Attracting and Retaining a Head of Planning in 2026: Skills, Team Dynamics and Delivery
- truthaboutlocalgov
- Jan 6
- 12 min read
Our perspective for councils that want a Head of Planning who can meet the moment, getting the Local Plan done, keeping enforcement credible, providing efficient, high‑quality decisions, and giving developers the assurance they need to help meet housebuilding targets.
Why this role is mission‑critical in 2026
England’s planning system is undergoing its most significant transformation in decades. The Government has introduced a 30‑month timetable for Local Plan adoption, backed by new regulations, transitional arrangements, and funding streams designed to accelerate preparation and ensure universal coverage. This is not optional, ministers have been clear that the era of seven‑year plan preparation is over. Yet, as of late 2025, fewer than one‑third of local planning authorities have an up‑to‑date Local Plan in place. That gap is a risk to housing delivery, infrastructure investment, and the credibility of local decision‑making. Councils that fail to meet the new timetable will face scrutiny and, potentially, intervention.
At the same time, the pressure on housing delivery is intensifying. Net additional dwellings fell to 208,600 in 2024–25, a 6% drop year‑on‑year, despite the Government’s pledge to deliver 1.5 million homes this Parliament. This ambition demands more than permissions on paper, it requires a planning service that can provide developers with confidence, accelerate build‑out, and maintain quality outcomes for communities. The Head of Planning sits at the centre of this challenge.
This is not a custodial role. It is a leadership position that translates national policy into local action. A strong Head of Planning will:
Drive Local Plan adoption within the new 30‑month framework, managing evidence, engagement, and examination with precision.
Deliver a predictable, high‑quality Development Management service, meeting statutory speed and quality thresholds while safeguarding appeal performance.
Maintain credible enforcement, ensuring compliance and protecting communities and responsible developers from the reputational damage caused by unchecked breaches.
In short, the Head of Planning is the linchpin for growth, housing delivery, and public trust. Without decisive leadership in this post, councils risk falling behind on statutory obligations, losing influence over place‑shaping, and undermining investor confidence at a time when every authority is under the spotlight.
The Strategic Context Councils Must Navigate
The planning landscape in 2026 is defined by reform, scrutiny, and delivery pressure. Councils are operating in an environment where expectations are higher than ever, and the margin for error is shrinking.
Plan‑making reform
The Government’s overhaul of the system introduces a 30‑month timetable for Local Plan adoption, replacing the historic seven‑year average with a disciplined, time‑boxed process. This new model includes gated checkpoints, early inspector involvement, and a requirement for digital, accessible plans that meet national standards. Councils must now demonstrate programme management capability, not just policy drafting skills. Failure to keep pace risks reputational damage and potential intervention.
Performance expectations in Development Management (DM)
DM services are under continuous monitoring for speed and quality. The designation criteria remain unforgiving: at least 60% of major applications and 70% of non‑majors must be decided within statutory timeframes, and no more than 10% of decisions overturned on appeal. Importantly, speed is now assessed on a rolling one‑year basis, meaning councils cannot rely on historic performance to mask current weaknesses. This demands real‑time oversight and agile resource management.
Current DM baseline
The latest national statistics underline the challenge. In Q3 2025, district authorities received 78,800 applications (a 3% decline year‑on‑year), decided 76,200 (down 4%), and granted 66,400, an approval rate of 87%. While 90% of major applications were decided in time, this headline masks growing pressure on non‑majors and the cumulative impact of staff shortages and rising complexity. Councils cannot afford complacency; designation remains a real risk for underperforming authorities.
Housing delivery pressure
The housing numbers tell their own story. Net additions fell to 208,600 in 2024–25, a 6% drop compared to the previous year. Against the backdrop of a Government pledge to deliver 1.5 million homes this Parliament, this shortfall is stark. Permissions alone will not close the gap, councils need Local Plans that allocate deliverable sites, DM services that provide predictable timetables, and enforcement regimes that maintain confidence in the system. Every part of the planning function is under the spotlight.
What Councils Need from a Head of Planning
The Head of Planning role in 2026 is not about maintaining the status quo, it is about delivering outcomes under unprecedented scrutiny and reform. Councils need a leader who combines technical mastery with strategic vision and the ability to inspire confidence across multiple stakeholders.
Local Plan Leadership
We need someone who can engineer the programme to meet the new 30‑month timetable, not simply draft policies. This means owning the Local Development Scheme (LDS) reset, structuring gateway submissions, and managing risk at every stage. The Head must keep Members, communities, and statutory partners aligned while commanding the evidence base, Housing
Needs Assessment (HNA), infrastructure planning, and viability testing. Holding firm on soundness is critical; the plan must examine cleanly and adopt on schedule. In short, this is programme management at scale, not just policy writing.
Development Management Assurance
Predictable, timely decisions are the lifeblood of investor confidence and community trust. The Head must maintain a data‑driven DM service, with live oversight of PS1/PS2 portfolios, weekly throughput huddles, and rapid intervention where queues build. They should be completely fluent in designation thresholds and understand how operational choices, validation discipline, caseload allocation, negotiation strategy, impact speed and quality. This is about avoiding designation risk while delivering a service that developers and residents can rely on.
Enforcement Credibility
Enforcement is often the silent test of a planning authority’s reputation. Councils need a Head who can implement harm‑based triage, deliver visible early wins on high‑impact breaches, and deploy the full suite of powers decisively. A clear enforcement posture protects communities and honest developers, and it stops non‑compliance becoming a rational choice. This is not about punitive action for its own sake, it is about fairness, deterrence, and maintaining confidence in the system.
Stakeholder Assurance and Growth
The Head must be a skilled diplomat, confident in engaging Members, developers, communities, statutory consultees, and Homes England teams. They should set clear pre‑application protocols, publish validation SLAs, and provide timetable transparency. Integrating design, viability, and ecology input at the right stages de‑risks schemes and accelerates build‑out. This is how councils unlock growth while safeguarding quality and sustainability.
Skills and Experience That Actually Deliver
Strategic Plan‑Making, Digital and Evidence
The Head of Planning must demonstrate mastery of the new plan‑making architecture, including the 30‑month timetable, gateway assessments, and digital standards. This is not just about drafting policies, it’s about programme engineering under pressure. A proven track record of taking a Local Plan through Examination and adoption is essential. They should understand how to integrate Housing Needs Assessments, viability studies, and infrastructure planning into a coherent evidence base, while ensuring compliance with soundness tests. Digital competence is now non‑negotiable: the ability to lead on interactive, accessible plans and manage data‑driven engagement is critical.
Development Management (DM) Portfolio Control
Running a DM service in 2026 requires more than case allocation, it demands real‑time performance management. The Head must be able to interpret PS1/PS2 data, spot throughput bottlenecks, and deploy resources dynamically to maintain statutory speed and quality thresholds. They need to balance speed with robustness, ensuring decisions withstand appeal scrutiny while avoiding designation risks. Weekly performance huddles, dashboard oversight, and a culture of accountability are part of the toolkit.
BNG/Ecology, Viability and Urban Design
Government’s 2025 LPA capacity survey highlights persistent gaps in biodiversity net gain (BNG), developer contributions/viability, and urban design. These are areas where poor advice can derail plans or delay major applications. The Head must know when to build in‑house capability and when to buy specialist support through frameworks or shared services. They should also understand how these disciplines interact with plan‑making and DM, ensuring viability evidence is robust, BNG requirements are integrated early, and design quality is not sacrificed for speed.
Enforcement Leadership
Enforcement is often overlooked until it becomes a reputational crisis. The Head must lead with harm‑based prioritisation, ensuring resources target breaches with the greatest community impact. Decisive action and clear communication are vital, both to deter non‑compliance and to reassure residents and developers that the system is fair. This includes readiness to use the full suite of powers, from planning contravention notices to injunctions, and the ability to defend decisions under legal challenge.
Stakeholder Diplomacy
Planning is political, technical, and relational. The Head must inspire confidence across Members, communities, developers, statutory consultees, and Homes England teams. They should set clear pre‑application protocols, publish validation SLAs, and provide transparent timetables. Skilled negotiation and the ability to manage expectations, without compromising policy integrity, are essential. This is how councils unlock growth while maintaining trust.
Culture and Team Leadership
Finally, the Head must be a culture builder. Councils need an inclusive, high‑trust, performance‑led environment where professional judgement is valued and accountability is clear. Investing in learning and succession planning is critical, creating pathways for future leaders and reducing dependency on expensive interim cover. The Head should champion continuous improvement, mentoring, and a data‑driven mindset that turns compliance into excellence.
The Workforce Reality, and How We Respond
The workforce challenge in planning is not a passing issue, it is structural, and it is acute. The 2025 Government survey confirms what most councils already know: 79% of local planning authorities (LPAs) are struggling to recruit, and 93% report skills gaps, particularly in digital capability, viability expertise, and ecology. These gaps are not minor, they strike at the heart of the planning reforms. Digital skills underpin the new Local Plan standards, viability expertise determines whether sites are deliverable, and ecology knowledge is essential for biodiversity net gain (BNG) compliance. Without these capabilities, councils risk missing statutory deadlines and undermining confidence in their planning service.
Senior Development Management (DM) roles remain among the hardest to fill. This is a critical vulnerability because DM performance is now assessed on a rolling one‑year basis, meaning councils cannot hide behind historic averages. If throughput falters, designation risk rises, and with it, reputational damage and potential loss of control over decision‑making.
Reports from Public Practice and sector bodies reinforce the picture: capacity shortfalls often keep services operating at minimum statutory performance, leaving little bandwidth for proactive improvement or innovation. Digital and data skills deficits are particularly persistent, slowing adoption of modern workflows and the Government’s push for interactive, accessible plans.
Broader public sector HR surveys add nuance. While flexible and hybrid working is linked to a 67% positive productivity impact, and recruitment challenges have eased slightly in some areas, succession planning remains underdeveloped, with 61% of councils lacking any formal process. This means even when we succeed in filling critical posts, we risk repeating the cycle of churn unless we invest in pipelines and retention strategies.
What Works in Practice
1. Compelling EVP (Employee Value Proposition)
We must sell impact and purpose, not just a job description. The EVP should highlight the opportunity to deliver a Local Plan in 30 months, unlock visible growth outcomes, and shape communities for decades. Pair this with professional autonomy, modern tools, and hybrid/flexible working, which evidence shows boosts productivity and attracts talent. Candidates want to know they will make a difference, not just process applications.
2. Structured Pipelines
We cannot rely solely on the open market. Councils should leverage graduate schemes, apprenticeships, and partnerships with Public Practice and RTPI to bring in new talent. Sector‑led improvement via PAS guidance and peer support can accelerate capability building. This is about creating a steady flow of talent rather than scrambling for interims every time a vacancy arises.
3. Targeted Retention Levers
Where lawful, use market supplements for critical posts. Fund professional memberships, CPD, and supported APC routes to Chartered status (MRTPI). These investments pay back in stability and service quality. Retention is not just about pay, it’s about professional growth and recognition.
4. Succession Planning
Define clear pathways, Team Leader → DM Manager → Deputy Head of Planning, and back them with mentoring and stretch assignments. Formalise who is gaining experience in plan‑making, DM, and enforcement so we build resilience across the service. Without this, councils will remain vulnerable to sudden exits and leadership gaps.
5. Smart Specialist Support
Close immediate gaps in ecology/BNG, viability, and urban design through frameworks or shared services while we build internal capability. This avoids bottlenecks and keeps projects moving. Councils should treat specialist support as a strategic investment, not an emergency fix.
This is how councils move from firefighting vacancies to building a sustainable planning service that can deliver under pressure. The alternative, continuing with ad‑hoc recruitment and reactive fixes, will not meet the demands of the 2026 planning landscape.
Building the Team Dynamic That Delivers
A high‑performing planning service is not just about technical competence, it’s about creating a team environment where clarity, accountability, and collaboration drive results. In 2026, with reform deadlines and performance scrutiny at an all‑time high, councils need to build a team dynamic that is disciplined, data‑driven, and trusted by Members and stakeholders.
Role Clarity
One of the most common pitfalls in planning services is blurred boundaries. When responsibilities across Policy/Plan‑making, Development Management (DM), and Enforcement are not clearly defined, teams drift into “blended chaos”, duplication, missed deadlines, and accountability gaps. Councils must set out explicit role definitions and make the interlocks clear. For example:
Policy teams own evidence, plan preparation, and Examination readiness.
DM teams focus on throughput, quality decisions, and appeal resilience.
Enforcement teams prioritise harm‑based action and compliance. The Head of Planning should lead this clarity exercise, ensuring every officer knows their remit and how their work contributes to statutory performance and strategic outcomes.
Data‑Driven Culture
Planning is now a performance‑critical service, and data is the backbone of improvement. Councils should embed a culture where DLUHC live tables and the interactive Power BI dashboard are not just compliance tools, they are operational levers. Weekly reviews of inflows, work‑in‑progress (WIP), speed metrics, appeal risk, and enforcement actions should inform resource allocation and workflow adjustments. This means:
Real‑time dashboards visible to managers and case officers.
Weekly performance huddles to tackle bottlenecks before they escalate.
Trend analysis to anticipate designation risk and plan interventions. Data literacy is no longer optional, it is a core competency for every planning leader.
Member Confidence
Planning decisions are inherently political, and committee performance can make or break public trust. Yet PAS’s national survey shows many councils do not see current Member training as effective. The fix? Move beyond generic sessions and deliver case‑based training focused on:
Soundness and material considerations, so decisions are defensible.
Appeal risk awareness, so Members understand the consequences of refusal.
Practical scenarios, so theory translates into confident decision‑making. Investing in Member confidence reduces risk, accelerates decision timetables, and strengthens the council’s reputation for fairness and competence.
External Assurance
Even the best internal plans benefit from independent challenge. Commissioning a PAS Peer Challenge and delivering a time‑boxed 12‑month action plan is now common practice among high‑performing councils. This approach:
Provides objective scrutiny of plan‑making, DM, and enforcement.
Aligns Cabinet and Scrutiny around a shared improvement roadmap.
Demonstrates to Government and stakeholders that the council is proactive, not reactive. External assurance is not a sign of weakness, it is a hallmark of modern governance.
Bottom line: A strong team dynamic is built on clarity, data, confidence, and accountability. Councils that invest in these foundations will not only meet statutory obligations, they will create a planning service that delivers growth, protects communities, and earns trust.
Practical delivery playbook (first 180 days)
Stabilise DM performance (Weeks 1–12)
Backlog attack: cleanse invalids; set weekly throughput targets; protect case officer focus time; keep majors above 90% in time and non‑majors above 70% to stay well clear of designation risk.
Appeal discipline: codify refusal reasons; run peer review for complex cases; track appeal rates monthly to keep overturns below 10%.
Developer assurance (Weeks 4–16)
Publish service standards (validation in ≤5 working days; major case timetables); formalise enhanced pre‑app with design, viability and ecology inputs; launch quarterly developer forums focused on clarity and predictability.
Enforcement credibility (Weeks 4–20)
Harm‑based triage; target early high‑impact breaches for visible action; report outcomes publicly to reassure residents and fair‑minded developers; review KPIs (notices issued, compliance rates, time to action).
Plan‑making programme (Weeks 6–24)
Reset the LDS to the 30‑month model; confirm gateways; commission critical evidence (HNA, infrastructure, viability); map risks and mitigations; ensure inclusive engagement and Member briefings aligned to procedural milestones.
People & capability (Weeks 1–24)
Skills matrix; fill immediate gaps in ecology/BNG, viability and digital/data via interim specialists while recruitment lands; launch graduate/apprentice intake; set out a formal succession plan and mentoring framework.
The numbers to anchor our business case
Plan‑making: A new 30‑month timetable with gateway assessments and digital standards; funding programmes and guidance to speed adoption; fewer than one‑third of areas have up‑to‑date plans, universal coverage is the stated goal.
DM performance (Q3 2025): 78,800 applications received (−3% YOY), 76,200 decided (−4%), 66,400 granted (87%), 90% majors decided in time.
Designation thresholds: ≥60% majors, ≥70% non‑majors decided in time; ≤10% appeals overturned; speed now assessed over one year.
Housing delivery: 208,600 net additions in 2024–25, −6% YOY; hitting 300k per year requires sustained absorption capacity and tenure mix, not just permissions.
Workforce: 79% LPAs face recruitment difficulties; 93% report skills gaps (digital, viability, ecology); senior DM roles are hard to fill; flexible working linked to productivity gains; succession planning remains weak.
Our Concluding View
If councils want a Head of Planning who genuinely meets the needs of the organisation and the place, we must recruit for impact, not maintenance. This is not about filling a vacancy; it is about securing a leader who can transform outcomes under the most demanding planning environment in decades. That means:
Local Plan adoption under the new timetable, done once, done properly, and delivered within the 30‑month framework that ministers expect.
Development Management assurance that is predictable on speed and strong on quality, so developers trust the timetable, investors commit with confidence, and communities trust the fairness and robustness of decisions.
Enforcement credibility that protects residents and responsible market actors, sending a clear message that compliance matters and the system works for everyone.
A people strategy that closes specialist gaps and builds pipelines and succession, not just firefighting vacancies, but creating a sustainable service that grows its own talent and reduces dependency on expensive interim cover.
We will attract the right leader by making the job about outcomes and influence, not just process. That means offering a modern Employee Value Proposition (EVP) that combines purpose, autonomy, and flexibility, backed by evidence that hybrid working improves productivity. It means committing the organisation to a data‑driven, improvement‑oriented culture, supported by PAS peer challenge and transparent performance reporting.
If we do this, we will not simply appoint a Head of Planning. We will build a planning service that can deliver growth with confidence, protect communities, and earn public trust at the same time. This is the difference between surviving reform and leading through it.
