Digital Codependency

Transformation Is Not An Internal Consultancy

The term transformation is thrown around A LOT. This post is a plea for organizations and teams in the public sector to dig deeper, beyond using the term as a branding exercise. The post uses digital as the example but this plea applies equally to any transformation effort (including and especially innovation labs). Digital transformation in an organization must go beyond offering products and services in bits of code.

Transformation is much deeper than the proverbial tip of the iceberg. We are talking about organizational or societal level changes. The end game is not digitizing existing services. Successful transformation efforts will have extended to:

1. shifting mindsets and perspectives;
2. changing individual and group behaviour;
3. adopting new practices and approaches; and
4. applying new tools and techniques.

“Digital is not just about technology, it is about developing the skills we need to work better together to improve”

It is for this reason that an internal consultancy model, whereby one unit is responsible for taking on projects for other units in the organization, is not transformative alone. Unless the team is explicitly and deliberately working to build the capacity of the organization to engage in and lead the work, the result will be digital codependency.

The challenge with this is, as the team responsible for leading the charge, you need to effectively work yourself out of the job. This is counter-intuitive for the consultant because scarcity in the skills they offer drives demand and value in a market. It takes an extrinsically motivated person, team, or organization with a Massive Transformative Purpose (MTP) to engage in such efforts.

Not only does digital transformation require capacity building of the institution, it also means having access to digital tools, something that can be extremely challenging from behind a firewall.

[Increasing] the digital skills and knowledge of public servants is one of the most impactful ways we can supercharge ongoing efforts to modernise government. Likewise, the lack of digital literacy amongst government executives is, I believe, a root causes of some of the challenges we are seeing today for public sector organisations trying to adapt to and succeed in the digital era.

…too often public servants have better access to modern digital tools at home than they do at work — Ryan Androsoff

Digital leadership for the modern public service | Apolitical

In a previous post I echoed a comment from the #Connected150 Conference: Digital government is just government in the 21st century. To truly engage in digital transformation we need teams who provide and enable:

1. Greater education for public servants to increase our undertsanding of the way digital platforms work, where there is opportunity and where there are challenges that need to be addressed;
2. Access to the digital tools public servants need to work better in the internet era;
3. Public programs to improve access, skills and digital literacy among citizens; and
4. Opportunities to learn and practice user-centred design and co-creation. That’s just the digital way.

Tom Loosemore famously defined digital this way:

Digital: Applying the culture, practices, processes & technologies of the Internet-era to respond to people’s raised expectations.

Digital transformation means changing the way we work… not simply the products and services we offer.

Digital transformation needs to be just as concerned about building the capacity of the public service as it is about creating digital products. “We built the thing… over to you” will likely perpetuate existing internal digital inequality and projects that don’t stick. This leads to frustration among staff, and I fear, skepticism about the value of digital (or innovation or agile or human centred design or citizen engagement… or… or). Superficial approaches to transformation perpetuate a fatalistic mindset that change is not possible.

This is why the Code for Canada model is so powerful. It is introducing fresh perspectives, modern tools, and digital practices as an explicit effort to build capacity, introduce new ways of working, and change culture in Government. It is not looking to create an over-reliance on one specific internal or external team.

A consultancy model creates “digital codependency”, whereby the organization relies on the digital unit to get the work done. The unit cannot possibly keep up with the demand or carry that burden alone. So if our efforts are not deliberately sharing skills, opening access to new tools, and investing in the capacities of our colleagues to do the same work, then they’re not transformational.

Who wants to be this guy though?

The Office of Strategy Management (OSM) at GNB is an example of a successful organizational transformation. Rather than falling into the trap of an internal Lean Six Sigma consultancy, the OSM has spread its tools and techniques through capacity building efforts, and a cross departmental network to support and sustain their transformation agenda.

At Innovation and Design Services we do our best to avoid this pitfall in a few of key ways:

1. A third of our time is devoted to capacity building initiatives. Through our 101 workshops and public innovation challenge we seek to increase innovation literacy, demystify the practice, and provide opportunity to try new tools and techniques;
2. When we are engaged to support a project we take a co-design approach. From workshop designs to user research, we work alongside our colleagues (and end-users where possible);
3. We share everything we do as openly and frequently as possible alongside a growing network of practitioners inside and outside GNB. We don’t keep our cards close to our chest. The tools we use, the approaches we take, and the lessons we learn are treated as common assets in (and often outside) the organization. The most recent example available here:

It can often feel as though this approach is time consuming and so the trade off for speed is lack of authentic engagement. The reality is, this work actually truncates the overall time of solution implementation. As literacy and capacity improve in an organization, so will the ability to implement change. The upfront costs of capacity building and co-creation are well worth the investment, in the age of transformation.