Governments today face serious, seemingly intractable public management issues that go to the core of effective governance and leadership. Government leaders are presented with difficult choices, but also unprecedented opportunities. The right kind of leadership approach and style can drive change in government.
Government agencies regularly report “incident” data, such as the number of burglaries, house fires, cases of food poisoning, bankruptcies, workplace injuries, and more. While these data can be used externally for accountability, they can also be used internally to predict and prevent these kinds of incidents.
Though mobile technology may help increase the standard of living in poor, rural, and remote communities, it also holds the promise of other benefits, like better health, and closer ties to the central government.
Can federal performance management schemes influence efforts at the local level? Typically, performance management works best in systems where agencies engage in direct service delivery, where leaders have more control over what is going on. But in complex intergovernmental programs, can effective performance management systems be developed and work?
Agency and program leaders depend on a range of mission support functions, such as finance, technology, acquisition, or workforce management, to get their jobs done. The delivery of these functions, however, have changed significantly over the past quarter century.
Research on decision-making has made advances in recent years, but the research has not been applied to the actual practice of decision-making, observes Swiss professor Phil Rosenzweig in a recent article in the November issue of Harvard Business Review.