Public Governance - Code for Chief Executive Excellence

Public Governance - Code for Chief Executive Excellence Content Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Structure of the book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Part one: Conditions and challenges for public sector chief executives in Denmark. . . . . . . 13 Fundamental traits and challenges for chief executives in a politically-led organisation . . . . 15 Characteristics unique to Denmark. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Characteristics unique to the public sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Values in the public sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 The challenge: executive management is tandem management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 New conditions and challenges for chief executives in a politically-led organisation . . . . . . . 21 Changes in the decision-making structure of the public sector. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 The challenge: an expanded management universe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 The knowledge society – from openness to communication and involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 The challenge: an interactive public sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Governance – new methods of combining forms of co-operation and management . . . . . . . . . . 29 The challenge: multiple competing management principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Part two: Public Governance - Code for Chief Executive Excellence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Nine recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 1. Clarify your managerial space with the political leader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2. Take responsibility for ensuring that the political goals are implemented throughout the organisation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 3. Create an organisation which is responsive and capable of influencing the surrounding world . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

2

4. Create an organisation which acts as part of an integrated public sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 5. Require the organisation to focus on results and effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 6. Possess vision and work strategically to improve the way your organisation accomplishes its assignments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 7. Exercise your right and duty to lead the organisation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 8. Display personal and professional integrity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 9. Safeguard the public sector’s legitimacy and democratic values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Part three: Self-evaluation method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Phase 1: The full Code - a first sounding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Phase 2: My chief executive role and management style – focusing on the individual recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Phase 3: My chief executive role in the future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Part four: The History of the Forum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 Aims and principles of the Forum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 Involvement of the chief executives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 Involvement of Danish and foreign researchers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 Public Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 The three themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 The Forum’s code model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122

3

Project phases and key events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 Workshop in Fredensborg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Opening conference: Executive management makes a difference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Workshop Conference: Debate on chief executive challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 The Midpoint Conference: On the trail of good public sector executive management . . . . . . . . 126 Code seminars: Good public sector executive management in daily life – your turn to speak . 128 Camp Code I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Camp Code II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 International development seminars: Management Excellence in the Knowledge Society and An International Perspective on Networks, Complexity and E-governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 Conference: Public Governance – a code for good public sector executive management in Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 The elements in the Forum’s knowledge generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 The three research teams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 The three theme panels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 The three e-surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Prize competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Process experiences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Board and secretariat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

Appendix 4

Appendix (outline) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 1. Summary of the Forum’s three e-surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 2. The project’s activities in chronological order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 3. Conference, workshop and seminar programmes in chronological order . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 4. The Forum’s publications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 5. Participant lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163

5

Foreword Almost two years ago, the chief executives in the Danish state, county and municipal administrations set themselves a common goal: under the title of Public Governance, they would develop a code for chief executive excellence which would apply across the entire Danish public sector. The background for this project was widespread recognition of the fact that excellence in executive management is a prerequisite for meeting the current and future challenges faced by the public sector. The level of ambition was high: we wished to develop a code that would apply to the most important tasks of chief executives, but which at the same time would be specific enough to inspire individual top executives to reflect on and develop their managerial behaviour in their daily work. The Code which we now present is the result of a process that called for persistent commitment on the part of chief executives across the whole public sector, as well as a challenging and educational partnership between the research world and the chief executives themselves. At the same time, new networks and relations have been created across the boundaries of the public sector, and between the research world and the chief executives. The work on the development of the Code has already helped to sharpen the focus of chief executives on their own management practice; however, the real effect will only become apparent in the long term. Accordingly, the launch of the Code should be

6

regarded as the start of a new process, in which public sector chief executives will perform concrete work with the Code within their own organisations. The Code sets the agenda for excellence in public sector executive management, and we hope it will contribute to further debate on executive management in the public sector, not only in Denmark, but also internationally. We would like to encourage all public sector chief executives to make use of the Code, both individually and in cooperation with others. Forum Board, Forum for Top Executive Management May 2005

7

8

Structure of the book

9

Structure of the book The book is structured on the basis of the Forum’s Code model:

Analysis of challenges Code: Recommendations Self-evaluation

The book’s first part begins with an analysis of the challenges. This analysis encompasses both the enduring and the emerging challenges which especially characterise the public sector, and which chief executives in the public sector must act within, understand and communicate in their management of public sector organisations. This analysis forms the Forum’s diagnosis and its justification for the formulation of a Code. The analysis focuses on the common characteristics of public sector executive management, and describes four images of chief executive challenges which form the starting-point for the Code for Chief Executive Excellence.

10

Four images of chief executive challenges: -

Executive management is tandem management

-

An expanded management universe

-

An interactive public sector

-

Multiple competing management principles

The second part contains the Code itself, which consists of nine recommendations for chief executive excellence in Denmark. As illustrated by the Code model, the Code encompasses the chief executive’s most important tasks. The nine recommendations are equal in value, and each of them demands commitment. The recommendations of the Code reflect the ways in which the chief executive, on the basis of personal leadership, can act within and create coherence between the primary top management perspectives: politics, organisation and the surrounding world. The individual recommendations are followed up by a manageable number of actionoriented questions relating to the chief executive’s management of the organisation, and which function as signposts towards the chief executive’s application of the Code to his or her own management practice. The nine recommendations are also followed up by a short description and rationale. The third part contains a self-evaluation method for use by individual chief executives. The purpose of this method is to facilitate the use of the Code and enhance its impact in relation to concrete chief executive managerial practice.

11

There is a clear link between the Code and the self-evaluation method; the method is intended to function as a “Code-mirror” which will allow individual top executives to reflect on their own management practice in the light of the Code’s recommendations. The self-evaluation method is for the chief executives’ own use. The self-evaluation method is structured in the form of three phases: Phase 1:

The full Code – a first sounding

Phase 2:

My chief executive role and management style – focusing on the individual recommendations

Phase 3:

My chief executive role in the future

Part four describes the thorough process of debate and knowledge generation which has given rise to the Code for chief executive excellence. The process utilised by the Forum, based on involvement and networks, has been crucial to its results.

12

Conditions and challenges for public sector chief executives in Denmark

13

Conditions and challenges for public sector chief executives in Denmark The point of departure for the Forum and for this analysis consists of two observations. Firstly, the Danish public sector is characterised by certain conditions which present unique challenges for public sector executive management. Secondly, these longstanding and well-known challenges are being reinforced, and at times even sharpened, by current changes and developmental trends within the public sector and in the surrounding society. Danish society and the Danish public sector are facing significant challenges. In concrete terms, the trends in the composition and norms of the population will continue for many years to come to place the public sector under significant pressure to deliver more and better public services within a tight budget. Public sector chief executives themselves point out that on-going improvements in efficiency and the constant prioritisation of resource use are among their most important challenges. In addition, they also point to the future implementation of the Structural Reform, increased public-private sector interaction, and the need for efficient interaction within and between the public organisations with the aim of achieving wholeness, efficiency and coherence in the public sector’s overall execution of its mission. Every day, public sector chief executives face questions, dilemmas and competing pressures that rarely admit of a single, clear-cut solution. Most chief executives agree that the challenges faced by the public sector have created a need for renewal and innovation. However, they are also of the opinion that such renewal and innovation can take the form of adjustments and improvements in the existing set-up, and thus do not

14

require more fundamental changes in the practice or structure of the individual public sector organisations. The question is how public sector chief executives can handle this paradox between innovation and conservation – how can chief executives develop the capacity of public sector organisations to tackle current and future challenges? The aim of this analysis is to describe the conditions, developmental trends and challenges that which characterise the public sector in particular, and which public sector chief executives must understand, handle and communicate in their management of the public sector organisations. The focus of this analysis is on the shared traits in public sector executive management across all levels of government. The analysis thereby forms a point of departure for the Forum’s Code for Public Governance – public sector executive excellence in Denmark. Fundamental traits and challenges for chief executives in a politically-led organisation Characteristics unique to Denmark The task of the chief executive in the public sector in Denmark is unique in comparison with other countries, since the professional chief executive fulfils both the role of an advisor to the political leadership and a top-level manager employed by the organisation. This is a fundamental characteristic of the Danish system. The two roles of the appointed chief executive are mutually supportive. This double role gives chief executives the possibility to integrate their leadership of the organisations with providing advice to the political leader/leadership. The double role thus gives the

15

chief executive the responsibility to build bridges between policy and professionalism, and between policy and implementation. This double role creates an interplay in the daily management of the public sector organisation, for which the mayor/minister is the responsible overall leader. The management space for the appointed chief executive is politically defined, and there is the potential for a lack of clarity in the division of roles and responsibilities between the political leader and the appointed chief executive. The appointed chief executives must exercise their corporate management of the organisation in close co-ordination with the political leader and with constant regard for their democratic responsibility. For the public sector chief executive, an essential task is to exercise, secure legitimacy for and create room for both the leadership task and the advisory task, which vary in scope and require different personal and professional skills. It is a constant challenge for the public sector chief executive to ensure a correct balance between these two chief executive roles and to provide the requisite focus to them both. According to the chief executives themselves, advising the political leaders is what takes up most of their time. This assessment is confirmed by the management staff on the level directly beneath the chief executives (directors of agencies, deputy directors, department heads, administrative directors), who agree that the chief executives tend to spend the largest amount of their time advising the political leadership. Some other special characteristics and conditions for public sector chief executives in Denmark could also be mentioned, such as the tradition for seeking consensus across party lines and the population’s high degree of trust in and satisfaction with the public sector, which is unique in comparison with other countries. The relatively low power

16

distance and the high degree of employee influence are also characteristic conditions for public sector management in Denmark. Characteristics unique to the public sector Compared with management in the private sector, the management task in the public sector is characterised by conditions which create different ground rules and challenges. Private companies are to an increasing degree experiencing the need to act on the same premises as public sector organisations, for example in the area of social responsibility, while on the other hand, public sector organisations have for many years looked to the private sector as a source of inspiration, and have borrowed management perspectives and tools from it. Nonetheless, it is possible to point to a number of fundamentally different conditions for chief executives in the public sector in comparison with the private sector. The public sector is characterised by a complex bottom line with many simultaneous,

sometimes

contradictory

and

partially

equivalent

success

criteria.

Efficiency, output levels and quality in accomplishing the tasks assigned to the public sector must be balanced by respect for democratic values and the rule of law, as well as regard for the community and the vulnerable, etc. This requires that the Chief Executive and the organisation are capable of orienting themselves towards and combining multiple – in some cases conflicting – bottom lines and varying criteria for success. In the public sector, the political leader is also the leader of the administration. Accordingly, the chief executive must exercise his or her overall leadership in close co-operation with the political leader and with constant regard for democratic responsibility. The Chief Executive must create a balance between, on the one hand, exercising visible leadership and, on the other hand, promoting the visibility and impact of the political leader.

17

While a private company can deploy its resources on the basis of its expected earnings and growth strategy, public sector organisations must operate with different ground rules for their economic transactions. The goals, frameworks and resources for the public sector organisation’s production are politically defined, and in addition, public sector production, regardless of whether it involves public projects or services, must be guided by concerns for public welfare, the common good, the big picture and the interests of society. The principle of transparency and openness is a fundamental condition. All decisions and actions must be capable of being publicly justified. Although many private enterprises are beginning to open themselves up to the public, for example with regard to the company’s brand or corporate image, this is more of a corporate-level strategic choice than a norm or a principle to which they are required to adhere. In the public sector, by contrast, the need to conduct decision-making processes which are completely open from their start to their implementation, with no loss of legitimacy, is a constant and fundamental challenge. While competition comprises a driving force in the private sector, the necessity of co-operation is a characteristic trait of the public sector. For citizens and consumers, quality and coherence in public services and the efficient utilisation of resources are more important than the manner in which the public sector is organised. Public sector organisations have an obligation to co-operate and co-ordinate with each other in order to promote the efficient utilisation of resources and the quality of their services. Finally, a fundamental condition of public organisations is that their field of activity and structure can be altered from one day to the next as a consequence of political decisions.

18

Values in the public sector The public sector plays a special societal role, which finds reflection in several traditional values. Studies have shown that, apart from minor variations between levels and sectors, there is a general public sector ethos which is deeply rooted in time. The classic values which are common to the entire public sector could be summarised as: 1) The public sector has a responsibility towards society in general, 2) There must be openness and transparency, 3) The rule of law must be safeguarded and 4) Norms of impartiality, objectivity and loyalty must be adhered to. Chief executives, both in their role as objective, non-partisan and loyal advisors to the political leadership and as leaders of their organisations, have an obligation to safeguard the public good and the fundamental democratic values of Danish society. The obligation with respect to the public good can embrace many complexities: special interests versus holistic considerations, short-term interests versus long-term considerations, financial versus social or environmental considerations, etc. A fifth value, which is as widely held in the public sector as the other four, is that of renewal and innovation; however, the context within which it occurs has changed. Whereas previously, the renewal of public sector organisations took The challenge: Executive management is tandem management The tasks of a chief executive in the public sector in Denmark are characterised by the chief executive’s dual role as an advisor to the political leadership and as the appointed leader of the organisation. In the politically-led organisation, the minister/mayor is the top-level leader. The management and management space at the top of the public sector organisations can be described as ”tandem management”, with the first choice always falling to the political leader, while the managerial role, space and responsibility of the appointed chief executive are shaped in an on-going interplay with the political leader.

19

The public sector plays a special societal role, and public sector executive management is markedly different from executive management in the private sector. The public sector organisation operates, for example, with a complex bottom line and with different considerations. and success criteria, which must be continually weighed against one another. In his or her advisory role to the political leader, as well as in the management of the organisation, the public sector chief executive must maintain awareness of the need to create an integrated whole and safeguard the democratic rules of the game. The question is, how can chief executives, in their interplay with the political leader, clarify and substantiate their management space (legitimacy, mandate and authority) on an on-going basis in order to be able to fulfil their obligations to this dual role? How can chief executives organise and exercise their tasks so as to achieve a balance between the provision of advice to the political leader and the management of the organisation? And how can the chief executive ensure continuity between policy and professionalism, and between policy and implementation? In brief, how can the chief executive ensure that the organisation retains an adequate focus on both the implementation and impact of policy decisions and on the advice provided to the political leadership?

place against a relatively stable backdrop, today, public sector chief executives must handle change in a more complex context and with a less stable outlook. This more complex context for the agenda for change in the public sector is the subject of the next section. What are the development trends that public sector chief executives need to understand and communicate, and which demands do these trends impose on chief executives in the management of their organisations?

20

New conditions and challenges for chief executives in a politically-led organisation The fundamental conditions for public sector chief executive management, as described above, have altered in recent years. They have been supplemented or reinforced by a number of recent development trends in the public sector and in society in general. These trends will be summarised under three main headings: 1) Changes in the decision-making structure of the public sector, 2) The knowledge society and 3) Governance. Changes in the decision-making structure of the public sector On-going changes are occurring in the framework conditions of the public sector which are having a significant impact on where and how decisions are made and policies created. Changes in tasks, new assigned tasks, public-private co-operation, Europeanisation and globalisation all contribute to creating more decision-making arenas, with more players and different types of interests and inputs. These changes in turn make for an increasingly complex and fragmented public sector, which increases the need for openness and transparency in relation to the citizens and stakeholders, as well as for efficient interaction within the public sector organisation and across the sector. The organisation of the public sector could be described as continual alternation between the decentralisation and centralisation of political and administrative decision-making responsibility. The political and operational responsibility for many welfare-related tasks has been decentralised since the 1970s to the counties and municipalities, where a further decentralisation has occurred, including the establishment of consumers’ and parents’ committees. Similarly, tasks and skills at the national level have been transferred to independent units, companies and boards. Movement is thus occurring in two dimensions: in part between administrative levels, and in part on the administrative levels themselves. Decentralisa-

21

tion is followed up by centralisation, which, amongst other things, is intended to co-ordinate activities and control the consumption of resources by individual public organisations as well as in the public sector as a whole. The centralisation tendency is for example manifested in the annual agreements on local government budgets, as well as through detailed legislation and the management of goals, frameworks and contracts, as well as through the introduction of quality standards and controls. The alternation between decentralisation and centralisation can be interpreted as an expression of the on-going harmonisation of policy creation and the decision-making structure in the public sector. The intention is partly to balance the decision-making responsibility between the different political levels, and partly to balance the gains that come from centralised control and co-ordination with the benefits that accrue from decentralising managerial responsibility. At the same time as these movements are occurring within the national boundaries, a Europeanisation and globalisation of the political and administrative decisionmaking processes is taking place. The boundaries between domestic and foreign policy are becoming blurred, and the position of the Danish state as the undisputed sovereign decision-maker in Denmark is changing as jurisdiction is transferred to the EU. More and more of the areas that previously were purely domestic political concerns now take place within the framework of the EU’s supranational decision-making procedures, in which planning, negotiation and binding decision-making have direct consequences for the individual public sector organisations and policy areas in Denmark. The immediate and direct consequences of globalisation are experienced differently in different parts of the public sector. However, it seems clear that globalisation is leaving its mark on all areas of Danish society, and that the public sector must be responsive to the challenges and changes that this brings in its wake. Society is being influenced

22

to an increasing degree by external trends, international competition, business cycles and events in other parts of the world. The lifestyles of Danes are changing, and new needs and problems are arising that the public sector must address – as an employer, as a public authority, and as a supplier of public services. Overall, Europeanisation and globalisation mean that the number of inputs to the political and administrative decision-making processes is increasing, while at the same time there is a growing need and greater opportunity for interaction across both organisational and national boundaries. Finally, the interaction of the public sector with private actors can also be regarded as a manifestation of the differentiation of the public sector’s decision-making structure. The introduction of management forms inspired by new public management (NPM) into the public sector has led to a greater differentiation between policy and production. The interaction between public and private actors has been intensified, and a larger part of the public sector is operating under semi-market conditions. The marketisation of public enterprises, privatisation, outsourcing, partnerships and co-operative endeavours with private actors all contribute to the fragmentation of the public sector’s decision-making structure, in which a part of the political control over the public sector’s services has been shifted to other decision-making arenas made up of market participants, consumers and citizens. The challenge: An expanded management universe The conditions for exercising chief executive management in the public sector have changed. The consequence of decentralisation, centralisation, internationalisation and public-private co-operation is the differentiation and fragmentation of the public sector’s decision-making structure. For the public sector chief executive, the challenge is to simultaneously handle this fragmentation while creating wholeness and coherence in the organisation’s execution of its

23

assignments and in the provision of advice to the political leadership. Consequently, it is not enough for public sector chief executives to orient themselves vertically ”upwards” towards the political leadership and ”downwards” in the management of their organisations. The chief executive and the public sector organisation must increasingly orient themselves both laterally and ”externally”, across the country’s borders. The fragmentation and increased complexity have thus expanded the chief executive’s management universe and created new conditions under which to seek to create an integrated whole and safeguard the democratic rules of the game. The challenges facing the public sector organisation could be summarised as the need to create openness and transparency in relation to citizens/stakeholders, and the need for efficient interaction, co-operation and co-ordination across the public sector. The question is precisely what requirements does this impose on chief executives, who, through their interaction with and advice to the political leadership, and in the management of their organisations, must clear the way for these developments?

The knowledge society – from openness to communication and involvement To an ever increasing extent, the political agenda and the norms in the public sector have been oriented towards developing the citizen-oriented public sector. The aim is for the public sector - in its organisation, services and product development - to build upon openness and responsiveness to the logic of the citizens and consumers, rather than the logic of the system. The development of a more service-oriented, interactive and engaging public sector follows on the heels of a more demanding, resourceful and informed population. In a modern knowledge society with new technology and increasing media competition, the politically-led organisation is influenced by interests, demands and values from many sides. The public sector organisation and the universe of public sector values are being influenced and expanded as ever more groups become active in more and

24

more decision-making arenas and exert influence on the fields of operation and policy decision-making processes of public sector organisations. Information technology and digital administration present new possibilities for communication, both internally within the public sector and between the public sector and the surrounding society. Information technology also represents a challenge to the public sector’s previous methodologies, monopolies and structures. Developments in information technology mean that the public sector’s stakeholders will be continually better able to conduct a dialogue as equals with the individual public sector organisation, and to challenge its monopoly of knowledge, particularly in relation to the definition of what is the correct knowledge, the correct solution or the appropriate level of quality for the individual. Via the Internet, individuals can to an increasing degree look over the shoulder of the public sector organisation, acquire a knowledge of the legal basis for decisions, and gain insight into processes and justifications with respect to both the advertised and the actual level of service, alternative services, etc. Information technology makes it easier for the individual to compare the level of service offered by different public authorities and service suppliers, as well as across national boundaries. Information technology also makes it easier for the citizen to come into contact with the public sector organisation’s political and administrative decision-makers. Information technology and digital administration thus play an independent and important role as a driving force in the modernisation and rationalisation of the citizen-oriented public sector, as well as in societal relations and in relation to the individual public sector organisation’s production, communications and services towards its stakeholders.

25

Information technology and digital administration bring new opportunities to modernise the public sector’s execution of its tasks, such as through the establishment of integrated, co-ordinated and targeted public services which were previously divided among different authority levels. The prerequisites for this are the sharing and management of knowledge, co-operation and co-ordination across traditional organisational and professional delineations in the public sector and in relations with external suppliers. A final prerequisite of special importance is the involvement of and interaction with the consumers/citizens, as co-creators of the services. These developments pose new opportunities and challenges to the public sector organisation, first and foremost in relation to its accessibility and its communication with citizens, who are seen as something more than mere consumers of public sector services. The goal in the citizen-oriented public sector is to create value for money in terms of quality. The public sector organisation’s service and dialogue with the individual citizen must be based upon knowledge of and respect for the citizen’s values and needs, and on a perception of citizens as co-participants, with their own resources and a shared responsibility for the development of public sector services. Openness and transparency are stimulated by the media, which to an increasing degree challenge and set up new frameworks for politics and public administration. The need for the public sector and the political processes to relate to the media is not new. Studies have shown, however, that a change has taken place in recent decades in the way the media acts, partly due to the greater number of TV channels and radio stations and the increasing level of competition between them. More programmes are being produced with political content, but political journalism has tended to shift its focus from substance to form. In addition, there is a trend towards personal and small-scale problems, which might previously have been given scant public at-

26

tention, being publicised in the press and rapidly attaining significance in the national political agenda. The choice of stories and perspectives by the media has an influence on both the political agenda and on the formation of opinions and norms among the public. As the media grows increasingly involved in influencing the formation of the political agenda, it creates the need for politicians to act on the basis of an understanding of the media’s strategies and logic, so as to set their own agenda. This provides other possibilities and conditions for the political decision-making processes. This picture is confirmed by public sector chief executives, who see ‘media-isation’ as a substantial challenge to the basic conditions under which they perform their daily work. For many chief executives, the challenge lies in finding ways to constructively handle this interplay with the media; many also feel that they need to cultivate skills and gain experience in this area. Information technology, digital administration and the media affect the conditions and frameworks under which the public sector performs its tasks in a number of ways. The speed is increased, decision-making processes become more exposed and their outcome less predictable, and all decisions can in principle be challenged. The individual public sector organisation is thus forced to maintain a constant focus on processes, justifications and communications strategies. The media, information technology and digital administration represent significant opportunities for public sector organisations to open up to and conduct a dialogue with their surroundings, as well as to communicate their goals and messages to the public, brand the policies and service offerings of public sector enterprises, set the agenda and influence the formation of attitudes towards developments in society and the public sector.

27

The challenge: An interactive public sector The challenge for the public sector organisations is to be able to grasp the new possibilities and conditions provided by information technology, digital administration and the media. These include increasing demands made on consumers/citizens, faster speeds and greater openness, communication and involvement on the part of the citizen-oriented public sector. A new approach is demanded of the public sector chief executive in order to manage and utilise the open processes and possibilities provided by information technology and digitalisation, involving not only technology and organisation, but also procedures and norms. Information technology and digitalisation have opened the door to many possible developments in the public sector, ranging from openness and transparency to new methods of communication, dialogue and negotiation. On all levels, public sector managers, case officers and service staff must be equipped to enter into dialogue with the consumer concerning the right solution for the consumer’s tangible needs, problems and expectations. As an extra aspect of this change, the public sector organisations also face the significant challenge of having to focus on the continual development of attractive workplaces and the recruitment of skilled employees. The question is, how can the chief executive support the integration into the organisation’s overall activities of a focus on results and effects, as well as greater communication and involvement? What is the role of the chief executive here, and how can the chief executive ensure an appropriate balance between innovation, a willingness to take risks and reliable operation? The media represent a number of channels through which the public organisation’s messages may be communicated to the public, and interaction with the media has become a necessary premise for public sector executive management. The question is how the chief executive can and must relate to this development in interaction with the political leadership, and in relation to the norms within the organisation, such as those governing media contact? How can the chief executive integrate the norms, strategies and skills required for the marketing, branding and influencing of opinion that public sector organisations undertake through the use of information technology, digital administration and media relations?

28

Governance – new methods of combining forms of co-operation and management The changes in the decision-making structure in the public sector, along with the establishment of more decision-making arenas and the freer and faster spread of information, communication and knowledge all point in the direction of a departure from the hierarchical form of management. The hierarchical form of management presupposes a chain of decision-making levels originating at an authoritative centre, and management which takes place via rules, norms and delegated authority. The hierarchy has traditionally been, and still is, the prevalent form of management in the public sector. Although decentralisation has occurred to consumer and citizen committees and to decentralised operating units, the political and administrative responsibilities are still uniquely located with the minister or the mayor/municipal council and the appointed chief executive of the organisation. Under current trends, however, it has proved increasingly difficult to understand and explain the public sector organisation as a well-delineated and unique entity which can be governed from a single hierarchical centre. The concept of governance may be viewed as an expression of the new and different forms of management, interaction and co-ordination that have arisen in connection with the outsourcing of tasks to private enterprises, the creation of public and public-private companies and the establishment of networks, partnerships and other co-operative structures to undertake public sector tasks, etc. In addition to the hierarchical form of management, three further forms of management may be identified, namely market-based, profession-based and networkoriented management. The existence of different forms of management is not in itself a new phenomenon within the public sector. What is new is the alteration of their relative weight in the various sectors (with the care sector, for example, characterised

29

by network management, while the infrastructure area is to a greater degree dominated by traits from the market-based form of management) and the use of different combinations, with elements from the various forms of management being combined in new ways. As other forms of co-operation and management mechanisms are being established, the role of the hierarchy is being redefined. By comparison with the hierarchy, the market-based form of management is in a certain sense a more spontaneous or direct form of management, ordered by the ”invisible hand” of the market through the interaction of demand and supply. The marketisation of the public sector has been encouraged by regulation, and in recent years there has been movement from a supply-driven to a more demand-driven public sector. Outsourcing, free choice programmes and user fees are examples of how the market-based form of management is making inroads into the public sector and is challenging the previous conceptions and their accompanying incentive structures. Where once the public sector made its own independent decisions on public sector production, in future consumer demand will also be a factor determining what the public sector organisation will offer - or create the necessary frameworks to provide. The spread of market-based forms of management is not solely an expression of the introduction of new forms of management and interaction into the public sector arena; it is equally an expression of the fact that new values, market logic and market-based reasoning are gradually being introduced into the public sector, where they are thriving alongside what we might term the classic values. Efficiency, productivity, competitiveness, documentation, innovation and customised individual services are examples of the ”new” values that affect, supplement and – on occasion – challenge the ”old” core values such as rule of law, stability and continuity. Some of

30

the new values, considerations and reasoning can be combined with pre-existing values, while others challenge the well-known values and give rise to dilemmas and conflicts. One form of dilemma can be triggered by the societal trend towards individualisation, which makes client profiles more complex for public sector organisations. The citizen/consumer of public sector services has never been a discrete entity, but adopts a number of different roles with respect to the public sector, for example as a consumer, taxpayer, voter and employee. The demands and expectations of the individual will depend, amongst other things, upon which value/interest carries the greatest weight in the specific situation or caseIn the political agenda for the citizen-oriented sector, there is an expectation that public sector services will increasingly be adjusted to specific and individual needs. If the equal treatment of citizens is increasingly based on differentiated treatment, a dilemma may arise between the need for coherent and stable service for the many (the public good) and the need for specifically-adapted services for the individual or group (special interests), in addition to the cross-pressures that arise between the infinite needs of the citizens/society for public sector services and the public sector’s limited resources. Another dilemma linked to the spread of the public sector into a semi-market involves the ongoing need to balance the financial, managerial and service-related benefits of marketisation against the possible loss of political and democratic control. Marketbased forms of management and co-operation imply new types of management and control tasks for the public sector. The placement of responsibility for production and operations for public sector tasks in market-based co-operative endeavours must be carried out with regard for public sector control, democratic responsibility and the public good. Finally, a not insignificant challenge lies in the confrontation between market-based and profession-based forms of management.

31

The profession-based form of management is typically found in knowledge-intensive organisations, where the work processes and output require a high degree of professional/vocational expertise which is difficult for outsiders to evaluate. The profession-based form of management is greatly emphasised in the public sector, which is characterised by many different knowledge-intensive environments (such as the social, health care and educational sectors). Moreover, public sector organisations often contain a number of different occupational milieus characterised by strong common cultures centred on professional values. Such occupational groups have a high level of education supplemented by specialised acquired knowledge, and hence often possess a monopoly of knowledge in their fields, self-determination in their work and a strong collective professional identity and culture. Management in these profession-based units is typically anchored in professional values, autonomy and internal professional control. A typical dilemma can arise when demands for increased efficiency and productivity on the part of occupational professionals in a public sector organisation are perceived as conflicting with the rule of law, professional norms of quality or professional autonomy. The combination of the profession-based management form (with its focus on professional values and standards) and the market-based management form (with its focus on the interests and behaviour of consumers) is one of many significant challenges posed by the need of public sector organisations, and of the public sector in general, for democratic and cross-cutting holistic orientation and prioritisation. The more the public sector is influenced by market-based management, the greater the challenge will presumably be to get market orientation to go hand in hand with professionalism within the politically-established frameworks.

32

The network-oriented form of management also plays a significant role in the public sector. A network is defined as a type of informal, negotiated order based upon negotiation, dialogue, hearings, involvement and representation. A network is created in a collaboration between independent players with a certain common interest in a field or activity. Network players will however often seek different goals through their participation in the network. The network-based form of management can be viewed as a response to the increased need for co-ordination and interaction within the public sector and in relation to the surrounding society. A network may be large or small, may have a short or long lifespan, and may be formed within or between organisations. They can also be formed between the public and private sectors. Networks based on more or less formalised collaboration between organised stakeholders, commercial enterprises and public authorities are examples of the networkbased management form. Informal networks of civil servants who co-ordinate a policy area across organisational boundaries are another example of network management. The network management form may be an expression of the fact that a field exists which spans traditional professional and organisational boundaries, but in which a hierarchical management form would be unsuitable for co-ordinating and managing processes, as the parties are equals and/or their status in the network changes over time as well as in relation to the matter under consideration. At local level, the politicians, the administration and the public institutions participate in networks with many groups (e.g. associations of all types, companies, other public authorities, professional organisations, ad hoc groups of citizens, etc.) for the purpose of executing the tasks assigned to the public sector and following up on political initiatives. The network-based form of management gives rise to various dilemmas, particularly in relation to their design, definition of objectives, responsibilities and legitimacy. The challenge for the public sector organisation lies in establishing and participating in

33

relevant networks which can promote and improve the accomplishment of the tasks assigned to the public sector, but in a manner and with a mandate that ensures legitimacy and respects the political responsibility. This presupposes that the public sector organisation is aware of, identifies and secures the involvement of the relevant stakeholders, and upholds values in a manner which is responsible, appropriate and well justified.

The challenge: Multiple competing management principles The existence of differing forms of management within the public sector is not in itself new. What is new is the change in their relative weight and the appearance of different combinatory models, in which elements from the various forms are combined in new ways. The presence of and competition between different forms of management in the public sector arena illustrates how the public sector organisation enters into a multidimensional stakeholder perspective which makes it necessary for the organisation to orient itself towards and enter into interaction with a large number of different players (values and interests) at different levels, both within and outside the organisation. The challenge for the public sector chief executive consists of mastering and being aware of the strengths and weaknesses, competing values and partially contradictory forms of logic that characterise the hierarchical, market, profession-based and network-based forms of management, respectively. The question is, how can public sector chief executives equip themselves to understand, communicate and act within the entire spectrum of forms of management and their associated forms of logic? The interplay and combinations between the various forms of management can give rise to a number of independent challenges for chief executives, who in their advice to the political leadership and their management of the organisation must choose the right context in which to place a given issue. The underlying legitimacy and value basis for a given matter can be ambiguous and may vary, depending upon the precise form of management on which the individual case, process, decision or initiative is based. From the perspective of the chief

34

executive, such a situation creates an ”ethical moment” in work and decision-making. These are situations in which laws and rules fail to provide clear answers and guidelines, and in which a public sector chief executive must take decisions which are based to a great extent upon the conscience, experience and current knowledge of the individual. The question is, how can the chief executive in the individual public sector organisation create the preconditions to ensure that the organisation’s conscious selection and use of particular management forms is in harmony with the politically determined goals and the needs of the surrounding world, as well as those of the organisation? A special challenge is associated with the tasks of management in public sector organisations dominated by specialised professional groups of personnel, particularly in the light of the increased complexity associated with accomplishing the assigned tasks, as well as the continual expansion in size of the organisational units, the requirement to focus on results, and the need for cross-cutting co-ordination, prioritisation and co-operation. The question is how chief executives in their choice of management forms can combine, communicate and challenge the various competing and at times conflicting values that characterise the public sector organisation. How can the chief executive act as a bridge-builder between the political decisions and values and professional values and implementation?

35

36

Public Governance - Code for Chief Executive Excellence

37

Public Governance – Code for Chief Executive Excellence The nine recommendations for executive excellence comprise the backbone of the Code. The recommendations are intended to function as a shared set of norms for what characterises a good public sector chief executive. It is the ambitious expectation that the nine recommendations will: -

Define the most significant tasks of a chief executive.

-

Comprise a shared frame of reference for chief executives across all levels of the public sector.

-

Sharpen the focus of the individual chief executives on their own roles, management style and conduct.

-

Give the individual chief executives an opportunity to periodically reflect on their own management practices in relation to the organisation’s results.

-

38

Provide material for dialogue at the top of the individual public sector organisation.

Code for Chief Executive Excellence in Denmark Nine recommendations 1. Clarify your managerial space with the political leader 9. Safeguard the public sector’s legitimacy and democratic values

8. Display personal and professional integrity

7. Exercise your right and duty to lead the organisation

6. Possess vision and work strategically to improve the way that your organisation accomplishes its assignments

2. Take responsibility for ensuring that the political goals are implemented throughout the organisation

3. Create an organisation which is responsive and capable of influencing the surrounding world

4. Create an organisation which acts as part of an integrated public sector

5. Require the organisation to focus on results and effects

39

40

1. Clarify your managerial space with the political leader

41

1. Clarify your managerial space with the political leader

42

A.

What do you do to ensure that you and your political leader have a shared understanding of the nature of your interplay in the management of the organisation?

B.

What do you do to encourage ongoing discussions between you and your political leader concerning your specific division of responsibilities with respect to the management of the organisation?

C.

What weight do you assign to your respective roles as advisor to the political leadership and leader of the organisation?

D.

What do you do to reconcile the political demands towards the organisation with the framework for the execution of its tasks?

”We have an administrative management space only if we are able to deliver proper political advice.”

(Danish chief executive)

As a public sector chief executive, your space to exercise management is dependent on the preferences of your political leader. The political leader is the senior manager with responsibility for the organisation. In practice, however, the political leader will choose to share his or her managerial space with you by delegating responsibility for a number of the daily management tasks. In this manner, you are given the responsibility to both advise and serve the political leader as well as to manage the organisation. The fundamental principle of the Danish system is that these two tasks are integrated and mutually dependent. ”The challenge for ensuring organizational performance is to devise a strategy for balancing the roles of the senior public executives: between the important role of policy and political advice; and the critical function of ensuring high-performing government programmes. They have irresistible demands and incentives for the former. If they do not attend to the latter, the performance of government will, in all likelihood, fail to reflect the quality of the advice they give.” 1 In the Danish system, the dual roles of the public sector chief executive are regarded as a strength, because they provide the chief executive with the opportunity to integrate the tasks of providing advice to the political leader and managing the organisation. This Note 1. Donald F. Kettl, Christopher Pollitt, James H. Svara: ”Towards a Danish Concept of Public Governance: An International Perspective”, Forum, August 2004.

43

enables you, as a chief executive, to reconcile your management-related prioritisation of the tasks to be accomplished by the organisation with the political demands, and to discuss the consequences of the political demands and prioritisations with the political leader. However, this dual role can also present the executive management challenge of creating an appropriate balance in the amount of attention you devote to each of the two tasks. In some cases the division of responsibilities between you and your political leader will be clear and unambiguous, but in most cases, your space to manage the organisation will emerge in daily interaction with your political leader. This applies both to your relative prioritisation of the tasks of providing advice and exercising management, and to the division of responsibilities that you establish between you and the political leader concerning the management of the organisation. However, you have a special responsibility to ensure that you and your political leader attain a common understanding of the nature of your interplay and your respective roles in the management of the organisation. As a chief executive, your responsibility in this context is to advise the political leader so that you can arrive at a clear division of tasks and working practices which will satisfy your respective conditions for exercising management both jointly and separately. The clarification of your mandate and managerial space is not something that can occur once and for all, but must rather be discussed and clarified on an on-going basis with the political leader. This can occur both in connection with specific situations and as an element in discussions of principles and general views.

44

2. Take responsibility for ensuring that the political goals are implemented throughout the organisation

45

2. Take responsibility for ensuring that the political goals are implemented throughout the organisation

46

A.

What do you do to ensure that the political goals and intentions are clearly understood by the organisation’s management and staff?

B.

How do you contribute to ensuring that policy and professionalism mutually support one another?

C.

How do you work to ensure that the various professional units regard themselves as a part of the organisation when performing tasks that require intra-organisational co-operation?

D.

How do you acquire the requisite knowledge to enter into a dialogue with the professional units concerning the execution of their tasks and their development?

”I can never run away from the fact that I am the one who is responsible for presenting the professional expertise to the politicians. And I am also the one who must ensure that the decisions of the politicians are implemented – regardless of what the individual employee might think of them.”

(Danish chief executive)

As a public sector chief executive, you are at the focal point of a very large organisation with a broad portfolio of tasks and encompassing many different professional groups. Regardless of whether the personnel groups concerned are at a town hall, in a state ministry or employees in an area such as health care, education, research or therapy, they are all characterised by special professional norms and values that are specific to the sector and organisation. The ethic of following professional norms is strong among public sector employees, but must not have the effect of causing the professional environments to become isolated from the political goals and management framework. The sense of identity, dedication and strong commitment to professional values is a strength, but also presents pronounced executive management challenges. On the one hand, you must ensure that political wishes regarding the accomplishment of the assigned tasks are incorporated and implemented in all corners of the organisation, even when the political goals challenge the autonomy of professional methods, orientations and assumptions. On the other hand, you must obtain expert knowledge and input from your professional staff concerning the effect of the political goals, so that this can be utilised and incorporated into your on-going advice to the political leadership, as well as towards the enhancement of service, quality and efficiency.

47

There is a constant challenge to your ability to communicate and justify, and to create balance and build bridges between various considerations, so as to ensure that policy, implementation and professional expertise go hand-in-hand. It is necessary for you to enter into dialogue with and challenge the organisation’s professional groups, with respect for their particular challenges and dilemmas. It is your task to ensure that professional environments do not become isolated and pursue narrow professional or personnel policy goals and desires. All parts of the organisation must understand and respect the rules of the game that apply in a politically-led organisation, including the fact that the accommodation of the political goals, the use of resources and the achievement of results implies co-operation between different professions and the sharing of knowledge laterally within the organisation. It is your responsibility to ensure that the management and staff of the organisation are aware of and understand the political goals and intentions, and that they pursue these goals. You must require that the organisation’s professional units assess their degree of goal fulfilment, including what works and what is inappropriate, and that this assessment is communicated to you.

48

3. Create an organisation which is responsive and capable of influencing the surrounding world

49

3. Create an organisation which is responsive and capable of influencing the surrounding world

50

A.

What do you do to ensure that the organisation’s assignments are tackled with a point of departure in the perspective of citizens and consumers?

B.

What do you do to keep the organisation open, interactive and accessible by the outside world?

C.

What do you do to safeguard and enhance the organisation’s reputation?

D.

How do you work to create consistency between the organisation’s communications, its daily practices and the political goals?

E.

What do you do to create a constructive interplay between the organisation and the media?

”I think very systematically about what the things we do will mean for citizens and users – how they will be affected, and how they will react.”

(Danish chief executive)

As a public sector chief executive, one of your primary tasks is to create an organisation in which your employees display respect for the citizen and the consumer, are open and responsive to changing trends and requirements, and are professionally competent in their fields. The legitimacy of the public sector depends to a large degree on the quality of the direct interaction between individual employees and the citizen. Citizens must encounter skilled employees who are both responsive to individual needs and act as guarantors of the legal rights of the citizen. The legitimacy and reputation of the public sector is, however, also affected by its ability to communicate externally. Thus, for you and your organisation to be able to affect the surrounding world, you must ensure targeted and persistent communication of the goals and strategies that your political leadership has set, and thereby also successfully communicate what your organisation stands for. The reputation of the public sector is not created through marketing measures alone; it is created through the daily encounters of citizens, consumers and companies with the public sector, and will depend on whether they experience consistency between what the public sector says and its actions in practice. The media are central players. They can help to ensure that citizens gain insight into the public sector, and function to a large extent as the population’s watchdog, monitoring the

51

performance by the public sector of its assigned tasks. The media are also an important player when the public sector needs to communicate key messages about goals and directions. It is thus crucial that the organisation enjoys open and constructive interaction with the media, even in difficult cases. The responsibility for communication cannot be borne by you alone, or by delegating the task to professional communications experts. You have the important task of creating an organisation in which the management and staff, at all levels, are trained and willing to communicate with citizens and users, with the media, and with the surrounding world in general. A prerequisite for this is a clear communications strategy which creates a common understanding of what should be communicated, who should be communicated with, and when and how the communication should occur.This in turn presupposes a permanent focus on developing communications-related skills among the organisation’s management and staff.

52

4. Create an organisation which acts as part of an integrated public sector

53

4. Create an organisation which acts as part of an integrated public sector

54

A.

What do you do to encourage the organisation’s management and staff to plan and organise their assigned tasks in co-operation with other relevant working partners?

B.

What do you do to ensure that the assigned tasks are executed in a manner which improves the consistency and quality of services for citizens?

C.

What do you do to ensure that the organisation’s management and staff perceive themselves, develop themselves and act as elements in an overall public chain of value, in which each element, in interaction with others, contributes to the wholeness, efficiency and coherence of the overall task performance by the public sector?

D.

What do you do to contribute to the on-going debate concerning which frameworks promote or hinder the coherent and co-ordinated performance of public sector assignments?

”We must not pursue our own interests when organising the execution of the tasks assigned to us. We need to think beyond our own organisations, so that citizens experience systematic consistency – irrespective of who is responsible for the task.”

(Danish chief executive)

As a public sector chief executive you are first and foremost the leader of your own organisation, but you also have a responsibility to support the consistency and coherence of the entire public sector, where relevant. This duty to undertake co-operation and co-ordination is a management condition that is specific to the public sector, in contrast to the private sector, in which the expansion of market share and the formulation of competitive and growth strategies are the primary motive forces. Public sector organisations have an obligation to co-operate in the execution of their tasks, so that citizens and users will experience coherence and quality in the performance of these tasks. It is not the obligation of the citizen to understand how the public sector functions; it is the responsibility of the public sector organisation to create co-ordinated solutions that are based on the needs of citizens. Those wishing to start a business, for example, should be able to obtain flexible and integrated advice from various authorities with regard to local development plans, planning permission, environmental approvals, employees, taxation, etc. Couples with handicapped children should obtain flexible and empathetic support for their needs, which will change over time, in connection with assistance and advice, care and training, follow-ups, resources, altered access to the labour market, etc.The changes that the public sector is undergoing in connection with the

55

reform of its mission and structure emphasise the necessity of looking beyond your own organisation. New forms of organisation and co-operation in the execution of public sector tasks – in partnerships and networks, and in co-operation between public, private and volunteer-based players – are contributing to an ever more complex situation. The need for co-ordination, co-operation and coherence in the public sector will require an expansion in your management perspective. It is not sufficient for you to orient yourself upwards towards the political leadership and downwards to undertake the management of your organisation. You must increasingly orient yourself towards the outside world, and laterally across the public sector. It is your duty towards the organisation’s management and staff to highlight and emphasise the value of co-operation across organisational and professional boundaries. Digital administration and transverse project units can provide an opening and a driving force in this respect. You must create the preconditions, i.e. the necessary processes, structures, technology, skills and culture, for your organisation to be able to plan and execute its assigned tasks in co-operation with relevant stakeholders both inside and outside your own organisation, with the aim of creating enhanced efficiency, quality and coherence in the services provided to citizens.

56

5. Require the organisation to focus on results and effects

57

5. Require the organisation to focus on results and effects

58

A.

How do you create on-going focus throughout the organisation on the connection between aims and means?

B.

How do you create a link between the common goals and values of the whole organisation and the goals and values of the decentralised units?

C.

What do you do to ensure that efforts and results are measured, made visible, discussed and followed up?

D.

What do you do to ensure that the knowledge obtained through evaluations brings about improvements?

E.

How do you react when you become aware of errors and inefficiencies in the execution of your organisation’s assignments?

”We are certainly better at formulating our goals than at following up on whether we reach them. It ought to be a matter of course that we systematically measure whether the results compare favourably with our efforts, and that we actually use the knowledge we gain when we follow up and act on it.”

(Danish chief executive)

As a public sector chief executive, it is an important part of your work to ensure that all managers and employees are focused on results and effects. It is not enough to define goals and formulate plans of action – it is also necessary to have a strong chief executive focus on the creation of results in all parts of the organisation. In step with the development of new forms of governance and organisation, the day-to-day management responsibility for this task has to a large extent been delegated to the managers of the individual units. While decentralisation has shown itself to be a strength, it poses challenges for you as the senior manager of the overall organisation. You have a special responsibility to create a result-oriented management culture among the organisation’s managers; a culture characterised by curiosity and a constant striving to perform the assigned tasks even better than before. It is your task to ensure that the focus of the individual units on results and effects does not occur at the expense of wholeness and consistency. Similarly, it is your responsibility to ensure that the organisation’s fulfilment of its goals is assessed and rendered visible in order to create on-going improvements. There can be many different explanations when the results fail to live up to the goals you have set; accordingly, it is a special challenge to ensure that results follow-ups are applied in a forward-looking manner, to

59

implement actions that create improvements. You must create a framework and incentives that promote systematic follow-ups of the core tasks, and encourage individual units to enhance their performance on the basis of knowledge of the relationship between resources, skills, activities and results. This requires the creation of a culture in which it is natural that the efforts of individual employees are measured and evaluated, and in which managers have the courage and the latitude to act firmly in their personnel management. Ensuring an interrelationship between aims and means is a continuing challenge in the public sector. Setting overall priorities will always be a political task, but as chief executive you have a special responsibility to ensure that the interrelationship is visible and discussed, and that the priorities are put into effect. This requires, on the one hand, openness and responsiveness to inputs from all parts of the organisation, and, on the other hand, the ability to act when you have evidence that parts of the organisation are not functioning efficiently.

60

6. Possess vision and work strategically to improve the way your organisation accomplishes its assignments

61

6. Possess vision and work strategically to improve the way your organisation accomplishes its assignments

62

A.

What do you do to make your organisation aware of and inspired by what takes place outside the organisation – both locally and globally?

B.

What do you do to create an organisation that can act in an international setting?

C.

How can you create a balance between reliable operations, innovation and a willingness to take risks?

D.

How do you help to ensure that you and your political leader are in continual possession of the knowledge and broad perspective required to develop new ways of executing the organisation’s core tasks?

E.

How good are you at promoting and leading innovative processes that can convert ideas and new knowledge into practice?

F.

How do you form a general view of strengths and weaknesses by combining hierarchical, market-based and network forms of management?

G.

How do you promote internal and external knowledge sharing?

”We are very introverted and prone to shut out the outside world. One of the greatest challenges of the coming years will be to break down the walls and see what is going on outside the organisation and around us.”

(Danish chief executive)

As a public sector chief executive, it is your responsibility to continually develop your organisation’s structures, processes, technologies and skills, so that it satisfies the political goals and expectations in terms of quality and efficiency, and achieves excellence. The operational frameworks of public sector organisations are subject to continual change, and there is always pressure to deliver more for the same or fewer resources. This requires you to be vigilant and visionary in relation to the environment in which your organisation operates – global or local, public or private. All public sector organisations are affected by globalisation, and as a chief executive, you must lead the way in developing your organisation’s globalisation strategy. You must be prepared to learn from and be inspired by a broad spectrum of environments and sources in Denmark and abroad. You must be aware of and allow yourself to be challenged by trends that are relevant to you, your organisation or the services it provides. You must lead the way in efforts to develop the organisation, and display an open attitude towards innovation, without this being allowed to exert a deleterious effect on daily operations. You will be constantly challenged to allocate resources appropriately and maintain a balance between, on the one hand, the need for dynamism, experimentation, daring and creative conflict, and on the other, the

63

need of the organisation and society for security, stability and zero errors. It is your responsibility to ensure that the choices made and initiatives pursued in connection with organisational development and change are robust and make a genuine and constructive contribution to the organisation’s efficiency and the execution of its tasks. The hierarchy is still a predominating, but no longer the only form of governance in the public sector. The market (such as in contract management, outsourcing and competition) has made inroads, and the establishment of networks in which tasks are executed with the broad involvement of professional groups and service users is an emerging governance concept for public sector organisations. These governance reforms are built upon varying and sometimes competing incentive structures and considerations. As a chief executive, it is your responsibility to ensure that the selection and combination of different forms of governance are informed choices, and that the management-related challenges and consequences of these choices are dealt with.

64

7. Exercise your right and duty to lead the organisation

65

7. Exercise your right and duty to lead the organisation

66

A.

How do you handle your role as the personnel policy manager for the entire organisation?

B.

How do you fulfil your responsibility to ensure that the organisation can recruit staff with professional and personal skills?

C.

What do you do to ensure that your management team, viewed as a whole, possesses the requisite professional and personal skills?

D.

How do you contribute to the ongoing evaluation of the latitude to exercise leadership at all levels?

E.

How do you fulfil your responsibility to take difficult decisions (e.g. firings or demotions) and carry them out in an appropriate manner?

F.

How do you ensure that management decisions are explained, communicated, and acted upon?

G.

How do you ensure that you are accessible for members of your organisation?

”I have had many different leaders over the years. The one I remember best gave me leeway, but you were never in doubt about what he wanted, and you could always count on actions following the words.”

(Danish chief executive)

As chief executive you have not only the right, but also the duty to lead your organisation in such a way that it thrives and develops. Demographic trends in the composition of the population are placing the public sector under pressure, and the competition for qualified employees is becoming more intense. Accordingly, you must preserve and promote the organisation as an attractive workplace. As a chief executive you are responsible for ensuring that the organisation performs the tasks assigned to it, but you cannot do everything yourself; much is outside your direct control, and you must solve your management tasks by managing through others. You must be aware of your own strengths and weaknesses, and organise the work of your inner management team so that it provides you with overview and insight without becoming a bottleneck in the organisation. You must seek to ensure that your inner management team, as a whole, is in possession of personal and professional skills that reflect the challenges faced by the organisation. You must organise and orchestrate management work in the organisation from top to bottom, and create the necessary conditions for the exercise of clear and visible leadership at all levels of the organisation. The recruitment and training of managers must have your particular attention, partly in order to ensure dialogue and the anchoring of your leadership values and objectives. You

67

must establish systems that will make it possible for you to follow up on whether the organisation’s behaviour and execution of its assigned tasks is occurring in accordance with your wishes. You must yourself be visible and available for the organisation, and you must be continually aware of the interrelationship between responsibility, skills, knowledge and resources, so that institution and department managers can carry out their assigned management tasks. You must be able to justify your choices and create the understanding that the balance between decentralised management space and central control can be dynamic. Finally, you must assume responsibility for difficult decisions such as firings or demotions and carry them out in a humane and professionally correct manner. ”Top executives must personally embody the spirit and culture they wish the organization to follow. They must build teams, from top to bottom of the organisation, which focus on implementing policy effectively. And they need to build a broad consensus behind a proactive approach to reshaping and refining the organization’s capacity and vision.” 2

Note 2. Donald F. Kettl, Christopher Pollitt, James H. Svara: ”Towards a Danish Concept of Public Governance: An International Perspective”, Forum, August 2004.

68

8. Display personal and professional integrity

69

8. Display personal and professional integrity

70

A.

What do you do to ensure that the advice you provide is always based upon principles of impartiality, objectivity and loyalty?

B.

How do you handle acting as a role model for the organisation, with all eyes upon you?

C.

What do you do to ensure that advising the political leadership and highlighting your own profile do not occur at the expense of managing the organisation?

D.

How good are you at creating consistency between what you demand of others and what you do yourself?

E.

How do you contribute – through your behaviour and management style – to ensuring that ideas and criticism are aired in the organisation?

F.

How good are you at giving and receiving feedback?

G.

How do you acquire knowledge of the concerns within your organisation?

”A chief executive must be both pleasant and tough.” (Danish chief executive)

As a public sector chief executive, you must be aware that through your words, actions and management style, you have a powerful influence on the culture and behavioural norms of your organisation. The tasks of a chief executive impose high standards of professional and personal integrity. You must possess moral courage and be personally and professionally assertive, so that you are equipped to handle situations in which you need to be particularly attentive to your impartiality, objectivity and loyalty. You must be able to act in situations and ”ethical moments” in which your choices and decisions cannot be justified with reference to a formal set of rules, but only by reference to ethical and moral norms. As a chief executive, you are a role model for the organisation’s managers and employees, and everything that you do or fail to do will be the subject of great attention. You thus have a particular responsibility to promote those values and norms that you believe should characterise the organisation. You can do this in many ways: by showing a sincere interest in your organisation, by your actions when the organisation experiences success or commits errors, through your ability to give and receive feedback, through your ability to be responsive and allow yourself to be challenged, in your manner of taking firm decisions and justifying your choices, through your compliance with deadlines and procedures, in your communications, and via your

71

participation in the organisation’s social life. As a chief executive, you must play an active role in establishing the overall management values and, especially, in living up to them on a daily basis. You must allocate a high priority to your management task, so that it is not sidelined in favour of your role as an advisor to the political leadership or in order to enhance your own profile. The organisation must, in other words, be in no doubt about ”who is minding the shop.” 3 You must work to establish your legitimacy, credibility and integrity by ensuring that there is consistency between what you demand of others and how you yourself act.

Note 3. Donald F. Kettl, Christopher Pollitt, James H. Svara: ”Towards a Danish Concept of Public Governance: An International Perspective”, Forum, August 2004.

72

9. Safeguard the public sector’s legitimacy and democratic values

73

9. Safeguard the public sector’s legitimacy and democratic values

74

A.

How do you help citizens and users to remain confident that the execution of your organisation’s tasks is grounded in objectivity, equality and impartiality, and that every decision can be justified?

B.

What do you do to ensure that your organisation is open and responsive to special needs and wishes, while at the same time considering the needs of the whole?

C.

What do you do to ensure your organisation continuously develops the requisite methods and skills to be open, communicative and engaging?

D.

How do you help to maintain the public sector’s fundamental values of impartiality, equality and objectivity?

E.

How do you create clarity concerning when the decision-making process is open and when it is closed?

”A good public sector chief executive is capable of acting in an open space where everything you do can be explained and justified.”

(Danish chief executive)

As a public sector chief executive, you have a special responsibility to safeguard the public sector’s legitimacy and democratic values. All public sector organisations operate on the basis of a set of fundamental values concerning the public interest, openness, the rule of law, equality, impartiality, objectivity, involvement and representative democracy. These values express the most pronounced difference between the public and private sector; they comprise the backbone of the public sector and express its legitimacy and its special societal responsibility. As a public sector chief executive, you must find a balance, both in your advisory and managerial tasks, between the need to involve stakeholders and the need to safeguard the public interest and representative democracy. It is your responsibility to ensure that citizens, users and employees understand precisely when and how they can gain influence in a given decision-making process. It must be clear who has the responsibility for taking the final decision, and how and when it will be taken. As a chief executive, you must ensure that the public sector’s basic values are fundamental to and provide the underlying justification for your advice to the political leadership, as well as in your daily management of the organisation, and whenever the organisation is challenged or sets a new course. However, it is one thing to ensure that you yourself understand and

75

act in accordance with these values; it is another thing to create an organisation in which they form the governing principles for action on a daily basis. It is your responsibility to see that the organisation’s managers and employees safeguard the interests and wishes of the political leader/leadership while at the same time remaining loyal to the fundamental values of the public sector. All decisions and actions must be justifiable, since they could potentially become the object of political interest and public scrutiny. As a chief executive, you must constantly ensure, through your advice, support and following-up, that your organisation’s managers and employees live up to the confidence of the public that the organisation will handle the execution of its assignments in an appropriate manner, even when their wishes are not accommodated.

76

Self-evaluation method

XX 77

Self-evaluation method “He who stops being better, stops being good.” Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658)

The practical application of the Code represents a challenge for you as a public sector chief executive, not least on the personal level. It challenges you to assess your management style and manner of dealing with others, your personal and professional management skills, and the repertoire of management tools that you apply in decision-making and negotiating situations. The self-evaluation method has been developed to help you to address this challenge. The aim is to support, challenge and provoke you to reflect on and develop your management style in the light of the Code. These self-evaluation tools are provided for your personal use, and it is up to you to decide whether and when you wish to take the tests. The self-evaluation method draws on the Code, and aims to set up a ”Code mirror” in which you can observe the manner in which you exercise executive management.

78

Code

Self-evaluation method

Norms for good public sector executive management

Reflections on your own management style

Phase 1: The full code – a first sounding The nine recommendations in the code form a coherent strategy for good public sector executive management. The first step in the self-evaluation begins from this holistic perspective. You are required to rate yourself on how well you handle the full Code. In which areas do you act in a clear and deliberate manner, and where less so? The purpose of phase 1 is to provide you with a basis upon which to reflect on your role both now and in the future, for example in relation to your political leader, your management group and the remainder of the organisation. It can give you a sense of where you stand in relation to the full Code, and which areas you might wish to give some more attention. Phase 2: My chief executive role and management style – focusing on the individual recommendations. Phase 2 emphasises the individual recommendations of the Code, and takes its point of departure in your reflections on one or more specific and typical executive management situations or incidents that you yourself identify. The assumption in this approach is that there is learning potential in both positive and negative experiences, and you will encounter questions which deal with both types of experiences. The specific situations that you identify will be the key to analysing your behaviour and management style. The questions will challenge you to consider the causes, advantages and disadvantages of your actions from all angles, and explore ways in which you might have handled the situation differently. Phase 3: My chief executive role in the future Phase 3 enables you to set goals for your management behaviour and development for the coming year. What will you do differently? What should others observe that you are doing differently, and how can you achieve this? In this connection you can consider the most important or easiest targets for you to achieve, and from whom you can seek feedback. You can also choose a different time horizon.

79

Phase 1.

Phase 2.

Phase 3.

The full Code

Focus on the individual recommendations

My chief executive role in the future

Considerations before you begin The method presumes that you take a concrete, constructive, open and honest view of your role and management style. In addition, there are a number of other considerations to be made before you start:

Your level of ambition?

Your reflections and goal?

-

Which of the three phases of the

-

Private and confidential?

self-evaluation test do you wish to

-

Open and visible?

take: one, two or all three? Time and location? Your method?

80

-

Make sure you have peace and quiet

-

Evaluation in isolation?

-

Involvement of others?

-

Who might be able to provide you with

the questions in the self-evaluation

constructive criticism and feedback?

test?

and ample time. -

When will you return to re-examine

Phase 1: The full Code - a first sounding

81

Phase 1: The full Code - a first sounding What is your general impression, when you consider the nine recommendations of the Code? ➤

Where are you clear and deliberate in your management style?



Where are you less clear and deliberate in your management style?

Recommendations in the Code’s values 1. You clarify your management space with the political leader 2. You take responsibility for ensuring that the political goals are implemented throughout the organisation 3. You create an organisation which is responsive and capable of influencing the surrounding world 4. You create an organisation which acts as part of an integrated public sector 5. You require the organisation to focus on results and effects 6. You possess vision and work strategically to improve the way that your organisation accomplishes its assignments 7. You exercise your right and duty to lead the organisation 8. You display personal and professional integrity 9. You safeguard the public sector’s legitimacy and democratic values

82

Clear and deliberate

Less clear and deliberate

Observe the distribution of the fields you ticked: ➤

Is there agreement between your actual and your desired management style – i.e. between what you do and what your organisation needs?



Is it clear to your management group and organisation where your focus lies?



Is it clear to your management group where you expect them to step in to support the execution of the recommendations?



Are there any recommendations in relation to which you feel you have a need to develop your role and management style?



In the light of this initial reflection of your management style in the full Code, are there any specific recommendations that it would be interesting for you to explore in depth?

83

84

Phase 2: My chief executive role and management style – focusing on the individual recommendations

85

Phase 2: My chief executive role and management style – focusing on the individual recommendations 1. You clarify your management space with the political leader A. B.

C. D.

What do you do to ensure that you and your political leader have a shared understanding of the nature of your interplay in the management of the organisation? What do you do to encourage ongoing discussions between you and your political leader concerning your specific division of responsibilities with respect to the management of the organisation? What weight do you assign to your respective roles as advisor to the political leadership and leader of the organisation? What do you do to reconcile the political demands towards the organisation with the framework for the execution of its tasks?

General impression What is your general impression when you consider the recommendation and your responses to the associated questions? ➤

Is there consistency between your daily management practices and your own needs, the needs of your political leader and those of your organisation?



86

How do you think your political leader assesses your management practices?

Reflections Identify one or more situations in which you, your political leader and/or your senior managers might wish that your role, conduct or management style had been different. ➤

Why did you act the way you did in the situation(s)?



In what ways could you have acted differently?



What consequences would this have had?

In which specific situations do you or your political leader typically feel a need to discuss your division of responsibilities in relation to managing the organisation? ➤

How would you characterise your role in this dialogue?



Are there situations in which you could work to strengthen your dialogue concerning the division of responsibilities, the ground rules and the management space?

87

2. You take responsibility for ensuring that the political goals are implemented throughout the organisation A. B. C.

D.

What do you do to ensure that the political goals and intentions are clearly understood by the organisation’s management and staff? How do you contribute to ensuring that policy and professionalism mutually support one another? How do you work to ensure that the various professional units regard themselves as a part of the organisation when performing tasks that require intra-organisational co-operation? How do you acquire the requisite knowledge to enter into a dialogue with the professional units concerning the execution of their tasks and their development?

General impression What is your general impression when you consider the recommendation and the associated questions? ➤

Where do you direct your attention in your daily work?



Is there agreement between your daily management practices and the needs of the organisation?



How do you think your management group assesses your daily management practices, in relation to their needs and those of the organisation?

88

Reflections Identify one or more situations in which your responsibility to reconcile policy and professionalism was challenged. ➤

What role, behaviour and management style did you make use of in relation to your political leader/leadership, your senior managers and the other managers in the organisation, respectively?



Why did you handle the situation as you did, and what were the advantages and disadvantages of this approach?



How could you have handled the situation(s) differently – before, during and afterwards?



Which strengths and weaknesses in your behaviour and management style were illustrated by the situation(s)?

89

3. You create an organisation which is responsive and capable of influencing the surrounding world A. B. C. D. E.

What do you do to ensure that the organisation’s assignments are tackled with a point of departure in the perspective of citizens and consumers? What do you do to keep the organisation open, interactive and accessible by the outside world? What do you do to safeguard and enhance the organisation’s reputation? How do you work to create consistency between the organisation’s communications, its daily practices and the political goals? What do you do to create a constructive interplay between the organisation and the media?

General impression What is your general impression when you consider the recommendation and the associated questions? ➤

Where do you direct your attention in your daily work?



Is there consistency between your daily management practices and the needs of the organisation?



How do you think your management group assesses your daily management practices in relation to their needs and those of the organisation?

90

Reflections Identify one or more situations in which you and your organisation were challenged in your communication with the surrounding world. ➤

Why did you act as you did in the situation(s)?



In what ways could you have acted differently?



What did you learn about your strengths and weaknesses from the situation(s) concerning your behaviour and management style in relation to the communication task required of you and your organisation?



How can you promote qualities such as responsiveness, openness and communication, of which you are not in direct control, in the organisation?

91

4. You create an organisation which acts as part of an integrated public sector A.

B. C.

D.

What do you do to encourage the organisation’s management and staff to plan and organise their assigned tasks in co-operation with other relevant working partners? What do you do to ensure that the assigned tasks are executed in a manner which improves the consistency and quality of services for citizens? What do you do to ensure that the organisation’s management and staff perceive themselves, develop themselves and act as elements in an overall public chain of value, in which each element, in interaction with others, contributes to the wholeness, efficiency and coherence of the overall task performance by the public sector? What do you do to contribute to the on-going debate concerning which frameworks promote or hinder the coherent and co-ordinated performance of public sector assignments?

General impression What is your general impression when you consider the recommendation and the associated questions? ➤

Where do you direct your attention in your daily work?



Is there consistency between your daily management practices and the needs of the organisation?

92



How do you think your management group assesses your daily management practices in relation to their needs and those of the organisation?

Reflections Identify one of the most recent or most important organisational and managementrelated changes that you have made in your organisation. ➤

What influence did considerations of interplay, wholeness and coherence within and outside your own organisation play in your choice of organisational design?



What weight did you assign to interplay, wholeness and coherence in the manner in which you communicated and justified these changes to the organisation’s management and employees?

93

Identify a situation in which there was a lack of coherence and quality in the services offered to the public, and in which your organisation was involved. ➤

How did you act in relation to the managers and employees in your organisation?



How did you act in relation to the relevant external working partners?



How did you experience your role, behaviour and management style in the specific situation?



94

How could you have acted differently, and with greater effect?

5. You require the organisation to focus on results and effects A. B. C. D. E.

How do you create on-going focus throughout the organisation on the connection between aims and means? How do you create a link between the common goals and values of the whole organisation and the goals and values of the decentralised units? What do you do to ensure that efforts and results are measured, made visible, discussed and followed up? What do you do to ensure that the knowledge obtained through evaluations brings about improvements? How do you react when you become aware of errors and inefficiencies in the execution of your organisation’s assignments?

General impression What is your general impression when you consider the recommendation and the associated questions? ➤

Where do you direct your attention in your daily work?



Is there consistency between your daily management practices and the needs of the organisation?



How do you think your management group assesses your daily management practices in relation to their needs and those of the organisation?

95

Reflections Identify one or more situations in which you – perhaps together with your senior management staff – conducted follow-ups or evaluations of the level of goal achievement in specific initiatives or projects. ➤

What role did you play in designing frameworks and incentives which would support the evaluation process from beginning to end?



How visible and responsive were you in discussing and justifying the purpose of the follow-ups?



How do you view and practise your role in ensuring that your organisation’s follow-up actions have the correct focus, and how do you apply the knowledge gained to create changes in your own practices?



What obstacles and barriers have you encountered to the systematic measurement and following-up of the organisation’s activities and results?

96



How can you, through your behaviour and management style, promote a forward-looking, constructive and results-oriented evaluation culture throughout the organisation?

97

6. You possess vision and work strategically to improve the way that your organisation accomplishes its assignments A. B. C. D.

E. F. G.

What do you do to make your organisation aware of and inspired by what takes place outside the organisation – both locally and globally? What do you do to create an organisation that can act in an international setting? How can you create a balance between reliable operations, innovation and a willingness to take risks? How do you help to ensure that you and your political leader are in continual possession of the knowledge and broad perspective required to develop new ways of executing the organisation’s core tasks? How good are you at promoting and leading innovative processes that can convert ideas and new knowledge into practice? How do you form a general view of strengths and weaknesses by combining hierarchical, market-based and network forms of management? How do you promote internal and external knowledge sharing?

General impression What is your general impression when you consider the recommendation and the associated questions? ➤

Where do you direct your attention in your daily work?



Is there consistency between your daily management practices and the needs of the organisation?

98



How do you think your management group assesses your daily management practices in relation to their needs and those of the organisation?

Reflections Identify any areas in your organisation where you observe dynamism and energy in relation to vision and openness towards development. ➤

What are the explanations for these cases?



How can you apply this knowledge in the executive management role, behaviour and style you display towards other parts of your organisation?

Identify any areas in your organisation where you observe inertia in relation to vision, inspiration and openness towards development. ➤

What are the explanations for these cases?

99



What can you do to bring about change?



In which situations can you promote your organisation’s capacity for internal and external knowledge-sharing through your behaviour and management style?

100

7. You exercise your right and duty to lead the organisation A. B. C. D. E. F. G.

How do you handle your role as the personnel policy manager for the entire organisation? How do you fulfil your responsibility to ensure that the organisation can recruit staff with professional and personal skills? What do you do to ensure that your management team, viewed as a whole, possesses the requisite professional and personal skills? How do you contribute to the ongoing evaluation of the latitude to exercise leadership at all levels? How do you fulfil your responsibility to take difficult decisions (e.g. firings or demotions) and carry them out in an appropriate manner? How do you ensure that management decisions are explained, communicated, and acted upon? How do you ensure that you are accessible for members of your organisation?

General impression What is your general impression when you consider the recommendation and the associated questions? ➤

Where do you direct your attention in your daily work?



Is there consistency between your daily management practices and the needs of the organisation?



How do you think your management group assesses your daily management practices in relation to their needs and those of the organisation?

101

Reflections Identify one or more situations in which you were faced with a difficult decision, and in which you, your political leader, your senior management and/or the persons affected by the decision might wish that your role, behaviour or management style had been different. ➤

Why did you act as you did in the situation(s)?



In what ways could you have acted differently?

Identify one or more situations in which you were faced with a difficult decision in relation to your role as the most senior manager employed by the organisation, and which you handled very well through your behaviour and management style. ➤

How did you act in the situation(s)?



What strengths and weaknesses do these two examples illustrate in your behaviour and management style, in relation to your role as personnel policy manager?

102

8. You display personal and professional integrity A. B. C. D. E. F. G.

What do you do to ensure that the advice you provide is always based upon principles of impartiality, objectivity and loyalty? How do you handle acting as a role model for the organisation, with all eyes upon you? What do you do to ensure that advising the political leadership and highlighting your own profile do not occur at the expense of managing the organisation? How good are you at creating consistency between what you demand of others and what you do yourself? How do you contribute – through your behaviour and management style – to ensuring that ideas and criticism are aired in the organisation? How good are you at giving and receiving feedback? How do you acquire knowledge of the concerns within your organisation?

General impression What is your general impression when you consider the recommendation and the associated questions? ➤

Where do you direct your attention in your daily work?



Is there consistency between your daily management practices and the needs of the organisation?



How do you think your management group assesses your daily management practices in relation to their needs and those of the organisation?

103

Reflections Identify one or more situations – ”ethical moments” – in which you faced competing pressures from different values and ethical considerations. ➤

What role, behaviour and management style did you make use of towards your political leader/leadership and the organisation?



What strengths and weaknesses can you detect in your management style and strategy?



How could you have approached the situation(s) differently?

Identify one or more situations in which your conduct had an effect, for better or worse, on the organisation. ➤

104

What did you do?



What could you have done differently?



What strengths and weaknesses do these situations illustrate in your behaviour and management style?

105

9. You safeguard the public sector’s legitimacy and democratic values A. B. C. D. E.

How do you help citizens/users to remain confident that the execution of your organisation’s tasks is grounded in objectivity, equality and impartiality, and that every decision can be justified? What do you do to ensure that your organisation is open and responsive to special needs and wishes, while at the same time considering the needs of the whole? What do you do to ensure your organisation continuously develops the requisite methods and skills to be open, communicative and engaging? How do you help to maintain the public sector’s fundamental values of impartiality, equality and objectivity? How do you create clarity concerning when the decision-making process is open and when it is closed?

General impression What is your general impression when you consider the recommendation and the associated questions? ➤

Where do you direct your attention in your daily work?



Is there consistency between your daily management practices and the needs of the organisation?



How do you think your management group assesses your daily management practices in relation to their needs and those of the organisation?

106

Reflections Identify one or more situations in which you have been challenged with respect to your responsibility to safeguard legitimacy and democratic values in the execution of the tasks assigned to your organisation. ➤

What role, behaviour and management style did you make use of towards your political leader/leadership, the organisation and the stakeholders in the surrounding world?



What could you have done differently – before, during and after?



What strengths and weaknesses do these situations illustrate in your behaviour and management style?

107

108

Phase 3: My chief executive role in the future

109

Phase 3: My chief executive role in the future Use your reflections from phase 2 as a point of departure. ➤

On the basis of these reflections, what goals will you set yourself over the coming year for your management style and behaviour?

110



What will you do differently?



What should others observe that you are doing differently?



What aspects of your management style can help you to achieve these goals?



What aspects of your management style may hinder you in achieving them?

My contract with myself ➤

How will you maintain your reflections?



Who will you ask to provide you with feedback?



When will you return to re-examine the questions in this self-evaluation?

111

112

The History of the Forum

113

The History of the Forum The Forum for Top Executive Management has been an ambitious and innovative management project in the public sector. The Forum was inaugurated in September 2003 as a joint project between chief executives spanning the municipal, county and state levels of government. The ambition of the project has been to establish a focus on good executive management through comprehensive debate and a process of knowledge generation, and thereby develop a code for Public Governance – Chief Executive Excellence in Denmark. The first deliberations concerning the establishment of a forum for top executives arose in the spring of 2002. For a long period of time, there had been an intense debate concerning public sector management. The debate had centred on the idea that good management makes a difference, and is a prerequisite for creating results and meeting the challenges facing the public sector. However, the debate had focused only to a lesser degree on the conditions for creating management space and the roles of top-level managers employed by the politically-led public sector organisations. There was thus recognition of the need to create a foundation for a debate on the special management tasks of public sector chief executives, focusing on both the enduring characteristics and the newer conditions for public sector management, which have

114

Altered framework conditions for public sector executive management

Altered conditions for public sector executive management

E.g. globalisation, media, increased user expectations, changing values and new incentive structures

E.g. the increased speed, complexity, transparency and diminished predictability of the decisionmaking processes

What is good public sector executive management? Enduring and emerging requirements for the public sector chief executive: - Roles - Strategies - Skills

been set in relief by current trends and developments. The aim was to clarify the characteristics of good public sector executive management, both now and in the future. What were the precise roles, strategies and skills that could be identified? The establishment of the Forum occurred at around the same time as the appointment of the Commission on Administrative Structure in October 2002, but there was no connection between the two. Nonetheless, the coincidence has been described by a number of chief executives as ”good timing”, partly because the work of the commission has in many ways provided a constructive context – ”a feeling of necessity” – for the debates in the Forum, and partly because a code for good public sector executive management could help to support the chief executives in their work of implementing the coming Structural Reform. ”It has been incredibly rewarding to spend time with colleagues from other sectors. The Forum has been a place for constructive, open and honest discussions across traditional boundaries, while the ”civil war” was raging outside.” (Danish chief executive) The process utilised by the Forum has been based on involvement and networks, and it has been crucial to the results. The Forum’s criteria for success were to involve the entire group of chief executives and make them the driving force in the development of a shared understanding of executive excellence. The commitment of the chief executives to the Forum has carried the project through to the launching of the Code. The common and cross-cutting debate between chief executives from municipalities, counties and the state has been the primary force in bringing the project to its goal.

115

”We were perhaps a bit hesitant at the start. Could our ambitious goals be realised? There is no doubt that the project has benefited greatly from the commitment shown by the chief executives.” (Danish chief executive) Right from the start, the Forum established a website at www.publicgovernance.dk, where the community of chief executives and other interested parties could follow the project, its activities and its results on an on-going basis. The target group was also informed and involved via a number of chief executive forums and networks at national, county and municipal levels, as offshoots from the Forum project. During the process, the Forum’s board and secretariat also published articles in various periodicals, trade journals and anthologies. The Danish Ministry of Finance, Danish Regions and Local Government Denmark have kept the political level informed on an on-going basis of the aims and status of the Forum project. The Forum has amongst other things been a theme of the Mayors’ Conferences of 2003 and 2004.

Aims and principles of the Forum The board of the Forum constituted itself in 2002/2003.4 The goal of the Forum project was defined from the start: to develop a code for Public Governance – good public sector executive management in Denmark. The Forum’s overarching ambitions: •

To clarify Public Governance in Denmark – develop a code and recommendations



To develop a common chief executive culture, conceptual framework and language through debate and the involvement of public sector chief executives.

”This will not be traditional committee-type work. The future Code is to be the result of a debate in our own ranks, between chief executives from all parts of the Note 4. The members of the Forum Board are listed in the appendix.

116

public sector. This debate is important in itself, because it creates shared reflections and contributes to developing a common language and norms for good public sector executive management.” (The Forum Board, at the opening conference) An important ambition was to organise the Forum as a dialogue-based, knowledgegenerating project between the community of chief executives and Danish and foreign researchers. Involvement of the chief executives First and foremost, it was essential to involve the community of chief executives from the state, county and municipal sectors in a common dialogue. The involvement of the chief executives in a cross-cutting debate was thus viewed from the beginning as a goal in itself, and a fundamental success criterion for the development of a common chief executive culture, conceptual framework and norms for good public sector executive management. The unifying thread in the debate has been a focus on the similarities and common aspects of the work of chief executives in all parts of the public sector. The Forum project was not intended to result in a comprehensive catalogue of all possible facets and nuances of public sector executive management, but rather to discover the central characteristics of executive excellence across the public sector, and the strategies associated with these characteristics. This focus on common features arose from the need for a general conceptual framework for public sector executive management, as well as the need for common norms and reference points. The debate on public sector management illustrated that not all strategies were equally good. The ambition was to establish a code for executive excellence which would provide a reference point for the individual chief executive, as well as for the individual public sector organisation and the public

117

sector as a whole. In the first instance, executive excellence is a matter of the chief executive’s individual managerial flair and skills. However, it equally involves the ability of the system as a whole to handle the challenges of the times on the basis of a common language and common norms across the public sector. ”The Code must make a practical difference to the individual chief executive. We need to make executive excellence the response to our times, rather than rules and procedures.” (Danish chief executive) The chief executives all participated in the Forum project on an equal footing and in their capacity as chief executives – and not, for example, as representatives of their organisations, sectors, boards, theme panels or anything else. The Forum’s activities have consistently aimed at achieving a mix of participants from every part of the public sector. Involvement of Danish and foreign researchers The involvement of Danish and foreign researchers has also been an essential principle for the Forum. While the debate and the formation of a conceptual framework would principally be of relevance to public sector executive managers, it would also require a theoretical foundation, and was intended to create a basis for dialogue and knowledge generation between management researchers and chief executives. One international and two Danish research teams were invited at an early stage of the project to make contributions to the Code.5 In other contexts, too, the Forum has encouraged mutual professional echanges between and among researchers and public sector chief executives.

Note 5. The participants in the three research teams are listed in the appendix.

118

The involvement of researchers was intended partly to secure theoretical input to the Forum’s own debate and knowledge generation processes, and partly to stimulate the research communities’ knowledge of and interest in public sector executive management as a field for research. The mutual professional challenges between the theoretical and practical fields have constituted an important device with which to stimulate debate and the formation of a conceptual framework for public sector executive management. ”The researchers have provoked debate and a search for clarity. They have to a great degree contributed to the systematisation and generalisation of our understanding of public sector executive management.” (Danish chief executive) Right from the start, one of the goals was to involve international researchers in the debate on good public sector executive management in a Danish context, with the aim of providing new perspectives as well as specific knowledge of best practices from an international point of view. With fresh eyes and from an international perspective, the international research team was able to pose thought-provoking questions to the debate which hopefully challenged established ways of thinking. The three teams of researchers worked in parallel and independently of each other. The researchers participated in and contributed to a number of the Forum’s conferences and workshops. Public Governance The ambition to develop Public Governance was partly inspired by the Nørby Committee, which was convened in 2001 by the then Minister of Trade and Industry to examine and make recommendations for good company management in Denmark.6 Note 6. ”The Nørby Committee Report on Corporate Governance in Denmark – recommendations for good corporate management in Denmark.” December 2001. www.corporategovernance.dk.

119

However, the Forum has differentiated itself from the Nørby Committee in both its content and its methods. The Forum’s content has been different because the public sector is characterised by some fundamental conditions which give rise to special ground rules for management, such as the public sector’s democratic values, its many varied bottom lines, etc. Public Governance differs in other words from Corporate Governance in certain central respects, for which reason management perspectives, tools and inspiration drawn from the private sector cannot enjoy unlimited application to public sector management. The development of Public Governance in Denmark has been organised as a common management project for the entire community of public sector chief executives. The field of activity for the development of Public Governance was defined by the Forum Board as: ”The interplay of the top-level, appointed executive manager with the political leadership and with the delivery system concerning goals, results, and behaviour, which ensures that the public sector organisation is on the one hand capable of handling the demands and expectations of the surrounding world, and on the other hand is itself in a position to shape developments.” Against this background, Public Governance was viewed as a description of the decision-making processes and decision-making skills involved in the day-to-day executive management of a public sector organisation. In this respect, the Forum defined its focus as something quite unique in comparison with, for example: -

Public Government – which typically refers to a political system’s structure, legitimacy and parliamentary basis.

120

-

Public Management – which typically refers in a narrower sense to various management disciplines and tools.

-

Corporate Governance – which often refers to the work of boards and management structures in private companies.

The Forum has focused on the roles and responsibilities of the individual chief executive as the top-level manager employed by a public, politically-led organisation, whereas the Nørby Committee’s code for corporate governance focuses more on management bodies – boards and senior management – and their roles and responsibilities. Three themes Public Governance has comprised the overall framework for the Forum’s debate and knowledge-generation process, placing a focus on three central themes for public sector executive management: -

The interplay between the political leader and the executive manager concerning goals and strategies for the organisation

-

When professionalism, politics and management go hand-in-hand

-

Executive management and communication in the knowledge society

The function of the three themes has been to focus the debate on common, central challenges for public sector executive management across the public sector.

121

The Forum established three theme panels, each consisting of approximately twelve public sector executive managers from the state, counties and municipalities, as well as researchers.7 The composition of the theme panels thus in itself reflected one of the project’s goals of establishing debate forums between researchers and executive managers across the public sector. The purpose of the theme panels was to function as expert groups and sparring partners and to provide a driving force for broad and relevant coverage of the individual themes, thereby creating a point of departure for specific proposals, recommendations and strategies for public sector executive excellence. In the course of a year, the panels carried out an impressive series of meetings. The Forum’s code model The Forum’s code model has provided a framework and a point of reference for the project’s debates, analysis and conclusion processes.

Analysis of challenges Code: Recommendations Self-evaluation

The analysis of challenges outlines at the macro level the conditions and developmental trends addressed by the recommendations in the Code. The analysis encompasses both Note 7. The participants in the three theme panels are listed in the appendix.

122

enduring and emerging challenges for public sector executive management, and constitutes the Forum’s diagnosis and argument for the composition of the Code. The Code itself relates to the individual chief executive’s role, conduct and strategies on an organisational level in the management of a public sector, politically-led organisation. The key specifications for the development of the Code were that it should consist of a limited number of brief and clear recommendations, followed by a manageable number of actionoriented questions concerning the chief executive’s management of the organisation. In order to support the widespread use of the Code in actual chief executive practices, it was accompanied by a self-evaluation method for the use of the individual chief executive (individual level). The aim of the self-evaluation method is to give individual chief executives an opportunity to reflect on their own management practices in the light of the recommendations of the Code.

Project phases and key events The Forum’s debate process has taken place at a number of key events which have simultaneously comprised important milestones along the way.8 The Forum’s phases and milestones Start-up phase

Phase of knowledge gathering and debate (First and second halves)

Workshop (March 2003)

Workshop conference (Feb. 2004)

Code seminars (Oct. & Nov. 2004)

Opening conference (Sept. 2003)

Midpoint Conference (Aug. 2004)

International development seminars (Feb. & March 2005)

Launch & wrap-up Camp Code I & II (Dec. 2004 & March 2005) Conference (May 2005)

Note 8. A chronological overview of the project’s activities, conference programmes and publications in connection with the various key events are included in the appendix.

123

The Forum’s debate phase consisted of two halves, separated by the Midpoint Conference as an important milestone. The aim of the first half was to present the overall perspective and acquire as much practical and theoretical knowledge as possible concerning chief executive management. During the second half, activities were oriented more towards prioritising and finalising the actual content and formulations of the Code. From the start, it was clear that the maximum involvement of the target group would require a special effort. As expected, there were many other demands on the time of the chief executives, not least due to the work of the Commission on Administrative Structure. Nonetheless, the activities of the executive management project were characterised almost without exception by large attendance and a high level of commitment. Workshop in Fredensborg In March 2003, the Board invited a dozen managers from the state, county and municipal administrations, as well as researchers, to attend a workshop in Fredensborg to discuss the introductory working papers. The main points of discussion for the workshop were: Are the goals and direction of the project correct? Have we defined the correct problems? How do we ensure the involvement of the target group? The discussion confirmed the focus and ambitions of the project. ”The content is good and relevant. The form must be new.” (Danish chief executive, at the Fredensborg workshop) The workshop raised a number of questions that would turn out to characterise and set the tone for the Forum. Amongst other things, a justification was sought for the Forum project– why right now? What had happened? What were the altered or new conditions, challenges or questions that had created a need to focus on public sector executive management and these issues at this precise time?

124

In response, participants pointed out that not all of the challenges for public sector executive management were grounded in current trends and developments. The debate on good public sector executive management should take account of the fact that the challenges for the public sector executive manager arise both from certain permanent conditions for executive managers and from some more topical trends and developments in the public sector and in society in general. As an example of a fundamental premise, the dual role of the chief executive, as an advisor to the political leadership and as the person responsible for the organisation’s operation and management, was highlighted as a special characteristic of Danish public service which has deep historical roots. Both at Fredensborg and for the entire lifespan of the project, this fundamental condition became a central point in the discussion of the dilemmas faced by public sector chief executives and the strategies that they employ. ”In production enterprises, the chief executive spends 100% of his or her time managing. In consulting enterprises, perhaps 80%. But in the ministries, we spend perhaps 10% of our time on strategic management and 90-100% of our time working on proposed legislation. We need more management.” (Danish chief executive, at the Fredensborg workshop) Opening conference: Executive management makes a difference The Opening Conference on 1 September 2003 marked the opening round of the joint management project and the debate on good public sector executive management. The aim of the conference was partly to present the Board’s ambitions for the project to the community of chief executives – to create an anchoring – and partly of course to inaugurate the debate on good public sector executive management. More than 200 public sector chief executives participated in the conference.

125

”I think it is entirely correct to place good executive management in public sector, politically-led organisations on a common agenda for the purposes of developing a modern, efficien and visionary public sector. This is of course what it is all about – giving citizens the best possible service for their tax money.” (Danish chief executive, at the Opening Conference) The participants found it interesting and innovative to establish a common basis for debate across all parts of the sector. There was however a concern that the differences in day-to-day practices and conditions might in the end turn out to be greater than the similarities. How far could we go in the direction of developing a common language and shared norms? Likewise, there was a certain degree of scepticism concerning whether it was realistic to try to develop a code that would both be workable and interesting. Workshop Conference: Debate on chief executive challenges As its next major event, the Forum held a Workshop Conference on 24 February 2004 which was attended by approximately 150 chief executives. The purpose of the conference was to focus on the challenges for public sector chief executives and to exchange experiences concerning these. The conference took as its point of departure three case studies, each of which illustrated some of the typical situations, dilemmas and cross-pressures experienced by public sector chief executives. The three cases were based on real events, and formed a basis for debate both in plenary sessions and in smaller groups: What is this case about? What challenges does the chief executive face in this situation? What can the chief executive do? The Midpoint Conference: On the trail of good public sector executive management The Midpoint Conference held on 30 August 2004 was an important milestone,

126

marking an end to the first half of the Forum’s debate process. Nearly 200 chief executives participated in the conference, at which the three research teams presented their contributions to the Code.9 The presentations by the researchers were subsequently commented upon by three ”reviewer teams” made up of public sector chief executives from state, county and municipal administrations. The responses of the three research groups to the same assignment by the Forum Board were interesting and differed markedly from each other. They described a number of the same trends and developments, but accentuated different aspects of the conditions faced by chief executives using concepts drawn from their separate research traditions. ”The researchers have provided good input and established a good agenda for the debate.”

(Danish chief executive, at the Midpoint Conference)

The contributions of the researchers were well received by the chief executives at the conference as inspiring and thought-provoking contributions to the Code process. The conference then formulated its success criteria for the future Code. In its content, the Code was to express a coherent perception of public sector executive excellence – not ”a Christmas tree that the individual can decorate with a personal choice of principles and skills” or ”a menu from which the individual can pick and choose.” The Code was to represent an integrated and practical conception which would be capable of providing (i) a common frame of reference across the entire public sector, (ii) a point of departure for personal reflections by individual chief executives, and (iii) a tool for creating dialogue in the individual public sector organisations.

Note 9. The participants in the three research teams are listed in the appendix.

127

Concerning the form of the Code, the message was: ”brief and clear”. The chief executives wished to see a practical and relatively succinct code with a manageable number of action-oriented recommendations, written in clear language. For the occasion of the conference, the Forum had produced five short “dogma films” on public sector executive management. The contributors were political leaders, private sector chief executives, representatives from the management level immediately beneath the public sector chief executives and representatives from the media, who in the film spots gave their own views of the challenges, prejudices, expectations, skills and good advice relevant to good public sector executive management. In addition to the three contributions from the researchers, the written summaries and conclusions of the Forum’s three theme panels were also published in connection with the Midpoint Conference. After the Midpoint Conference, there were a total of six written contributions – or building blocks – for use in the subsequent work of summarising and formulating conclusions for the Code: three from the research teams and three from the theme panels. Under the heading ”From research contributions to practical executive management in daily life”, the goal of the Forum’s activities during the autumn of 2004 was to involve as many public sector chief executives as possible in discussions on the content and formulation of the Code’s recommendations. Code seminars: Good public sector executive management in daily life – your turn to speak! In September, the Forum’s board and secretariat prepared a comprehensive list of all the recommendations made by the researchers and theme panels. The list was rather long: 25

128

recommendations, each with up to five sub-recommendations. This list formed a point of departure for discussions at two seminars for the entire target group, held in October and November of 2004 in Copenhagen and Aarhus, respectively. At the code seminars, the chief executives had the task of prioritising and revising the many recommendations. Between meetings, the chief executives were encouraged to follow up in their own organisations by conducting dialogues with the politicians and the senior managers/management groups. On the basis of the discussions held at the first code seminar (in October) the Board and secretariat revised the list for the second seminar. At these working seminars, the code work and debate was expanded even further. Chief executives who had not previously been able to participate, or who had participated only to a limited extent, now received an opportunity to engage in the debate. The seminars were marked by intense and concentrated discussions on the Code. What were the most important recommendations? What was lacking? Which aspects of the chief executive’s task had been insufficiently elucidated? Through discussions and prioritisation exercises, chief executives from state, county and municipal administrations sought to achieve a common result. The code seminars enabled the participants to approach an understanding of the special role, responsibility and function of public sector executive management, irrespective of sector. The formulation of concepts and descriptions of executive management were at the core of the efforts to arrive at brief, comprehensive and precise formulations. A few themes from the seminars may be highlighted, to give a general impression of the debates.

129

The chief executive as a role model for the organisation’s managers and employees was a concept that evoked mixed feelings. However, there was general acknowledgement that a code should address the function of the chief executive as a role model in the organisation. Everyone agreed that internationalisation and globalisation had become general facts of life, but the consequences of these trends for chief executives were viewed very differently. For some, these were very real and present aspects of daily life, while for others they were rather more indirect and distant. Internationalisation should be included in the Code in a manner that reflected this variation. Initiation of a dialogue on the chief executive’s role and management space as the toplevel and responsible manager of the organisation led to discussions of, for example, the tension between individual and collective managerial responsibility. ”You cannot do everything yourself,” it was said, and the chief executives saw both a necessity and a dilemma in the use of management teams and the delegation and distribution of managerial responsibility. The Code should, in an objective and precise manner, describe how the chief executive can simultaneously practise clear and visible executive management – through others. The chief executive’s responsibility for promoting legitimacy and democratic values in the public sector was something that everyone saw as a practically self-evident element which should be included in the Code. However this was also a recommendation of a more philosophical character, which was difficult to express in words that were brief, clear and precise. The chief executive’s relationship with and management of the occupational professional employees and professional communities was a topic of discussion. On the

130

one hand, the chief executive needed to treat the occupational professional employees with respect and empathy and thus remain up-to-date with the practical conditions and challenges, while on the other, the chief executive was required to manage the professional communities and secure the execution of the political goals. Through the chief executives’ discussions, prioritisations and qualifications, the two code seminars reduced the number of recommendations from 25 to 16. Camp Code I In the middle of December 2004, the Forum Board invited eight chief executives to an intensive 24-hour seminar in Sweden. The working foundation for Camp Code was based on the conclusions of the code seminars, in the form of an updated rough draft of the recommendations and questions. The goals of the camp were to tighten the process still further to allow the Board to formulate and determine the content of the final Code. Camp Code litmus test What was the overall impression of the Code as a whole in relation to: -

An appropriate mixture of soft/hard?

-

The scope of the chief executive’s relationships and tasks in relation to the political leadership, organisation and surrounding world?

-

Self-contained?

-

Occasion for reflection?

-

Sufficiently action-oriented?

Camp Code II During the course of January and February, the Board formulated the final Code. In March 2005 the Board invited those who had participated in the first camp to attend an initial presentation of the completed Code. The general impression was that the Forum had achieved its goal, with a Code that lived up to its objectives.

131

”The form is right on target. It is quite usable” (Danish chief executive, at Camp Code II) International development seminars: Management Excellence in the Knowledge Society and An International Perspective on Networks, Complexity and E-governance During weeks 8 and 9 of 2005, the Forum for Top Executive Management and the international research team held two international development seminars in North Carolina, USA, and the Netherlands. The purpose of the seminars was to focus on skills enhancement for chief executives. On the basis of a draft version of the Code, the participants discussed challenges, strategies and chief executive skills with their colleagues. Contributions were made by international researchers from the respective research environments as well as foreign chief executive colleagues. Conference: Public Governance – a code for good public sector executive management in Denmark 10 May 2005: Presentation of the Code for Chief Executive Excellence, with the participation of public sector executive managers, political leaders and management group/senior management members, as well as representatives from research and educational institutions, the consulting world, professional organisations, foreign working partners and the media.

The elements in the Forum’s knowledge generation The commitment of the community of chief executives was the primary driving force which carried the project through to the launching of the Code. The debate and knowledge generation process also received important inputs from the three research teams, the three theme panels and the three e-surveys.

132

The three research teams The composition of the Danish research teams was the result of an open process in which the Forum Board issued an invitation to all relevant institutes at the Danish universities and business schools. Researchers with knowledge of and expertise in the areas of administration/public sector management, human resources and processes of change within public sector organisations in the knowledge and network society were encouraged to submit a brief draft on how they wished to contribute to the project. The rationale for this broad invitation was that the Forum Board did not wish to involve specific persons in advance, which might exclude other qualified researchers from contributing to the project. Two research teams submitted drafts which formed the basis for a working relationship. After a broad screening of the international research world to obtain the most qualified persons, five international researchers – two from Europe and three from North America – were directly invited to participate by the Forum Board. All responded positively, and three were able to participate. The Forum Board’s assignment for the three research teams was to provide a contribution to the Code for good public sector executive management that would be of practical relevance and developed in dialogue with public sector chief executives. The Forum’s task for the researchers -

A brief definition of the concept of Public Governance in a Danish context.

-

A survey and specification of the challenges faced by public sector chief executives today. Which dilemmas, cross-pressures and challenges can be identified?

-

A description of chief executive strategies for good practice/excellence in the handling of dilemmas and cross-pressures relevant to Public Governance.

-

A proposed list of the chief executive skills required to handle such challenges.

133

The international research team was also asked to provide a proposal for a measuring instrument/self-evaluation method to evaluate good management at chief executive level in Danish public sector institutions. The Forum appointed Carsten Greve, associate professor at the University of Copenhagen and Copenhagen Business School, to function as consultant to the international research team with respect to knowledge of the Danish political system. The international research team, Carsten Greve and the Forum’s secretariat held three working seminars during this period. All three research teams prepared their contributions on the basis of data collected from public sector chief executives, either in advance of the Forum and/or occasioned by the Forum. As an element of their report “Udredning om god offentlig topledelse” (”Report on good public sector executive management”), Kurt Klaudi Klausen and Ove Kaj Pedersen carried out a number of interviews with chief executives from the Forum’s target group. The team also obtained knowledge of public sector executive management through their participation in one of the Forum’s theme panels. On their own initiative, the research team carried out a comparative analysis of codes for good public sector executive management in the UK, the USA and New Zealand, and included this in their report. Torben Beck Jørgensen and Karsten Vrangbæk based their contribution “Værdibaseret bidrag til kodeks for god offentlig topledelse” (”Value-based contribution to the Code for good public sector executive management”) on data from an extensive questionnairebased survey carried out among Danish public sector managers in connection with the Danish Democracy and Power Study.

134

The international research team based their contribution, ”Towards a Danish Concept of Public Governance”, on interviews with public sector chief executives and leading Danish politicians. In February 2004, the researchers carried out four focus group interviews with around 16 Danish chief executives in order to reveal precisely which challenges the chief executives themselves identified as the most significant. The four focus groups were both mixed and divided up by sector. In May and June 2004 the international researchers carried out interviews with five (county) mayors and former ministers to hear the viewpoints of the political leaders concerning the division of roles, expectations, etc. in their interplay with public sector chief executives. The three theme panels Participation in the three theme panels was by direct invitation from the Forum Board. The members of the three theme panels participated as themselves and in their capacities as chief executives, and not as representatives for their sectors or organisations. The tasks of the theme panels -

Stimulate debate among the target group

-

Generate knowledge of the area

-

Prepare written contributions for researchers

-

Prepare cases for use at the Forum’s Workshop Conference (February 2004)

-

Recommend winners of the Forum’s prize competition, etc.

The three theme panels defined their own agenda and methodology. They worked in parallel, independently and separately from each other, and met approximately once per month during the period from November 2003 to November 2004. Their participation was marked by great commitment, and the three theme panels in many ways typified experiences of the common management project. ”The cross-cutting debate has far exceeded expectations.” (Danish chief executive)

135

The interplay between the political leader and the chief executive concerning goals and strategies The task for theme panel 1 consisted of identifying challenges, dilemmas and recommendations relating to that part of the chief executive’s role which involves interplay with the political leader in managing the organisation. A permeating theme of the discussions was the dual role of the chief executive, including the need to create language, awareness and understanding in relation to developments in the interplay, contrasts and similarities across the governmental sectors, and in particular, in relation to ways in which development trends at the macro level are reflected in challenges at the organisational level, as well as recommendations for good public sector executive management on this basis. The theme panel prepared the debate document “Ti statements om nye udfordringer for god offentlig topledelse” (”Ten statements on new challenges for good public sector executive management”), which was submitted in June 2004 to the three research teams to provide inspiration. When professionalism, politics and management must go hand-in-hand The task for theme panel 2 consisted of focusing on the problems and strategies associated with the executive management of occupational professionals and professional environments. In June 2004, the theme panel invited chief executives and occupational professionals to a dialogue session on management in occupational professional environments. The event provided an occasion to discuss some of the challenges and problems that must be handled in the meeting between occupational professionals and chief executives. The mini-conference took as its starting-point a debate document produced by the panel entitled “En anden verden – Topledelse i fagprofessionelle miljøer” (”Another world – Executive management in occupational professional environments”). This debate document was based on 13 interviews with chief executives and occupational

136

professionals within the educational sector, the health care sector and highly-specialised administration. As a follow-up to the theme panel’s dialogue session, a publication was drafted with the title “I dialog med topledelsen – Replikker fra seminar om topledelse i faglige miljøer” (”In dialogue with the executive management – Remarks from a seminar on executive management in professional environments”). Both documents were submitted in June 2004 to the three research teams to provide inspiration. Executive management and communication in the knowledge society The task for theme panel 3 consisted of identifying the new challenges and conditions that the knowledge society poses to the public sector and to public sector executive management. On the basis of discussions in the panel as well as the secretariat’s interviews with members of the panel and two debate meetings held for public sector chief executives in the spring of 2004, the theme panel set out its view of the challenges and accompanying recommendations in the document “Topledelse og kommuniktion i videnssamfundet” (”Executive management and communication in the knowledge society”), which was submitted to the three research teams in June 2004 to provide inspiration. The three e-surveys As part of its efforts to gather knowledge on public sector executive management, the Forum carried out three electronic questionnaire surveys in the period from August 2003 to August 2004.10 The Forum’s surveys had different purposes and utilised various methods of questioning: -

Quantitative surveying of facts (e.g. gender, age, level of education, seniority)

-

The prioritisations of chief executives (e.g. their ranking of the importance of the various challenges, the time they spent on various management tasks, their ranking of the most important work tasks and their actual and desired use of time).

Note 10. A summary of the Forum’s three e-surveys is attached in the appendix.

137

-

Assessments of a more qualitative character (such as assessments of actual and desired management style on a scale from 1 to 5).

These methods encountered some difficulties, notably the very large managementrelated field and the broad spectrum of terms and concepts relating to the state, county and municipal administrations. A challenge in the design phase of the surveys was thus to formulate and prioritise questions that would be comprehensible and meaningful to the entire target group, for example when formulating a manageable number of possible responses to questions relating to the prioritisation by chief executives of their various tasks. The three e-surveys achieved an average response rate of 40-48 percent, which was satisfactory and provided a sufficiently solid basis upon which to formulate some general impressions concerning chief executives and executive management in Denmark. The Forum’s first survey was carried out in August 2003 and aimed amongst other things to chart ”The public sector chief executive– a picture of the profile, career, work-related areas and management challenges.” The results of e-survey 1 were published at the Forum’s Opening Conference on 1 September 2003. The second survey was carried out in February 2004 and aimed to reveal the ”Public sector chief executives’ view of policy advice, leadership and skills”, including precisely which trends and developments chief executives identified as having particular influence on changing the framework conditions for their work. The questionnaire was prepared in co-operation with the international research team. The results of e-survey 2 were published at the Forum’s Workshop Conference on 24 February 2004.

138

The third and final survey was carried out during the summer of 2004, and aimed to discover how public sector managers at the management level immediately beneath the chief executive assessed the chief executive’s management style, skills and prioritisation of tasks. The study was prepared in co-operation with the international research team, and was intended to form a mirror image of survey 2. The questionnaire was sent out to 1,748 persons: deputy chief executives and administrative heads in the municipalities, deputy directors and administrative heads in the counties, and department heads, deputy directors and deputy chief executives in the state. State agency directors were also included, in relation to their assessments of the permanent secretaries. The results of e-survey 3 were published at the Forum’s Midpoint Conference on 30 August 2004. Prize competition In September 2003 the Forum announced a prize competition within each of the three themes, with a response deadline of 1 August 2004. The prize competition was open to public sector (executive) managers from state, county and municipal administrations, as well as to students and researchers at Danish universities and business schools. The aim was to spread and diversify the debate on public sector executive management. The Board chose the winning entry in December 2004.11

Process experiences The management project in its entirety, and the work in the three theme panels in particular, illustrated how, through debate and the exchange of experiences, it is possible to formulate shared norms and move closer to a common language and a stronger common understanding concerning public sector executive management. Note 11. The winning entry, “Når faglighed, politik og ledelse skal gå hånd i hånd” (”When professionalism, politics and management must go hand-in-hand”) by Mads Ole Dall and Klaus Bakdal, may be viewed at: www.publicgovernance.dk

139

The project showed that there was a great need for a space in which chief executives could exchange experiences and discuss executive management with each other. The Forum has given rise to the creation of new networks and relations across the public sector. The common debate with chief executive colleagues from other sectors was experienced as highly constructive and rewarding. The dialogue was open and honest, and demonstrated that it is fruitful to discuss executive management with colleagues across traditional boundaries. The Forum demonstrated that chief executives have much to give to and learn from each other. The experience also showed that there are more similarities than differences between the municipal, county and state sectors – markedly more than many had believed at the outset. The differences and nuances that the discussions revealed were as frequently based on individual attitudes to ”my management of my organisation” as on innate differences between the state, county and municipal levels. However, there were naturally variations and differences across these levels. The organisation of the Forum project as a dialogue between researchers and chief executives proved both meaningful and rewarding. Theory and practice challenged and provoked each other on an on-going basis, which was seen as fruitful and constructive by both parties. A unifying thread in the discussions was that it is difficult to understand and speak about a chief executive’s management space and interplay with the political leader in isolation from the chief executive’s role as an advisor. These two sides of the chief executive’s task were seen by many as integrated and inseparable. A highly significant feature of the Forum was to reach an understanding and a conceptual framework

140

for the chief executive’s interplay with the political leader in the management of the organisation. Likewise, there was a shared recognition of the challenge of finding the right balance between serving the political level and practising visible leadership of the organisation.

Board and secretariat The Board’s role and working methods From the beginning, the Board defined its role in the common management project as: -

To establish strategy and principal content

-

To lay down frameworks and budgets

-

To discuss and approve proposals and project descriptions produced by the secretariat

-

To follow up on goals and frameworks on an on-going basis

-

To function as the Forum’s outward face

The Board’s role in the project varied during its various phases. The Board naturally played the principal role in the start-up of the management project in defining ambitions, focus and elements. In the knowledge-gathering and debate phase, the Board played a simultaneously active and withdrawn role. The Board’s main role during this phase was partly to secure a basis for the maximal involvement of the community of chief executives, and partly to maintain the focus of the debate on the Code’s objectives. In the summation and conclusion phase, the Board once again played a central role in the formulation of the final Code. The Board held an average of just under one meeting per month during the lifespan of the project. The secretariat participated in the meetings of the Board.

141

The secretariat’s role and working methods The Danish Ministry of Finance, Danish Regions and Local Government Denmark all contributed resources to the secretariat of the common management project. The secretariat was responsible for the planning, co-ordination, execution and summing-up of Board meetings and all other activities in connection with the Forum project. Right from the start, the Forum’s secretariat established and developed its own virtual Forum project organisation, which was supported by regular weekly meetings. Responsibility for the management of meetings and the co-ordination of meeting agendas was undertaken in rotation, with changes each quarter. Co-ordination between the weekly secretariat meetings was chiefly undertaken by e-mail, supplemented by bilateral working meetings and writing sessions. The secretariat secured joint responsibility on an ongoing basis, and divided up the tasks in such a way that the team responsible for the current tasks in all the project’s activities was composed of representatives from all three organisations. The project-based organisation and methods conveyed a number of advantages: (1) it built bridges between the different cultures, working practices and norms that the members of the secretariat brought with them from each of the organisations involved, (2) it ensured that the skills of the secretariat were both utilised and enhanced, and (3) it was a motivating force in the secretariat’s commitment.

142

Appendix Appendix (outline) 1. Summary of the Forum’s three e-surveys The typical Danish chief executive Challenges faced by Danish public chief executives 2. The project’s activities in chronological order 3. Conference, workshop and seminar programmes (in chronological order) Workshop in Fredensborg Opening Conference: Executive management makes a difference Workshop conference: Debate on chief executive challenges Regional meetings: Executive management and communication in the knowledge society Dialogue session: Managing occupational professionals – challenges, dilemmas and conflicts Midpoint Conference: On the trail of chief executive excellence Code Seminars I and II: Chief executive excellence in daily life – your turn to speak Camp Code I Seminar: Management Excellence in the Knowledge Society Seminar: An International Perspective on Networks, Complexity and E-governance Conference: Public Governance – a Code for Chief Executive Excellence 4. The Forum’s publications 5. Participant lists Three theme panel Three research teams Participants in the Forum Board’s workshops Forum Board and Secretariat

143

1. Summary of the Forum’s three e-surveys During the period from August 2003 to August 2004, the Forum for Top Executive Management carried out three electronic questionnaire surveys (e-surveys). E-surveys 1 and 2 were carried out among the chief executives themselves, while e-survey 3 was conducted among managers on the level directly beneath the chief executive. (For the sake of readability, public sector managers who report directly to chief executives will be referred to in the following as “level 2 managers”.) E-survey 1 describes the general characteristics of Danish public sector chief executives with respect to their personal profiles, types of tasks and managerial challenges. E-survey 2 reveals the views of the chief executives regarding their own work-related tasks, management style and skills. E-survey 3 aimed to create a picture of how level 2 managers assessed the chief executives’ prioritisation of work-related tasks, as well as the management style and skills of the chief executives. The themes in e-survey 3 are hence to a large extent identical to those of e-survey 2.

The typical Danish chief executive Chief executives in the Danish public sector possess a number of common characteristics which cut across the national, county and municipality levels, relating to the personal profiles, types of tasks and general challenges of chief executives (cf. table 1). TABLE 1 Characteristics of a typical Danish public sector chief executive

The typical Danish chief executive Personal profile

Types of tasks



Male



51-60 years of age

1) providing political advice



Social sciences graduate



Recruited internally



No private sector or foreign managerial experience



Employed as civil servant





Three main types of tasks:

General challenges ➤

Increasing internal efficiency

2) case processing



Greater productivity

3) management of the organisation



Public-private interplay



Implementation of the Task and Structural Reform

41-60 hour working week



Prioritisation of the organisation’s resources

Source: E-survey 1, carried out by the Forum for Top Executive Management among 158 chief executives in Denmark.

144

Personal profile The typical public sector chief executive in Denmark is between 51 and 60 years of age and is a graduate of law, economics or politics (LLB, MA/BA (econ.) MA (political science)). A total of 91% of the Danish chief executive group were men. Low mobility A majority (69.5%) of the chief executives – with the exception of the chief executives of the municipalities – were recruited internally. The vast majority of permanent secretaries were recruited from the same ministry (81.8%). Two-thirds of the directors of agencies were recruited from the same agency (68%) and six out of ten clerks to the county councils were recruited from the same county council (40%). A majority of Danish chief executives of municipalities were recruited externally, but the vast majority of municipal chief executives came from positions in the municipal sector (78.7%). Mobility between the state on the one hand and the counties and municipalities on the other is low. No permanent secretaries and only 14% of the agency directors possessed management experience from a county or a municipality. None of the clerks to the county councils and only 11% of the municipal chief executives had management experience from the state. A total of 15% of the chief executives had management experience from the private sector, and 10% had experience with management from abroad. Types of tasks The typical chief executive spends most of his or her working hours on tasks related to: 1) assisting the political leader, 2) management of the organisation and 3) case processing and professional management (overall average 43%). The chief executives spend least time on tasks relating to: 1) enhancement of their own skills, 2) external communications and press relations and 3) networks and external relations. Where public sector chief executives participated in professional networks, the network usually consisted of players from other parts of the public sector. A total of 90% of Danish public sector chief executives expressed satisfaction with their jobs. However, chief executives in general would like to have more time to devote to their strategic management tasks, develop their own skills and participate in networks and other external relations. General challenges For a typical chief executive in Denmark, the most significant general challenges consist of: 1) increasing internal efficiency, 2) greater productivity, 3) the public-private interplay, 4) implementation of the Structural Commission’s decisions and 5) the continual prioritisation of the resources of the organisation.

145

Challenges faced by Danish public chief executives Task prioritisation The chief executives were asked to assess how they prioritised their various work-related tasks, while the level 2 managers were requested to give an assessment of how they felt the chief executives prioritised the same tasks. By comparing the assessments of task prioritisation by the chief executives and the level 2 managers, respectively, it is possible to identify areas in which there is general agreement (cf. table 2). TABLE 2 Assessments by chief executives of their own prioritisation of work-related tasks, and assessments by level 2 managers of the chief executives’ prioritisation of work-related tasks. The six most highly prioritised tasks.

Chief executives’ assessments

Level 2 managers’ assessments

1.

Concept development and formulation of visions Advising the political leadership

2.

Ensuring the efficient use of resources

Influencing decision-making processes to attain rational and efficient solutions

3.

Influencing decision-making processes to attain rational and efficient solutions

Legal, financial policy/budget-related and other professional and technical advice to the political leadership

4.

Recruiting the right staff members

Ensuring the efficient use of resources

5.

Encouraging co-operation between departments

Concept development and formulation of visions

6.

Advising the political leadership

Administration of financial policy matters, budgets and maintenance of budgetary controls

Source: E-surveys 2 and 3, carried out by the Forum for Top Executive Management among 191 chief executives and 714 level 2 managers in Denmark.

Comparison of the assessments of the chief executives and the level 2 managers of the prioritisation of tasks revealed that there is broad agreement between the tasks to which the chief executives themselves believe that they assign a high priority, and the tasks which they prioritise highly in the view of level 2 managers. The chief executives and the level 2 managers agreed that concept development and the formulation of visions, ensuring the efficient use of resources and influencing the decision-making processes are among the five most highly-prioritised work-related tasks of chief executives. The level 2 managers differed from the chief executives in assessing that advice provided to the political leadership was among the chief executive’s most highly prioritised tasks. The chief executives assessed staff recruitment and inter-departmental co-operation to have a higher priority than advising the political leadership. The level 2 managers are thus more of the opinion than the chief executives that the chief executives are more oriented towards advising the political leadership than managing the organisation.

146

Management style The level 2 managers were also requested to assess the actual management styles of the chief executives in relation to how they felt these management styles ought to be. In general, the level 2 managers assessed that the chief executives were oriented towards the various management areas that are dealt with in the survey questions. However, the level 2 managers felt that there was room for improvement in the chief executives’ handling of the following management areas: 1) encouraging feedback on his/her management, 2) acting as a driving force to create clear ground rules for the organisation’s management group, 3) supporting the skills enhancement of the senior management/management group and preparing them for future management positions, and 4) providing constructive feedback to persons who report to him/her (cf. table 3). Specifically, the level 2 managers desired improvements in relation to obtaining constructive feedback on their own management. TABLE 3 Wishes of level 2 managers in relation to the management style of the chief executives

Assessment of chief executives Assessment of level 2 managers Management style ➤

Increased emphasis on: 1) encouraging feedback on their own executive management, 2) acting as a driving force to create clear ground rules for the organisation’s management group, 3) supporting the skills enhancement of the senior management/management group and preparing them for future management positions and 4) providing constructive feedback to those who report to them.

Source: E-surveys 2 and 3 performed by the Forum for Top Executive Management among 191 chief executives and 714 level 2 managers in Denmark.

Chief executive skills In general, the level 2 managers regarded the management-related skills of the chief executives as being well-developed and adequate. In particular, the public sector chief executives distinguished themselves by having: 1) extensive knowledge of public sector administration, 2) negotiating experience, 3) experience in establishing strategies, 4) experience in the analysis of policy programmes and political proposals, and 5) experience with leadership and the monitoring of projects. In addition, level 2 managers highlighted a number of organisational management skills that they felt to be the most important for a chief executive in the Danish public sector. These included: 1) experience in the management of management groups/

147

department head groups/senior management, 2) experience in establishing strategies, 3) the ability to communicate externally with various players, 4) negotiating experience and 5) experience with the analysis of policy programmes and political proposals. However, it turns out that there are relatively large differences between the assessments of level 2 managers of the chief executives’ actual skills and their assessment of the importance of these skills in relation to the optimal execution of tasks (cf. table 4). Level 2 managers feel that chief executives ought to enhance their management skills and gain more experience in the following four areas: 1) team building and team leadership, 2) methods of ensuring good internal communications, 3) conflict management and 4) management of management groups/department head groups/senior management. TABLE 4 Wishes of level 2 managers in relation to the management skills of the chief executives

Desires of the level 2 managers in relation to the management style of the chief executives Management skills ➤

Increased need for skills enhancement, including: 1) experience with team building and team leadership, 2) experience with methods to ensure good internal communications, 3) experience with conflict management and 4) experience with the management of management groups/department head groups/senior, management.

Source: E-surveys 2 and 3 carried out by the Forum for Top Executive Management among 191 chief executives and 714 level 2 managers in Denmark.

Conversely, the level 2 managers felt that the management skills of chief executives in relation to: 1) negotiating experience, 2) experience in the management of IT projects/systems, 3) knowledge of relevant methods and analytical instruments and 4) experience of co-operation with international organisations is in complete accord with the importance of these tasks. The chief executives generally assessed their skills levels to be more than satisfactory. The skills that chief executives stated that they possessed only to a limited degree were also those they regarded as being of lesser importance to their work. However, external and internal communications skills stand out in this regard; in these areas, the chief executives rated their own levels of competence as being significantly lower than the importance of these skills. More than two-thirds of the chief executives wished to spend more time on skills enhancement; pressure of time was stated to be the most significant barrier in this regard.

148

2. The project’s activities in chronological order March 2003

Workshop in Fredensborg.

August 2003

E-survey 1.

September 2003 Opening Conference ”Executive management makes a difference”. Executive management workshop with Robert D. Behn, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University November 2003

The three theme panels commence work.

December 2003

Establishment of the three research teams.

February 2004

E-survey 2. Workshop conference ”Debate on chief executive challenges”. Meeting between the Forum Board and the three research teams. The international research teams carry out focus group interviews among chief executives from state, county and municipal administrations.

April 2004

Regional meetings on ”Executive management and communication in the knowledge society” (organised by theme panel 3). National research team carries out interviews with public sector chief executives. E-survey 3 of a representative selection of managers at the level immediately beneath that of the chief executive (deputy directors, department heads, heads of administration).

May/June 2004

The international research team carries out interviews with top politicians from the state, counties and the municipalities.

June 2004

Dialogue session on the theme ”Executive management in occupational professional environments” (organised by theme panel 2). The three theme panels submit their contributions to the three research teams.

149

August 2004

Midpoint Conference ”On the trail of chief executive excellence”.

September 2004 The secretariat and the Forum Board prepare a comprehensive list of Code recommendations and questions, on the basis of input from the three research teams and the three theme panels. October 2004

Code Seminar I ”Chief executive excellence in daily life – your turn to speak” (Aarhus and Copenhagen).

November 2004 Code Seminar II ”Chief executive excellence in daily life – your turn to speak” (Copenhagen) December 2004 Camp Code I.

150

Jan. – Feb. 2005

The Forum Board draws up the final Code for Chief Executive Excellence.

February 2005

International development seminar for the target group. Management Excellence in the Knowledge Society, North Carolina State University, with James Svara and Donald Kettl.

March 2005

International development seminar for the target group. An International Perspective on Networks, Complexity and E-governance, Erasmus University Rotterdam, with Christopher Pollitt.

March 2005

Camp Code II.

May 2005

Conference ”Public Governance – a Code for Chief Executive Excellence in Denmark”.

3. Conference, workshop and seminar programmes (in chronological order) Workshop in Fredensborg (Marts 2003, Fredensborg) 13.15

Welcoming speech Board Chairperson Karsten Dybvad

13.30

Executive management when professionalism, politics and management must go hand in hand Introduction: Erik Jylling. Chairperson: Otto Larsen

14.45

Executive management in a political organisation Introduction: Kurt Klaudi Klausen. Chairperson: Peter Gorm Hansen

16.00

Coffee break

16.15

The chief executive and the surrounding world Introduction: Niels Åkerstrøm Andersen. Chairperson: Jørgen Rosted

17.30

Towards a definition of Public Governance Introduction: Ove Kaj Pedersen. Chairperson: Henrik Hassenkam

18.15

Coffee break

18.30

Discussion and ”What now...?” Summary: Henrik Hassenkam

19.30

Dinner

Opening Conference: Executive management makes a difference (1 September 2004, Axelborg) 13.00

Welcome to the conference Conference chairperson: Connie Hedegaard, journalist and host of the TV programme DR Deadline

13.05

Executive management in public sector organisations Karsten Dybvad, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Finance

151

13.25

Great Challenges for Public Leaders Robert D. Behn PhD, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University

14.25

Break

14.40

Corporate Governance – what is its relevance for Public Governance? Lars Nørby Johansen, Chairperson of the Nørby Committee

15.05

Panel: reflection and debate - Bo Johansen, Chief Executive, Aarhus County Council - Jens Christian Birch, Chief Executive, Greve Municipality - Jørgen Rosted, Development Manager, National Business and Housing Agency - Dorthe Pedersen PhD, Senior Lecturer, Department of Management, Politics and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School

15.50

Managing Strategic Change Demands on Leadership in Public Organisations Prof. David Wilson, Marketing and Strategic Management Group, Warwick Business School

16.35

Panel comments and questions from the participants

17.00

What now? – The Forum for Top Executive Management after the Opening Conference Peter Gorm Hansen, CEO, Local Government Denmark

Workshop conference: Debate on chief executive challenges (24 February 2004, Danish Architecture Centre, Copenhagen) 13.00

Welcoming speech and presentation of the day’s programme Jens Kristian Gøtrik, Chief Medical Officer

13.15

Workshops 1. The chief executive’s advice in the political process – a case study on the political need for durable strategies, and on the unpredictability of the players. Debate paper: Jens Christian Birch, Chief Executive, and Niels Højberg, Chief Executive 2. Leadership and conflict management when professional groups collide – a case study on managerial posts, areas of responsibility and external mobilisation.

152

Debate paper: Bo Smith, Permanent Secretary, and Peter Orebo Hansen, Director of Health Services. 3. Executive management, personnel and the media – a case study of what happens when a personnel matter is used in a media campaign. Debate paper: Niels Aalund, Chief Executive 15.00

Coffee break

15.15

Public sector chief executives’ roles and challenges – seen from the outside Prof. Donald Kettl, Prof. James Svara and Prof. Christopher Pollitt. Chairperson: Henrik Kassenkam, Senior Advisor

17.15

Summary and thanks to participants: Henrik Kassenkam, Senior Advisor

Regional meetings: Executive management and communication in the knowledge society (April 2004, Copenhagen and Roskilde) Questions for debate: - What new challenges does the knowledge society pose to the organisation of executive management tasks? Executive management – as team, person or function? - How can the chief executive make strategic use of communication in relation to the daily management tasks, and in interaction with citizens, users and other stakeholders? Meeting chairpersons and presenters: Lisbeth Lollike, Director, State Employers’ Authority Professor Niels Åkerstrøm, Copenhagen Business School Mogens Hegnsvad, Chief Executive, Græsted-Gilleleje Municipality Erik Lohmann-Davidsen, Chief Executive, Roskilde County Council Agenda: 15.00

Welcoming speech and introduction Debate and workshops Common summary

17.00

Conclusion

153

Dialogue session: Managing occupational professionals – challenges, dilemmas and conflicts (9 June 2004, KL Building)

154

10.00

Welcoming speech Suzanne Aaholm, Chief Executive, chairperson of theme panel two, welcomes participants and introduces the work of the theme panel.

10.20

A researcher’s perspective on the management of occupational professional environments Theoretical introduction to the issues by Dorthe Pedersen, Senior Lecturer, Copenhagen Business School.

10.40

Another world? – Executive management in occupational professional environments Experiences from interviews with chief executives and occupational professionals, Eva Zeuthen Bentsen, Department Head, Danish Regions.

11.00

Break

11.15

Why is it so difficult? – Seen from an occupational professional’s perspective Three occupational professional managers are interviewed on their view of management and chief executives in specialised environments. The panel includes Erik Skoubo Kristensen, Surgeon, Peter Bach-Mogensen, Department Head, and Lisbeth Lentz, Area Manager.

12.30

Lunch

13.30

Why is it so difficult? – Seen from a chief executive’s perspective Three chief executives from the state and local authorities are interviewed on their view of management in specialised environments. The panel includes Mogens Hegnsvad, Chief Executive, Per Okkels, Chief Executive, and Jens Andersen, Agency Director.

14.30

Break

14.45

Summary of open interviews

15.00

What are the ”ten commandments” for good management in occupational professional environments? Henrik Kassenkam, Senior Advisor, presents ten challenging proposals for good management in occupational professional environments.

15.15

Parallel workshops – on the solutions to the morning’s challenges, problems and dilemmas

16.30

Summary

Midpoint Conference: On the trail of chief executive excellence (30 August 2004, Øksnehallen) 12.30 12.40

Welcoming speech and opening of the conference Conference chairperson Mikael Kamber, Journalist, TV-2 On the trail of chief executive excellence Peter Gorm Hansen, CEO, Local Government Denmark, and member of the Forum Board

12.55

Public Governance in Denmark – when a Code for chief executive excellence is the answer Presentation by Prof. Kurt Klaudi Klausen and Prof. Ove Kaj Pedersen. The debate will be introduced by a review team: - Niels Preisler, Permanent Secretary, Ministry for Refugees, Immigrants and Integration - Erik Lohmann-Davidsen, Chief Executive, Roskilde County Council - Per Mathiasen, Chief Executive, Skive Municipality

13.40

Coffee break

13.50

Values and management between hierarchy, market, network and clan – challenges, dilemmas and strategies for modern chief executives Presentation by Karsten Vrangbæk, External Lecturer, and Prof. Torben Beck Jørgensen. The debate is introduced by a review team: - Peter Loft, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Taxation - Palle Lund, Chief Executive, Vejle County Council - Søren Thorup, Chief Executive, Hillerød Municipality

14.35

Break and refreshments

14.55

A Code for Senior Government Executives: Leading for the Future Presentation by Prof. Christopher Pollitt, Donald Kettl and James Svara. The debate is introduced by the panel: - Michael Dithmer, Permanent Secretary, Danish Ministry of Economic and Business Affairs - Jesper Jarmbæk, Agency Director, National Survey and Cadastre - Per Okkels, Chief Executive, North Jutland County Council - Søren Lund Hansen, Chief Executive, Varde Municipality

16.05

Evaluation of chief executives Otto Larsen, CEO, Danish Regions, and member of the Forum Board, and Kurt Brusgaard, Director, Ray & Berndtson

17.00

Public Governance – from research contributions to executive management in the daily routine Karsten Dybvad, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Finance, and chairperson of the Forum Board

155

Code Seminars I and II: Chief executive excellence in daily life – your turn to speak (October and November 2004, Copenhagen and Aarhus) Aim: I. II.

Preliminary discussion and prioritisation of the recommendations in the general list Second discussion, prioritisation and formulation of the recommendations in the revised general list

Agenda – Code Seminars I and II: 12.00

Arrival and lunch

13.00

Welcoming speech and commencement

13.30

Code workshops

15.00

Presentation and discussion of the groups’ choices

15.45

Summary and contextualisation

16.00

Wine reception

Camp Code I (December 2004, Kullen)

156

Friday 13.00

Lunch

13.45

Welcoming speech and introduction

14.10

Executive management in our time – reflections on the Code Reflections on our own leadership models. What did this executive stand for?

14.40

The chief executive and relations with the surrounding world Joint discussion of the general list’s recommendations.

15.40

Break

15.50

The chief executive’s management of the organisation Discussion of the recommendations on the basis of the calendar exercise: What have you spent your time on during the last one to two weeks? Prioritisation.

17.30

Break

18.00

The chief executive’s interplay with the political leadership Joint discussion and qualification of the recommendations.

20.00

Dinner

Saturday 09.00

The Code in practice Discussion of the launch and implementation. What can promote or inhibit the impact of the Code?

10.45

The Code – overall prioritisation Group prioritisation of the ten most important recommendations.

12.15

The final litmus test Summary of the prioritisation. What picture is emerging?

12.45

Conclusion

Seminar: Management Excellence in the Knowledge Society (Uge 8, North Carolina State University, USA) Tuesday 09.30

Introduction and opening remarks

09.45

The Code for Danish Top Executives: Assessing Challenges and Capabilities in Your Organisation Professor James Svara, North Carolina State University

11.15

Assessing Organisational Climate Director James Horner, Administrative Officers Management Program, North Carolina State University

12.00

Lunch

13.30

Small group exercise: Identifying your preferred organisational characteristics

14.45

The Code for Danish Top Executives Professor Donald Kettl, Fels Institute of Government, University of Pennsylvania

17.30

Reception with local academics and government officials

157

Wednesday 09.00

The Code for Competencies for Top Executives: Meeting the Challenges Professor Donald Kettl og Professor James Svara

10.00

Expanding Competencies by Building Balanced Teams City Manager Pamela A. Syfert, Charlotte, North Carolina

12.00

Lunch

13.30

Result-based Management President C. Morgan Kinghorn, National Academy of Public Administration Small group exercise: Assessing the performance management systems in your organisation. Kinghorn will be available as a “consultant” to permanent secretaries and directors general; Syfert will be available as a ”consultant” to regional and municipal CEOs

16.00

Comparative Perspectives on Leadership: The responsibilities of Canadian Deputy Ministers Vice-President Ralph Heintzman, The Public Service Human Ressources Management Agency of Canada

18.30:

Dinner Conversation on leadership challenges Ralph Heintzman

Thursday 09.00

Introduction to Special Topic for Workshop: Management in the knowledge society President Emeritis Costis Toregas, Public Technology Inc Small group exercise: Assessing the use and new potential for ICT in your organisation

12.00

Lunch

14.00

Integration of ICT into organisational management and relations with the public Professor David Garson, North Carolina State University Small group exercise: Incorporating new technologies in the management of your organisation. Toregas and Garson will be available as “consultants”

158

19.00 Friday 09.00

Dinner

Using assessments for professional and organisational development Assistant Professor of Psychology Bart Craig, North Carolina State University

11.00

Summing up and moving forward James Svara

12.00

Lunch and presentation of certificates to participants

Seminar: An International Perspective on Networks, Complexity and E-governance (Uge 9, 2005, Erasmus University Rotterdam) Tuesday 10.00

Introduction

10.15

Getting to grips with the code Professor Christopher Pollitt

12.30

Lunch at Faculty Club

14.00

Government Reforms: lessons from the past Professor Walter Kickert

15.30

Top executives and ministers: the Dutch experience Professor Paul t’Hart

Evening

Dinner and presentation: Media Pressures Politicle journalist Ton Planken

Wednesday 09.00

E-governance skills for top executives Professor Victor Bekkers

12.30

Lunch at Faculty Club

14.00

Competencies: Designing a system for implementation Professor Christopher Pollitt

159

Thursday 09.00

Steering networks Dr. Erik-Hans Klijn

12.30

Lunch at Faculty Club

14.00

Managing with complexity Professor Geert Teisman

Evening

Dinner Speaker: Arthur van Leeuwen – CEO, Financial Market Authority

Friday 09.00 – 12.00

International links for top executives Michael Duggett, Director General, IIAS

12.00 – 13.00

Lunch at Faculty Club

13.00 – 14.00

Summing up and presentation of certificates to participants Professor Christopher Pollitt

Conference: Public Governance – a Code for chief executive excellence (10 May 2005, Børsen)

160

12.00

Light lunch

12.30

Welcoming speech and opening of the conference Thomas Larsen, Political Commentator, Berlingske Tidende, conference chairperson

12.45

Common norms for executive management in the public sector Karsten Dybvad, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Finance, chairperson of the Forum for Top Executive Management

13.10

Reflections on the Code Jørgen Rosted, Development Manager, National Agency for Enterprise and Construction

13.25

The Code seen from the mayor’s chair Carl Holst, Chief Executive, Southern Jutland County Council, and Nick Hækkerup, Mayor, Hillerød Municipality

14.00

The Code in the daily routine – three personal stories Niels Bernstein, Permanent Secretary, Prime Minister’s Office Niels Højberg, Chief Executive, Funen County Council Suzanne Aaholm, Chief Executive, Køge Municipality

14.45

Break

15.15

The Code seen from outside Lars Rebien Sørensen, Managing Director, Novo Nordisk Lars Nørby Johansen, Managing Director, Group 4 Securicor, chairperson of the Committee on Corporate Governance

15.45

The Code – future perspectives Peter Gorm Hansen, CEO, Local Government Denmark, member of the Forum Board

16.00

Public Governance as an International Trend towards Excellence – the Danish Contribution professor James Svara, North Carolina State University

16.30

Excellence in top executive management – a prerequisite for an innovative Denmark Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen

16.50

Conclusion Thor Pedersen, Minister of Finance

17.00

Reception

161

4. The Forum’s publications Discussion papers - Executive management makes a difference – discussion paper for Opening Conference, 1 September 2003 - On the trail of chief executive excellence – discussion paper for conference on 30 August 2004 - From research to practice – impressions and inspiration from the conference on 30 August 2004 Case Studies (Workshop conference, February 2004) - The Battle of Midtown – a case study on executive management in the cross-fire between politicians, the organisation and the surrounding world (February 2004) - The Battle for Hearts at Ledreborg – a case study on managerial posts, areas of responsibility and external mobilisation (February 2004) - Louisehøj – county psychiatric management under pressure. A case study of what can happen when a staff matter is used in a media campaign (February 2004) From the theme panels - Ten statements on new challenges for chief executive excellence (June 2004) - Another world? Executive management in occupational professional environments (June 2004) - In dialogue with chief executives – dialogue from the seminar on executive management in professional environments (August 2004) - Executive management and communication in the knowledge society (August 2004) E-surveys - The Public Sector Chief Executive – a portrait of the profile, career, tasks and managerial challenges (August 2003) - The public sector chief executive’s view of advice-giving, management and skills (February 2004) - Chief executive excellence – a survey undertaken among public sector managers who report to chief executives (August 2004)

162

Research contributions - An investigation of chief executive excellence (Kurt Klaudi Klausen & Ove Kaj Pedersen, Aug. 2004) - A value-based contribution to the Code for chief executive excellence (Torben Beck Jørgensen & Karsten Vrangbæk, Aug. 2004) - Towards a Danish Concept of Public Governance: An International Perspective (Donald F. Kettl, Christopher Pollitt & James H. Svara, Aug. 2004)

5. Participant lists Three Theme Panel Theme Panel 1: The interplay between the political leader and the chief executive concerning goals and strategies for the organisation Niels Højberg, Chief Executive, Funen County Council (spokesperson for the panel) Jens Christian Birch, Chief Executive, Greve Municipality Lisbeth Finderup, Chief Executive, Nordborg Municipality (until March 2004) Jesper Holm, Chief Executive, Helle Municipality Niels Vad Sørensen, Chief Executive, Aarhus Municipality Karoline Prien Kjeldsen, Permanent Secretary, Danish Ministry of Culture Torsten Hesselbjerg, National Commissioner of Police Anne Lind Madsen, Director, National Board of Industrial Injuries Claes Nilas, Managing Director, Greater Copenhagen Authority Professor Ove Kaj Pedersen, University of Copenhagen & Copenhagen Business School Professor Kurt Klaudi Klausen, University of Southern Denmark Carsten Greve, Senior Lecturer, University of Copenhagen Henrik Kassenkam, Senior Advisor, Ministry of Finance Secretariat: Local Government Denmark, with: Solvejg Schulz Jakobsen, Assistant Director Lise Balslev, Consultant Theme Panel 2: When professionalism, politics and management must go hand in hand Suzanne Aaholm, Chief Executive, Køge Municipality (spokesperson for the panel) Bjarne Pedersen, Chief Executive, Søllerød Municipality Jørgen Schmidt, Chief Executive, Ikast Municipality

163

Per Okkels, Chief Executive, North Jutland County Council Bo Smith, Permanent Secretary, Danish Ministry for Employment Annemette Digmann, Head of Education Department, Aarhus County Council Jens Chr. Gøtrik, Director, National Board of Health Jens Andersen, Director, National Rail Authority Claus Juhl, Director, Danish Agency for Governmental Management Dorthe Pedersen, Senior Lecturer, Copenhagen Business School Professor Finn Borum, Copenhagen Business School Henrik Kassenkam, Senior Advisor, Ministry of Finance Secretariat: Danish Regions, with: Eva Zeuthen Bentsen, Assistant Director Merete Pagter Møller, Administrative Officer Line Nørbæk, Administrative Officer Theme Panel 3: Executive management and communication in the knowledge society Leo Bjørnskov, Permanent Secretary, Ministry for Science, Technology and Development (spokesperson for the panel) Allan Vendelbo, Chief Executive, Ballerup Municipality Mogens Hegnsvad, Chief Executive, Græsted-Gilleleje Municipality Niels Aalund, Chief Executive, Viborg County Council Peter Loft, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Taxation Lisbeth Lollike, Director, State Employers’ Authority Professor Niels Åkerstrøm Andersen, Copenhagen Business School Professor Steen Hildebrandt, Aarhus School of Business Henrik Kassenkam, Senior Advisor, Ministry of Finance Secretariat: Ministry of Finance, with: Elisabeth Hvas, Assistant Director Tine Vedel Kruse, Chief Consultant Barbara Taudorf, Administrative Officer

Three research teams Professor Torben Beck Jørgensen, University of Copenhagen Karsten Vrangbæk, Senior Lecturer, University of Copenhagen Professor Ove Kaj Pedersen, University of Copenhagen/Copenhagen Business School Professor Kurt Klaudi Klausen, University of Southern Denmark

164

Professor Donald F. Kettl, University of Wisconsin Professor James H. Svara, North Carolina State University Professor Christopher Pollitt, Erasmus University Rotterdam Sparring partner: Carsten Greve, Senior Lecturer, University of Copenhagen/Copenhagen Business School

Participants in the Forum Board’s workshops Camp Code Claes Nilas, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Family and Consumer Affairs Leo Bjørnskov, Permanent Secretary, Ministry for Science, Technology and Development Kim Høgh, Chief Executive, Birkerød Municipality Lisbeth Lollike, Director, State Employers’ Authority Niels Højberg, Chief Executive, Funen County Council Per Mathiasen, Chief Executive, Skive Municipality Per Okkels, Chief Executive, North Jutland County Council Peter Loft, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Taxation Suzanne Aaholm, Chief Executive, Køge Municipality Fredensborg Workshop Anders Kretzschmar, Director, National Business and Housing Agency Bo Johansen, Chief Executive, Aarhus County Council Per Okkels, Chief Executive, North Jutland County Council Jes Lunde, Technical Director, North Jutland County Council Lisbeth Finderup, Chief Executive, Nordborg Municipality Anders Vestenholtz, Chief Executive, Stenløse Municipality Jens Christian Birch, Chief Executive, Greve Municipality Torsten Hesselbjerg, National Commissioner of Police Jytte Lyngvig, Chief Executive Officer, Danish Medicines Agency Mogens Bundgaard-Nielsen, Managing Director, Sund&Bælt Professor Ove Kaj Pedersen, Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen Professor Kurt Klaudi Klausen, University of Southern Denmark, Odense Professor Niels Åkerstrøm Andersen, Copenhagen Business School Erik Jylling, Chairman, Danish Association of Junior Doctors

165

Forum Board and Secretariat Forum Board Christian Kettel Thomsen, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Finance (chairperson, appointed September 2005) Karsten Dybvad, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Finance (chairperson, resigned September 2005) Otto Larsen, CEO, Danish Regions Peter Gorm Hansen, CEO, Local Government Denmark Jens Christian Birch, Chief Executive, Greve Municipality (appointed December 2003) Erik Lohmann-Davidsen, Chief Executive, Roskilde County Council (appointed November 2004) Jørgen Rosted, Development Manager, National Business and Housing Agency (resigned January 2005) Henrik Kassenkam, Senior Advisor, Ministry of Finance Secretariat Ministry of Finance Elisabeth Hvas, Assistant Director Camille Hersom, Administrative Officer (until April 2003) Jens Qvesel, Administrative Officer (until December 2003) Barbara Taudorf, Administrative Officer (until December 2004) Tine Vedel Kruse, Chief Consultant (from March 2004) Berit Didriksen, Administrative Officer (from March 2005) Danish Regions Eva Zeuthen Bentsen, Assistant Director (until March 2005) Sisse Vase Fallinge, Administrative Officer (until March 2004) Merete Pagter Møller, Administrative Officer (Oct. 2003 – Feb. 2005) Line Nørbæk, Administrative Officer (Feb. 2004 – March 2005) Marie Louise Bloch Poulsen-Hansen, Administrative Officer (from January 2005) Local Government Denmark Solvejg Schulz Jakobsen, Assistant Director Lise Balslev, Consultant Birgit Øbakke, Consultant, (July 04 – Dec. 04)

166