My wife sometimes ‘volunteers’ me to help. Usually when officialdom is getting in the way. This time it turned into a glorious adventure into functional stupidity – a state where intelligent employees are discouraged from thinking for themselves and doing the right thing. A state where they are encouraged to follow the process and do what they are told without question.
A cousin’s family had moved into a house along with their late twenties daughter with disabilities. They needed a ground floor wet room adding so she could shower in her wheelchair.
For 2 years they had talked with the local authority adaptations team. After 2 years no satisfactory solution was being proposed. I met the man from the council. He was proposing adaptations that severely damaged the property in terms of living there as a family, that would have devalued the property, and some aspects did not meet building regulations.
Then a knight in shining armour arrived. The new manager of the adaptations team who had recently joined the authority. He quickly identified the issues, saw that what was being proposed by the family worked, and got things moving.
Plans were submitted for planning approval. The same plans the adaptations team found acceptable and would fund. Planning was refused; claiming the user of the bedroom would not have a view out of the window. A requirement under general needs housing guidelines.
Correct. She cannot see out of the window unaided. There’s a hoist to get her out of bed and into her wheelchair. She has carers 24/7. Sitting in bed staring out of the window is not an option. Also, she had at this point, been going to the local swimming baths for nearly 3 years to shower as there was none accessible at home.
The adaptations team knew this, knew the property, had explored all options, and had endorsed the proposed solution. The planners suggested there needed to be a review of other options. They even suggested an alternative that was physically impossible and which they would have realised had they visited the house.
Flabbergasted I wrote to the CEO of the local authority. I said, in a more roundabout way, where’s the common sense here? Why didn’t the planner talk to the adaptations team?
The response was priceless. Thank you for your complaint – I have submitted it to the complaints team who will write to you when their investigation is complete. Several weeks and guess what? A letter saying the correct procedures had been followed, and the local authority was not at fault. Wow.
The head of adaptations was equally frustrated. We talked about the situation. He would try to speak internally. I decided to ring the planner and say what I thought.
Finally, recognition that they had missed something. Apparently, nobody realised it was a disability wet room (really? Read the plans, note the disability features for a wheelchair, the lift between levels, the ramps, wide doorways). Now they needed confirmation the girl was disabled and that her need for a shower was greater than her need for a view. Really.
Of course, we had to resubmit planning. More delay whilst they considered the same application again. And approved it immediately (i.e. in 6 weeks).
Great. Let’s get building. Oh, the council cannot help – their builders won’t be available for a year. Apparently, we can go find our own builder. The catch? – no money until it is complete. So, find over £60,000 under the mattress and get on with it. The lift manufacturer (there is a 7-inch change in levels) needs money upfront too.
We did it. She has a shower at home. After 4 years of living there.
Where to begin unpicking this organisationally? The first adaptations man was trying to save money despite there being a protected pot for this purpose. He was also lacking some skills for the post. He has retired.
The new head of adaptations was very good. He found ways round things and worked to fix problems. He was frustrated by a lack of support within the local authority and the lack of trust. Surely if he said this is what is needed and the most effective solution the planners could accept that? Yet there is no mechanism for the adaptations team to communicate with the planners nor the other way. He deserves to be supported internally.
The planners followed guidelines slavishly. Why employ qualified people if they cannot use judgement? Where was the questioning of the situation, the trust in other council employees? (Why would a planner, having taken years to qualify, stay in a post that doesn’t encourage them to think about their role? No wonder local authorities are short of planners).
Why did it take 4 years to do something ordinary? Why were the needs of this young woman secondary to process and guidelines? Why was the CEO disinterested in the situation and content that an investigation showed the right processes had been followed?
If I were CEO, I’d want to know why this young woman had met such difficulty in being supported. I’d want to see my department professionals cooperating, using their experience, knowledge and skills to serve the public effectively. For them to use their professionalism to make value judgements around guidelines. I’d want to know why so much time, money and energy had been wasted delivering a much needed shower room.
The investigation of my ‘complaint’ also beggars belief. Surely the ‘senior officer’ assigned to investigate must have asked why this young woman was waiting so long for a shower. But no – the process was followed.
Research shows that functional stupidity creates a culture where short term harmony and efficiency of repetitive functions lead to catastrophic failure when the context shifts.
These organisations promote process over purpose. They rely on policy and stifle innovation, creativity, and critical thinking. Nobody suggests doing things differently as it’s ‘too difficult’ to change the process. Innovation, creativity and imagination wither.
Managers rise through the organisation through mastery of organisational politics and presentation – not through competence or wisdom. Nobody is held accountable (see the investigation above). Managers exert authoritarian attitudes, shift blame, avoid accountability whilst diminishing employee value and customer experience.
We refer to the managers in these organisations as business idiots. They create systemic problems, build processes for every function, create work for the organisation that serves the organisation – not the customer. Procedures reinforce metric reporting that misleads.
It’s not just local authorities. Consider Carillion who failed spectacularly despite the board having received reports that all was well. These types of organisations deliver reports that conceal problems through omission and selective framing. Reports that protect reputations, minimise concern and scrutiny, reassure, and ultimately deceive.
The functionally stupid organisation exists primarily to serve its own internal structures and fails to serve its customers, even going so far as to keep them at a distance.
Have you tried to speak to your electricity supplier, bank, insurer, health provider or local authority recently?
For change to happen these organisations need to employ outsiders, people with different experience, leaders who want to deliver. The current leaders need to take a long look in the mirror and decide what is important. They should ask themselves why they want to lead the organisation? Then why would others want them to lead?
If the answer to the second question does not answer the first, then perhaps a new leader is required.