03 February 2010

The pilots are only the end of the beginning


Stephen Taylor and Phil Swann

The submission of the Total Place pilots’ final reports to ministers this month marks not the end of the process but just the end of the beginning, say Stephen Taylor and Phil Swann

This month’s deadline for Total Place pilots to submit their ‘final’ reports to the Government marks the end of the first phase of this journey.

So, here are some early lessons for ministers, the pilots, other places and civil servants, drawn from our experience in supporting two of the pilots.

First, a reminder to us all.

The notion that any of these reports is final is nonsense. Writing an impressive report is the easy bit. The real challenge is to ensure that the recommendations get traction locally, and have a lasting influence on ‘the way we do things around here’.
We need to move on from thinking in terms of ‘pilots’ to putting in place the conditions necessary to sustain a total place approach in the longer term.

A key lesson for ministers and their shadows is to acknowledge just how shallow the political debate about public expenditure seems, when viewed from a Total Place perspective. We are confident the pilots will demonstrate that it is possible to secure improved outcomes at less cost.

But, it will require effective political leadership nationally and locally to create the conditions in which more can be delivered for less.

This means framing the debate in a different way. Talking about ‘protecting hospitals’, for example, closes down potentially-exciting opportunities to get more for less in a way which a commitment to ‘prioritising health and social care’ does not.
The pilots have been urged to ensure that their reports are clear, factual and concise. We have been told that they should be ‘bold about what the project means for the future’. And bold we will be.

It is also important, however, that space is created to explore what didn’t work, what failed, and what we found difficult.
A weakness of upwards reporting is that pilots want to tell a good story rather than paint an honest picture of how difficult it can be.

The difficulties include the perception that ‘doing’ Total Place has to be ‘added’ to the day job. Others cited included the pros and cons of the tight timetable, the relationship between Total Place and the myriad of other initiatives which deluge councils and their partners,  the imprint of history on today’s partnerships and innovations, and the challenge of securing shared ownership.

Other challenges include the ambiguity of the local strategic partnership (LSP) role and its governance relationship with partners, the inability of many councillors to stand away from running the factory, the disincentives on public sector managers to act collaboratively, and the reluctance to identify possible savings for fear that budgets will be immediately cut.

There is also the problem of decommissioning, given the public sector’s genetic inability to stop doing things, the absence of any constitutional platform to define what is national and what is local, and the constant pressure for ‘quick wins’ born out of the mismatch between political and real world timetables – not to mention the belief on the part of ministers and civil servants that they can achieve their goals through reorganisation, greater control and tweaks to the machine.

These are just some of the things we have grappled with and which need to be talked about in an honest and open way.
There is learning here, not just for other pilot programmes, but also for how councils and their partners create the space and opportunity to radically review what they do, and why they do it.

It is also important that pilots put in place robust arrangements to continue the work.

The real challenge will be to maintain the momentum, once the paraphernalia of the pilots has died down.

An important pointer for other councils and their partners is to avoid being seduced by the notion of Total Place as a solution to something. Rather they should have regard to the four most important characteristics of how we have worked:
  • Sticking with a simple question – how can we secure improved outcomes at less cost through whole-scale organisational and cultural change? – and testing hypotheses which relate to that question
  • Asserting, whenever possible, the paramount importance of the citizen or consumer’s perspective, and using that perspective to drive service redesign
  • Focusing on systems as a whole, in terms of both analysis and action
  • Using a tight timetable to focus effort and build momentum.

Other places also need to understand that Total Place is about long-haul learning which has two primary ingredients – a different kind of conversation up, down and across the system; and disciplined quantitative insight into what really does and doesn’t work.

The existence of a dedicated team with full-time resource seconded can give this process a real push. And the location of the team and the organisations from which its members are drawn can influence the ownership of a project such as this, particularly where a number of councils and organisations are involved.

Finally, we hope that civil service colleagues have learned that giving localities a clear brief and then keeping out, except when invited in, can result in exciting and imaginative approaches to intractable problems.

Pilots have enjoyed a close and collaborative relationship with Whitehall. A long-standing challenge for Whitehall is how to extend that relationship beyond a small number of pilots.

Phil Swann is project director for the Bournemouth, Dorset and Poole Total Place pilot, and is a programme director with Shared Intelligence. Stephen Taylor is project director for the Birmingham Total Place Pilot, and is a director of Taylor Haig





 Back     Top of page

Advert