WRITTEN ON December 6th, 2005 BY David Burke AND STORED IN Uncategorized

While there are similarities, any project like Transformational Government needs to state plainly the difference between a customer and a citizen. The current document does not, and deliberately confuses the two. Notice the language in paragraph 22:

The key actions required are (a) to increase understanding of customer needs and behaviours; (b) to define customer groups and appoint directors to lead the overall development of services to those groups..

Why “behaviours”? Parents need to understand the behaviours of their children, but only because children cannot take charge of their own affairs. Scientists study the behaviours of animals in a laboratory. But no one pretends the animals are co-authors of the resulting research. And it makes sense for private companies to follow shoppers as they walk through supermarket aisles, noting what products attract the most attention. But that doesn’t mean the supermarket is a democracy.

Following the analogy that government can be run as a business with citizens as customers, who are the shareholders? Customers can be served, but they can also be seduced, fooled and manipulated. Shareholders are the ones who meet each other and get to vote. Customers behave; shareholders act.

So shareholders want tools of participation and access to information that is public, deliberately not modified for different audiences. They want to appoint their own directors and take action amongst themselves, not under the paternal eye of a government appointed director. If Transformational Government spends huge sums of money to treat citizens like customers, these shareholders will be usurped.

What is the difference between a focus group and a grass roots campaign? Between a market research survey and a general election? Between “personalised service” and “easy navigation”? The difference is who owns the process – who’s intention sits in the driving seat.

For government to serve me as a customer is nice to have. But my rights as a shareholder must come first. Don’t observe my behaviour to understand my needs. My first need is for democratic control, and no amount of efficiency can take its place.

One example of transformational government in the criminal justice system imagined a woman picked up outside a department store for “acting suspiciously” and deported in the same paragraph. That is incredibly fast service. If FOIA requests are processed with the same speed then great. But if that first need for democratic control is not met, there is nothing to stop us customers from eventually choosing other analogies: government as nanny, government as phishing web site, government as jailer.