Successfully Leading Local Government Teams

By Lewis Bender and Mary Bender

Successfully Leading Local Government Teams is a collection of stories that describe the unique challenges facing public sector teams that their private-sector counterparts do not face. It contains stories that describe the struggles, victories, defeats, and challenges of local public-sector service organizations. The

• Language: English
• Publisher: LEWIS G. BENDER
• Release date: Aug 2, 2021
• ISBN: 9781087895598

Book preview

SLLGTcover.jpg

Successfully Leading Local Government Teams

Meeting the Challenges of Problem Employees

© 2021 by Lewis G. Bender, PhD, and Mary R. Bender. All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced in any written, electronic, recording, or photocopying form without written permission of the publisher or author. The exception would be in the case of brief quotations where permission is specifically granted by the publisher or author.

Cover, Interior Design, and eBook conversion: Rebecca Finkel, F+P Graphic Design

First Edition

Introduction and Overview 1

section 1: Dealing with Problem Employees

Story 1: I’ll Smile in Your Face While I Stab You in the Back!

STORY 2: The PC Puppeteer

Story 3: Why Is Everybody Always Picking on Me?

Story 4: Everyone Needs to Know That I’m the Smartest Person on the Team

Story 5: What Hill Are You Willing to Die On?

SECTION 2: Excellent and Poor Leaders

Story 6: The Team Liturgy

Story 7: Keeping the Wheels on the Bus

Story 8: Do You Like Me?

Story 9: Once in Awhile the Good Guys Win

Story 10: The Excellent Leader

SECTION 3: Dysfunctional Elected and Appointed Public-Sector Boards, Councils, and Commissions

Story 11: Faith and Trust and Pixie Dust

Story 12: The Plate Glass

Story 13: Lack of Courage and Backing

Story 14: We Hear Nothing; We See Nothing; We Do Nothing

Final Thoughts

Problem children (PCs) are to me as fleas are to a veter inarian. Good for business. If I had to identify the one factor that has contributed the most to my work of strengthening public-sector teams, it is PCs. Rarely do I get called to help a team when everything is peachy. Just like the vet. If the dog is fine, leave the dog alone. Frequently, problems within the elected or appointed team caused by a PC become the motivator for training and team development. I’ve been working more than 40 years with my work with police departments, public works operations, fire departments, city councils, park districts, county and township boards, and various other local government entities. And I understand the unique factors inherent in public-sector teams, such as politics and inconsistent performance standards, are that significant contributors to team environments and support PC behaviors.

Public Sector Is Different from Private Business

Public-sector team leaders and teams face challenges that their private-sector counterparts do not face. Inconsistent performance and success standards, public scrutiny and declining positive public perceptions, and employee reward systems for severely limited performance contribute to the challenges facing public-sector teams. And, of course, a problematic addition to the list is the ever-present politics. These and other factors significantly impact the culture, performance, and team dynamics of local public-sector organizations. They also serve as factors that can empower PCs.

Inconsistent Standards

Leading, governing, and participating in public-sector teams is challenging. Unlike many private-sector teams, there are no clear measures, like profit, or success. Instead, there are often competing ideas and values about acceptable or unacceptable goals, job performance, behavior, or work quality. One city councilperson or manager may be hot-to-trot to push for strict enforcement of weed and junk ordinances in yards. Simultaneously, the next councilperson or the mayor wants to de-emphasize these issues due to public complaints or media attention.

One public works director rules with an iron fist, while the next one has a more humane approach to the troops. The inconsistencies and varying standards of work and performance aren’t just because of leadership changes. They often exist under the same leader. One police chief, for example, may have three captains who range in their leadership styles from captain easy-rider to captain hard-ass. The same range can often be found at the operations level among the shift sergeants.

Variations in leadership styles are not unique to public- sector organizations. Most private-sector organizations also face this challenge. What is unique to public-sector teams is the lack of an overarching standard of success. As noted previously, the lack of a defining consistent profit standard of success makes public-sector organizations much more vulnerable to the vagaries of people’s likes, wants, and dislikes—in other words, politics. What was the right thing last year is now wrong. What was important before the election or the arrival of the new boss is now low priority.

People who were important before the new board was elected, or the new supervisor hired or promoted, are not important now. These changes and variations of standards, goals, and practices have a significant impact on people in teams. Sometimes, the changes are healthy and can mean moving from an old-fashioned, dysfunctional we’ve always done it that way culture to a healthy and positive team environment. Other times, the revolving door of leaders and implicit and explicit expectations, standards, and priorities can create a team culture that is unhealthy and resistant to change. The lack of consistent leadership standards, job performance, and goals provide a perfect environment for people who seek to perform at minimal work levels and are toxic to a team’s culture.

Public Scrutiny and Public Perceptions

Public-sector workers and elected and appointed leaders are a favorite focus of local, state, and national media. Some local TV stations carry regular programs such as It’s Your Money, videoing public-sector workers’ apparent laziness. One media outlet followed public works employees around for a month and put together a one-minute segment showing them sleeping in their trucks. It was later learned that these employees were on legitimate work breaks. Nonetheless, the damage was done. The historical image of public works people as lazy, wasteful, and minimal performers was reinforced.

Public works, of course, is not alone in this disparagement campaign. In recent decades, police have come under massive attacks against their reputations, motives for service, and credibility. In the past, many in the public viewed a police officer’s word as the inviolable standard of truth and fairness. Heightened media attention, body cameras, and cellphone cameras, combined with political exploitation of disastrous incidents, have impacted police across the country. Command officers must manage by perceptions. Images are more impor- tant than facts and contextual realities. Twenty seconds of video can generate months of TV time and millions of dollars in lawsuits. The message to many officers is that it is safer doing nothing than actually doing the job.

Again, this negative portrayal of public servants feeds into a victim culture, which is a perfect narrative for problem employees. Why try? becomes the mantra of the PCs. No matter what you do, they won’t understand or appreciate your work. Message sent and received: It is foolish to work too hard. Just get by.

Lack of Effective Reward and Incentive Systems

The absence of consistent standards and increased public scrutiny and critique make it very difficult to create a public- sector incentive system that rewards high performance. Public employee pay is more likely rewarded based on longevity than performance. Thus, the person who works hard will get the same pay—or even less—than the person who works at a minimal level. So, if you work hard and I just get by, and we both get the same pay, who is the fool? This is a common narrative for low-performing, dysfunctional employees.

A variation of this theme is the hard worker. A high performer must be a kiss ass and is just trying to get promoted.

The irony is that not even promotion to a higher rank or supervisory level can serve as an incentive system in some places. Key factors, such as productivity or past evaluations, are not allowed by union contracts in many public organizations. How well a person tested is considered with much greater weight than past performance appraisals or productivity.

Effective, high-performing public employees are motivated by their character and internal reward systems. The sacrifices they make are due to their dedication and commitment to the job. External incentives and reward systems have little or no role in the thinking of these high-performing individuals.

However, others who may not be internally driven and motivated are more vulnerable to the PC’s negative messages within their team.

Politics

Yes, politics is ubiquitous. It is found in private- and public- sector organizations. So, what is the difference? It is unlikely that the decisions or performance of a local business owner or business manager will make the local newspaper, TV news program, blog, Twitter, or Facebook. It is, however, much more likely that we will see the city manager, DPW director, police chief, and others being heavily critiqued on those platforms. Private business is private; the world views public business as their business. Indeed, it is a political sin not to be transparent. In most communities, decisional processes, let alone actual decisions, must be in the public’s open view.

These realities can have numerous impacts on teams and team leaders. Decisions get quickly tried in the court of public opinion. Whether it is something as dramatic as an officer- involved shooting or as mundane as trimming the trees in the right-of-way on Elm Street, decision-makers can be quickly thrown into a vortex of controversy. These and other political realities force decision-makers, at all levels, to grapple with the balance between what is the right decision versus what is the correct political decision. This dilemma can range from ethical choices to the question of what is most efficient. The controversy can range in scope from a neighborhood screaming about NIMBY (not in my backyard) to video camera footage of a police officer-involved shooting impacting the country’s attention.

Whether the controversial decision is small or large, it can significantly impact people and teams at the operational level. When political factors override logical or best-practice considerations, people who implement those decisions often feel a lack of support and even betrayal. Politics is more important than the right way, or, Watch out; they will cover their asses and leave you hanging out there. These and other accurate and inaccurate interpretations of decisions are excellent sources of power for PCs. These interpretations help PCs advance their narrative of, We are all victims of uncaring leaders. Regrettably, in some cases, the narrative is accurate.

The Book Overview: Stories of the Challenges Facing Public-Sector Teams

Public-sector teams can be a great breeding ground for highly dysfunctional and divisive PCs. They can also be a gathering place for highly motivated, elected or appointed leaders who arrive with a mission: To make it better. This combination of motivations is tantamount to the irresistible force that meets the immovable object.

The following 14 stories are about the struggles, victories, defeats, and challenges of local public-sector service organizations. Each of the stories in this book reflects events and situations that actually happened. Names, places, and many contributing factors have been changed to protect the guilty and the innocent people involved in these stories. The book is divided into three sections.

Section 1: Dealing with Problem Employees has five stories dealing with the challenges of problem children (PCs) at the operational level. The stories outline some of PC’s most prevalent behaviors and how they impacted team members and team leaders. The stories are also about successful and unsuccessful approaches for dealing with PCs.

Section 2: Excellent and Poor Leaders includes five stories about effective and ineffective leaders and their impact on teams. The stories reflect a mixed bag of ethical and unethical leaders and how they either supported or undermined effective team members and PCs.

Section 3: Dysfunctional Elected and Appointed Public-Sector Boards, Councils, and Commissions is about four elected and appointed governing bodies that successfully and unsuccessfully dealt with PCs on their board. The stories also reflect some of the impacts that functional and dysfunctional governing bodies have on the organizations they lead.

Jack was having a great Sunday afternoon at the end of a terrific four-day weekend. He had enjoyed the time with his wife and kids, and now, he and his daughter were fishing for perch. Then, it suddenly and unexpectedly happened. Paul Crumbly (PC—aka problem child) popped into Jack’s head. PC was a problematic member of the team that he led. Oh crap, I have to deal with Paul tomorrow. I wonder what he will do this time? For much of the rest of the afternoon, PC lived rent-free in Jack’s head. The thoughts of the PC were decidedly negative and impacted the rest of Jack’s day.

How many times have public-sector team leaders in law enforcement, public works, clerks’ offices, etc., relayed this kind of story! Too many to count. There are numerous subtle and not-so-subtle impacts that toxic, problematic employees have on their leaders and fellow team members. In 44 years of dealing with and studying the behaviors and impacts of people like PC, I have come to believe that their most significant negative impact is in your head. In some of the most insidious ways, PCs often destroy the sense of joy, accomplishment, and hope of the people around them. They rob you of your serenity.

Do not despair! There is hope. Based on all these years of research, it is also apparent that the vast majority of problem- employee behaviors are predictable. Also, there are specific things that you can do to at least mitigate, and maybe even resolve, the problem of the PC’s behaviors and their impacts on you and your team.

This section outlines some of the behaviors and impacts that problem children (PCs) inflict on teams and team leaders. We examine some of the strategies for dealing with these toxic people. And, finally, we outline several examples of teams and team leaders who successfully dealt with PCs and some who were unsuccessful.

Over the many years of working with teams, dealing with one or more PCs and their issues, it became apparent that most PCs followed specific, predictable behavior patterns. Though they may have a wide variety of personalities, certain behaviors, tactics, and strategies were shared. Perhaps the top five predictable PC behaviors (there are many more) include:

• PCs play divide-and-conquer games.

• PCs spread gossip and rumors.

• PCs always play a zero-sum/win-lose game.

• PCs are always victims.

• PCs question everything and never take ownership of anything.

facilitator sidebar

The idea of catching employees doing something right can be an excellent antidote to the poison spread by the PC. So don’t play the divide-and-conquer game. Bosses who are stuck in the world of directives and discipline are very vulnerable to this PC tactic. Getting out of the office