Managing the relationship with politics is a core competence for public executives, even though it is rarely discussed explicitly. It is generally regarded as a tacit skill, one that is poorly formalized and learned mainly on the job. What makes reflection on this competence particularly urgent is a global trend of transformation in the political sphere, marked first and foremost by increasingly short political cycles, with the resulting rapid turnover of the political class in ever shorter time frames, and, more broadly, by a new way of operating in the political arena. If politics is changing the way it functions, what changes does public management face? What skills are needed to manage the relationship with contemporary politics?
To address these questions, within the EMMAP program (an executive master in public management taught in Italian), a comparison was carried out between a panel of public executives with extensive experience working alongside political leaders and scholars of public management. The outcome of this discussion was published in an article in the journal Azienda Pubblica.
The starting point: how politics is changing
Three main changes are affecting the functioning of politics and, consequently, its relationship with public management.
- The first concerns the acceleration of consensus cycles, with more volatile political classes, shorter learning periods for the art of governing, and leaders who are less “trained” in managing public affairs.
- The second is the communication revolution, in which social media influence agendas and decision-making timelines, often at the expense of the space needed to address complexity, with growing pressure on administrative structures.
- Finally, there is the crisis of trust in institutions, fueled by anti-bureaucratic rhetoric that puts pressure on everyone—politicians and managers alike.
What skills public managers need: ten good rules
If this is the context, what enables an effective relationship with politics? An analysis of the panel participants’ responses produced a ten-point guide<. ten suggestions for managers who work under contract with political leadership.
First, it is essential to learn how to read and legitimize the political playing field:
1. Being able to read political signals.
Understanding the context, priorities, and dynamics does not mean replacing politics, but rather tuning in to anticipate change and reduce misunderstandings. Ignoring these aspects because they are seen as outside the remit of management is not a responsible exercise of the role.
2. Anticipating political needs.
Knowing one’s counterpart makes it possible to anticipate requests and propose solutions compatible with administrative constraints before emergencies arise or political consensus forms around administratively unworkable solutions.
Action must be oriented toward speed.
3. Responding quickly.
In the relationship with politics, timeliness matters at least as much as accuracy. A preliminary response that can be refined but arrives quickly is better than a perfect one that comes too late to be useful.
4. Ensuring speed of execution.
Slow administrative action risks becoming politically irrelevant. In sensitive dossiers, time is as decisive a variable as the quality of solutions: failing to ensure timely execution undermines managerial credibility.
The relationship of trust, and not of affiliation, is built through good interpersonal communication.
5. Communicating simply and concisely.
Translating technical complexity into clear and genuinely concise messages is a key competence. What cannot be explained in a few lines risks not being understood or used and is therefore useless.
6. Always providing feedback.
When something does not work, silence is not an option. It is necessary to find the right way, respectful and constructive, to say so, because trust also grows out of the courage to address difficult issues.
7. Seeking authority, not personal consensus.
Respect is also built by saying uncomfortable things that no one else wants to say. Avoiding conflict at all costs weakens the role and undermines credibility over time.
8. Acting with full transparency.
Sharing information openly, avoiding asymmetries and opacity, strengthens reliability and reduces the risk of misunderstandings or suspicion.
Never losing sight of the fundamentals of one’s role, even under pressure.
9. Maintaining a technical, non-affiliated stance.
Working with all political parties is a sign of professionalism. Independence strengthens credibility and protects the role over the long term.
10. Monitoring the ethics of one’s choices.
Safeguarding the legitimacy of administrative action means defending public values and the present and future of democratic institutions. At the same time, making every effort to implement the will of those who hold democratic legitimacy is a necessary function for institutional stability. Managerial action lies in holding these two forces together.
Public management and democratic institutions
Public management is not only competent execution, but also conscious mediation between political will, regulatory constraints, and technical effectiveness. In a time of instability and pressure, strengthening the development of a public managerial class better prepared to handle this relationship means reinforcing, rather than weakening, democratic institutions.
Raffaella Saporito, Silvia Rota, Franco Gabrielli, Fabrizio Dall'Acqua, Alessia Grillo, Francesca Rammairone, “Competenze politiche per dirigenti pubblici: un decalogo e cinque note a margine.” Azienda Pubblica, fascicolo 4, 2025. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.30448/AP.2025.4.09.
