Bureaucratic bearings: How business can navigate the public sector and shape policy

Endless meetings, opaque processes, and glacial decision making – for the private sector, working with government can feel like navigating a maze blindfolded. Yet beyond the frustration lie opportunities – if you know where to look. Sarah Baddeley, an Auckland-based Partner at MartinJenkins, shares her thoughts.

The current Government is clearly inviting New Zealand’s business communities to participate more actively in developing solutions to problems facing the country. The private-sector clients I work with are looking at this as a significant opportunity, but they’re also trepidatious about the time commitment, concerned about the prospects of success, and worried about unintended consequences.

In this article I describe some of the challenges that industry can encounter when trying to influence government, and then sketch out some common features of successful influence campaigns.

THE HARD STUFF ABOUT WORKING WITH GOVERNMENT

In my two decades working at the intersection of public policy, strategy, and government relations, I've had several different front-row seats to what happens when the private sector engages with government to try to shape its decision making.

I’ve seen the inside of the Treasury and the Beehive as a public servant, and I’ve also worked in leadership roles within industry in a regulated sector (energy) here and in Australia, and in my time I’ve seen businesses and industry groups struggling with several ongoing difficulties.

A complex beast

First, government is a complicated beast, not a simple monolith. Trying to understand which agencies and officials to engage with on a given issue can be bewildering for those unfamiliar with the government world.

This complexity often frustrates business leaders accustomed to more straightforward decision-making processes with fewer moving parts. But recognising the complexity and working with it is a prerequisite to engaging with government effectively.

Glacial processes combined with an appetite for quick wins

Government processes also often move at a glacial pace compared to the private sector. I’ve found it crucial to manage my clients’ expectations around this, letting them know that if the change they’re after will require legislation, they’ll need to buckle in for at least 12 to 18 months.

But those long timeframes are also often overlaid and complicated by a countervailing concern with shorter-term political considerations, driven by the election cycle. This can create a natural appetite for achieving and showing off quick wins.

Businesses need to understand this core difference between policy and politics, between engaging on policy substance around long-term issues and navigating the political considerations. Both are important, but they require different approaches.

For those used to the private sector, government decision making can seem to move at a glacial pace (Source: Noaa, Upsplash)

An aversion to risks and straight talking

New Zealand's public service is staffed by many superb, quickfire minds, but at the same time it’s an organic system that can seem frustratingly slow to adapt and change. Public servants can be constrained by systems and a culture that prioritises minimising risk over bold action.

This caution is understandable given how closely public spending is scrutinised, but it can stifle progress and frustrate businesses used to more agile decision making.

This caution also comes through loudly in the communication zone. When businesses and NGOs are interacting with government, they’re frequently frustrated by the tendency of public servants to shy away from straight talking. As well as couching their statements in bureaucratic-ese, public servants often hedge their responses with multiple layers of qualifications.

This indirect way of communicating can be maddening for business leaders accustomed to more forthright exchanges.

Yes and no

There’s an adage – or if there’s not, there should be – that an answer will often be “Yes” outside of Wellington, but can become “No” when the same conversation is had later in the Beehive.

Different factors can be behind this. Outsiders might simply assume they’re “up against” faceless naysaying merchants in the public service who are applying the handbrake. But it may just be that fuller information has been brought to bear, turning that initial easy yes into either a straight negative or a tentative and frustrating “maybe” that requires you to do a lot more work.

Sometimes it may be the reluctance of politicians to deliver bad news. When faced with budget overruns, or initial evidence that policies aren’t working, or the need for unpopular reforms, there's often a political calculus in Wellington that may come across as favouring obfuscation over transparency.

At the same time, businesses can sometimes feel that they themselves have to provide a high level of transparency and disclosure when working with government. This can be uncomfortable for some businesses used to greater commercial confidentiality.

WORKING SUCCESSFULLY WITH THE BUREAUCRACY AND THE GOVERNMENT

In my experience, the most successful efforts to influence government policy and decision making take a considered approach of working with both the bureaucracy and the government. These successful strategies tend to share the following key features.

Reflect the national interest, not narrow sectoral or commercial interests

First, successful proposals are firmly rooted in advancing the national interest. They move beyond narrow sectoral concerns to demonstrate how the proposed policy or intervention will benefit Aotearoa New Zealand as a whole.

In their own decision making, businesses typically focus on specific market segments or stakeholder groups, and base their decisions on clear financial information. By contrast, the problems faced by government are often orders of magnitude more complex and should not be underestimated. Sometimes the business of government is hard because the issues are wickedly complex, not because the simple solutions haven’t been contemplated. Government has to balance the diverse and often conflicting needs of the entire population – and will typically be armed with imperfect, even inconsistent information.

As well as key economic and social consequences, policy makers must consider environmental sustainability, obligations under te Tiriti o Waitangi, and the broader, long-term national interest – all while operating under intense public scrutiny and rigid statutory frameworks. That congenital public-sector caution I talked about above is in part a simple response to long experience dealing with all the complicated, often competing interests of multiple stakeholder groups.

For your influence strategy to succeed, it will need to speak clearly to those different dimensions and to the broad, national interest.

Build a broad coalition

Strong proposals will address the national interest not just in the what but also in the who. You will be more effective if you can work collaboratively with sector and industry groups, community organisations and NGOs, academic institutions, even potential business competitors, to bring together a broad coalition of interested parties.

This collaborative approach will create a compelling narrative of widespread support. It will not only amplify the message, it will give the government confidence that your proposed changes have been well-considered from multiple perspectives.

It will cut through the noise of competing interests, creating a coherent story that resonates with both public servants and politicians alike, and lead to policy changes that make a meaningful, and hopefully enduring difference out there in the real world.

Sarah Baddeley, Auckland-based Partner at MartinJenkins

Provide credible evidence

The positions this combined voice is advocating for must of course be built on a sturdy foundation of credible evidence, not anecdotes and assumptions.

You need solid data and rigorous analysis that can withstand scrutiny, including scrutiny against clear self-interest.

Understand the realities of implementation

Finally, government will be more receptive to proposals that show a deep understanding of the realities of implementing government policy. You will need to acknowledge the potential challenges, and offer practical solutions that take into account the complexities of government operations.

For example, you’ll need to show you appreciate the lengthy and extensive processes necessary for even relatively simple regulatory changes. Any new or amending legislation will require public consultation and Cabinet decisions, and will also take time in the House away from other completely unrelated legislative priorities.

IT'S WORTH THE EFFORT

Working with government can be frustrating and at times bewildering. The bureaucratic inertia of parts of the public service, combined with the short-term pressures of the political cycle, creates an environment that can be difficult for outsiders to navigate.

But for those who persevere, the rewards can be transformative. By taking the long view, by working in genuine partnership with other organisations outside government, and by aligning their own commercial objectives with public-good outcomes, businesses can drive lasting change that benefits both business and society.

You can receive our insights delivered directly to your inbox