Ten propositions about public leadership

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of some pressing but under-researched aspects of public leadership. Ten propositions about public leadership are set out and these are intended to be thought-provoking and even controversial in order to stimulate researchers to design research which addresses key theoretical and practical questions about leadership in the public sphere. They will also help practitioners navigate an increasingly complex leadership context. Design/methodology/approach – This invited essay uses ten propositions about public leadership, selected from three sources: the leadership literature, the author’s own research and from collaborative research discussions with academics, policy makers and practitioners. Findings – The first proposition argues for distinguishing public leadership from public service leadership given that the former is about leadership of the public sphere. Other propositions concern context; purpose; conflict and contest at the heart of public leadership; leadership with political astuteness; dual leadership; leadership projections; fostering resilience; leadership, authority and legitimacy; and the challenge to researchers to use research designs which reflect the complexity and dynamism of public leadership. Practical implications – While this essay is primarily addressed to researchers, there are many ideas and concepts which practising leaders will find insightful and useful in their work. Originality/value – This essay draws on deep experience in undertaking high-quality academic research about public leadership which draws from and feeds into policy and practice. It utilises organisational psychology, public management and political science to create synergies in order to enhance the understanding of public leadership

Leading with political astuteness: A study of public managers in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom

Combining quantitative survey data from over 1000 middle and senior public managers, as well as qualitative data from 42 in-depth interviews, the study sheds light on how managers understand politics in their work; how they rate their own and their colleagues’ political skills; how they use their political skills; and how these skills were developed. The report also sets forth recommendations to improve the development of managers’ political astuteness at the level of the individual, the organisation, and the professional body/training provider

Leading with political astuteness: a study of public managers in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom

This research is an example of the collaboration ANZSOG strives to achieve with its partners and stakeholders, involving researchers from The Open University, RMIT and ANZSOG, and supported by the UK Chartered Management Institute. It is a three-country comparative study investigating politics and political skills in the work of public sector managers. Combining quantitative survey data from over 1000 middle and senior public managers, as well as qualitative data from 42 in-depth interviews, the study sheds light on how managers understand politics in their work; how they rate their own and their colleagues’ political skills; how they use their political skills; and how these skills were developed. The report also sets forth recommendations to improve the development of managers’ political astuteness at the level of the individual, the organisation, and the professional body/training provider. Authors: Professor Jean Hartley, Professor John Alford, Professor Owen Hughes, and Sophie Yates

Asymmetries of Leadership: Agency, Response and Reason

Drawing on empirical data from an action research project in policing, we propose that the power relations of leadership unfold in asymmetries of agency, response and reason: Leaders both expect and experience more responsibility than control; more blame than praise; and interpretations of failure - both their own and others’ - based more on personal fault than on situational or task complexity. We focus, therefore, on power asymmetry not in the sense of structural inequality between leaders and followers, but rather, as constellations of incongruity, imbalance and unevenness which circumscribe leaders’ actions, choices, relationships and feelings about their work. From this perspective, privilege and disadvantage are not polar opposites reflecting the powerful versus the powerless; instead, they are intimately interwoven within leadership experience. The asymmetries of police leadership involve an intermingling of the necessary and the impossible; a decoupling of failure from irresponsibility; resilience at the prospect of being blamed for success as readily as for failure; and containment of society’s unresolved crises of responsibility, anxiety and risk. We crystallise this as a paradox of transparency and occlusion - of openness and closedness - in which police leaders are scrutinised by, and answerable to, those whom they must also protect, including from having to bear the full burden of knowledge of the dangers of the world. We reflect on the implications of this not just within policing, but for critical understandings of the power of leadership more generally

Police learning & development 2025:destination map

The National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC) and Police and Association of Crime Commissioners (APCC) have set out their vision for the future of policing in their joint Policing Vision 2025.The Open University’s (OU) Centre for Policing Research and Learning (CPRL) and The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) are supporting the transformation process through the Initiating Transformation of Police Learning and Development Project (ITPLD). This work engaged all police forces in England and Wales and is intended to support the transformation of training, learning and development (L&D) to support the realisation of Vision 2025.Understanding what the post ‘transformation’ landscape looks like and how it might link to effective delivery for policing and publics alike are key questions. Understanding in these areas would provide:• Strategic policing practitioners with a model against which they could benchmark their and other’s activities,• L&D professionals with a model for integrating and aligning delivery to meet force/ agency priorities, and• Individual learners with a framework against which to understand their opportunities and responsibilities.In addition, it would also describe a ‘destination’ from which key activities, events and processes necessary to realising the vision might be identified, mapped, and navigated to. The Destination Map presented here has been developed as an approach to tackling these challenges and seeks to provide strategic leaders, L&D professionals, and policing more widely, with a model which they can use to help guide them successfully into an uncertain future. The Destination Map was developed collaboratively between academics and police practitioners from a variety of disciplines, not least L&D specialisms. The initial thinking has been refined and shaped through the feedback of numerous reviewers. The research team is grateful to everyone who has contributed to the development of this model, and in particular to the invaluable contribution of Philip Knox (PSNI), Arif Nawaz (GMP), Janet Prescott (Staffs) and Peter Ward (East Midlands) in supporting the initial and subsequent shaping of this work.This document is intended primarily for use by those within organisational executive teams and within L&D functions (at both leadership and operational levels)

Devolving healthcare services redesign to local clinical leaders: Does it work in practice?

The purpose of this article is to present the findings arising from a three year research project which investigated a major system-wide change in the design of the NHS in England. This radical policy change was enshrined in statute in 2012 and it dismantled existing health authorities in favour of new local commissioning groups built around GP Practices. The idea was that local clinical leaders would ‘step-up’ to the challenge and opportunity to transform health services through exercising local leadership. This was the most radical change in the NHS since its inception in 1948. The research methods included two national postal surveys to all members of the boards of the local groups supplemented with 15 scoping case studies followed by six in-depth case studies. These case studies focused on close examination of instances where significant changes to service design had been attempted. We found that many local groups struggled to bring about any significant changes in the design of care systems. But, we also found interesting examples of situations where pioneering clinical leaders were able to collaborate in order to design and deliver new models of care bridging both primary and secondary settings. The potential to use competition and market forces by fully utilising the new commissioning powers was more rarely pursued. The findings carry practical implications stemming from positive lessons about securing change even under difficult circumstances. The article offers novel insights into the processes required to introduce new systems of care in contexts where existing institutions tend to revert to the status quo. The national survey allows accurate assessment of the generalisability of the findings about the nature and scale of change

The Assessment of African Protected Areas

In order to achieve goals for reduction in the rate of biodiversity loss, it is vital that geographically flexible conservation funding is focused on the areas where biodiversity is the highest and is most threatened. There is currently a shortage of systematic and repeatable methods for the assessment of priority areas for conservation. Furthermore, existing prioritisations tend to focus on large biogeographical units, defined by regional experts. We propose a continental scale repeatable methodology, using existing geographical databases, for the prioritisation of African protected areas. This information is utilised to develop 6 indicators for each protected area, quantifying its value with regards to amphibian, bird and mammal species diversity, irreplaceability of habitat, and threat from population pressure and agricultural boundary pressure. These indicators are then summarised to show how the protected area performs, for each indicator, in comparison to other protected areas from the same country or the same ecoregion. Results are also synthesised to show the most valuable protected areas for a given taxa. Finally, the prioritisation is presented via the internet in conjunction with phenology, climate, and environmental information specific to each protected area.JRC.H.3-Global environement monitorin