One-third of public service executives have mentally ‘checked out,’ study suggests

Part of this ‘checking-out’  is within the nature of the public service itself: a bureaucratic, hierarchical culture, with divided accountability between the public service and the political level.

Exacerbated, of course, by the distrust between the two, and the general values and ideological divide:

Studies show those who do whatever they can to remove obstacles for employees have highly motivated staff – a phenomenon whose importance is typically underestimated by leaders, according to Dowden.

Dowden said people want to feel like they are making a meaningful contribution and, as long as they are fairly paid, will go the extra mile. The public service historically attracted people who wanted to make a difference, so they came to the job with a strong sense of purpose.

“Leaders and executives in an organization very much want to live their values and when they perceive gaps … or disconnect between values and purpose, that can be incredibly challenging to work through.”

Dowden said autonomy is another key driver of engagement and motivation. In the majority of organizations, executives have the most autonomy, with more control the higher up the chain they move. APEX’s surveys, however, show executives often feel they have little authority and are micromanaged. Surveys found executives feel this lack of control regardless of level, whether Ex 1 or Ex 5.

Autonomy comes almost entirely from the culture created by the direct supervisor. Those who don’t micro-manage and who give workers the freedom to work on projects in the way that suits them – while still being accountable – get the best results.

There are two kinds of micro-managers. The perfectionist – à la Steve Jobs – who have high standards and like control over the projects for which they are responsible.

The more toxic micro-manager seems to have a need for people to know who is charge, gives little autonomy to direct reports, doesn’t accept feedback and gets involved in the minutiae of a project.

The 2014 public service survey gives mixed messages on this front. Generally, employees – including 84 per cent of executives – are satisfied with their direct supervisors and feel they can count on them. They aren’t as positive about senior management, especially when it comes to making “timely and effective” decisions and ensuring critical information flows down to staff.

But Dowden said so much about leadership and management comes down to trust.

The Conservatives have made little secret of their distrust of the public service. Experts, including the Public Policy Forum, have cited the “trust gap” between politicians and public servants as the biggest challenge facing the next generation of leaders.

APEX has also flagged its concern about this relationship and the need to improve “understanding” between the two.

The lack of trust, coupled with the concentration of power and decision-making in the Prime Ministers Office and the Privy Council Office, has intensified the lack of control and authority many executives complain about today.

So while I was fully engaged during most of my time in the public service (and fortunate to have had an interesting career with supportive managers), there are structural limits to the degree of engagement  possible or desirable.

One-third of public service executives have mentally ‘checked out,’ study suggests