Leading or lagging behind: where is the thought leadership in the culture, sport and leisure sector?

Your comments

• Leadership is about credibility and ability to deliver. No leader can improve outcomes without contributing to the objectives of their organisation, and team work at all levels is the key to this. Because of the nature of where Leisure, Culture and Sports generally sits in an organisation leaders need to be both strategic and tactical. Strategic in improving services, guiding the direction of the service, deploying resources and promoting what they can deliver in terms of organisational wide objectives, the "thought" bit! Tactical in working with partners, PCTs, Place Shaping Teams and the likes of English Heritage and Sport England. It is the tactical part of the leadership role which is particularly important as partners are generally trying to promote their own agenda, in a lot of cases these agendas come with funding attached. It takes a strong leader to be able to turn down a funding stream which may contribute to organisational outcomes but will always dilute them, because of the strings that are attached, thus altering the original "thought". Have leaders in Culture become more tactical because of the constant need to chase partnership funding therefore diluting the strategic impact they are having? Is it the role of Leadership in our area to be entirley tactical and to constantly deliver others objectives? Should we be providing sport because its fun or because it provides a "healthy", "positive activity" for people in Years 6 and 10? Leaders in our sector are not lagging behind they just have to avoid being diluted.

  Simon Gardner on 16 Sep 2009

• Sharing ideas, sharing the best and the worst, learning from mistakes and celebrating in style is surely what our industry excels at. We've all been there, done that and got the badge!
  The elite performers, the top technicians, the artistic directors are there excelling because there is a structure and pyramid of support, learning and training that takes them to those dizzy heights. Throughout the industry I have been priviledged to meet great ambassadors and effective leaders in the cultural and creative sector, but actually in true pyramid selling style we all have a responsibility and a duty to be ambassadors and leaders in our own back yards and beyond ... Improving our services, advocating our value and mentoring the next generation of ambassadors and leaders. So for me its good to have debate and share ideas, success and failures ... to learn from all of that, but greater than that we must not just 'talk the talk' to deliver improvement and better cultural outcomes we must ' walk the walk'. Through the London Cultural Improvement Group key public sector bodies are working together to improve the cultural offer - we talk the talk and then we are walking the walk together !

  Christine Parsloe on 18 Sep 2009

• I agree that tactically walking the walk whilst encouraging and nurturing leadership at all levels is important. Perhaps greater thought should be give to how we develop our leaders of the future. How can we best utilise young peoples creative energies to positively challenge our current leadership and promote an appetite for leadership and an environment in which a new generation of culture leaders can flourish?

  Debbie Cowley on 18 Sep 2009

• I believe there are a lot of thought leaders out there, but they often lack a platform or opportunity to extend their influence and insight. I would suggest taking hold of the opportunity of the Olympics to formulate a National Institute underpinning this sector, where all those different voices and 'thoughts' are developed into 'actions'. If the existing agencies and organisations can put their resources behind it, and we might at least get wider influence

  Barbara Bell on 18 Sep 2009

• We debated this at the yesterday's (17 Sept) 'Future of Culture and Sport' conference. An important contribution to the debate came from a new CEO who has a legal background but recognises that culture and sport are very important to his new council, hence his attendance. He was utterly surprised at the complex structure of organisations covering the sector, including the quangos (we heard there are moves to take the 'L' out of MLA to set up a new one just for Libraries!) but especially in terms of the professional institutes. However much leadership input we get from individuals, unless we address this, we have little chance of success
  
  In my view, all of the wasted resources and, especially, the muddle associated with focussing on the ILAM/ISRM/NASD issue, with great confusion about whether this would lead to 'one institute' (never any chance) has effectively left us even further behind the game. We need 'one voice' for the sector - and the scope of this seems to be either 'culture and sport' (per DCMS) or 'culture, tourism and sport' (LGA). Given what it's taken to form CIS (if we ever do!) from just 3 of the institutes across the sector, can we really look to bring at least 10 and arguably 20+ together? No. So our best chance must be the Natonal Culture Forum, where all the institutes can come together to represent us all. At the 'interactive seminar' on 'Leading the Culture Sector' yesterday, 2 people knew about NCF - myself and Martyn Allison - so you could say we have a long way to go!
  
  David Albutt - a personal view and not necessarily that of any of my other 'hats'!

  David Albutt on 18 Sep 2009

• That's what we need another "buzz" term - "thought leadership" - please.
  Those who currently see themselves as leaders should give thought to the decline in physical activity participation rates on their watch and ask themselves what more they could have done. In many cases, especially in local governmnet, the old guard are a big part of the problem in perpetuating old school thinking and lacking in creative and innovative solutions.
  A real leader is one who knows when the time is right to step aside. Times have moved on but leisure in particular is dragging itself behind like a lame horse.

  George Gently on 18 Sep 2009

• There are many leaders in the sector with very few followers! Public sector provision is in terminal decline and the quangos that control our National attempts to imrove development, education and participation in the sector are becoming ineffective. Sport, Leisure, art and high culture are businesses like any other and whilst ensuring that social inclusion drives all that is done in the sector, a business like approach is needed. Innovation rarely comes from debate or from a committee approach. Tackle the issue through competition, attract the best from other sectors and challenge them to achieve in culture sport and leisure, then reward their attempts - is this not the basis for improving performance in all walks of life?

  Jim Durie on 18 Sep 2009

• If a 'thought leader' is recognised among peers for innovative ideas, and for promoting and sharing these ideas, can the disparate sport, culture and leisure sector provide this type of leadership? In my opinion there are too many bodies claiming to provide leadership, but this lack of cohesion dilutes the message. There continues to be a 'silo' mentality between sport, culture and leisure, and indeed within the three areas too. For example do sports governing bodies really talk to one another and, more importantly, learn from one another.
  
  To improve the situation the number of bodies jostling to lead needs to be reduced.
  
  If best practice is to be shared by truly inspirational leaders do these individuals have time to share, or are they constrained by the requirements of maintaining service delivery? Are leaders currently 'spinning too may plates'? Fewer bodies to engage with may free up some time to allow sharing of best practice to take place. Equally, the time spent demonstrating the value of sport, leisure and culture to partners on an individual basis could be better utilised sharing best practice, if a coherent series of messages about sport, leisure and culture was imparted to potential partner organisations. Each area is good at informing itself, but not the other two areas and not the wider community of potential partners. Again, a role for a leader.
  
  Service delivery across sport, leisure and culture must be of the highest quality. The improvement agenda must underpin all services and perhaps improvement requires a more robust means of assessment across all three areas. The principles of Quest could be applied and monitored as a demonstration of continuous improvement.
  
  I consider that sport, culture and leisure will be challenged by the public spending review and each area must demonstrate the contribution it can make to the health and wellbeing of people and communities. Furthermore it is imperative that the delivery of services is tackled in a creative manner and that whilst we can learn from the past, we do not have to continue to replicate what happened in the past.

  Andrew Webb on 18 Sep 2009

• This has certainly stimulated a debate which was what we hoped it would do, and I hope more of you will will join in.
  I like the comment by George Gently on the responsibility of the old guard, being part of that generation myself, but I would ask where are the new guard rushing to take the baton from us? Why are so few young managers willing to take on roles and responsibilities in the professional bodies to influence and shape the future? If you do not like the current fragmentation why are more members not willing to stand up and call for a different approach and change things? Most of the bodies already struggle to get people to join and take responsibilty within them and when it comes to asking for volunteers the only people there are the "old guard". Is it that these organisations no longer have a relevance or is it simply that the day job dominates so much there is no time and energy to do any more?

  Martyn Allison on 18 Sep 2009

• Thought leadership and innovative ideas can only be produced by someone with a thorough practical grounding in the relevant discipline, with the accent on thorough. University should only be regarded as a finishing school after a thorough period of practical experience. I have heard university lecturers state that we won't get the candidates if we insist on too long a period devoted to obtaining practical experience. To that I say, "Tough, we would be better off with with fewer candidates with more rounded experience." Sound leadership would then follow. And more jargon achieves nothing.

  Peter Ellis on 18 Sep 2009

• We don't need yet another dead-hand mnemonic which acts more to limit or close the boundaries of real comprehension and debate of the issues which face us. "A thought leader is an individual of recognised authority..." predefines the acceptable source of ideas, of inspiration, imagination, perhaps of encouragement. Unless and until we are open to ideas, to creative input, to criticism or encouragement, from people who fall outside that "recognised authority" then the channels of ideas and action open to us will narrow and become increasingly difficult to navigate. It is surely through people being willing to accept ideas from other than recognised authority that those of "recognised authority" might learn and take appropriate action through their position of prospective leadership.
  Or might that be too much "thinking outside the box"?

  David Rose on 19 Sep 2009

• Inspirational and innovative ideas are generated by people, not only with an academic background but one that is supported by thorough practical experience - and that means working for more than a year in one's discipline of choice! There are those who would say that insisting on too long a period of practical training would deter new entrants. Tough - we need those with a good grounding. Administrators, per se, are the wrong people. It should be remembered that an administrator is a management tool in the same way that an accountant is. When I read the above comments, I was dismayed by the proliferation of meaningless jargon which achieves nothing. The recent issue of "Inform" illustrates this admirably. Whilst we are on the subject, this organisation is supposed to represent the many disciplines incorporated into the new Institute. It is dominated by active sport, there is no balance. Good ideas come from well-rounded individuals.In my view, the Institute should widen it's reach: for example, there is never any mention of the benefits of passive recreation.

  Peter Ellis. on 20 Sep 2009

• This is an interesting debate. I know you are 'stirring the pot' but I would take issue with the phrase:
  
  "A thought leader is an individual of recognised authority"
  
  Surely leadership can come from many parts of an organisation, and need not necessarily spring merely from those in 'authority'. A dynamic organisation wouldn't wait for its 'authorities' to lead, would it? And in any case, recognised by whom?

  Richard Sved on 21 Sep 2009

• Thought Leaders are people prepared to take risks, learn, fail, succeed and share. (Yes, failing is good as long as we share what we learned!!).
  
  If we all tried something a little radical in the next twelve months to address a common issue and were prepared to share the outcomes of it with the sector - I reckon we'd be in a lot better shape than we are now......If we can't take risks in this current environment, we never will....
  
  On the issue of 'young guns' coming through the ranks - they need role models to inspire them. Doing the same thing as last year or clinging on to historical models of delivery don't get my pulse racing...

  Duncan Wood-Allum on 21 Sep 2009

• "A Thought leader" is an individuals who can inject new ideas, accept criticism when the initiative fails.
  
  Having graduated in June, I am no exception from other Sport Development professionals finding it extremely difficult to break-through into the profession. I reckon old guards should relax their needs for experience candidates when advertising Sport Development posts.
  
  The industry requires changes in policy initiative, formulation and policy implementation. This will allow us young guns to be part of the policy making rather than followers of the current leaders opinions.

  John on 23 Sep 2009

• Platitiudes! - so the new is always better; innovation is always needed; more change management! - it's quality and continuity and evolution not wild exaggerations about what we're to do if we're to 'survive'. You mean they'll be no art, no literature, no sport, no leisure if we don't all change and innovate now as a consequence of the recession? And someone needs to read their Orwell: Thought Leaders! - I ask you. Not as bad as calling arts council arts officers 'relationship managers', but close.
  
  What we need is thought in action; detail -not more vague thoughts about thoughts. And if leaders cannot make the time to think for themselves and find out about who is doing what they should give up their jobs and do something more productive instead of complaining about their own inability to lead. If you're leader, you've got to be tough - and that's not simply about the implementation of new business models etc, but about the necessity of being intellectually engaged with culture. Don't ask for someone to hold your hand and professionally develop you, learn to feed yourself - you're a leader after all. And have an eye for the talent around you and look after it - you may find there are bodies of 'old' knowledge and thinking in the most awkward of places in your organisation that its essential for you to engage with in order to do justice to the rich history of your organisation. Ah the arrogance of the new.
  
  Maybe the reason for the absense of thought leaders is that those who enjoy thinking about things feel their brains ache when confronted with a lot of the repetitive and vague rhetoric of policy documents.

  Dr Strange Leader on 24 Sep 2009

• "Thought leadership" - what other silly names will they come up with in lieu of real solutions.
  Obviously real thought was not put into it.

  Eaen Hirst on 24 Sep 2009

• Leadership by demonstrating action is our strength.
  
  Specifically, leadership in public sector leisure needs to tightly link into the health and safer public agenda by being seen to support and reach LAA and JNSA targets. We have masses of good practices to display across all the UK.
  
  We need to raise our profile in publicising our successes in this economic downturn and especially with a financial downturn following soon.

  Philip Sayers on 26 Sep 2009

• I think that at this moment in time the emphasis needs to be on the "leadership" rather than the "thought" in terms of a corporate political voice for sport and leisure.
  
  Within the sector there are plenty of innovative thinkers doing things but we lack "sector authority".
  
  I firmly believe in a well recognised sector body which enables good practice to be shared and more so to represent the sector amongst all others especially within the public domain.
  
  Within this body there needs to be a value placed on innovative thinking - even if that includes trying again, in a better way, a previous idea/methodology. Every profression will include an element of prescriptive approaches but we need to diminish this as much as possible. One way is to have a body with a strong forum for demonstrating and showcasing different ways and routes to solving problems to demonstrate such rather than producing stock model answers.
  
  I agree with those who voice concerns that "thought leadership" is just another branding exercise for a previous incarnation. The redeeming element is that it brings to the fore the timeless notion of people having the knowledge, skills and experience to solve, deal with, progress various issues without common resort to best practice models which all too often, although successful in the used domain, become the definitive way forward for all without proper consideration of their own environment.

  Graeme Thompson on 30 Sep 2009

• There have always been 'Thought Leaders' (albeit under different titles before) and there always will be (and someone will come up with a new version before too long!)
  
  The question is surely more about :-
  1. The level of impact and platform such people have (or could have), their competence, credibility and ability or liklihood to influence in their own environment and then beyond....and
  2. The openness and abilities of others to listen and hear these thoughts and put aside their own prejudices to consider what is being communicated and question, adopt, adapt, develop and / or respond.(ie. doing something with or about what they are communicated)
  
  There will always be an old guard and new young guard...if you look for them, but don't get hung up on this, if someone has something to offer, listen to them, irrespective of how you or others package them! This has quite a lot to do with our own abilities to be (and remain) open and engaging rather than closed, protective and adversly judgemental.
  
  The landscape today is very different to even 10 years ago where, more frequently, less senior people appear to have wider service portfolios and greater weight of work. This has created more generalists further down organisation structures. This can fragment professional capability within specific services and has led to batched services under something loosely called Culture, Sport and Leisure or any local derivative of...!
  
  For Sport (interestingly kept seperate from Culture?) in Govt organisations and some peoples promoted perceptions, there is no excuse for not working to build a single Chartered Institute which will not only bring much needed Member competence / testing as a measure of recognition, but will act to further build public and service user confidence in the Chartered provider in the future...surely a worthwhile improvement for the Sector.
  
  In an environment of fewer fiscal and people resources, year on year, the sector is relentlessly expected to not only improve but, also, to actually do a lot more with even less. This can and does build unhealthy pressures and expectations and is surely creating an increase in workplace stress in many genuine cases. (Accepted, there are areas who do need to improve and do not yet accept or embrace this, too!)
  
  No wonder people who actually 'do the work' are less visible elsewhere in Institutes or other sector contibutions.
  
  This equation has got severely out of synch for a Sector largely without Statutory Status.
  
  When comparisons are made between the UK and the rest of Europe in relation to hours worked and productivity, we do not appear to fare very positively. Link this with increasing pressures to try to ensure balanced 'work : life' arrangements and it appears we are heading in a less positive direction, by design!
  
  Perhaps we ought to re-think and find a way to get off the ever speeding treadmill and analyse where we have got to and at what cost...
  All too often,
  * budget rather than service focus
  * statistics rather than people
  * reacting rather than creating
  * fear rather than hope
  * insecurity rather than confidence
  
  What we need to find is perhaps:-
  * better belief in our own self value
  * challenge to those required of us
  * some space to be human!
  * balanced and realistic improvement
  * recognition and understanding
  * freedoms rather than controls
  
  A personal view and not necessarily that of my employer or Institute.

  Steve Jarvis on 01 Oct 2009

• Leaders inspire people to do things they didn't believe they could do....and then they get out of the way! Our sector needs inspirational leaders....but then what's new?
  
  I'm inclined to think that we have a tendancy to spend too long on improving the things we can already do, rather than find solutions to things that we just don't understand.
  
  I've long held the belief that it is not necessary to know all the answers but essential to be asking the right questions. I suggest that if our leaders do that, listen to others, consider the solutions then act with the utmost conviction, we'll inspire a whole load more creative and dynamic young thinkers who may ensure that sport and exercise in this country is a pursuit that is valued as a powerful and essential part of our culture.

  John Oxley on 05 Oct 2009

• Ah, so thought can be separated from action? I don't think so!
  
  What we need (and in many cases have) are leaders who encourage the teams they lead to consider options, maximise opportunities and deliver services that people value.
  
  What we need even more is better networking. We don't share good practice very well, especially good practice in areas of work that are not 'new'; we don't reward 75% of existing leaders with any respect and recognition; we don't share effective mechanisms for advocacy at local and regional level.

  Christine Johnstone on 08 Oct 2009