# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We'd like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Accept additional cookies Reject additional cookies View cookies

Skip to main content

Framework to better understand the system in which policy is made and co-designed with civil servants from across the government.

Documents

Request an accessible format.

If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email alternative.formats@education.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

Details

The Policy System Framework covers four main pillars:

inputs and resources

practices and processes

people and relationships

culture, and context

For each pillar, the framework sets out the respective components with descriptors, designed for those who are applying the framework to their own policy system to support capability-building.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Framework to better understand the system in which policy is made and co-designed with civil servants from across the government.

# data[].attributes.body
10 podcasts for public servants (apolitical.co)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Podcasts are the happy medium between work and play. Sometimes, you just need a listen utterly unrelated to your job. Something to escape to. But sometimes a podcast is precisely what you need to re-inject some energy into your role and to remind you why you do what you do.

There are many podcasts about politics. Perhaps too many. But there are far fewer options focusing on the people keeping government moving. You might have noticed that both Apolitical and our sister organisation, The Apolitical Foundation, recently launched government-flavoured podcasts. We want to share those and celebrate the podcasts that inspired us. Happy listening.

Here's a podcast we created with the Centre for Public Impact. We're really proud of it. It's a gorgeous soundscape featuring policy stars and electric ideas. The latest episode dives into bright ideas for climate action in cities. From digital twin cities to neighbourhood heat-sharing networks, it's a helpful dose of climate hope.

What's it like to create a democracy from scratch? Should we pay closer attention to politicians' mental health? What does a climate hero look like in government? This podcast asks the big questions, and uncovers some fascinating answers.

Local government is where national policy hits the road. It's where big ideas meet bin collections. It's also a nucleus for creative, replicable and scalable policy ideas. The Govlaunch podcast celebrates and explores innovation in local policy.

Ed Milliband, a former leader of the UK opposition party, meets bold policy thinkers and explores their ideas to tackle the big social and environmental problems we face.

Want to see behind the headlines on culture, society and current affairs across the African continent? This is the podcast for you.

This podcast by the Civil Service Environment Network looks closely at the intersection between climate challenges and policy possibilities. It's ideal for public servants working on climate.

What's the big picture in global diplomacy? Foreign policy hoovers up a lot of attention in the news media, but for public servants looking to go deeper, this is the podcast for you.

What goes on behind the scenes in the Australian government? This podcast lifts the curtain to share the stories and strategies that drive government.

Digital government isn't just an issue for an IT team or an outsourced tech tool. It's a culture shift. This is a podcast for public services looking to use digital tools to get better results for citizens.

We're cheating with this one. Democracy Group is a collection of government-focused shows in the USA. Check it out.

👋 You can create a post like this one! Share your thoughts with a community of public servants. Learn more

(Image Credit: Unsplash)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Podcasts are the happy medium between work and play. Sometimes, you just need a listen utterly unrelated to your job. Something to escape to. But sometimes a podcast is precisely what you need to re-inject some energy into your role and to remind you why you do what you do.

# data[].attributes.body
Handbooks | The Behavioural Insights Team (bi.team)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Through our work we have identified some of the fundamentals of doing good Explore work. This handbook aims to help behavioural insights practitioners apply them to developing their own solutions.

# data[].attributes.headline
Economic Justice and Rights - Apolitical Training

# data[].attributes.subject
Economic Justice and Rights - Apolitical Training

# data[].attributes.body
Economic Justice and Rights (apolitical.co)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This course is a part of the Apolitical Premium catalogue. Funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation makes it possible for us to offer this course free to any Apolitical member.

This course will give you insights into the world of women and girls' economic justice and rights. You'll find out why so many women are excluded from the same opportunities as men, why some women's contributions to their economies are disregarded, and why some women face more economic hardships than others. You'll tackle common misconceptions head-on, and explore how these untruths can impact the fight for women and girls' economic empowerment before delving into the detail on the main barriers to the cause. In the final section, you'll get to grips with methods used to advance women and girls' economic justice and rights around the world, by examining frameworks and other useful documents.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This course is a part of the Apolitical Premium catalogue. Funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation makes it possible for us to offer this course free to any Apolitical member. This course will give you insights into the world of women and girls' economic justice and rights.

# data[].attributes.headline
Social Purpose Leadership in 2030 - Report Summary 

# data[].attributes.subject
Social Purpose Leadership in 2030 - Report Summary 

# data[].attributes.body
Report summary: Social purpose leadership in 2030 (apolitical.co)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This report is authored by Heather Russek, Co-President, Creative Futures-a strategist, researcher, designer and innovation expert with 20 years of experience in policy innovation, healthcare leadership, management consulting, programme and project management, and strategy; Jessica Thornton, Co-President, Creative Futures-a futurist, facilitator, strategist and creative problem solver with 15+ years of experience in the public and nonprofit sector; and Camara Chambers, Senior Manager of Partnerships and Leadership Development, Leadership Lab at Toronto Metropolitan University-she has built her career over the past 15 years in roles that work at the heart of improving people's lives, working in the fields of equality, education, and community services.
Report name
Embracing Our Future: Social Purpose Leadership in 2030
Who wrote this report?

Creative Futures Studio Inc. helps public, nonprofit, and socially-minded leaders plan and prepare for their future. Using applied futures research, they help organisations navigate complexity and embrace uncertainty, arming them with the tools to think beyond present-day issues and imagine, prepare for, and navigate multiple potential futures. Learn more here.

The Leadership Lab is an action-oriented think-tank at Toronto Metropolitan University that develops leaders and solutions to make progress on our most pressing civic challenges. Through leadership development and policy and research activation, they are building a new generation of skilled and adaptive leaders and change-makers, at all ages and stages, to build a more trustworthy, inclusive society. As the Leadership Lab plans to expand its leadership training to reach more emerging leaders across Canada, this project was an exciting opportunity to gain invaluable insights into the skills that leaders will need to be effective in the coming years. Find out more about the Lab's work here.

In 2030, will co-leadership models be the new normal for public and nonprofit sector organisations? Or is it possible that we will have no leaders at all? Across Canada, leadership philosophies are evolving, responding to tremendous changes happening globally and locally. To better understand these emerging changes, and what they could mean for leadership approaches in 2030, Creative Futures and the Leadership Lab at Toronto Metropolitan University collaborated on a new research project, Embracing Our Future: Social Purpose Leadership in 2030.

Best quote

Organisations are acknowledging that the leadership skills of the past are not the leadership skills of the future.

Key takeaways:

Public and nonprofit organisations are facing a landmark moment for leadership transformation, and have an opportunity to redesign the organisational systems and structures that are no longer serving us.

There is tension between the past and future. Many public sector and not-for-profit leaders are making decisions based on the future, optimistic about how the changes underway create an opportunity for new leadership approaches. Other leaders are experiencing challenges adjusting to an increasingly complex and uncertain organisational environment, where their past leadership approaches are no longer serving them.

What if virtual teams were thriving in 2030? What if communities were truly at the centre of decision-making? What if the comprehensive wellness needs of teams were prioritised? This research demonstrates the possibility of new ways of approaching decision-making, organisational structures, and leadership philosophies.

What's in this report?

The purpose of this report is to demonstrate the possibility of new ways of approaching decision-making, organisational structures, and leadership philosophies in the nonprofit and public sectors. This report offers 13 emerging trends impacting leadership in 2030 based on conversations with 31 leaders from the public sector and not-for-profit organisations. To demonstrate how these changes could lead to better futures, Embracing Our Future offers three deeply optimistic future scenarios in 2030 to spark new thinking about the future of leadership. This research seeks to demonstrate how the challenges leaders and organisations face today could lead to positive change in the future.

Why should you read this report?

Current leadership models and structures are not working in many public sector and nonprofit contexts, and now is the time for transformation. Prior to COVID-19, many organisations were struggling to address everyday internal challenges, as well as external factors such as a growing sense of mistrust of public institutions, cybersecurity threats, the climate crisis, and polarised political opinions, all creating tension for traditional leadership philosophies. Many of these challenges have been intensified by COVID-19 stresses, a global awakening to the prevalence of systemic racism, financial constraints, and an increased focus on wellbeing and mental health. All of these challenges demonstrate the fraught nature of current leadership approaches, and the need to consider new approaches. Embracing Our Future describes three optimistic futures of leadership meant to inspire leaders to see how the challenges they face today could lead to positive changes down the road.

Who is this report for?

Embracing Our Future is focused on nonprofit and public sector leaders. However, this report invites all formal and informal leaders to reflect on their own organisational future, and what actions need to be initiated to embrace this landmark moment of leadership transformation.

🔗 Read the full report here. 🔗

👋 You can create a post like this one! Share your thoughts with a community of public servants. Learn more

(Image Credit: Unsplash)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Report summary: Social purpose leadership in 2030

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This report is authored by Heather Russek, Co-President, Creative Futures-a strategist, researcher, designer and innovation expert with 20 years of experience in policy innovation, healthcare leadership, management consulting, programme and project management, and strategy; Jessica Thornton, Co-President, Creative Futures-a futurist, facilitator, strategist and creative problem solver with 15+ years of

# data[].attributes.body
Charting your leadership pathway (apolitical.co)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The problem: Organisations recognise the importance of investing in their emerging and current leaders. However, the practice of authentic, intentional, and horizontal leadership remains a challenge.

Why it matters: Leadership impacts an organisation's ecosystems, values, culture, and initiatives (e.g. policies, programmes, services).

The solution: Be purposeful in your leadership self-development using these tips and advice.

Leadership development is a top challenge for organisations.

A Gartner survey reveals that 29% of employees do not believe their leader is authentic, empathetic, and supportive. Wouldn't it be great if you could make a real impact and become a memorable leader, gaining the interest and understanding of as many people as possible?

Leadership is who you are called to be

During voluntary one-on-one conversations with management (manager, director, senior executives) within the Ontario Public Service, I learned about their leadership defining moments. They described these defining moments as a pivotal time in their lives. A time when they were called upon to steer an organisation and teams in a time of crisis or need such as a global pandemic, or hosting a continental multi-sport event, or transforming an organisation's culture towards racial equity.

Reflecting on this time, they spoke about using lessons learned to grow personally and professionally. Their practical tips are:

1. Be authentic-know and accept who you are. This includes accepting your strengths and weaknesses. Do not force fit yourself into what you think are the ideal characteristics of a leader.

2. Be empathetic-take time to bring others along, even if it means slowing down. Your team needs to trust you, and likewise, you need to trust your team.

3. Be courageous-speak your truth and welcome different perspectives into the conversation. Create an environment of trust in bringing teams along through meaningful stakeholder engagement and fostering these relationships by inspiring a collective vision.

4. Be supportive-create a psychologically safe environment for your team. Be strategic in co-developing solutions through negotiations and active listening. Champion others so they can be recognised for the work they do.

In leadership, practical things matter. These tips provide us with an opportunity to learn and grow. It helps us to chart a pathway of self-development in our (in)formal roles as leaders.

Leadership self-development is a continuous journey

Each person shared that their self-development is a gradual process, in which their abilities and character are developed through lifelong learning opportunities. Their advice is to:

1. Plan your career pathway-think of where you want to be in three to five years and create a plan on how to get to this destination from your present job position.

2. Curate a brand-show who you are (e.g. kind, trustworthy) as a leader and be consistent in your engagement with diverse groups.

3. Learn from others-observe other leaders and pay attention to how their leadership style affects their teams.

4. Receive feedback-lean into and be open to having difficult conversations. Reflect on these conversations by asking, how does this resonate with me or how does this align with my purpose and cause?

5. Leverage peer advice-have a network (e.g. mentor, coach) of trusted advisors inside and outside your organisation to discuss ideas and strategies before implementation, instead of using a 'trial by fire' approach. Use the advice of industry thought leaders such as Brené Brown, Simon Sinek, or Oprah Winfrey.

Everyone deserves to be happy and fulfilled at work. Now, imagine if you used these practical tips and advice to make a real impact and become a memorable leader, gaining the interest and understanding of as many people as possible.

Read Keren's article how to build anti-racist public institutions through evidence-based policy here.

👋 You can create a post like this one! Share your thoughts with a community of public servants. Learn more

(Image Credit: Unsplash)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The problem: Organisations recognise the importance of investing in their emerging and current leaders. However, the practice of authentic, intentional, and horizontal leadership remains a challenge. Why it matters: Leadership impacts an organisation's ecosystems, values, culture, and initiatives (e.g. policies, programmes, services). The solution: Be purposeful in your leadership self-development using these tips and advice.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Case Against Vibes Theories of Politics

# data[].attributes.subject
The Case Against Vibes Theories of Politics

# data[].attributes.body
The case against vibes theories of politics (substack.com)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is it that most shapes how people vote, and what they think of parties and politicians' values?

On both sides of the Atlantic, there's a debate going on between invested in theories of the tangible - policy or issues - and those who increasingly believe it's the intangible. The 'atmospherics' of cultural and tribal markers; personality. That is, vibes.

James Kanagasooriam eloquently outlined an iteration of this recently, building on an argument popularised by Janan Ganesh. Both pieces are worth reading in whole but the thread is, as James argues, that voters:

"...have stopped looking at the substantive content and policy positions of politicians (and vice versa) and give their support based entirely on a political aura"

This explains certain dissonances or irrationalities in opinion: why Conservative members saw provincial Remainer Liz Truss as one of them but not urbane Leaver Rishi Sunak; why people think Rory Stewart is more different to Boris Johnson than he is, and so on.

All of which stands against a conventional 'popularism' argued by the likes of David Shor or Matt Yglesias. This holds that, at the margins at least, issue positions still move votes most. Parties looking to win or retain power should talk about popular things loudly and do unpopular things quietly.

Vibology is a broad tent but few in it think policy irrelevant. They just down-weight it below personality, or what Ganesh calls a politician's 'personal effect'. For some like James or Janan its cultural heuristics, for others its charisma, strength, authenticity - leadership qualities.

To a degree that may surprise you, it's a school of thought popular with many brilliant people, of which James is definitely one, paid to think about public attitudes and elections.

For that reason I hesitate to object. As a thesis it has appeal, not least because in a fast moving media environment less and less prime time space is given to depth. And among very high engagement voters or apparatchiks, tribalism does reign.

Even still, when it comes to ordinary voters, vibes theory does feel like a bit of an over-correction to me. And a slightly risky one at that.
The case against vibes
Of course, a policy literalism would be daft - and full fat popularism can go too far. Voters don't read manifestos in detail or follow the ins and outs of party press releases, probably they never did.

But take the current polls. A voter feeling that Labour is closest to their view on their most important issue is still more highly correlated with intention to vote Labour than, for instance, perceptions of Sunak or Starmer's strength.

Academics often find the same thing when they do more rigorous testing.

Politicians and parties have brands, of course, and alongside tribal signifiers they can distort voters' perceptions ( i've argued this before myself!).

But over time, it's positioning on policy which affects these brands most. Largely because politicians themselves mostly use policy positioning to send signals. Do they open up areas of difference or not? Voters don't notice most of the ins and outs, obviously - but over time, or at at important moments on important matters, they do.

This arguably matters more as party loyalties break down, not less.

For instance, there's been a stark drop in Leavers seeing Labour as anti-Brexit. Is that really down to the vibes of Starmer, a pro-Remain North London lawyer? Or because the party has gone out of its way to reposition Labour on Brexit precisely for these voters?

At a national level at least, where the stakes and attention are highest, our politics is still resolutely the stuff of issues, through which values and vibes are refracted.

We can see this in practice when we look closer at the examples James and Janan raise.

Sunak may have had some popularity with Remainers (though possibly more because of his positioning against Truss' economic plans). Either way, it has not survived contact with governing, as he leans into hardline positions on the likes of immigration. Or started to own the accumulated policy baggage of 12 years in power.

Similarly Boris Johnson's liberal Mayor of London vibes did not survive him getting on the wrong side of socially liberal voters over the EU referendum. Corbyn's authentic anti-politician chic did not help with populist voters after years of taking positions that cut against their values.

More generally, our new Prime Minister's rejection by the Conservative membership probably had less to do with him being 'urbane' than that he was on the wrong side of the membership on the most salient issue in the race - the economy and tax cuts. And to a lesser degree loyalty to Johnson. Brexit was just no longer as salient.

Indeed, it's how important Brexit is to you, and the view you have on it, that will shape how similar you think Rory Stewart and Boris Johnson - not their vibe.

Much of the dissonance that gets attributed to vibes is really just about shifting issue salience, i'd argue.
The Liz Truss vibe experiment
All of which is interesting if rather esoteric. But there's a reason it matters: it shapes how we are governed.

The Truss premiership is a prime example. It is a perfect illustration of what happens when a political project think vibes matter more than substance or issues.

There is a reason that Truss and her team marched towards the sound of political gunfire, delivering a volley of policies that were always unpopular (tax cuts for the rich, fracking etc), all while making a virtue of it.

Some of it was she genuinely believed these things, and that they would work.

But some of it, I would speculate, was an over-investment in vibes theory, albeit of a different flavour to the one James K outlines. Many of the best people in Conservative polling circles somewhat encouraged the view that voters would overlook her doing things they disagreed with provided she look strong, authentic and one of them. As long as the vibes were right.

The reality was simply more boring, I think. Unpopular things made her unpopular. Even before the most severe market reaction, this had sunk the Conservatives in the polls.

Truss herself did her best to project strength and consistency and all the things we are told voters value. Then she became a popularist in a foxhole, switching tack to emphasise the more popular parts of her platform, the energy price freeze.

But it was too late; the salience of the things people disagreed with her on had spiralled beyond her control.

Some of this was also about the mythology of Thatcher; that she did unpopular things but was respected for it. But this is a misreading of history. As the below graph shows, in 1979, Britons bought the basic Thatcherite argument. By 2022, much less so. Thatcher may have had ups and downs, but Truss was not operating in the same public attitudes environment.

The same goes for Hunt now compared to Osborne and Cameron.
Labour brand vibes?
Briefly, it's worth pointing out Labour too can be prone to an over-focus on intangibles that leads them to second guess voters too much. Albeit in their case it pushes them towards an abundance of caution not risk.

Sometimes you get the impression that those around the party think the Labour brand so uniquely bad - the vibes so off - that ideas which are popular in abstract become less so when proposed by a Labour politician.

This is built on sound analysis: messengers matter; Labour's reputation on spending is bad and made worse by the 2019 manifesto. A preponderance of things which are popular in abstract can add up to voter incredulity.

But again, you can go too far with this.

We can see this from split-testing - where survey respondents only see an idea attached to either a generic, Labour or Conservative brand. There is some brand penalty, which in an environment where Labour is far ahead is striking. There's definitely a need to be careful around borrowing (this research was done before the mini-budget also).

But as you can see here, the Labour brand only knocks 5-6% off a typical idea or arguments in climate, for instance. A comfortably popular idea (when polled generically) can survive this, including with voters in swing seats.

The risk is simply that a focus on the atmospherics of brand feels inadvertently encourages parties to either under-think or over-think things a little.

It's old fashioned, but the next election will probably be largely decided by the basics: which party has an overall argument of what needs fixing most with the country that resonates with voters? Which party is closest to voters on key areas of perceived party disagreement? Which are trusted on issues of competence ('valence' issues)?

Voters still make good judgements on these, I think. Though simple challenges, these matters are also really hard for any party to control entirely. But in their pursuit of them, or as we analyse them doing so, it's probably not worth focusing too much on vibes.
~ @SteveAkehurst

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The case against vibes theories of politics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is it that most shapes how people vote, and what they think of parties and politicians' values? On both sides of the Atlantic, there's a debate going on between invested in theories of the tangible - policy or issues - and those who increasingly believe it's the intangible.

# data[].attributes.body
Resources - Wellbeing Economy Alliance (weall.org)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Issue area OLD WAY: Current system response(s)NEW WAY: Indicative Wellbeing Economy response(s)

Arts

Arts commodified and exploited to spur consumption and conformity

Climate crisis and communities

Carbon capture and storage and emergency responses to 'natural' weather-related disasters

Low income communities most affected by climate crisis and bear most of the costs

Communities expected to increase their resilience

Community empowerment

Empowerment agenda without the powerful giving up or sharing power

Thin representation even when democratic systems are in place

Subsidiarity

Deliberation

Attention paid to different styles of communication

Agendas set by communities, not just consultation on the details

Rich and robust democracy with meaningful representation, beyond party politics

Economics education

Curricula confined to neo-classical approaches and narrow focus on theory and models

Pluralistic and heterodox curricula on offer

Dynamic macro modelling and systems perspective

Real world context to the fore

Food system

Prices ignore environmental costs of production (including transport costs) and do not pay living wages to suppliers

Unhealthy addictive food cheaper than healthy food

Small-hold producers are price takers at the beck and call of large agricultural complexes

Fossil fuels

Exhaustion of remaining fossil fuel reserves seen as viable

No planning for livelihoods of workers in brown fields beyond fossil fuels, leaving communities economically stranded

Tangible pathways of training, enterprise creation, income support for brown field workers

Relevant skills directed to circular economy and renewable energy

Homes and housing

Rationed by price, uninsulated and energy inefficient, used as investment devices by rentiers

Co-housing

Sustainable design

Publicly and community-owned mixed with privately owned

Intergenerational Justice

Young people engaged because they are the 'future' on pre-determined agendas

Young people's knowledge not recognised as valid or counting as much as older experts

Lack of intergenerational engagement

In-work poverty and earnings inequality

In-work tax credits from the state to top up inadequate wages

Large gaps between highest paid and lowest paid

Compensation committees decide remuneration rates - vested interests dominate

Workers owning the business so have a guaranteed share of the value created by their work

Wages determined by (or better reflect) social value

Low ratio between highest and lowest paid

Justice and Defence

Justice seen as basic right of citizenship e.g. equality of access to defence/prosecution lawyers, perhaps paid or subsidised by taxes.

Wellbeing of people is at the centre of the justice system and decision making

Restorative, community-based solutions financed

Justice system to enable the general population to feel safe, to be fair and to facilitate a flourishing community. It attends to "the causes of the causes" of criminal behaviour.

Defense resources budget is consistent with the Article 26 of the UN Charter which demands disarmament and reduced military expenditures as a precondition for increased security, development, and peace.

Kindness and compassion

Dismissed as unimportant or even non-existent due to prevailing belief in rational economic man

Recognised as a fundamental aspect of being human and nurtured through the nature of work, design of public spaces, the nature of advertising and education, and narratives about human motivations

Prioritising care and respect for all living beings, including animals and nature

Materials cycle

Linear: take, make, use, waste

Planned obsolesce

Prices unrelated to environmental costs

Circular

Extended producer responsibility

Prices of inputs and production reflect true and full cost, including environmental impacts

Local artisans delivering repair and remanufacture

'Right to repair' incorporated products from the initial design stage

Mental health in the workplace

Reliance on individualised coping strategies without attending to the nature of work and causes of stress

Employees treated as 'on-demand' and disposable inputs and a cost to be minimised

Dominant culture of hierarchy and overwork

Healthier relationship with work: jobs designed to deliver autonomy, control and relatedness; sense of purpose; and sufficient and secure source of income and hours

Jobs designed with task rotation, ability to see a process through, reward reflecting effort

Mindsets

The dominant mindset is that there is no alternative to neoliberal capitalism and business as usual

The dominant mindset is that thousands of alternatives for designing economies exist - it is in our power to design economies differently. Economies should have human and environmental wellbeing as their focus

Innovation is the norm

Natural capital accounting

Ecosystem services ignored in corporate account keeping

Use of ecosystem services appropriately counted (may not require assigning a monetary figure)

Recognition of the inherent value of nature, beyond the services it provides to human beings

Pharmaceuticals

Monopolised by large corporations, making significant profits

Insufficient regard for public spending that makes research and subsequent commercial success possible

Access to medicine often based on ability to pay

Patents can restrict access to medications for large numbers of people

Medicalised, downstream treatment orientation

Pollution

Costs passed onto third parties

Clean up rather than prevention

Polluting the commons charged at true prices so that producer pays

Caps on emissions set according to science

Productivity

Seen as key to economic growth

Results in pressure on workers to increase pace of work rather than supporting care, quality or craftmanship

No heed paid to influence of power within an organisation and how this shapes distribution of value share nor if more production is itself sustainable

Resource productivity is a key consideration, rather than labour productivity

Recognition that in some sectors (such as arts and care) labour productivity might lead to sub-optimal outcomes

Purpose of the economy

Boils down to increasing per capita GDP

Holistic measures of progress that encompass human and ecological wellbeing, including of future generations

Co-creation of these measures through wide public consultation

Retail

Excessive focus on economies of scale

Process orientated, the only service is designed to secure the transaction

Automated

Clinical

Passive process

Work

Acute specialization and atomization

Workers treated as 'just in time inventory' and a cost to be reduced

Extremes of overwork, underwork, unemployment and underemployment

Purposeful

Jobs designed to meet fundamental needs

Tasks shared, autonomy devolved, scope to follow through

Workers treated as human beings

Work shared to allow more economic equality and working time reduced to allow other activities in employee's lives

Renumeration reflects social value (not just what 'Compensation Committees' decide) and employees receive a decent share of the value they create

Less overworking

There is meaningful, appropriate, sufficient work for everyone who wants it

Person-centred economic development and investment strategies

Space and infrastructure

Spaces are designed for private interests and with private vehicle needs prioritised.

Public space often commercialised.

Linear and top-down/elite planning processes.

Spaces are designed for community and connections.

Green space is prioritised and flourishing of nature is built into design.

Decentralised, participatory planning processes.

Taxation

Taxation is usually just an arbitrary levy placed on activities that we actually would like to encourage - like honest useful work (PAYE) and trade (VAT) investment in green energy (business rates) which effectually discourages them particularly for small businesses

Tax things we want to discourage such as excessive use of non-renewable natural resources, poor use of land (including hoarding of it), monopoly rents and don't tax things we want to encourage

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Issue area OLD WAY: Current system response(s) NEW WAY: Indicative Wellbeing Economy response(s) Arts Arts commodified and exploited to spur consumption and conformity Climate crisis and communities Carbon capture and storage and emergency responses to 'natural' weather-related disasters Low income communities most affected by climate crisis and bear most of

# data[].attributes.headline
A Practical Step by Step Guide to Stakeholder Mapping in the Public Sector

# data[].attributes.subject
A Practical Step by Step Guide to Stakeholder Mapping in the Public Sector

# data[].attributes.body
A practical step-by-step guide to stakeholder mapping in the public sector - Better Govs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The success of your project doesn't depend on you. At least not entirely. You need to engage others to get it done and think strategically about who gets involved and how. This blog shares a practical guide to do a stakeholder analysis in the public sector.

What is a stakeholder analysis?

As you already know, implementing projects in the public sector is not easy! Even if the technical and administrative capacities to implement projects exist. If there are groups with enough bargaining power uninterested in following through with implementation, projects can fail.

A stakeholder analysis, also known as stakeholder mapping, is a tool to help you think systematically about the people or organizations that could impact a project. It could be due to their influential power or their authority, formal and informal. Understanding their interests and power could help you anticipate potential outcomes of your project and develop strategies to increase the likelihood of success.

While in real life, you won't necessarily sit and map out your actors like this, understanding this process will help you identify some principles and considerations that will be useful.

Types of stakeholders

Stakeholders can be classified as:

Primary stakeholders: those directly affected by the project;

Secondary stakeholders: actors whose involvement is only indirect or temporary;

Key stakeholders: actors that can use their voice, skills, knowledge, or position of power to significantly exercise influence over a reform; and

veto power: those key stakeholders without whose support and participation the desired results cannot be achieved.

A step-by-step guide to stakeholder mapping

This is a step-by-step process you can follow.

1. Define the scope of the stakeholder mapping: Identify clearly the issue at stake. Define a suitable time to do the mapping and the conditions under which an update will be required. Remember, policies and projects are dynamic, and so are the people involved in them.

2. Identify the list of all the potential stakeholders. Consider, for example, direct beneficiaries, people with particular interests in the success (or failure) of a project, and people possibly affected by the reform. For inspiration, you could think of past projects and those who had influenced them.

3. Value your stakeholders. For each of the stakeholders you identified in step 2, try to classify them on a scale from 1 to 10 in two categories:

their interest in the reform. In other words, how important is the reform to them? (We will do that on the X-axis)

their power to affect the reform. This measures the influence they have over the project or policy, and to what degree they can help achieve, or block, the desired change. (Use the Y-axis)

You could use a matrix similar to the one in Figure 1 to map all your stakeholders.

4. Categorize the stakeholders: Once you've mapped the stakeholders, you could classify them into four groups. Those with:

high power and a strong interest in the project are the people or organizations it is important to fully engage and bring on board;

low power but high interest is the group that needs to be kept informed. They have the potential, if organized, to form the basis of an interest group or coalition that could lobby for change;

high power but low interest should be kept satisfied and ideally brought around as supporters for the proposed policy change; and

low power and low interest are the groups to be monitored. As the dynamics of the relationship change and the project evolves, this group could gain relevance to the project.

Figure 1: Matrix for Stakeholder Analysis

5. Identify key stakeholders and assess the importance of these stakeholders for the reform or project. You can expand on the previous analysis by:
a. Identifying how relevant certain actors are to the project. Graphically, this can be measured by the size of the circle in Figure 2.
b. Identify their position towards the issue with colors: green if they are supporters of the policy, yellow if their position is neutral, and red if they are against the project.
Figure 2: Example of the matrix for stakeholders mapping

6. Design strategies to engage and influence stakeholders. Once you've identified the key stakeholders, it's time to put together your action plan.

a. Key messages: Craft key messages to facilitate communication. While the core message is the same for all, you can highlight different aspects of the reform depending on each stakeholder.

For example, the Ministry of Finance would be concerned about the financial impact of a project, while the potential beneficiaries would focus on the benefits of that project.

b. Anticipate responses for key actors. Thinking ahead of time could help engage them in a discussion and facilitate an agreement.

If you want more tips on this, don't miss next week's blog about negotiation principles and register for our upcoming workshop on how to influence a decision-maker.

Next steps

In the public sector, you need to work with others. The stakeholder mapping is a practical tool to identify the key actors involved in a project, their interests and their power. Doing it will help you craft your implementation strategy and anticipate problems. Even if you don't follow the step-by-step guide, being aware of these elements will be highly beneficial for the success of your project and your career.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A practical step-by-step guide to stakeholder mapping in the public sector - Better Govs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The success of your project doesn't depend on you. At least not entirely. You need to engage others to get it done and think strategically about who gets involved and how. This blog shares a practical guide to do a stakeholder analysis in the public sector.

# data[].attributes.headline
An introduction to policymaking - apolitical course 

# data[].attributes.subject
An introduction to policymaking - apolitical course 

# data[].attributes.body
An Introduction to Policymaking (apolitical.co)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Policymaking is a key function of government. And the effectiveness of this process often determines the real-world outcomes of policies.

However, the policymaking process is complex and requires the agreement and participation of many actors.

This free course will guide you through each stage of the policymaking process, from agenda setting to evaluation. You'll also learn how to engage relevant stakeholders and communicate your policies effectively.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Policymaking is a key function of government. And the effectiveness of this process often determines the real-world outcomes of policies. However, the policymaking process is complex and requires the agreement and participation of many actors. This free course will guide you through each stage of the policymaking process, from agenda setting to evaluation.

# data[].attributes.headline
Making Effective Policy  Without New Money

# data[].attributes.subject
Making Effective Policy  Without New Money

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Policy Profession website is for colleagues working in government departments, agencies, arm-length bodies, local authorities and public bodies.

If you are outside of government, please visit the Policy Profession on:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Policy Profession website is for colleagues working in government departments, agencies, arm-length bodies, local authorities and public bodies. If you are outside of government, please visit the Policy Profession on: