The main difference between the agencies I led related to their size. Smaller agencies such as the APS Commission and the Department of Housing did not require elaborate structures for control or to ensure collaboration as did larger agencies. The fundamentals of management, however, were the same and the issues very similar. The people-management issues were somewhat more complicated in agencies with different internal cultures to manage (which was true of housing as well as health), but in any organisation they require considerable effort by the agency head personally.
Agencies also have different cultures and it is sometimes important to shift the culture (Table 6.5).
Table 6.5 Enthusiasm, scepticism and cynicism
Balancing enthusiasm, scepticism and cynicism was a common challenge in each agency I led; however, the starting point differed each time.
I found the Department of Health in 1996 to be a rather cynical organisation, too quick to find fault elsewhere and to question motives. The uncertainty created by the change of government certainly added to unease, but did not explain the lack of trust within the organisation and with many external stakeholders. One of the themes of the leadership development strategy was to counter this cynicism through better understanding of the roles and perspectives of different groups within the department and across the health and family services system, while confirming the importance of scepticism (as fundamental to professional advising and to scientific discovery). I also encouraged enthusiasm for departmental policies and processes where these had been carefully developed and well considered within the organisation.
On the other hand, I found the Australian Public Service Commission in 2002 to be an enthusiastic little organisation, eager to embrace new ideas, particularly on management. It had pockets of cynicism, but its main weakness was its lack of scepticism about the latest management fads and fashions. One of the themes I pursued as Public Service Commissioner was to ‘hardwire’ the commission’s initiatives in leadership development and values-based management into the realities of public service administration (see Chapter 12).
Different personal styles clearly affect the approaches of agency heads to management. My own style was probably somewhere between a Tony Ayers (keenly interested in management) and an Ian Castles (keenly interested in policy analysis and relying on others to help manage the organisation): recognising from Ayers the vital importance of people management but knowing that I, perhaps not as much as Castles, needed support on the management side to complement my strength in policy analysis. I primarily used the executive and the management committee to support me, rather than delegating management responsibilities to a deputy, which Castles tended to do. My style was, I like to think, more collaborative than some of the more famous mandarins of the past (recent and decades ago), but my personality required some solitude to analyse and reflect on important issues, and then to take personal responsibility for my decisions. I was sometimes criticised for not having enough ‘mongrel’ in dealing with under-performing staff, but I would prefer to err on that side than the opposite: in any case, positive reinforcement is usually more effective than negative feedback.