WASD BAHRAIN 2017 - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

WASD BAHRAIN 2017

The role of KM in achieving Efficiency, Effectiveness & Value for Money in the Public SectorProfessor John AdamsBritish University in Egypt

Digital revolution, smart cities

and

performance

improvement:

T

owards

a sustainable knowledge-based inclusive development Slide2

Smart

cities will require smart public sector organisations to manage them.The real question is How do we get from where we are to this?I will start with where I think we actually are in 2017Slide3

Peter F. Drucker (1909-2005), often referred to as the ‘father’ of modern management theory, consistently argued that public-sector organisations are

“big rather than strong”, “flabby”, “cost a great deal” and “do not achieve much.” (Drucker, 1992). Government is concerned with procedure and has no choice but to be bureaucratic.

Drucker also argued (1995) that for government officials,

at all levels

, loyalty

is more important than

performance

because

the

structure of public sector organisations (PSO’s) protects

them from

the ‘discipline’ of the ‘market’ – getting ‘things’ done efficiently and effectively. As

a result,

all PSO’s are vehemently resistant

to

change. Finally he concluded that government

should restrict itself to

governing

but not

doing (see Drucker

, 1992,

1995; Leung & Adams, 2010).

Some have argued (see

Chobanyan

&

Emblemsvag

, 2005

) that this view of PSO’s has now become the

settled

opinion of the general public

in many countries

and has now manifested itself into a general backlash against the ‘accepted’ order.Slide4

So, where are we in 2017?

Rapid and increasing rejection of ‘big’ government and the rise of ‘populism’ in the USA, Britain, Europe, S. America, S.E. Asia and other regions of the world. The rejection of ‘globalisation’ in many parts of the world, even by politicians, and the consequent rise of nationalism in some countries in Europe, MENA & elsewhere.In short, the general public no longer has the same level of trust in government and its agencies that was present until quite recently.

Many PSO’s (and governments) are now more keenly aware than ever that this trend needs to be reversed, and quickly. And that

they

need to be

seen

to be working

FOR

the public and not for themselves, as argued by

Gordon

Tullock

40

years before Drucker, but from an economic perspective (see

Tullock

, 1976).

C

an this trend be reversed?Slide5

In my view, by reasserting the importance of achieving Value for Money by PSO’s, because it is the

gap between what the public get and what they are ‘promised’ that goes to the centre of the decline in trust. An alignment of VFM principles with Knowledge Management has the potential to do this. What does VFM mean?

UK National Audit

Office, 2016.Slide6

The

processes component of the VFM framework is where KM can have a major impactin terms of embedded systems to retain and enhance organisational knowledge to enablethe PSO’s purpose and objective to be fully understood by all employees. This must include:SMART* service level agreements within and between the PSO’s departments and as the

social contract

between the PSO and the public.

Rules and regulations that are consistent and predictable and understood by all.

A PMS that is focused on achieving PSO objectives, not just imposing them on staff.

A system that rewards achievement and not simply loyalty or seniority.

* Specific

, Measurable, Agreed, Realistic and Time-based.Slide7

The potential impact of integrating VFM and KM can be conceptualised in terms of the likely

benefits this can bring to PSO’s – these are:Consistency - between PSO departments and PSO’s (eg SLA’s)Comparability - of departments and PSO’s (efficiency index

)

Clarity - of objectives at all levels

Controllability - absence of ‘sub-cultures’ in PSO’s (V & H Trust)

Comprehensiveness - all PSO functions systemised (

effectiveness index

)

Boundedness - not ‘stepping on others PSO toes’Slide8

The issue of Trust within PSO’s

If Drucker , Tullock (and others) are correct then the existence of ‘sub-cultures’ within a PSO is a major threat to both VFM and KM because they will act deliberately to undermine both.This is the combination of the twin problems of (1) Vertical & Horizontal Trust and (2) the classic Principal-Agent

problem*.

*This part will be

included in the

paper at a later dateSlide9

Trust within PSO’s

+ H

- H

+ V

-

V

But trust in superiors

Distrust in superiors

No trust between staff at the same level

No trust in anyone except oneself

Trust between staff at the same level

T

rust between & within all levels

Totally Dysfunctional

VFM & KM impossible

VFM & KM possible IF

Sub-cultures are eliminated

VFM & KM possible IF

h

eirarchy

move to inclusiveness &

transparency

VFM & KM functionality

a

ssured (extremely rare)Slide10

The PSO’s ‘knowledge’ is embedded in its staff, especially senior staff. However when staff

leave or transfer, the organisational knowledge is depleted unless it is transferred to youngerstaff and to new recruits. This is a key element of KM and requires the following:Succession planning for senior staffContinuous training for all staffIntensive training for new staff (professionalised & certificated)

Continuous job rotation (but medium, not short term)

Continuous reinforcement of the PSO’s Purpose, its Objectives, its SLA’s & VFMSlide11

These are difficult requirements but if implemented could reverse the negative trends

identified earlier and generate real benefits for the PSO and, more importantly, for the public.

The PSO becomes more

e

fficient & effective at

s

uccessive time periods

a

fter a short period of

k

nowledge depletion if and

o

nly if the requirements

a

re actually implemented.

Efficiency

&

Effectiveness

TimeSlide12

SHOKRAN