Social partnership learnings

slideshare Linkedin google+ mailto

Reform within social partnerships

Nigel C Carr

http://www.slideshare.net/NigelCCarr

http://uk.linkedin.com/in/nigelccarr

https://plus.google.com/110070377834624234613/posts

mailto:[email protected]

www.reformprogramme.com


2012



Name Reform within social partnerships

Problem How to manage change with the

support of unions and professional

associations

Assumptions Unions and professional associations

are one of the critical success factors

in public sector change

Examples Workforce Agreement Monitoring

Group (WAMG)

Acceptance

Criteria

• Genuine partnership

• Respect for individual perspectives

Deployment • Deep democracy or equivalent

• Agreement, concordat or equivalent

• On going joint governance and

monitoring

This pack is part of a library of

resource freely published by the

Reform Programme

• It is based on the results of real

programmes in the public sector

• Resources have been kept as

close as possible to the actual

deliverables

• Resources are reasonably self-

contained

For information on other resources

please contact The Reform

Programme


What is a social partnership?

A formal concordat between diverse service and workforce

representative organisations to provide the critical role to

ensure the implementation of an agreed set of challenging

objectives. This is couple to a commitment to continue

working collaboratively on progressing the wider agenda.*

The term “social partnership” in the United Kingdom has often been associated with bilateral

relationships between unions and employers that are focused on resolving conflicting priorities. The

above definition of social partnership, and the references throughout the document, are based on a wider

understanding of the role of all stakeholders in defining and achieving the aims of public policy.

Within Europe the term Social Concertation is often used as an alternative to social partnership and

usually includes business representatives.

4

www.reformprogramme.com 5

Characteristics of reform How public/private sector transformations deliver reform

Reform value chain

• Changes at the point of service delivery are

driven back up the service value chain after

stimulating demand for support

• Process, content and relationship sequence of

priorities for reform is the reverse of “normal”

change management order

• Change channels as part of the capacity building

as well as communication

Reform resources

• Implementation resources usable by staff on the front line

• Leveraged model using mainstream resources rather than by-passes

• "Cascades" of KPIs that make sense at the point of service delivery as well as nationally

Reform monitoring

• Sustainability of the change outcomes in regard to a balanced scorecard

• "Cascades" of KPIs that make sense at the point of service delivery as well as nationally

• Single integrated reform support and monitoring organisation forms the basis of the change agent relationship management

Reform cultural change

• Use and management of change agents as part of local “social partnership”

• Managing practical "cultural change“ as behaviour change rather than management theory

• Differentiated approaches, not “one size fits all”, across and along the service value chain


Reform needs to be managed across two

different delivery strategies

Mainstream delivery …

• Use of the existing local

management and service delivery

mechanisms (public and private

sector)

• Local knowledge and intelligence

supported from the centre

• Front line management and service

based teams implementing service-

led reforms

• Costs are mostly in training and

quality assurance

Bypass delivery …

• Use of new resources – but often

end up seconding people from

existing system

• Costs are mostly in secondment

costs

• Use system bypass if the change is

small and/or the system doesn’t

have an ongoing role in supporting

the service units

6


Our learning about key characteristics

of a reform channels …

• Capability is concentrated at the centre

– Based on expertise and experience of the central resources

– Based on gathering new good practice from the field

• Cascade develops homogeneous capacity in the system’s own

resources

• Training and development to create capacity

• Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) to ensure there is capability

within the capacity

• Feedback and coaching relationships built to ensure rapid take up of

new skills/behaviours

• System develops ownership of the change agenda, facilitated by the

change agent

7


Our learning about forming social

partnerships

• The basis of the Social Partnership is a signed concordat:

– Aspirational objectives desired by all

– Schedules are progressively more difficult over time

– There is a defined on going role for the social Partnership in the

implementation

• The objectives will need to be based on a new perspective for all

– Challenging traditional assumptions of roles and disciplines

– Not based on least worst compromise

• Objectives can include commitments to deal with more difficult issues

when appropriate progress has been made but to be concluded

before the final third of the scheduled time

• When a detailed implementation plan cannot be defined then the

concordat should define the creation of a reform team for which the

Social Partnership acts as a steering group

8


Our learning about managing social

partnerships

• The whole social partnership needs to meet regularly to fulfil its on going role

in the implementation

• Subgroups can be created to handle specific issues

– They need to report to the main meeting

– They often need to comprise all organisations in the partnership and engage wider

officials

• The networks of the organisations in the social partnership are key sources

on intelligence on progress in the implementation

– However, these networks are not on their own appropriate to deliver the

implementation

• The chair and location for the meetings should rotate. Strategy summits to

consider wider aspects of the implementation should be held as the regular

meetings often need work at mainly a detail level

• If there is a reform team then should act as an honest broker across the

partnership and be present at all the meetings for steering

9


Public sector reform critical success factors are key to the

development of reform channels

Service-level

reform levers

Critical

success

factors

Social

partnership

Challenge to the

system

Enabling

programme

Implementation

resources

Mainstream

delivery

Public sector

resources

10


• Private/public sector acceptable performance is

different:

•“full” failure is/isn’t allowed

•Competition/service aspirations

• Change needs to be planned and executed at this

lowest level in target resources, structures, processes

and boundaries in services

Service-level reform levers

Why is it important?

• Standards agenda and Industrial agenda are actually the same

•Workforce vision of new professionalism

•New performance management (Balance Reform Scorecard)

• The identified problems are shared - relevant and important to both the

change sponsors and targets

Service-level reform levers …

• Mainstreaming change into

permanent roles/responsibilities

and concurrence on

implementation

• Overwhelming majority of

unions/associations in the game

What are the implications for private/public sector reform?

11


Social partnership

• Develop new joint objectives

• Provider led reform - reform is done on behalf of the

vast majority of resources

• Produces a coherent vision of the future

• Partnership between public and private sectors


• Single agreed versions of advice and guidance signify solidarity of

purpose within the sponsors

• Other aligned advice providers are not competitors

• All stakeholders will have to take new positions

• Not about finding only the common denominator (committee)

• Not compromise (collective bargaining)

Social partnership …

• Government, representative

bodies, unions, employers and

experts working in concert

• Foundation for future

cooperation and system

transformation


12


• Most expertise in change is based on private sector

ideas in product industries

• This doesn’t apply to private/public sector service

industry

• A system can’t challenge itself from within with quick

coherent results

• Current system is focused on cost (customer/public

purse) rather than long term value (private/public service)

Challenge to the system


• Role models the future behaviours required by the reform including

modelling to social partners

• Perceived to be working independently of sponsor and target - builds

capability to change and acts as a fixer


Challenge to the system …

• Independent change agent as

critical friend

• Key role of data and evidence for

CQI and to invoke change

13


• There are defined progress, outcome and support

measures of the reform

• Change at the point of service delivery is the priority:

• Increased capacity for future change; inclusive team

driving change; coherent at the point of service

delivery; services leading reform

Enabling programmes of support


• Change is not seen as a professional activity in service teams

• Front line change process has key checkpoints, supported by events

to share learning and experiences

• Local measures drive “support planning” for

service teams


Enabling programme …

• Expert change agent working

"beneath the surface"

• Public/private partnership

creating success for the system

14


• Private/public sector is weak on process (tools and

techniques) and strong in content and relationships

• This is not about leadership; this is not about training

and development

• This is about building capability and capacity to change

• Initiate change in the place where there will be least

resistance to change – and then bring change up front

in the implementation

Implementation resources


• Resources are given away – where possible carrying the system’s

badges

• Resources pay explicit attention to rational, political and emotional

requirements - incorporate buyer and user behaviours


Implementation resources …

• National network of local

management and service-based

advisers

• Training and skills transfer of the

highest order

15


• Differentiated local delivery for a national programme

• System emulates success – part of their CPD; not a

theoretical central model

• Not prescribed nationally or locally

• Only use system bypass if the change is small and/or

the system doesn’t have an ongoing role in supporting

the service units

Mainstream delivery of Transformation


• Removes fortress culture around service boundaries

• Integrated channels – person-to-person, web, helpdesk

• Specialist channels


Mainstream delivery …

• Use of the existing local delivery

mechanisms (public and private

sector)

• Local knowledge and intelligence

supported from the centre

• Service-based teams

implementing service-led reforms

16


• Fostering informed practice and collaboration between

service teams

• Progress data owned locally; assessment of progress

and action planning locally and facilitated/normalised

centrally

• Drives prioritisation of support in the reform – acting on

progress monitoring requires the capacity to have “the

difficult conversations”

Multiplier effect of current public sector

resources


• Costs are mostly in training and quality assurance – not in

secondment costs

• Allows scaling up of a core team capability to the capacity required

by the project –must be a core team capability


Public sector resources …

• Effect of national core network

greater than sum of its parts

• Buy-in, trust and credibility

established locally and nationally

17


Structuring next steps Some of the key considerations in developing an approach

Different geographies have very

different demographic and socio-

economic profiles

There needs to be a number of

different local service teams types

included in the Pathfinder

Consideration Conclusion

How to ensure that the Pathfinder

is replicable

The conditions must be the same

for the Pathfinder as for the roll out

(e.g. no pump priming)

How to ensure that the Process is

sustainable

The reform must be about building

ownership, capacity and capability

at a local level – for local solutions

Building a change agent network

takes time and we want to get it

right first time

Use a Pathfinder approach and

prepare for the national roll out in

parallel

There are many organisations

involved in this field who will be

only too willing to help

Focus the effort through the local

teams, but leverage resources on

a national basis


Public Sector Mgmt

Private Sector Mgt

Assessment

19

Change Agents and existing tools How Change Agent ways of working fit into the existing toolsets

Evidence

Specific Practical Advice

Benchmarking

Service Mgmt

Training

Conclusions

Develop training for use

in the wider community

targeting at reform

Application of a change

process for use in the

wider community

Continue to develop and

enhance

Action plans

To be capable of

delivering the change

process to local

organisations

Tools and advice

available

Current support programmes needs to place more emphasis on assessment and targeted change processes


Establishing the Reform How to create the conditions for success in the largest reform issues we face

Service Regional/Local National

Service

Regional/ Local

National

International integration

Political

National integration

Public sector

Private sector

Monitoring

Establish Reform Pathfinder

Delivery

Key:

Capacity building

Single reform change process working

across sectors and disciplines

Cross-party support to reform approach secured

Innovation

Local cross party communication

aligned to national organisations

Coherence with Treasury Reviews

National/Local conferences on opportunities for

future-safe development

Geopolitical analysis of UK energy/climate/

carbon scenarios

Service knowledge networks

established across public and

private sector disciplines

Local support and capacity building propositions

developed in collaboration with front line service

teams

Reform progress and outcome measured co-created

Local reform delivery adopt change agent roles with support and

monitoring roles

Balanced scorecard of national consistent and locally meaningful

measures

Regional/local incubator and research

delivery Multi-sector priorities agreed for innovation objective

Coordinated local government and local

authority response

Differentiated regional and local reform teams through traditional existing funding

streams

Differentiated empowered service teams with local

communities

National venture funding pools

Private/public funded ventures

& markets

Communication and information provided in the context of the

reform change process

Single reform change process working

across sectors and disciplines

Government & Nonprofit

Social partnership learnings