2014: The Digital Disruption of Government

From 2014.

Author. Marie Johnson. Published on LinkedIn 6 April, 2014.

The digital era is determined by the citizen/client experience.

In a recent article, I wrote about the challenges of digitising government, red tape, and what if the giants of the web designed government service delivery. The article described the past decade characterised by growing complexity and red tape in government administration - the same timeframe that has also seen the rise of digital platforms of engagement and commerce, and the disruption of traditional industry models in retail, financial services, media, education and manufacturing.

A recent article in Forbes magazine described how digital disruption has only just begun and I would absolutely agree with that. But missing from this an other lists is the digital disruption of government. Digital disruption happens in "other" industries, right? Where the value chain is dis-intermediated, re-defined and totally re-imagined.

In these "other" industries, we see agile new business models; customers expressing their experience and choice in terms of value received - ie the customer experience; the inevitable workforce shifts with jobs lost to automation or value extinction; new "jobs" created, and re-imagined; and the impact of globalisation and localisation.

What does digital disruption look like in government? After all, government is not immune from the impacts of the digital era, the next wave industrial revolution. "Digital" is not a fringe issue; it is not an IT issue; and it does not equal social media. Digital is starting to impact and will re-define the machinery of government. Digital will change cost structures of government and the relationship with citizens.

So what are the symptoms of the digital disruption of government and what will the future of digital government look like?

Fifteen years ago, I wrote about the coming revolution in financial services (see recent LinkedIn update) and I see just as significant disruptions coming for government.

In these LinkedIn blog posts, I will be looking at what the future of digital government might look like, and will be writing in more detail about the following symptoms of digital disruption in government. So what are the symptoms?

1. Industrial age governance does not appear to be effective. The evidence of this is the litany of audit reviews, various commissions of inquiry and capability reviews which point to “IT” project disasters and the cost to the public purse of billions of dollars – and this is happening world-wide. Not one of these projects was an “IT” project – there is in fact no such thing as an “IT” project. This is a governance and accountability question that goes to the foundation of public administration. The very fact that the assurance and review mechanisms in government describe major investments and change initiatives as “IT” projects is a symptom of a governance paradigm increasingly ill-suited to the digital era.

2. Related to point (1) and exacerbating it, is the lack of a digital capability architecture strategy in government. There are some governments now moving to address this issue. The lack of a digital capability architecture in government means that agencies are continuing to invest in silos which locks in costs, limits interoperability, and creates digital red tape. One of the most persistent examples of this is authentication – and yet government agencies should be able to leverage the capabilities of banks for example which have a robust national economic asset in digital credentials.

3. The lack of an API strategy in government means that agencies cannot readily leverage the economic digital assets of broader industry. Agency investments are capital intensive with legacy capital programs stretching out for years. This not only locks in costs and risks, and impedes the ability to leverage industry innovation, but from a democratic perspective, limits the ability of agencies to anticipate and respond to government priorities in an agile way. The lack of a whole of government API strategy also inhibits innovative solutions – developed from both open government data and other data sets – from being able to connect with the government platform. The API strategy for government will be essential for the “Internet of Things of Government Services”.

4. Industrial age procurement processes are not only a significant driver of red tape but are out of sync with the dynamics, time frames and innovation required in digital government administration. And because there is no digital capability architecture, agencies are each procuring the same or similar capability from an agency-specific perspective. This “process” focus rather than “architectural” focus drives multiple costs and risks across government without achieving interoperability, agility or an improved experience for citizens / clients. Whilst there is a growing discussion around the procurement processes for cloud services, there is not yet a whole-of-government architectural capability approach to cloud services in government.

5. The answer to point (4) above is not to bring mega agencies together or to put in place “shared services” arrangements. These are industrial age administrative approaches, reminiscent of the era referred to in the Forbes article where operations were organised “around the power source, which was how you had to in the age of steam”.

Far more fundamental questions need to be understood – what is the mission, what is the operating model and what is the most optimal capability architecture. This does not mean that government owns, operates and delivers the requisite capabilities – quite the opposite. The argument for “big agencies” is often scale and purchasing power – the dynamics and economics of which are fundamentally different in the digital era.

Mega agencies and shared services arrangements are industrial age approaches to organising around the power source.

Instead, in the digital era, government will be a platform of thin agencies connecting to other capability platforms, defined by a digital capability architecture and..

…determined by the citizen/client experience.

Government as a platform delivering the “Internet of Things of Government Services” – driven by digital disruption – will be a re-imagination of the machinery of government and the relationships with citizens clients. This is not a direction that governments can choose or not choose - it is happening.

Question: I am interested in hearing from other thinkers and futurists on the notion of “government as a platform” and the opportunities and challenges from the digital disruption of government. I am now of the view that “government as a platform” is a failed concept.