The UK public sector finds itself at a crossroads. The post-war model, once a paragon of efficiency, is now widely seen as clunky and outdated. But, in a twist of irony, a glimmer of hope has emerged from an unlikely source: the British military.
Now, before you raise an eyebrow (or two), hear me out. As a veteran of nearly two decades in the Army, I’m no stranger to its shortcomings, its blunders, and its less-than-stellar reputation when it comes to public spending. But, to my surprise, it’s the military’s mission-based lingo that’s become the buzzword du jour in Whitehall, thanks to Labour’s “mission-driven government” initiative.
So, here’s the bottom line: I’m optimistic, but only cautiously so.
I’ve seen first-hand the power of mission-based thinking on operations, but I also know that simply co-opting the language won’t magically transform the public sector. Successful implementation requires more than just clever slogans; it demands a profound shift in mindset, culture, and operational approach.
If it is to be implemented effectively, accompanying the mission-based language should be the adoption of a "mission command" approach.
Such an approach would offer a radical departure from the centralised status quo. It would provide a decentralised, adaptive model which champions the empowerment of frontline workers, a shared understanding of overarching goals, and an unwavering commitment to agility. It’s a military, and now political, doctrine that prioritises results over rigid adherence to process, and – I believe – could very well hold the key to transforming the UK public sector.
At its core, mission-based thinking offers the public sector the chance of a revolution in power dynamics. It places trust in the hands of those closest to the action, the frontline workers who possess an intimate understanding of local contexts and the unique challenges they present. By granting these individuals the autonomy to tailor solutions, the public sector could unleash a wave of innovation and responsiveness that traditional models simply cannot match.
"Success will require a fundamental shift in how we view the role of the public sector; it must no longer be the monolithic provider of services, and instead become a nimble, adaptable network of empowered individuals working towards a common goal"
But autonomy alone is not enough. The foundation of mission-based thinking is built upon a shared understanding of overarching goals, meticulously crafted through collective training and the establishment of shared doctrine. This collective knowledge acts as a guiding light, ensuring that every decision and every action aligns with the overarching mission.
At its best, it is a testament to the power of shared purpose, a unifying force that overcomes boundaries and fosters a culture of collaboration.
The agility inherent in mission-based thinking is perhaps its most potent weapon. In a world characterised by constant change, the ability to adapt has never been more important. A mission-driven model could encourage flexibility, empowering the public sector to rapidly manoeuvre in the face of new challenges and opportunities. It’s a stark contrast to the often-cumbersome nature of traditional bureaucracy, where change can be attritional.
The challenges of change
However, as with any paradigm shift, mission-based thinking presents its own set of challenges.
The first is the most obvious. It can lead to reductive thinking.
We either try to reduce everything to a mission or run the risk of missing the other important stuff. In practice, this is often hard to mitigate, as mission-based thinking is the language of priorities and, to quote a Prussian: “He who defends everything, defends nothing.”
Nonetheless, it must be mitigated, as not everything that is important will make it into a mission.
Secondly, as a direct response to the above, some policymakers may try to "mission wash" the work they want to prioritise to make it fit into the mission’s scope. Ruthless honesty regarding what is and is not "on mission" is essential to maintain the approach’s integrity.
Thirdly, again linked to the above, the autonomy it offers can lead to "mission creep" where those on the frontline delivering the objectives – often with the best of intentions – expand them beyond their original scope. The solution to this lies in rigorous prioritisation and an unwavering commitment to staying within the clearly defined boundaries of the mission.
The most significant challenge, however, lies in striking the delicate balance between autonomy and accountability. The empowerment of frontline workers necessitates robust oversight mechanisms to ensure the responsible use of authority. The public sector must embrace transparency and foster a culture of accountability, where successes are celebrated, and failures are viewed as opportunities for learning and growth.
Despite these challenges, the potential rewards of mission-based thinking are too significant to ignore. By carefully selecting appropriate missions, establishing clear objectives and intent, empowering frontline workers, fostering collaboration, and establishing robust oversight, the UK public sector can unlock a new era of effectiveness and impact.
At its best, mission-based thinking is not just a strategy, it is a mindset. But to ensure success will require a fundamental shift in how we view the role of the public sector. It must no longer be the monolithic provider of services, and instead become a nimble, adaptable network of empowered individuals working towards a common goal.
As I said, I am optimistic. I genuinely believe that if the government accompanies its use of mission-based language with a new culture of mission command, the UK public sector can usher in a new era of public service. One that is more responsive, more effective, and more in tune with the needs of the people it serves.
But the question remains: is the government prepared to embrace this cultural change?
Following a 17-year career as an infantry officer in the British Army and a period working in parliament, Owen Pritchard moved into local government. His extensive experience includes advising two combined authority mayors, serving as deputy leader of a London council, and leading a government-funded digital technology programme to improve the secure and inclusive use of digital technology by councils and their communities.