Local government is probably similar to other sectors, and most individuals for that matter, in looking upon the advent of artificial intelligence (AI) with a mix of trepidation and enthusiasm.

The enthusiasm is no doubt fuelled by the prospect of something that can relieve the pressure valve facing councils up and down the country. Yet when you bring together council chief executives and senior managers to talk about their experience of AI, you are invariably met with a cacophony of responses.

 It was clear that with everyone's placement on the trepidation-enthusiasm curve differing there was a particular challenge for large organisations, such as councils, to determine the speed and ambition around AI for their authorities

While not necessarily pulling against each other, councils appear to be heading along a variety of different routes towards an AI future. The question remains whether they will arrive at the same destination.

At a round table on the topic, hosted by Local Partnerships on the fringes of The MJ's inaugural Future Forum Midlands event near Stratford-upon-Avon, a group of chief executives and senior officers from the region's councils gathered to discuss their progress and future vision for the largely unpredictable world of AI.

One participant candidly described their council's early excursions into the AI universe as ‘unambitious', but with staff in services moving from trepidation to increasing enthusiasm as they learned more about its potential.

Indeed, it was clear that with everyone's placement on the trepidation-enthusiasm curve differing there was a particular challenge for large organisations, such as councils, to determine the speed and ambition around AI for their authorities.

‘We are at the decision stage,' explained one participant. ‘We need to take staff on the journey, but we're using it in a haphazard way at the moment.'

And it was a similar story in relation to members. Another contributor at this working lunch highlighted how councillors could prove a ‘barrier'. Their enthusiasm for face-to-face contact with residents and for offices to remain fully occupied was proving a hindrance to technological progress.

Another pointed to the lack of governance their council had in place for AI.

They were not alone in lacking robust governance and there was a strong call for this to be standardised across the sector.

While there were concerns the technology was as yet failing to offer clear value and cashable savings, the seemingly endless possibilities had everyone delving in to try and find the worth.

‘It's important to make sure there is added value if you are introducing AI tools into a system that already works,' said one participant, revealing it had proved successful for them for optimising waste routes. It was also soon to be used within this council's CCTV operation – flagging unusual behaviour which a human could then check.

This was an important point, because there was unanimity around the table that AI was not about replacing staff. It was far more about easing workloads and creating more capacity across services. There was a strong feeling humans need to check on AI-generated results.

One chief revealed his authority's twofold approach to AI. On the one hand, encouraging managers to identify problems that the digital team could seek to solve through AI and, on the other, encouraging staff to use general tools such as ChatGPT to aid their work. For the latter, they were looking to HR to put in place policies to ensure there were parameters.

With growing enthusiasm for the ability of the likes of ChatGPT to alleviate the mundane processes in many roles, one participant emphasised the need for staff to avoid abdicating responsibilities for the results produced artificially. Staff still needed to ‘own it'.

And there was a sense around the table that uncertainty about what others were doing, and a lack of reliable intelligence around how initiatives had gone, was hampering the dial from moving away from trepidation and towards enthusiasm.

One chief was keen for there to be greater publicity around practical examples the sector could learn from. It was a sentiment echoed by others, who argued improvements for the sector could be accelerated through opportunities for ‘collective learning'.

But local government seems to need to be convinced of the honesty around supposed success stories.

‘You hear examples, but when you peel it back it's not quite what it said it was,' said one voice around the table, who demanded to ‘see the whites of their eyes' when case studies were offered up.

There was nonetheless a clamour to learn more from those who were further down the road than others. For a sector used to being the experts in much of what it does, the lack of understanding around AI was something all appeared to be keen to come together on so the scales can collectively fall from their eyes.

‘We should agree what the problems are,' said one.

But with another lamenting the difficulty of learning more from good examples that appear on the grapevine, because people are understandably busy with the day job, councils are looking for support to bring this collective learning together while they nonetheless continue to plough their own furrow.

The expert advice offered up was that there were two ways for councils to proceed. Firstly, bottom-up, looking to solve problems as they arise. And, secondly, through having a long-term vision of where AI would take the authority. Both had their downsides.

The former led to ‘solving yesterday's problems', while the latter was inevitably ‘going to be wrong'.

Nonetheless, the advice was both approaches needed to be pursued simultaneously, in the knowledge of the drawbacks.

An ‘adaptor' mentality was needed: An approach where a form of AI was embraced but if it proved unsuccessful a different solution was ‘plugged in'.

Yet, the trepidation remained around the table, with one participant pointing out: ‘I can't afford to take risks, so I have to use it to solve today's problems.'

Another concurred, adding: ‘I don't want to invest in a Betamax system.'

And a fear of ‘being led' by people trying to ‘sell a product' was causing clear nervousness.

Yet, the enthusiasm for AI that proves successful remains ever present as long as the knowledge provided is trustworthy.

It could be argued that the local government sector has a tendency to let itself down through internal competition. The desire to succeed and stand out as successful can prevent shared learning from flourishing.

But on a topic where all are pretty comfortable to admit novice status, and where all are more concerned about the potential pitfalls than they are about coveting success, AI could prove a rare occasion where local government is prepared to accept the virtue of standardisation.

‘The sector needs to be leading in this space,' said one participant.

The simple truth is – standing still isn't an option. As one voice pointed out: ‘Residents will be using AI to interact with us, so that's going to impact on us anyway.'

Another added: ‘We need to develop something that works for everyone and we need to start acting.'

 

Adele Gritten of Local Partnerships on the challenges of responsibly reshaping service delivery

At our recent round table on artificial intelligence (AI) I was struck by a shared sentiment: a blend of cautious optimism and a clear recognition of the need for shared learning and alignment. This reflects the sector's unique challenge of balancing the risks of new technology with the definite potential to reshape service delivery.

The immense pressure on councils is undeniable. AI can offer solutions to streamline operations, from optimising waste routes to augmenting CCTV monitoring. Yet the integration of AI isn't just about efficiency, it's about capacity building and enabling staff to focus on more strategic priorities. At Local Partnerships we help councils deliver strong governance frameworks to ensure AI is implemented responsibly and aligned with broader strategic objectives.

However, the challenges are real. The lack of accessible, reliable case studies is stalling progress. Sharing lessons learned, including both successes and, crucially, mistakes, could catalyse our collective advancement. We don't need perfection; we need honesty and collaboration.

AI isn't about replacing human judgment. The value of AI lies in its ability to complement our expertise, not replace it. Staff must remain accountable for AI-generated insights, ensuring these tools are used ethically and responsibly.

Local government thrives on pragmatism. As emphasised during the round table, we must focus on both immediate problem-solving and long-term vision. An adaptive mindset will be crucial to addressing today's needs while embracing innovation.

Residents are already interacting with AI in their daily lives and we must be prepared to meet them where they are. Together, through shared learning and strategic action, we can lead the way in harnessing AI for public good.

Local Partnerships is here to help future-proof public services and support local government resilience. Owned by the public sector, we deliver value for the public purse and would welcome conversations about your AI experiences and how we can help your local authority succeed.

Adele Gritten is chief executive of Local Partnerships

@LP_AdeleG | www.localpartnerships.gov.uk

 

Participants at The MJ/Local Partnerships round table

Adam Hill – chief executive, Mansfield DC

Ian Knowles – chief executive, West Lindsey DC

Shokat Lal – chief executive, Sandwell MBC

Chris Meah – chief executive, School of Code

Michelle Sacks – chief executive, Huntingdonshire DC

Craig Taylor – director of regeneration and neighbourhoods, Bassetlaw DC

Adele Gritten – chief executive, Local Partnerships

Mike Burton – editorial director, The MJ (chair)

Paul Marinko – deputy editor, The MJ (reporting)