Gov 2.0 Archive

Technology CSI

How do you know if your project is successful?  How would you describe this success to your kids or parents?  What differentiated your work from that of your predecessor?   How will the history books describe the legacy that you’ve left behind?  These are some of my favourite questions that I ask in job interviews.  I’ve found that these questions are deceivingly difficult for many to answer.  I’ve also asked these questions to organizations on both the delivery side and the receiving side of large IT projects.  “On time and on budget” simply doesn’t cut it as an answer. 

What stands out in my mind are those answers that are based on measurable results and not some squishy terminology.  Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the fact that many outcomes are qualitative.  But saying that you were responsible for a particular domain or contributed to a particular effort gives no sense of how noteworthy the effort was.  Consider the following statement “I participated in the Vancouver Olympic effort”.  Unfairly ambiguous?  Perhaps.  But it helps demonstrate the point that it is difficult to make a decision without more concrete evidence.

Evidence based decision making, a sort of technology CSI, helps link technology projects to business outcomes which ultimately gets the attention of an organization’s senior leaders.  In an era of shrinking budgets and the occasional scepticism towards technology initiatives it becomes more important than ever before to build the evidence of concrete business outcomes.  Evidence helps us appreciate if we are accomplishing the business objective that we set out to and allows us make course corrections when the evidence show us otherwise.  Evidence therefore allows for informed risk taking.  While evidence alone won’t guarantee 100% project success, it will improve the odds dramatically.  It will also allow for earlier identification of those activities that should simply be stopped.  With the appropriate evidence, those efforts that have been stopped, cancelled, discontinued, etc. will not be deemed as failures but rather stepping stones towards the next success.  Evidence helps everyone understand what has happened, helps us safeguard against the reoccurrence of those things that stood in the way of full success.  I say “full success” in place of “failure” since we will have learned from the efforts the led up to the decision point and will be able to build from them going forward.  Of course even with all the evidence in the world, doing the exact same thing twice and not being successful is just wrong.

So as you build out that project plan or consider your objectives for your upcoming year, take a moment to consider how you can prove your success to others.  You’ll be glad you took the time to think about the evidence you’re going to need to convince others of how really great your work was.

Share

Canada Gov Camp

I’ve had the opportunity to connect with a number of innovative thought leaders across Canada and engage in many of the local Open Gov activities that they are leading across the country.  Since many of these activities have been focused on specific local regions, I’ve been thinking that perhaps it’s time to broaden the conversation and include all three levels of government.  This Canada Gov Camp will follow the successful changecamp model and seeks to foster a dialogue between thought leaders in the community, government and industry in an un-conference format.  Here is a brief synopsis:

Date: early June 2010, (Welcome keynote – evening prior)

Location: TBD – Central Ottawa Location

Précis:

 A number of municipalities have embraced the concepts of open government and government 2.0.  There have been a number of community driven events where interested individuals have come together to progress the thinking in this area and explore tangible activities under the umbrella of change camps or citycamps.  While interested individuals have travelled across the country to participate in these unconferences, the focus of the events have been local or community oriented.  We think that these discussions are of critical importance to the future and are keen to support and encourage the conversation at a broader level.  We feel that by providing an environment for a discussion at the national level, to explore the interactions between cities, provinces and the federal level, these conversations can expand and bring together all jurisdictions that support Canadian individuals and businesses.  We expect that participants will explore the role of provincial and federal governments in cultivating the growth and prosperity of Canada’s vibrant communities.

Watch for more info once the location has been fully secured.

Share

Come on Deputy, Don’t Fear the Tech Gear

“Senior leaders in government remain concerned about IT projects”, revealed a good friend of mine following a recent executive roundtable he attended. He went on to note how unfortunate this is given the strong potential that technology has to meet the government’s objectives noted in the speech from the throne and other significant initiatives.

You’ll recall that the speech from the throne (http://www.sft-ddt.gc.ca/ ) calls for a review of administrative services with an emphasis on improving efficiency. It also calls out the launch of a “digital economy strategy to drive the adoption of new technology across the economy.” eGovernment conversations also raise the concept of government as a model user of technology, or even in some cases , a leading edge adopter of technologies through the use of test facilities. So why the reluctance?

There are any number of reasons why senior leaders may be nervous about embracing IT to enable service transformation. One leading reason is the uncertain outcomes following several large government IT projects. I believe that this is a result of incongruous timing between policy and technology. Government priorities, policies and even projects often span several years. One great example is New Brunswick’s goal to become self-sufficient by 2026 (http://www.gnb.ca/2026/ ). Started in 2007, this initiative has a close to 20 year time horizon. If we shift to have a look at the technological pace of change where new features / services are being delivered on an almost weekly basis, especially in the case of iMotorola Bag Phonenternet based services, we can quickly see the staggering amount of change that can occur over 20 years. While the number of changes due to weekly enhancements (1040) gives us a number that we really can’t appreciate, perhaps taking a look back at a common technology 20 years ago will put things in perspective. The early 1990s saw the emergence of 2G networks and the cell phone pictured here. So it would have been hard to imagine the multifunctional smart phones many of us use today.

Now let’s think about a traditional large government project. Large government projects take time, often spanning multiple years. Often the time between original concept to final delivery can span several technology generations leaving even the seasoned project manager with a change control nightmare just to keep pace with changes in technology and, perhaps even more challenging, changes in their customer’s expectations.

Ruthless Incrementalism

Given this apparent discordance between policy and technology, what is a senior leader to do? My feeling is that the key is to deliver measureable and meaningful outcomes in shorter timeframes. In place of multi-year, multi-million dollar “Projects”, deliver multiple low cost projects within a given year. Instead of a one million-dollar project, reconsider the project as a “Program” with one thousand, thousand-dollar projects. These small projects promote agility in face of technological change while building towards the broader program goals. The program can make rapid adjustments to ensure ultimate success should any one small project fail. There are a handful of other key principles that support this nimble approach to IT services delivery that I’ll explore later through this blog. But until then, with my apologies to the Blue Oyster Cult, “come on Deputy, don’t fear the tech gear”

Share