MICHAEL DEMPSEY - Cranfield University

Conclusions
own, in some cases. The issue of the move of the whole union into the
CPSA’s former head office was not something which was given
attention at the time and it seems only retrospectively that this was
seen as having created cultural problems, for both sides, even if the
suggestion is that these may have been short lived. But there do
appear to have been positive attitudes to the contribution open plan
space could make to staff working together, even if the driver for these
decisions, at national level, were related to space allocation rather than
to culture.
‘Meaningful’ Managerial Actions
Merger management
A consequence of the lack of agreement on the character of the new
union was certainly a factor in the lack of any recognisable merger
management except when induction programmes were made available
to staff moving into the new head office. Joint training commenced
quite some time later. This was something of particular difficulty for
managers from PTC where considerable effort had been put into the
process of merging the NUCPS and IRSF – whatever their views about
the success or otherwise of those processes, managers were aware of
what could have been done in PCS. Managers were in some cases left
to get on with their new roles – but several did take up the challenge of
creating new teams and staffing structures were agreed relatively early
to facilitate this.
Managing by information
Managerial communication did not figure in those terms in managers’
descriptions of their key roles and it seems clear that for the first couple
of years of the new organisation it was not satisfactory. After the
Eastbourne meeting, however, there is evidence that it improved, in the
sense that senior managers began to have one to one meetings with
their staff. There is no evidence about whether that translated into an
effective managerial communication strategy taking in the staff at large
though the mechanisms for one to one meetings, in the form of the
development review system, were available to them.
Managing through People
PCS managers are aware of the importance of managing people in an
appropriate fashion and many express their attitudes in enthusiastic
terms. There is some suggestion that, in the union as a whole, this has
not gone far enough – this from a manager who felt he had particular
success in empowering people when he was a manager in the civil
service. On the other hand, there is no formal system of performance
management and some feelings that this would in principle be difficult,
either because trade unionists had a problem judging people adversely
or because of the difficulty in measuring performance. Those, however,
who were enthusiastic in using the development reviewing system
believed that it was difficult to discuss development needs without
discussing performance and the scheme served, therefore, as a means
of addressing performance issues openly.
198