Four different quotes from conversations I’ve had the past few weeks:
- “Tennis is just like dancing. You need to keep repeating the same movements so that you can memorise it. You have to train regularly because it’s muscle memory.”
- “Why do you expect people in government to reflect and learn and iterate? They don’t care. They do the job, get a salary, and are fine with whatever is going on as long as they don’t get imprisoned or sacked. They are french fry makers. You are looking for a chef. You need to make something that french fry makers can do.”
- “Most civil servants don’t view themselves as reformers. A lot of them think of themselves as mere soldiers. Some have given up, others who have upped and left. Changed careers or left the country. Why? Weariness. Exhaustion… It can get especially frustrating to hold the line or even push for something different, and you end up in a situation where the powers-that-be win. The work we do falls on deaf ears. That hurts a lot Ivy.”
- “An office that can spearhead the government’s preparation for AI and its effects in Philippine society? We can barely hit the minimum targets of what the department needs to do. Don’t expect any of the leaders here to think something like that.”
Quote #3 lingered a bit longer in my head since it happened on the heels of the chat with #2. And having both conversations was a bit of a doozy for me because of my own personal takes on the matter (more on that in next week’s blog).
It can get so easy to dump on government without personally knowing specific folks who are working tirelessly and thanklessly in these age-old institutions. Think government departments who are between 73 to 128 years old (n.b. that’s from young democracies). If you’ve explored the depths of the bureaucracy, know it like the back of your hand, and still have the energy each day to make things work or change even a tiny thing for the better, then my god are you a hero. But who, pray tell, actually knows the stories of these unsung and invisible public servants and what they’ve done? Of what it takes to make things happen or to ‘hold the line’ in order to block a politician’s vested interests? More importantly, is there anyone actually helping them beyond offering the usual online/Face-to-Face technical training? I’d personally prefer less weary and definitely less exhausted public servants who are making decisions for our public services, climate crisis, national security, among others. If the bureaucrats are leaving or burnt out, I’d be deeply worried and pretty afraid of what’s to come. Who’s meeting them where they are and designing support that is fit-for-purpose (*ahem* not donor driven)?
I was reminded of this powerful page from the book published by Public Digital. Granted this resource is about digital transformation — however! one big however here! — I’d argue that this is the heart of policy entrepreneurship. Of thinking and working politically. Navigation and securing clearance. Persuading and figuring out the real org chart. Sharing stories and getting to know who’s protecting whose interests. Sometimes it’s also about talking to people you normally wouldn’t talk to. Knowing the blockers, both the real and imagined. And yes, it’s about being angry yet keeping it on the down low. What I’d add to this achingly beautiful prose on bureaucratic hackers is one that other folks might raise an eyebrow on
Leadership
There I said it (and now I’ll do a Homer Simpson…)
Yes, leadership. My sincere hope is that external actors and development partners don’t forget that what we’re asking from public servants to do are works of leadership.
Learning-while-building-the-ship so that you can spearhead and execute a reform that’s never been done in the country’s history? Leadership. Managing an inter-agency team of at least 10 ministries who all have their own turfing/personal dynamics whilst being forced to work on a shared mission? Requires leadership capacities. Facilitating a multi-stakeholder meeting where folks have various ways of framing and approaching the socio — political problem yet you need to find common ground and ways of working despite clashing ideologies and tense relationships with some personalities. Leadership with a huge chunk of mediation, hosting generative dialogue, empathic listening, etc. You get my drift.
Leadership means going somewhere we’ve never been before. I would have expected that when we speak of policy entrepeneurs and bureaucracy hackers, we would look into and unpack types of leadership styles and capacities deployed in the wild by these brave individuals. Michael Mintrom shared the common attributes, skills, and strategies of policy entrepreneurs (see table below) However, I have yet to come across any materials or blogs documenting anything on leadership and policy entrepreneurs. Does anyone have any leads?
I had to write this down tonight (I spy my clock — 11:48pm Manila time) since something has been niggling at the back of my head. I’m thinking about this moment in time of our collective history, where we all know deep in our bones that our governments and age-old institutions need to shape-shift in order to operate in a manner that meets the needs of the current and forecast what future generations require. The line that I’ve been hearing in many global gatherings since 2013 goes something like — It’s time to move away from 20th century mindsets and make sure we create 21st century governments for 21st century citizens.
For me, the questions are: How do our governments learn? How do public servants regularly build muscles for reflection and learning?
In Asia specifically, how do we move past pilot-itis and siloed ‘experiments’ that seek to do something new yet doesn’t even permeate the larger institutional structure? How do we “scale deep”?
If the assumption is that public servants are ‘soldiers’ or ‘french fry makers’ who happen to be exhausted — what’s the approach and how do we best engage them?
I’m a bit obsessed with the idea because it is only in the endless cycle of learning, reflecting, refining, and testing do we come out of our status quo and birth new ways of thinking and doing. And we all know that to question the current state of things and to imagine better so that a wider public may benefit is — yet again — leadership.
More soon.
