5 Insights for Policy Innovators

by Nick Charney

---

A couple of weeks ago I traveled down to Washington DC with Jason to discuss policy innovation with a number of different US thought leaders / organizations (e.g. Partnership for Public Service, 18F, the OPM Innovation Lab, US Digital Service, GovLoop/GovDelivery, NASA, Deloitte, IBM, etc.). We thought it would be good to share some of the key findings from our discussions.

Spurring innovation can be as simple as turning an intentional blind eye

John Kamensky from the IBM Centre for the Business of Government regaled us with stories of government reinvention labs under Vice-President Gore. The principle was simple enough, central authorities articulate a small set of goals -- e.g. be more client centric, cut red tape, improve client satisfaction -- and then turn an intentional blind eye to any activities that might bump against corporate policies in trying to achieve those goals. Not everyone had to do it, “reinventing labs” were simply teams that self selected, invoked the shield they were offered, and went about doing good better. He called it “using fairy dust to break bureaucratic mythologies” because it didn’t rely on any structural changes. Now he did say that this approach can ruffle feathers because it can undermine the hierarchy and/or the gatekeepers but it's also an incredibly simple way to facilitate greater innovation within the enterprise at relatively low cost, it's replicable within and across organizations, and boils down to giving civil servants license, a sense of agency, and a stronger connection to outcomes and organizational priorities.

Innovation teams need partnership playbooks that articulate their terms

Many of the US innovation teams have developed playbooks that clearly articulate what they do and don’t do, who they work with, and how others can access their services. This gives everyone a clear sense of what is in and out of scope as well as the cost of doing business with the team. My observation is that many of the Canadian innovation teams lack this sort of specificity. Being able to develope and then clearly articulate your value proposition and the service(s) you can provide to the department (and for that matter the management teams that allocate its scarce resources) is of the utmost importance for innovation teams, while the inability to do so is their achilles heel.

If you want to attract projects to a department or agency’s innovation team, give it a budget that it can use to match funds

One of the biggest differences we found was that many of the US innovation teams (and fellowship programs) have a budget that allows them to match the funds of the project proponent. This makes working with the lab (or bringing on a fellow) more attractive to the proponents. This seems to have resulted in some interesting optics whereby some see innovation teams as a subsidy to core business (access to warm bodies) while others see the prospects of successful collaborations that produce results much greater than the status quo (supercharge your ROI). Regardless of the opinions on the ground, these teams continue to be supported by senior civil servants and politicians..This approach does require that innovation teams have a strong management approach and a process through which they vet incoming projects -- meaning it’s very much linked to the notion of playbooks mentioned above.

Storytelling

All of our visits reinforced the importance of documenting the impact that innovation teams are having. Some teams had sent a team member across the country to visit collaborators on ground in order to document and celebrate their stories, some teams used their playbooks to ensure collaborators’ objectives were documented and outcomes recorded, other teams benefited from reporting requirements enshrined in legislation, and some teams adopted a culture of reporting out for its inherent value of sharing lessons learned and demonstrating what’s possible.

Without this data, it’s difficult for a team to surface what they do exceptionally well and the conditions that need to be in play to do their best work (see playbooks, above), and it’s difficult to create a narrative that points, in real terms, to the impact.

If you want to use money to drive innovation, active budget hold backs are always better than passive asks to carve out funds.

Basically it’s really hard to force someone’s hand once you’ve already put the money it. Asking people to direct their money to innovative projects is always going to be less effective than making their receipt of that money contingent on innovation in the first place. By far one of our favorite conversations was with John Kamensky, he walked us through the history of public sector innovation from Clinton to Obama which was fascinating. He also provided a stellar policy innovation reading list that we wanted to share with all of you as well.

Cheers

Two Lessons After a Few Weeks In

by Nick Charney

---

I quietly changed roles recently -- shifting away from a role working on policy innovation at the macro systems level to working on the implementation policy innovation at the micro program level. I'm enjoying the experience so far and (as usual) have been reflecting a bit on what I can learn along the way.

The danger of templates and the tension of task completion
Templates might be useful tools for standardization but they also create an artificial barrier that limits our thinking, especially templates that only push us to think to a certain milestone (e.g. design) and stop short of another (e.g. implementation). In other words they can create artificial barriers that reinforce an "out of sight out of mind mindset" when in reality those things -- while downstream -- ought to be given due consideration upstream. Similarly, there's a constant tension between doing completing the task that is immediately in front of you and that which is not. It takes a high degree of effort to say no to the pressure of the immediacy and keep your focus on longer term objectives. The risks closer to you often seem more important than those downstream but it is that very proximity that inflates their severity not their inherent characteristics.

The importance of stepping outside of strategic policy
Take the time to step outside the strategic policy world and work in or on a program and/or on implementation; there's a lot to be learned.



Note(s): 

• If you are interested in stepping into parts of my old role you can find more information on it here (internal link).
• I'll be in DC talking policy innovation + holding a small hackathon on the Policy Innovation Portal (internal link); contact me if you'd like to set up a meeting or hit the link above to register for the event.

Keeping Yourself Honest

by Nick Charney

---

Last week was amazing.

I hit the road with a friend and went down to Washington DC to deliver a couple talks, well actually it was one talk - Scheming Virtuously - but I delivered it twice, once to the US Census Bureau and again at a federal workplace training expo.

Despite the talk being over 5 years old, it's still fresh and resonates with audiences on a level I never really anticipated when I wrote it. I love delivering it because it keeps me honest. It reminds me of the kind of public servant I aspire to be and the strategy and tactics I ought to deploy to ensure that I get there. It also reminds me of both the best and worst parts of my career thus far and forces me to take stock of where I am at that particular moment. In short, it grounds my thinking, brings me back to centre and renews my drive to push forward. I always build lots of time into my talk for interaction with the audience because it requires introspection and provides an opportunity to walk the talk.


Why did you leave your job at the Ottawa Senators Hockey Club?

Because I wanted to do something more with my life than throw big parties for people with a lot of money. Don't get me wrong, I loved my job, but I wanted to give back to the community, to the country, in a different way. You don't necessarily have to have that public service motivation to do a good job. Maybe you are satisfied in other ways, and that's great. I'd rather work with someone who is motivated than someone who isn't. It's takes all kinds of people to power our organization and not everyone is interested or suited chasing the bigger picture. All I ask is that if you don't have aspirations larger than your current set of tasks, don't get in the way of those who do. Don't stick a spoke in someone's wheels for no good reason. It happens more often then we realize and it's a major impediment to change.


How do we break out of the culture of email and get back to the basics (talking to one another) when people get upset when I walk into their office?

You've got to remember that whenever you walk up to someone else you are interrupting their workflow. Often the frustration isn't about you it's about how often their flow has been interrupted today. Live interaction is synchronous. The person you are talking to has to stop doing whatever they were doing and deal with you solely on your terms. Email on the other hand is asynchronous the other person can get to it later without stopping. Often the challenge is that you are waiting on something from someone before proceeding. We think we've designed these smooth and slick organizations with neat little org charts. We assume people and tasks fit together like puzzle pieces but in fact wherever those things meet the edges are jagged and messy. Proactive, honest and human communication is the only way to smooth these edges. That takes work. We've got to lean in.


How do you track and build support for a change initiative?

Print your org chart and get three highlighters. One green, one yellow and one red. Hide the org chart in your top drawer. If you are particularly bold, pin it to the outside of your cubicle. As you meet with people colour code them. Green lights are your go to people, yellow lights are on the fence and can go either way, red lights are obstacles. Always approach green lights first they are you go to's. Approach yellow lights second, find out what it's going to take to turn them green and give it to them. Approach red lights last and take two greens for every red you meet. Overwhelm with numbers, exert pressure, and be strategic. If you are serious about change you need to get serious about how you execute it.


Finally I just wanted to thank both my contacts at the US Census Bureau and the Federal Workplace Training & Expo (you know you are!) for the opportunities. It's always great to meet people who have dedicated their lives to public service. If you read this blog but haven't read the handbook yet, it's available for free here, the prezi (embedded above) from the presentation can be found here, and, as always, if you are interested in seeing the presentation live and in person, drop me a line we can work something out.

Cheers