Organisationally what has changed and what needs to change further to support the role?

Structures , Support and Systems

‘The Local councillor should be the first port of call for the community and the officers.’ James and Cox (2007) ‘The culture of the organisation has changed in response to the devolution agenda‘ Strategic Neighbourhood Manager LCC.

The work of James and Cox (2007) and the LGIU (2008) stress the need to ensure that members can address problems through direct action and that they must have real opportunities to influence decisions about services and spending with real powers and budgets to do things locally, Hambleton (2008). The majority of respondents and participants indicated that directing local money and the ability to influence local services was key to developing their community leadership role James and Cox (2007). The data identified that some members are more experienced in dealing and allocating small pots of money than others (L7/2009 and CCIF 2009.10) and the outcomes are clear (CS/019/10), however certain decisions of the allocation of those funds can be inconsistent with what is actually agreed with partners (internal questionnaire) (CS/019/10). The views of some authorities is that the focus should be on ensuring that the performance of the council is in line with local priorities and not dividing pots of money to individual Councillors LGIU (2008). The data also indicates that in some wards the money allocated is not used (CCIF 2009.10) and it has been proven too expensive to monitor LGIU (2008). There are other monies which could be allocated at a local

level such section 106 monies and discretionary voluntary grants. The allocation of any monies and the role of local members in any process needs to be explicit (CS/019/10 and (L7/2009) especially in light of reducing

resources and increasing demand (report CCIF 09/10). It is clear however that some members are reticent to take on executive powers (CS/019/10) (interviewees).

The neighbourhood governance model adopted within the authority

(CS/019/10) is similar to many other authorities (a service influencing model), but members currently still need to be convinced of their value (internal questionnaire 2010). Therefore as well as looking at members input at a strategic level their role and involvement in the local structures needs explaining James and Cox (2007) and LGIU (2008). The key to success locally is all key players locally understanding their roles and the benefits to working in partnership Wilkinson and Craig (2002) (CS/019/10) as stated by one interviewee ‘the member should be ‘the golden thread’ in any

neighbourhood governance structure’.

Support

Performance framework Members

The Comprehensive Area Assessment assesses the effectiveness of the working relationships between senior members and officers and how they jointly drive the vision for the city forward (CAA 2009). The Council as with most other authorities does not have a performance framework for local members, James and Cox (2007), Hayes (2008) and Hambleton et al (2009).

Yet recent legislation has been approved (Police Authority Regulations 2010) which has identified competencies which are required to be met before

members are allowed to serve on Police Authorities. This requires members to evidence that they have relevant key skills and also appointments can be terminated if that member performs poorly. It would seem that revisiting competency frameworks for members maybe back on the government agenda Simpson (2008).

The view of all interviewees was that it is the electorate who assess their performance. If this is the prime concern then the analysis of the data

collected highlights a number of key areas where it can be clearly established as to the results of the activities of local members on behalf of the community (CCIF 09/10 and L7/09).

To date the Council website reflects –

• the % of meetings members have attended

• the number of outside bodies they serve on

• where they hold surgeries and when

Rather than trying to impose a performance framework which members may well react to Pettigrew (1972) and in the past has not proved successful Simpson (2008) and Nickel (2008) the increasing interest in the development of personal websites or social networks presents an opportunity for the Council with the local member, to include updates of successes such as -

• The numbers of casework processed through casework management system or other direct systems (LS/20/10)

• The number of local applications processed for CIF or WNF and the outcomes to the community by ward (report CCIF 2009.10 and CS/019/10)

• The levels of engagement by members of the community from ward events etc., and the outcomes for which the member has been directly responsible (CS/019/10)

• The developments and actioning of Neighbourhood Area Actions Plans with partners (CS/019/10)

• Members could be asked to assist officers with providing information on relevant NIs for their patch (cohesion, influencing local decisions and overall satisfaction with the area)

• Members could have responsibility to monitor and contribute to the new Duty to Involve (LGPIHA 2007) and LGIU (2008)

This should not over burden members or local officers LGIU (2008)and could be seen as an extension to the current District committee delivery reports (CS/019/10)

Officers

The new Business Planning Framework for business units makes reference to responding to both political demands and policies and neighbourhood devolution but there is very little reference to local members as a customer, (Business Planning Framework 2009.10). Therefore corporately systems need to be more aware or responsive to members needs, James and Cox (2007). This is reflected in the fact that only one service issues a satisfaction questionnaire (internal questionnaire 2010) to members seeking their views on the performance of the service and even this is not reflected in the

consultation section on the intranet website as members are seen as internal customers only. This does not reflect the value or independent role of local members Hambleton (2008). This needs to be addressed with relevant key local services being included in satisfaction questionnaires to members which would help shape service delivery and respond to wider customer needs LGIU (2008). This message could be made clear to officers as part of key changes in legislation to which they have to respond. However there could be resistance as this maybe seen as a blurring of the management function and the political role Simpson (2008) (Business Planning framework 2010.11) and Kotter (1999). The new business planning framework also needs to capture and report on the local neighbourhood action plans (CS/019/10).

Corporate teams could play a more proactive role such as the equalities team giving targeted support members in the more diverse wards, James and Cox (2007) and Hambleton (2008). The introduction of any new organisational process will need to be assed in terms of its overall value in contributing to the Council achieving its corporate aims (Corporate Plan 2009-2012) and Kotter (1980).

The annual review of direct support arrangements (Internal questionnaire 2010) to members needs to reflect the developing role of members as well as the increasing demands on those members serving in the more diverse

wards LGIU (2008) IdeA (2009). Differentiating the level of support could be explored.

The devolution programme should also review with partners what support they can provide locally to members (CS/019/10) as well as developing data sharing protocols Papadopoulos (2007)and establishing ‘one version of the truth’ (interviewee) and James and Cox (2007) in relation to the performance of public services locally. This will need some perceptions around the

importance and intended use of the information to be addressed Wilkinson and Craig (2002).

The profile and availability of the member casework system needs to be raised (LS/20/10) and the system needs reviewing to ensure members are advised when jobs have been completed. This may however have resource or staff implications (LS/20/10).

The review of the pilots on participatory budgeting and total place indicates a lack of involvement in some of the pilots and certainly a more participative rather than directive role for local members in determining the allocation of local funds (CS/019/10). The key point being as one interviewee stated ‘Do not leave councillors out of the processes which are attempting to deliver better community leadership’.