Agenda item

A Committee-requested item on Transformation. Councillor Liz Leffman, Leader of the Council, Stephen Chandler, Executive Director (People), and Mark Haynes, Director of Customer and Culture, including Transformation (interim) have been invited to present the report.

The Committee is recommended to NOTE the report having raised any questions on its contents, and to AGREE any recommendations it wishes to make to Cabinet arising therefrom.

The Committee had requested an item on the Council’s approach to Transformation. Councillor Liz Leffman, Leader of the Council, Stephen Chandler, Executive Director (People), and Mark Haynes, Director of Customer and Culture, including Transformation (interim) presented a report on Transformation to the Committee.

The Leader introduced the report describing how it cut across the whole organisation and supported the Delivering the Future Together programme. Staff had been worked with closely with regular well-attended meetings fostering much positive feedback.

The purpose of the Transformation programme was to support the nine priorities of the Administration as well as the organisation’s vision to be the employer, partner, and place shaper of choice. The programme would also help the organisation become more sustainable, one aspect of which had already been discussed in the previous item. Partnerships and collaborations were also an important part of the programme to deliver all the services the Council wanted while embracing technology.

The Executive Director (People) and Director of Customer and Culture, including Transformation (interim), presented the programme to the Committee. Transformation was about large-scale strategic changes that would help the organisation operate differently, focusing on culture, technology, and business models within the organisation.

The Transformation programme encompassed five keys areas which would help the organisation reach its overall objective to become a sustainable and successful organisation. These included being leaner, fewer buildings, embracing technology, collaborating with partners, and leveraging commercial opportunities.

The agreed governance process was explained through the workings and stages of the Strategic Transformation Programme Board (STPB), also known as the Design Authority. The transformation route was also explained throughout the five stages of: identify, define, design, deliver, and close. An update was given of where various transformation projects were in this transformation route, including the Commercial Strategy.

An update was also provided on the Delivery Hub Concept. This included the Programme Management Office, which included the Change Academy; Business Intelligence, including data and insights; and Communities of Practice, where like-minded people came together to share knowledge and learn new skills.

The Committee addressed the following issues:

·       Whether the governance structures were too bureaucratic and time consuming, in terms of the number of meetings. It was also unclear to the Committee, how one meeting, within the governance structure, would affect or impact subsequent meetings. Clear lines of accountability and governance transparency were recognised as essential.

Officers acknowledged that it was always about finding a balance between robust governance without creating its own industry of works. Technologies were being looked at to ensure systems and processes were as automated and lean as possible, including the use of AI. Sufficient rigour and governance would remain essential. The system was constantly being evaluated, including by the Lean Team. This was to make sure teams and projects were not stepping on each other’s toes, and program managers were talking to one another with clear roles and responsibilities.

·       How much were consultants being used in transformation program, and would transformation process leave the organisation more or less reliant on consultants in the future to carry out core functions of the organisation?

The Change Academy existed to ensure OCC staff were properly trained to avoid the organisation needing or relying on consultants, such as PwC. The support PwC provided in developing the Transformation programme finished on 2^nd April 2024. The programme had since been operating without external support, though there remained consultant involvement on a small, time limited piece of work concerning automation. However, this did not close the door on the organisation taking advantage of either the expertise or capacity a consultant could offer for a short-term piece of work.

Officers highlighted their commitment to ensuring the skills and abilities in the organisation are developed and growing our own. The creation of a Director of Transformation and Customer Service was intended to guarantee the capability and capacity within the organisation grows and matures without the reliance on external consultants.

The Change Academy graduates were employees who had put themselves forward and wanted to make this difference to within the organisation. This demonstrated a commitment to the ethos of becoming an employer of choice where people could invest in their careers at OCC. This formed a crucial part of the iterative process of transformation which would reduce the Council’s reliance on consultants by ensuring people were trained to continue the process and develop their career.

It was also explained that the term ‘consultancy’ had been used interchangeably. The £4m commitment to savings in this area was largely focused on agency staff savings.

·       Members also requested an update on whether the delayering process within the organisation was on track.

Officers were aware of potential for pushback against terms such as transformation and its feared connotations of restructuring or job losses. However, officers attempted to alleviate these fears and highlighted the organisation’s attempts to reframe the concept of transformation as becoming the employer of choice and being supportive of what OCC staff wanted to do.

The process of delayering had begun with the first tranche focusing at the Director level. Consultation was hoped to be finished within the week and feedback received allowing the process to move on to more junior levels within the Organisation.

Meetings had also been held on a regular basis with staff to guarantee complete transparency over the whole process. Unions had also been involved in discussions, and they understood the intentions of the delayering process.

·       Could OCC be the employer of choice if roles were constantly changing making it difficult to settle into a role? Could the restructure encourage experienced members of staff to leave? What guarantees could be given to stakeholders that the Transformation process would create a more resilient organisation in the long term, rather than simply achieve medium term financial targets?

Officers did not agree that the Transformation programme and approach would make it harder to attract or retain staff. It was argued that the workforce was aware employment is more fluid than it had ever previously been. An organisation that allowed employees to grow and develop was seen as a positive. Being the employer of choice was about allowing this growth and development, by providing staff with opportunities to experience new things within employment. Transformation would create and offer these different opportunities. The Change Academy was highlighted as an example of creating these opportunities.

There had been a tendency in the past not to look to develop from within the Organisation. Instead, the Organisation would look externally. This was seen as something the Organisation had to learn to do and maximise the potential for staff to move across as well as up and down the Organisation.

The Committee resolved to request the following actions:

·       For a Gantt chart, relating to a Transformation project, to be shared with Members of the Committee as an example of the processes carried out.