The Promise and Perils of Mission-Led Governance in Aotearoa

29/11/2024

In the ever-evolving landscape of public governance, a new approach is catching attention across the seas in the United Kingdom. Called mission-led governance, it promises a fresh perspective on how institutions and organizations might better serve society. The core idea is compelling: what if our public institutions could genuinely prioritize social and environmental purposes alongside—or even above—financial returns?

For those of us in Aotearoa New Zealand, watching this development, there’s an undeniable appeal. Here’s a framework that, at first glance, seems to echo the values embedded in Te Ao Māori—kaitiakitanga, the sacred duty of environmental stewardship, and manaakitanga, the deep responsibility to care for people. It offers a vision where community needs might finally take precedence over top-down Pākehā decision-making, where long-term sustainability could triumph over quick wins and short-term gains.

But we’ve been here before. The 1980s taught us something about our national character: when Aotearoa New Zealand discovers a governance trend, we don’t just dip our toes in—we dive headfirst. This trait has been both our strength and our weakness. More recently, the Living Standards Framework stands as a cautionary tale of good intentions meeting harsh reality. Despite its promising foundation, it fell victim to weak implementation, struggled with financial modelling, and achieved more superficial change than genuine transformation.

Today, our public institutions are already stretched thin. Walk into any government department, and you’ll find teams grappling with basic implementation challenges. This isn’t a political issue—it’s an institutional one. Our systems lack the proper tools to track complex social outcomes, our research infrastructure has gaps, and our monitoring systems need updating. The machinery of government is creaking under its current load; adding another layer of complexity might just bring it to a halt.

The timing couldn’t be more challenging. We find ourselves in the midst of a culture war, with deeply conflicting visions of what success looks like for Aotearoa. Mission-led governance requires a clear, shared understanding of our societal goals—but right now, we can’t even agree on what kind of nation we want to be. It’s like trying to navigate a waka when the crew is rowing in different directions.

Then there’s the elephant in the room: money. Mission-led governance isn’t cheap. It requires robust financial strategies, sophisticated measurement systems, and patient capital. This means having an honest conversation about taxation—yes, that conversation. Someone will need to pay more, and everyone will need to be more patient about seeing results. In today’s political climate, that’s a tough sell.

Looking ahead, social investment approaches might offer a path forward. But we’re at the very beginning of that journey, and with the current government’s focus on cultural battlegrounds rather than structural reform, even this stepping stone might remain just out of reach.

Does this mean we should abandon the idea of mission-led governance? Not necessarily. But we need to be clear-eyed about the challenges. We need to build the pre-conditions for success: stronger implementation capabilities, better measurement systems, clearer accountability frameworks, and most importantly, a greater consensus about our national direction.

The promise of mission-led governance—aligning our institutions with our deepest values, serving both people and planet—remains compelling. But like a complex hāngī, it requires careful preparation, the right resources, and most importantly, patience. Without these elements in place, we risk repeating past mistakes, where grand visions dissolve into superficial changes and missed opportunities.

For now, perhaps our mission should be more modest: strengthening our institutional foundations, building our measurement capabilities, and working to heal the social divisions that make any major reform so challenging. Only then might we be ready to embrace the full potential of mission-led governance in a way that truly serves Aotearoa New Zealand.