First-order syndrome - shorterm vs. effectiveness
Demand-driven or Command & Control?
We can create exactly the kind of digital systems & processes, we want - they are 100% designed with no "human" unpredictable aspect. And here lies the problem - people can adabt, systems cannot.
The design-to-adabt obligation mean that we ourselves are responsible for designing, how systems change, upgrade, adabt and improve according to the individual needs.
In other words how innovation & individual value per sustainable ressource constantly improve in the public sector.
And here is the problem - a problem that is essentially scaling the core Command & Control Economics problem:
An ICT project may believe to make a small improvement (e.g. "automate" a manuel process) but when did you see a public sector ICT project plan with constant change and change in many parallel directions simultanously to cover different & increasingly more individualised needs?
What we get is "First-order syndrome" - the shortterm investement for a claimed benefit that create legacy and make further innovation more difficuelt, more costly and the entire system gets less and less effective over time.
Even worse when we consider Public Sector infrastructure/ICT Architecture projects that affects a lot of ICT projects & services.
Small mistakes, bottlenecks or weaknesses scale exponentially - especially if these infrastrcuture/middelware projects require follow investments that bind various ICT systems more and more to eachother.
Digital Public Services are presently approached as 100% central control with a surface of "citizen co-creation" mainly as "outsourcing" of some data-entry tasks, but no fundamental change as to the pre-internet "mainframe" paradigme.
Now cross-border public sector infrastructure scale this problem exponentially by interlinking national public sectors to this kind of thinking.
Whereas there is not doubt that we both have to define clear security & other validation requirements for public service transactions, but here is nothing that say that this structure has to be or will benefit from central interlinkage and control of everything.
On the contrary - the almost deterministic outcome of present thinking is a public sector becomming less and less effective and more and more costly to operate.
This is not sustainable. We cannot have a public sector that gradually drain more and more ressources for less and less value undermining overall competitiveness.
I have elsewhere raised the suggestion that true Citizens Empowerment means real process isolation for the sake of demand-driven innovation. The effective way to ensure this is through the identity identity , ie. eliminate shared identifiers. The purpose is effectively to provide a solution to the Command & Control problem.
We talk about a gradual shift to loosely coupled systems components that gets integrated & combined from demand-side instead of buiding legacy from central command & control.
In the Research Project HYDRA, we did a lot of the basic work on creating inclusive middleware for model-driven and onthology-supported dynamic resolution.
This could act as a motor for an alternative approach but the problem is that the mainfraime thinking is an exlusive and non-interoperable paradigm.
Citizen Empowerment will have a lot of other aspects in terms of e.g. solving the cloud problem but also - as there can be no backdoors - requiring new solutions as to how to do e.g. research.
Similar it will creat new oppurtunities for true ICT value creation not just focussed on sales and targetting through Central Command & Control-style analysis of Big Data.
If citizens have all data available and only the citizen herself can combine non-realted contexts - a question is which tools do citizens need as many will not be willing or able to "manage" this personally.
There have to be a lot of built-in "automation" if that with poroper open interfaces will create massive innovation.
This stired what I experienced as a massive resistance to change claiming all sorts of motives and fears on my behalf.
My fear is very simple - the unavoidable pressure of globalization affect all aspects of society - unless the public sector pick up innovation speed significantly and exponentially, European ruin is almost deterministic.
The only alternative is "Greek solutions" with massive cut-backs which will just create another form of meltdown.
So - to those that see e.g. Stork and the Central Command & Control paradigme it represents - I ask the same question, I tried to resolve. How do you move beyond rethoric of "trust" and exponentially create real value ?