| • |
Agencies function as separate silos |
| • |
Constituents interface with many agencies instead of one government |
| • |
Little or no cross-agency sharing and coordination in service delivery |
| • |
No evidence of a service delivery network |
|
| • |
Some agencies working together through central agency coordination |
| • |
An increasing understanding that “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” |
| • |
Some attempts at consolidating service delivery at WOG level |
| • |
A small, but growing service delivery network |
|
| • |
Strong network within government |
| • |
Strong confidence in network potential, development picks up momentum |
| • |
Leveraging the network to understand constituents and create new services to benefit them |
| • |
Coordinated WOG approach to service delivery with some private sector participation |
|
| • |
Vast private sector inclusion within the network |
| • |
Harnessing the “power of us”: government, private sector and individuals leveraging a developed network in a massive co-creation effort |
| • |
Boundless and unlimited potential for innovation in service delivery |
|
Source: Ministry of Finanace, Managing for Excellence Directorate
The model shows how networks within a government mature from the Age of Agencies with very few, if any, networks to the Golden Age of Networks, when the public and private sectors are all interlinked in a well-connected network.
By providing leadership and encouraging mindset changes, a government can actively nurture and grow its network maturity from Ages I to IV. Doing so increases the participation base which the government can draw on.
Subsequently, by leveraging the built-up networks, a government can tap on the resources and imagination of many participants to fulfill the needs of the constituents.
By actively cultivating and leveraging the network, a government can bring out its full potential to deliver maximum value for public service delivery.
|
