Tom Johnson: Resistance to change is futile

Tom Johnson.

The old adage, a camel is a horse designed by a committee, is increasingly applicable to the proposed amalgamation of the Hawke's Bay Local Authorities despite the latest position paper from the Local Government Commission receiving the positive support of Better Hawke's Bay chairwoman Rebecca Turner and Mayor Lawrence Yule.

It cannot be denied that Hawke's Bay is falling seriously behind other regions in New Zealand in many of the economic growth indicators. The independent report presented by economist Sean Bevin clearly establishes these facts which have been further confirmed in the article by Hastings District Councillor Malcolm Dixon (HB Today, December 4) and other commentators.

Both sides in the amalgamation debate show a lack of understanding of the elementary psycho-social dynamics of organisational culture and change. The parochialism that has stifled growth and created unnecessary and costly duplication of resources in the past still persists, as does a stubborn status quo mentality (particularly in Napier) that opposes change in some latter day Canute-like stance to preserve what is perceived as an idyllic lifestyle. Unfortunately the macro environmental forces for change cannot be controlled or resisted. They can only be managed ... Change is inevitable. To resist means, as the statistics provided by Sean Bevin show, that you go backwards. This is a serious matter and is the critical issue for Hawke's Bay residents.

The promotion of the Auckland unitary plan by the pro amalgamation proponents as an exemplar for Hawke's Bay to adopt was unfortunate because the plan is a train wreck. It was introduced in a top down intervention with undue haste.

Its failings are many: poor leadership, failure to provide the cost benefits promised, the undemocratic introduction of race based, unelected and unaccountable Maori representatives to boards and committees as a co-governance concession, and the unnecessary cost of this duplication, just to name a few. There's nothing wrong with the principle of seeking greater efficiencies and lowering costs, but it is a disaster in its implementation.

Forty years ago, C Northcote Parkinson (1974) bemoaned the fact that society was in the "space age" technologically, but still in the "horse and buggy" days administratively and management wise. Nothing has changed.

The purpose of the Local Bodies Act is to provide for democratic and effective local government that recognises the diversity of New Zealand communities. While the Act places regulatory strictures on local authorities' promulgation of good-quality local infrastructure, public services, and performance, this should not be used as an excuse for resisting change. Look what red tape has done to the Auckland building market.

Greater democratic representation in local government is another red herring used in Hawke's Bay as an obstruction to change.

Inexplicably the Commission responded by increasing the number of committees as a sop. This is the very antithesis of management efficiency! Has nothing been learnt from Central Government's 51 unelected list members under the MMP system that are a slothful, expensive and inefficient bureaucracy at taxpayer expense?

Democratic principles which provide individual freedom of speech and the right to vote and elect those who will govern are vital in our society, but they do not require or mean a plethora of boards and committees that stultify sensible decision making, and efficient and cost effective governance.

This is a time for leadership to prevail and is an opportunity for the mayors to acknowledge the need for a commitment to future growth in Hawke's Bay and a need for change. If the elected mayors and councillors throughout Hawke's Bay can't or won't work together, then they shouldn't be there.

To bring about change, any change management expert will advise to start with the doable and achievable first and then build on success to get commitment and support.

Surely agreement could be obtained to one District Plan for the whole of Hawke's Bay with one set of bye-laws, uniform building regulations, dog control laws, etc. Similarly accounting and control systems should be unified. When these changes are successfully achieved, all the services systems could be unified. Such moves done within a strict time frame would then lead to solving the more fractious subject of staff reductions in a refined management structure with minimised social dislocation.

This will not be achieved without a clear-cut vision for the future and a strategic formulation of measurable, reasonable and achievable goals.

The strategic execution and success is then enhanced. Management guru Alfred Chandler (1962) advised that structure follows strategy - not as advocated by the Local Body committee as a top-down intervention.

A commonsense collaborative approach would solve this problem equitably over a measurable time period; otherwise it is the ratepayer who pays for the bureaucratic ineptitude. A recent HB Today highlighted a similar proposal from Craig Foss. It drew the predictable meaningless response from our wunderkind Labour politicians that it smacked of mediocrity. The mediocrity unfortunately lies in procrastinating politicians who allow ideology to over-rule reality and reason.-Tom Johnson has spent 35 years in senior management positions in NZ business. He has a PhD in Management with a special focus on organisational culture and change management.

-Business and civic leaders, organisers, experts in their field and interest groups can contribute opinions.

Email: editor@hbtoday.co.nz. All views expressed are those of the writer, not the newspaper.