Well-funded public bodies still struggle to innovate. Three barriers hold them back, and three quick wins can start to move them: blend technologies, consult beneficiaries, and automate with care.
Innovation has become almost synonymous with the entrepreneurial spirit of the private sector. That makes it harder for even the most strategic public bodies to keep pace with start-ups and private companies in finding new ways to serve the people who depend on them.
Many public bodies receive generous resources, whether from federal or state budgets or directly from taxpayers. Yet the building blocks of continuous, constructive innovation are difficult to put in place. There is light at the end of the tunnel, provided the factors that hold innovation back are addressed in time.
This article looks at three barriers that stifle innovation in public bodies, then at three quick wins that can start to remove them.
Three Barriers
Barrier 1: "Keep it as it has always been done"
The paper form is the familiar example: a form that applicants must complete, in full or in part, by hand to receive a service. Some of these forms have been in use for generations with little or no change to their layout or structure. Each generation, and younger people above all, expects services that are smarter and more convenient, such as applying from a phone in a few minutes. We will not go into the arguments some agencies raise to justify outdated practices here, but the risk of keeping them grows with every year they stay in place.
Barrier 2: Thinking from the inside out
Many public bodies still operate under rules and guidelines written for a different era. When that is accepted as normal, the message to the people they serve is that their time comes last. And when consulting beneficiaries on the quality, efficiency and effectiveness of services becomes the exception rather than the rule, the costs multiply: missed opportunities, broken bridges with service users and wasted efforts at real innovation. Public bodies that work alongside experienced service users, and stay open to agile and design-thinking methods, can build a better and more sustainable service ecosystem together with them.
Barrier 3: Internal opposition to investing in innovation
Proposals to invest in innovation are often turned down for familiar reasons:
- No budget. There is no funding to execute the business case.
- "We know best." As fiduciaries, the institution believes it knows what beneficiaries want, and assumes its own priorities are theirs.
- "Nice to have." Innovation is treated as optional. As long as beneficiaries are not complaining and must use the service as designed, the imbalance of power removes any pressure to improve it.
Three Quick Wins
Rethinking long-standing practices with a strategic eye on what new approaches can deliver does more than modernize a public body. It can lead to more engaged employees, more satisfied beneficiaries, better-targeted investment and more secure funding.
Leading governments are also strong advocates of sustainability agendas, and they look to support public bodies that help them make progress on them. Leading public bodies, in turn, see innovation as a way to strengthen their standing on environmental, social and governance (ESG) commitments.
The path is not straightforward, and each body needs an honest review of its current state. But some quick wins are available now:
- Blend technologies. Combine technologies to design scenarios that raise the quality, timeliness, efficiency and effectiveness of services. For example, immersive environments and advanced digital identity could create new ways to access, request and receive public services, while lowering the cost of delivery over time.
- Consult beneficiaries. A consultative approach produces better results and builds a genuine outside-in view of service delivery, reducing bias and building trust between agency and citizen. Voice-of-the-customer programs are a proven starting point.
- Automate with care. Study where routine, time-consuming, low-value activities can be automated without cutting jobs, freeing people for the more specialized work that today's beneficiaries need. Assess the effect on each pillar of the ESG agenda, with the goal of a world-class, sustainable service experience.
Exhibit 1: From barrier to quick win
| Barrier | What it costs | Quick win that addresses it |
|---|---|---|
| "Keep it as it has always been done" | Slow, paper-bound services and frustrated users | Blend technologies to redesign how the service is accessed |
| Thinking from the inside out | Lost trust and services built around the institution | Consult beneficiaries and act on what they say |
| Internal opposition to investing | Innovation stalls before a business case is heard | Automate with care, and fund the next step from the savings |
Where to Start
Pick one service that many people use and few people like. Map it from the beneficiary's side, measure how long it takes and what it costs, and test one change against those numbers. A visible early result does more to overcome internal opposition than any strategy document.
Interested in continuing the conversation? Let's connect at: innovation@hkdolts.com