Purpose

Cabinet is recommended to endorse proposed
structures and make decision on whether to proceed with
implementation of the proposed restructure.
 

Content

Cabinet:
 
(1)          
noted the consultation on the proposed new structure at Senior
Management level across the organisation (Appendix A of the report)
and consider the alternative proposals received to the consultation
and officer responses as set out in Appendix B of the report;

 
(2)          
noted the analysis of proposed deletions and
analysis of savings as set out in Appendix C of the
report;
 
(3)          
agreed that the proposed new ‘To Be’ structure at
Senior Management level across the organisation as set out in
Appendix D of the report be implemented in accordance with the
Council’s Management Framework; and
 
(4)          
noted the Organisational Design Principles underpinning the
proposed new structure set out in Appendix E of the report.
 

Options & Alternatives Considered

There are three alternative options:

Do Nothing.

If this proposal is not taken forwards it would
result in significant risk to delivery of our savings as set out in
the MTFS; this could lead to budget shortfalls and financial
instability.

The scope and impact of future operating model
reviews and service level restructures would be compromised,
limiting the organisation's ability to optimise operations and
improve service delivery.

Delaying action may result in higher costs in the
future as inefficiencies persist and the need for more drastic
measures increases.

Take a decision not
to adopt a new Senior Management Structure and proceed with
management restructures on a Directorate-by-Directorate
basis.  

While this would still facilitate the delivery of
savings on an individual basis, the lack of a centralised approach
would reduce the ability to make a strategic impact, reduce
alignment with the organisational design principles, and make it
more difficult to take a coordinated approach to identifying and
addressing inequalities such as gender and ethnicity pay
gaps.

A piecemeal approach would reduce the ability to
make a strategic impact across the organization. This could lead to
inconsistencies and misalignment with organizational design
principles.

It would become more challenging to take a
coordinated approach to addressing systemic issues, such as gender
and ethnicity pay gaps. This could hinder efforts to promote
equality and inclusivity.

The lack of a unified strategy may lead to
fragmented efforts, making it harder to achieve cohesive and
comprehensive improvements.

Alternative Proposals Considered
through consultation

During the consultation period 13 alternative
proposal forms and 4 Query Forms were received; all of the
alternative proposals and queries were considered by Strategic
Directors following the close of consultation, and responses
provided to individuals. Amendments to the restructure proposal
resulting from Alternative Proposals have been captured within the
Decision Report (Appendix C of the report). Summarised proposals
and responses are provided in Appendix B. The
representations received during the consultation have been fairly
and reasonably summarised in the Appendix B of the report however
should any Cabinet member wish to see a copy of the verbatim
response this will be provided to the Cabinet member.

These together with the queries were considered by
Strategic Directors following the close of consultation. Responses
to the alternatives and reasons why alternatives are not being
recommended are set out within Appendix B and those responses have
been shared with individuals. 

As can be seen a number of alternative proposals
which related to making changes to specific job descriptions have
been agreed by the Strategic Directors and are reflected in the
proposed ‘To Be’ Structure Charts set out in Appendix D
which Cabinet is being asked to agree.