Transitions In Governance

So far the candidates for president have paid a lot of attention to problems around the world and the role the United States should play to help solve them. However, there is a growing consensus by other writers and bloggers that not enough attention is being paid to government performance. People would like to know how the Obama and McCain campaigns would solve the issue of government management and performance. If we go by history and look at the past presidential transitions, almost all new administrations have changed the government management approach of their predecessor. In light of this, it is almost assured that should either McCain or Obama become president, they will most likely usher in their own management agenda. Unfortunately, there is not a whole lot of information out there yet from either campaign on what their management agenda will be. Click here to read what some say should be on the next president’s management agenda. Please give us your thoughts and comments on this issue.

The Performance Institute is contributing to the Association of Government Accountant’s weblog on the need for the presidential candidates to focus more time on the state of government performance, accountability and transparency. Click here to read the article and contribute to the discussion.

The next president will have his work cut out for him when it comes to issues of improving government performance. Some reports are saying not enough has been done by the current president and congress to improve government efficiency. To remedy the performance issues, career civil servants should be appointed to lead federal agencies as this would ensure that people who have been in the system and understand the pros and cons of doing certain things, are in the driver’s seat for implementing any performance measures that are needed to improve government efficiency. What is your take on this issue? Read this article and give us your feedback.

In the business world we tout that competition brings out the best in competing parties. In this case the best includes - more efficiency for the competing parties, and lower cost to the consumers. Might I say it also brings accountability to the table – especially with competitors keeping an eye on each other’s actions. So if competition works well in the business community, should it be any different when it comes to government services? May be it is not so simple to say….however some reports do show that competitive outsourcing is working for the government and is in fact saving taxpayers billions of dollars, while improving efficiency and accountability. So, why is Congress reportedly not so keen on competitive outsourcing? Read this article that gives a little more detail and return here to give us your thoughts.

E-government is a significant topic in the realm of government accountability and transparency, as well as for the Transitions in Governance Project. Discussion of improvements to e-gov has continued, and for the first time in a year, the score of federal websites rose on the University of Michigan’s American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) E-Government Satisfaction Index.

ACSI is produced by the University of Michigan in partnership with the American Society for Quality and CFI group, and has been used since 1999 by more than 100 agencies and departments. Federal websites are finally generating more satisfied customers, but the question remains as to whether this is a lucky blip, or if this is the beginning of a positive trend in citizen satisfaction.

Federal websites face several challenges to achieving the user-friendliness of private and commercial websites. First of all, government sites get less funding than their commercial counterparts.  Secondly, the ban on cookies for federal websites ensures anonymity, but makes tracking and re-visiting more difficult. Lastly, each government website is owned by a different agency, so little consistency exists among federal sites.

How can the federal government overcome some of these key difficulties in making their websites easy to use? What more can be done to ensure citizen satisfaction? Could new technologies resolve some of these problems? Click here to learn more about the ACSI and the challenges federal websites face.

“Federal Employees…they work for U.S.” is the catchphrase for the National Treasury Employees Union’s new public service campaign. However cheesy the slogan might be, a great message lies behind it, and couldn’t have come at a better time.

Several government agencies have recently faced difficulties in filling critical positions, and the forecast does not look promising—the baby boomers have begun to retire and will continue to retire for the next decade.

The “They Work for U.S.” campaign reveals the significant and rewarding work of federal employees and the wide range of job opportunities available. Through this project, NTEU is helping to dispel the negative perceptions surrounding government work, and will hopefully lead to a new generation of talented and dedicated federal employees. Learn more about this campaign at www.theyworkforus.com and share your thoughts with us.

At times, our government managers and executives lack an essential quality to effective managing: the ability to lead. OPM has recently added “developing others” to their executive qualifications list, meaning that the candidates in question have experience in providing consistent feedback to the employees they manage. They give employees projects that will develop their skills, constantly consider the talents and needs of employees, and provide guidance at every worthwhile opportunity.

The new criterion was added only two years ago, but has hardly been mentioned? Perhaps it is because leading is the very essence of managing or being in an executive position. Should we be able to expect that effective leadership is a requisite to the selection of government executives? Does the fact that OPM has to explicitly include leadership as criterion insinuate something about the capability and performance of government managers? How can we measure the leadership ability of government executives in order to hold them accountable? Read this article to learn more about “The Golden Manager’s Rule.”

The presumptive presidential candidates for this November’s election are preparing to transform the next administration’s government. Below is the agenda of each candidate on improving federal management as well as a reality check by Transitions in Governance. Which of these initiatives are critical for enhancing government performance? Which are pragmatic? Do you agree with Transitions or have a different take? Post your comments today.

McCain: Reduce spending on special interest projects Pros: The growing budget deficit and increased public scrutiny could bring new urgency to the issue. Cons: A Congressional Issue that many previous Presidents, Congressional leaders and others have failed to get a grip on. Chance of Success: 20% Establish greater transparency of the official activities of lobbyists Pros: A hot issue that could become more do-able with the help of bloggers, websites and others. Cons: A Congressional Issue. See above. Chance of Success: 33% Create an independent ethics office in Congress Pros: An interesting and well intentioned idea. Cons: Another area the President has no authority over. And who watches over the watchdog? Chance of Success: 10% Enforce limitations on corporate and union contributions to political parties Pros: The Supreme Court has ruled on this and the Executive Branch should enforce it. Cons: The issue is not enforcing current regulations; McCain seems to be hinting he disagrees with recent Court rulings, which some feel aids Democrats.. Chance of Success: 20%		Obama: Create an accessible internet database of lobbying reports, ethics records, and campaign finance filings Pros: Completely achievable with modern technology. Bloggers and new media have led the charge and brought us to this point. Cons: Who is really going to read it all? Chance of Success: 90% Require nearly all contract orders over $25,000 to be competitively awarded Pros: The war and other issues have brought this issue to the fore and it needs to be addressed. Cons: The definition of “competitively awarded” differs based on who you talk to. Chance of Success: 60% Involve Cabinet officials in online fireside chats with agency workers Pros: Everyone loves fireplaces Cons: Aren’t e-mails, web sites, online forums, press release and all employee bulletins enough? Chance of Success: 60% Reform the political appointee process Pros: Desperately needed, the number of appointees has skyrocketed and the process is slow and drives away good people. Cons: Does “reform” mean returning positions to career Feds or just getting his people in place faster? Chance of Success: 65%

Carly Fiorina, former chief executive officer at Hewlett Packard Co., asserts that presidential candidate John McCain understands the importance of technology and the internet. Does McCain have a plan for e-government? Read this article and give us your opinion.

According to a survey given to members of the Defense Department’s financial workforce, human capital issues are of the most concern to both executives and the general workforce. The implementation of the National Security Personnel System, the civilian management system of the Department of Defense, is at the forefront of these concerns. Click here to read more about these issues and give us your feedback.

The deputy chief executive officers of federal agencies are preparing for the next administration transition, as they are essentially in charge while they await the appointment of new political executive officers, and are responsible for making the transition a smooth one. Click here to find out what career officials in several agencies are doing in preparation of the transition.

Senator George Voinovich asked the deputy director for management at OMB, Clay Johnson, to speak about the delay in appropriations bills and its effect on performance at the end of a Senate hearing in May. Congress has yet to pass appropriations bills and probably will not do so until the next president is sworn in. Voinovich describes the difficulties programs face in moving forward without knowing their budgets, and how an absence of this information leads to excuses about why agencies can not perform successfully during a transition. Read this article and give us your reaction.

According to members of the administration, competitive sourcing saves the government hundreds of millions of dollars. Some members of congress believe otherwise, labeling the practice that sets federal workers against contractors “controversial” and “detrimental.” A House bill seeks to halt competitive sourcing by the government for a year, long enough to let the next president deal with the issue. Click here to learn more and share your comments.

Every incoming presidential administration faces pressing management challenges. After taking office on January 20, 2009, the next president will confront a particularly thorny set of “people management” issues related to the 1.9 million civilian employees of the executive branch. The next administration and Congress must answer several key questions regarding the federal workforce that will influence the effectiveness of the government. This forum gathered a small, diverse group of experts and key stakeholders to discuss and offer advice on three important workforce management issues.

Click here to learn more about pressing management issues through the Partnership of Public Service.

This winter, for only the second time in 16 years, the White House will get a new inhabitant. Over the course of 47 debates during the 2007-2008 primary campaign season, candidates rarely – if ever – discussed federal management. Yet, the next president’s success rests largely on his ability to effectively manage federal operations with the help of a highly skilled management team. Amid tremendous pressure to score major policy victories in the first 100 days, the new administration must also quickly invest in government’s long-term organizational health.

Click here to learn more about the Partnership for Public Service’s management initiative.

Over the past decade, many have had high hopes for information technology in supporting government management, but its use at the federal level has fallen short. Will the next administration use IT to its full potential in a successful management strategy? Click here learn out how IT supports government management and share your thoughts.

In anticipation of the upcoming Presidential elections, some are worried that management initiatives enacted under Bush will be abandoned. However, it seems likely that Bush’s lines of business initiative, which has consolidated systems and cut costs, will remain in operation even after his term ends. Read this article on the lines of business initiative give us your feedback.

The Senior Executives Association will urge and the next President to fill more high-level jobs previously held by political appointees with career feds. This could improve government performance and use talent within agencies, but are the pay benefits high enough to attract well-qualified candidates? Click here to read more and share your comments.

OPM recently released a Presidential Transition Guide which offers advice to federal employees who are new to transition procedures and to those who may lose their job as a result of the upcoming presidential transition. The guide provides information on issues ranging from unemployment compensation to security clearances. Read this article to learn more.

The power of government unions provides them with an opportunity to be innovators in employee benefits. Their stability and large size gives them strength and an advantage over their private sector counterparts. A more equal income distribution among government employees has already been achieved, but will they be able to overcome economic restraints and a combative environment to make greater strides toward employee benefits? Click here to read more and offer your thoughts.

The Office of Management and Budget has launched a pilot program to improve PAR, the Performance and Accountability Reports used by federal agencies. The new format is more concise, easier to read and understand, and helps agencies identify the most important management issues. OMB encourages all agencies to use their pilot program of PAR to cut down on the time it takes to create the report, and to spend more time analyzing performance management. Click here to learn more about PAR and give us your comments.

So it is settled, McCain and Obama will battle it out for the presidency. But, are either teams ready to form a new administration should they win? Some think-tank groups which include the Performance Institute, have laid out a transition management agenda for whoever the next president is. Will all this preparation ensure a smooth transition? Read this article and give us your feedback.

A telework bill which would permit federal employees to work from home was approved by the House. This initiative could ease traffic congestion, cut air pollution, and help save on the soaring cost of gas. Opponents of the bill are concerned about a drop in productivity, although supporters argue that agencies which currently use telework have shown no such consequence. Is this a win-win-win situation or are there potential pitfalls to teleworking? Read this article and share your thoughts

Obama has transformed campaigning through the Web, and his understanding of the medium relative to his opponents has paid off. If he is elected President, Obama could use the Web to transform governance as well. Would e-governance provide greater transparency and a voice for public opinion or confusion and chaos? Read this article and give us your opinion.

Social networking on the Internet could prove to be a potential talent base for government. It allows more people to have an input on policy direction. The challenge comes in knowing where to draw the line for input from a high number of people offering their own opinions. Read this article and tell us what you think.

In some government agencies, there have been attempts to develop new business processes modeled after the private sector. Some of these new processes have not had the desired effect of improving government operations. Do you think government should be managed like a business? Read this article and give us your comments.

Jon Desenberg, Policy Director at The Performance Institute will be the guest blogger - May 23 on the AGA Weblog. Join him as he discusses talent challenge and performance in the workforce. Click here to read the blog, and to offer your thoughts.

In today’s government, contractors work side by side with government employees and sometimes confusion can arise on which group should perform certain functions. Does this confusion diminish government performance, or in the grand scheme of things, do contractors work actually enhance government performance? Read this article and give us your comments.

The Intelligence Community has been using different performance pay systems to give pay raises. These systems have been criticized by some as not fairly rewarding employees for their performance. Changes are now being made to ensure employees who perform satisfactorily get at least the pay raise they would have received under the General Schedule. Do you think the new system will be better? Read this article and give us your thoughts.

There is a push to have government use web based collaborative tools in the hopes of increasing taxpayer participation in policy initiatives. Click here to read the following article and let us know if you think the web could enhance government performance.

Apparently senior government executives would still like their pay to be based on performance, but some do not think that the pay-for-performance system improves their agencies’ results. Read this article and tell us what you think.

The goal of improving government performance management will likely carry on into the next administration. The current performance initiatives have seen an improved performance in government agencies’ ability to meet policy goals, therefore the new president will only have the opportunity to enhance this program rather than do away with it. Click here to read the comments from leading performance management experts as they discuss this topic. Please give us your feedback.

According to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the President’s Management Agenda (PMA) Scorecards for the second quarter show that government agencies are improving. Click here to read the article, and click here to see the current scorecard. Please give us your comments.

The Intelligence Community like other government agencies is moving to a performance evaluation system. Read this article to see how they plan to implement it.

The Bush Administration is predictably trying to hang on to its performance measurement tools, but it seems likely that the new administration, like each before it, will institute their own assessment system.  Of course, even now, PART sometimes has a limited role in program funding due to political motivations.

Is PART the solution or are you looking forward to the next administration’s tool?  Read more on the Administration’s Attempt for a Performance Management Legacy here.

Management issues will never be at the forefront of a presidential campaign, so who is responsible for carrying management reform and performance issues through each administration?  It comes down to the brave career feds, according to panelists at the Transitions dialogue at The Performance Institute’s Government Performance Summit.

Click here to read more in an article in Government Executive.  Who will step up during this transition to maintain positive government transformation?  Let us know your thoughts.

At the Transitions dialogue at The Performance Institute’s 2008 Government Performance Summit, Johnson cited PART as example of the unprecedented level of transparency in this administration. 

 Click Here to read more about the discussion in an article in Federal Computer Week.  Agree?  Disagree?  Comment now.

What is the future of A-76? Congressman Tom Davis discusses the competition between government contractors and federal employees and examines whether A-76 is dead for now. Click here to listen to interview

The Transitions Project is looking for your comments, does Senator Obama’s plan, outlined below, go far enough? Is it acheivable? And what are the obstacles you see in its implementation? Let us know!

Obama outlines open government agenda

By Jill R. Aitoro jaitoro@govexec.com November 20, 2007

In a Silicon Valley address last week, Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama laid out his plans to use technology to increase government transparency, promising online access to federal data and the opportunity for citizens to comment online on pending legislation.

Bush administration officials said such moves would simply expand on initiatives already under way.

Building upon previous promises to free government from undue political and financial influence, Obama’s technology and innovation plan would aim to increase transparency through e-government initiatives.

“We will put government data online in universally accessible formats, [allowing citizens to] track federal grants, contracts, earmarks and lobbying contracts, participate in government forums, ask questions in real time, offer suggestions that will be reviewed before decisions are made, and comment on legislation before it is signed,” Obama said during a speech at the Google headquarters in Mountain View, Calif. on Nov. 14.

The plan would expand on the 2006 Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act — co-sponsored by Obama — which mandates the creation of a user-friendly Web site to track federal spending data. Rule-making agencies would be required to deliberate issues via live feeds on the Internet that would allow citizens to respond to their efforts. Nonemergency legislation would be posted on the White House Web site, where people would be able to review and comment on it for five days before it was signed into law.

Cabinet officials would be required to hold periodic nationwide online town hall meetings to answer questions and discuss issues before their agencies, and such technologies as blogs, wikis and social networking tools would be used to enhance internal, cross-agency, and public communication and information sharing.

“Technology empowers people to come together to [drive] change,” Obama said. “We have to do more than get our house in order; the opportunity in front of us is bigger than that. Seizing this opportunity is going to depend on more than what the government does and even more than what the technology sector does.”

In the Bush administration, Karen Evans, administrator of e-government and information technology at the Office of Management and Budget, oversees governmentwide IT initiatives. Her office is responsible for enforcing the requirements of the 2002 E-Government Act, which requires the use of Internet-based IT to enhance citizen access to government information and services.

“We don’t analyze specific campaign plans, but any efforts on government transparency will be building on our efforts already in place,” said Jane Lee, an OMB spokeswoman. “From Expectmore.gov, the earmarks database, to Internet postings of agency budget justifications, we’ve made unprecedented progress at the federal level in providing greater transparency, holding government accountable and delivering results for taxpayers.”

The AFL-CIO sponsored Democratic Debate offered us a chance to hear each candidate’s pitch to be the “Worker’s Candidate”. It even let us hear Congressman Dennis Kucinich’s offer to “see America take a new direction… and have trade that’s based on workers’ rights: the right to organize, the right to collective bargaining, the right to strike…”

While we probably will not see a Kucinich Presidency, there’s a good chance we will see someone with a union endorsement, a change from the last eight years, which saw repeated conflicts between the administration and Federal unions on Pay for Performance and, yes, collective bargaining.

There’s no escaping the fact that the fifty-year old GS System is flawed from several perspectives. Most importantly, it hasn’t adequately differentiated between employees and now is used unevenly between agencies. Differentiating between high and low performers has been repeatedly sited by Federal employees as a top challenge, but the implementation of DoD’s new pay system, NSPS, has been seen by some, including several Federal courts, as a one-sided affair that trampled employees rights.

A last minute House amendment to the DoD Appropriations Bill, denies funding for key portions of NSPS. The Congressmen who offered the amendment brought up union and barganing issues that would have been right at home at the AFL-CIO Debate. So what would a “Worker’s President” mean for the future of pay for performance? And what happens to the 100,000 plus DoD employees who have already moved to the new system?

A dedicated Public Service Academy, as Senator Clinton has been mentioning on the campaign trail, is an attractive idea to all of us who are pursuing the best and brightest to serve in the Federal government. Or is it?

It has worked well for West Point and The Naval Academy, but there are no other undergrad or graduate level programs serving that group. You can’t graduate from Harvard with a degree in Army Officer, but you can graduate with a degree in Public Administration or Public Policy. In Washington alone there are multiple programs in these areas. Do we need another? Could we just enhance the loan re-payment program and get to the same place without re-inventing the wheel? After mulling it back and forth, it just doesn’t seem to be a wise use of our limited resources, however a specific smaller and more focused Homeland Security Academy seems like a much better idea. Or maybe we’re missing something; what could a Public Service Academy do that today’s multitude of programs could not?

We’ve been able to begin talking with a few departing senior officials as part of our research for the Transitions project. Last week I sat with a senior executive who had years of business experience before coming to the administration.

I couldn’t have agreed with him more when he said, “I’d hate to be buying a company and see all the talent leaving the building before I even got there.”
That’s his explanation for what happens during a time of transition and indeed, that’s what’s already happening in the last year of this administration.

He also commented that, “Nothing against career folks, some of them are very good. But when the new political people come in they’re going to understand just a little of what we tried to do and basically start many things up from scratch.”

You can see echoes of both of these comments all over this report about DHS.

Increasingly I hear the following questions:

Why would a political come in and start working as the clock runs down?
Why are an increasing number of leadership positions that require technical skills being politicized and filled through the Schedule C program?
And why don’t we insist on fixed term contracts for some of these folks so they can transition these important organizations into a new administration?

I don’t know the answer to these questions, but they are very troubling.

As a country we simply can not afford to continue wasting the one or two years at the beginning and end of every Presidency. Particularly bad when the White House changes parties, we seem to be already entering one of these periods, and at a time we can least afford it.

Could we create a smoother transition and fill some of these gaps? How?

Several years after the acceptance of Electronic Government by governments worldwide as part of their reform initiatives, there is a growing recognition that over-reliance on technology, insufficient collaboration in government, lack of emphasis on building human capacity and inadequate public consultation all limit possible benefits of such initiatives. As a result, the focus has been shifting from technology-enabled improvements in government operations (Electronic Government) to improvements in interactions between government, non-government and civil society stakeholders (Electronic Governance). Under the new focus, it is no longer acceptable to let technical or organizational issues drive Electronic Governance initiatives alone. Instead, a multi-disciplinary, multi-stakeholder and community-oriented approach is required.

The International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (ICEGOV2007) will be in Macao, SAR, China during 10-13 December 2007 — papers need to be submitted by July 30. This is not your typical conference because this will bring together managers, developers and researchers from government, industry and nongovernment organizations, and academia to share the latest findings in the theory and practice of Electronic Governance– an idea broader than Electronic Government as understood to date. The major focus is work within and across sectors and disciplines — the heart of the emerging management issues of electronic (digital) government/governance.

Read more. . .

How can government, industry and researchers work collaboratively on Electronic Government initiatives to enhance the public interest without providing any unfair competitive advantage to industry players? What are the barriers and structural solutions to Electronic Government working across the public, private and independent sectors and across disciplines? How can hierarchies and networks work with each other as opposed to against each other in a digital world? How might the next President structure the Executive Branch to enable electronic governance as reflected above?

Four international working groups are exploring the cutting edge of where Electronic Government is headed globally.

• Online Consultation and Public Policy Making
• An Open Platform for Urban Simulation
• A Comparative and Transnational Research Agenda in North America
• Digital Governance and Hotspot Geoinformatics for Monitoring, Early Warning, and Management

Read more. . .

How can these international research efforts contribute to the next e-government agenda?

In a recent column on the Harvard Government Innovators website, Bill Eggers explains his experiences visiting graduate schools of public policy and administration.  He writes, “On these visits, I always ask two questions. First: How many of you are going into public service of one kind? Invariably, I’m greeted by a sea of raised hands. I then ask for a show of hands of everyone who plans to go into government service. Most of the hands go down. The training grounds for our future public servants are instead producing lots of future consultants, lobbyists, and nonprofit executives.” 

This isn’t happening because students of public policy and administration aren’t interested in the work of government - after all they have chosen to study public administration - so why is it happening?  Is it the slow and often burdensome recruiting process, is it the impression that government is too bureaucratic, or the impression that one can have a bigger impact in the nonprofit sector?

Generation Y cares about giving back, yet this generation may not see the connection between government service and making a real impact on the ground.  I wonder if we are failing to tell the stories Generation Y’ers need to hear to make the connection?

The Partnership for Public Service tells these stories by honoring our civil servants with Service to America Medals (Sammies).  I attended the Sammies Finalist breakfast the same day I read Bill Eggers’ column, and as I heard the incredible stories of our federal civil servants, I wished more of my cohort could hear what federal civil servants accomplish.  

Edward Peter Messmer averted a health crisis in Lebanon by getting fuel reserves into the country during the Lebanon-Israeli conflict last year.  John S. Morgan and his team created the program which helped to solve thousands of cold cases by utilizing DNA evidence.  Michael Trimble led the team of archaeologists who investigated Iraq’s mass graves and built the case which helped convict Saddam Hussein of genocide.

Where in the world could one make a bigger difference?  And how can we tell these stories loud enough that people hear them?

The new Democratic majority, despite promising to cut the number of earmarks in half, has found a way around its own reforms. It’s been dubbed “phonemarking,” and refers to lawmakers seeking money for their favorite causes and pet projects outside the appropriations process, by directly contacting federal agencies. Contrary to all the rhetoric about open and transparent government, the reality is that nothing has changed. Lawmakers are still determined to divert public funds to special interests without allowing a transparent and accountable process to debate their merit.

The public’s increased attention and scrutiny to earmarks during the last election was a promising start to a serious discussion on government performance. That’s why Congressman John Murtha’s recent display on the House Floor was so disappointing.

As Mr. Murtha tried to add $23 million in funding for the National Drug Intelligence Center in his district, Republicans Mike Rogers and Todd Tiahrt questioned the earmark for a project that the House Government Reform Committee called an “expensive and duplicative” use of scarce resources.

When Mr. Rogers proposed using that $23 million for other intelligence work, Mr. Murtha replied, “I hope you don’t have any earmarks in the defense appropriations bills because they are gone and you will not get any earmarks now and forever.” This personal use of earmarks was banned in a new ethics rule passed earlier this year.

As we has listen to Federal managers, a common issue continues to be programs and projects hamstrung by earmarks and other political forces, wasting taxpayers money and producing few if any results. What more can be done to prevent important programs from being used as personal and political tools?

Commentators in both the private and public sectors have been trumpeting the importance of networks and collaboration as ways to solve both business and societal challenges. Most institutions – corporate as well as governmental – are organized in hierarchies, which were highly successful in meeting challenges of the 20th century. However, as institutions increasingly face non-routine challenges, or challenges that reach across a range of service providers, networks may be the “new” approach to solve them. But what do they look like? If they exist, how do you find them?

The IBM Center for The Business of Government has released a new forum of articles addressing the use of networks and collaborative approaches. It notes that horizontal, cross-agency collaboration is evolving along three lines: in the delivery of routine services via “virtual agencies,” such as recreation.gov; in the delivery of routine services but via physical integration, such as Service Canada; and in the delivery of non-routine services such as responding to emergencies.

Articles in the forum address each of these approaches, as well as identifying various types of networks and the different jobs of managers in networks. Seeing them in action helps spark imaginations.

Each of these approaches offer both new opportunities for future government leaders, as well as opening new questions, such as how to create accountability in a collaborative environment. Understanding how states and localities are attempting to use these tools, and how they respond to the challenges, may create a roadmap for how the federal government might use them successfully to address large-scale problems.

 Do you have examples you would like to share?

 Transitions in Governance, working with Google, unveiled its new Government Management Search Engine today, May 15th.  Transitions, working through all of its partner organizations, interested universities, OPM, GAO and others has put together a “verified” list of quality, recognized government managment sources.   With over 30 current sources, Transitions is well on its way to putting together the most comprehensive government management information center for the Federal Government.    Google is working with Transitions, as well as state, local, and Federal agencies to extend the government’s ability to deliver information to citizens.    If you are interested in adding your web site to our search index, contact Desenberg@performanceweb.org

This world of Second Life is mainly occupied by today’s generation, where virtual reality has been part of how they grew up. Their brains function differently. They make decisions differently. They engage in teamwork differently. They collaborate differently. To be responsive to them, as well as to the pre-Internet generation, we need to create a different government – one where “virtual agencies” exist to deliver services and solve social problems in ways that are radically different than government does today.

Don Tapscott and Anthony Williams, co-authors of “Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything,” focuses on business collaboration. They point to phenomena such as Amazon.com, MySpace.com, Wikipedia, Linux, and the Human Genome Project that leveraged the use of mass collaboration.

The increasing reliance on mass, horizontal collaboration – reflected in social networks such as Second Live — is also a driving force for changing the way government works. Dr. Donald Kettl says, “Although public institutions are organized in hierarchies, they increasingly face difficult, non-routine problems that demand networked solutions.”