throws out an alternative.  We have no usable measures.  Suppliers remain confused.

‘’Let’s enforce planning and procurement contracts.”  Not agreed.  Contracts are not being managed.  “Let’s ask residents what they want.”  Not agreed.  “Let’s get employment advisers who know how to write a CV to help our job-seekers write a CV.”  You know where I’m going with this by now.  A CV from an employment adviser I received today starts with “Experienced professional with strong skill in administrative role communication, problem-solving and organisation.”  Her last job was from “Sept. 2023 – currant”.  The job shrivelled away like a dry grape.  

Unlike Tina, I don’t even get the courtesy of a half-decent excuse like “we can’t do that” or “that’s not in the budget.”  All I get is that the AD will think about it and then never does.  I don’t even get to talk to him; I have to ask my proxy monkey manager who will relay the message (except we all know the monkey doesn’t actually talk to the organ grinder).

I would be delighted if we ever got to the next stage of management/improvisation: add something of your own.  I thought we might get something from our senior management team in the away-day today but all they did was ask questions.  They made us do all the work by just asking questions.  They didn’t initiate any interaction or ideas.  They didn’t even react to feedback the scribe on each table worked so hard all afternoon to write, condense and present.  The councillor started off the event presenting the problem.  The Exec Director and his supporting act AD asked questions but contributed nothing except to refer to an Industrial Strategy that no-one has ever seen.

Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981): Was the monkey really able to relay back to his keeper what Indiana Jones was up to?

Incidentally, the last agenda item for the afternoon was on Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI).  “Write on a post-it note”, we were told by our AD, “if you feel you can’t talk to your manager about bullying, harassment or unfair treatment, and pass it to us.”  I’m not sure if they understood the metaphysical ramifications of this exercise but “selection bias” seems to affect a lot of the staff surveys done in the council.  I learned today that we have a Head of EDI.  Someone in the council is dedicated to promoting transparency of recruitment, progression and dismissal decisions to ensure managers are promoting equality and diversity.  I looked around at the room of senior staff who were mostly white middle-age men, but did have a sense that this was important and something attendees had an interest in.  Research had been done with HR, we were told by the Head of EDI, to understand the ethnic breakdown of council staff and those who have progressed.  Those stats weren’t actually presented to us so I’m not sure why she was telling us.  No mention of staff churn, though.  I put my hand up to ask about it: “Were staff members from a minority ethnic background, women or disabled staff more likely to leave the council?”  She looked at me blankly.  I don’t think she knew what I was saying.  In the silence, her manager, an HR officer, stood up from the back of the room, a white male, natch, and walked to the front.  “We [HR], have an exit interview for when officers leave voluntarily but it has a poor take-up.  It is getting better, though.”

And this is who HR is surveying: those who have a job and those who are promoted.  Those who leave because they were treated unfairly, or were unfairly sacked, are not represented in the survey.  We know the council has no compunction about sacking staff illegally and does not respect employees’ employment rights (see Don’t Be Consulted When It’s About You).  That HR is managing EDI does seem to be putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop.  But I didn’t write on a post-it note to tell my manager that I was unwilling to tell my manager that.

Maybe Miss World can crack that nut and initiate some new ways forward for greater economic equality if she is looking for a new project.  Our own directors don’t seem to have much of an idea.