A thorough review of the states “Needs” is required, how large is the need, how does the need compare with other states, is the need growing in resource demands, and how well does each government organization satisfy the need. This requires collection of a lot of data, a thorough review of the data, interviewing providing organizations, and decisions about how needs should be best satisfied. The results can lead to a restructuring of reporting lines of the organizations, a combining of similar activities under one organization, and in some cases the downsizing or the elimination of an entire organization. This can be accomplished by the action of the Reform Commission.

In addition to the above actions I favor a structured two step approach to obtain a more efficient state government. An analysis of the detailed workings of the state government is necessary. Normally this is done by outside consultants or by analysts who interview function personnel and construct detailed process flow charts. The cost of providing enough analysts to do this would be prohibitive. And it would be fiscally impossible to hire enough outside consultants to study the entire state government. Therefore in Step One I recommend that Japanese management practices currently, being used successfully in American businesses be implemented in the state government. This should initially be done in a test environment (a selected organization). I recommend an approach similar to a process called “Total Quality Management“. It consists in the implementation and training of “Work Improvement Teams (WITs)” (They may also be called by other names). Step Two uses the process flow charts developed by the function’s WITs for budgeting and staffing purposes.

Now let’s define our terms. All government organizations have “Functions” that perform “Processes” to produce “Products” that satisfy state “Needs“. A “Function” is the name of a part of an organization that uses a unique set of processes to achieve a result or product that satisfies a specific need. “Processes” are the steps required to achieve the desired product and are usually represented on a process flow chart. The “Product” is the result of the work processes and is expressed for example in specific terms such as “miles of new highway” or “population served“. How well a function or a government organization accomplishes their task was addressed by the Reform Commission in their analysis of state “Needs“.

In Step One Work Improvement Teams (WITs) are formed one for each organizational “Function“. They should meet at a scheduled time once a week and be moderated by a facilitator who also provides training in quality techniques. When they have been trained and understand the Total Quality Management process each WIT elects their own new leader. After a sufficient time has elapsed for the WITs to become successful in making improvements to the function’s processes (their primary task); the bottom level of supervision is eliminated. The second level of management should then be reviewed for its functional requirement if the organization is an over managed bureaucracy it too may be eliminated. At the second level of management WITs are generally not required.

WITs should concentrate on the development and analysis of process flow charts to achieve the largest payoff because this is where the resources are being expended. Process flow charts depict manual processes, which may also show computer input and computer output, (reports). For our purposes each process should not be more than 15 minutes in length. If the current process flow chart does not reflect the minimum time length, function personnel should be asked to redo or expand their process flow chart to incorporate the short time length. In some process flow charts processes may depict days or months of work these have little value to the WIT or anyone else within the organization but may be useful in explaining to others how the organization works.

One of the main reasons for WITs is to replace the need for analysts who would interview function personnel and construct the process flow charts and the need for outside consultants to time study the processes. The cost of providing enough analysts or consultants to do this would be prohibitive. I recommend that detailed process flow charts be developed by each WIT function for all functions within all state organizations. This gets WIT function personnel involved in the improvement activity. Each process step can then be reviewed for its necessity and appropriateness by WIT function personnel and management as well as by analysts. One should never underestimate the desire and the capability of the person who actually works on the process. It is very rewarding to see employees genuinely excited about their jobs. For more information on implementation of Work Improvement Teams see: Article 8. “Work Place Continuous Improvement“ and for their alternative to government bureaucracies see: Article 1. “Reforming Business and Government Bureaucracies”.

In Step Two of the two step approach a trained analyst uses the process flow charts developed by the WITs to estimate the time required to perform each process. The total estimated time to perform a function (the addition of all the estimated times for all of the processes) when multiplied by the average number of times that the function is performed in a month equals the functions estimated budget in hours per month. An estimated staffing level can then be calculated from the data by dividing the estimated budget hours by the normal hours that an employee works in a month.

A significant difference occurs when reducing staff during budget cuts. The present method tends to lay-off those at bottom usually the most recently employed. The government reform method using WITs keeps in tact those employees that are actually doing the work and eliminates management staff.