As a company that dedicates itself to public sector transformation, does it surprise anyone that we often run headlong into politics? No, me either. What I have been considering lately is how our clients view politics and how politics might be better utilized to serve, rather than impede, government reform. I'd like to share those musings as well as a "cool" idea from Beverly Stein, one of our newest network members.
First, my reflections --
To some clients, politics is a given - a fact of life that cannot be altered. I hear this in voices that say, I don't comment on the law. I just administer it. Some see politics as an obligation that must be attended to, but offers little value. An example might be a client who goes through the motions of a public hearing because it's required. For a few, politics is to be wielded to their personal advantage. To a reformer, none of these views are particularly helpful. And, even for reformers, including me when I was an executive, some consider politics something to be avoided. We try to get as much of our change done under the political radar screen.
There's got to be a fifth alternative the politics of reform! In the best sense of the word, politics is the bringing together of people's voices on public issues of import or to improve the operation of government. In that sense, politics must be embraced as an ally for those of us interested in the continued strength and betterment of the public sector.
Traditional methods of political engagement need to be supplemented...
For many of our clients, when they think about addressing the politics of an issue, they think about using traditional methods of political engagement, such as public hearings, public opinion surveys, "Blue Ribbon" study commissions, and advisory groups.
On the flip side, when individual members of the public want to become politically active, they think about traditional methods of elections, letters to their elected officials or to the editor, and, in some states, initiatives and referenda. If community activists are in the mix, especially those who have been trained under the school of Saul Alinsky, they may add marches, sit-ins, and demonstrations to the repertoire.
My intent with this Connie's Corner is to improve on this list of tactics for both reformers from the inside and from the outside - of government.
I have a list, albeit small, of ideas from our client engagements, and I am eager to hear of more. Here's a sampling.
-- In Iowa, the Governor has worked hard to articulate for the public what they might receive in exchange for their investment in transformation. He has asked for their patience with the change effort, and stated what their return will be in terms of reduced costs, improved performance, or both. We call this making the deal visible with the public.
-- When a East coast client was interested in ways to improve statewide equity of a public policy, we encouraged him to not only provide incentives for counties who got it right, but to publicize the costs of continued inequity inside the counties that didn't. That way, their local publics could decide if they wanted the practice to continue. (Our client decided not to do this, but I think additional work on public accountability tactics are warranted.)
-- Inside many engagements, clients who distinguish their primary customer from among all the people placing demands on them have reported being more effective in the political arena. (We have a whole process, called stakeholder management that helps clients think through ways to decrease political resistance and increase the passion of supporters while staying aligned with the interests of their customers.) Clients report that it helped them get past former behavior where balancing all the interests often lead to everybody getting a little something, and no one feeling particularly good about the lowest common denominator result.
What about citizen reformers?
Here's one cool idea from Beverly Stein, a new Public Strategies Group network member. You may know of Beverly. She's been a legislator, county executive, was instrumental in crafting and implementing Oregon's Progress Board, and recently ran for governor there. What you may not know is she also has great experience at the community organizing level.
What Beverly would like to do is educate large groups of community activists, service advocates, community based organizations, and non-profits about the language and principles of results-based budgeting and public sector reinvention. Her reason - to assist all these groups be even more prepared in their approach to political engagement in these tight budget times.
Rather than just asking for more money, or demanding that services continue, they would be positioned to offer creative solutions to policy makers who are also struggling to continue important public services. They would be able to respond to and critique, on the spot, those ideas that emerge in the atmosphere of budget cuts that don't advance reinvention.
I love this idea, as I am especially interested in examples where direct public engagement has worked well in government reform. Let me know if you have ideas to add to the list I've started. Let's make it a long one!
I'll end with my personal revision to Hubert Humphrey's quote:
The end is governing, a means is the politics of reform.
|
