GOVERNMENT TECHNOLOGY/Striking a balance takes cooperation
Just when information technology is at its most popular, CIOs finally have to admit they do not have the resources to make good on all the promises they have made on behalf of electronic government. Furthermore, they no longer have the privilege of blaming insufficient technology on chief executives or political bodies; they have joined the ranks of the decision-makers and are struggling to balance electronic government with other community needs.
With more electronic government opportunities than resources, how do CIOs determine whose “children” get the new shoes? For example, does the community upgrade its IT system, or does it buy a new fire engine? If it invests in information technology, which departments receive hardware and software first? If it purchases the fire engine, how do the community leaders meet the organizational and public expectation they helped create for electronic government?
Determining the proper balance between electronic government and other community needs is a difficult thing for any one person to do. Therefore, Tucson, Ariz., has developed a two-step process, which involves many city departments, to balance the needs of the community.
First, new equipment, additional staff or service program expansions are proposed when departments submit their annual budget requests. An executive committee reviews all the requests, including those for information technology, and recommends the most valuable projects for inclusion in the budget. Once an IT initiative has been included in the budget, it becomes a part of the ongoing resource allocation process.
Next, Tucson calls together senior representatives of all city departments to join with the IT department in a peer review of project proposals. Departments are asked to identify information technology and electronic government projects for the next 24 months and plan their implementation. Departments come together monthly to refine, update and integrate the plans, which are used to inform city management, employees and community members about the city’s electronic government agenda.
Departments have come to accept that widespread digital government cannot be implemented in one year. The demand for limited resources — money and time — and the need for organizational change are simply too great. Therefore, the city’s comprehensive plan is divided into short-term (next 12 months) and mid-range (12 to 24 months) components.
Priorities are set by the group. Projects satisfying legal mandates receive the highest priority. Projects that involve multiple departments and that make efficient use of shared resources receive the next highest priority. Finally, projects that significantly improve the effectiveness of a single department are ranked and included in the plan.
Financial and staff resources are then matched to projects in descending order. When the available resources have all been committed, everyone knows which projects will have to wait.
The city has found that, when departments must face each other directly and make a case for a share of limited resources, those projects that most benefit the whole or that meet a critical need quickly rise to the top. Every department has a voice, and, with decisions made in public, even the “losers” know they had a fair opportunity.
CIOs are successful because they developed a vision for technology’s role in changing government. However, as their influence grows, they must remember that technology is not the solution for every community problem. By sharing their authority with a broad constituency of departments, CIOs can help departments decide whether IT investment provides the same public benefit as a new fire engine or public park.
The author is CIO for Tucson, Ariz.
