Restructuring the UK Government: Risk, Reckoning, or Renewal?

The UK government is undergoing one of its most significant waves of internal restructuring in recent memory. In just the last six months, major departmental changes have been announced or enacted across the Cabinet Office, Ministry of Defence, the Department for Business & Trade, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and a growing number of arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) including the NHS England. These include consolidation efforts, leadership changes, and renewed scrutiny over the size, purpose, and accountability of agencies operating outside departmental Whitehall structures. 

While the headlines often focus on cost-cutting and efficiency, the underlying story is more profound: our current state structures—whether departmental or semi-autonomous—are increasingly out of step with the demands of modern policy delivery, technology, and citizen expectations. 

The Triggers Behind the Shift 

Several forces are converging to drive this restructuring wave: 

• Unprecedented Budget Pressure: While fiscal constraint is not new, this administration faces an exceptional level of pressure. With a challenging economic backdrop, debt interest at historic highs, and intense demand for investment, organisations have to find cost reductions at scale—often without clear reinvestment plans or delivery transformation roadmaps. 
• Delivery Challenges: According to the National Audit Office (NAO), “more than 60% of major government programmes are at risk of failure due to delivery challenges, many rooted in organisational structure and governance” (NAO, 2023). 
• Digital Transformation: The push for “digital by default” services requires new capabilities and ways of working that legacy structures can’t support. 
• Policy Complexity: Cross-cutting issues like climate change, net zero, and AI governance don’t sit neatly in departmental silos. Structure must enable—not constrain—joined-up responses. 
• Public Trust: Citizen expectations of government responsiveness are rising coupled with pressure from independent scrutiny. Recent polling from Ipsos (2024) shows that only 32% of UK adults believe government institutions are “fit for purpose in today’s world.” 

Structural Change Without Strategic Clarity Is a False Economy 

History shows that reshuffling boxes on an organisational chart, in isolation, delivers limited results—and often causes disruption. As the Institute for Government noted, “machinery of government changes are often poorly managed, with limited assessment of costs or benefits and almost no post-implementation review” (IfG, 2023). 

In contrast, successful transformation hinges on four strategic pillars: 

1. Leadership Alignment  
   Before even defining the "why", there must be clear alignment and commitment among senior leaders to steward and sponsor change. Leadership fragmentation is one of the most cited blockers to successful implementation, especially when restructures span multiple directorates, agencies, or delivery partners. 
2. Purpose-Led Design 
   Every redesign must be rooted in a clearly articulated strategic intent—whether it's improving service outcomes, enabling collaboration, or unlocking efficiencies. Without this, organisations risk shifting problems rather than solving them. 
3. Evidence-Based Decision-Making 
   Structural choices should be grounded in data—not assumptions. This includes analysis of spans and layers, cost baselines, accountability gaps, capability mismatches, and the demand required to effectively deliver—ensuring workforce supply is aligned to real operational needs. 
4. People and Capability First 
   Any new structure must support the talent, skills, and behaviours required for future delivery. Otherwise, even the most elegant models will collapse under operational strain. 

Case in Point: NHS England 

In early 2025, NHS England announced a significant leadership restructure aimed at reducing duplication with the Department of Health and Social Care. Thousands of roles are under review. While the stated aim is to “streamline decision-making and improve patient outcomes,” many insiders have questioned whether the restructure is aligned to the system’s real delivery challenges—especially integration across ICSs (Integrated Care Systems). 

An NHS Confederation briefing (2024) warned that: 

“Restructuring must be accompanied by a cultural and capability shift. Otherwise, we risk demoralising teams and undermining delivery at a time when stability is badly needed.” 

The Way Forward 

Done well, restructuring offers a reset moment. A chance to design fit-for-purpose organisations that reflect today’s challenges—not yesterday’s assumptions. This requires a step change in how the civil service approaches design: less reactive and cosmetic, more strategic and insight-led. Leaders must resist the temptation to “announce and defend” a new structure without proper diagnosis or engagement. 

The Baringa Organisation Design Framework (BODF) offers a digitally enabled, data-driven, and insight-led approach to structural change. It connects strategy to execution through a four-phase model that combines workforce analytics, behavioural insights, and implementation rigour. Designed specifically for complex organisations—like government departments and ALBs—it ensures that design decisions are backed by evidence, tested with stakeholders, and embedded through strong governance and change support. 

But any framework is only as effective as the will to apply it. The choice now is whether this restructuring wave becomes another missed opportunity—or the moment the UK government retools itself for the future. Get in touch with Baringa today if you are interested in learning more.