New York, United States
I'll try to make the impossible, to write something about New York, the city everyone already knows everything about.
What New York gave and taught me,
In a city with a population larger than Sweden, more nationalities than any other place I've been (although it's not my first time in the city), and home to so many organizations, I've met the assumption that living in New York City is enjoyable. Indeed, but not in the way people assume. Most (or all) hours were spent in a library, packed lecture hall, seminar session or computer lab, either writing formatted policy memorandums, working on a group task, preparing notes, conducting a simulations and/or learning something new. In rain (very much rain when it rains), wind (very much wind when its windy), and shining sun (the sunset in New York is something special), with short deadlines, changing conditions, global events, and long nights, I'd say it was one of the most transformative time-periods (despite working full-time, studying full-time and overlappning coursework in another time-zone, and being apart of 5-10 extracurricular at the same time during the bachelor's degree).
Ideas were being tested with some of the brightest and most experienced. Application and feasibility of implementation and practices were being tested (and questioned). Only in a cohort of 200-500 people, about 70 - 90 nationalities were represented. Different backgrounds, different experiences, and different ways of working. That is why I love New York, the people, the work culture, and the ambition. It demands the hours, but people put heart and values into their work. New York is, for me, leadership. Public leadership, private leadership, ethical leadership, and beyond.
A home too!
On public management: New York knows how to host and manage people like no other place. A recent thought after my degree, is the city's ability to manage people, events, and organizations in the rapid speed it does. It is impressive, but requires discipline.
On strategy: policy, business, design, and communications,
are there any touching points?
I'd say yes. Similar to strategy for organisations and businesses, politics is strategy for society. It is about setting a direction for society, and figuring out how to do it in the best way (that's the design).
In other words it's about governance, implementation/execution, and citizen's (customer's) experiences/satisfaction (while politics is on a macro-level and measured with other KPIs). As follows, we may think about:
- Customers (citizens) experience
- Positioning (in the world or region)
- Growth strategy (with other measures e.g. GDP, HDI)
- Value proposition (to trade-partners)
- Change strategy (in society, but why not also double materiality)
While the "competition", partnerships, collaborations, and challenges (always) are on a global scale.
A few reflections
01. The time to create tomorrow is now, but preferably yesterday
As cliché or cheesy as it may sound, New York and policy school, often pinpointed creating momentum and urgency for the right policy matter. Policy packages and corporates strategies are streamlines for the organization to implement and pave a path towards a certain direction. But often discovered, one wished one would have started earlier (yesterday) on creating tomorrow. I think that is as true for corporations as for society.
Nonetheless, a few key words of this time and that connects to the definition of economics, “the ability to manage resources”, are: thoughfulness, but speed, precision, and a long-term lens. From a political and corporate perspective, it’s about better managing resources, but partnerships and engagement with relevant stakeholders.
02. Implementation is above
(almost) everything
Something policy school together with previous business education are doing well, is the aspects of application and how things plays out in the real world. It's in focus, and even modelled, or simulated. A recent thought is that labs and/or simulations may not be a bad idea to engage in (more) for corporate or policy efforts as well.
I have been thinking about double materiality
to sustain the currents in this era
Sustainability is a part of the Swedish DNA (or our global brand as a healthy and clean nation and in our way of living), while double materiality has become an increasingly important part for organizations’ value creation and to sustain in the long-term (not only for environmental sustainability, the company impact), but for the economic value impacted by the environment. The geopolitical disruptions and fast changes have become more severe and unpredictable, which moves attention to other variables that also impacts organizations’ performance. For instance, the energy sector lately - which creates stronger dependencies for firms on the renewable sector and/or the climate - has become an even more vital part of organizations’ cost considerations. That requires increased 1) flexibility/agility/adaptation, but 2) deep awareness about the firm, the landscape, and markets (orientation), and 3) resilience (to persist during tough times).
03. Value creation & another way to think about design
Design feature I: Many can create a policy or strategy, but it may not receive as much traction or utilization (even after it has been put on the table). Connecting to the first point about resourcefulness, another way to design efforts is not (always) to create policies and strategies “targeting” the policy or business challenge directly, but programs / initiatives that nurture a behavior or a way of thinking in another - sometimes rather relaxed - context to lower barriers. Those skills or processes will then become easier to apply in the “real context” or just lower the barriers to segway into a more complex "context". That is something I think Policy Design 5.0 and Business Strategy 5.0 should (could) look like. Similar, but not quite the same as the concept of “gamification” of things, but rather another context/setting and instead of testing capabilities, nurture those.
Design feature II: In this time era, both business strategy and public policy design may have to work more with "flexible policies" (connecting to the first point again) to "increase utility curves". What does that mean? To provide more benefits to society or an organization, within the same restrictions, create flexible policies among different options / tools (unless obvious / clear what is most beneficial for stakeholders and society). The costs should be quite similar in both the short and long term.