Creating a Culture of Innovation - Arizona State Universityicprv/courses/hst498/resource web... ·...

The PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for

The Business of Government

Creating a Culture of Innovation:

10 Lessons from America’s Best Run City

Janet Vinzant DenhardtProfessorSchool of Public AffairsArizona State University

Robert B. DenhardtProfessorSchool of Public AffairsArizona State University

Tr a n s f o r m i n g O r g a n i z a t i o n s S e r i e s

January 2001

About The EndowmentThrough grants for Research and Thought Leadership Forums,The PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for The Business ofGovernment stimulates research and facilitates discussion onnew approaches to improving the effectiveness of governmentat the federal, state, local, and international levels.

Founded in 1998 by PricewaterhouseCoopers, The Endowmentis one of the ways that PricewaterhouseCoopers seeks toadvance knowledge on how to improve public sector effec-tiveness. The PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment focuses on the future of the operation and management of the publicsector.



Creating a Culture of Innovation 1

Creating a Culture of Innovation:

10 Lessons from America’s Best Run City

Janet Vinzant DenhardtProfessor

School of Public AffairsArizona State University

Robert B. DenhardtProfessor

School of Public AffairsArizona State University

January 2001

2 Creating a Culture of Innovation

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword ......................................................................................3

Executive Summary ......................................................................4

Introduction ................................................................................5The Study ..............................................................................5Background ............................................................................6

Lessons Learned............................................................................91. Taking Pride ..................................................................102. Looking Ahead and Creating New Challenges ..............123. Building Relationships and Fostering Participation ........154. Serving Citizens ............................................................175. Trusting and Empowering People ..................................196. Enacting Core Values ....................................................227. Respecting Employees and Treating Them Well..............238. Taking Risks and Learning From Experience ..................249. Recognizing and Rewarding People’s Efforts ..................25

10. Building a Stable Foundation and Staying the Course ....27

Conclusion..................................................................................29

References ..................................................................................30

About the Authors ......................................................................31

Key Contact Information ............................................................32


ForewordJanuary 2001

On behalf of The PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for The Business of Government, we are pleased topresent this report by Janet Vinzant Denhardt and Robert B. Denhardt, “Creating a Culture of Innovation:10 Lessons from America’s Best Run City.”

The City of Phoenix has a reputation for excellence. In 2000, it was named the best run city in America by Governing magazine and the Government Performance Project at Syracuse University; in 1993, it wonGermany’s Carl Bertelsmann Prize for being one of the two best run city governments in the world. Thisreport examines how Phoenix has developed a culture of innovation that has served as the foundation forthe creation and implementation of the city’s many innovations.

Denhardt and Denhardt present 10 key lessons based on Phoenix’s success. These lessons fit together toreflect and embody a consistent set of organizational and individual values and perspectives on people and innovation. We hear much today about values such as trust, empowerment, and pride in a job welldone. The City of Phoenix provides an example of how these values can be put into practice. We believethat the lessons learned from Phoenix can be applied to all organizations — public, private, or nonprofit.

Several of the lessons from Phoenix focus on the importance of employees: trusting and empowering peo-ple; respecting employees and treating them well; and recognizing and rewarding people’s efforts. Otherlessons have to do with a customer-oriented focus: building relationships and fostering participation; andserving citizens. Some lessons involve the city’s approach to change: looking ahead and creating new chal-lenges; taking risks and learning from experience; and building a stable foundation and staying the course.

It is our hope that this report will provide information and insights for executives in all organizations interested in building a culture of innovation and change.

Paul Lawrence Ian LittmanPartner, PricewaterhouseCoopers Partner, PricewaterhouseCoopersCo-Chair, Endowment Advisory Board Co-Chair, Endowment Advisory [email protected] [email protected]




The accomplishments and successes of the City ofPhoenix are remarkable. In 2000, Phoenix wasnamed the best run city in America in a study ofgovernment performance conducted by Governingmagazine and the Government PerformanceProject at Syracuse University. This recognition onlyserved to reinforce the city’s reputation for excel-lence. In 1993, it won Germany’s Carl BertelsmannPrize for being one of the two best run city govern-ments in the world. Departments within the city aresimilarly lauded with awards, prizes, and profes-sional recognition. Both citizens and employeesgive the city extraordinarily high marks as well.

This study examines how Phoenix has been able todevelop a culture of innovation that supports andencourages cutting-edge government. Drawing froma series of interviews and other materials, this reportpresents 10 key lessons based on Phoenix’s success.These lessons focus on the values of pride, trust,empowerment, and a number of other organiza-tional factors that have become fully ingrained inthe culture of city government in Phoenix and, inturn, contributed to the city’s success. Our purposeis to provide information and insights for publicadministrators interested in building a similar cul-ture of innovation and change in other jurisdictions.

The Phoenix experience underlines the importanceof inculcating core values, including both personalresponsibility and teamwork. It demonstrates thenecessity of stability in fostering change. It high-lights the necessity for supporting people and

trusting them, equipping and empowering them to be innovative. It reminds us that the values ofpublic service and citizen engagement must be atthe forefront of everything public managers do.Finally, Phoenix demonstrates that, in developingand implementing improvements, managers will be aided by involving everyone and respecting, honoring, and acting on their contributions.

We suggest that these lessons need to be consid-ered as inseparable and mutually reinforcing piecesof a whole. Accordingly, we recommend that thedevelopment of an innovative culture requiressimultaneous attention to a number of culturallevers. Perhaps the most fundamental and impor-tant lesson that we can learn from Phoenix, how-ever, is that how you do things is every bit asimportant as what you do — and in some waysmore important. By carefully considering howinnovation is approached, the process can leavepeople feeling involved, valued, responsible, andempowered rather than frustrated and resistant tofuture changes. With time, consistency, and perse-verance, other public organizations can develop aculture that fosters a commitment to excellence,innovation, and striving to be the best.

Executive Summary


If you have lunch at Crazy Jim’s Restaurant diago-nally across the street from City Hall in Phoenix,don’t be surprised if you overhear city employees at the next table talking about how to do their jobsbetter. As implausible as this may sound, that’swhat happened to us. In fact, it happened morethan once. The employees we overheard, of course,work for a city that is consistently recognized asthe best run in the country, known for both itsinnovative practices and standards of excellence.This past spring, Phoenix was the only city receiv-ing an “A” grade from a yearlong study of localgovernment performance conducted by theGovernment Performance Project at SyracuseUniversity and Governing magazine. In fact, thedirector of that project, Pat Ingraham, calledPhoenix “a veritable innovation machine.”

The city’s accomplishments have not only beenlauded in the pages of Governing. In 1993,Phoenix won the Carl Bertelsmann Prize for being(along with Christchurch, New Zealand) one of thetwo best run city governments in the world.Individual departments within the city consistentlyreceive awards, prizes, and professional recogni-tion. Both employees and citizens give the cityextraordinarily high marks as well. In indepen-dently conducted surveys, 97 percent of employeesagreed or strongly agreed that “the city is a goodplace to work” and 89 percent of citizens reportedthat they were satisfied or very satisfied with thecity’s performance. The city’s success seems noth-ing short of remarkable. How has the City ofPhoenix achieved this level of accomplishment and what can we learn from its experience?

The StudyUnder an earlier PricewaterhouseCoopersEndowment for The Business of Government grant,we investigated how city managers can effectivelyand responsibly lead change (Denhardt &Denhardt, 1999). We explored this question basedon case studies of three city/county managers whoare especially highly regarded for their efforts inleading change. We found that in addition to man-aging ongoing and varied organizational changeprocesses, these managers were also quite attentiveto building a culture of innovation over time. Onceideas such as involvement and communication,quality and innovation, collaboration and engage-ment became embedded in the culture of the orga-nization, people throughout those jurisdictionsbegan to look for ways to extend these values. Theybecame attuned to new opportunities that they pre-viously wouldn’t have recognized. We concludedthat making innovation the norm, rather than theexception, is essential to the process of institution-alizing change.

Given the record of success and achievement thatthe City of Phoenix has compiled, it seemed anideal setting in which to study how public adminis-trators can create and sustain a culture that sup-ports ongoing innovation and change. Unlike ourprevious work that looked at the process of leadingchange in new settings from the city manager’s per-spective, in this study we wanted to take a broaderlook at cultural and organizational factors that havedeveloped over a long period of time. We wantedto examine the factors that have contributed to andsustained Phoenix’s “culture of innovation,” includ-

Introduction


ing the ways in which administrators see their rolesas innovators, how they think about and respond torisk and opportunity, and how they foster innova-tion and creativity in others.

We explored these issues by first interviewingPhoenix’s city manager, Frank Fairbanks, talkingprimarily about his efforts to build a culture ofchange. We also gathered information from thecity, including the background materials that wereused in the Syracuse University study, as well assurveys, reports, flyers, bulletins, new employeepackets, and information provided to citizens. Wethen conducted approximately 30 interviews,mostly with department heads, but also with staff to the manager, mayor, and council, and with cityemployees. After learning of the important contri-bution to building the culture of innovation inPhoenix of the previous city manager, MarvinAndrews, we interviewed him as well. We thenhad a second interview with the current city man-ager in which we asked him about his approach tochange and innovation and about what advice hewould give others involved in trying to bring aboutchange in local government. Drawing on our inter-views and other materials, we describe here 10lessons about organizational culture and leadershipthat are key to understanding the Phoenix experi-ence. These lessons deal with cultivating leader-ship, building trust, empowering workers, andother factors that have contributed to organiza-tional success. Our intent is to provide informationand insights for public administrators interested inbuilding a culture of successful innovation andchange in other jurisdictions.

However, the conversations we overheard in CrazyJim’s might best exemplify the underlying themethat links these lessons together. In Phoenix, theongoing search for new and better ways to manageand govern have developed deep, sturdy roots. Thissearch for innovation is not just something they do,it has become who they are. The values of this cul-ture do not rest on the surface, they are not put onfor show, they are not new, nor are they simplywords or symbols. These cultural roots are wovenin and around the entire foundation of the City ofPhoenix, becoming an integral part of how the cityand the people who work there define themselvesand their public service work. The offshoots ofthose roots can be seen in the willingness to try

new things, in the creativity and energy of theemployees, and in the pride people take in theirwork — but the roots remain underneath, so mucha part of the city’s character that they are largelyhidden and taken for granted. And they have takensome time to grow. In order to learn from the suc-cess of Phoenix, we have concentrated on under-standing this cultural foundation or “root system”for innovation and change.

These lessons and recommendations paint an over-whelmingly, some might say unrealistically, positivepicture of Phoenix city government. Indeed, peoplein city government in Phoenix will be the first topoint out that things aren’t perfect. As we will dis-cuss more fully in the sections that follow, they stillfeel the need to be better, to meet new challenges,and to address the problems that remain. Althoughthings may not be perfect in the city, our purpose isto focus on the attributes of the city’s organiza-tional culture that have contributed to the city’ssuccess. On balance, we believe that the followingrepresents a realistic picture of the organizationalculture of the City of Phoenix, a picture that war-rants a careful look for the lessons it can teach us.

We begin by providing some background on thecity, its history, and its characteristics. We then con-sider the factors that emerged as important to thedevelopment of a culture of innovation in Phoenix:trust, the management of risk and opportunity, per-spectives on failure and learning, organizationalconditions and commitments, structural innova-tions, the roles of managers, and other factors. Weconclude with some practical recommendations forother managers interested in the lessons we havelearned from talking to some of the key peoplewho helped create a culture of innovation inAmerica’s best run city.

BackgroundThe City of Phoenix is a relatively new city, thoughone with a somewhat checkered past. Phoenix isthe capital city of Arizona, the last of the 48 con-tiguous states to join the union (1912). The citygovernment was established in 1881, and for thenext 67 years the city experimented with varioustypes of mayoral, commission, and manager gov-ernments. There were 27 changes of mayoraladministrations between the years 1881 to 1914,


and there were 31 city managers in the 35 years ofcommission-manager government that followed. By the late 1940s, Phoenix was in serious trouble.High crime rates and corruption plagued the city.In fact, because of widespread prostitution andvenereal disease, Phoenix was declared off-limits to servicemen during World War II (Hall, 1982).

Under these circumstances, a reform movementlaunched in the late 1940s had few problems find-ing support among the media and civic groups. In 1948, voters approved a council-manager formof government that, with variations, remains themodel for Phoenix city government today. Follow-ing this model, the city became much more highlyprofessionalized, and a more effective relationshipbetween the city’s political leaders and the cityadministration developed. What is most strikingabout Phoenix today, however, is its phenomenalgrowth. The population grew from 107,000 in 1950to 669,000 in 1975. During the same time period,the size of the city went from 17.1 square miles to276 square miles. The city has continued to grow,reaching its present population of 1.2 millionspread over 470 square miles, with a populationincrease of approximately 30,000 new residentsper year. In fact, from 1990 to 1998, Phoenix expe-rienced a 21 percent increase in population, mak-ing it the fastest growing city of its size in thenation during that time period (Morrison Institute,2000). During this time, however, beginning in thelate 1980s and extending through the early 1990s,Phoenix experienced a severe recession, wipingout numerous banking institutions, sending thehousing market into a tailspin, and leaving stategovernment in disarray.

While the economy has recovered and is currentlyquite strong, Phoenix battles crime problems, trafficcongestion, poor air quality, and the challenges ofurban sprawl just like many other American cities of its size. Yet, according to the Government Perfor-mance Project, Phoenix handles these challengesbetter than other cities. While the study identified a few areas where the city could improve, such as in long-term workforce planning, cost accounting, and revenue estimation, the study published inGoverning magazine (February 2000) was nothingshort of glowing in its review of the Phoenix citygovernment. In fact, Phoenix was the only city in thestudy to receive an average grade of “A” across the

five categories of city management studied. For acomplete accounting of the city’s many accomplish-ments and activities, the full text of the report andaward application submitted by Phoenix is availableat http://www.governing.com/gpp/gp0phoe.htm.Selected excerpts from Phoenix’s “A” report cardinclude:

Financial Management: Rigorous is the wordfor every aspect of Phoenix’s financial manage-ment, from contingency planning to the moni-toring of contracts. When the city councilmakes a decision, it has in front of it informa-tion on all financial ramifications. Any pro-grammatic change — down to an expansion ofswimming pool hours — includes an analysisof the fiscal impact, which the Budget andResearch Department then reviews. The citypublishes a summary of its proposed budget asa 16-page newspaper insert (including aSpanish version) and distributes it widely.

Human Resources: The local government inPhoenix is strikingly rich in information aboutits workforce and customizes training programsin accordance with the data it collects.Computer systems enable the personnel depart-ment to keep a database of information aboutthe effectiveness of training, a real rarity in anyAmerican city…. Phoenix uses manyapproaches to reward employees who do supe-rior work, including a very strong EmployeeSuggestion program. Personnel evaluations arewell done.

Information Technology (IT): Phoenix uses whatit calls a “coordinated decentralized approach”to information management. This seems to workexceptionally well, combining maximum inputfrom agencies with a powerful central controlover the general direction the city is heading in.Departmental barriers and turf fights over IThave all but faded away in Phoenix. Managersutilize the technology continually to performtheir tasks better, in citywide decision making as well as in specific agencies.

Capital Management: Largely because of anextraordinary capital planning process — and a vigorous effort to educate citizens — 19 outof Phoenix’s last 20 bond proposals have wonvoter approval. Departments generate five- to


seven-year capital needs studies, which arecarefully reviewed to make sure they’re consis-tent with citywide plans and financial feasibil-ity. The city generates an enormous amount ofdata to inform the effort. Capital needs are esti-mated far enough in advance to keep fees andcosts from rising precipitously. Phoenix’s focuson maintaining its infrastructure is also veryimpressive. There is a five-year facilities man-agement plan, which includes replacementschedules for major components of infrastruc-ture…. City policy is to fully maintain facilitiesand defer no maintenance costs.

Managing for Results: Overall goals in Phoenixare guided by vision statements and valuesstatements. No. 1: to produce high customersatisfaction at the lowest possible cost and in aseamless fashion. Phoenix doesn’t have gargan-tuan strategic planning documents — “cre-denza ware” in the words of [Budget] DirectorCeil Pettle. It does an excellent job, however,of communicating strategic vision down theline. “You ask a garbage collector how he con-tributes to customer service, and he can tellyou,” says Pettle. Getting input from citizens isa high priority. Hundreds of volunteers sit oncommittees to keep leaders informed on themood of the citizenry at a given moment.Perhaps most importantly, data is used consis-tently to improve services. When Phoenix dis-covered that citizens didn’t want to speak withmultiple employees to get answers to easyquestions ... it issued a pamphlet for every fieldemployee with information on common prob-lems and how to respond to them (Barrett andGreene, 2000).

The city’s organizational structure looks like manyother American cities, with a few exceptions. Forexample, most cities the size of Phoenix have astrong mayor form of government rather thanPhoenix’s council-manager form. The city council is made up of eight members, elected by district innonpartisan elections. Another difference worthy ofnote is the longevity of its leadership. The currentmayor, Skip Rimsza, took office in 1994. The cur-rent city manager, Frank Fairbanks, was appointedby the council in 1990. The previous manager,Marvin Andrews, served the city from 1976 to1990. Many other top managers have been with the city for long periods.

The current organizational chart places citizens atthe top, followed by the mayor and city counciland then the city manager. The assistant city man-ager is second in command and then there are sixdeputy city managers, reporting to the managerthrough the assistant city manager. Each of thedeputies supervises five or six city departments.Every few years these departments are movedaround somewhat, so that over time the deputiessupervise a different mix of departments. There isalso movement and rotation among departments.Otherwise, the structure is fairly typical of similarsized cities.


Rather than chronicling the many accomplishmentsand innovations of the City of Phoenix, we haveconcentrated on understanding the culture of inno-vation that has served as the foundation for the cre-ation and implementation of these innovations. Wehave focused on culture for two reasons. First, theimpressive array of innovations and improvementssuccessfully implemented in Phoenix has alreadybeen documented, most recently in the findings ofthe Government Performance Project summarizedearlier. Secondly, and most importantly, we arguethat how Phoenix planned and implemented thesechanges holds the answer to understanding theirability to build a culture that embraces innovationmuch more so than what they did. Phoenix hasclearly developed what Valle would call “an adap-tive organizational culture” as its core competence(Valle, 1999, p. 245). By developing this core com-petency, it has equipped itself to manage andembrace change on an ongoing basis.

What do we mean by organizational culture?Organizational culture has been likened to an indi-vidual’s personality, the unseen force that providesidentity, meaning, direction, and the basis for action(Oden, 1997). Edgar Schein (1987), whose earlywork brought the cultural perspective forward as asignificant alternative to the prevailing structural andsystems views of organizations, distinguishes threelevels of organizational culture. First, there are theobservable artifacts and creations of the cultureincluding the social and physical environment, lan-guage, and day-to-day operating procedures androutines. Second, there are the values of the organi-

zation, which, when they are accepted by the mem-bers, guide and motivate behavior to reflect thosevalues. Third, there are basic underlying assumptionsor patterns of belief that are taken for granted to thepoint that they are not even questioned. Scheinargues that it is this last category that is the core defi-nition of culture, “a pattern of basic assumptions —invented, discovered, or developed by a given groupas it learns to cope with its problems ... that hasworked well enough to be considered valid and,therefore, to be taught to new members as the cor-rect way to perceive, think, and feel in relation tothose problems” (Schein, 1987, p. 9). These coreassumptions are developed and become institution-alized over a relatively long period of time — fromfive to 15 years or more, according to some esti-mates (Bluedorn and Lundgren, 1993). When cul-tural norms become firmly rooted, they can be quiteresistant to change, literally forming the identity ofthe organization and setting the parameters for “howthings are done around here.”

In the sections that follow, we talk about 10 keylessons we learned from our research and observa-tions about the culture of “how things are done” inmunicipal government in Phoenix and about howthat culture was established over time. To the extentpossible, we have expressed these lessons using thevoices of the people who work there, to provideboth the information they communicated as well asthe flavor of their comments. Before presenting andexplaining these lessons, however, we mustemphasize that while these lessons are discussedseparately, they are all part of a unified, consistent,

Lessons Learned

Figure 1: The Phoenix Management Team

Deputy City ManagerJacques Avent

Deputy City ManagerGeorge Britton

Deputy City ManagerGeorge Flores

Deputy City ManagerJack Tevlin

Deputy City ManagerMarsha Wallace

Deputy City ManagerAlton Washington

Assistant City ManagerSheryl Sculley

City ManagerFrank Fairbanks


mutually reinforcing whole. Part of the success ofPhoenix is that all the pieces fit together — a sub-ject we will return to in the conclusion of thisreport. The city’s culture of innovation is not builton any one or two or three factors. All of the fol-lowing lessons or perspectives fit together to reflectand embody a consistent set of organizational andindividual values and perspectives on people andinnovation. As City Manager Frank Fairbanks toldus, Phoenix became a city that embraced changeby “evolution.” It’s been building “layer upon layerover many years.”

So, these lessons are neither sequential, in order ofimportance, nor separable. They represent interde-pendent characteristics of a unified foundation uponwhich Phoenix has built a record of success overtime. In other words, this cultural foundation is farmore than a statement of values or principles.Rather, it has come to define the professional iden-

tity of managers, the nature of their behavior, thecharacter of city initiatives, and the quality of ser-vice provided. It has been developed piece bypiece, consistently, and over a long period. Like theproverbial “Rome,” the culture of innovation exem-plified in Phoenix was not built in a day. But, fromthe experience and perspectives of the city’s admin-istrators and staff, we can learn a number of practi-cal lessons on how to build a culture of innovation.

1. Taking Pride Taking pride in individual, departmental, and city-wide accomplishments seems to be a key factorfueling continued innovation and improvement inthe City of Phoenix. In fact, one of the things thatbecomes immediately apparent in conversationswith managers is that they take great pride not onlyin their city and its accomplishments, but also intheir departments and in their individual work. Indiscussing some of the key issues emphasized dur-


ing his 1976-1990 term as city manager, MarvinAndrews recalled, “We put a lot of effort intobuilding people’s pride in their job and excellenceand quality.” Clearly this is an emphasis that hascontinued to produce a number of important andpositive consequences.

The fact that Phoenix has competed for a numberof awards is one indicator of the pride managerstake in their city’s accomplishments. Assistant CityManager Sheryl Sculley remarked, “We want peo-ple to say about Phoenix, ’We want to be just likethem.’” Citywide honors and awards emphasizeand underscore for the people who work for thecity that their efforts have paid off. Competing forsuch awards has provided an opportunity for thecity to evaluate its accomplishments and take stockof its successes. Winning has provided an external“pat on the back” that further reinforces the pridethat people across the organization express, creat-ing a cycle of pride and success. As with many ofthe lessons discussed in this report, efforts in thisregard seem to build a momentum of their own. Inthis case, taking pride results in quality, qualityresults in accomplishment, accomplishment resultsin recognition, which, in turn, increases pride.

There has been a conscious effort by the cityadministration to view these awards as a reflectionof the accomplishments of the whole city, but par-ticular emphasis is placed on the contributions ofthe front-line employees. The idea is to emphasizethat all departments and all employees play animportant and vital role in the success of Phoenix.According to Finance Director Kevin Keogh,“There’s a basic emphasis on excellence, on doingan excellent job and being the best you can be inyour field. But there’s probably an even largeremphasis on the city as a broader organization andsupporting the objectives of that organization.”

That does not mean that people don’t take pride intheir individual departments as well. As PersonnelDirector Lera Riley explained, “The goal for mostdepartment heads is to have the best department ofthat type anywhere in the country or the world. Thatis their goal, and there is a great amount of pride inwhat they’re doing. There is citywide pride, butthere is also pride in that department.” The depart-ments also apply for and win awards, emphasizingtheir expertise and success within their own field.

The desire to be the best, coupled with a belief thatthey can be creative and successful, underlies theirefforts to innovate and achieve excellence. And,indeed, many specific departments in Phoenix areconsidered the best in their field.

Deputy managers and department heads see it astheir responsibility to know what is happening inother city organizations and in the field of publicadministration generally. Managers told us that thisoccurs because in some cases it makes far moresense to adapt an innovation tested in anotherjurisdiction than to start from “scratch.” As AviationDirector David Krietor put it, “We’re pretty good atidentifying what’s happening out in the world, bothin the public and private sectors, and adaptingthem to work in Phoenix.” Managers also use thisinformation to gauge the performance of their owndepartments not only in reference to other depart-ments in the city, but also to what similar depart-ments in other cities are doing and how well theyare doing it. “In our annual performance plan, weare not just comparing ourselves internally, but are also looking at how we rate in our field on anational basis. I think that expectation does keepyou on your toes,” said Human Services DirectorGloria Hurtado. Similarly, Deputy City ManagerJacques Avent commented, “We do a lot of bench-marking against a group of selected cities, our peercities. Our people are constantly looking at thatpeer group and measuring ourselves against them.We don’t want to come up short.”

Individual pride is also a hallmark of the organiza-tional culture of the City of Phoenix. Director ofPlanning David Richert pointed out, “We are anorganization of a lot of different people. Not oneperson should stand out in that, but you all shouldstand pretty tall. That’s what makes any team work.”

The city publishes a weekly newspaper ad

called “City Page” every Friday. This page

highlights quick and simple facts about the

city’s performance as well as upcoming

city events and programs.


The emphasis is on each individual taking pride inwhat they do and their contribution to the team. Asthe city’s vision and values statement reads, “Weeach do all we can.”

This high level of individual, departmental, and city-wide pride creates an interesting dynamic amongmanagers. “We work hard at being innovative,”commented Deputy City Manager Marsha Wallace.“One of the things that helps us is a little internalcompetition. We have several departments that areliterally the best in the country, if not the world.Everyone knows it, and everyone wants their depart-ment to reach up to that level.” While this competi-tion seems to be friendly, it does seem to create anexpectation that all parts of the organization willstrive to be the best. Jacques Avent told us, “Wehave excellence awards we give out every year. Youdon’t want your department to come up short onexcellence awards. How would that look? It’s awhole culture where people want to be excellent.”

2. Looking Ahead and Creating New ChallengesAlthough pride is a key element of the City ofPhoenix culture, it is pride that can be seen as bal-anced with, or even in tension with, a value placedon creating new challenges. In other words, whenmanagement and employees in Phoenix recognizethe extraordinary accomplishments of the people inthe organization, there is great celebration andpride. But with that pride, the next question isalways, “What can we do to be even better?” Inother words, pride is used to propel the city for-ward to confront new challenges.

Part of this drive to always look forward can beseen as taking root in the 1970s, when former citymanager Marvin Andrews began communicating tocity employees the need for ongoing change andimprovement. “Things were changing extremelyrapidly and would change a lot more rapidly in thefuture. We needed to be ready to cope with thatconstantly changing situation. In fact, we needednot only to not be bothered by it but to use it.Changing constantly is a good way to get newideas and get things done.” In short, success doesn’t mean the work is completed. It means you move on to the next challenge.

Frank FairbanksCity Manager

Frank Fairbanks was appointed city manager by the Phoenix City Council in April 1990. Heis responsible to the mayor and city council forthe day-to-day management and operation ofthe city. He works closely with the mayor andcity council, helping them formulate objectives,policies and programs.

Fairbanks joined the city in 1972 and hasserved as a management assistant, executiveassistant to the city manager and assistant citymanager. During that time, he helped developcitizen involvement and participation pro-grams, police and fire service improvements,employee productivity, organizational develop-ment, performance measurement and the useof advanced technology.

American City and County magazine selectedFairbanks as the “1994 Municipal Leader” ofthe year. That same year, Governing magazinenamed him the “Public Official of the Year.”While Mr. Fairbanks has been city manager,Phoenix won an international competition tobe named “Best Run City in the World” by theBertelsmann Foundation in Germany.

Prior to working with the city, he worked as a Peace Corps volunteer in the Office of thePresident of Costa Rica. Fairbanks has a bache-lor of science degree in finance from LoyolaUniversity in Los Angeles and a master’s inbusiness administration from the University ofCalifornia Los Angeles.

He is chair of the Strategic Planning Committee ofthe International City/County ManagementAssociation and is active in Public TechnologyIncorporated, an organization which developstechnological solutions to urban problems. He isa Fellow of the National Academy of PublicAdministration.


The idea of always looking forward to the nextchallenge has become an important part of theorganizational culture. For example, one of theconcerns among the top executives in the City ofPhoenix after winning the Bertelsmann award in1993 was that winning the award would a create afeeling of complacency, that the city had accom-plished all it could and all that was left was to sim-ply continue being excellent. Managers in Phoenixexplicitly said “no” to that idea. “We have tried toapproach rewards as recognition of the great workthe employees are doing and reinforce innovationby employees. But we also say we need to chal-lenge ourselves. Things aren’t perfect here. Weneed to use rewards to challenge ourselves.” Wehave to ask ourselves, Frank Fairbanks said with asmile, “what do we need to do to really deservethis award?”

This attitude is echoed in the voices of top manage-ment. Deputy City Manager George Flores com-mented, “Even though we’ve hit this pinnacle ofsuccess, I think there’s still so much more that wecould be doing. And I also think that stating that isone of the reasons why we keep pushing our-selves.” Sheryl Sculley expressed a similar senti-ment when she said, “We very strongly feel thatwhile it’s an honor to receive these awards, thatcertainly does not mean we’re a perfect organiza-tion. There are always areas that we’re working onfor improvement, to do things better and providean even higher level of customer service.”

Yet, the message is not a negative one that suggeststhat the organization is not good enough. Ratherthe focus is on the need to move in a positivedirection, to continually innovate and improve to keep up with the challenges ahead. HumanServices Department Director Gloria Hurtadoexpressed it this way: “The environment in whichwe live and work is constantly changing. That doesn’t allow complacency to happen.” This ideahas taken a firm hold in the cultural roots of thiscity organization. In fact, at this point, the recogni-tion of the need to push forward and keep improv-ing is largely taken for granted. As one managersaid, “In some places, just kind of staying even ispart and parcel of what you do. Here it’s alwaysbeen a matter of improving, of doing things better.It’s something that is rooted in the organization,and it’s a part of the environment.”

The people who work for the City of Phoenixreport feeling invigorated by this expectation andchallenge. Alan Brunacini, chief of one of the mostoutstanding fire departments in the country, com-mented, “People have asked me, ’How could youhave stayed in one place for so long?’ I say aboutevery 90 days I have a new career because that’show much is changing in the process.” Similarly,Tammy Perkins of the Neighborhood ServicesDepartment put it this way, “It keeps managers andstaff members really fresh. I’ve been with the cityfor 18 years, but I haven’t ever been in a placewhere I’ve been able to kick back and say ’Yeah,I’ve got this job down, I know this job, and I don’t

“The Phoenix Futures Forum process

involved 30 citywide and village forums

and meetings leading up to 12 weeks of

intensive task force activity. More than

3,500 people participated in one or more

of these meetings. During the forums,

detailed notes were made of the comments

of participants as well as of speakers.

These comments were made in response to

the questions, ’What do you believe are

the most important challenges and oppor-

tunities which Phoenix must face in the

next 25 years?’ and ‘What are the most

important strategies and actions which you

believe should be taken to create the ideal

Phoenix?’”

— Government Performance Project, 2000, mfr-4.


have to hustle anymore.’” In fact, this seems to bepart of the reason that Phoenix has been able toretain the talent in its management team. Many ofthe managers we talked with have been in Phoenixfor 15 to 20 years. Yet none reported being bored,stagnated, or unchallenged in their jobs. In fact, itis quite the contrary. What they communicate is asense of excitement, energy, and a delight in facingthe challenges ahead.

In Phoenix, managers are expected to be general-ists with a sense of the “big picture” who canunleash the creative talents of employees. One ofthe things the city does to foster this attitude andavoid complacency is to move both programs andpeople around the city organization so that peoplecan gain new perspectives and new experiences.As people move around, they raise new questionsand consider new approaches. Mark Hughes, headof public information for the city, explained: “Wehave a team environment here. We push responsi-bility downward so that we really don’t spend a lotof time telling people what to do around here. Wekind of let them do their thing and then we talkabout how they’re doing. We’re coaches more thananything.” As generalists, managers are not neces-sarily expected to be subject matter experts in theareas they supervise. According to Lera Riley, “Theorganization puts stronger emphasis on the well-rounded manager as opposed to assuming, forexample, that we need an engineer to manageengineers.” Aviation Director Krietor agreed,“There’s definitely a philosophy here that comesfrom the top that if you’re a quality manager, youwill have a commitment to the city and that youwill understand the big picture, so you can managedifferent types of organizations.” For example, thepersonnel director came most recently from thepublic works department and the director of avia-tion was formerly in economic development. Thecity engineer recently moved to become the devel-opment services director and an assistant directorof water service became the city engineer.

This has been a very conscious strategy on the partof top management. Riley explained, “At somepoint in both Andrews’ and Fairbanks’ tenure ascity manager, they very consciously did ’fruit bas-ket turn over.’ They said they wanted to reconfig-ure and combine things to challenge people to begood managers as opposed to being just technicalexperts who had risen to management in their par-ticular areas.” In general, she continued, “Weencourage people to wander around the organiza-tion and get a different perspective.” This has sev-eral consequences for the style of managementdemonstrated in the departments across the city.First, it makes it more likely that managers willrely on the expertise of their employees. Second,as already mentioned, it helps people gain anunderstanding of the whole city organization and

Sheryl L. SculleyAssistant City Manager

Sheryl Sculley is the assistant city manager forthe City of Phoenix, the number two positionin Phoenix city government and a position shehas held since May 1990. She was a deputycity manager for the City of Phoenix fromJanuary 1989 to May 1990, and served asMayor Rimsza’s chief of staff in 1995. Prior tojoining the City of Phoenix management teamin January 1989, Sculley was city manager of Kalamazoo, Michigan, and worked for thecity a total of 15 years. Sculley has worked 26 years in city management.

Sculley earned a bachelor of science degree in journalism and political science from BallState University and a master’s degree in pub-lic administration from Western MichiganUniversity. She also graduated from HarvardUniversity’s John F. Kennedy School ofGovernment Program for Senior Executives in State and Local Government.

Sculley currently serves on the GreaterPhoenix Economic Council Board ofDirectors, the Downtown Phoenix PartnershipBoard of Directors, the Governor’s DiversityCouncil, and the Heard Museum Board ofTrustees. She served on the Valley of the SunUnited Way Board of Directors for six yearsand is a past president of the Arizona City/County Management Association, havingserved on that board for four years. Sculley isa graduate of the Phoenix Valley LeadershipProgram Class XII and the National LeadershipAmerica Program founded by the NationalWomen’s Resource Foundation.


organization-wide issues. Tammy Perkins observedthat as generalists, the challenge becomes one of“knowing when you need to know how muchabout a particular technical area, being able tolearn that technical area quickly, as the issues andthe policy perspectives come and go. But I thinkthat helps us keep a bigger picture.” Third, it pro-motes a problem solving orientation based on abroader perspective than might have otherwisebeen the case. As Lera Riley explained, “It forcesyou to look at problems and solving them basedon trying to take the fundamentals of what youwere doing before and asking yourself, ’How isthis like other things in the organization? How arethese things connected?’”

Finally, promoting a generalist management roleallows people to grow and develop within the orga-nization and enhances interdepartmental coopera-tion. Marsha Wallace agreed: “It keeps you on yourtoes and it keeps you innovative, and it allows youto look at new ways of doing things instead of beingin the same job for 10 or 20 years doing things thesame old way. The other thing it helps with is inter-departmental cooperation, because you really don’twant to do something that has an adverse effect onanother department when you know that in twomonths you may have that department.”

3. Building Relationships andFostering ParticipationA training handout from the Fire Departmentreads, “The most powerful, longest term, mostenduring organizational element = relationships.”This statement expresses another key aspect of thevalues which make up the organizational culture inthe City of Phoenix: that building personal relation-ships characterized by open communication, col-laboration, and mutual respect is an important partof what makes Phoenix successful.

Early in Marvin Andrews’ tenure a decision wasmade to build and maintain stronger relationshipsamong the people and organizations that wereimportant to helping the city serve its citizens.Unquestionably, one of the most important of thoserelationships is between elected officials and citymanagement. Up until that time, the practice hadbeen to have all communications with the councilgo through the city manager’s office. This had, on

occasion, led to miscommunication and frustrationon the part of elected officials. One of the firststeps Andrews took upon assuming his post was toopen up communication lines between elected offi-cials and managers in city departments. Heexplained that the “department heads were all sea-soned professionals so I thought, I’m going to openthis up as long as they keep deputy managersinformed of what is happening. It worked and that’sthe way we continued the whole time.” Andrewsalso made some important structural changes thathave continued to the present: “I put a deputymanager in the mayor’s office to act as liaison, andalso put a position in the council’s office as a coun-cil’s assistant. Those were tough positions, but itworked out very well.” These individuals workedwith the mayor and council, but also with the citymanager and his staff, and they became the keys tomaintaining open lines of communication andinformation between the two parts of city govern-ment. The current city manager still credits thesepositions as serving as an important link and chan-nel of communication and cooperation.

In part building on these structural arrangements,positive relationships have been cultivated overtime. Today, as Deputy City Manager Jack Tevlinmentioned, “There’s a very open relationshipbetween management and the political side of thecity.” This relationship goes beyond structural inno-vations that create formal lines of communication,however. Managers in the city have cultivated aprofessional and personal connection with the peo-ple in the offices of the mayor and council based onmutual respect and responsiveness. “There is a closepersonal bond between the mayor and council andthe staff of the city. Historically, the mayor andcouncil have had a great deal of respect for the staffand vice versa, and there’s an equal level of respon-siveness on both sides. We try to be responsive tothem, and they, in turn, have been responsive andresponsible when it comes to our suggestions.”

The cultivation of other relationships has beenimportant as well. Frank Fairbanks reported, “Wework very hard to build good relationships with ourunions. We have put a lot of effort in communicat-ing with them and inviting them into decisions.There is almost no significant programmatic deci-sions we make that we wouldn’t first go to the unionand talk with them about what we want to do and


ask their leadership to be involved in the process.We want their input.” Further, he explained, “wealso encourage them, if they think they see some-thing wrong in the organization, to just call and tellus and give us a chance to work it out.”

Inside the organization, communication and per-sonal relationships are viewed as an absolutelyessential element of organizational life. CityManager Fairbanks places a great premium on

communicating with and knowing city employees:“It is very important that I get a chance to talk withemployees and to communicate with them. Theyare where the action is.” For this reason, he regu-larly meets and talks with employees, shares hisideas and listens to theirs. Communication and lis-tening to employees is not considered the job ofthe city manager alone, however. The assumptionamong managers is that doing their jobs wellrequires the cultivation of relationships character-ized by open communication and cooperation. Thiscommunication, it is assumed, is not a merely amatter of memos, bulletin board postings, and pro-nouncements. Communication occurs in the con-text of a relationship. Public Works Director JuanMartin observed, “One of our philosophies is thatthere is no one best way to communicate. Wecommunicate in a way that we feel comfortablewith our employees.” That comfort, of course,comes from building relationships and personalbonds with the people you work with. For exam-ple, as the city works to increase service integra-tion, Gloria Hurtado said, “You can mandateservice integration, and you can force people to dosome things, but you won’t get people to truly col-laborate until they build relationships.”

These relationships are enhanced by, as well ascontribute to, the city’s commitment to open, broadinvolvement in decision making. In his study ofpublic and nonprofit organizations, Paul Light(1998) found that innovation is enhanced when

Jacques AventDeputy City Manager

Jacques Avent has served as deputy city man-ager of Phoenix since November 1992. Inthat role he has had oversight responsibilityfor the Finance Department, PersonnelDepartment, Police Department, PublicWorks Department, Housing Department,Human Services Department, and LawDepartment, and was responsible for devel-oping a new department of NeighborhoodServices. Through the NeighborhoodServices Department, Avent has had primaryresponsibility for all redevelopment andneighborhood revitalization programs.

Avent joined the City of Phoenix staff in 1989as executive assistant to the City Council andthen served as executive assistant to the citymanager from 1990 to 1992. Prior to that, heserved as vice president for public finance atSecurity Pacific Merchant Bank in New Yorkfor two years. Avent also was on the staff ofthe National League of Cities for 13 years,the last nine as director of service programs.He also served on the staff of the NationalAssociation of Regional Councils, theMetropolitan Washington Council ofGovernments, and the National UrbanCoalition.

He currently serves as a board member of theValley of the Sun United Way, NeighborhoodHousing Services of Phoenix, PhoenixSalvation Army, Arizona Senior Olympics,and Phoenix LISC.

He is a graduate of Howard University.

“During the development of the City’s

budget, Phoenix conducts 11 community

budget hearings to get citizen input. Staff

and council representatives present a trial

budget to the community. Changes to the

budget are made based on problems and

needs brought forward by citizens.”



organizations become more democratic and shiftfrom centralized rules to a more participatory style.Clearly this is the case in Phoenix. When Phoenixis going to try something new or institute a change,the norm is to involve everyone who has a stake ora role to play. Marvin Andrews feels that city man-agers “need to encourage ideas from everyone inthe city. When you get big, that gets even more dif-ficult. That’s why I tried to inculcate in the organi-zation that ideal — that’s the way things are done.”Today, that is still the way things are done, andinvolvement includes both people inside the orga-nization and the citizens they serve.

Employee involvement is seen not only as the bestway to achieve implementation of new ideas andprograms, but also as the way to develop the bestprograms. The first step, however, is reaching a con-sensus on what needs to be changed and why. “Ifyou need to change a unit, and you can get to thepoint where everybody in the unit really under-stands why the change is occurring, and you’ve gota good number advocating the change, you’re goingto be more likely to succeed than if it comes fromthe top.” Once the need for and willingness tochange is established, involvement is the basis fordesigning the change. Deputy City Manager AltonWashington was more specific: “Everyone has tohave a role and everyone has to have an opportu-nity to make recommendations and to help facilitatechange in the organization. If you limit the opportu-nities for involvement, then you limit your ability togenerate the ideas and the fixes that work.”

4. Serving CitizensOverlaid across this culture of pride, new chal-lenges, relationships, and communication is a valueon serving citizens and the public. The people wetalked with evidenced a commitment to public ser-vice as the underlying purpose of everything theydo: the way they challenge themselves and eachother, the pride they take in their work, and theirefforts to be professional, responsive, and open —all revolve around the goal of serving the public.This public service ethic seems to be an integralpart of their professional identity. In other words,improvements are sought, innovations explored,and risks are taken for one purpose: to provide bet-ter services and be more responsive to the public. “Idon’t know if our good customer service is a resultof our innovative tendencies, or if we’ve become

innovative because we want to provide good cus-tomer service,” Juan Martin remarked. On the otherhand, maybe it doesn’t really matter which onecame first. In Phoenix, innovation and public ser-vice seem to go hand in hand.

City Clerk Vicky Meil expressed this public serviceethic clearly when she said, “One of the things Itell my employees regularly is that they will neverget in trouble if they are taking care of the cus-tomer. Ultimately that’s what it’s all about.”Emphasis is placed on the idea that each individualworks for and serves the people of Phoenix. SherylSculley explained, “A groundskeeper is not just rid-ing on the mower, but serving as an ambassador forthe city. We value that and encourage it andreward it, even if it’s just a note or a word ofthanks.” In an independently conducted employeesurvey, over 90 percent agreed with the statement“The people in my work group work hard to treatthe customer well.”

Assistant to the City Manager Ed Zuercherexplained that the relationship between the cityand the council is the starting place for this publicservice focus. He stated, “Respecting the ability ofthe elected officials to signal key issues and con-cerns from the community early on has been a keyto our success.” He cited the city’s seamless serviceinitiative as one example of how “professional staffcan succeed because the elected officials havetheir fingers on the pulse of the community.”Zuercher stated that the city manager “was hearingfrom the city council that the community was frus-trated about contacting the city and gettingbounced around on the phone before the right per-son was found to answer the question. Because ofthat, Frank [Fairbanks] worked with staff to developa program to address that concern, called ’seamlessservice.’ Now employees are trained to be the con-

“The city has a comprehensive system of

performance indicators, but cites citizen

satisfaction as “our most important results

measure.”



tact point for the citizen…. A pamphlet of informa-tion was developed for field employees to use.Most importantly, the attitude has changed thateveryone needs to take ownership of an inquiryrather than passing it off.”

Recognition of the need for ongoing citizeninvolvement permeates the entire organization.Managers do not assume that everything is okay if citizens aren’t complaining. Rather, there is anactive and ongoing effort to involve citizens indetermining how the city will establish prioritiesand how it will provide services. Lera Riley com-mented on her experiences:

Citizens have a stake and are involved try-ing to define things. There is a necessity forcitizens to feel engaged in our business,

helping us determine how we are going tospend money according to the prioritiesthey establish for what they want the com-munity to look like. I can remember goingto meetings, particularly in the early ’90swhen resources were very, very tight. Theeconomy was bad generally and the cityhad to tighten and change programs dra-matically in order to bring our expensesinto line with revenues. We had lots ofpeople showing up at meetings being veryclear about what their priorities were.Because things have gotten much better,the numbers of people are decreasing. Butpassiveness in terms of citizen involvementis not good for the city. We’re doing well,but part of the reason is that we havealways had an active citizenry.

George Britton is the deputy city managerresponsible for Development Services, InfillHousing, Information Technology andTelecommunications, Emergency Programs,Water Services and Water Strategy. During1994, he served as chief of staff to MayorThelda Williams. Prior to this appointment, hewas deputy city manager with responsibility forthe Human Services, City Clerk, Housing, EqualOpportunity, Fire, Engineering and ArchitecturalServices, and Street Transportation Departments,as well as Environmental Programs and theEducation Office. He came to Phoenix in 1986as water and environmental resources man-ager/deputy city manager.

Prior to joining the city, he served as executiveassistant to Arizona Governor Bruce Babbittfrom 1980 to early 1986. As executive assis-tant, Britton chaired the Governor’s Cabinet,oversaw state agencies dealing with finance,transportation, natural resources, environment,capital development, and health. He served asinterim director of the Department ofAdministration in 1982 and again in 1985.Britton served on Governor Rose Mofford’stransition team.

Before joining the Governor’s staff, he servedas the director of municipal utilities and assis-tant to the city manager in the City ofScottsdale, Arizona. Britton served in the AirForce Reserve from 1970 to 1978.

Britton is a member of the Governor’s WaterManagement Commission Arizona WaterResources Advisory Board, was an advisor tothe National Performance Review’s Federal-State-Local Team, past chair of the State WaterQuality Advisory Council, and is Vice-Chair ofthe Arizona Town Hall. He chaired the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency’s LocalGovernment Advisory Committee and is amember of the University of Arizona’s Collegeof Business National Advisory Board. He is arecipient of the Arizona Superior ServiceAward from the American Society for PublicAdministration and the Hispanic NetworkRecognition for Leadership for the NewMillennium.

He received his undergraduate degree from the University of Oregon, a master’s in publicadministration from the University of SouthernCalifornia, and completed the John F. KennedySchool of Government Senior Executives inState and Local Government Program atHarvard University.

George W. BrittonDeputy City Manager


Again, the belief is not only that citizen involve-ment helps with implementation, but that theirinvolvement makes programs better. David Richertgave the example of the city’s award-winning recy-cling program: “We couldn’t afford it all at onetime, so we went out to the people and said, ’OK,if we start it here, this is what it’s going to cost andhere is how we will expand the service.’ Based oncitizen comments, we moved the project from thesouth part of the city to the north. Now it’s proba-bly one of the best in the country.”

Deputy City Manager Jacques Avent expressed asimilar commitment to citizen involvement whenhe remarked, “The success of the NeighborhoodServices Department is totally dependent on theability to involve everybody else in doing the work.The reality is that a single department with limitedresources can’t do all the things a neighborhoodneeds to help them.”

Managers across the organization talk about thispublic service responsibility. They openly reject theidea that they are the “experts” who know bestabout what citizens need. Rather, the citizens areconsidered the experts in this respect. TammyPerkins recalls, “Traditional city government used to go out to communities, particularly low- andmoderate-income communities and say, ’We knowwhat’s best for you,’ and then we did it. Now thefocus really is on spending time in these communi-ties and asking the leadership what they want to doand then figuring out how we adjust and facilitatecity government to provide them with the level ofservice that they need.”

Harold Hurtt, chief of police, also emphasized thatserving the public in this manner takes continualeffort and attention. He places an emphasis in hisdepartment on being proactive in working withneighborhoods and staying “on the cutting edge inresponding to our citizens.” Similarly, David Krietorbelieves that serving the public and being responsiveto citizens is, in large measure, what his job isabout. “I spend at least four or five nights a week insome type of a neighborhood or community meet-ing. It’s just expected that you would do that,” hesaid. Supervisors are expected to use the public ser-vice filter in evaluating what they do and how theymight do it better. As a training guide used in theFire Department states, “Bosses must continually

challenge any and every organizational activity witha standard question: ’What does what we are talkingabout or doing have to do with delivering service toMrs. Smith?’ Any blank looks or negative answersshould produce a pause/discussion/redirection.”

5. Trusting and Empowering People People who work for the City of Phoenix trust eachother. That trust is extended in every direction and isenacted in thought, word, and deed. Many point tothe legacy of former city manager Marvin Andrews,who worked hard to instill this value. At one levelwhat he did was simple. He decided that he wouldsimply trust the people he worked with to do theirbest and to achieve excellent results. In practice, ofcourse, putting that trust into action was not so sim-ple. It required persistence and consistency. “Weneeded to emphasize results. To get results you helppeople set goals and then give them the tools andtraining to do their job adequately. So we embarkedon a lot of training programs, particularly for newsupervisors.” Once trained, he trusted them to dotheir jobs. “A lot of other city managers thought Iwas crazy. They would say to me, ’You’ve got allthese people out here and all these things going on.How do you know what’s going on? You’ve got tokeep your finger on what’s happening.’ To me, it’sall about trust. I’ve got to trust my managers to do agood job and they have to trust their people to dothe same thing,” noted Andrews.

There is also a great deal of trust between thecouncil and the city staff. As Ed Zuercherexplained, “It is a vitally important piece of oureffectiveness that there is trust between the electedbody and the professional management that allowsfor an exchange of ideas, sharing of credit, and bet-ter, more responsive service to the community.”This trust has been built up over the years and isbased, again, on open communication, mutualrespect, and a recognition of the contribution ofeach in serving the public. Today, Chief Brunacinireported, “The people who have managed thisplace have done an excellent job in creating sys-tems and processes and experiences where peopletrust each other, and they’re basically willing tochange. Because of this trust, change isn’t threaten-ing to us. It’s just what’s next in the process.” Infact, one of the sections of a training manual forsupervisors in the Fire Department is entitled simply, “Build trust or go home.”


This trust means that managers not only encourageinnovation, but also allow people to take the reinsof projects they propose. Frank Fairbanks explainedthat when he listens to a proposal for a new idea,“I say to myself, there is probably more to begained in letting them make this change than inmaking some little, tiny improvement in it or hav-ing an argument over it. If they sense that they canput together some sort of improvement in serviceand all they get from management are commentsabout we don’t like this or that doesn’t work orwhy don’t you do this another way, the energy andcommitment can be lost. We really work at notbeing negative.” This approach recognizes that giv-ing someone freedom and control over a projectmay have more potential benefit for the organiza-tion in the long run than any marginal improve-

ments a manager might make. So, in Phoenix,because you trust the people you work with, youapplaud their efforts to try new approaches, evenwhen the approach they propose is not exactly theone you would have chosen. Rather, you trust themand let them do their jobs.

Many people think of empowerment as merely adifferent word for delegation. In Phoenix, the atti-tude towards empowerment is more like thatexpressed by Culbert and McDonough (1985):

Empowerment is the key to understandingtrust and trusting relationships in an organi-zation. No clear-thinking individual inter-nalizes a system that is not personally andprofessionally empowering to him or her.

George Flores began his career with the City of Phoenix 28 years ago as a management aideintern in the city manager’s office. Flores waspromoted to the position of deputy city man-ager in September of 1998 and is currentlyresponsible to the city manager for oversightand direction of the Arts Commission, CityClerk Department, Equal Opportunity Depart-ment, Human Services Department, and GoalsCompliance & Disparity Programs. Flores provides lead management support to the CityCouncil Family, Arts and Education Subcom-mittee and the Mayor’s Heritage Commission, and is also a member of the City Manager’s Residency Committee.

Prior to this appointment, Flores was the direc-tor of the Development Services Department for 11 years. This department is responsible forissuing building permits and inspecting all pri-vate development projects within Phoenix. Inthis capacity, he reorganized the city’s develop-ment services from six departments into a sin-gle department in order to provide a moreefficient and effective approval process.

Previously, Flores served as director of theEconomic Development Department for nearlytwo years. During that time, he managed theredevelopment efforts of downtown as well assix neighborhood redevelopment areas. TheArizona Center, the Mercado, and the FrenchQuarter were several of the downtown redevel-opment projects which resulted from programsunder Flores’ leadership.

In the 1970s, Flores worked in managementassistant positions in the City of Phoenix aswell as the cities of Scottsdale and Glendale.

Flores is active in the community and belongsto many professional organizations. He is cur-rently the Arizona City/County ManagementAssociation (ACMA) President-Elect and hasserved in several capacities with the Interna-tional City/County Management Association(ICMA) including president of the ICMA Hispanic Network.

Flores has received the City Manager’sExcellence Award twice during his career fromtwo different Phoenix city managers for his various management innovations.

A native of Phoenix, Flores earned his master’s inpublic administration in 1976 and a bachelor ofarts degree in 1971 from Arizona State University.

George FloresDeputy City Manager


An organization’s management can onlysucceed when its representatives understandthis fact and comprehend what individualsneed in order to feel empowered (182).

In Phoenix, empowerment is based on the assump-tion and expectation that each employee will inter-nalize organizational values not only because theyhave an opportunity to help shape them, but alsobecause they are empowered by them. Eachemployee is given the personal responsibility andopportunity to serve the public, while the organiza-tion takes the responsibility to support and to equipeach person to do so. In order to empower employ-ees, the expectation is that managers will work toensure that people have the opportunity and free-dom to do what is right and to do their jobs well.The idea that people will simply do what they aretold is rejected not only as impractical, but also asdestructive to the organization. And that’s the citymanager’s view: “We don’t have a world where youdo what you’re told when you’re told. We have aworld where every one of us in the city is responsi-ble for working together to improve the community.”

When everyone is willing to take responsibility,there can be many innovations going on at once.Mayor Skip Rimsza, when he was being inter-viewed for a story on Phoenix’s “A” report card inUSA Today (January 31, 2000) was asked about aPublic Works Department test of a garbage truckthat doubles its capacity by pulling a trailer. Themayor was quoted as responding, “See, I didn’tknow anything about that.” Waving his arms in theair, he continued, “That’s what I love about thiscity.” This attitude of empowerment, coupled withtrust and mutual respect, results in an environmentin which managers and directors are not expected,nor are they encouraged, to control all of the deci-sions in their units. Deputy City Manager GeorgeBritton clarified, “One of the things this organiza-tion does is that it will adopt innovations veryquickly compared to most larger organizations.And I think a lot of that is because of the distribu-tive processes — the philosophy of distribution —of empowerment…. Decisions are made at the ser-vice level more than they’re made at the centraloffice.” Part of the role of the deputy city manager,then, is to support and work with departments toensure they have what they need to implementimprovements. This not only helps departments

with individual innovation projects, but also estab-lishes a positive climate for ongoing efforts toimprove. Gloria Hurtado put it this way: “We’reprovided with the tools and support — that keepspeople innovating and doing new things.”

The idea is that this sense of empowerment shouldpermeate the entire organization. Once again,Fairbanks explained, it starts at the top, but theintent is to extend it throughout the organization.“Part of my leadership role is a responsibility toempower management. The deputies have a senseof empowerment, and through them, the depart-ment heads have a sense of empowerment. But Ireally spend a lot of my time communicating thiswith all levels by walking around the building talk-ing to people about it. We talk about how it is up toeach of us. One of the things we all say to people isthat you can’t leave it all up to the manager. Eachone of us needs to make a difference, and the sys-tem has to allow people to make improvements.”

Fairbanks also believes that empowerment isenhanced when managers interfere as little as pos-sible. In other words, when someone is excitedabout an idea, has done their homework, andwants to try something, sometimes the best thing

“To more effectively serve the community,

patrol lieutenants are becoming ‘area man-

agers’ and have been given the responsibil-

ity of covering specific geographic areas of

the city. Results-oriented and customer-

driven, this concept allows the community

to have a closer relationship with police

officials who are accountable for the prob-

lems in their assigned area, 24 hours a

day.”

— City of Phoenix 1999 Annual Citizens Report, 6.


a manager can do is get out of the way. He stated,“If someone wants to innovate in a department inhow they deliver services, we tend to go with it,even if we have doubts. We’ll raise our concerns,and obviously if we think it would be a disaster, wewouldn’t say yes. But, if someone is committed andexcited, even if we’re not completely sure it’s sucha good idea, we try to allow people to make thechange so that they have the sense that they can.”Doing so, he said, gives people a sense of empow-erment to continue to try new things. In Phoenixthat is the crux of the issue — they try to managechange efforts in a manner that will not only resultin success, but also encourage future innovation.

6. Enacting Core ValuesIn the mid-1990s, the city manager asked theemployees of the City of Phoenix how to make thecity even more successful. Hundreds of employeesresponded, and from their responses a new state-ment of vision and values was developed. That state-ment now appears on every business card, as well asin reports, speeches, conversations, videos, posters,and even refrigerator magnets. As one employee saidlaughingly, “It’s everywhere!” It states:

We are dedicated to serving our customers.We work as a team. We each do all we can.We learn, change, and improve. We focus on results. We work with integrity.We make Phoenix better!

The elegance and simplicity of these statementsmay belie their importance. The purpose of thevision and values statement was to communicateand inculcate core organizational values.Importantly, however, the vision and values state-ment was in large measure based on the valuesexpressed by the workers themselves. Since itsdevelopment, this statement of vision has beenincorporated into all aspects of city government.Reports are organized by it, speeches are writtenaround it, departments and individuals evaluatethemselves by their contribution to it. Maybe moreimportantly, they talk about it and they do it.

Jack Tevlin remarked on the importance of puttingthings in a simple and straightforward way. “One of

Jack Tevlin Deputy City Manager

Jack Tevlin was appointed deputy city managerfor the City of Phoenix in December 1991. Hehas responsibility for the Budget & Research,Planning, Public Transit, and Street Transporta-tion Departments, and the education function.Prior to this, he served as chief of staff in themayor’s office in 1990, as executive assistant tothe city manager from 1989 to 1990, and asexecutive assistant to the Phoenix City Councilfrom 1982 to 1989. Before coming to the Cityof Phoenix, Tevlin served as a staff assistant forthe Maricopa Association of Governments.

Tevlin received his B.A. in political science fromMarist College in Poughkeepsie, New York, andhis M.P.A. from Arizona State University.

Phoenix’s statement of vision and values

is “incorporated into all aspects of the

city government. The six values were

communicated to all the employees

through a series of cascading meetings,

so that employees on all levels had a

chance to discuss the intent of the vision

and values. Vision and values are in front

of the employees all day long — business

cards, pens, posters, videos, speeches,

and recognition.”

— Barrett and Greene, 2000, 7.


the geniuses of Frank,” he said, “is that he’s a verysimple communicator. And it works. Our recentemployee survey demonstrated that 93 percent ofour employees are aware of our vision and values.”Beyond talking about it, however, managers in theCity of Phoenix work to enact these values. AsChief Hurtt said, “I don’t think it’s old-fashioned tosay we lead by example.” In other words, one getsthe sense in talking with managers that the state-ment of vision and values is more than words — infact, more than simply what they do, it embodieswho they are as managers of the City of Phoenix.

In describing the importance of Phoenix’s visionand values, Lera Riley emphasized, “An importantpart of the message is that it’s up to each of us.When we talk about vision and values, we talkabout how it’s our responsibility to perform well,make the community better and we do it as a team.But it’s up to each one of us to do what we can.”To make it work, “The whole organization needs tothink like this. We’ve taken a fairly small list ofthings that say this is our organization and theseare the values that we have.” Each unit, depart-ment, and employee is then challenged to figureout “What am I and what is my organization doingto exemplify that? How do I fit into the whole?”The statement gets “a bunch of people talkingabout it, and it becomes embedded more andmore,” observed Riley.

Expressing and enacting values is part and parcel ofbeing a successful manager in Phoenix. As GeorgeFlores commented, “I believe the vast majority ofour managers have had positive personal valuesthat have transcended anything of a negative naturethey had to work with — or any obstacle — andthat the employees below them have picked up onthose things and that they work within that samespirit.” Moreover, by making values explicit, Rileyexplained, “we tell employees about what we cher-ish about what they do well and what may not beas valued in the organization.” In all of these dis-cussions, however, the idea that predominates isthat values are not simply a nice and tidy set ofstatements of principles in Phoenix. They aretreated as catalysts and reinforcements for behaviorand defining expressions of the culture of the city.

7. Respecting Employees andTreating Them Well “Ultimately, successful companies and successful

organizations are good to their employees, andthey support, train, reward, and are nice to thepeople in their organization. And that’s probablythe most fundamental thing.” This comment byExecutive Assistant to the City Council RickNaimark neatly summed up a fundamental culturalnorm in the City of Phoenix: people from the top tothe bottom of this organization are important, andall are respected and valued. The assumption is thatthe organization has become successful and willcontinue its success because of the effort and com-mitment of the employees who work there.

When Frank Fairbanks talks about the people whowork for the city, his comments reflect feelings ofrespect and confidence. He consistently givescredit for Phoenix’s success to the city’s employees,he clearly believes in them, and he knows that theywill do an excellent job. If they don’t, then it’s theorganization’s fault. “We have great employeeshere. I try to create an environment in which theemployees have an opportunity to have an impactto improve service delivery. Employees want to doa good job. If you can harness their talents at theservice delivery level, they’re in a lot better positionto make positive things happen.” He went on tosay, “It’s important that people feel that they canmake a difference and that people will supportthem in making a difference. We have great

“Some of the best ideas for improving city

services come from our own employees.

Last year 291 employees submitted sugges-

tions, many of which were put into practice

throughout the city. Forty-one suggestions

resulted in more than $1.6 million in cost

savings or cost avoidance improvements.”



employees, and they’ll jump at that. It’s whenemployees feel that their supervisor won’t let themchange or that there will never be resources to dosomething differently that they stop trying.”

It is clear that people who work for the city havepositive feelings towards their employer as well. Asnoted previously, 97 percent of employees agreewith the statement “The City is a good place towork.” With regard to their immediate supervisors,88 percent of employees agree their supervisor“allows me to use my judgment” and almost 80 per-cent agree that “we treat each other with respect.”As Budget Director Ceil Pettle explained, “We feelvalued and that makes us do a good job, and we’revalued because we do a good job. I think it’s kind ofa self-feeding system. This is a great employer.”

This helps create a very positive environment inwhich people seem to enjoy their jobs and liketheir work environment. As Naimark said simply, “Ilike coming to work every day.” It seems clear thatmost of the people who work for the City ofPhoenix like their jobs, and a significant part ofthose positive feelings are based on the fact thatemployees feel valued, respected, and listened to.

Although the idea of simply “being nice” to peoplemay seem to be an old-fashioned platitude with lit-tle place amidst the complexities and challenges ofbig city management, it is clearly a norm that has asignificant and positive influence on the peoplewho work for the City of Phoenix.

8. Taking Risks and Learning FromExperienceWhen we asked what advice he would give othermanagers based on his experience in Phoenix,Marvin Andrews said, “Don’t be afraid to take arisk, look at change as opportunity to get thingsdone, and move forward.” Clearly this remains acentral value in the organizational culture in theCity of Phoenix. George Britton put it simply andcompellingly when he said, “Thoughtful risk —rational risk — is sort of our touchstone for sur-vival.” The assumption is that risk is an inherent partof innovation, and innovation is necessary to suc-cess. Kevin Keogh reiterated this idea. “When weare trying things, looking ahead, and anticipatinghow we will have to change, when we are trying toevaluate options and make informed decisions —there will be risk. There’s just so much change goingon, I don’t know how you avoid risk.”

In Phoenix, the emphasis is not on trying to avoidrisk, but rather on finding ways to use risk construc-tively to help the organization improve and learn.So people are not only allowed, but also encour-aged to try new things, even if there is risk involved.Marsha Wallace explained, “Our city managershave had a leadership style that encourages peopleto be innovative and lets them take some risks.” Partof this willingness is based on trust. As Bozemanand Kingsley found in their study of risk culture inpublic and private organizations, “managers whotrust their employees are likely to have employeeswho will take calculated risks” (1998, 116).

Marsha WallaceDeputy City Manager

Marsha Wallace has served as deputy citymanager of Phoenix since December 1997. Inthat role, she has oversight responsibility forthe Aviation, Personnel, and Fire Departments,and the International and Sister CitiesCommission programs.

Wallace joined the City of Phoenix staff in1980, and served as executive assistant to thecity manager before being named as deputycity manager. Prior to coming to the city, sheworked as a performance auditor for the Stateof Arizona, and a district program manager forthe State Department of Economic Security.

She has a master of public administrationdegree from Arizona State University and abachelor of arts degree in human developmentand psychology from the University of Kansas.

“Phoenix was the first major city in

the country to automate its garbage

collection service.”



What else can an organization do to encouragecalculated risk? Marvin Andrews answered, “Youcan encourage risk by not raising hell with peopleabout failure, and then trying to encourage them tocome up with more ideas. That isn’t always the eas-iest thing to do. A couple of times when somethingfailed, I had to step up and take responsibility withthe council and the mayor. After a while, peopleget the idea that they can try something out andmaybe it will work and maybe it won’t.” Either way,they won’t be abandoned or left out on a limb.

Clearly the people who work for city governmentin Phoenix have gotten the idea. Part of the reasonis that they know they can rely on the people theywork with to support them and not turn on them ifthings don’t go as planned. “Ideas and suggestionsare actively solicited and often tried,” AltonWashington remarked. “That doesn’t mean allchange works. To me the real test is when you initi-ate something and it doesn’t work. I’ve found inthis setting that you don’t have the recriminationthat sometimes you find in other organizations.”Echoing this sentiment, Ceil Pettle observed,“Because many of us have been here a long timewe kind of have some information under our beltsand some expertise that allows us to look for betterways of doing things and to test them. It’s alsonever been threatening. It’s never been somethingwe’ve really been whacked with.” City Auditor BobWingenroth said the message is clear: “There areprobably 15 or 20 mechanisms, and subculturalmessages and expectations that add up to this: It’sokay to take a risk and it’s okay to make a mistake.”

Like his predecessor, Frank Fairbanks feels stronglythat the way managers respond to problems is akey factor in developing and maintaining an innov-ative culture. He told us, “When there are prob-lems we work really hard not to punish people; wetry to solve the problem. Sometimes it’s tough,especially if you get a bad newspaper article, andespecially when the newspaper article is right andfair! But when there are problems, we work reallyhard not to punish people and hang them out todry. We try to solve the problem instead.”

9. Recognizing and RewardingPeople’s EffortsIn addition to not punishing people for failure, theother side of encouraging innovation is rewardingand recognizing people when there is success.Marvin Andrews emphasized this theme during histenure. “We worked to recognize the efforts ofemployees. For example, one of the things weemphasized was teamwork. We set up a quarterlyprogram where outstanding teams were recog-nized. They were invited to breakfast with their

“The city’s employee excellence awards

program recognizes outstanding employee

performance. Once a year, employees,

supervisors, and managers can nominate

teams or individuals for special recogni-

tion based on criteria such as exceptional

performance, solving an extraordinary

problem, implementing an innovative

idea, an outstanding act resulting in recog-

nition from the public, exceptional sup-

port, or contribution to the seamless

service mission. Winners are selected by a

committee of employees and receive an

award and photo with the mayor and city

manager. Each city department also has

programs to reward and recognize

employees for their hard work and dedica-

tion to excellence.”


families and it was videotaped and shown on thecity’s public television station. That went extremelywell. I think they are still doing it. Someonedubbed it ’Muffins with Marv’!”

Reward and recognition of effort and accomplish-ment continues to be an important and visibleaspect of organizational life in Phoenix. “We do alot with rewards, celebrations, and events. We tryto create a positive benefit of taking a risk so that ifsomeone is willing to stick their neck out and itworks well, there is really a big pay off. This holdsfor the whole organization, whether you are apolice officer, a supervisor, or a middle manager,”Frank Fairbanks said. In a similar vein, GeorgeBritton emphasized that positive reinforcementbegins with the executive team and extendsthroughout the organization. “At every monthlydepartment head meeting, if somebody has donean article or something it is recognized, it’s cele-brated, it’s passed around and the peers see that.”

Because of the positive relationship that the cityoffices have built with the council and councilstaff, people also report that they are confident thatthe council will recognize their accomplishmentsand successes as well. Bob Wingenroth stated,“Our council also supports us. People don’t go tocouncil meetings expecting to get beat up, and ifwe hit a home run, they pat us on the back likeyou wouldn’t believe.”

Interestingly, Frank Fairbanks thinks it is importantto not only reward the people directly involved inthe innovation, but also the people who facilitatethose improvements and don’t “get in the way” ofnew ideas. “Sometimes managers and supervisorscan become threatened when successful innova-tions come from their employees — afraid theymight look like they are not doing their job.” So, hesaid, “If some employees or middle managers orsupervisors in a department come up with a changeand improve service, we also lavish praise on thedepartment head, because they really did play arole by just allowing it to happen, by not obstruct-ing it, or not being negative about the change.”

Alton J. WashingtonDeputy City Manager

Alton Washington was appointed deputy citymanager for the City of Phoenix on June 29,1998. In this role he currently has responsibil-ity for the Law Department, Engineering andArchitectural Services Department, and theParks, Recreation and Library Department, aswell as the Family Advocacy Center and theOffice of Environmental Programs.

Prior to this appointment, Washington servedthe City of Phoenix for eight years as directorof the Human Services Department. In thiscapacity, his primary duties included adminis-trative responsibilities for 17 senior centers;employment and training programs for low-income people and meeting the labor forceneeds of the City’s economic developmentefforts; education programming for pre-school-ers in the Head Start program as well as socialworkers in select elementary, middle, and highschools; five family service centers providingemergency assistance to needy individuals andfamilies; program support for the homeless;and information systems support for theHuman Services Department. Washington hasalso served Phoenix as deputy public worksdirector for three years. In that position, he hadmanagement responsibility for telecommunica-tions, energy conservation, contracts adminis-tration, and administrative support functions.

In addition, Washington has served in a varietyof management positions at the state and locallevels. He earned his bachelor of science(political science) and master’s in publicadministration at Arizona State University. Heis a member of several professional organiza-tions including the International City/CountyManagement Association, American Society forPublic Administration, U.S. Conference of CityHuman Services Officials Board of Directors,Academy of Political Science, NationalAssociation of Community Action Agencies,and Arizona Community Action Association.


10. Building a Stable Foundationand Staying the CourseFor a city known as an “innovation machine” itmay seem odd to talk about the importance of sta-bility. Perhaps somewhat paradoxically, a key les-son from the Phoenix experience is that stability iscritical in creating a culture that embraces change.While these two ideas can be seen as being at oddswith one another, Frank Fairbanks told us, “Stabilityhelps create an environment for change.” InPhoenix, stability and constancy have, in manyways, created a firm and steady foundation fromwhich to innovate and take chances. As Jack Tevlinclaimed, “This is a very stable environment on boththe management and political side.” This stability isnot, however, a matter of holding still. Rather, it isbased on a number of elements, most particularlyassuring that systems are reliable, information isavailable, and that people know they can rely oneach other, their managers, and the organization.

Over the years, investments have been made increating a sound and reliable system of manage-ment information, including budgetary, accounting,and performance data, that helps managers see theresults of their efforts to improve and innovate. AsFrank Fairbanks explained, “We have good systems— a very active auditing system, a very strongaccounting system, a very strong measurement sys-tem, good personnel control, and good budgetingsystems. The existence of those systems gives youthe freedom to take more chances because youknow you’re not going to get too far out of whack.”The information provided through those systemshelps the city highlight problems, track progress,and identify results. Rick Naimark agreed when hesaid, “Resources are important to the innovationprocess because you have got to have the resourcesto create new programs and to do new things. Butresources are also important because innovation isenhanced by having good information technology.”Good information, he explained, allows them toinnovate and monitor the results. Sound informa-tion systems and a strong budgeting process meansthe city can allow departments freedom in theirbudget to reallocate their funds and to find newways of delivering services.

Another important piece of the stability seems to bethat once people come to work for the city they

tend to stay. At the risk of understatement, when 97percent of your employees think the city is a goodplace to work, it bolsters recruitment and retention.This longevity is very evident at the managementlevel. It’s not that the city doesn’t hire new peoplefrom outside the organization; in fact, a number ofnew directors from outside Phoenix were hired inrecent years. But there is a core of people whohave been with the city for a long time. TammyPerkins described the effect of this long tenure.“We’ve known each other forever. And because allof us have moved around, we’ve worked with eachother. So it’s easier to avoid getting caught in a nar-row ’silo’ perspective. As we work together, it’s notjust about our own departments. It’s about what’sthe right thing to do for the city.” This familiaritywith each other and each other’s programs lends

Once a month, the city manager’s execu-

tive report highlights accomplishments

and tabulates how the city performed in

hundreds of ways, such as number of

community volunteer hours in human ser-

vices; average time of criminal case from

arraignment to conclusion; telephone hold

times; on-time performance for Dial-A-

Ride; and the average wait for a zoning

hearing, an emergency call response, and

a water leak repair. In an easy-to-read for-

mat, the report presents measures of orga-

nizational indicators compared to

performance in other cities, as well as

external and internal measures of current

and past performance.


some predictability and stability to an environmentcharacterized by change. Stability is also achievedby treating each other in a consistently professionaland respectful manner.

So, perhaps one of the most fundamental lessonsthat can be learned from the Phoenix experience isthat building a culture of innovation requires con-sistency, persistence, and time. As noted at thebeginning of this section, the culture that hasserved as the basis for all the city’s accomplish-ments was built over many years. Further, it is aculture built on many factors that are both interde-pendent and mutually reinforcing. Over time, thesefactors collectively come to define “the way we dothings around here.” Chief Brunacini convincinglyargued that change had become a part of the insti-tution of city government: “One of the hallmarks ofPhoenix is that we have developed the approach orthe philosophy that change is a process, not anevent. If you hang around here very long, you seethat there’s just a lot of change that’s going on allthe time. So it becomes more of a way of life thansomething that you react to.”

When you ask people how it all began or how theculture was established, they find it difficult toexplain. They just say, “That’s the way we’ve alwaysdone it.” Bob Wingenroth said as much, “Your job isnot to do what you’re doing now, but is to do some-thing better every year. When I joined this organiza-tion 20 years ago, I think that ethic was part of theplace already.” Marvin Andrews knew it might takea long time, but Phoenix has been able to consis-tently promote a set of values over time. “It takes along time to institutionalize change. When westarted some of this, some of the people I talked tosaid that it would take nine or 10 years to get itaccepted by everybody. They told me it was a long-term thing we were getting into, and it was. It washard from year to year to see where we were mak-ing much progress. But then when you go back fiveor six years, you can see that it has changed quite abit. But changing culture is always a long-termprocess. It’s something you just have to keep work-ing at.” Phoenix has clearly benefited from a seriesof managers who were willing to keep working onbuilding and sustaining a culture of innovation.


Based on the lessons learned from the Phoenixexperience, where does a manager interested inbuilding a culture of innovation and a record ofaccomplishment begin? The short answer is that youbegin everywhere at once by promoting a processof change that builds the capacity for future innova-tion. Remember Frank Fairbanks’ remark, “There’snot just one thing you do. We do a lot of things.”

The Phoenix experience teaches us that the devel-opment of an innovative culture or “root system”means paying attention to core values and doing alittle bit of everything all at one time, workingthrough and with people across and outside theorganization. As a model, Phoenix teaches us thatin order to inculcate core values, people need to beinvolved in defining them in a widely shared andopen process in which each individual not only hasthe opportunity to participate, but also to under-stand his or her role in promoting those values. Itteaches us to examine our assumptions about peo-ple and challenges us to then act on those assump-tions. It urges us to question what it means to be amanager and then take action to enhance thosemanagement skills that are most needed. It instructsus to support people, train and equip them to do agood job, and then trust them, let go, and get out ofthe way. It teaches us that the values of public ser-vice and citizen engagement must be at the fore-front of everything we do. Finally, it teaches us thatin developing and implementing improvements, wedo so by involving everyone and respecting, honor-ing, and acting on their contributions.

The City of Phoenix has a culture that has built uponitself, as one aspect has reinforced and reflectedanother. For example, trusting people builds responsi-bility; responsibility, in turn, builds trust. Involvingpeople and valuing them makes them more willing toparticipate in change. As they do so, pride and confi-dence grow. Their willingness to participate in changebased on this pride and confidence enhances thevalue of their participation. Relationships built oncommunication, mutual respect, and personal con-cern foster trust and cooperation. Trust and coopera-tion strengthen good relationships. And so on. Thecomplexity of these interrelationships and inter-dependencies makes them no less clear or apparent. Inthis sense, the “innovation machine” has built its ownmomentum, fueled by pride, confidence, and trust.

In conclusion, perhaps the most fundamental andimportant lesson we can learn from Phoenix is thathow you do things is every bit as important as, andperhaps in some ways more important than, whatyou do. How you do things can build the capacityfor the organization and individuals to change inthe future or it can undermine these capacities.Processes can leave people feeling involved, val-ued, responsible, and empowered. Or they canleave people feeling left out, angry, powerless, andresistant to change. It is clear that in Phoenix, whenpeople from the manager’s office to the lunchroomat Crazy Jim’s talk about the “way things are donearound here,” they are referring to a process thatfeatures a culture of innovation, that respects andvalues people, that enhances their trust and confi-dence, and over time builds a cadre of civil ser-vants who manage the best run city in America.

Conclusion


Barrett, Katherine and Richard Greene. 2000.“Grading the Cities.” Governing. February.

Bluedorn, Alan and Earl Lundgren. 1993. “ACulture-match Perspective for Strategic Change.”Research in Organizational Change andDevelopment 7: 137-179.

Bozeman, Barry and Gordon Kingsley. 1998. “Risk Culture in Public and Private Organizations.”Public Administration Review 58(2), 109-115.

City of Phoenix, 1999. City of Phoenix 1999Annual Citizens Report: We Focus on Results.

Culbert, Samuel and John McDonough. 1986. “The Politics of Trust and Empowerment.” PublicAdministration Quarterly. Summer, 171-188.

Denhardt, Robert B. and Janet Vinzant Denhardt.1999. Leadership for Change: Case Studies inAmerican Local Government. Arlington, Va.: ThePricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for TheBusiness of Government.

Government Performance Project, 2000.http://www.governing.com/gpp/gp0phoe.htm

Hall, John. 1982. Phoenix, Ariz. In DecentralizingUrban Policy: Case Studies in CommunityDevelopment (Paul R. Dommel and Associates,eds.) Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.

Light, Paul. 1998. Sustaining Innovation. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Morrison Institute for Public Policy, 2000. Hits andMisses: Fast Growth in Metropolitan Phoenix.Tempe, Ariz.: Arizona State University.

Moynihan, Donald. 2000. Managing for Results inthe Cities: Innovative Practices. GovernmentPerformance Project. Syracuse, N.Y.: SyracuseUniversity.

Oden, Howard. 1997. Managing CorporateCulture, Innovation, and Intrapreneurship.Westport, Conn.: Quorum Books.

Schein, Edgar. 1987. Organizational Culture andLeadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Valle, Mathew. 1999. “Crisis Culture, andCharisma: The New Leader’s Work in PublicOrganizations.” Public Personnel Management28(2), 245-257.

References


About the Authors

Janet Vinzant Denhardt is Professor in the School of Public Affairs atArizona State University. Her teaching and research interests lie primar-ily in organization theory and organizational behavior. Her book (withLane Crothers), Street-Level Leadership: Discretion and Legitimacy inFront-Line Public Service, was published by the Georgetown UniversityPress. In addition, Dr. Denhardt has published numerous articles injournals such as Public Administration Review, Administration andSociety, American Review of Public Administration, Public Productivityand Management Review, and Administrative Theory & Praxis. Prior tojoining the faculty at Arizona State, Dr. Denhardt taught at EasternWashington University and served in a variety of administrative andconsulting positions. Her doctorate is from the University of SouthernCalifornia.

Robert B. Denhardt is Professor in the School of Public Affairs atArizona State University and Visiting Scholar at the University ofDelaware. Dr. Denhardt is a past president of the American Society for Public Administration, and the founder and first chair of ASPA’sNational Campaign for Public Service, an effort to assert the dignityand worth of public service across the nation. He is also a member ofthe National Academy of Public Administration and a Fellow of theCanadian Centre for Management Development. Dr. Denhardt haspublished 14 books, including Theories of Public Organization, PublicAdministration: An Action Orientation, In the Shadow of Organization,The Pursuit of Significance, Executive Leadership in the Public Service,The Revitalization of the Public Service, and Pollution and PublicPolicy. He has published over 75 articles in professional journals, pri-marily in the areas of leadership, management, and organizationalchange. His doctorate is from the University of Kentucky.


To contact the authors:

Janet Vinzant Denhardt or Robert B. DenhardtSchool of Public AffairsArizona State UniversityP.O. Box 870603 Tempe, AZ 85287-0603(602) 965-3926

e-mail: [email protected] or [email protected].

To contact the City of Phoenix:

Frank FairbanksCity ManagerCity of PhoenixCity Hall200 West Washington StreetPhoenix, AZ 85003(606) 262-7958

Key Contact Information

To download or order a copy of these reports, visit the Endowment website at: endowment.pwcglobal.com

Innovations: ProgramDelivery

Managing Workfare: The Case of the Work Experience Program in theNew York City Parks Department (June 1999)

Steven Cohen

New Tools for ImprovingGovernment Regulation: AnAssessment of Emissions Trading andOther Market-Based RegulatoryTools (October 1999)

Gary C. Bryner

Religious Organizations, Anti-Poverty Relief, and CharitableChoice: A Feasibility Study of Faith-Based Welfare Reform in Mississippi(November 1999)

John P. BartkowskiHelen A. Regis

Business Improvement Districts and Innovative Service Delivery(November 1999)

Jerry Mitchell

An Assessment of BrownfieldRedevelopment Policies:The Michigan Experience(November 1999)

Richard C. Hula

San Diego County’s InnovationProgram: Using Competition and aWhole Lot More to Improve PublicServices (January 2000)

William B. Eimicke

Innovation in the Administration ofPublic Airports (March 2000)

Scott E. Tarry

Entrepreneurial Government:Bureaucrats as Businesspeople (May 2000)

Anne Laurent

Rethinking U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Policy: ManagementChallenges for a New Administration(November 2000)

Dennis A. Rondinelli

Innovations: Management

Credit Scoring and Loan Scoring:Tools for Improved Management ofFederal Credit Programs (July 1999)

Thomas H. Stanton

Determining a Level Playing Field for Public-Private Competition(November 1999)

Lawrence L. Martin

Using Activity-Based Costing to Manage More Effectively(January 2000)

Michael H. GranofDavid E. PlattIgor Vaysman

Implementing State Contracts forSocial Services: An Assessment of the Kansas Experience (May 2000)

Jocelyn M. JohnstonBarbara S. Romzek

Corporate Strategic Planning in Government: Lessons from the United States Air Force(November 2000)

Colin Campbell

The President’s ManagementCouncil: An Important ManagementInnovation (December 2000)

Margaret L. Yao

Using Evaluation to SupportPerformance Management:A Guide for Federal Executives(January 2001)

Kathryn NewcomerMary Ann Scheirer

Managing for Outcomes:Milestone Contracting in Oklahoma (January 2001)

Peter Frumkin

TransformingOrganizations

The Importance of Leadership:The Role of School Principals(September 1999)

Paul TeskeMark Schneider

Leadership for Change: Case Studiesin American Local Government(September 1999)

Robert B. DenhardtJanet Vinzant Denhardt

Managing DecentralizedDepartments: The Case of the U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services (October 1999)

Beryl A. Radin

Transforming Government: TheRenewal and Revitalization of theFederal Emergency ManagementAgency (April 2000)

R. Steven DanielsCarolyn L. Clark-Daniels

Transforming Government: Creatingthe New Defense ProcurementSystem (April 2000)

Kimberly A. Harokopus

Trans-Atlantic Experiences in HealthReform: The United Kingdom’sNational Health Service and theUnited States Veterans HealthAdministration (May 2000)

Marilyn A. DeLuca

Transforming Government: TheRevitalization of the Veterans HealthAdministration (June 2000)

Gary J. Young

The Challenge of Managing AcrossBoundaries: The Case of the Officeof the Secretary in the U.S.Department of Health and HumanServices (November 2000)

Beryl A. Radin

A Learning-Based Approach toLeading Change (December 2000)

Barry Sugarman

Creating a Culture of Innovation:10 Lessons from America’s Best Run City (January 2001)

Janet Vinzant DenhardtRobert B. Denhardt

E-Government

Managing Telecommuting in theFederal Government: An InterimReport (June 2000)

Gina VegaLouis Brennan

Using Virtual Teams to ManageComplex Projects: A Case Study ofthe Radioactive Waste ManagementProject (August 2000)

Samuel M. DeMarie

The Auction Model: How the PublicSector Can Leverage the Power of E-Commerce Through DynamicPricing (October 2000)

David C. Wyld

Supercharging the EmploymentAgency: An Investigation of the Useof Information and CommunicationTechnology to Improve the Serviceof State Employment Agencies(December 2000)

Anthony M. Townsend

Assessing a State’s Readiness forGlobal Electronic Commerce:Lessons from the Ohio Experience(January 2001)

J. Pari SabetySteven I. Gordon

Privacy Strategies for ElectronicGovernment (January 2001)

Janine S. HillerFrance Bélanger

Revitalizing the PublicService

Results of the GovernmentLeadership Survey: A 1999 Survey ofFederal Executives (June 1999)

Mark A. AbramsonSteven A. ClyburnElizabeth Mercier

Profiles in Excellence: Conversationswith the Best of America’s CareerExecutive Service (November 1999)

Mark W. Huddleston

Leaders Growing Leaders: Preparingthe Next Generation of PublicService Executives (May 2000)

Ray Blunt

Reflections on Mobility: CaseStudies of Six Federal Executives(May 2000)

Michael D. Serlin

Toward a 21st Century Public Service: Reports from Four Forums(January 2001)

Mark A. Abramson, Editor

Becoming an Effective PoliticalExecutive: 7 Lessons from ExperiencedAppointees (January 2001)

Judith E. Michaels

ENDOWMENT REPORTS AVAILABLE

For additional information, contact:Mark A. AbramsonExecutive DirectorThe PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for

The Business of Government1616 North Fort Myer DriveArlington, VA 22209

(703) 741-1077fax: (703) 741-1076e-mail: [email protected]: endowment.pwcglobal.com

1616 North Fort Myer DriveArlington, VA 22209-3195


The Business of GovernmentBulk Rate

US Postage

P A I DPermit 1112

Merrifield, VA

About PricewaterhouseCoopersThe Management Consulting Services practice ofPricewaterhouseCoopers helps clients maximize theirbusiness performance by integrating strategic change,performance improvement and technology solutions.Through a worldwide network of skills and resources,consultants manage complex projects with globalcapabilities and local knowledge, from strategythrough implementation. PricewaterhouseCoopers(www.pwcglobal.com) is the world’s largest profes-sional services organization. Drawing on the knowl-edge and skills of more than 150,000 people in 150countries, we help our clients solve complex businessproblems and measurably enhance their ability tobuild value, manage risk and improve performance inan Internet-enabled world. PricewaterhouseCoopersrefers to the member firms of the worldwidePricewaterhouseCoopers organization.

Creating a Culture of Innovation - Arizona State Universityicprv/courses/hst498/resource web... ·...

Documents

Transcript of Creating a Culture of Innovation - Arizona State Universityicprv/courses/hst498/resource web... ·...