Today’s Morning Buzz is brought to you by Mary King, a writer with Envisio based in Toronto, Ontario. Mary is into local government, urban spaces, and the democratization of public space! Connect with Mary on LinkedIn.
- What I’m reading: “Life Between Buildings” by Jan Gehl. Public space can be a fairly nebulous topic in local government, so I’ve been re-reading some urban planning and urban theory books.
- What I’m eating: This insane pickle dip I started making. Bunch of Greek yogurt, then throw in some fresh dill, pressed garlic, chopped dill pickles, dehydrated minced onion (or onion powder, your call), dash of pepper, splash of pickle juice, and a TINY bit of dijon mustard. Truly, it will knock your socks off.
- What I’m listening to: The album “Everybody Digs Bill Evans” by Bill Evans.
Performance management is a practice that involves setting clear goals, measuring outcomes, and using data to guide decision-making. For local governments trying to take action on climate change, effective performance management requires a genuine commitment to facing the facts.
I’ve talked before about how it’s easy to get overwhelmed by the scope of climate change and the perceived impossibility of action in the face of such a huge problem. While local governments are actually incredibly well suited for tackling climate action, the enormity of the issue (and the potentially unfriendly data) can create a kind of inertia. Local government leaders or elected officials may sometimes hesitate to embrace the facts, face the data, and take performance management seriously out of fear that revealing failures or shortcomings could lead to political backlash.
This makes sense because nobody likes being the bearer of bad news, particularly if an elected official is trying to advance politically. Being straightforward and candid about the reality of climate change is never going to be a cheerful topic. But dodging transparency is a strategy that ultimately backfires.
Performance management helps programs stay on track and pivot quickly when necessary, and a big part of that process is seeing what went wrong, where. Admitting where things went wrong in government is about making sure that we can get back on track and do what’s right for the community, especially when it comes to something as important as climate action.
The Importance of Admitting Mistakes in Climate Action Plans
Climate action plans are complex, and require long-term commitment. A successful climate action plan involves a coordinated, holistic, cross departmental myriad of strategies, from reducing greenhouse gas emissions to increasing community resilience. In our customer database, we frequently see major plans that involve efforts across departments and sectors and community members.
Performance management can help in this process through properly setting expectations and taking stock of the current reality. “Decarbonizing the economy” can’t be accomplished in a week. Replacing an entire fleet of public transportation takes time and money. Doing a study on flood resilience requires a data team, and an ability to access the community members. These initiatives are critical, and they take time and resources.
Given the scope and complexity of these efforts, it’s unrealistic to expect everything to go perfectly. There will be hiccups. Some initiatives might not work out as planned.
By tracking progress, identifying what’s working and what isn’t, and being transparent about it, local governments can learn from these experiences and make better decisions moving forward. Trying to cover up a misstep might seem tempting in the short term, but it’s like trying to hide an elephant behind a curtain — eventually, everyone’s going to notice.
This is important especially when it comes to climate disaster readiness. Being able to safely and effectively respond to floods, hurricanes, heat, smog, or wildfires are all part of a good climate plan that encompasses resilience and adaptation.
Trust as the Foundation for Climate Action Success
Climate action is a massive problem and aiming for perfection is admirable, but what’s more important is getting something done. Personally, I think people tend to respond best in the long term to honesty and a commitment to doing better. Trust in government isn’t built on never making mistakes or not getting something completely right the first time; it’s built on how those mistakes are handled, and what happens moving forward.
This is particularly important for controversial, and sometimes politically divisive, action items like climate action. Any kind of action plan that requires a team effort is going to be met with pushback. So being honest and building trust is a path to efficiency.
If you’re trying to build a sandcastle and the tide comes in, you wouldn’t just pack up and leave. You’d rebuild, maybe try a different spot, and learn from what happened. In the same way, when climate action plans face setbacks, it’s important for local governments to be upfront about what went wrong and what they plan to do next. This not only helps maintain public support but also shows a commitment to getting it right.
Admitting mistakes and embracing performance management are key to the success of local government initiatives, particularly when it comes to climate action. By fostering a culture of honesty and continuous improvement, local governments can build the public trust needed to support long-term environmental goals.
And hey, everyone loves a redemption story. Who doesn’t want to be known as the leader who faced challenges head-on, learned from them, and came out stronger on the other side?