This week I attended the 25th Annual Conference on Policy Analysis, a gathering designed for economic and policy analysts, government administrators, and representatives from the business and nonprofit communities engaged in public policy. Mirroring today's environment, the conference was titled, "Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste," where keynote Chris Farrell redubbed it, "I Hope we never let a serious crisis go to waste." State and local government leaders and policymakers offered their perspectives on a range of topics. Jay Kiedrowski moderated a panel -- Chris Farrell, Julian Schuster, Tom Hanson, and Terry Speiker -- on key issues pertinent to government officials and general citizenry. Among those highlighted include the changing paradigm of healthcare, financial regulatory issues, economic (in)security, and unemployment, and investment in education. Lori Sturdevant led the second panel and asked discussants -- Steven Bosacker, Jim Mulder, and Cal Ludeman -- to respond to the possibility of increasing efficiency of government. In this section panelists claimed solutions in addressing inter-governmental redundancy, outcome measurement, investment in employees, systemization of innovation, and extensive collaboration. All offered thorough and thoughtful arguments, clear points of view, and even told a couple of jokes. Great conference by my standards.
So why do I feel like we're caught in a tennis game of contradictory solutions to government reform? I know I'm not the only one (a fellow colleague mentioned this issue at the conference providing me the idea of this blog post). Save. Spend. Save. Spend.
Save. Reduce redundancy between overlapping government services. Spend. Scale innovation at all government levels. Save. Downsize and restructure departments. Spend. Invest in research-based measurement indices. Save. Mandate staff furloughs. Spend. Invest in young public sector leaders. Save, spend, save, spend. I might be getting a case of whiplash here.
Certainly I understand that times of economic uncertainty call for strategic solutions that will incorporate methods of both cutting costs and investing wisely. But I don't understand what form redesign, realignment, or restructuring will take. Or what kind of trade-offs will be necessary to truly solve our current challenges. Talking about the issues and potential solutions is a start. Maybe we just need to keep serving the ball and we'll figure it out after the first couple of sets. PubTalkers, what do you think?
