PASC 1: Policy unco-ordinated

Filed under: Governance,Policy,Strategy — lenand @ 2:42 pm
Tags: , ,

Let’s start at the beginning.  The Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) asked for evidence with 12 questions, the first being:

1. How well is technology policy co-ordinated across Government?

It is not obvious that technology policy is coordinated. How much work done by various CIO and CTO Council working parties has been completed and published? One example is the “Enterprise Architecture for UK Government”, started in 2006, and already featured in a previous blog. It was a brave attempt to develop an Enterprise Architecture reference model, intended to:

identify opportunities that will underpin improvements in the areas focussed on in the strategy, in particular:

  • Services enabled by IT designed around citizens and businesses
  • Moving to a shared services approach
  • Broadening and deepening government’s professionalism”

Benefits looked very promising:

  • “Promoting the development of common infrastructure
  • Improved management of risk
  • Identifying and aggregating demand to promote efficient use of resources
  • Sustainable alignment of business and IT functions
  • Agreement of shared standards to promote better inter-working between agencies
  • A greater competition in the supply of IT services and products
  • Improved business agility and a reduction of total cost of ownership

So many questions could be asked:

  • Where are the results?
  • How much budget was consumed?
  • Who benefitted?
  • What was learnt?
  • Why was the effort stopped?

There was lots of good will from both local and central government ICT managers, but no programme leadership. It was not a failure of policy; it was a failure of governance. And, as Quarkside knows – Governance Matters.


Blog at WordPress.com.