This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.
Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
STATES OF JERSEY
Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel Succession Planning within the States of Jersey Police Sub-Panel
FRIDAY, 15th OCTOBER 2010
Panel:
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour (Chairman) Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier (Vice-Chairman) Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour
Witness:
Chairman, Appointments Commission
Also present:
Ms. S. Power (Scrutiny Officer)
[11:16]
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier of St. Saviour (Chairman):
I would like to welcome you to this session of the Education and Home Affairs Panel. We will make the introductions. My name is Roy Le Hérissier, Chairman, Deputy of St. Saviour .
Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour : Deputy Jeremy Maçon of St. Saviour , hello.
Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier :
Deputy Trevor Pitman of St. Helier No 1, Vice-Chairman.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
Alan Merry, Chairman of the Appointments Commission.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Okay, thank you for coming. We are well aware that you do not have direct jurisdiction over police appointment procedures but I think you are involved in a tangential sort of way.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
At the highest level, yes. We are obviously involved in the recruitment of the new Chief of Police in this high level post.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
We are quite interested in hearing about what general policy is within the States around this area because it is quite a contentious area, as you know.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
So, are you asking particularly about succession planning or are you talking about recruitment? What is it?
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: Succession planning.
Chairman, Appointments Commission: All right.
But all the policies that underpin succession planning, like training and development, performance appraisal, and all those things. So we have got a list of fairly broad questions. I know you are fairly new to the task but I wonder if you can tell us what your experience is, and indeed your assessment is of succession planning within the States of Jersey?
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
I think, my exposure so far, and this is based on a bit of experience, but also talking to the outgoing chairman and looking at the chairman's report, some of those issues were represented in Mike Liston's report, I have seen reflected in reality. I think it has to be said, that I had a discussion, a meeting, with the States Employment Board to talk about that report, and really from my point of view there are a number of interrelated issues that impact on this area. One is training and development, one is succession planning, one is performance management, a range of things, and also in the midst of all those things, trying to make sure you get the best people you can do to do the jobs that are very important to move the States forward. It is a balancing act and it is quite a tough balancing act, and I do not think it is an issue that just the States finds difficult. Getting succession planning correct is a really tough thing and, in fact, there was a very recent article in the Sunday Times. There was a review done in the U.S. (United States) where there was something like 40 per cent of those corporations did not have a successor for the top jobs, and 65 per cent had ... the person whose name was in the box for the next job, they had no idea whether they wanted to do the job. So those challenges that the States face are not unique and they are pretty difficult things, but what it does take I think is a plan, and a joined up plan for all of
those factors. None of them can work in isolation. One of the things that was taken away from the discussion with the Employment Board as to what we, working with Ruth Davies as the H.R. Director, and how we could begin to put together a plan where we can address, as much as one can, the concerns. There are obviously issues in development and succession planning, and when you come across to the assignments, they are always to fill in the bigger jobs. There is always a question of saying: "Is there an internal person?" That is always where you look first, but you need to make sure that that person has got the capabilities and skills to fill the job and to do the job to the necessary standard. At one level, from an Appointments Commission perspective, our job is to make sure that the recruitment process is fair, it is free from bias and it is professional and we use a good quality standard process. My experience of that so far is very good in terms of what is happening. However, because of maybe not having internal people, it is also of concern to me as a professional businessman who is obviously saying: "Well, further down the track, why is it we are not getting people coming through?" If you do not address that, then the JAC will always be involved in doing the Chief Officer of this or the Chief Officer of that, you know, as an end product. At one level we can continue to make sure that is done professionally and fair and free of influence, et cetera. But I would rather be doing less of that if we had people coming through the process. So I recognise the issue and I recognise some of the challenges in addressing the issue, but I do think it is quite complex and not one-dimensional. My experience would say that the States, and it applies equally here, there are no easy answers to it. It takes time.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Okay. Well, the questions overlap. In fact, number 2 overlaps, but I think we will still ask it.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Yes. So how successful has succession planning, in your opinion, been in the past?
Chairman, Appointments Commission: In the States?
Deputy J.M. Maçon: Yes.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
As I said before, my experience is only 6 months' worth, right, so it is very limited. For any of the very top jobs I have not yet come across any situation where there has been a successor in the team to step up to the top job, the senior jobs. I have to say that is the acid test. There has not been for the senior-level jobs there have been appointments made externally for those top-level jobs. So at one level you have to say that is the acid test, so it has not been successful. I think that if there were candidates we have not even really considered candidates, this is in my 6-month tenure, so it is a very limited period, but we have not considered anyone.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Do you think it is one of these situations where we may be chasing a mirage? In other words, as was argued to us in the last session, by definition the big jobs in the States, although they are to do with Jersey they are to do with a range of decision-making, like the police chief, for example, and terrorism, for example. They are to do with a range of decision making which you will not normally experience in totality in Jersey. So you need people with that breadth and you will never get it if you just move up through the system. Do you think that is an argument worth acknowledging?
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
I think generally that point is true because what you have in any organisation, and if I look at the States as an organisation, you have got a very different set of circumstances developing that the organisation has to manage and address and you are facing very different circumstances, as the States now, than you were 5 years ago, and that will continue. So you need to have people who have the breadth of skills to handle what you have to face, no matter what you think may come around the corner. I think it is achievable to have people coming through, but you cannot do it by people being trained here. So if you want to bring people up who have a good chance of having the skills or a good percentage of the skills then you have to have the investment and the commitment. It takes time and money to get a mixture of those people and build up the skills. Some of the skills cannot be built up de facto on the Island. So you have to make the commitment and the cost of saying: "Let us put them into a police squad" using the Chief of Police as an example. They have to build up experience of those elements in forces in the U.K. (United Kingdom) where they would gain that experience. That gives you a much better chance of success. But that takes commitment and it costs, you know, because you are taking people who have an active role here and put them into the U.K. for a longer-term, so it is a challenge.
To what degree is that problem surmountable then? Because we discussed this with the earlier session. Obviously, Jersey being a little Island, for some people that have got family, et cetera, going away for 2 years, perhaps that is a big decision to make. Is there any way to encourage and ensure that local people do progress is to state quite clearly: "Right, if you want to get to the top [very early on in their career] at some point you are going to have to go and work in Manchester for 2 years" or whatever: "You are going to have to go " Is that something that should be built into contracts perhaps, or
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
I do not know whether you can build it into contracts. I mean, because I think people make decisions as they go through their careers as to where they want to stop. Sometimes it is a conscious decision and sometimes it just happens, you know, in terms of whether they want to go and people reach their own comfort levels and say: "Well, I am comfortable doing this." But in my experience, for people who want to make progression, and the other side of that is that the States feel that they have the skills to progress, then there is at that point and I do not think it is necessarily a contractual thing, but there is a point where you are saying at that point: "Here is the deal from here on in. If you want to make progress and go to a Deputy and Chief Officer then we will invest in that because we think you have got the talent, but at the same time you must understand that your part of the deal is you have to commit to whatever that may be, whatever it takes, and that might be spending time off the Island." But I do not think you can do that in employment-contract terms, but there is kind of a personal contract when somebody is putting themselves forward for
progression. There is always a small percentage who are the real ones who can be identified, the talent who you think can take on the next job.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Is that comfort zone, is that a problem, as I imagine it could be in somewhere like Jersey because people think well, we are always hearing that the top jobs in Jersey are very well paid. People do not want to make that step up where suddenly the buck stops with them. I mean, is there
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
I think the experience interestingly across the States, one of the points that I have picked up in some of the recruitment processes I have been involved in, and also Mike Liston picked up in his report, was that there are a number of quite good people in the States, but for a range of reasons they decide to say: "Well, I do not want the top job. It might give me another X thousand pounds " That might not be a lack of desire, but there might be a lack of they do not necessarily want to put themselves or their families in the fishbowl to that extent because it can be that and they put themselves
it can be a tough job for somebody in one of the top ones in terms of the way that the press and various other things can pick up things.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
That probably comes to your point with the previous interview that political you are saying politics is much closer here.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
It is very much closer and of course everyone in the organisation that has got any nous or any skills, we will see that and say: "Well, do I really want that? Do I want all my kids to see me in the J.E.P. (Jersey Evening Post), every Friday" or whatever? So that is another decision that people make. But there is certainly some evidence to I have certainly had some experience of people saying they do not really want to push themselves forward. That might be a bit anecdotal, but I suspect that that is true.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
I asked at the beginning, or I certainly asked of the other witnesses, is it really possible to run a total localisation policy, or if you really are concerned about the overall health of the organisation, any good organisation will need a mix, it will need people from outside who will freshen it up, bring new ideas before they go native. It will need people who have got a solid experience and are working their way up the system.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
I think it is impossible in any organisation to do it totally from within, unless you are a massive organisation where your resources are tens of thousands of people. But in the States I do not think any of the departments I think it would be - I do not know what the right word is - but people would end up going native over a period. The system will grind them down. Even the better systems will grind them they will become part of the system and people need to be getting new experiences to keep their minds open about challenges and how they develop themselves, et cetera. So I do not think total localisation is achievable. I do not think it is. But what I do believe is that with the right development and the right training you can make the situation much better than it is. Also, I think that potentially you need people at different levels in the organisation. It is not just the top jobs; there is down, if you are trying to change and improve and improve efficiency.
[11:30]
Some of the challenges that are being faced because of you know, through the C.S.R. (Comprehensive Spending Review), which obviously you people are very heavily involved in, then there will be some people who have just never had to manage that experience so far. It is quite a tough thing to do, to take that percentage out of costs. Whereas I am just using that as an example. There will be people in other places who have done that. How do you build up experience? I just do not think you can do it internally because you cannot gain the range of experiences in this location. I just do not think you can do it. So there is always going to be some element. But the key thing is making sure you are doing it for the right jobs. You may well wish - and I could not name which department or which jobs I am thinking about - to say: "I always want that job to be filled externally." But that should only be there when you have got a plan in place that says: "Well, these other jobs, we are going to work really hard to make sure that we can fill a bigger percentage of them locally." But you can only do that with a joined-up plan. You cannot do it with just any element of it in isolation. It does not work.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Ironically, of course, many years ago the political committee responsible for the police did make that decision. Not so much that it can only be filled externally, but there were conditions placed upon who would be the next chief that essentially made it like that. In other words, it would only be an external candidate that could fulfil all those conditions. But oddly enough, they then reverted.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
I do not think any of these things can stand still. But it is a real challenge to get you know, I do not see any evidence of people saying: "Let us just rush off the island to recruit." I really do not see that, you know, in terms of getting people generally. What I do see, and we would challenge that anyway, is saying other internal people
have we considered? have we looked internally. ? So, people do understand the implications of doing that. But I just do not think if the skill set is not there, or perhaps, as we talked about, Trevor, that the desire of the individuals is not there, then there are times when you are going to have to bring people in.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Okay, thank you. I will move to question 3 to Deputy Maçon.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Okay. What are the main training and development policies, the succession planning?
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
I can only talk in generalisation about this, but for me there are 2 elements of training and development, and this is based on my broader experience: there is training and development to do the job you are in and to make you do that job better, and then there is training and development to do the next job. In terms of my focus my interest is on the latter rather than the former. What should be different for each role is how do you build the skills and experience. It is building up a range of skills and experience that probably are not necessary in the current job. They are building up their skills to handle the next job. It may be a sideways move, it may be an upwards move. It is recognising with individuals, what those skills are, working with them on a plan. I do not think it is training courses for me. Those things help, but they are only one factor of development. Most people I think learn through experience and application of experience. You need to find we are building the skill set to do that. I know there have been initiatives, but I think in many organisations some future leaders' programmes and those types of things have good intent, but one initiative does not do it. That does not work. You have got to have a continual follow-up to that initiative. It is quite an investment of time and money to do it. So I do not know whether that answers your question?
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Yes. So one of the arguments for recruiting locally is that you do not have to pay the extra bit to which you have to make up in order to bring in the skills, but given that the amount of money that is needed in order to skill someone up that much, because you were talking about the constant training and up-skilling and things like that, do you think that cost-wise there is any difference?
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
I do not really know the answer to that. I think it is incredibly difficult in any organisation to measure the benefit of the return of training and development. A lot of people try, and I gave up many years ago trying to do it, because you all know lots of people who have been in training courses and said: "That was a great course, really interesting" but they did not do anything different afterwards. You know, and it is about change of behaviours. So trying to measure that is quite a tough ask. But you have got 2 elements of this. You have got the organisation's desire and ongoing commitment during tough times to commit to the cost, either the pure cost or the time cost, or whatever, of developing people and challenging them. But there is another 50 per cent, which is just as important, is the person's desire to do that. Because I do not think development, particularly for the senior jobs, is not: "What are you doing for me?" The people need to have the drive and the desire to take that on. The better people will do a lot of the development themselves. It is at least a 50:50 deal; it is not something that should be done to people, particularly at the senior level, for the senior jobs. It is a joint process and people need to commit to that. It does not necessarily need to be costly. There are also things that can be done, and one of the things, for example, that we have been talking to the Employment Board and Ruth about is saying when we get to senior appointments we can say: "Well, this is a person who meets 70 per cent of the criteria that we are looking for" and that person meets them really well. Do we believe we can fill the other ones through training, or can we recruit another person in the team, the next person down, who has that skill set? So, you are never going to get somebody who is 100 per cent perfect in those things. If you take that approach where you can backfill the gaps in experience, either by further training one person in-post', or by somebody else in the team who has those skills, then you increase your chance of your internal succession planning processes and development processes being more effective. But I do not think you can just draw a line between one or the other and say from a cost point of view what is one way or the other. So that is my observations on it.
Thank you.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
It probably leads on from what Jeremy has asked, really, and it may be that by the time it reaches you as the Appointments Commission it is not really the place where this would be done, but certainly from a human resources' perspective, what safeguards are in place so, for instance, you do not have a situation, which certainly did happen over here, where you have a group of people that is very clique? What safeguards can be put in place so that you do not get that: "Well, now it is my turn to get the top job" so you get progression that way? Is there anything that can be done to
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
Well, I think the processes that are in place do address that. I think that certainly from the core processes that we look at from the Appointments Commission is making sure that the decisions that are taken are taken independently and that the processes are professional. They certainly are, from my experience so far, and they are thorough in terms of assessing that person against the skills. You need to make sure that those decisions for the appropriate-level jobs are taken by people outside. It is our role to make sure that we are comfortable that the process stacks up and would stack up if anyone looked at it, and it is professional and tests each candidate in the same way on each criteria and then makes decisions based on that, rather than whether they are next
if you know what I mean? There is always going to be an element of that, but very
rarely are we slotting people into those jobs. It does happen, but I do not see it as a significant issue for the big jobs. I think the processes are pretty robust to make sure that this doesn't happen.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
I was going to build on Trevor's point because I have certainly heard that allegation about one or 2 departments in the States. The issue is not that you did not do the job well - I am sure you did do it well and you continue to do it well - the issue is an organisational culture has developed. It is perhaps a bit incestuous. Are you aware of that when you make the decision? How have you handled that?
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
Well, I have to say I have not faced it yet, all right? So that is the first thing. I have had only a few positions, in my experience so far, when I looked at finance for example, when I have been involved with the restructuring of Treasury, there were some quite good candidates. Certainly there was one that was interviewed and he was a good candidate, but he was not right for the job to move up. For the very senior jobs I have not seen that as an issue. I can see how it could exist, but if it gets to the Appointments Commission stage, one of the things that I am conscious of is saying: "What is the basis that those decisions have been made on?" We can control that when it comes to the commission. Myself and the other commissioners can say: "What is the criteria that are being applied here?" If the appraisal and development and performance processes in the organisation are not picking up the real if they are not being reflective of reality, that is where you get a problem and everyone thinks that these people are great and then I can look at that and I can raise an eyebrow and
say: "Well, what is that based on?" If it was based on all the performance appraisals then the next question is to say: "Well, what is the performance appraisal system doing?" Is that just shuffling people towards they are the next one that come out at the top, if you know what I mean, rather than I cannot question that, but I would not be surprised if there was an element of that happening. Once it gets to the appointments process that we are involved in, if they go through that process then we would be saying: "Are they up to the job or are they not?" It does not matter what they have been through. We would look at that professionally and independently. But if they are the next person for the job coming up, and the internal processes are not strong enough, then that would be an issue. Certainly it is something that Mike Liston picked up on is that performance management and making the correct decisions with people, good, bad or indifferent, as they come through their careers, is about being honest and direct with people. I know that that is a concern that the H.R. (Human Resources) Director has. I know it is a concern that Mike Liston had, is to make sure that that is happening.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Can I just ask with regard to the police specifically, when it gets up to yourselves or the commission, what is it absolutely, completely safeguarded against that there can be a move to say: "Well, we want this person because he is going to be quite malleable, going to be quite compliant"? How do you check against that? It is not almost like: "We are appointing this candidate, not because he is the best, but we know he will not rock the boat, he will not come in and think: Well, we did this differently in the Metropolitan Police in London'" or whatever? What sort of safeguards are against because I think you said politics are much closer here.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
Yes. Are you talking about roles somebody coming internally or externally?
Deputy T.M. Pitman: Externally.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
Externally, all right. Okay. One of the things that I certainly have been pushing very heavily on, and I am sure Mike was the same, is being very clear and upfront with these roles and say: "What is it that you are trying to achieve here?" There is a job description, which is always a list of duties, which has to be in place, of course, but one of the things I am always pushing for is to say, if this person did really well when you brought them in, what would they have achieved in the first 12 months or 18 months? So what are the immediate things they have to address and really build up something that is really quite tangible and to say: "Well, what skills do you need in those roles?" From that you then build up a set of criteria. We then build up the processes and the selection processes to make sure that we are assessing against those factors, as well as any technical competencies that are required. So I am pretty comfortable when it gets to that stage that the chance of malleable people getting through is limited because certainly from my point of view, it has to be that people have to meet those criteria or we should not be appointing them. But I push very heavily with the Ministers and the Chief Executive and those people that I deal with to make sure that they are clear about what it is they are trying to bring into the business and why do they need those skills, as opposed to these skills into the business, the organisation. If we do that job well, which in my experience so far, that has worked out quite well, but we are looking to bring in talent that will make a difference, not people who will just keep the plate spinning. I do not think that that is what the States needs.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Could I just ask, because I do not know and I probably should, but how does it differ here, the appointment, with the police chief? That is the Minister's recommendation, or it has come to the States and it was discussed. How does that differ from a police chief being appointed in the U.K.? Are there any things that we should be doing?
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
I do not know. I mean, I think the police chief, for example, I think was I mean, obviously we have just been through the process and there is a recommendation being put forward as we speak. I find that very interesting because we have used input directly from Her Majesty's Inspectorate. We have used the competency set that is used across the police force and we have made some adaptations to that to make it more relevant to Jersey.
[11:45]
So we have used the same kind of criteria and somebody from the H.M.I. (Her Majesty's Inspectorate) sat in on the panel. We were able to build on his experience to say: "Well, what are the processes?" His input was invaluable. We could not have done that independently. Wherever possible in the senior jobs, we will have a technical person that comes in, and the input of that person, who sees the development of those officers throughout their careers, and sees what happens to them through the strategic command courses, and the things that should be happening with them and who they are seeing, it is invaluable input. So I think as much as possible we have mirrored exactly what the processes would be in the U.K.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Sticking on the police, and I know you did not want specifically to talk about it, but you have been involved. Out of your very interesting answer, 2 questions certainly strike me. One is how you assess how the Chief of Police is going to handle the peculiar political situation on the Island, particularly its recent years. I mean, I am not suggesting you pose the recent history to them and ask them, but given that is the way things work, things are much closer here, as Trevor said. The second thing is we know and we have read their paper, and they may have forwarded it to you; they have produced quite an interesting paper that I hope they will forward to you on the history of succession planning in the police and so forth.
Chairman, Appointments Commission: I have not seen that one.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
One of the big issues, and it has been the necessity to do this strategic course at Bramshill, and that weeds out all the local candidates, as you know. It has, historically, it appears, as well. Whereas Guernsey, as I understand, recruit from a lower layer. Okay, it is a smaller force, not materially a smaller force, but they recruit from a lower level, which gives them a much greater choice of candidates, of course, and I assume it enables them to look at some local candidates, should they so wish to do. But it gives them more flexibility, whereas we have given ourselves this very rigid requirement, which puts us on a par with recruitment of chief constables. So, 2 things: the political environment and, secondly, the requirement for the strategic course.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
The first thing, I think, the processes we looked at and we try and make it as evidence-based as possible, so it is not so much what do you think of We had processes in the police where they do apart from looking at their careers to date and checking that out through the H.M.I., and it is quite useful in H.M.I. because it is much more visible than it is in any other job you are looking at because it is a fairly tight community, but checking out their experiences and how they have handled situations is, as much as you can, both in terms of looking at their C.V.s (curriculum vitaes) and details, but also putting them through experiences and media exercises, exposing them to politicians, et cetera, and putting them through the panel process and looking at the psychometrics. So how do you think they are going to handle that? You can never get a perfect answer for that because no matter how well you try and describe the situation here in terms of being that political closeness and that visibility issue, you cannot really experience it until you are in it, you know? But what you can do through the process is to make sure that the skills they have shown and the evidence they have shown in their career to date, and in their references, and in the processes minimises the risks attached to that. Be very upfront with people. Eyes wide open and saying: "This is what it will be like" and looking at how you then assess that. A difficult area to assess, but some people - when we look through all of their C.V.s of all the people who were on the list for the Chief of Police - there is a very impressive list of achievements in some of the things they have handled in terms of press around for example London bombings and similar situations. A number of them have been involved in very difficult situations that have been in national media and were very visible, and under quite a lot of pressure where the police had erred and made mistakes and they had to step up and handle it. So some of their experience is quite relevant, but it prepares them better for what they might face here. Some of the issues may be more visible, but perhaps not as challenging as some of the issues they have had to face in the east of London or whatever. So, I think on that side that worked pretty well. The second part of the question I
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Well, apparently this strategic course acts as a great filtering process. Should it be there?
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
I think that it is certainly seen within the police force in the U.K. as being a filter and people appear, from my experience of looking at the C.V.s, to be kind of rated as they go through that process and they do not move up the way unless you have been through that. So, it looks to me as if that is a very, very thorough development and assessment process of whether people can take the lead and can lead a force. From that point of view it has a track record and it has a reputation that is, I think, working effectively for the police force, so I do not think you can ignore it. I think the thing to be doing though is targeting some of your local candidates to go through the programme.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
And that is the concern, I suppose, for us looking at it because there is currently no local potential successor who has even applied to do that.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
Yes, and that needs to be addressed. I do not think we should probably just hold on to the strategic command course as the only thing, but it is a process which appears to have a strong validity within the police force, and so part of the challenge is making sure you do recruit people who do have the talent, or you identify people who have the talent to go through that process and whether the organisation decided not to use the SCC (Strategic Command Course) as the filter, you still need something that is equivalent to make sure that they have the skill sets to take it on. My view would be that we should question whether it is relevant, but my view would be if you do not use that set of criteria you end up making up your own and I would be tending to say: "Well, let us use the set that is there and has a credibility and is well-established across the U.K. force."
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Did you pose them some of the scenarios that have occurred in Jersey to try and see what their reaction was?
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
Yes, we have done. We did do that and, as I say, there was a balance between the experiences they ... I mean, I am not going to talk about the individuals but some of them had been involved in the sex crimes and there was some horrendous reading in terms of what they have handled themselves, and what they had to front up. Where police had made significant mistakes as for example in the Rachel Nickell case, and various other cases. So that element of the experience is there, and then when you talk to them then you try and put scenarios to them, as much as you can, of how they could handle those situations, and that is what happened in the media interview. I am sure that is what the politicians would talk about and other chief officers they met. How do you think the people handle that and will respond to that? But, as I say, there is a 5 per cent or 10 per cent that you can never get until you are actually in-post' so, I think those processes are pretty thorough, as much as they can be.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Just 2 questions: one which we asked our previous submittees, is the balance between the Nolan Principles, which is what you work under, and this is the Appointments Commission, how is that balanced against succession planning where you prime a candidate for a particular post? How do you reach that balance?
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
For me I do not think it requires a balance, unless I have misunderstood your question. I think from the Appointments Commission we are looking to say: "What is the job that has to be delivered? What skills do you need?" On one level I can say from an Appointments Commission our role is to make sure we can get the best possible person to do the job, the best skill set. At one level I can say we do not care whether they come from the U.K., I do not care whether they come in internally, et cetera. I am looking to say: "Do the people have the skill set?" I used to say this in a previous business: "I would rather develop them internally but at the end of the day you need to have people who can deliver and perform and deliver what the job requires." So, from my point of view I do not think it is a balancing act. I think it is saying: "Here are the criteria. How do we then assess those criteria?" Whether somebody has come through a succession planning route or whether they have come through an external advert is not so much of an issue for me because the same criteria would be applied. So, I do not think there is a balance between one or the other. Somebody who has come through succession planning would have the benefit of understanding the organisation better, and the counter to that is they are part of the organisation. In some of the points you were making, are they part of the system and will they drive change, et cetera? So, you need to balance those things against candidates if you had internal candidates and external candidates. I have to say, as I said, for the senior jobs I have been involved in, I have not had to make that balance as we have had to advertise externally.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Thank you. How do you think the States of Jersey Police can maximise opportunities for local applicants while also best utilising outside candidates?
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
This goes back to one of the challenges in the whole succession planning process, because at one hand you have, if the top job is always off-Island then people will stop trying for it, so you have the balance, the motivation and desire so that people do have a chance to come up through. I think that is where the balance comes from and there is no point in putting lots of time and effort into developing people, but then them never being appointed, because that has a retrograde impact on the rest of the business; the rest of the organisation sees that very visibly and says: "Well, what is the point? I was going to go in for that and push myself forward for the next promotion but if he did not get, or she did not get it, then why would I bother because they are always going to go off the Island?" So, if the commitment and the development is there to develop people, then you need to give those people a really good chance of getting to the top; not all the time but earning their place, and then getting their opportunity, and that is where the balance comes, I think, from my perspective. But on the one hand, if you say there is no way we can ever recruit internally, and I do not believe that is the case, but if you believe that, then you should not spend lots and lots of money and time trying to develop people to do the job if you are never going to appoint them, and that is where you have a balance of how you approach it. I think it is achievable but it does take significant commitment to get those people identified, both from the individual and from the organisation to bring them through, and be honest with people as to whether you think they can make that shift. Because I think one of the things that can happen in organisations generally, and I am sure it is a factor; I do not have evidence but I am sure it is a factor, that one of the bosses up front will be saying: "I think you are doing really well. I think you could be the next XYZ" and if that is not absolutely true ... it is an easy thing to say to an employee, it is quite damaging if they then find out that they have not ... so it is about being honest and upfront with people and saying: "This is what I think you need to develop before you can take the next step up" and if you do that and then people say: "Well, I understand I need to develop this skill and I am willing to put in the
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Is it fair to say that this particular problem in this situation of the police, because possibly it is a nice comfortable zone and it is not the same as being on Northside or in inner London, and perhaps it is quite good money, perhaps people are not going to want to put themselves in that goldfish bowl at the top. Is that even surmountable? Maybe it is not.
Chairman, Appointments Commission: I think it is a good question. I think it ...
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Because we seem to have a lot of sergeants who could qualify for that level and as you go up there seems to be quite a gap.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
Yes. I do not know the reasons for that. One of the things with developing skills and experience is if you do not have a chance to use those skills and experience that you develop then you begin to wonder why was that, why did I do it? There will be lots of training courses people have been on where whether it is a technology programme that you go and learn how to do A, B, C and if you do not practice it the next day you have forgotten it by 3 or 4 days later. So, there is a kind of: "Is it relevant?" and that is maybe where your question is coming from? That is how do you give them broader experience, but they never actually face the circumstances here. Then people may be saying to themselves: "What is the point? I do not need to go and do that" and that would then get them to a level, which will stick from a development point of view, but I do not think that is a reason not to push development and planning and seeing what you can do to build quality up across the force.
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
One other point, developing from what Roy asked earlier, is what has happened recently in Jersey, does that have to have a detrimental effect on people who would want to be local police chief? It might be impossible to judge, but ...
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
I do not think it would make them hugely encouraged to come forward to do it, and I think it is bound to have an impact because there is that challenge that everything that happens; good, bad or indifferent in the Island, people see it and within the organisation people see it in probably more detail than the public does, and they have a perspective on it and that will definitely influence people's views about whether they want to push themselves forward to be the next senior person. Do they want to do that? But again, I think it is achievable but you do not suddenly put in lots of investment and one pops out the end. You could put in lots of investment and the person does not pop out the end, but the personal commitment and the wish to take the next step up I think is a challenge, and it is a challenge that may be peculiar to Jersey but it is something that Jersey has to face, not just the police force.
[12:00]
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Okay. Well, we have covered a lot of ground and in fact we are at the end of the session, but are there any points you would wish to make? Anything you feel we may have the wrong end of the stick or ...?
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
No, I do not think so. I think the questions have been very clear from my point of view. The only thing I would say is from my perspective, and this applies to the police force and the rest of the States, we need to have a set of circumstances where all of the factors are taken into account. It is development in training, it is J Cat licenses, it is local versus non local, all of these factors are interrelated. You cannot address one in isolation and if you address one in isolation I think there is a risk of spending lots of money and not having any output out of that, because it will not make an impact. The other aspect is there is nothing instant; it takes time but it is worthwhile doing if you invest - and some of it is time rather than money - but it is an investment to commit to people that you will develop them. I think there is a good chance of getting better quality candidates now but it is not a once a year activity.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: Okay. Jeremy?
Nothing further to ask.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier: Anything else?
Deputy T.M. Pitman:
Just a point with what is going on presently economically. Is there a danger that the fact that someone might appear to be a good manager and he can get more for less; a businessman rather than certainly in the police. Is there that danger that the reason to be of having a police chief gets eroded and there is more focus on him being a good cost-cutter and ...
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
Yes, and I would come back again to the criteria we put in place and the assessment of those criteria, and the criteria are quite comprehensive across the skill set you are looking for. You are obviously looking for people who can get best value out of it but you also have huge ... I am just taking as an example in Jersey, you are looking for somebody who has good experience of connecting with the community and those 2 things do not necessarily go hand-in-hand, so you need a balance of skills. I do not think there is any chance at that level of one set of skills being predominant, because they are assessed against all the criteria, and if they were really lacking in a very strong set of criteria then we would not appoint in that case.
So, that could never erode the importance of having expertise in serious crime experience or ...
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
No, there is a balance and I think one of the challenges is to make sure ... nobody is ever going to come with the full skill set that you would like them to have, so there are always trade-offs to be made, like I said, how you are rating them? Certainly in the police process there was quite a wide set of criteria but when you hone those down and say: "Well, what are the top 4 or 5 that are really important?" then you do not want to compromise on any of those if you possibly can. So you need to try and get a balance but that is not a perfect process, but you need a balance. But you would never be in a situation ... and we did see candidates with C.V.s who were, what I would call, very good policemen and would be a very good maybe leader by the force, et cetera, but probably did not have the experience or the skill set to address some of the challenges that the force faces, which are strategic, structural and those things. So you need to get that balance. If there was somebody who was totally strategic or totally cost-cutting, for example, but could not build the morale and the team spirit and focus on a vision for the force, that would be more damaging from Jersey's point of view, as well as the police force's point of view, so I am pretty comfortable that the balance against the criteria, ensures there is no bias.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Just a wild card question; it has been suggested in some quarters that because the police culture is so strong that the police should go outside the police and, in fact, we
do run 12 police forces in Jersey of course, which are run by people who are there because of common sense or whatever criteria you wish to use. Do you think there is any merit in that one?
Chairman, Appointments Commission: When you say "outside the police" what ...
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Well, they would have good business management skills, for example, they would have good communication skills, but they would not be immersed in the police culture.
Chairman, Appointments Commission:
That is the $64,000 question. My experience of this is limited to obviously this last process of the police, is that you have a range of skills and experience and challenges that you face in the police, and challenges that have been faced in Jersey in the police that you can only gain by being in the police. There are lots of other professions where I would say quite comfortably you can bring in a good business head and you can do an element of that in any senior executive role, or chief officer role, probably less so in the police, I think. But it also depends what skill set you have underneath, so the next level down, as you were saying earlier, maybe that quality is not there at the level down in terms of people wanting to go through to the S.C.C. If you have a good skill set, who is a really good policeman, then you could have somebody at the top who is more of a general manager. I think it is unlikely to happen in the police but I can see that happening in other areas as long as you have the technical skills to
run it, but I do not really see that as a possibility because I think the person has to have a high level of professional credibility with the beat' policemen. They are going to be looking for someone who is providing direction as well as is a policeman', so I think that maybe initially that is less likely.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Okay. I think that is it. Thank you very much indeed for coming.
Chairman, Appointments Commission: Thank you very much for your time. Thank you.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
We have enjoyed your evidence.