The Digital Disruption of Government

The Digital Disruption of Government

Marie Johnson

Managing Director and Chief Digital Officer

Centre for Digital Business

6 April 2014

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 and 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?

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.
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.
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”.
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.
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.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Biography

/ Marie Johnson
Managing Director & Chief Digital Officer
Centre for Digital Business
email:

Marie Johnson is the Managing Director and Chief Digital Officer of the Centre for Digital Business, with extensive public and private sector experience in Australia and internationally in technology and innovation. Marie established the Centre for Digital Business to continue her advocacy and thought leadership as a trusted strategic advisor to government leaders and businesses globally in innovation and digital transformation.

From a transformation implementation perspective, Marie has led the strategy and implementation of very significant reform programs to the digital machinery of government: the Business Entry Point (a digital initiative of the three levels of government); the introduction of the Australian Business Number; digital credentials and authentication; technology and operating model design for the Access Card; digital identity and whole of government architecture; innovation in payments and information services; the creation of the BasicsCard; and implemented a digital operating model with differential pricing for visas and visa services generating an estimated additional $700 million in revenue.

At Microsoft, Marie led Microsoft’s Public Services and eGovernment initiatives worldwide. The egovernment and digital initiatives Marie has led have been recognised globally as groundbreaking achievements by the United Nations and global think tanks.

For 5 years, Marie has been a member of the Accenture Global CIO Council Advisory Board. The Advisory Board provides a significant role in the governance of the Council, and developing insights and perspectives on the direction, content and research programming for the Accenture Global CIO Council activities.

Marie was named “Innovative CIO of the Year 2006-2007 – Australia” by the Australian Financial Review MIS Magazine.

In 2009, Marie and her team at the Department of Human Services received the “Prime Minister’s Award for Excellence in Public Sector Management – Gold Award” for the BasicsCard Project.

In October 2013, Marie was named one of Australia's "100 Women of Influence" by the Australian Financial Review & Westpac Group.

Marie is a Board Director of the Australian Information Industry Association (AIIA), which sets the agenda for the ICT industry in Australia.

In April 2014, Marie was appointed as a member of the NSW Government ICT Advisory Panel.

Marie is professionally committed to advancing women, particularly in ICT and is Vice President of Women in Information and Communications (WIC).

Marie has an MBA from the Melbourne Business School; a Bachelor of Arts; has completed the Harvard University John F Kennedy School of Government Senior Executive Fellows Program; and is a graduate of the Australian Institute of Company Directors.

Marie is professionally and personally committed to supporting philanthropic initiatives. A fitness enthusiast, Marie has run half-marathons and marathons including the London Marathon in 2012 in a team of 10 that raised $100,000 for the Leukaemia Foundation. Marie is a supporter of the Indigenous Marathon Project

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

All views are the personal opinions of the author, and do not represent the views of organisations referred to in this article.