Article 40. How We as Americans Approach Change.
Americans have an interesting approach to making things happen when compared with the Japanese and Germans which tend approach change through careful analysis over many months even years studying all aspects of the problem. Americans have a tendency study a problem for a few weeks then jump right in the middle of solving it with an all-out sink or swim attitude. You may get away with catastrophic failure in the business world where only the bottom line is at stake but in the public sector where major screw ups are brought to the public’s attention it can end a political career.
You need to be aware of this tendency to “bite off more than we can chew”. Not that this is a bad thing but it can be a real asset when needed and used properly. One of the driving factors for elected officials is that you don’t have years to study a problem. Unless you have the change firmly established your successor will most likely throw out everything you’ve done good and bad in a “not invented here fashion”.
The approach I recommend is to develop an overall strategic plan for government reform. You have to know what the reform is going to look like “a vision” and what steps are needed to get there. These steps should be small ones. With small steps you can afford to experiment a small failure here a small success there. Once you known what works you can duplicate the successes and move more rapidly to your goals. You should encourage small failures you can learn from them and more people are willing to try new things. When you compare this approach with the usual American way of jumping into the middle of a problem you can see how it avoids catastrophic failure. This approach works well when you are implementing Work Improvement Teams (WIT). See the following: Article 8. “Work Place Continuous Improvement.” Article 11. “Adaptation of Manufacturing Quality Improvement Techniques to Achieve Efficient Government.”.
There are times when you have to jump into the middle of things especially when an integrated computer system is required. Why an integrated system?
Integrated systems allow information to flow freely from one computer application program to another through databases where all application programs can store and retrieve data. There is only one database structure, Relational Databases, that allow for the storage and retrieval of information using the Structured Query Language (SQL). This is the method used to retrieve information on the Internet. Don’t let anyone sell you on a different method it will cost you millions.
All computer application programs such as purchasing run on a unique operating system. A completely integrated computer system will use only one operating system. This unique operating system can run on all computers (IBM, Digital Equipment etc.) those, which are large enough to handle it. The problem that occurs is that when one operating system is adopted all the other operating systems and all the programs that run on them are redundant. Now you are really in middle of things when you try to make a change like this. This is why you should realize that this is going to take a few years and that a strategic plan accepted by all stake holders is very important without it you will never get an integrated system.
I have recommended that states develop a Centralized Purchasing System. This can be implemented in stages with the facilities and computer hardware put in place first. Followed by loading the databases from each redundant system one at a time in a step by step fashion until completed. For more information see the following: Article 21. “Centralized Purchasing- The Best Way to Balance State Budgets.”, Reader Question 6. “How do You Implement a Statewide Purchasing System”, and Article 28. “Making Centralized Purchasing Work using Aggressive Negotiation.”.
