Assistant Deputy Ministers (ADMs) occupy one of the most complex leadership roles in the federal public service. You are expected to be the expert in your portfolio, the translator of political intent, the manager of vast operations, and the bridge between Deputies and the Directors General who implement on the ground. It is, quite simply, one of the hardest balancing acts in government.

At its best, the role of ADM allows you to shape public policy in meaningful ways while ensuring that your branch or sector executes with precision. At its worst, you can find yourself mired in cultural drag, forever advising but never deciding, forever convening but rarely moving.

The Trap of Endless Advising

Many ADMs see their role as “advisors” to the Deputy Minister. While advice is undoubtedly part of the job, an overemphasis on this function can create two dangers. First, it can leave you overly reliant on the Deputy for direction, undermining your ability to act as a decision-maker in your own right. Second, it can create the perception among your DGs that you are reluctant to own outcomes, which cascades down as hesitancy and ambiguity.

In transformation, this dynamic is deadly. Cultural inertia thrives when leaders equivocate. If ADMs inadvertently position themselves only as advisors rather than accountable decision-makers, transformation loses oxygen long before it reaches the operational level.

The Balance Between Expertise and Cultural Intelligence

One great misconception about the ADM role is that it is about subject matter expertise. Expertise is vital, but it is not enough. Without cultural intelligence—the ability to understand how organizational behaviours, incentives, and fears shape decisions—expertise risks being either ignored or endlessly debated.

For example, in a major IT modernization, an ADM may have deep technical advisors telling them that migration to a cloud-based system is feasible. Yet the culture within the department, shaped by decades of “playing it safe” with legacy systems, may resist with quiet non-action. The ADM who relies only on technical advice will miss the real obstacle: not whether the migration is technically possible, but whether the culture is prepared to execute.

This is where cultural intelligence becomes a leadership multiplier. An ADM with cultural acuity knows that the presenting issue is rarely the real issue. You can see when staff are “slow walking” a project because they fear accountability. You can interpret when consensus-seeking has become an excuse for paralysis. And crucially, you can intervene at the cultural level—not just the technical one.

Making Decisions in Ambiguity

ADMs often inhabit a space of ambiguity. Policy directions may be broad, resources constrained, and stakeholders pulling in different directions. Waiting for perfect clarity is tempting—but it is a trap. In transformation especially, decisive movement is more valuable than perpetual aligningt.

An ADM willing to decide, to commit, and to signal clearly gives their DGs the courage to act. Conversely, ambiguity at the ADM level multiplies uncertainty below. As one former Clerk of the Privy Council noted, “If the ADM is unclear, the entire branch will stall.”

Leadership Courage as a Cultural Signal

Courageous decisions from ADMs are not only about advancing the file; they are about sending signals to the culture. Every time you take ownership of a choice—whether popular or not—you reinforce the expectation that leaders at your level are not simply conduits of advice but actual decision-makers.

This courage creates cultural permission for DGs to take ownership in their domains. It cascades downward, reinforcing accountability and moving the culture away from endless caution toward constructive action.

Why Independent Insight Matters for ADMs

ADMs are deeply enmeshed in the culture they must change. Even with the best intentions, it is difficult to perceive how your own branch’s behaviours, habits, and narratives are slowing progress. Independent insight provides a mirror unclouded by internal politics so you can see the real barriers to execution.

For ADMs charged with delivering results in highly complex transformations, this outside perspective is not optional. It’s an essential tool to ensure that the decisions you make are grounded in reality, not just the filtered views of your branch.

What’s Next?

At Institute X, we help ADMs distinguish between surface-level agreement and genuine commitment, between technical challenges and cultural resistance. If you are leading transformation in your branch and want the clarity to act with conviction, let’s talk.

References:

1. Savoie, D. (2020). Whatever Happened to the Music Teacher? How Government Decides and Why.
2. OECD (2017). Fostering a Culture of Leadership in the Public Service.