# Executive Leadership in Government Notes on senior civil service systems, public leadership, and the people who occupy top administrative roles in government. ## Entries [[2025-05-11]]: The "[plan haute qualité managériale des services de l'État](https://www.fonction-publique.gouv.fr/files/files/publications/publications-dgafp/prospective_rh-dossier-analyse-corh.pdf)", an inter-ministerial initiative developed by the french [DGAFP](https://www.fonction-publique.gouv.fr/la-dgafp) in collaboration with the DITP (Inter-ministerial Directorate for Public Transformation) and the [[Délégation Interministérielle à l’Encadrement Supérieur de l’État (DIESE)|DIESE]] (Inter-ministerial Delegation for Senior State Management) and presented in October 2024, was created to address a critical issue: the deeply negative perception of management within the French state's public service. This problem was underscored by surveys in which "management style" received low ratings (5.6/10 compared to other sectors, and an even lower 5.2/10 from civil servants themselves) and was identified by potential candidates as a greater deterrent than compensation. In addition, experts noted that public sector managers are often seen primarily as technicians, lacking essential skills in organization, staff recognition, team animation, and overall managerial piloting. ^haute-qualite-manageriale-FR Consequently, [the plan](https://www.fo-dgfip-sd.fr/B31/IMG/pdf/le_plan_haute_qualite_manageriale_teste_dans_les_services_de_l_etat_a_la_une_acteurs_publics.pdf), which targets the entire management chain from senior executives to middle and local managers, aims to positively develop the image of these management practices and promote greater commitment among public managers. It introduces a voluntary operational process for public services that focuses on identifying the conditions for effective management, evaluating existing HR tools and formulating a subsequent action plan. It is structured around two complementary components: one focusing on the commitment of services and the other on the commitment of individuals and teams to improve practices, and includes competency blocks related to embodying public service values and ethical decision-making; strategic vision, innovation and embracing change; relational skills; and action-oriented performance management and adaptability. [[2025-05-06]]: Came across the [[Global Executive Leadership Initiative (GELI)]], a training program for senior humanitarian and development leaders. It is designed for individuals from the [[United Nations (UN)]] system, international and national NGOs, and the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. GELI is hosted by the [[United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS)]] and operates with financial support from AGFUND, the EU and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC). The initiative offers leadership-focused courses and support services, both regionally and globally. Participants engage in peer-based learning formats that include joint training sessions across different types of organizations. [[2025-04-23]]: Today I revisited a valuable initiative I came across some time ago: the [Developmental Leadership Program (DLP)](http://dlprog.org), led by [David Hudson](https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/staff/profiles/gov/hudson-david) ([[University of Birmingham]]) and funded by the Australian Aid Program between 2019 and 2022. DLP is an international research collaboration that explores how leadership, power and political processes shape development outcomes in the Indo-Pacific region. It highlights how effective and inclusive institutions often emerge not through external templates or technical fixes, but through home-grown political processes that respond to local contexts and power dynamics. DLP’s contribution is a reminder: **understanding “who leads” and “how they lead” matters just as much as designing systems for them to operate within**. [[2025-04-07]]: Trusting managers is only half the equation. A [new report](https://manhattan.institute/article/radical-civil-service-reform-is-not-radical-lessons-for-the-federal-government-from-the-states) by the [[Manhattan Institute]] argues that federal civil service reform should draw lessons from U.S. states, where decentralization of HR, greater managerial discretion in hiring and pay, and more flexible dismissal procedures have been in place for years. While the outcomes of these reforms are mixed, the report makes a strong case for expanding _managerial authority and accountability_ at the federal level. However, it leaves a critical gap unaddressed: _what kind of senior public managers_ are needed to responsibly wield these powers? The report assumes an “enabling environment” will lead to better outcomes, but offers no proposals for how to develop or support a cadre of capable executives—especially at the state level, where up-to-date information on senior personnel systems is scarce. Empowerment without investment in leadership capacity risks replicating the very problems reform is meant to solve. ### Executive search for government Mapping of firms specializing in executive search for government: - [Zentrum für Management und Personalberatung](https://www.zfm-bonn.de/) (Germany) - [Perrett Laver](https://www.linkedin.com/company/perrett-laver/) (Global) - [DSG-Koya](https://www.linkedin.com/company/koya-partners/) (USA)