Transformation in government is never about technology alone, nor about bold political vision in isolation. At the highest levels of leadership—where Ministers and Deputy Ministers carry responsibility for both vision and execution—the challenge is subtler and more insidious. It’s the silent drag on change that arises when everyone around the table nods in agreement but little actually moves once the meeting ends.

This is not about insubordination, nor is it about malicious obstruction. More often, it’s the predictable inertia of an institutional culture built on risk aversion, consensus-seeking, and the invisible pressures of loyalty to the status quo. The danger for senior leaders is that the surface-level signals of agreement can conceal a deep reluctance, or even an inability, to shift entrenched practices.

The Illusion of Alignment

Deputy heads and senior advisors may affirm support for transformational initiatives, yet behind closed doors the machine of government often defaults to incrementalism. “Yes” in the meeting room can quietly become “let’s slow-walk this until the urgency passes.” The result? Ministers believe progress is in motion, but six months later, the outcomes are cosmetic at best.

One OECD study found that public-sector reforms frequently stall not because of poor design, but because mid- to senior-level leaders revert to familiar habits under pressure.¹ For Ministers and Deputies, the real risk is mistaking organizational politeness for genuine commitment.

Why Employees Won’t Say What You Need to Hear

Here’s a hard truth: your employees—even senior ones—rarely provide the unvarnished view you need. Their livelihoods, reputations, and relationships are tied to being seen as team players. Dissent carries personal risk, while compliance carries none. When you need to know if a transformation is truly taking root, don’t expect those within the culture to be candid.

An independent lens is not a luxury: it is the only reliable way to distinguish progress from performance theatre. Without it, the signals you receive are filtered, shaped, and softened by the very culture you are trying to change.

When Decision-Makers Must Go Against the Grain

Deputy Ministers in particular carry the burden of converting political direction into operational execution. This often requires not just interpreting the Minister’s intent but also resisting the gravitational pull of organizational culture. Sometimes, the right decision is not the one that pleases the most voices around the table.

As Garth Brooks sings, “Sometimes you gotta go against the grain.” That phrase should resonate with senior public service leaders. Transformation demands conviction, not just consultation. A Deputy Minister willing to take the heat for pushing against embedded preferences can create space for real outcomes—space that cautious consensus will never generate.

The Value of Cultural Intelligence at the Top

Cultural intelligence is not about being nice or endlessly accommodating. At the ministerial and deputy ministerial level, cultural intelligence means recognizing how institutional incentives, fears, and behaviours shape what you are told, and then using that understanding to interpret signals correctly.

This does not mean discarding expertise. Domain knowledge is essential: you must know enough to evaluate advice critically. But cultural intelligence equips you to hear the unsaid, notice the discrepancies between stated enthusiasm and actual behaviour, and identify when your own leadership messages are being lost in translation.

The Independent Perspective as a Leadership Tool

Ministers and Deputies need trusted insight that doesn’t depend on organizational politics. Independent perspectives cut through the filters, surfacing uncomfortable truths and overlooked opportunities. They allow leaders to see where risk aversion is masquerading as prudence, and where cultural drag is consuming political momentum.

Put bluntly: when billions of dollars and years of political capital are invested in transformation, you cannot afford to rely solely on internal voices conditioned by the culture you’re trying to change.

What’s Next?

At Institute X, we work with senior public service leaders to expose the gap between stated commitment and actual movement. Our independent perspective provides a reality check that insiders cannot. If you are leading a transformation and want to know whether your organization is truly aligned—or just politely nodding—let’s have a conversation.

References:

1. OECD (2001). Public Sector Leadership for the 21st Century. Paris: OECD Publishing.
2. Savoie, D. (2019). Democracy in Canada: The Disintegration of Our Institutions. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.