In the summer of 2025, the Portuguese government relaunched with renewed impetus an old theme related to the management of change in large human systems: the reform of the State and Public Administration.
The challenge of change in Public Administration
Any “reform” in a large ecosystem such as all the organizations within the sphere of the State and Public Administration naturally provokes different forms of resistance, arising from the way changes affect the daily lives of all those impacted by them, their “zones of risk and comfort,” their power, their incentives… etc.
At times, barriers arise from the very conditions imposed by some stakeholders, or even from the expectations created by those leading the change: it is not possible to reduce staff… (despite the enormous optimization and digitization of processes being advocated)… it is not possible to alter or merge structures (that would be too disruptive and unsettling)… it is not possible to make people work towards goals for which they would be effectively accountable for successes and failures because such a culture does not exist… in short, at times it seems that only one thing is possible:
– Nothing!
Beliefs that hinder transformation
Effectively, managing a process of change in a large human system, with an overwhelming past and culture pulling strongly in certain directions, as is the case of Public Administration, is a task at the level of yet another of Hercules’ labors.
But even without the Greek mythological hero, such a task can be carried out successfully, provided we take into account some fundamental principles of change management.
Let’s begin with the beliefs that usually do not hold in the face of such an enormous and Herculean task:
- Believing that change is desired by everyone, and therefore collaboration will exist.
No! Most people are afraid of change and prefer things to remain as they are. Someone who has never been held truly accountable for results, good or bad, in their work, now prefers to be accountable for achieving objectives? Someone who loses control, through digitization, of tasks they previously carried out autonomously—do they want to lose that power? The answer is as obvious as it seems: no!
- Believing that it is possible to improve processes, eliminate redundancies and make people accountable for results-oriented objectives without altering structures, in terms of the number of people and management positions.
This belief is similar to believing that I can eat twice as much as I do now, maintain the same level of activity, and not gain weight. It won’t happen, because mathematically… more calories in, same calories out… fat will increase.
Assuming that we change processes and systems without reducing staff is to assume, from the outset, one of two things: either we are not truly optimizing and digitizing these processes, because new inefficiencies remain, or we are further lowering people’s productivity, as we maintain staff not because they are necessary, but because we created the expectation that this headcount would be maintained regardless of the added value of each employee.
It is worth noting that process optimization in the public sector could be an opportunity to transfer many employees to the private sector, which suffers from a real shortage of qualified labor.
Additionally, within or between public structures themselves, there are countless possibilities for optimizing structures through the transfer or reallocation of human resources with specific qualifications, removing them from low value-added or even redundant structures or functions and placing them in others where they can generate more value.
- Believing that change in large human systems is quick, or compatible with a single political cycle.
There is nothing slower and more difficult to change in a large organization than its culture. All the more so in a set of large-scale organizations such as the State and Public Administration.
Resistance to change is the rule, not the exception. Only an action with strategic purpose and a coherent guiding thread over time (certainly more than 10 years) can produce results. And that is hard to reconcile with the temporary political cycles of 4-year terms—or even less, as has been the case in Portugal.
But within this context, what are the critical success factors of a successful reform of the State and Public Administration, focusing now on what concerns the management of human resources that make up these multiple and complex structures?
The answer is undoubtedly complex, but possible.
Vision and meritocracy: the pillars of change
Among the multiple factors that make the difference in a systemic change of a broad set of organizations, two stand out: the vision of change and the courage of those who lead its implementation.
Starting with vision, one of the greatest challenges in changing anything in the State or Public Administration lies in the difficulty of having a systemic and integrated vision of that change.
The “patchwork quilt” resulting from the numerous career and remuneration models, for example, makes it very difficult to define a single and unifying perspective of these multiple systems – what applies to teachers does not apply to doctors, which in turn does not fit coherently with the rules for finance ministry staff, which again have nothing to do with the rules for the management of leaders and technicians of any other government structure.
Defining an overarching vision, applicable to all and capable of guiding the multiple changes required, is the first condition for the success of such change.
This was understood by an equally reformist government of one of the CPLP countries with greater democratic maturity, Cape Verde.
Understanding that only by creating common and integrative models that serve as a reference for all State and Public Administration careers and functions could real change be possible, the government of Cape Verde began by building a new foundation on which all changes would rest. In 2023, it published a new “Public Employment Framework Law” (Law no. 20/X/2023, of March 24), in which it included, in a single paragraph, a definition of its vision of the change to be undertaken:
“This statute embodies a new vision for the integrated management of human resources in Cape Verde’s Public Administration, based on a key and structuring principle: The management of human resources in Public Administration must ensure that each civil servant has a profile suited to their role, knows their functional content, the work they must perform and the results to which they contribute—both for increased accountability and for remuneration in recognition of their merit as a servant of the State.”
This definition of vision, or desired situation after the change management process, contains three “ingredients” for success that are worth briefly decoding:
- Systemic vision: as the State is the owner of its multiple structures, including direct and indirect administration, public institutes or even local authorities, only systemic models that can comprehend all this diversity in an integrated and coherent way will have any chance of success. We see this, for example, through the introduction of a job evaluation mechanism in the design of multiple careers, which makes it possible to compare functions as diverse as teachers, doctors, nurses or judges, and consistently “arrange” this diversity in a single pay table.
- Meritocracy: this is the keyword in change management in the State and Public Administration, as in any organization that adequately serves the interests and needs of its clients, users or beneficiaries. It means that there is equality of opportunity regarding possibilities for advancement, but not equality of consequences in the face of good and bad performances, based on reasonably objective and consensual criteria (results achieved and activities carried out). Doing well or poorly makes a difference.
- Focus on results-oriented objectives: this is a profound organizational change (necessarily requiring the introduction of planning and objective evaluation routines), which generates enormous resistance in public organizations (and in many private ones too). The main objection? “That doesn’t depend on me…” or “I did my part, but ‘they’ (colleagues from another team, department or even the rest of the team) didn’t do theirs…” Only a culture of accountability and empowerment allows this resistance to be overcome.
But for State and Public Administration reform to happen, having a coherent vision of the changes intended is not enough.
Courage as a decisive factor
A predominant attitude of those who successfully lead organizational change processes—and which makes all the difference in any transformation of processes and cultures—is courage!
Simple and direct. That’s it!
Any process of change management in large human systems requires someone to lead that change: a Government, an Agency, a Board of Directors… in short, leaders who drive the multiple integrated changes needed, but above all who overcome the resistance to change of all those who try to keep things the same, or at least maintain the fundamental status quo to preserve their comfort zones.
Leading a major transformation and managing change means making choices, taking difficult decisions and often “swimming against many currents.”
Why is it so important to have a clear vision of change?
Because it is that vision that contains the guiding principles which cannot be abandoned in this change, because those principles are non-negotiable values.
If we believe that meritocracy and accountability for results are better than advancement based on seniority and the absence of accountability, then we cannot abandon these guiding principles/values simply because within a large system—public leaders and civil servants themselves—or on its periphery—such as commentators and media specialists—many raise their voices against such changes. Or worse, they agree with these principles, but then undermine them in various ways.
Returning to the example of Cape Verde’s plan to transform human resources management in Public Administration, in about three years, the most diverse instruments capable of enabling such transformation were produced, with emphasis on the Performance Management System (which introduced objective and activity evaluation in Public Administration) and the PCFR (Career, Roles and Remuneration Plan) which last year defined management principles applicable to all general regime Public Administration careers, and which now serves as a guide for the multiple special regime careers.
But as in all good examples of a country’s capacity to manage change as a whole, we can already glimpse clouds and possible strong headwinds against that change on the horizon, arising from the paralyzing and sometimes destructive effect of change processes, called the proximity of legislative elections (already next year).
More than ever, courage will be the determining competency of those who continue these changes, merely by believing that it is important to have an integrated and coherent vision of change, that meritocracy pays off, and that responsibility should prevail over lack of accountability.
Regardless of the direction this change will take in the coming years in Cape Verde, it is worth, here in Portugal, reflecting on some lessons we can learn, now that we are facing one of the noblest tasks Hercules could take on: making the lives of all of us, citizens, better—for our generation and for those of our children and grandchildren!
Artur Nunes
HUMANPERSI
Managing Partner
