C3. Leadership

1. A-Z of Commissioning C3. Leadership October 2010

2. Outline Introduction and context Theory and concepts Benefits Practical tips Case study Group exercise

3. C3. Leadership I. Introduction and context

4. Introduction

5. Leading the Children’s Services System • The whole local area – including resources and the local population

6. C3. Leadership II. Theory and concepts

7. Leadership in Children’s Services • Modern leadership in children’s services is customer centric and includes: • Working with partners to integrate services around the end user – moving from command and control to influencing and facilitative leadership • Leading the whole system • Communicating the vision for all children and young people • Cascading an understanding of the strategic vision across all partners, including parents and communities • Securing effective engagement of children and young people • Leading entrepreneurial thinking and service transformation

8. Theories and Models • The following leadership models are most appropriate to children’s services, and are explored further in this section of the module: • Goleman – leadership styles • Kotter – transformational and transactional leadership • Mintzberg – distributive leadership

9. Goleman Source: Daniel Golman

10. Kotter Source: John Kotter

11. Distributed Leadership • Mintzberg and others have written about distributive leadership, positing that leadership takes place at all different levels in the organisation. • Hartley and Allison’s (2000) research in public services shows that leadership is distributed and is often exercised at the boundaries of partnerships.

12. C3. Leadership III. Benefits

13. In High Performing Partnerships, Partners… • Purpose and Leadership – share a common vision and purpose, understood and accepted as important by each partner • Outcomes and Customer Focus – always focus on outcomes and work together to satisfy the needs and expectations of customers • Culture and Communications – promote ‘can do’ values and effective communications at all levels within the partnership and within partner organisations • Learning and Innovation – continuously seek improvements in activities and ways of working, learning from each other and from elsewhere • Management for Partnership Performance – put in place necessary management practices and resources, and manage changes needed to achieve partnership goals

14. Exercise • What personal leadership qualities or ‘leadership map’ supports you in having a stronger commissioning role? • What models or frameworks helps you think about your own leadership and that of others in your organisation and community? • Where do you see ‘leadership gaps’ ? • Where are your strengths and development needs as a leader in commissioning?

15. Leadership in Effective Partnerships… • Negotiating the “rules of engagement” for all the players • Creating the capacity to relate well • Encouraging learning and space for creativity and innovation • Brokering relationships between different belief systems • Using creative tension – drawing strength from difference • Creating trust • Developing mutuality

16. C3. Leadership IV. Practical tips

17. Six Principles of Good Governance • Focusing on the organisation’s purpose and on outcomes for citizens and service users • Performing effectively in clearly defined functions and roles • Promoting values for the whole organisation and demonstrating the values of good governance through behaviour • Taking informed, transparent decisions and managing risk • Developing the capacity and capability of the governing body to be effective • Engaging stakeholders and making accountability real

18. Fail Fail The Partnership Life Cycle Productivity Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Time Forming Frustration Functioning Flying

19. Push: Goal setting Driving Institutionalising Rational presentation Pull: Value driven Need fulfilment Vision Support Educate Effective Influencing Styles moral sense objectives personal will-power confidence positive future formal authority energy logical argument re-evaluation

20. Bridging – where… other’s contribution is important to you other must be committed to outcome you are open to influence – final decision not yet made other will not lose out other is not upset Attracting – where… you & other share common goals, values, aspirations other trusts & admires you other is unsure, directionless situation triggers important hopes, fears, values generating energy or sense of purpose is more important than other’s specific actions PULL Which Influencing Style?

21. Persuading – where… other respects your competence you have exclusive info alternative positions can be tested by facts & reason unemotional behaviour you are seen as objective, not competitive Asserting – where… both have a personal stake you have legitimate needs, requirements, expectations you can use pressures, incentives you are in control compliance is sufficient, not commitment other’s need to control is low PUSH Which Influencing Style?

22. Stakeholder Engagement and Participation Source: Audit Commission

23. Ladder of Participation 8. Child initiated shared decisions 7. Child initiated and directed 6. Adult initiated shared decisions 5. Consulted and informed 4. Assigned but informed 3. Tokenism 2. Participation as decoration 1. Manipulation Source: Roger Hart and the FreeChild Project

24. C3. Leadership V. Case study

25. Case Study • This local area partnership has been in existence for 18 months. Initially there was a lot of enthusiasm for it and the potential to focus all services on improving outcomes for children and young people. • With time, the partnership has developed exciting new projects but the partnership is functioning less well and there is little evidence to suggest transformation of major services or a step change in achieving better outcomes. • Leadership action was taken to review the partnership with a view to re-engage the key players with the core mission and purpose and revitalise their commitment to transformational change.

26. Case Study – What They Did • Recognised that the partnership had more potential but to achieve this they had to re-think leadership in the new context and to secure a strong commitment from all players to better outcomes for all children. • The concrete action they took was to: • Undertook a governance review using the good governance standards and use this to establish the rules of engagement. • Embraced the idea of distributed leadership and the need to invest in building this capacity in the system. • Created space to discuss what transformation and transition means and where they are in the lifecycle. • Looked for ways to build and embed new ways of working: CAF; TAC; BHLP and using tools such as OBA to achieve step changes in outcomes for children, young people and families

27. Case Study – What Happened • Renewed energy and greater trust and understanding between partners and clarity around expectations of each others’ contributions. • CAA singled out the partnership as being particularly effective in engaging partners in building their capacity and that of children and families. • Partnership able to demonstrate improved performance and outcomes around specialist services through better CAF, BHLP and LP processes. • Partners committed to constructively challenge each other’s contribution to get best value towards improved outcomes. • Partners readiness to pool budgets and to re-design existing services.

28. Case Study – So What? • There is a high degree of trust and confidence in the partnership and leadership is positively experienced at all levels. • Leaders in the partnership are more able to explore innovative ways to re-design children’s services system using tools such as OpenStrategy, exploring the possibilities of transforming the current system to one which is explicitly focussed on improving outcomes for children and young people.

29. C3. Leadership VI. Group exercise

30. Exercise – Shire Children’s Trust • A local area partnership in a large County has been established for the last 18 months and has been recently reviewed. • The review found that the partnership operates on the principle of different agencies working together where they can. • Progress in commissioning outcomes based services is patchy, morale is lower than expected, and it appears that members and key partners have not bought into transformational change through commissioning.

31. Exercise – Borough Children’s Trust • A local area partnership in a London Borough has been established for the last 18 months. They have worked very hard to get different agencies to come together in the new partnership. • They have commissioned new services and now have to generate efficiency savings at a time when they are just beginning to see the real benefits of partnership working and commissioning outcome based services. • The partnership was not anticipating the level of efficiencies that are now required and relationships are quite strained as a result.

32. Exercise • Choose one of the previous examples in your group and explore the scenario with a view to reflecting on the following questions: • What do you think might be the key issues? (Think about the different leadership models for partnerships and the and lifecycle curve.) • As leaders, what can you do to address each issue? What are your first actions to help a strategic partnership to perform effectively? • Whatever level you are at, what is the learning for your role in your strategic partnership?

33. www.commissioningsupport.org.uk