We should be bold in our overarching goals, and we should get there incrementally. The SES needs bold, not incremental change. Strategic leadership is more important than management. The big problem is the increasing distance between the SES and the policy makers. Depriving them of that, dealing with the political leadership through a filter, is very demoralizing and demotivating.
Leadership is the important thing to improve the place and respect of the career service.
I'm not sure that being a change manager is compatible with a lifelong career in Government. I think the SES, renamed as the Senior Professional Corps, is a worthwhile and valid change. But if you want change managers, you need flexibility and responsiveness that, frankly, you ought to get out of your political appointees. The real question is how the political leadership makes the best use of career SES talent. I would focus on how to manage within the current system and how the leaders of the system actually lead.