Our transformation action learning workshops provide a unique development opportunity for councillors and officers to explore possible solutions to overcome obstacles in their transformation programmes.
Benefits to councils
- A safe environment to reflect, exchange and curate knowledge.
- The pathway for participants to develop the capability to deliver transformation.
- A peer network of mutual support, aimed at supporting attendees both during and after the action learning workshops.
- Learning about transformation projects in other councils.
- A time and place to regularly collaborate and tackle challenges.
This programme is now closed for councils to sign up for but learning from councils who have previously been through the programme can be accessed below.
Transformation action learning sets: Previous programme learning and resources
Ground Rules
Participants agreed to a set of ground rules for the discussions:
- Be open and honest.
- Listen to one another and don’t interrupt.
- It is participants’ personal involvement that matters – no substitutes for meetings.
- Respect confidentiality - starting point is the Chatham House rule. You can talk about what was discussed at the session but not attribute any dilemmas, points of view or actions to individuals or their organisation.
- Follow the structured method: 30-minute blocks per council and one topic selected from expressions of interest.
- Present your issue first, framed as a “How can I/How do I” question, covering significance, stakeholders, difficulties and benefits.
- Ask open ended questions before giving suggestions
- Follow up on committed actions.
Action learning problem #1
How can we clarify responsibility for cross-cutting savings, ensure service and digital teams share ownership of delivery, and design problem-led approaches that secure commitment to benefits across organisational boundaries?
Context
The issue owner described a situation where they are looking to realise savings across a transformation portfolio and build a shared ownership approach for cross-cutting deliverables. Services understand their own pressures and are comfortable with a problem-led, service design approach, yet services like the digital function often default to technology-centred thinking rather than treating digital solutions as one element of a broader organisational change process.
The council’s previous approach allocated savings targets to individual services, which created clarity and accountability. However, for cross-cutting items, no equivalent mechanism existed, and this has generated ambiguity, resistance and delivery risks. The issue owner’s preferred position would be to reset the starting point of this project, focusing first on clear service problems and desired outcomes, then determining how digital solutions contribute to the overall model. They need an approach that simplifies expectations, sets out a coherent route for realising benefits, and fosters buy-in from digital colleagues and service managers who are unable to see their part in cross-cutting savings.
The core challenge is securing shared ownership where benefits fall outside an individual cost centre, navigating organisational boundaries, and ensuring enabling functions understand how their work contributes to cashable financial gains. The issue owner emphasised the need for simplicity, clarity of roles and visible buy-in across services and digital teams so savings can be realised at pace.
Question insights and solutions suggested by other participants
- Participants queried how cross-cutting savings were set during the budget process and noted that digital savings had been based on general evidence rather than service-specific baselines, limiting buy-in.
- Participant also emphasised the need for a coherent case for change with clear priorities, principles and a shared organisational “why” to align officers and members.
- Colleagues encouraged closer integration between transformation and digital planning so that digital acts as an enabler within a service-design-led model rather than a standalone stream.
- They highlighted the importance of structured engagement with members, recognising that politically sensitive decisions require timing, transparency and early involvement.
- Participants advocated user-centred design approaches involving staff, members and enabling teams in shared problem-solving to avoid the need for retrospective buy-in.
- They underscored the value of peer support for members when navigating difficult or unfamiliar decisions.
- The group reflected on governance arrangements, noting that cabinet models can support clearer accountability for challenging decisions.
- Participants stressed the need to balance financial realism with a sense of hope, framing changes as necessary steps to protect key services and future outcomes.
Response from the issue owner
The individual welcomed the emphasis on clarity and confirmed that refreshed corporate values, a target operating model and a set of design principles now guide their transformation approach. They described strengthened engagement with members through policy briefings and targeted sessions, alongside staff events that explain the rationale for change and build understanding of the organisation’s financial position.
They reiterated that transformation must be service-design-led and centred on residents, staff, businesses and members. The issue owner acknowledged that digital and transformation planning have not yet been fully aligned but noted that work has begun to integrate these processes, bringing the right teams together earlier and avoiding imposed solutions. Locating transformation under the assistant chief executive provides a platform for more coherent cross-organisational planning.
They recognised the importance of political dynamics, especially the shift from a committee system to a cabinet model, and the need to frame difficult decisions with purpose and hope. The individual committed to strengthening the case for change, embedding clearer principles, improving alignment with digital strategy and deepening engagement across the organisation, and will report back on progress at the next session.
Action learning problem #2
How can we rebuild trust and productive relationships following the initial stages of Local Government Reorganisation, maintain staff morale, support residents through uncertainty, and begin shaping a unified culture that delivers stability on day one and the foundations for long term transformation?
Context
The issue owner described their experience of the Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) process. With two models for the future types of councils emerging. The process became fraught, divisive, and created discomfort among officers and members alike. The organisation is now moving into a phase where it must secure a safe and legal day one position, stabilise services, and simultaneously begin building the culture of the future council.
Internally, the organisation has already undergone significant transformation, with reductions in headcount, reduced expenditure, and reduced investment into voluntary and community partners. These measures were necessary but have contributed to staff apprehension and fatigue. Morale, while generally good historically, reached a low point during the LGR period and is still recovering. Staff remain concerned about the implications of reorganisation and the pace of change that will follow.
Externally, the organisation must manage resident expectations and navigate the external environment where the models were publicly debated. Leaders have sought to maintain an honest narrative with staff and stakeholders, shared information openly across boundaries, and recognised early the importance of continuity of services before attempting more ambitious transformation. However, they are seeking insights on how other areas have managed unitarisation, restored trust after contested processes, and set up conditions for an effective transition.
Question insights and solutions suggested by other participants
- Participants enquired about reduced staff churn due to uncertainty created by LGR and explored how vacancy freezes, deletions, and role redesigns were being used to control costs.
- They queried whether staff in ‘at-risk’ functions understood their likelihood of impact and how transparently this was being communicated.
- Colleagues highlighted the emerging competitive dynamic among senior staff as structural decisions remain unresolved and considered the risk of energy being diverted into competition rather than preparation.
- They asked how continuity of essential services could be used to reassure staff whose roles will remain necessary within new unitary arrangements.
- Participants reflected on the potential benefits of a larger organisation, including clearer resident access routes and reduced duplication, and explored how these might be communicated.
- They stressed the need to prioritise core operational readiness, citing lessons from other LGR areas where delays in merging systems and budgets caused disruption.
- Colleagues emphasised the importance of early development of a target operating model supported by shared strategy, values and design principles to guide integration.
- They encouraged identifying organisational strengths and areas of exemplary practice to influence discussions on future service models once formal joint arrangements and shadow authorities are in place.
Response from the issue owner
The issue owner explained that the organisation has already reduced the headcount of its workforce and is reaching a point where further reductions risk undermining service delivery. They highlighted the emotional and cultural challenge of moving from a small, familiar council to a much larger structure, noting the pride in the current organisation.
Work is underway to develop a retention approach for the coming year to ensure continuity and support key staff through the implementation period. They also reflected on the difficulty of promoting the benefits of a larger unitary model while internally feeling uncertain about the potential loss of agility and close working relationships.
They confirmed that permanent leadership roles have yet to be appointed and that early engagement with emerging joint committees and shadow arrangements will be essential. They intend to influence early conversations on values and operating models and acknowledged the importance of tailoring messages to different staff groups as the organisation prepares for vesting day.
Action learning problem #3
How can we embed early intervention and prevention in frontline environmental services, harness the rich intelligence gathered on the ground, and translate this into meaningful insight without creating a sense of surveillance for staff or communities?
Context
The issue owners outlined a long-standing financial context of year-on-year savings pressures, coupled with the ambition to shift the organisation towards earlier intervention and prevention.
Environmental services teams, public realm operatives and waste crews visit the same streets weekly, observe local patterns and hold valuable practical knowledge about place, vulnerability and household circumstances. The challenge is to move beyond a reactive operating model and use potential intelligence as part of a council-wide preventative approach.
The wider vision extends beyond operational improvements in the public realm. It seeks to connect frontline observations with social care, housing, revenues and benefits, and other services. Examples include spotting emerging signs of crisis such as changes in household condition, repeated complaints or patterns in recycling waste, and combining these with existing datasets on rent arrears, benefit claims or food bank use. The ambition is to build a fuller picture of need, act earlier and prevent escalation.
However, the organisation faces cultural barriers. Operatives are resistant to any perception that they are being asked to “spy” on communities, and the council wants to avoid creating discomfort among residents. Staff must feel supported, not surveyed, and any approach must be simple, proportionate and aligned with their primary role. The issue owners emphasised the importance of designing a model that captures intelligence in a respectful way and integrates it meaningfully with existing early intervention processes.
Question insights and solutions suggested by other participants
- Participants noted the need to address ethical considerations explicitly, ensuring any approach is proportionate, respectful and clearly understood by staff and communities.
- They advised drawing on existing practice in other services, such as fire and rescue, housing and voluntary organisations, where routine contact already incorporates welfare checks.
- They encouraged a closer partnership with community and voluntary sector networks to broaden insight and reach into areas where the council has less presence.
- They suggested framing intelligence gathering in welfare-focused terms, using simple, neutral flags rather than detailed observations that could appear judgmental.
- They emphasised the importance of trust, so frontline staff feel confident reporting concerns and residents understand how information will be used.
- They proposed keeping the method of data capture straightforward, with limited categories and a clear process to avoid unnecessary volume or complexity.
- They recommended starting with small-scale pilots to test the model, refine the approach and signal that the organisation is learning rather than imposing a fixed solution.
- They highlighted the value of feeding back outcomes to staff, demonstrating how concerns raised lead to appropriate action and reinforcing engagement.
Response from the issue owner
The individuals welcomed the focus on ethics, trust and proportionality, noting that the work is at an early examination stage and that the primary aim is to prevent residents and families from reaching crisis rather than interfere with privacy. The individual acknowledged that they must determine whether an ethical and safe model is achievable or whether the concept is not workable in its current form. Technical capability is not the barrier; handheld devices and reporting pathways already exist and could be adapted.
Their focus is instead on designing an approach that feels appropriate for operatives and acceptable to communities, with clear and neutral language rather than detailed observations. They agreed that learning from fire services, police, social care and community meals providers will be important and will explore safeguarding pathways and existing practice with local partners. They recognised that effective early intervention already exists within social care and contact centres and that the environmental services model will require similar clarity and sensitivity.
They emphasised the need for co-design with frontline teams, voluntary organisations and health partners, supported by the neighbourhood programme, and noted that some services may present an open door for early pilots. They valued the emphasis on feedback and trust, ensuring staff see that concerns raised lead to constructive action. The individual will take forward these insights to shape an ethical, community-focused approach and will report back on pilot activity, partnership engagement and emerging learning.
Ground Rules
Participants agreed to a set of ground rules for the discussions:
- Be open and honest.
- Listen to one another and don’t interrupt.
- It is participants’ personal involvement that matters – no substitutes for meetings.
- Respect confidentiality - starting point is the Chatham House rule. You can talk about what was discussed at the session but not attribute any dilemmas, points of view or actions to individuals or their organisation.
- Follow the structured method: 30-minute blocks per council and one topic selected from expressions of interest.
- Present your issue first, framed as a “How can I/How do I” question, covering significance, stakeholders, difficulties and benefits.
- Ask open ended questions before giving suggestions
- Follow up on committed actions.
Action learning problem #1
How can we balance the delivery of short-term MTFP (Medium Term Financial Plan) savings and efficiencies with longer-term, investment-led transformation, while maintaining strong financial discipline and creating space for innovation?
Context
The issue owner described the organisation as being in a period of reset, characterised by a central tension between delivering immediate savings over the next one to two years and pursuing longer‑term, innovative transformation. Existing programmes such as those focused on libraries and leisure require significant upfront investment, longer delivery timelines and a more exploratory approach. These sit alongside urgent financial pressures that demand immediate, tangible and cashable savings.
The organisation has strong foundations in financial management, governance and business case discipline, with a clear emphasis on delivering measurable efficiencies. While these are recognised strengths, they can also limit the organisation’s ability to explore more forward‑looking or innovative ideas. There is a growing sense that different approaches, frameworks and levels of documentation may be needed for short‑term efficiency initiatives compared with longer‑term transformation, even though both must operate in parallel.
The council is also working within a context of rising demand driven by demographic pressures, deprivation, the cost of living and growing need in children’s services and transport. This increases the need to manage current pressures while also investing in upstream interventions to reduce future demand. At the same time, digital capability remains in the early stages of development, limiting the organisation’s ability to fully control innovation in support of transformation.
Overall, the issue owner highlighted the challenge of aligning organisational vision, political understanding and delivery frameworks across these competing priorities, questioning how to create space for innovation while maintaining financial discipline and delivering immediate savings.
Question insights and solutions suggested by other participants
- Recognise the limits of incremental efficiencies. Acknowledge that continued reliance on process improvements and is becoming increasingly unsustainable, and that further savings will require more fundamental change.
- Develop a clear shared vision. Define the future state of the council beyond financial targets, ensuring alignment across members, officers and staff on what the organisation is trying to achieve for residents.
- Align savings and transformation within a single narrative. Present efficiency and transformation as interrelated rather than competing priorities, showing how both contribute to financial sustainability and improved outcomes.
- Frame proposals in political and financial terms. Articulate the economic impact of transformation, demonstrate visible results within electoral cycles, and ensure proposals resonate with member priorities and decision-making frameworks.
- Use practical examples and clear storytelling. Draw on tangible case studies, such as service redesign and asset rationalisation, to show how transformation can deliver both cost savings and better services and communicate choices in a positive and accessible way.
- Adopt a structured, phased approach to change. Sequence activity to stabilise finances, address root causes and enable longer-term transformation, while using peer learning and external examples to build confidence and support among stakeholders.
Response from the issue owner
The individual confirmed that the organisation is financially stable, supported by strong MTFP planning and consistent delivery of savings. However, they noted that reliance on incremental efficiencies is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain and does not amount to genuine transformation. They identified the absence of a clear and shared organisational vision as a significant barrier, with current activity driven primarily by financial targets rather than a defined future state.
They reflected that while previous programmes have delivered process improvements, they have not fundamentally reshaped services. More ambitious opportunities such as asset rationalisation and service redesign remain underexplored due to political and community sensitivities. They recognised the need to move beyond a purely financial framing and articulate a clearer long‑term ambition.
The individual also acknowledged the importance of stronger narrative, framing and storytelling to engage members, particularly by presenting transformation in economic terms alongside wider community benefits. They emphasised the value of co‑producing a shared vision with key stakeholders and drawing on external best practice.
Lastly, they observed that the challenge lies less in generating ideas and more in how those ideas are communicated and positioned. They intend to refine their approach to better align stakeholders and support progress on both immediate savings and longer‑term transformation.
Action learning problem #2
How can PMO effectively support and prepare for transformation in the absence of a Transformation Director, while building consistency, clarity and value across multiple programmes?
Context
The issue owner outlined a complex landscape of six transformation programmes spanning digital, resident access, revenue generation, workforce, adult social care and corporate property. These programmes are at varying stages of maturity, each operating with different frameworks, governance arrangements and levels of progress. Currently, there is no overarching transformation vision or integrated plan that connects these programmes into a unified portfolio.
The PMO is serving as the central coordination point, providing reporting, assurance and cross‑programme support. However, its capacity is extremely limited, with a single resource managing multiple responsibilities. While central dashboards and highlight reports exist, they are primarily assurance‑focused rather than geared toward driving transformation outcomes. Benefits are not consistently defined or tracked, and the quality and structure of business cases vary significantly.
The organisation is awaiting the appointment of a Transformation Director, though timelines remain uncertain, particularly given upcoming elections. In the meantime, the issue owner aims to strengthen the foundations for the incoming lead while enhancing the impact of the PMO in the short term. Transformation is perceived as sensitive in some areas particularly workforce and asset‑related programmes making open discussion and alignment more challenging.
They also highlighted uncertainty around governance and leadership, including whether digital should be positioned as the lead for transformation activity, alongside inconsistent engagement from senior leadership. The core challenge is determining what the PMO can realistically do now to add value, build organisational readiness and support a more coherent, joined up transformation approach.
Question insights and solutions suggested by other participants
- Clarify the current baseline. Develop a comprehensive view of all programmes covering their stage of development, ownership, business cases, risks and reporting development to establish a strong foundation for future leadership.
- Strengthen benefits management. Define, track and report benefits consistently across programmes, using benefits as a common thread to align activity and demonstrate value.
- Build on existing structures. Enhance the consistency and standardisation of current dashboards, highlight reports and business cases rather than creating new frameworks from scratch.
- Maintain independence in transformation leadership. Position transformation as a cross‑cutting organisational capability rather than locating it solely within digital or any single function.
- Keep data capture and assurance proportionate. Use existing business cases, risk logs and reporting to identify gaps and areas requiring attention without adding unnecessary burden.
- Prioritise stakeholder engagement. Strengthen relationships with programme leads, sponsors and key stakeholders to understand challenges, provide targeted support and identify opportunities for improvement.
- Use informal engagement channels. Create safe, low‑pressure spaces such as pre‑boards, clinics and lessons‑learned sessions to surface issues and support delivery.
- Introduce light‑touch governance enhancements. Apply stage‑gate reviews and structured conversations to improve quality and alignment without slowing progress.
- Leverage people‑focused PMO skills. Use relationship‑building, facilitation and collaboration to encourage openness, strengthen partnerships and support cultural change.
- Prepare for incoming leadership. Develop a clear, structured overview of programmes, gaps and opportunities to enable a smooth transition for the new Transformation Director.
Response from the issue owner
The individual welcomed the focus on establishing a clear baseline and confirmed this as a priority. They recognised the need to understand the current position of each programme and to identify any gaps. They also acknowledged that benefits management requires immediate attention and agreed to begin developing a consistent PMO‑led approach without waiting for additional leadership direction.
They highlighted the importance of strengthening stakeholder engagement and committed to using their existing people skills to build stronger relationships with programme leads. This includes creating opportunities for informal conversations and feedback. They also identified opportunities to introduce supportive mechanisms such as PMO clinics and targeted engagement sessions to gain a deeper understanding of programme needs.
The individual noted that while existing reporting and governance structures provide a useful foundation, refinement is needed to better align them with transformation outcomes. They also recognised gaps in engagement with senior leadership and will explore ways to strengthen this connection, including improving how insights and recommendations are communicated.
They committed to progressing key actions that will support a stronger platform for transformation, including improving benefits tracking, enhancing stakeholder engagement, and preparing a structured overview of programmes to support the incoming Transformation Director.
Ground rules
Participants agreed to a set of ground rules for the discussions:
- Be open and honest.
- Listen to one another and don’t interrupt.
- It is participants’ personal involvement that matters – no substitutes for meetings.
- Respect confidentiality - starting point is the Chatham House rule. You can talk about what was discussed at the session but not attribute any dilemmas, points of view or actions to individuals or their organisation.
- Follow the structured method: 30-minute blocks per council and one topic selected from expressions of interest.
- Present your issue first, framed as a “How can I/How do I” question, covering significance, stakeholders, difficulties and benefits.
- Ask open ended questions before giving suggestions
- Follow up on committed actions.
Action learning problem #1
How can we be more assertive and, where needed, more radical in scoping, prioritising and managing our programme to deliver cashable benefits faster, while keeping stakeholders with us and sustaining effective officer member collaboration?
Context
A council wide transformation programme launched in early 2024 is now midway through phase two. It grew out of outcome-based resourcing in 2022 to 2023 and aims at modernisation, efficiency, commercial thinking and savings. About 20 projects span customer services, HR, licensing, procurement, museums, assets, markets and cultural and commercial services.
Many services are delivered in house, which increases leverage for change but also concentrates delivery risk. Delivery capacity is small, with two business analysts and most activity carried by existing staff. Governance brings officers and members together with monthly reporting, and projects are screened against the council plan to 2027.
Benefits realisation is uneven. Baselines and measures are not always set at the start and there is reluctance to commit dates. Only a few projects have completed which limits lessons learned. There is a long backlog of potential projects that are not yet prioritised, and the team is debating whether a more radical approach is needed. Scoping after initiation is often rushed and re engagement with staff, stakeholders and members is limited. Communications beyond the budget cycle tend to be reactive rather than steady and early.
Modernisation and commercial gains are visible, but cashable savings are not arriving at the pace required. The programme needs tighter scoping, clearer measurement and firmer communication while keeping strong collaboration between officers and members and a clear link to the council plan.
Question insights and solutions suggested by other participants
- Build staff ownership. Present corporate teams as enabling services. Keep projects led by services with senior sponsors. Mark progress and share brief internal updates that avoid fatigue.
- Align the portfolio from the top. Publish simple gateway criteria linked to the council plan. Use a transformation planning group and a board chaired by the chief executive to prioritise work.
- Use clear evidence and regular checks at the start of each project, set a baseline and name who is responsible for each benefit. Use a simple published gateway, linked to the council plan, to decide which ideas to proceed.
- Track dates, milestones and cashable savings in one dashboard, and review it on a fixed cycle at the board chaired by the chief executive to keep delivery on track.”
- Bring residents in earlier. Use resident insight to shape choices and explain the reasons for difficult changes.
- Be firmer on delivery. Set dates and ownership, agree on what takes precedence, such as statutory duties or savings, and give practical support to managers who are new to projects.
Response from the issue owner
The individuals liked the emphasis on clear selling points and will frame corporate teams as enabling services while they identify the programme’s distinct value. They will tighten start up so each project sets a baseline, a benefit owner and expected dates, and they will introduce a published gateway with simple criteria before items reach the board. They intend to add value across services and partners, to build more holistic and complete relationships between them and the council.
They also found the case for early “easy wins” useful, to prove what works at small scale, celebrate results, and build trust for larger changes. They will keep senior sponsorship in place, review dates and benefits every four weeks, and use a single dashboard to track progress, risks and dependencies. They will streamline the pipeline, close lower value items sooner, and give practical support to managers new to projects through concise templates and short clinics, while agreeing a clear order of precedence so statutory duties, savings and outcomes are balanced.
As an action, the individual will use these insights to set out a short plan and report back at the next session on steps taken to align the programme and accelerate cashable benefits.
Action learning problem #2
How can we reach more residents at scale, including the least engaged, listen well in a politically charged environment, explain the financial context and its trade-offs, use engagement methods that are consistent, repeatable and proportionate in cost, and turn what residents tell us into practical choices in policy, service design and the MTFS?
Context
A new administration has introduced a stronger emphasis on resident engagement in the council plan, alongside acute short-term financial pressures. The intention is to listen at scale and use insight to shape services. There is recognition that large-scale engagement is new for the organisation, traditional consultations reach some groups, and intensive outreach to under-represented communities is costly and cannot be deployed authority wide. Expectations also need managing: residents do not see the full financial picture, and the familiar tension remains between wanting lower taxes and better services.
Benefits management is the weakest element of programme control. Past programmes have been delivered competently in process terms, yet the original purpose and intended benefits have not been tracked consistently. A legacy portfolio is weighted towards long-term preventative work with ethical and social value but limited short-term, cashable impact, which does not support the current MTFS period. The portfolio, therefore, needs more clearly defined, shorter-cycle projects with robust baselines and measures.
Operationally, the transformation function is shifting from filling resource gaps to setting standards, governance and benefits discipline, which will require services to work differently. Politically, a long period of stability has ended; engagement now sits in a more contested environment, with attempts to frame consultations and messages.
Question insights and solutions suggested by other participants
- Define what engagement means at different levels. Treat comments from service users as distinct from whole-population opinion.
- Treat complaints as learning and set clear baselines and targets for reach and representativeness.
- Join up insight across the organisation. Bring Net Promoter Score and other service data into a single corporate view so resident evidence is not trapped in silos and can inform priorities.
- Scale methods in a way that fits the place and demography.
- Blend libraries, leisure centres and targeted in-person activity with digital tools; reduce self-selection by widening the sample while keeping costs proportionate.
- Start earlier so engagement shapes choices. Use plain language to explain constraints and trade-offs and bring resident input into discovery for the portfolio and the MTFS rather than after decisions are formed.
- Keep engagement neutral and credible. Frame consultations clearly, show the financial context, and track who is taking part to guard against partisan skew or single-issue capture.
Response from the issue owner
The individuals recognised that current practice is strong with service users but fragmented overall and confirmed an intent to create a single council-wide approach with a clear brand, shared standards and a common evidence store.
They will set measurable targets for reach and representation, vary methods to reflect geography and demographics by combining local sessions in libraries and leisure centres with simple online routes and trusted intermediaries, and establish standing sounding boards that include youth and tenant voices to test proposals quickly. They will differentiate engagement from consultation, so expectations are clear, treat complaints as a source of learning with themes analysed across services, and build a straightforward route for resident insight to inform portfolio gateways, business cases and prioritisation.
They will report back to communities on what changed, track cost, reach and impact to keep activity proportionate and affordable, pilot the model in two priority areas to refine standards, templates and training for managers, and bring a short note to the next session on early results and any support needed from peers.
Action learning problem #3
How can we embed meaningful, cross-cutting change over the longer term, secure benefits and outcomes that span multiple services, balance this work with business-as-usual pressures, and maintain staff engagement throughout?
Context
Our transformation programme has run for nearly two years and is now moving into a second phase. It is mission led, with five missions covering communities, partnerships, place, colleagues and transformation, underpinned by design principles such as reducing inequality, prioritising prevention, putting communities at the centre, working in a place-based way, and being digital by design with better use of data and intelligence. Phase one comprised 14 reviews ranging from cross cutting change to discrete service improvements in areas such as fleet, waste and customer contact.
Financial pressure is even and currently there is no immediate cliff edge. The programme has recognised £6million of savings in year one and forecasts a further £2million this year. Examples include a new hospital discharge model delivered with health partners and changes to waste collections. Digital modernisation and the first applications of artificial intelligence are improving throughput in social work and other enabling services. Staff engagement scores are strong, and performance has been maintained or improved. The programme’s visibility is high, and expectations are rising.
Governance has been strengthened: cabinet remains the decision maker, with a corporate management team providing officer oversight through monthly boards, mission boards beneath that, and multidisciplinary project groups with directors, sponsors and enabling services such as finance, HR, data and information governance. Reporting covers milestones and risk at programme and mission level, with plans to replace manual tracking with a digital tool.
However, shared ownership between services and enabling teams is variable, the pace and volume of change stretch capacity, and business as usual pressures compete with longer term cross cutting work.
The leadership wants to embed change that endures across missions and services, lock in benefits that span organisational boundaries, and keep colleagues motivated through sustained delivery.
Question insights and solutions suggested by other participants
- Prioritise projects where staff have a clear stakes and motivation, introduce a light “options check” at start-up so services do not jump to a single preferred solution,
- Bring enabling services such as PMO, finance, data and HR in earlier to triage and unblock delivery.
- Create a standing rhythm of member touchpoints at mission and project level so engagement becomes an everyday conversation rather than an end-stage update,
- Broaden workforce engagement through mixed methods (short digital updates, in-person roadshows for non-office teams, and a community of practice), and surface interdependencies systematically through start-up documentation, mission boards and escalation to the executive board.
Response from the issue owner
The individual felt member engagement has almost gotten there but noted some gaps, particularly the need to be more upfront and to make it an everyday conversation rather than periodic updates. They described a two-year, iterative approach with lessons learned, highlighting stronger engagement where portfolio holders are involved early at operational level.
They outlined varied channels to suit preferences: cross-party briefings, digital newsletters, in-person seminars and one-to-one sessions. They also mirrored this variety for the workforce, adding weekly “keep in touch” notes, marketplace-style drop-ins and targeted roadshows for non-office teams such as waste and enforcement.
They praised a growing community of practice across their transformation programme which shares lessons, identifies training needs and provides peer support for colleagues working on challenging reviews.
They remain open to advice on embedding a continuous conversation with members and will keep refining the model in response to feedback.
In 2024/25, the Local Government Association (LGA) commissioned Shared Intelligence (SI) to deliver a series of action learning sets (ALSs), as part of the LGA’s wider transformation support programme, which recognises the need to support the capability for large scale change in local government.
The aim of the ALSs was to support councils to problem-solve and act on delivering their transformation programmes. In particular, they were focused on giving councils a peer learning experience to enhance transformation skills and confidence.
ALSs provide an opportunity for close collaboration in real time between groups of individuals with similar challenges about real-life issues or tasks. ALSs bring peers together to share learning to identify what works well or less well. They focus on action and provide the opportunity for participants to test ideas and reflect on the effect of their actions.
