The Public Administration Select Committee has today published a report which is deeply critical of the Government’s ability when it comes to strategy.
While this is old news as far as Cowan Global are concerned, we’ve been stating as much for months, the Government’s response suggests that still no one is listening.
The Parliamentary Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) has today published a report; ‘Strategic Thinking in Government: without National Strategy, can viable Government strategy emerge?’
The report tells us that a lack of strategic thinking is leading to a “patch and mend” approach to policy making and that an absence of national strategy was leading to mistakes such as those following the recent budget.
In an appraisal which presents nothing new to regular readers of this blog, the report also states that the aims set out in the Coalition agreement were too meaningless to serve any meaningful purpose.
You might be mistaken in thinking the PASC is an opposition led group. In fact it is a cross party committee chaired by Conservative MP Bernard Jenkin who states; “this is a long-term problem.”
In a scathing analysis of the Government’s strategic ineptitude the PASC report expresses concern at the Government’s “inability to express coherent and relevant strategic aims.” The report goes on; “This factor also militates against clear thinking about presentation, which was evident in the aftermath of the Budget and in response to the possibility of industrial action by tanker drivers.”
As an analysis of the Government’s knowledge of and ability to devise and deliver strategy, the report does not stop there stating; “There remains a critical unfulfilled role at the centre of government in coordinating and reconciling priorities, to ensure that long-term and short-term goals are coherent across departments.”
PASC Chairman Jenkin called on the Government to publish a statement of National Strategy in late spring or early summer each year saying it could introduce the next Budget process and make clear how specific policy measures announced in the following months tied in with long-term objectives.
“This is not about abdicating policy-making to opinion polls, but national strategy must appreciate what sort of country the public aspires for the UK to be,” he said. “Failing to do so in the long-term undermines national self-confidence, and in the short-term could have catastrophic consequences.”
It makes damning reading and reinforces the numerous examples of poor strategic thinking from government all too frequently reported on this blog. However, what the report does not ask (and therefore answer) are two key questions:
Does the Government understand what good strategy is and, if not, where are they taking their advice on strategy from?
The clear evidence of recent months and years is that the majority of politicians (not just the Government) have a poor understanding of good strategy. The danger is that they do not realise this and therefore are not taking action to remedy the problem. They think they are expert where, in reality, they are far from being so.
This is demonstrated by the choices made when seeking advice. Until recently the Prime Minister’s strategy advisor was Steve Hilton, a leading ‘Blue-Sky thinker’ but far from strategy expert. At least Hilton’s appointment suggested recognition of the need for sound advice however since his departure the PM has chosen not to replace him.
In response to the PASC report, this low on understanding and sound advice government has said it has “a very clear objective to bring down the deficit and restore economic growth.”
They could not have given a more clear demonstration of their lack of understanding, yet again, quite clearly confusing goals with strategy.
Footnote 1:
While this author welcomes the report I am disappointed that the PACS report does not recognise the inherent flaws in the policy of ‘Initiativeitis’ employed by both the previous and current governments and now widespread in its application. It is a policy which demonstrates better than any other the poor understanding of strategy evident at Westminster.
Footnote 2:
In 1999 Justin Kruger and David Dunning (Cornell University) published ‘Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognising One’s Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments.” (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1999, Vol 77, No 6, 1121-1134) In their concluding remarks they state; “We propose that those with a limited knowledge in a domain suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach mistaken conclusions and make regrettable errors, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realise it.” In short without a critical friend, without skilled, knowledgeable advisors, the Government are operating in exactly the space defined by Kruger and Dunning; that of the unskilled and unaware.
Read the full PACS Report here.
© Jim Cowan, Cowan Global Limited, April 2012
IS KING CANUTE ADVISING THE GOVERNMENT ON STRATEGY TO COUNTER OBESITY?
29 04 2012Last week a new report forecast that by 2035 diabetes would cost the NHS 17% of its entire budget with obesity being a major contributing factor.
In place of decisive action to stem the tide, the Government are employing a strategy of asking people nicely and hoping lifestyles will change; more a King Canute style policy of inflated self-belief based on little but hope rather than clearly mapped out actions and measures.
A new report from the York Health Economics Consortium due for publication in late May, warns that the majority of NHS spending on diabetes is avoidable. The ‘Impact Diabetes’ report, commissioned by Diabetes UK, the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation and Sanofi, suggests that 80% of the NHS’s £9.8bn annual UK diabetes bill goes on the cost of treating complications. Experts advise that much of this is preventable with better health checks and better education.
Baroness Barbara Young from Diabetes UK said; “The report shows that without urgent action, the already huge sums of money spent on treating diabetes will rise to unsustainable levels that threaten to bankrupt the NHS.
“If this rise in diabetes is allowed to continue, as is happening at the moment, it will simply be disastrous for the NHS and wreck NHS budgets. I think we have a car crash coming.
“But the most shocking part of this report is the finding that almost four-fifths on NHS diabetes spending goes on treating complications that in many cases could have been prevented.”
Among the areas requiring urgent attention from government is the ticking obesity time-bomb. However, far from acting decisively with strategy laying out clear actions and measures, successive governments have done fair impressions of King Canute sitting on the beach only in place of holding back the sea they believe they will hold back the obesity tidal wave.
In August last year the Telegraph reported that many of the world’s leading experts proposed that the time had come to tax unhealthy foods, the alternative maintenance of the status quo likely to result in nearly half of UK adults being obese by 2030.
Obese people suffer more with diabetes, heart disease and cancer posing a serious threat to the NHS’s ability to cope. The threat is so serious that The Lancet predicted that by 2050 fighting health problems caused by obesity would absorb over a third of the NHS’s budget.
Professor Steven Gortmaker, from the Harvard School of Public Health, said taxing unhealthy food and drink would save governments billions by reducing obesity-related illness as well as bringing in revenue. His analysis showed a ‘fat tax’ was the single most effective measure, in terms of lives saved. He said that such moves were effective and cost-effective to society.
Prof. Gortmaker went on to say that “so far, governments haven’t shown any leadership whatsoever. We have let the market do its work and it’s worked well to produce obesity.”
In the UK, Professor Klim McPherson, from Oxford University, criticised Coalition ministers for believing they could solve the problem without drastic action.
So, what of the Government’s strategy to tackle obesity?
David Cameron believes people can be “nudged” to better health by creating incentives to help them make better choices.
The Health Secretary Andrew Lansley has said, “rather than nannying people we will nudge them. Nudges are very important. Tax is not a nudge, tax is a shove.”
Anne Milton, the Health Minister sounded more tuned in to the scale of the problem when stating last August; “We’re too fat and we need to do something about it.” She then went on to state, “we have no plans to impose a fat tax.”
When Prof. Gortmaker advises that a fat tax would be “more effective and cost-effective to society,” he identifies key components of good strategy which is to be effective, efficient and economical. Good strategy cannot and should not be based on merely hoping for positive outcomes.
Taking lessons in strategy from King Canute is not wise. Perhaps someone could give the Government a nudge (or maybe a shove) in the right direction before the weight of obesity breaks our NHS.
© Jim Cowan, Cowan Global Limited, April 2012
Read more blogs by Jim Cowan
info@cowanglobal.net
Twitter @cowanglobal
Facebook.com/cowanglobal
Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: Andrew Lansley, Anne Milton, Baroness Young, Consultant, David Cameron, Diabetes, King Canute, News Comment, NHS, Obesity, Planning, Political Comment, Professor Gortmaker, Professor McPherson, Strategy
Categories : All Blogs, Consulting, News Comment, Strategy