William’s question is about outcomes, end products.
I also think we need to address how projects are created and proceed. The two are not unrelated. By modifying how projects are researched, selected, designed and developed, and the people involved and the boundaries of the problem, we can radically alter the nature of what is created.
Take a for instance. Isobel Harding recently described the work being undertaken by the Local e-Democracy National Project. Looking at the Project’s website, I get the distinct impression that the idea is for local authorities to learn from other local authorities. But what about all the exciting projects that have been developed - innovatively and highly cost effectively - in the voluntary sector? Is this self-limiting approach a consequence of those involved in such projects being local authority people themselves, I wonder.
When I asked Isobel about tools - which is what she said they were promoting - she mentioned, amongs other things, avatars. Those in the not-for-profit sector groan. Been there, done that, sounds trendy but is largely a waste of time...Almost inevitably, the public sector seems to be - a few years? - behind the rest of us. There’s perhaps a wish to learn from best practice, but only from public sector practice. What about learning from the mistakes and achievements of the private, or not-for-profit etc. sectors? What about saving money - that can then be spent more productively - by not trying to reinvent the wheel?
I don’t think this is so much a question of ‘not invented here’ (though you do see this in any sector). It’s more that the public sector has not really figured out how to relate to the rest of society: it’s a little trickier, the structures are different, the relationships are not established, and so maybe it’s easier not to.
It has to be said that other-sector initiatives may also seem a little scary to those in government. They Work For You - currently still in beta - has parliamentary proceedings with self-posted comments from ordinary people. How scary is that?! But in this context scary is interesting rather than bad. Risk is something that needs to be taken on board, but with an acceptance that there will be some failures as well as successes (and this is perhaps a good reason why we need to move away from the Public Accounts Committee model of accounting for what the public sector does).
I would encourage people in the public sector to explore what’s going on out there, outside their own walls. There are some very bright people with some very interesting ideas and applications who are already making things happen, and who are largely doing this as a labour of love. They’re not getting the funding they truly deserve. You need them and they need you.
Cross-posted from City of Bits Blog
Published by Louise Ferguson on 23/09/04 at 10:45pm
Next entry: Offer accepted! We have a deadline!
Previous entry: The Dutch looked at constitutional implications of e-gov
This page has been viewed 486124 times
Entries: 1598 | Comments: 2648 | Trackbacks: 206
Most Recent Entry: 09/07/2008 09:35 pm
Most Recent Comment: 09/08/2008 12:18 pm
Members: 185 | Logged in: 0 | Guests: 39
Most recent visitor: 09/08/2008 02:38 pm
Most visitors ever: 443 on 10/12/2005 02:21 pm
I’d agree with your assessment that the public sector can be very inward looking and that as a result it feels behind the times. However, at the same time there are bits and pieces going on that are I hope useful and interesting. For example Data Street (http://www.datastreet.co.uk) which officers at my local authority have created to help them understand waste issues more comprehensively. We’re now developing the application so that at some point members of the council and the public will be able to interact with it; perhaps by sending photos of flytips or graffiti from their mobile phone or pda.
Reply by Andrew Brown on 09/24/04 at 3:49 pm