Challenges facing the new Civil Service chief executive

The new CEO will have important roles, but more modest and limited than those of a chief executive as normally understood. He or she will not run the Civil Service or line manage Permanent Secretaries, as a CEO elsewhere would. So what does the job involve? And will it help fix any of the problems identified in previous IfG research? How will it relate to the Cabinet Secretary and others? The new CEO could have been a deputy to Sir Jeremy Heywood, as the second most senior permanent secretary. A more junior permanent secretary has handled some of the management functions for the Cabinet Secretary in the past. Some of the trappings are there, sitting on the Civil Service board (again, not really a board, but an executive management committee), attending Cabinet as an observer (adding to an already packed room), and representing the Civil Service internally and externally, including to parliamentary committees. But the real number two in the hierarchy will be Sir Nick Macpherson, the Treasury Permanent Secretary. Instead, the CEO will be the senior official for efficiency and reform, in ‘executive control’ over the commercial, supplier management, digital, property, HR, project management, shared services and civil service reform functions - in the Cabinet Office - driving ‘the Government’s ambitious efficiency and reform programme’. There is a strong case for the pulling together the leadership of these functions at the centre. The new post could be a way to achieve this - though, almost certainly, finance will rightly remain with the Treasury. But the new post remains circumscribed by the federal structure of Whitehall and the power of departments, and the occupant will need to establish their credibility rapidly if they hope seriously to influence what happens beyond the Cabinet Office. The new CEO will have several masters, ultimately the Prime Minister, and, on efficiency issues to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. But he or she will also both work ‘day to day’  to the Minister for the Cabinet Office, Francis Maude, and in management terms report to the Cabinet Secretary, Sir Jeremy Heywood. Clear, simple? The role A credible occupant of the post might be able to use these relationships, taking forward a new core agenda for civil service reform- as set out in various IfG reports - which commands clear support from both politicians and fellow civil service leaders. This is a tough enough task in itself, made harder by the limitations of the post. The other way of looking at the new role is what it means for the Cabinet Secretary. Sir Jeremy may have taken on the title of Head of the Civil Service but it does not really alter, or add to, his substantial current influence. But he does not have the time or background to perform many of the functions which Sir Bob Kerslake did. On paper, Sir Jeremy is taking on the appraisal of 35 Permanent Secretaries, three times as many as he line manages now. But this is too large a burden for him to carry out without support and advice from elsewhere. One of the new CEO’s core roles will be to work closely with the Cabinet Secretary to ‘support and challenge departmental permanent secretaries  to ensure that the Government’s operational delivery, reform and programme priorities are implemented with pace and rigour’. As such, the CEO will support the Cabinet Secretary ‘in managing the performance of departmental permanent secretaries’. There is also speculation about there being a role here for departmental non-executive directors in preparing assessments. The Institute’s report ‘Accountability at the Top’ highlighted the importance of improving their performance management, and the recently published objectives for Permanent Secretaries were an advance in this area. Another question is who will perform the key internal communications job of the Head of the Civil Service, the weekly visits around the country to where most civil servants work. Sir Bob did that well with his manifest straightforwardness. As chief policy co-ordinator and adviser, Sir Jeremy will not have the time. That might require those other Permanent Secretaries on the Civil Service Board to step forward to take on more corporate leadership duties, a desirable goal in itself. This will only work if there is a clear core agenda for reform which all these leaders are backing. Many details of the post have still to be worked out, though there have already been some changes. The CEO will be the accounting officer, answerable to Parliament, for only those parts of the Cabinet Office over which he or she has executive control. Other head office functions will be handled separately, with those most directly supporting the Prime Minister sensibly reporting to Sir Jeremy. Overall, there is a sense of hurry, not just in the muddle over the job description but also in the speed of recruitment. Normally, finding and appointing such a senior figure takes several months of inquiry, discussion and multiple interviews.  The closing date for CEO applications is September 5th with a short-listing meeting the following week and final interviews the week after. The IfG takes longer over the appointment of interns. Moreover, the proposed start date is just six weeks later, which looks pretty short for ‘an outstanding individual who has a proved track record of running large complex, multiple-stakeholder organisations through a period of change and cost reduction’. This ’significant experience’ is ‘likely to be in the private sector’. Unless somebody suitable has already been identified, this looks an unrealistically tight timetable. There may well be candidates among executives who have already reached the senior level of a big company and can afford the probably large pay cut. With the likely appointee in post six months at most before the general election, there are political risks. It would be sensible if both the broad job description and its occupant were acceptable to the Opposition, even if only on an informal basis. There will be someone with the title of Chief Executive by the end of the year.  But unless there is more discussion about the real role, and its limitations, there is the danger of further disappointment and frustration. Sir Jeremy and civil service leaders have sought to make the best of a messy situation. Ultimately, however, it is the Prime Minister’s responsibility to ensure that the change succeeds.