-
Conclusion
- University of Ottawa Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
Conclusion -government's first decade has been less transformative than transitional, and this assessment holds particular resonance in the case of Canada. Despite the promise of dramatic change and continuous innovation, it is possible to argue that the public sector today looks much as it did some ten years ago when the Internet began its ascendancy to the mainstream of social and marketactivity. Any such argument is also partly misleading, however, since it underplays the significant changes and investments that have occurred as governments —like all organizations —struggle to keep pace with accelerating rates of technological change. Online public service delivery is an emerging reality at all levels, and e-democracy, though rather slow to evolve in Canada, is beginning to impose itself as a more regular feature of politics and decision making in many jurisdictions around the world. Still, many of the changes to date can be characterized as transitional since they have been introduced in a manner that has either sought to explicitlymaintain traditionalprinciples and organizational practices or failed to overcome their limitations in order to realize new ones. Although there are pockets of innovation and examplesof transformation on a microscale, broader systemic reform has so far remained elusive. Perhaps, then, the most pertinent question surrounding the public sector in going forward is whether we are therefore on the cusp of a transformation that is now unavoidable and just a matter of time. Whereas the answer to this question should be seen as affirmative, it does not necessarily follow that the implications will be positive. Much depends on the decisions and choices of those in power within the public sector as well as the preferences and actions of the citizenry. This bookhas revealed some key design tensions that have emerged thus far in the transition toward a new digital era, tensions that may well become key determinants in whether the path ahead spurs E 284 E-GOVERNMENT IN CANADA significant renewal —and thus a positive transformation —or stymies it, bringing instead the risk of significant decline and uncertainty. Centralization and Complexity With respect to service and security, these primarily internal and organizational dimensions of e-government have been brought by the rise of Internet connectivityacross societies—challenging governments to make use of this new cyberspace to become more citizen-centric. Perhaps the greatest risk emerging in the Canadian context is an excessive degree ofcentralization, both organizationally and politically. In terms of organization, initiatives such as Service Canada —unless underpinned by a new governance regime to effectively facilitate coordination in an appropriately networked manner (with implications for incentives, skills, processes, and accountabilities)—will further centralize authority in the familiar command and control manner typically deployed for key government initiatives. There is little question that today's organizational context—relying heavily on interoperability to guide and coordinate a set of diverse and dispersed activities —requires an important leadership capacity endowed with the resources and authority to act. Yet it is the very nature of this leadership that is in flux today, although the degree to which it is changing sufficiently in the public sector remains open to interpretation. Striking a new balance between hierarchy and flexibility, between vertical and horizontal dimensions of accountability, is the nexus of technological and organizational interoperability and innovative leadership. Strengthening the capacities of the public service in this regard, via initiatives such as Service Canada, entails more than incremental modificationsto existing structures and processes. A more networked and collaborativemindset must take hold in order to loosen the forces of bureaucratic and political tradition that are intertwined with vertical hierarchy and control. Accordingly, politicians must also embrace a more collaborative mindset —particularly ministers, who must begin to operate in tandem with colleagues in more open and integrative mechanisms that [3.93.173.205] Project MUSE (2024-03-19 10:53 GMT) CONCLUSION 285 transcend objectivesetting, resource allocation, and results reporting. While cabinet may well need to preserve an element of secrecy in extraordinary circumstances, such changes effectively call for a dispersal of its members and duties away from a concentrated and allinclusive core across a new and diverse set of political networks based on interdependence, openness, and shared accountabilities. The dangers of centralization also apply democratically and federally to the relative visibilities and capacities of local, provincial, and federal governments. Across the spectrum ofnew service delivery and public security challenges, establishing new entities such as Service Canada and reorganizing old ones via shared service models and the like are unfolding in an excessively insular manner driven...