What is a mayor for? First, to define a “true north”

In times of extreme political turbulence at the federal level, it is also time to think about the next opportunity that we, as citizens, will have to decisively influence political life, namely, the election of a new mayor, which is approaching on the calendar.

So it is worth asking: what is a mayor for? What should we expect of him or her?

The relevant legislation defines a series of “traditional” roles for mayors. For example, according to the Brazilian Federal Constitution and the Supreme Electoral Court, it is up to the mayor to ensure the application of the constitution locally, to define how the resources coming from taxes and other funds transferred by the State and the Federal Government will be used, to mediate public policies with other spheres of power, to draft, approve or veto bills made in the municipal councils, to form partnerships with the private sector and, of course, to implement actions that improve mobility, education, health, security, the occupation of urban space, public cleaning, sports, leisure, etc. in cities.

But how could better management, “leaner” management, help mayors do all this more efficiently?

In short, the central role of a mayor is to create the conditions, processes and structures to solve and help solve a city's problems.

In this scenario, the first role of this new leader would then be to articulate a “vision” – a “true north”, as we say in the lean system – for the municipality, in the sense of establishing where its residents want to go. In other words, what kind of city we want to have. But this must be done without the vague and superficial official jargon that fills municipal administrations and that does not guide concrete actions.

In this context, the mayor must define ways of identifying the citizens' aspirations, opinions and wishes. This, however, must be done based on real data and facts and on a first-hand understanding of reality. Not based on the distorted views of marketers or election-focused polls, but on direct contact and deeper knowledge.

Cities can be huge or small. But in every situation it is essential that the mayor go to the “gemba”, the place where things happen, to understand and see with his or her own eyes what is going on. The mayor will not get this view at official ceremonies, whose purpose is often purely publicity, but rather “in loco”, seeing firsthand what is happening and what the real problems and needs are. Getting out of the office is essential, but with the humility to listen and the critical sense to understand.

Within the lean system, defining this “true north” is essential. In this management model, there are those who believe that if we try to go to several places at the same time, we will not get anywhere.

Of course, in doing so, it is necessary to incorporate the interests of the majority of the population and of citizens and to create situations of convergence that are as beneficial to everyone as possible.

Defining where we want to go obviously means defining where we do not want to go. Therefore, these are often difficult choices. It is probably not possible to solve everything for everyone right away.

From there, it is necessary to understand where we are today, that is, what concrete reality we currently have regarding a city's central issues, problems and needs.

This is a profound change in the management paradigm compared to what mayors are used to following. “Professional politicians” are often afraid to publicly acknowledge problems, preferring to ignore or mask them when they are in government or to overstate them when they are in the opposition.

This situation needs to change. Everyone needs to acknowledge the existence of the city's problems, because that is the first step toward solving them. What can change are the various resolution strategies and the actions that will have to be taken.

Neighborhoods without paving. Streets full of potholes. Inadequate mobility. Precarious health care and education. Floods every year. Broken traffic lights. Drug users on the streets... You just have to look. Or want to look. All of this needs to be acknowledged by everyone – the mayor first of all – so that effective action can be taken.

This will help clearly define the main problems and needs. There are so many that it is necessary to choose, to prioritize. This means that some will not receive as much focus and concern at first. The criteria for defining this are essential. Criteria such as which problems are the most impactful, the most relevant, the easiest and quickest to solve right away... or some other criterion. This is essential.

Once the main problems are defined, the mayor should seek to develop a process to solve them, both through the structure for which he or she is responsible, city hall, and through the other “social actors” involved.

It is quite likely that city hall will need to develop its capability to solve problems. And to coordinate a process with other social actors and levels of government for these solutions.

Within this context, it will be up to the mayor to lead the creation of more agile and efficient management processes. He or she needs to develop better public administration methods and practices, eliminating bureaucracy, seeking the career development of employees and creating learning opportunities, capable of making the work more aligned with the needs of citizens.

In this sense, perhaps the hardest part is changing the current mindset regarding the objectives and interests of parties or specific groups versus the wishes and needs of citizens. Until it becomes clear that the latter must prevail, there will be little progress. An emphasis on transparency and a greater focus on costs and benefits will be essential.

Thus, the mayor needs to be able to lead the city in pursuit of a better future. As our view tends to have a strong managerial connotation, many may argue that there is a dilemma between the “politician” and the “manager”. For us, the mayor has to be both at the same time.

Thus, in taking on these two roles, he or she must define the “true north”, mobilize support and alliances, have scientific methods for solving problems, define goals and actions... And carry all of this out, checking what is working and what is not.

He or she does not have to be a superman or a superwoman. But must develop the capability of existing structures, create new ones or eliminate unnecessary ones, in order to solve problems. One at a time. With the scientific method.

In the coming months, we will contribute more concrete examples of what we need to do to make municipal management more effective and of the role of the number one leader of cities, the mayors.

The resources collected through the various taxes and fees must be directed toward ensuring the best possible use, avoiding wasting them on activities that are of little interest to citizens.

Clearly, many of the problems of cities are linked to the federal and state spheres of executive power and to other economic and social actors. In other words, there are problems that depend exclusively on city halls (such as public cleaning, management of physical space, etc.). Others in which they play a fundamental role (mobility, education, health, security...). And others in which they support the solution (job opportunities...).

The enormous dissatisfaction that large segments of the population have shown with governments, at the various levels, and also with the legislative branch, the two levels of power chosen directly by popular vote, shows that it is necessary to rethink these bodies of political decision-making and managerial execution.

Thus, beginning to take the first steps in building a better future means making progress in defining what is expected of the next “number one” executives of our cities.

If we want to establish a new kind of government, more effective and transparent, starting at the municipal level, closest to citizens, may be a good step.

Building a better political future is in our hands, starting with the election of the new mayors.