Navigating UN Reform: Leadership Strategies in Times of Change

8 June 2025

By Katja Hemmerich

At the 12 May UN80 briefing, member states voiced concerns about the reform process and its challenges. A recurring theme was that reform should strengthen the organization—reinforcing its normative functions, balancing development, peace and security, and human rights, and improving performance and inclusion. While diplomatic, the Secretary-General repeatedly emphasized that difficult decisions lie ahead due to financial constraints. Viewers of the televised briefing couldn’t help but wonder how the SG and his leadership team will reconcile member states' priorities with stark fiscal realities. Meanwhile, UN staff associations have become more vocal about their limited involvement in the reform process.

Ultimately, member states are the decision-makers on UN reforms. For some UN entities, like the Secretariat, this is not just at a strategic level but includes the details of which posts are abolished or moved to different locations. The SG therefore needs to reach some level of agreement with Secretariat department heads on reforms and related cost-cutting, as well as with UN system executive heads on system-wide reforms, including potential mergers. UN policies require staff consultation on job cuts and relocations. Any proposal the SG puts forward will then be reviewed, potentially picked apart, and adjusted by member states before it can actually be implemented.

With mounting arrears from the US and China, uncertainty over 2025-2026 payments, and reduced voluntary contributions from traditional donors, reform negotiations have little financial wiggle room. To say that the SG and his leadership team are between a rock and a hard place is an understatement. Consequently, this month’s spotlight explores leadership and negotiation techniques that can help UN leaders navigate this complicated landscape effectively.

Leadership Requires a Different Approach in the UN

The consulting firm McKinsey, which has written extensively on leadership, including the book CEO Excellence, notes that leadership in the public sector is generally more complex than in the private sector because "failed programs can be highly visible and bring severe personal consequences for top leaders—while successful programs, which can be harder to measure, may be rewarded with a reduced budget when delivered efficiently." As a result, McKinsey highlights that one of the six markers of an effective public leader is their ability to navigate government mandates, relationships, and institutional coordination—a core competency for public sector leaders (McKinsey, Honing Leadership Excellence in the Public Sector, April 2025).

The same applies to the UN, although with 193 member states instead of a handful of political parties in legislative bodies, and approximately 80 different departments and offices in the UN Secretariat alone, it is even more complex. The organization is also currently undergoing a major period of upheaval—largely forced by financial realities. At the same time, a growing number of member states and observers see this as an opportunity for a genuine transformation of the organization, enabling it to respond to the collective problems of the 21st century in ways previous reforms have not achieved. All of this naturally leads to the conclusion that now is the time to adopt a leadership approach touted by McKinsey as a key trait of successful CEOs: "Be bold. Fortune favors the bold." UN staff are certainly looking for such leadership.

However, research on effective leadership skills in international organizations suggests that a completely different approach is needed for UN leaders to facilitate constructive decision-making, addressing both the short-term financial crisis and the organization's longer-term transformational change. This stems from the intergovernmental structure of the organization and some of the disconnects in accountability inherent in its institutional structure.

Confident Servitude as an effective UN Leadership Style

As an intergovernmental organization, member states are ultimately the ‘boss’ of the UN, with the Secretary-General serving as the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) rather than a Chief Executive Officer (CEO). While the level of authority that CAOs wield may vary, the fundamental hierarchy between member states and the administration remains a consistent feature across all international organizations. Accordingly, research across international organizations has highlighted that ‘confident servitude’ is an important competency for successful leaders.

Confident servitude entails demonstrating respect for and deference to the formal authority of member states, who serve as the ultimate policymakers in any international organization. This, in turn, enables leaders to earn the trust of member state representatives, creating openings for influence behind the scenes through various informal processes. As a 2020 study of leadership in the ASEAN Secretariat noted, effective engagement with member states was developed by leaders who

"brought a certain skill to their servant performances, carving out space for action and influence without being seen to do so." - (D. Nair, “Emotional Labor and the Power of International Bureaucrats,” 2020).

Those who carve out such space and skillfully exploit informal processes can influence international policymaking far beyond what formal authorities or conventional measures of power might suggest. This applies to both administrative leaders and member state delegates. A critical competency in making this work is a strong understanding of organizational and legislative processes, as well as where influence can be exerted—for instance, in deciding which topics appear on formal meeting agendas and how they are framed.

As ‘bold’ UN leaders have discovered, introducing a UN report to launch a change process or innovation is only possible when member states have invited it within a formal agenda item—no matter how vital the innovation may be. Confident servitude requires finding ways to evolve decision-making substance without undermining the legislative authority of member states.

The Importance of Technical Expertise in UN Leadership

Another critical competence for effective UN leaders is technical expertise in the subject matter—particularly for politically contested issues like the UN80 reforms. While member states conduct their own research to formulate policy positions, they often lack detailed technical insights—especially regarding implementation or operationalization—that reside within the UN administration. This information asymmetry arises from the UN’s extensive experience in executing policies and programs, providing unique insights that may not be accessible to member states and which can crucially shape the debate and eventual decisions. Several delegations highlighted that they consider the UN's expertise on lessons from past reforms as a valuable asset. A point reiterated by the Fifth Committee, who has repeatedly asked for such insights to shape the justification for any reforms presented to it.

But more than that, recognition of this technical expertise helps to build trust and strengthens the credibility of UN leaders as informal interlocutors who can informally advise member states about the potential impact of their decisions. To create the appropriate political momentum, leaders need to identify like-minded member states with whom to engage and where possible build and work through groups or alliances of multiple member states. Because UN leadership has limited formal authorities and roles in decision making processes, i.e. leadership does not chair any decision-making meetings, this political stakeholder management is primarily an informal process.

At formal meetings, influence is wielded by how an issue is presented and framed—which is why technical expertise is such an essential leadership competence. Confident servitude requires leaders to frame discussions in an impartial manner, ensuring they represent the interests of most stakeholders without favoring one group. At the same time, strong technical knowledge enables leaders to shape the debate by defining the problem to be solved, emphasizing lessons learned, articulating key conclusions, and presenting recommendations to member states. Communicating these ideas clearly to an audience with varying levels of technical knowledge, while focusing on the organization’s needs without appearing to advocate a political position, is incredibly challenging—but key to leadership success.

Ultimately, the UN80 reform process requires international leaders to balance formal and informal interactions with member states, leveraging technical expertise, diplomatic skills, and strategic stakeholder engagement. As a 2021 study of policy-making in the ILO and WHO concluded:

"Our findings reiterate the common observation that diplomatic skills, inclusiveness, and the appearance of impartiality are key." - J. Ege et al., "How do International Bureaucrats Affect Policy Outputs? Studying Administrative Influence Strategies in International Organizations", 2021

The Problem with ‘Confident Servitude’ Leadership and UN Reform

UN80 is taking place in a particularly complex policy-making environment, given the extreme shift in U.S. policy on the UN and foreign aid, as well as the significantly divergent views across the UN membership on the organization's future. This alone makes it difficult for even experienced and effective UN leaders to exercise their leadership competencies. More than that, however, the UN80 process has exposed one of the inherent weaknesses of ‘confident servitude’ as an overall leadership technique: while it works well with member states, it does not work with staff.

Confident servitude succeeds with member states when leaders “shine without outshining states” (D. Nair, “Emotional Labor and the Power of International Bureaucrats,” 2020). This implies deference to both the authority of member states and their ultimate decisions, even when those decisions serve national interests over the needs of the organization. While this is a political reality of any intergovernmental organization, emerging research on the UN has highlighted that such compromises can create challenges for staff, particularly when political decisions appear to undermine the fundamental values of the UN Charter or the organization's performance vis-à-vis the public it serves. Because formal accountability mechanisms are primarily designed to ensure compliance with member state decisions, little recourse exists when those decisions fail to strengthen the UN’s ability to fulfill its Charter mandates. Preventing or addressing conflicts becomes impossible for UN staff when the Security Council cannot agree on a resolution authorizing action. Instead, staff are forced to witness suffering—and, if donors permit, provide humanitarian assistance, which ultimately remains only a stopgap measure.

Such contradictions between political decision-making and the aims of the UN Charter breed staff cynicism. More importantly, when leaders and their communications to staff are perceived as purely tactical, cynicism deepens, strengthening resistance to change as staff question leadership’s integrity and loyalty to the organization. Yet it is precisely this tactical approach, rooted in loyalty to member state decisions, that underpins the successful implementation of ‘confident servitude.’ As noted by Dr. Ben Christian, whose 2024 study of the UN Secretariat identified this phenomenon, leadership

"narratives that do not match the perceived reality on the ground are therefore prone to provoke cynicism among IO staff. Such cynicism does not lead IO employees to openly address the perceived discrepancies (‘criticism’) but results in a destructive, defeatist attitude that can destabilize the organization from within. My interviews show that cynicism is particularly high when IO employees feel that the organizational ‘action’ does not match the ‘talk’ from the top. In this case, IO employees lose faith in the righteousness and integrity of their organization." - B. Christian, “Just Theater!”—How Self-Legitimation Practices Can Backfire in International Organizations", 2024.

The solution, according to Dr. Christian, is for UN leaders to acknowledge political realities and the inevitable disconnect between words and action—without adopting a defeatist attitude themselves. In the case of UN80, for example, UN leaders initially avoided discussing job cuts, presumably to prevent anxiety. However, this positive intention has backfired somewhat, given the reality of widespread position eliminations, ultimately reducing trust in leadership narratives moving forward. Similarly, while UN leaders often wait to consult staff on an issue until they have a clear position to present in a positive light—a strategy also employed in UN80—this approach frequently reduces staff buy-in rather than increasing it.

"Narratives of [international organization] (IO) leadership that are overly affirmative and gloss over all existing problems are often rejected by IO staff." - B. Christian, “Just Theater!”—How Self-Legitimation Practices Can Backfire in International Organizations", 2024.

The challenge, of course, is that staff communications can easily be leaked to member states. Thus, framing communications effectively becomes crucial for successful leadership. When addressing staff, UN leaders must acknowledge political realities, be realistic and self-critical about what they can and cannot do, and provide a clear, justified rationale for internal decisions. At the same time, however, leaders must avoid explicitly referencing specific member states or political groupings in ways that, if leaked, could undermine their impartiality in member state discussions.

Navigating the Complexities of Leadership in UN80

Inspiring staff while facilitating decision-making among 193 member states is a phenomenally challenging endeavor at any time—but especially now, in the context of UN80. Successful leadership requires a delicate balance between competing priorities, achieved through adept communication and negotiation skills in both informal and formal processes. While every leader brings their own personality to the role, effective leadership must also be grounded in a strong technical understanding of how the UN functions, the impact of past reforms, and the operationalization of member state decisions—all while remaining true to the principles of the UN Charter.

Though it may seem like an impossible task, the world needs such leaders now more than ever.