However, neither X nor Y alone can achieve all of the likely objectives of a major council's change programme. If the aim is for a council to survive and prosper X and Y must combine.
I am not advocating a half-hearted, ill-thought through mixture of the two. That can be confusing and debilitating. Nor am I suggesting frequent switches from one to the other. There is no surer way to destroy trust. Only X followed by Y makes any sense.
Sound easy? I think not. Only very sophisticated managers can change from X to Y successfully. Most of us adopt a technique that suits our world view and stick with it. Consequently, brave decisions have to be made in order to adopt a sequence and a process that makes sense to you and those around you.
Of course managers and others need to focus on new goals and aspirations, but through debate and experiment and not through diktat. Through these means new arrangements and alterations in relationships acquire a sense of ownership and legitimacy. To produce a dynamic and adaptive council it is absolutely crucial that leaders at all levels are allowed space to innovate and make changes. It is likely - and healthy - that what emerges four or five years down the line is quite different from what was originally conceived.
Overblown training programmes, impossible total quality programmes and fancy sounding change programmes do not need to play a big part. After the first period, when X is more predominant, consultants should be kept to a minimum and used to support, not drive change.
In the end, your own people have to live with a mature change programme. The real job is in changing hearts and minds through new found passions and commitment.
Former executive director, IDeA