TheLectern

By Steve Kelman

Blog archive

More ELC observations from Steve Kelman

These are sort of random, as my kids would say, but here goes -- what they do have in common is that these are things I'm hearing from more than one person, things that seem to be on people's minds:

1) The biggest change going on right now in terms of what people expect from technology is social media. By this, people don't just mean Social Media with capital letters (Facebook, Twitter, etc.), but the idea that communication using technology should not be just one way, from sender to recipient -- from an agency to the public, in government's case. The social media idea with lower-case letters is that recipients should be given a chance to react to messages, and in many cases to help adapt or shape the messages.

2) Government needs to get much better at "fast failure." This is the good middle ground between the exaggerated risk aversion that comes from never being willing to fail and a "who cares if we fail" attitude that can bleed to quickly into indifference about results and success. In the IT arena, fast failure fits in to the idea of modular or agile development, getting increments out quickly so one can find out whether they are working, and make quicker go/no-go decisions.

(There is one caveat here, though. The organizational scholar James March has noted that organizational changes typically produce productivity declines early on, because people are trying new things and there hasn't been a chance to go down the learning curve. "Fast failure" needs to give some time for people to adapt before leading to that decision.)

3) A number of people noted the relative absence this year of senior contracting people at the conference. This may be a budgetary issue, or just a coincidence. The worry, though, is that this is a sign of declining interest of contracting people in working together closely with IT and program customers. One of the best changes coming out of the 1990's was a "customer service" orientation in contracting that encouraged ties between contracting and the people on whose behalf contracting folks are buying. Reversing that historic development would be a disaster.

Posted on Oct 25, 2011 at 12:09 PM


Reader comments

Tue, Nov 1, 2011 David Bodner

I would caution against over-generalizing one person's experience. But, as people operate more and more in crisis mode, they may find it tougher to make the time-investments in things like one-on-one meetings.

Wed, Oct 26, 2011 Steve Kelman

Ugh, if this is happening, it is indeed depressing, because the government needs now more than ever to engage with industry to work on figuring out how to save money in this budget environment. Any other industry or government folks want to give your observations here?

Wed, Oct 26, 2011

We can't survive to many more government failures. How about just getting it right the first time.

Tue, Oct 25, 2011

Steve, I have seen a distinct decline in the willingness on contracting officials to engage with industry in the past year. It has been a year of empty "industry days," inadequate RFPs, and government contracting officials answering acquisition questions inadequately or not at all. It seems like years of a lack of resources and development of an acquisition workforce is taking it's toll. It is very discouraging at a time when collaboration is the only way to overcome budget challenges.

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above