1. Government Administrators - Information and tools to help manage the day-to-day operations of their jurisdiction as well as to inform policy formulation. The ability to communicate operational data to the public.
2. Public Interests - Actively engaged citizens interested in keeping track of the services that their government is providing.
3. Academic Interests - Research groups hoping to harness public data for academic studies used in policy formulation.
The question then becomes how to organize a program that will meet the interests of all three stakeholders? Part of the current difficulty in getting governments to report performance data has been that guidelines have largely been written by external groups for the sake of providing data to a third party (i.e. academics, research orgs, etc), with few clear, tangible benefits for the governments providing data. There is always the promise of benchmarked data, the ability to compare metrics across jurisdictions, etc., but the governments providing the data are interested in more immediate benefits. I propose a simple system that is standard practice in the private sector but only seems to have recently crept into the public sector:
1. Report performance metric data on pre-defined schedule.
2. Analyze data for troubling trends or missed targets. Operationally research root cause of problems.
3. Provide corrective action for metrics where target was missed or data is trending in wrong direction.
4. Repeat process for next reporting period.
And in its simplicity the above process will satisfy all three stakeholders. The government has a running narrative of operational data and the policies/actions it is undertaking for improvement. The public also has access to both the data on services that it needs as well as information on government policies. Assuming that the jurisdiction picked a standardized set of metrics, academic groups will have access to data for research purposes. Everybody wins!
The above is a simplification of a system that I will flesh out further in future posts, but the idea is to plant the seed of thought. I've looked at various websites and have yet to find this sort of methodology being advertised on government sites and it would be interesting to see it in practice (though I in no way take credit for this as an original idea. It's basic root-cause analysis. The hope is to find tools relevant to the public sector to implement said analysis). As always, I welcome feedback on this concept, and look forward to providing more detail.
Great work on this -- I posted to our Twitter page (GovPartner) as I think our followers will enjoy it as well.
ReplyDeleteThanks,
Gabriela
This sounds very similar to an adaptive management framework. Did you purposely decide not to use the framework and if so, why?
ReplyDeletewhere as profitability is a measure of performance in the private sector the same cannot be said about the public sector.Discuss?
ReplyDelete