Dear GKD Members, Thanks to all participants in this discussion. I've found it extremely interesting.
I would like to propose what may be a somewhat radical approach to using ICT to strengthen local governments (LGs): We should be thinking of LGs -- and encouraging them to think of themselves -- as companies do. LGs provide services for citizens, who are their customers -- and are also their "stockholders". Thus, citizens have a conflicting role. On one hand, as customers, they want high quality services. On the other, as stockholders, they want to keep costs down. ICT can help LGs do both. ICT can improve the efficiencies of "back-office" operations by squeezing out waste. And ICT can improve services to citizens. I think Ed Malloy made a crucial point in saying that the latter -- serving citizens -- is more important than the former -- simply improving operations for its own sake. There are several important implications that derive from this approach: (1) LGs must become more "customer-focused". No viable company invests in improving operations to produce something that customers don't want. LGs have to learn to operate on the same principle: identify the needs of their customers/citizens, and base ICT adoption on fulfilling those needs. It sounds obvious, but we've all seen innumerable development projects that help LGs adopt ICT to do something without any clear input from citizens on their priorities. How can LGs become customer-focused? There are plenty of tools: surveys, community meetings, etc. LGs should be encouraged and helped to use appropriate methods to gauge the needs of their citizen/customers. It is not enough simply to promote the concept. LGs need specific tools and understand how and when to use them. (2) LGs must become more strategically competitive. Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in most developing countries have difficulty peering over the edge of their own community/country and understanding the world market in which they are competing (knowingly or unknowingly). A major thrust of economic growth competitiveness projects is to help SMEs understand where their competitive advantage lies and how to strengthen it to compete in the global markets. LGs need to learn the same. Most LGs have no notion that they can use ICT to significantly increase job/business opportunities in their community. They need to understand how they can use ICT to promote jobs and entrepreneurship opportunities in their constituency. Every local government can and should be using ICT to do so. This is where development support can be extremely valuable. We should be helping LGs identify the levers they can use to promote business development in their own backyards, whether they are Provincial governments, districts, or municipalities. Some of these levers involve promoting an "enabling environment" within the locality. For example, LGs -- even municipalities -- can address data protection issues even if the national government has failed to do so. Enabling environmental initiatives can be crucial to attracting investment that provides business/job opportunities. Other levers are more industry/cluster/enterprise-based. All too many LGs (with donor support) pursue industry/cluster-support strategies that are inappropriate and will be ineffective. Many of those strategies are simply "copy-cat" approaches -- initiatives that are "hot" elsewhere but are not based on the particular community's competitive position. For example, many cities are providing tax breaks to companies setting up call centers; yet even with low costs, many of these call centers are doomed to failure -- they simply lack an overall competitive advantage with other locations. LGs need to do exactly what companies must do: understand their competitive advantage and how to utilize it strategically. There are yet other levers. For example, LGs need to understand their revenue base, and that means understanding such things as capital markets so that they can foster businesses that will create sustainable economic growth. (3) LGs need to operate cross-sectorally. Donors can afford to operate in "sector" silos: education, health, economic development, etc. LGs cannot. For example, LGs have to understand how education/training of the local workforce affects local economic growth in the short- and long-term. They must be able to use ICT to link across education and economic development sectors in ways that will strengthen local businesses. (4) LGs need to squeeze out inefficiencies. Like businesses, LGs have a value chain that provides services. They should be able to analyze their value chain and identify where they can use ICT to reduce costs and maximize impact. Frankly, I don't buy the notion that LGs will not reduce inefficiencies because they have too many staff. Rather, I would argue that the problem is that the staff are doing the wrong things. There's plenty for LGs to do -- more than current staff could possibly handle. If ICT can help wring costs out of current processes, staff could do more that has value. If ICT helps them deliver the right services, they can get greater positive impact with fewer resources. In Miraj Khaled's Bangladesh example, the politician that distorted the decision-making process in order to give his constituency a crippled power plant probably didn't win many voters. How do we convince LGs to use ICT to make these changes? That's a topic for another email -- but not surprisingly, I suggest we use change management approaches that have proven effective in companies. Thanks again to all GKD members! Regards, Janice -- Janice Brodman Director Center for Innovative Technologies EDC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------ This DOT-COM Discussion is funded by the dot-ORG USAID Cooperative Agreement, and hosted by GKD. http://www.dot-com-alliance.org provides more information. To post a message, send it to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd For past messages, see: http://www.dot-com-alliance.org/archive.html
