On Leadership: Why Crafting Great Policy Cannot Be Delegated

In the 1980s British television show Yes, Prime Minister, a political aide seeks guidance from senior Foreign Office officials on a pressing foreign-policy issue facing the prime minister. The seasoned diplomats respond, politely but firmly, with a four-stage strategy.

“In stage one, we say nothing is going to happen. Stage two, we’ll say something may be going to happen, but we should do nothing about it. And stage three, we say that maybe we should do something about it but there’s nothing we can do. Stage four, we’ll say maybe there was something we could have done, but it’s too late now.”

The aide, puzzled, presses further, asking what should happen if the prime minister demands options.

The civil servants respond that they’ll certainly provide options: three of them. One will be completely unthinkable, and the other two, upon closer inspection, will turn out to be exactly the same thing.

This satirical exchange reflects a deeper truth about government inertia – a phenomenon that continues to challenge political leaders today.

Ben Rhodes, former deputy national security advisor to President Barack Obama, captured this dynamic – recognisable to any political leader struggling to implement their agenda – with the term “Washington muscle memory”. It describes a political system’s resistance to risk, innovation and change – a reluctance deeply embedded in a government’s bureaucracy.

This inertia often manifests in one of three ways:

1. Leaders are presented with lengthy reports offering numerous vague, high-level options – with pros and cons attached to each, but little to no data on what is most feasible or most necessary – and burdened with the task of sifting through these choices in search of the most suitable course of action.

2. Leaders are presented with a single option, often unaffordable or impractical, accompanied by warnings that alternatives are impossible.

3. The government system insists that no viable options exist, effectively concluding the issue is insurmountable.

The way in which leaders navigate these challenges – or overcome “muscle memory” – is a defining factor in their overall success.

During the Covid-19 pandemic, the Finnish government sought to establish a nationwide text-messaging system to provide citizens with updates on public-health measures. Despite the country’s reputation for technological innovation – it pioneered the text message itself – the political decision-makers faced substantial challenges. Each government ministry argued that the task fell outside its legal remit and would therefore be very difficult or impossible to carry out, or was too costly and impractical to execute. Ultimately, the messages were sent, demonstrating that persistence can overcome systemic resistance and lead to an effective solution, even when government institutions deem an issue insurmountable.

But the concept of “muscle memory” should be considered more of a feature than a bug. In the wake of the Covid pandemic, New Zealand attempted to undertake an “immigration rebalance” following the reopening of its borders in mid-2022. The rebalance was designed to make it easier to attract and hire high-skilled migrants, while also supporting sectors to move away from a reliance on lower-skilled migrant workers. The policy was intended to make it easier to fill genuine skills gaps in the country.

One topic that quickly became a focus of the discussion was health-care workers, and in particular nurses. Efforts to address health-care staffing shortages by fast-tracking residency upon arrival for internationally trained nurses met resistance from government departments. Officials warned that the policy would be ineffective, as nurses might use this pathway to migrate to Australia for higher salaries, or to leave the profession after gaining residency. Concerns were also raised regarding the possibility of detrimental effects for the local workforce.

With the media, stakeholders and medical specialists calling for increased support to address staff shortages, political pressure led the government to implement the fast-track programme, despite firm internal advice to the contrary.

Nearly three years later, the initial concerns proved valid: the policy was ultimately ineffective, failing to resolve the immediate staffing shortages stakeholders were concerned about, and, today, newly graduated nurses are struggling to find jobs. One can see now that there were other possibilities beyond simply accepting the policy as a binary “take it or leave it” decision. Options such as capped quotas or temporary, short-term skills measures could have been considered.

This example highlights a key point – not about who was correct, but rather that creativity, flexibility and willingness to engage with alternative choices (or, indeed, a lack of alternative choices to consider) are all critical determinants of a leader’s effectiveness.

Both cases illustrate the need for leaders to question, interrogate and thoughtfully consider policy advice to ensure the best possible option is pursued.

Right or wrong, political leaders are often given poor choices, impossible choices, too many choices or no choices at all by their staff, their cabinet, civil service and consultants. In this context, who can help a leader with the decisions they need to make – to break out and define new, innovative paths through political minefields?

Drawing on our experience in leaders’ offices around the world, we outline five key strategies to avoid policy analysis paralysis and reach impactful solutions.

1. Build a Team You Can Trust

You will only go as far as your team. Surround yourself with forward-thinking advisors who understand you, your vision and your political constraints. Leaders cannot solve every problem themselves; they need creative, innovative teams that can solve problems and provide workable options. These can be and often are political advisors but they can and should also be trusted, problem-solving senior civil servants.

Your advisors must balance ambition and pragmatism – they should be data-driven, and open to new ideas and unconventional approaches, but rooted in reality and motivated by a desire to improve the lives of citizens. A strong team acts as a conduit for choice, offering leaders a wider range of actionable options to solve complex problems. Legacy thinking, closed minds and “can’t-do” attitudes are the enemies of progress.

2. Be Clear and Direct: What’s the Problem?

Policy solutions often fail because the problem they aim to address is poorly defined. Leaders must clearly articulate the core issue and the desired outcome. Often the exact problem or target is lost in translation, leading to confused policy solutions. For example, solving a food-security problem is very different to solving the problem of small farmers’ low incomes. The former might necessitate large-scale investments in grain and rice manufacturing and storage to boost local production, but this could put some small farmers out of business. If helping small, local farmers improve their incomes is the priority objective, cooperatives and agricultural extension programmes may be the better choice. Clarity is critical to designing and evaluating policy options.

Setting clear problem statements and objectives is a leader’s responsibility and cannot be delegated. If the leader doesn’t set an ultimate vision and destination for the government to travel towards, the system is likely to get it wrong.

3. Time Is Almost Always Your Constraint – Manage It Appropriately

Make sure you pre-emptively carve out the time to focus on your big policy priorities. Leaders, their political staff and civil service alike are constantly bombarded with the day-to-day and absorbed by new issues, but finding real, plausible solutions to big problems requires time and space for critical and creative thinking. Make sure to plan for it; schedule it into your agenda to ensure you are putting aside the time to think, plan and ideate to address your biggest problems and priorities.

4. Search Relentlessly for the Best Ideas

When presented with few or no options for achieving an important goal, leaders must be sceptical – and curious. Almost always, better alternatives are out there but require greater effort and creativity to uncover.

Have your team look far and wide for solutions. Leverage diverse sources for policy ideas and consultation: think-tanks, NGOs, international organisations, other governments and public consultations. While external organisations often have their own agendas and objectives, a trusted network can offer fresh perspectives. Remember, the government machine does not have a monopoly on good ideas. For your biggest priorities, take the time to see what alternatives exist.

5. Focus on Implementation

The best reforms are the ones that can actually be implemented – not the ones that just look revolutionary in speeches and press releases. Announcing amazing-sounding policy that cannot be implemented is ultimately just a promise to be broken. Effective policy design must consider practical constraints, including budget, timeline and administrative capacity.

Cost will be a key consideration, so it’s important to ask questions that help to identify what’s possible for a leader to achieve with the finite resources at their disposal. Of the measures available, which are the most effective, and could a phased approach be considered? If the government cannot implement the ideal policy for everyone, could the programme be retargeted, starting with the lowest-income families?

Gather the data and build the delivery systems directly into your policy design – real benefits for citizens, not simply policy announcements, are the goal. Policy design should incorporate delivery systems and account for real-world trade-offs. When policy design becomes policy reality, there will be real winners and losers, and such choices are inevitably political. Engage citizens in the process, communicate transparently about challenges and build public understanding of the compromises that must be made to achieve progress.

The Leader’s Singular Role: Navigating Pressure, Politics and Policy

Ultimately this hard policy work falls to the leader and their trusted team of advisors and senior public servants. But no one can truly understand the pressures and trade-offs that rest solely upon the shoulders of the leader: the one who has to make the final decision, taking into account myriad past promises, the sentiment of citizens and constituencies, the eventual winners and losers, and the impacts for the future. In the court of public opinion, it is never the advisors or the public servants who are criticised for a decision, or for the policy approach; it is always the minister or the leader.

No leader is perfect. Sometimes you get it right, and sometimes you get it wrong. But if you prioritise building a strong team, who can scour the earth for the best policy solutions, they can equip you with the options you need to make the right choice.

Our Credentials

• Tuulia Pitkänen is TBI Senior Advisor and former Chief of Staff to Sanna Marin, Finland.

• Kurt McLauchlan is TBI Senior Advisor for Government Strategy & Policy and former Senior Advisor to Jacinda Ardern, New Zealand.

• Justin To is TBI Senior Director for Economic Prosperity and former Deputy Director of Policy to Justin Trudeau, Canada.

Quote from Tony Blair taken from his 2024 book On Leadership: Lessons for the 21st Century.