Week 4 – Assignment 1: Examine Executive Visioning and Week 5 - Assignment: Assess Leadership Challenges

11/17/21, 2:20 PM Change, Complexity, and Leadership Challenges

https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.proxy1.ncu.edu/doi/epdf/10.1111/puar.12917 1/1

Change, Complexity, and Leadership Challenges 311

Public Administration Review, Vol. 78, Iss. 2, pp. 311–314. © 2018 by The American Society for Public Administration. DOI: 10.1111/puar.12917.

We better stop now, what ’ s that sound? Everybody look— what ’ s going down?

—Buffalo Springfield, 1967

W e look now, and what do we see? A rate of change and complexity we have never experienced. Maybe it is not unexpected

that amid this environment we see a reaction—a foundational desire to connect to our identity, an anchor in our lives. We can find this complexity and an accelerated pace of change in the disciplines of the administrative or operational world (think “smart cities,” for example). On the other hand, in the political arena, we find the challenge of grounding our lives in a seemingly stable, simplistic world that often produces “us and them.” It comes to a head in the contemporary version of that enduring theme—politics and administration—producing new leadership challenges.

In this column, we chart with a broad brush what we see happening in contemporary local government— centered on what we are calling the gap between political acceptability (politics) and administrative or operational sustainability (administration). Then, we identify and describe associated leadership challenges and the mind- set and skills/talents needed to “bridge the gap.”

Bridging the gap is the essential prerequisite for effective governance. Political acceptability focuses on what it is we want to accomplish and the dynamics around building support among competing political initiatives. But can we do what we want to accomplish, and can we do it over time? An assumption is that this process of connecting politics and administration begins with the political (vision, mission, policy initiative). But in our experience, that is not always the case. Frequently, the process of improving a water treatment plant or virtually any other infrastructure investment is initiated by a need—an element of administrative sustainability— and then the question of political will is engaged.

There is nothing new in setting out this dynamic back-and-forth relationship. We understand that without effective bridges between political and administrative arenas, little is accomplished, and trust in public servants—both political and professional— erodes and the value of government itself can be questioned. Acknowledging the tension surrounding the need to maintain integrity in political and administrative arenas, something is happening that is making the gap between these two arenas—these two mind-sets—more difficult to bridge, fostering new leadership challenges.

To better understand the challenges faced in connecting political acceptability and administrative sustainability, we propose the metaphor of the bridge, stimulating several observations. For example, there is not one bridge; each policy initiative or administrative/operational need may have its own bridge, which may or may not be constructed on a sound foundation and connect political and administrative worlds. Some bridges will be longer than others, suggesting a longer time span to make connections. Some will be wider, suggesting more parties on the bridge and maybe more potential for “accidents.” Some bridges will be both long and wide. And some may lead to nowhere!

Traditionally in council-manager government, we expect the city manager to work the bridge. This expectation is captured in the familiar graphic of a governing body and administrative staff separated by a city manager. But as the bridges multiply and become longer and wider and invite more engagement, the work often leads to dead ends. The bridging task becomes more challenging (Nalbandian et al. 2013 ).

Leadership Challenges The first challenge focuses on roles and responsibilities, particularly of department heads or the equivalent. We used to describe the city manager and department heads collectively as a “management team.”

Robert J. O ’ Neill , Jr. John Nalbandian

John Nalbandian is emeritus professor, School of Public Affairs and Administration, University of Kansas. He was a longtime faculty member in the public administration program at the University of Kansas, which focuses on educating students for careers in local government. He served for 12 years as chair of the public administration department and was elected to two terms on the city council in Lawrence, Kansas, where he also served as mayor. He has been widely recognized for his teaching, research, and service. Presently, he works with local governments throughout the country sharing his learning.

Robert J. O ’ Neill, Jr. is past executive director of the International City/County Management Association. He retired from the organization in December 2016. Previously, he served as county executive in Fairfax County, Virginia (1997–2000), where he was credited with developing a series of strategies aimed at revitalizing older residential communities and commercial areas as well as launching a series of initiatives focused on performance and results management. His “reinvention” of the government of Hampton, Virginia, as city manager (1984–97) was widely recognized; his many accomplishments included downtown and waterfront revitalization initiatives as well as the development of a nationally recognized youth-at-risk program. E-mail: [email protected]