Someone working in public service can make nine good decisions and still be remembered for the one that did not work. When that happens, the consequences reach beyond the individual, because everyone watching learns something about whether it is worth trying a different approach or safer to keep doing what has always been done.
That is a difficult environment in which to ask people to innovate. We can encourage new ideas and talk about improving services, but those ambitions will struggle to become practical changes if the people responsible believe they will be left exposed when an attempt falls short.
My concern is that fear of failure can become a powerful influence on public-sector decisions, shaping what people are prepared to suggest as well as what they are willing to do. A talented person may understand a problem and see a possible way forward, yet decide that the personal risk of pursuing it is greater than the value their organisation appears to place on change.
As a political leader, I believe we have a responsibility to address that. If we want public servants to exercise judgement and help us find better ways of working, we need to give them support which means something when the outcome is uncertain, rather than encouragement which lasts only while everything is going well.
Public organisations are responsible for services people rely on and for resources which must be used carefully, so accountability belongs at the centre of any decision to change. The challenge is to make room for responsible experimentation within that obligation, allowing people to explore an approach while understanding why it is being tried and what can be learned from it.
There is a difference between accepting an unsuccessful outcome and refusing to examine it. Learning requires us to understand what happened, which assumptions were wrong and whether the experience points towards a better approach, rather than allowing the fact that something failed to become the end of the conversation.
The person involved may now have a much stronger understanding of the problem than they had before. If our response is simply to punish them or ensure they never take another risk, we can lose that knowledge while sending a discouraging message to colleagues who might otherwise have brought forward their own ideas.
That is why I believe we need a safe space for innovation in public services, where people can test their thinking and receive support from those responsible for leading the organisation. Safety in this sense should mean confidence that a decision will be considered fairly, with attention to its purpose, the judgement behind it and the lessons it provides.
For Newport, this is part of how I think about leadership and the city’s future. We need people who are willing to engage with opportunities and work with others to make progress, which becomes harder if every uncertainty is treated as a reason to wait or every unsuccessful attempt as proof that trying was a mistake.
Political leaders face pressures of their own, including the possibility that one decision will overshadow a much wider record. I understand that pressure, but we should also recognise how easily it can influence the environment beneath us, encouraging caution throughout an organisation even when we are asking it to become more ambitious.
Across Wales, improving public services will depend on the capability and judgement of the people delivering them. Technology may create new possibilities, but people still need to identify the problem, consider a different response and decide whether it is worth pursuing, with leadership prepared to support that work through uncertainty.
Fear of failure should not become the defining condition of Welsh public service. If we want people to help us find better answers, we must give them room to try, expect them to learn and remain willing to back them when the experience is more difficult than anticipated.
That is a responsibility for leadership, and an essential part of making improvement possible.
