When just leadership is present

You can always tell you are sitting in a cinema full (mainly) of women: they laugh louder than when more men are present. And so it was with The Other Woman, which my wife & I went to see on Friday night. It is an enjoyable romcomromp with some predictable and some unpredictable comedic moments with all the actors turning in good & funny performances. It is not going to win any cinematic prizes but it is going to give a large number of women and quite a few men (including me) a good few chortles, belly laughs and guffaws: especially when the anti-hero gets his just desserts.

It is well directed & edited: the film slides seamlessly from one scene/set to another (including a house by the sea that my wife and I fell in love with). The story just about hangs together if you ignore the fact that the emotional reactions to the various scenarios are sublimely inappropriate & unlikely. But don't let that put you off: it's a comedy, it's a fantasy and it's good fun!

This is a film about teamwork: about three women turning their differences and conflicting interests into a purposeful and efficiently executed plan. There is even a sort of Gantt chart thrown in for good measure to indicate how each of the women are scheduled to take action. They respect and agree how to deploy each other's skills & talents in pursuit of clear and agreed aim.

And there is no leader since they are all acting in the role of leader: the leadership comes from their shared goal. Sometimes a leader needs to know when not to be a leader and just share in the joint project.

When did you last give up being a leader?

_____________

This is the twenty eighth of my new series of blogs about leadership ideas to be found in the movies of our time. You can read here as why I am doing this. Please subscribe to this blog if you want to read more. Thanks. Click the label 'film' to see all the others.

Camel lady

Tracks was one of those delightful films that I stumbled into, almost by accident, having not read any of the reviews or crits beforehand. It is beautifully humble film with no pretensions and quietly tells a moving story of a young woman who decides to trek from Alice Springs to the Indian Ocean with her dog and several camels. The cinematography is understated until near the end when it explodes into a sea of colour. And not much happens in the story but there again, it kind of does.

We are led to the view that this journey could be about the woman in question wanting to walk out her demons, having decided that only the kind of 'aloneness' you can get in huge desert will help her to do this. There are other characters who flit in and out of her journey, mostly to her annoyance (but not ours). It is a wide and wise film with a big sky and a big belief that we all have a journey like this inside us.

The main character has a very treasured compass. Without her compass, she would get quickly lost in a sea of sand and scrub. But that isn't the main reason why she values the compass so highly: we learn why during the film. The compass has a worth that extends well beyond its utility.

Sometimes leaders can be very functional and only rate objects, (or work methods, organisational structures etc) for their contributions to productivity & performance. However wise leaders recognise that the value of these artifacts & features of the organisation may well include high emotional value and only makes changes with great circumspection.

What are the totemic features of your organisation that you only change with great care?

_____________

This is the twenty seventh of my new series of blogs about leadership ideas to be found in the movies of our time. You can read here as why I am doing this. Please subscribe to this blog if you want to read more. Thanks. Click the label 'film' to see all the others.

Transcendence, transference, trans...something

I went to see Transcendence really hoping all the critics were wrong. I was thinking often people just don't get scifi, or they went expecting mega special effects and didn't get them or whatever... But I have to say were it not for Mr Depp on the cast, it would have sunk without trace by now. I felt like I was watching a Dad's race at a primary school: lots of urgent flailing of legs & arms to get to the finish line but eventually falling into a lumpy heap.

The film tries desperately to knit together nanotechnology, spirituality, psychology, biochemistry and artifical intelligence (yeah, all that) into something that ends up being cross between a reworking of the myth of Icarus, the Six Million Dollar Man and Cold Mountain. So I thought, who was the writer? It turns out to be one Jack Paglen whose credits include a forthcoming remake of Battlestar Gallactica. Say no more. Watch this film only if you drool over Mr Depp (and plenty do).

One of the core themes to the movie might be summed up in the words: just because you can does not mean that you should. At one point in the film, it is proposed that the difference between self aware AI and plain ordinary very clever AI is knowing the difference between right and wrong (as if ethics is ever binary). And then the film goes on to show how even self aware AI doesn't know the difference between right and wrong. It is all very confusing, rather than been consciously ironic - or perhaps it was! (Certainly, there is a moment where one of the main characters is booked secretly into a hotel room in name of Turing: even though I was sitting in MK, which includes Bletchley, no one else seemed to laugh...)

But to get back to the leadership point: the film is about the wise (and unwise) use of technology. I would contend that the mark of a fine leader is one who is able to distinguish what can be done from what should be done. In other words ethics is core to good leadership.

As a leader, what was your last ethical decision?

_____________

This is the twenty sixth of my new series of blogs about leadership ideas to be found in the movies of our time. You can read here as why I am doing this. Please subscribe to this blog if you want to read more. Thanks. Click the label 'film' to see all the others.

The 'Truncheon of Doom' & what price justice?

You may well have heard of the 'Barnet Graph of Doom'

This basically shows that Barnet council is going to run out of money at round about the end of this decade when sources of income dry up (DCLG goes into deep hibernation) and demand for social care & children's services just keep rising.

Birmingham not to be outdone has created the 'Jaws of Doom'

I believe there is also a 'Scissors of Doom' graph which seeks to predict when the NHS will run out of money / healthcare consumes all of public spending / Government introduces the Logan's Run option to reduce demand (I jest of course...) I cannot find it on the net: perhaps it is censored as being even scarier than senior politicians in swimming trunks...

But this got me wondering: do we have (or need) a 'Truncheon of Doom': a graph which shows when predicted resources available for the police & criminal justice services are exceeded by demand for said services? Could such a graph be constructed? How elastic is demand for policing? Or will money always be found for sufficient courts and prisons to lock people up and deliver justice?

Evidence based practice has now migrated across from healthcare into the probation and police services (although there is still a long way to go), a trend I was predicting back at the turn of the century. In a similar way, do we now need more Criminal Justice Economics (like Health Economics)? 

The University of York seems to be ploughing quite a lonely furrow. But is there could be much more... do we need more academic research to look at costs and benefits of various approaches to policing, probation and other parts of the CJS? When does the 'Truncheon of Doom' close in?

But let me make a further link (and I am just exploring this really, prompted by part of Peter Neyroud's input last night)...

Retributional Justice is about right & wrong, about punishment, guilt and fair process. In many ways the victim is as much a subject of the justice process as the offender. The benefits to the victim are not weighed against the cost of the judicial intervention. Thank Heavens, I here you say, justice should have no price because it has intrinsic and supreme value... Do you believe that?

Whereas, on the other hand, one model of Restorative Justice sees crime as a harm to be healed, and therefore the process of justice becomes the method by which that healing occurs. And so if that healing can occur without due (and hugely costly) legal process but instead with some other intervention / RJ based desistance method perhaps: then is that a better outcome for the individuals involved and indeed for society at large? (Because it could be far more cost effective...)

As I say, I don't know. I want to think about this some more. But what do you think? 

The love nudge

Although The Love Punch features some of my favourite actors, I didn't go with high expectations. I was not disappointed. The trailer suggested something of an unlikely plot, set in some beautiful parts of France with a few giggles along the way. And that indeed is what the film was like. No Trade Description Act infringements to report here. (Although I still don't quite get 'love punch'... is this punch as a mildly intoxicating party drink or a thump? I am none the wiser.)

The plot is contrived, ludicrous, and impossible frothy stuff. But I am guessing it was a total romp to make and who wouldn't turn down the chance to 'act' in silly costumes (including some rather well fitting wet suits which pitches an ex bond actor against Timothy Spall) in some lovely places. It was a bit of fun but I don't think it is going to win any awards.

As for a leadership theme, I think it going to have to be about being dauntless! Just think of a goal and believe you can do it, and you will! At least that is the message of the film (I guess). And of course the leadership literature is full of dauntless leaders who sail across oceans, win chests full of medals, turn businesses around because they believed it possible...

So all one has to do is believe in a goal as much as they did and you will achieve your goals too. Maybe. Perhaps. But the trouble with these heroic models of leadership (inspirational though they are) is that the we don't get to hear the stories of the heroes who failed. They may too have just as ardently believed in their mission. But it did not work out due to other factors outside their control.

There will be the NLP practitioners / gurus / black belts (or is that six sigma...?) who will sagely say: ah but those who failed clearly didn't believe in their goals enough... or hadn't visualised their achievement properly... or hadn't ticked all the boxes of some other list of essential goal setting behaviours. Yada yada.

By all means: be dauntless, be courageous, envision your goals. But just don't expect that is all you need to do. But then I am sure you don't...

Which dauntless leader do you admire the most? (And what is their secret do you think?)

_____________

This is the twenty fifth of my new series of blogs about leadership ideas to be found in the movies of our time. You can read here as why I am doing this. Please subscribe to this blog if you want to read more. Thanks. Click the label 'film' to see all the others.

Preventing domestic homicide

Prompted by a piece of research (which I now cannot track down - help!**) which showed (I think) that many people carrying out domestic homicides were not on any kind of high risk register, I have just written to the FoI departments of all the UK domestic police services with the following request: 

I am now carrying out a small piece of research into the preventability of domestic homicide. The numbers of women being killed by former or current partners seems to be a constant average of two per week. Based on some scant data, I have formed the hypothesis that many of the men committing these very serious crimes are not known to the police before hand – or on any kind of ‘watch’ list / risk register. And I need your help to find out if there is any basis to my hypothesis. Consequently, I would be most grateful if you could answer the following questions:

1. How many domestic homicides has your force dealt with over the last five years? A total figure is fine, or if you wish, break it down year by year. In this context, I am defining a ‘domestic homicide’ as being when a person is found guilty of killing a partner/former – murder or manslaughter. I am excluding other tragic cases of where parents kill themselves and/or their children etc.

2. How many of these persons (the ones convicted of killing) had any kind of prior criminal record ranging from low level crime to more serious acts of violence, cautions to imprisonment etc?

3. And how many of these people were on any kind of watch list / high risk assessment register / or similar?

Please note that if you cannot answer one of these questions (due to a FoI exclusion etc), please do still answer the other questions that you can. I would greatly appreciate avoiding the email tennis of you writing back to me to say that since Q2 (say) cannot be answered, you cannot answer Q1 & Q3 unless I want to alter my inquiry etc. Many thanks. And please forgive the round robin email: it is just so much quicker for me.

Any feedback on refining these questions would be much appreciated, if you think that would help me investigate the hypothesis more effectively. 

Thank you for all your help.

I will keep you posted on the responses.

Any feedback to me? 

**UPDATE 1321 | 250414: My plea has been answered by Peter Neyroud (thank you!). Here is a link to power point slides (NB they will download on clicking) of research by CC Sara Thornton: Does prior history of domestic violence predict domestic murder or other serious assaults? Very helpful piece of research which deserves to be read and acted upon.

I have made my decision: go and see this movie!

Locke  is one of the best films you are ever likely to see. It is an exquisite and sublime blend of taut editing, compelling direction, hypnotic cinematography, and incandescent acting. The script is bursting with power, emotion and aching understatement. This is a movie that you simply cannot, must not and should not miss.

I am not going to tell you much about the film since its magic and insight is best revealed to you inch by inch, mile by mile. This is a film that quietly builds and builds as the main character undergoes a life transforming journey that will make you reflect on decisions that you have taken in the past. I urge you to go and see this outstanding film.

There are so many leadereship themes that I could focus on from this film but I will select just one: deciding on your priorities. In the film, Locke says one particular sentence several times: I have made my decision. His decision is to prioritise X and not Y or Z. Gradually the film allows you understand just why he has made this decision and why it is so important to him to stick with it, no matter what the consequences.

But this is not stubbornness or blind pursuit of a superficial goal. No. This is because his decision is existentially critical to him. He knows that he must stick to this decision to maintain a sense of integrity and worth. Even though his future changes as a result, indeed he knows that this decision will shape his future. But he also knows that without keeping to his decision, he has no future.

Thankfully, most decisions we make in life are not so critical. But all of us, especially when we are in the role of leader, need to recognise the moment when we are facing such a challenge. The art of leadership is knowing when and knowing what to do.

When was the last time you faced such a decision on priorities? How did it go?

_____________

This is the twenty fourth of my new series of blogs about leadership ideas to be found in the movies of our time. You can read here as why I am doing this. Please subscribe to this blog if you want to read more. Thanks. Click the label 'film' to see all the others.

Divergent courage

Picture the scene: a poolside somewhere in uptown LA on a hot balmy evening after several margaritas & gin slings, a couple of film producers are talking....

Producer A: This Hunger Games thing... it's making a whole load cash. Can we do something like that?
Producer B: Hmm. Do you mean, a post apocalyptic dystopia, rebellious young woman with a brooding pout, impossible romance, teetering on the edge of revolution, lots of violence but no blood and only the hint of sex? 
Producer A: Dys what?
Producer B: And use unknown actors who won't cost a lot and can passably act, have sets that that are dark, dank and also don't cost much?
Producer A: Yeah. That's the sort of gig. Can we have some sort of neo-feminist thing going on but so long as the blokes are ultimately in charge? 
Producer B: Of course. No problemo. We will avoid any stories by Ursula LeGuin: we need to make sure we can attract the teen girls and boys in big numbers. Narrative integrity is not that important...

And so began the making of Divergent.

The film is all about "I am not a number/factor" and refusing to be categorised. In that sense it is implicitly about authentic leadership: carving your own path, not letting others decide your position / caste / class / fate... It is an energetic film, seeking to inspire its viewers to act courageously themselves.

But it is extremely hard to be a courageous leader: to stand out from and above expectations of others, both senior and junior. The weight of doing the usual thing is immense and takes real strength to lift the load off one's shoulders. And this strength, as the film shows, derives from great self belief.

Do you believe in yourself? 
_____________

This is the twenty third of my new series of blogs about leadership ideas to be found in the movies of our time. You can read here as why I am doing this. Please subscribe to this blog if you want to read more. Thanks. Click the label 'film' to see all the others.

An uplifting team

A Long Way Down is worth seeing if only for the brilliant lines that the character called Jess (well played by Imogen Poots) gets to say. I am not sure I would have cast Pierce Brosnan as the humiliated and vanilla vacuous ex TV presenter, but his acting just about convinces. Aaron Paul and Rosamund Pike are better cast. It is a quirky story about four people who meet at the top of 'Topper Tower' on a New Year's Eve, all planning to commit suicide. It doesn't end there (although some harsher critics have probably said it should have done).

I am fan of Nick Hornby and I have read the book on which this is based a while ago. So I was curious to see how it translated to the big screen. It is very funny in parts, poignant in others and offers a sort of romcomtrag mixture. It just about works although I am fairly sure that people desperate enough to want to throw themselves off a building would not be quite as sparky as these four characters. OK...ish.

The leadership message that came through for me was the power of teams. These four random people happen to turn themselves from a randomly collected group into a team where the members are not prepared to die for each other. They self-organise, care about each other and work together. There is no leader except that they are all leaders.

Good leaders spot teams that are working well together and generally stay out of the way. Some of the worst mistakes that managers can make is when they interfere with such team work by merging teams, reorganising them, or making a few redundant and expecting the remaining members just to carry on as if nothing had happened. A self-organising solid team is a pearl in any organisation.

What are you doing with your pearly teams?

PS: Just came across this delightful example of teamwork. Watch and enjoy.
_____________

This is the twenty second of my new series of blogs about leadership ideas to be found in the movies of our time. You can read here as why I am doing this. Please subscribe to this blog if you want to read more. Thanks. Click the label 'film' to see all the others.

Ms Johansson goes walking in Scotland

Hmm. People sometimes ask me how I choose the films I go to see. Sometimes, I go and see a movie out of curiosity, a recommendation, a review or even just because it is showing at a time that suits me... (Remember, I have an unlimited pass from Cineworld.) It was the latter with Under the Skin. (If the times had suited, I would have seen 20 Feet from Stardom...)

Many of the reviews are nothing short of hyperbole: "visually stunning and deeply disturbing: very freaky, very scary and very erotic" (in my opinion, none of these adjectives apply), "grippingly eerie, intriguing and unsettling film" (nah, not really...) or even "masterpiece" (yeah...right).

Here are the adjectives I would use: pretentious, drab, moody (in a teenager kind of way), vacuous, directionless, mildly disturbing. You might have guessed by now that I did not rate this movie. Nor do many it seems: the cinema had about 4 people in it. So do not bother, unless you are a total fan of Scarlett and have to see all of her films.

So what is the leadership lesson from this cinematic creation? I can think of a few for the director and the critics who have been taken in, but that isn't what I try and do with these blogs. Is there a theme to highlight that connects to an aspect of good leadership? Hmm, are there any solid narrative threads at all? Tricky...

I think the underlying theme for me is one of desperation: this is a film about people (and aliens) driven to desperate acts, as symbolised in the beach scene. In management circles there is much talk about creating 'burning platforms' in order to generate the energy and creativity to achieve transformation. I can buy into a much of this idea and have seen it happen. However, leaders need to take great care: urgency can easily descend into desperation. The consequences then may be anything but creative or transformational.

If you are a leader intent upon setting the platform alight, do you (at least) know where the fire exits are?

_____________

This is the twenty first of my new series of blogs about leadership ideas to be found in the movies of our time. You can read here as why I am doing this. Please subscribe to this blog if you want to read more. Thanks. Click the label 'film' to see all the others.

Clockwork homage

I do not usually write about DVDs that I have seen but I feel compelled to blog about Hugo, which I watched yesterday afternoon, while doing my ironing. First thing I would say is that I need to watch this again without my shirts in the way. This is beautiful film, with glorious use of colour and framing. It is a marvelous and enchanting story which, like a magical mystery tour, takes you to places you could not imagine. I won't breathe a single word about what happens. This is a film to be seen and be delighted, (especially if you are film hack like me).

There is superb acting from the young actors (Asa Butterfield and Chloë Grace Moretz) and the older ones (Ben Kinsgley & Sacha Baron Cohen especially). And it is of course directed by Martin Scorsese: so how would it not be brilliant?

As you will gather, this is a film where clockwork is a key feature of the story. At one point, Hugo imagines the world to be like a large clockwork machine with each one of us having a part to play. As he says, machines never come with parts that do not have a function. The challenge for all of us to find what part we have to play... what is our unique purpose?

Leaders are good at knowing their own purpose and more critically, helping others find their own purpose too. Leaders are good at spotting where a new cog might fit so that the whole machine judders into smoother running.

How are your watchmaking (and repairing) skills?

_____________

This is the twentieth of my new series of blogs about leadership ideas to be found in the movies of our time. You can read here as why I am doing this. Please subscribe to this blog if you want to read more. Thanks. Click the label 'film' to see all the others.

Bored by elevator pitches?

There is still time to book yourself a place on our SpeakEasy Moot!

• It is in the news? Click here
• Sorry what? Click here
• Hmm... when... where? 10 April at Buckingham Community Centre, 0945 for 1000 start
• How can I book? Click here

Everyone's business

There were so many nights when I, as a young boy, had to watch helplessly as my father verbally and physically abused my mother. I can still recall the smell of alcohol, see the fear in my mother's eyes and feel the hopeless despair that comes when we see people we love hurting each other in incomprehensible ways. I would not wish that experience on anyone, especially not a child.

And so begins Bishop Desmond Tutu's article on forgiveness in last Saturday's Guardian. Anyone reading this will be reminded of just how many victims there are of domestic violence. A very good friend and skilled colleague of mine was murdered by her ex last year. I sat in Southwark Crown Court last week as her murderer was convicted and sentenced to (at least) 20 years imprisonment. The high incidence of domestic abuse is one of the reasons why I spend some of my time in schools helping 9/10/11 year olds understand more about abuse, including emotional & domestic abuse. (Citing the HMIC report: "In the UK, one in four of young people aged 10 to 24 reported that they experienced domestic violence and abuse during their childhood")

This matter is everyone's business.

And so I praise Theresa May for calling for the just published HMIC scrutiny "Everyone’s business: Improving the police response to domestic abuse". This is a worthy report that has already attracted much comment (such as here, here and here). I am sure that it is being read carefully in many places this morning, not least the police forces that have been highlighted as being particularly lacking in their response.

The report is long (157 pages) and contains some excellent and it would appear, developmental help to forces wishing to improve their response to domestic violence (which should include even the ones that are praised such as Thames Valley). I certainly have not read it all.

Some of the twitter comment about this report has been about how much the police cannot do this alone and how much other partners need to work in tandem to tackle this issue. This is a point not lost on the authors of the report who say in the second paragraph of the introduction

Other agencies and partners share the responsibility to tackle domestic abuse and keep victims safe; it does not rest solely with the police. However, the police have an essential role to play. 

So we know it is "complex" and it is about partnership working and it is not all the police's fault... the only question now is what next: just how should things improve in the police service and beyond? As the report states "Domestic abuse is a priority on paper but, in the majority of forces, not in practice" (my added emphasis)

This reminds me of my often used challenge: it is easy to write a 'strutegy' but a heck of lot more complicated to create a 'stractegy'. (The former exists only on the glossy page whereas the latter exists in action - see here for more about this analysis.) So I start with this concern: has the HMIC recommended actions that will result in strutegies or stractegies?

There is much to commend the conclusions and recommendations for action that the report advocates. But here are my concerns (from an organisational development perspective):

E-learning in this area is probably rightly criticised. However classroom learning in groups may be little better unless it is complimented by tackling organisational culture and leadership. The "Myth of the Hero Innovator" remains, in my opinion, one of the most important pieces about change ever written:

I recommend you to get hold of a copy ("The Myth of the Hero-Innovator and Alternative Strategies for Organisational Change" Georgiades & Phillimore. In "Behaviour Modification with the Severly Retarded" Edited by Kiernan & Woodford. 1975)

In essence what Georgiades & Phillimore advocate is a whole system approach to making change happen and not relying on a single measure (such as 'sheep dip' training that the police service embarked upon when tackling institutional racism) to effect sustainable development of practice.

But to turn specifically to the recommendations in the report:

R1: A national oversight and monitoring group should be established and convened immediately to monitor and report on the progress made in implementing these recommendations.

I think that is a good start. The key to its success will be whether membership of this group includes people prepared to stand up to some very powerful vested interests and say what needs to be said. It is unclear what authority this group will have other than hold up a mirror...

R2: By September 2014, every police force in England and Wales should establish and publish an action plan that specifies in detail what steps it will take to improve its approach to domestic abuse.

I could be churlish and say what happened to local accountability especially as "Police and crime commissioners should hold forces to account in this respect"..? (My added emphasis) But I really fear, as above, that these action plans could look good on paper, but will they be stractegies or strutegies? Consulting other organisations and victims, as the report recommends is no guarantee that these actions will be properly followed through, or even the right actions. (Email me if you want me to wax lyrical about why.)

R3: To inform the action plan specified in Recommendation 2, chief constables should review how they, and their senior officers, give full effect to their forces' stated priority on domestic abuse.

How they what? This sounds like political speak to me...

But it does go on to say that the action plan (and their leadership of it) should be based upon an assessment of culture, values, performance management, reward & recognition policies etc etc. In other words this is about Leadership and Organisation Development! Make no bones about it. Will we see this? I hope so!

R4: Data collected on domestic abuse needs to be consistent, comparable, accessible and accurate so that it can be used to monitor progress.

Cannot argue with that. But shouldn't all national data on all types of crime and police response be like this anyway? Has the Home Office been sleeping on the job too?

R5: The College of Policing is updating authorised professional practice for officers on domestic abuse alongside other areas such as investigation and public protection. This update should be informed by the conclusions of and recommendations in this report...

Again, makes sense to me. But I am sad that there is no explicit mention of evidence based practice in this recommendation: a golden opportunity missed in my opinion. There is some (though not much) good controlled research in this area. We need more. Perhaps the Home Office could have offered funding to support some more of such research that forces could have bid into?

R6: The College of Policing is reviewing the evidence base for risk assessment in cases of domestic abuse. The College should urgently consider the current approach to risk assessment with others..

This is vital and at least 'evidence base' is mentioned here. But a mention of resources here would not have gone amiss.

R7: The College of Policing should conduct a thorough and fundamental review of the sufficiency and effect of training and development on forces' response to domestic abuse... Police forces should ensure that their approach to domestic abuse training is evidence based

Good. And it says 'development' too, thereby extending this beyond the realm of just 'training'. And another hat tip to 'evidence based'. But how many forces (and PCCs especially) really understand what this means...?

R8: The College of Policing, through the national policing lead for domestic abuse, should disseminate to forces examples of how forces are targeting serial and repeat domestic abuse perpetrators in order to prevent future offending.

Always a good idea. More talking heads type conferences or maybe something more interactive... and developmental?

R9: The Home Office should reconsider its approach to domestic homicide reviews.... Police and crime commissioners should track how and when recommendations from domestic homicide reviews are implemented.

Again, good stuff. No quibbles. Although how close is this sailing PCCs into operational waters?

R10: Police and crime commissioners should consider the findings and recommendations of this report when commissioning services for victims of domestic abuse. 

Very good point and very timely given that we are now in the run up to this commissioning round. Here is a role for Police & Crime Panels to be monitoring...

R11: Tackling domestic abuse requires a number of organisations in both the statutory services including health, local authorities, the Crown Prosecution Service and probation) and voluntary and community services to work together. 

Has Ms May talked with Mr Grayling recently, I wonder, about his 'reforms' in the world of probation? Partnership is just about to get a whole lot more complicated! And I am curious that the 'National Offender Management Service' is not mentioned here: what about the prison service elements as well?

...
So in sum, these recommendations (and I have not read the full report) I think offer a route forward which has the potential to take a whole system approach. The proof will be in pudding.

Indeed the real proof will be in whether there are fewer victims of domestic violence in the years to come...

The challenge of collaborating on custody & control rooms

Sally Chidzoy has been investigating the proposed collaboration between Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire & Cambridgeshire. You can see her short piece on BBC iPlayer at the moment from last nights Look East slot. The piece begins at 3'54" in. I appear a little later - with about two sentences! (There is a lot more in the can as it were - but such is TV...)

The piece is here.

To expand on what I was saying: I think that when assessing the cost/benefits of cross county collaborations (of which I am generally in favour, of course) it is vital to look at the proposals from all angles, not just the police one. There are the people arrested of course, but also bodies such as Victim Support (remember people arrested are often victims too), the Crown Prosecution Service, the defending counsel and others who may well have to follow a person put into custody scores of miles away from where they live or where they were arrested.

In other words a whole systems approach needs to be taken.

I have no criticism of what any of the Chief Constables or PCCs in these three counties are doing, since I do not know what plans have been made and how they are approaching the matters. I hope that they will be consulting widely from all angles so that this results in new collaborative arrangements that not only are more efficient and effective for the police, but also for all the other parties involved.

Leadership as poetry

I saw The Book Thief the other day. And whilst the acting (especially by the younger members of the cast) was superb and the story gently and enchantingly told, I left this movie feeling that the book must be much better. My hunch is that the book contains far more detail & description than a film could possibly show. And the narration by Death probably worked in the book but felt clunky in the film.

But go see it, if only for the costumes and sets which skillfully give an evocative impression of Germany during the war. I was struck at one point by a scene of a German soldier doing something caring (I won't say what exactly) since that is an image we very rarely see. This is a good movie but not a great movie. I think, but I don't know how, it could have said more.

This is a film about words and the great importance of words in helping us to understand, appreciate, and grapple with the world around us. Sometimes words come out right, sometimes they come out wrong. Good leaders are always very careful about the words they say or write. It is probably harder being spontaneous if you are leader. Perhaps.

As I have said before on this blog, one of the most important things that leaders do is make new futures real and desirable. Words are critically important here. Being able to evoke an image in the minds of people is a hugely valuable skill for any leader. At one point in the film, Liesel is challenged to do this... and does it well.

So in my view, leaders should be poets: able to use words to describe that which cannot be seen... yet.

How are your poetry skills? 


UPDATE: Richard Crompton tweeted me of the piece he put (The Policeman and the Poet) on my collection of stories about inspirational leadership. Indeed I was thinking of him as I wrote this blog. Have a browse, it is a thought provoking piece.

_____________

This is the nineteenth of my new series of blogs about leadership ideas to be found in the movies of our time. You can read here as why I am doing this. Please subscribe to this blog if you want to read more. Thanks. Click the label 'film' to see all the others.

Non Stop Leadershp

Liam Neeson is one of my favourite actors: I carry his performance in Schindlers List around with me in my head & heart. His performance in Non Stop is equally arresting. In a twist of fate, the current mystery and tragedy surrounding Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 has brought elements of the movie into even closer and scarier focus. If you want an edge of the seat drama that will keep you guessing until the end: this is definitely a film for you. At times, I wanted an oxygen mask to fall out of the cinema ceiling to remind me to breath!

The casting is credible (even Michelle Dockery manages to shake off her dour Downton garb) and the story is (just about) plausible. Thankfully the trailer did not reveal all. It is a bit a corny ('flawed man finds himself in a crisis') but transposed into a modern day and dangerous setting that we can all relate to, it becomes fresh again.

SPOILER ALERT: Do not read any further as I am about to reveal something of the plot line.




At a key point in the film, Liam Neeson's character has to regain control and the respect of the passengers (things are rather getting out of hand). How does he do that? He does not use violence and he does not use threats. Instead, he is disarmingly honest about his failings. In one leap, he transcends the two dimensional and 'not to be trusted' air marshal into being a three dimensional human being that is to be trusted and followed.

This is true of many leaders who have to handle people's reactions based upon what those people think they know about the leader rather than what the leader actually is. Poor leaders continue to wrestle with the impressions people have of them. Good leaders will reveal themselves in three dimensions to those whom they seek to lead.

How much of 'you' do you reveal?

_____________

This is the eighteenth of my new series of blogs about leadership ideas to be found in the movies of our time. You can read here as why I am doing this. Please subscribe to this blog if you want to read more. Thanks. Click the label 'film' to see all the others.

Engaging PCCs?

Just a quick post to link to Bernard Rix' most recent thematic on "PCCs & Public Engagement". As you will read, I assisted Bernard with this thematic. There is some very useful analysis there on how much (and how little) PCCs are doing to engage with their publics.

It is still, just, possible to say these are early days for PCCs. But only just. Given that while this governance structure is only a 16 months old but given that it was partly built on the limitations of Police Authorities engagement with their publics, I would have thought that PCCs overall would have made greater progress.

So CoPaCC's second thematic is really a call to arms: many (if not most) PCCs need to wind up several gears on their engagement strategies. Some are leading the way. It is time for them all to do so.

So please can we see an end (and start) to:

• Public consultations that start when all the strategic deliberations are more or less over (do it earlier!)
• Surveys that only tap into people's opinions (rather than their judgments)
• Focusing on processes & outputs (rather than seeking the public's views on desirable outcomes)
• Singular methods of engagement (when multiple approaches would work far better)
• Engagement than ends just with consultation (as opposed to joint action)
• Too much focus on looking backwards (looking forwards leads to far richer conversations)
• Fragmented consultation strategies (joining up with several agencies is cheaper and better reflects the experience of the public)

I live in hope...

PCCs: the good, the bad and the ugly

Prompted by this article in The Economist: Police oversight - Missing a beat, I added this comment which I republish here:

What is good about PCC based police governance:

• Policing has always been political, and introducing PCCs has made that more explicit
• Many of those elected are 'big beasts' or rapidly becoming so - able to challenge daft Whitehall policy
• The range of indie PCCs has added plurality, spice & diversity to the tribal party political debate on policing policy
• PCCs have had to grapple with real budgetary challenges & made precept decisions on that basis
• Many PCCs have pursued innovative paths and highlighted issues that had hitherto been largely overlooked such as the interaction between policing and mental health service users
• Many PCCs really understand ‘evidence based practice’
• Some PCCs have made real efforts to reach out to their publics in systematic and indeed very ‘human’ ways (watch out for CoPaCC’s forthcoming thematic* review on PCC engagement)
• The majority of PCCs have conducted their office with due probity in recognition that they are spending the public’s money
• Some Police & Crime Panels (PCPs) have grappled positively with their hard (limited) and soft (more extensive if act shrewdly) powers to hold PCCs to account
• It has provoked a further debate about what should be good governance of the police & justice services (PCCs are not ‘it’, in my view)

What is bad about PCC based governance:

• Introducing PCCs has introduced tribal party politics into policing which has turned off many citizens
• Despite introducing these political specialists, the government has not listened to them enough
• With some notable exceptions, PCCs are largely grey, male and white (in contrast to their more diverse predecessor police authorities)
• Too many PCCs are defaulting to budget first and strategy second with little linkage between the two
• Too many PCCs have not put their heads above the parapet and stayed largely invisible
• Too many PCCs just have no clue about what evidence based practice really means and how it could challenge police culture
• Too many PCCs still think that running a few public meetings in cold & dark town halls equates to real engagement
• A politically significant number of PCCs have sailed very close to the wind (I will be generous) on personal expenses, appointing old chums and generally gilding their office 
• Too many PCPs have either been bland fan clubs or sniping cabals, detracting from constructive scrutiny & debate
• The founders, supporters & protagonists of this system of governance can only think of giving even more power to single individuals while limiting the checks and balances on this power

And I will add: what about the ugly?

Or to be fair, some of them are really quite handsome!

Cinema etiquette

I really love this!! Please could all cinemas show it at the start of a movie! (Thanks to Kevin Lloyd who pointed me towards it)

Cuba libre

Cuban Fury is a fun movie: a rom com with a salsa twist. There isn't much to tell that cannot be gathered from the trailer: guy with low self esteem falls for beautiful boss and seeks to woo her with his long forgotten salsa dancing talent. You can write the ending of course. It features all the usual ingredients: misunderstandings, happen chance meetings, coincidental back stories, admiring glances held on camera longer than you would hold them in real life and a smattering of slap-stick.

If this doesn't attract you enough, then go and see it for the gnarled face and brooding humour of Ian McShane, playing the salsa dance teacher who has seen it all and yet still believes. This is a film with passion, pathos and pirouettes.

Office romance is a central part of the narrative and therefore features several collegiate conversations and liaisons: several of which I am pretty sure would not pass company HR policies these days! The relationship between Nick Frost and his manager, Chris O'Dowd borders on the abusive.  You know what, it does more than just border on it..!

And as always poor management just serves to highlight what good leadership and management should all be about. Nobody abuses their staff like Chris O'Dowd does in the film, in real life... do they?

But how does one know? Do bullies know that they are bullies? Are they consciously or unconsciously mean and abusive? 

_____________

This is the seventeenth of my new series of blogs about leadership ideas to be found in the movies of our time. You can read here as why I am doing this. Please subscribe to this blog if you want to read more. Thanks. Click the label 'film' to see all the others.