WRITTEN ON November 2nd, 2005 BY Jim Murphy, Cabinet Office Minister AND STORED IN Transformational Government
So far it’s been a hectic day, launching the Transformational Government strategy. And it’s been a hectic summer as we’ve worked on it. What has struck me is the amount of collaboration it has all entailed.
We’ve been to far corners of the country –from primary schools to even an oil rig. We’ve met those on both sides of the frontline and they’ve shared their insights with us. It’s all been very useful as we develop the strategy.
It’s an example of the type of behaviour we hope that this strategy will drive. Listen to the customer – gain insight. Design that insight into the services. Make sure we share where possible. And, make sure that we make the most of the professionals involved.
I’ve also been struck with the appetite for transformation. Recently, I made a couple of speeches about e-Government. One to a conference and the other in a Westminster debate. The questions and comments that followed were encouraging. There’s an acceptance that transformational e-government is a way ahead for public services. There’s also an eagerness to go faster and further. It’s clear that many of Ideal Government’s contributors share that eagerness. I hope that when you read our strategy that you’ll see it as laying the foundations for that future.
You can find the strategy and supporting docs on the CIO site.
10 Responses to “Kicking Off The Strategy”
Jim, welcome, and congratulations on this (incipient) ground-breaking dialogue. As you’ve noted, there are plenty of articulate and motivated individuals out there. A focus group it ain’t. I think we’re all just impressed that you’re willing to engage. Here’s to it………
Fantastic to see this strategy and the minister online.
In general, this is a major step forward and really shows IT in government coming of age – this is about change and citizens, not technology. The long term view and realistic timeframe also give one confidence.
I have three related questions:
1. Does Tony Blair understand the fundamental political and managerial implications of this? Processes cannot be reformed and services made citizen-centric without a root and branch re-engineering of the entire public services. This means ministries, agencies and the relationship between central and local government being radically altered.
2. The customer group directors are a major innovation and seem key to making this work. But what budgets and power will they have? Who will resolve the myriad turf wars?
3. Without a fully engaged cabinet minister driving this, with full Blair-Brown backing, there will not be “fundamentally different ways of delivering public services”. Is such an appointment envisaged?
On a more serious note, good to see (on page 4) that “modern governemnt .. relies on accurate and timely information about .. animals” (amongst others)!
Jim, great to see you taking this initiative, and I really like the energy your first post implies, because transformation is going to require Ministers and officials with not just the appetite but the energy to transform government processes. Inertia, fed by apathy, are really difficult obstacles to overcome, and require sustained, directed efforts.
My question is this: how will you know when “government” is “transformed”? In posing this, I am all too familiar with the temptation to suggest targets and so-on — avoid these — but really to identify some firm concepts of what will represent the hallmarks of transformed government. In 2011, if one were to publish a retrospective account of the process, what will we likely see as having happened?
We can do this in other areas. For example, it is pretty obvious to me the banking and financial industries have undergone major transformation since computers were introduced, which accelerated over the last 10 years via the internet. For my part (and that of my business), I don’t go near a branch any more; major transactions are undertaken electronically, supported by call centres and so-on. Obviously, this has impacts in terms of the physical manifestation of the finance sector, but in terms of customer service, choice and quality there has been a marked improvement.
I can see the possibilities for this in government services, but there are many sacred cows to be slaughtered. Hence the need for sustained energy.
I think that your government is on the right track, although the way forward can be pretty tough. The technology is the easy part…change management is the challenge and there isn’t any silver bullet approaches to create a happy end result.
We (in British Columbia) embarked on this strategic direction about 10 years ago beginning with the backroom systems (finance, payroll, communications) and then the technology infrastructure. These type of changes takes time, energy and most of all perserverance. Of course, the Ministerial support and oversight is very much welcomed.
My advice for the Public Servant management support folks is to look at the big picture and try to put your self into the shoes of the public we serve. Common systems makes good sense and it’s perfectly acceptable to think like a taxpayer!
Good luck on making your vision a success…and if you want to chat about implementation strategies please don’t forget to call your ‘country cousins’ *smile*.
Cheers,
JAM
Likewise, let me add my support to the approach being taken here. It’s very positive to see an open discussion and dialogue taking place in this way. I’m still reviewing the detail of the document, which overall takes a positive and aspirational tone and approach. It’s good to see a clear marker like this being set down that we can focus on.
A few immediate observations in the interim:
• I think it would help make the strategy concrete – and give it some clear outcomes to aim for – if it set out some scenarios (or “a day in the life of”) to illustrate the way public services will be working at various points in the future. This is not only useful to help ensure that the necessary step changes can then be mapped and worked on to deliver those outcomes, but also to help engage a wider audience than the “techie” one in understanding the significance of this strategy and the impact it will have on their lives. This is not just about IT and that message needs to be clearly communicated.
• on which point, perhaps we could ask the industry as a whole to temporarily set aside our natural competitive instincts and support the Government in running a few open showcase days where we really show the best highlights of IT-enabled transformation projects that have already happened? This would help open many eyes to the art of the possible and also help the debate include a far wider audience.
• to help drive through significant cultural change of the type implied by the strategy, I believe the Civil Service risk/reward model will need changing (based on the recognition that all too often rewards drives behaviours) to help encourage and support the transformation required. So-called “IT projects” are fundamentally major business change projects: and often it is the change programme itself at the root of the problems that can arise.
I look forward to digesting the strategy in full and contributing in both this forum and elsewhere. Congratulations.
As a person who has been in the public sector for six months following a substantial career in international commercial business I greatly welcome this initiative. If there is a real will to make it happen then it could make a much needed difference.
As a previous contributor has pointed out, change can be painful and requires total commitment from the top down. One aspect that strikes someone entering the public sector immediately is the amount of duplication and irrelevant KPI’s which serve no purpose other than employ a vast army who enjoy debating how many angels can dance on a pinhead. One is also struck by the vast array of “stakeholders” and other “interested” parties who sit on the innumerable and often ineffective advisory groups. This excess is often also seen in the over-sized boards of some public sector companies which have more of a co-operative rather than businesslike approach. These delivery organisations need to be transformed to slim, effective, customer focused and accountable entities which are charged with delivering the agreed policy. Leadership that succeeds is rewarded, those who fail are shown the door and those who transgress severely sanctioned. Such should be the standards as this is public money where, unlike a quoted company, the shareholder have no option but to participate and so have the right to expect the best practice.
Finally I would suggest that a COO function needs to be considered at department and supra-department level to drive synergy across government to avoid the duplication which often leads to so much waste. While there have been attempts at this in the past it has often been for reasons other than that of clear business drivers. This task of transformation is massive but the spirit of this strategy goes very positively in the right direction.
The challenge is for those prepared to execute to step up but is certainly not for the faint-hearted!
More congratulations on the overall strategy and the interactive approach. It’s good to see a positive reception from a diverse group.
One question: the overall timetable makes sense, but we know that parts of government are further down the track than others in terms of delivery capability; and some audiences are further down the adoption process than others. What plans are there to “fast-track” parts of the overall approach, and how will such groups be identified and chosen?
Whilst very much supporting transformational government, I have a number of awkward queries about how this initiative will go forward:
1. Will this build on lessons learned from local egovernment – particularly around the value of enabling peer to peer support for service and transformation practitioners?
2. Will standardised systems and processes allow for management of those ‘don’t fit the model’ exceptions that are inevitable when moving to a one size fits most model?
3. Will there be headroom for process and service innovation?
4. What should local government be doing over the next 18 months? And to what extent are local authorities going to be engaged in developing plans for currently centrally run services?
5. And what people preparation is planned? Do we need to work on common core competencies for all public service staff? Should we be developing the foundations for cross boundary working – joint team development for starters! The people issues are always the hardest.
There are so many more questions…….
It’s more than obvious to me that the banking and financial industries have undergone major transformation since computers were introduced.
A Minister asking for feedback from the blogville, we never get this in France, in the world…? A first perhaps… A step in the right direction… Bonne chance!