Totally agree, Fwiw I wrote a whole book (the Art of Public Strategy, based on working in UK government) on why the lever metaphors are so misleading (the book also looks in some detail at the relatively few cases where that way of thinking can be effective, but shows why they are the exceptions). I thought that was all pretty obvious and conventional wisdom 15-20 years ago. But in and around policy forgetting often outpaces remembering and learning (& much went wrong in missions because so little was learned from the many governments which have pursued big missions throughout history). When people talk about levers I often wonder how they apply this to their families: exactly what levers do they pull to bring up their children?
I came at this from a different angle in my book ‘Theories of Performance’ (2010) but one of the central ideas in that - performance regimes - emphasised the complex nature of steering performance in government. I tried to create some structured models of how this complexity works - mainly to help practitioners understand their ‘performance regime’.
The main working model of the New Labour govt (so-called ‘deliverology’) at the time I was writing was ‘levers’ thru and thru. However there were also signs of better ways of doing things, as Geoff Mulgan points out.
Great piece, Polly. The govt is already enacting this understanding re systems leadership in parts (impact economy, Pride in Place as you note). Ironically, you cannot do it in parts, you have to do the narrative and change leadership at whole system level for the modular elements to cohere and embed. I'm not sure you can retrofit it.
Perhaps the problem is not thinking hard enough about levers; a real lever is a simple machine that lets you exert more force than you otherwise could, hence the idea of leverage.
The levers in SKS' remark seem more like switches or pushbuttons that don't act directly.
It might be good to think more about where the government can act in a way that gets leverage and a more-than-proportional response, and also to think about where it needs to avoid unwanted leverage (eg the NHS seems to respond to whatever ministers say with hair trigger sensitivity and enormous gain, sending it crashing from priority to priority)
Polly. I like the orchestra idea. He might have tried explaining it instead as orchestral manoeuvres in the dark. But however one perceives it and approaxhes it if you make a lot of inexplicable mistakes and misjudgements then you are going to struggle.
Leaving aside the well known examples I mean eg why the avoidable war on the wildlife conservation wing of the environmnetal movement? Relations there are the worst in decades and for what? They are changing things which don't really need changing but worse doing so eraticaly and indecisively which suppresses both the construction sought and the only functioning nature market in BNG and all very predictably so.
Use of external reports has been quite interesting though and quite speedy sometimes
The other reason a policy doesn't work like a lever is when rules we make up become seen as unchanging laws of nature - particularly in the world of finance and economics. It is belief in these "laws" which govern the physics in which policy operates.
‘Culture eats levers for breakfast’ … precisely. And yet we have a department for culture in government, but it’s characterised by many as peripheral to wider values and systems, it’s underfunded and is often treated as an afterthought. Instead, culture (and heritage, a much misunderstood concept but a hugely potent force in terms of cultural values) is one of the true magic bullets that government does have an influence over. And it can be used to create a new and healthy patriotism that engenders transformation of our systems and behaviours across government and civic society.
Totally agree, Fwiw I wrote a whole book (the Art of Public Strategy, based on working in UK government) on why the lever metaphors are so misleading (the book also looks in some detail at the relatively few cases where that way of thinking can be effective, but shows why they are the exceptions). I thought that was all pretty obvious and conventional wisdom 15-20 years ago. But in and around policy forgetting often outpaces remembering and learning (& much went wrong in missions because so little was learned from the many governments which have pursued big missions throughout history). When people talk about levers I often wonder how they apply this to their families: exactly what levers do they pull to bring up their children?
I own the book! You gave it to me the first time we met, in one of those little meeting rooms by the link door to the cabinet office.
I came at this from a different angle in my book ‘Theories of Performance’ (2010) but one of the central ideas in that - performance regimes - emphasised the complex nature of steering performance in government. I tried to create some structured models of how this complexity works - mainly to help practitioners understand their ‘performance regime’.
The main working model of the New Labour govt (so-called ‘deliverology’) at the time I was writing was ‘levers’ thru and thru. However there were also signs of better ways of doing things, as Geoff Mulgan points out.
Great piece, Polly. The govt is already enacting this understanding re systems leadership in parts (impact economy, Pride in Place as you note). Ironically, you cannot do it in parts, you have to do the narrative and change leadership at whole system level for the modular elements to cohere and embed. I'm not sure you can retrofit it.
Excellent and applicable to in corporations and large non-profits. I promise to stop using the lever metaphor immediately.
Perhaps the problem is not thinking hard enough about levers; a real lever is a simple machine that lets you exert more force than you otherwise could, hence the idea of leverage.
The levers in SKS' remark seem more like switches or pushbuttons that don't act directly.
It might be good to think more about where the government can act in a way that gets leverage and a more-than-proportional response, and also to think about where it needs to avoid unwanted leverage (eg the NHS seems to respond to whatever ministers say with hair trigger sensitivity and enormous gain, sending it crashing from priority to priority)
Polly. I like the orchestra idea. He might have tried explaining it instead as orchestral manoeuvres in the dark. But however one perceives it and approaxhes it if you make a lot of inexplicable mistakes and misjudgements then you are going to struggle.
Leaving aside the well known examples I mean eg why the avoidable war on the wildlife conservation wing of the environmnetal movement? Relations there are the worst in decades and for what? They are changing things which don't really need changing but worse doing so eraticaly and indecisively which suppresses both the construction sought and the only functioning nature market in BNG and all very predictably so.
Use of external reports has been quite interesting though and quite speedy sometimes
The other reason a policy doesn't work like a lever is when rules we make up become seen as unchanging laws of nature - particularly in the world of finance and economics. It is belief in these "laws" which govern the physics in which policy operates.
‘Culture eats levers for breakfast’ … precisely. And yet we have a department for culture in government, but it’s characterised by many as peripheral to wider values and systems, it’s underfunded and is often treated as an afterthought. Instead, culture (and heritage, a much misunderstood concept but a hugely potent force in terms of cultural values) is one of the true magic bullets that government does have an influence over. And it can be used to create a new and healthy patriotism that engenders transformation of our systems and behaviours across government and civic society.
Really enjoyed this! 've been looking for a good critique of the awful leavers metaphor for a while now, thanks.