This week, I continue my 'Taking the boot out of the public sector' series. It's too common to dunk on government, and when even the politicians get involved, I get grumpy.
Last week, we busted the myth that the private sector would do public sector work better or faster.
This week, we're talking about what happens when capitalism dominates the conversation and we try to apply a profit-oriented model to public services.
Spoiler alert: the shoe doesn't fit.
Private businesses exist to capture private value in the form of profit. This is the purpose of private sector activity, and it shapes the way all subsequent choices are made. Because businesses exist to capture private value in the form of profit, efficiency is king. Through direct transactions with consumers, businesses manage operations quickly and cheaply to capture the most private value possible and return it to shareholders. In business, autocracy makes sense.
In the public sector, government actors and agencies aim to generate public value - little of which is then returned to the actor who created it. For example, a Council running business support programmes creates local economic value. This value is captured by local business owners (profits), residents and visitors (goods, services, and employment) and other tiers of government (increased taxes). The Council receives no financial return or quantifiable benefit.
Because the public sector exists to generate public value, decisions are made differently. They're made in public, with public, or both. Collaboration, engagement, and transparency come before efficiency. Because the payoff period is longer and the payoffs are more nebulous, quantifying and attributing benefits is more complicated. Because of this, the marker of quality is how the decisions are made, as much as which decisions are made.
If you try to stick a private sector operating model - fast, cheap, quantifiable - onto a public sector agency, the agency will always lose. But when you do that, you're judging a fish by it's ability to climb a tree. Which isn't smart.
Just because it's hard to tell, doesn't mean we shouldn't try. Holding the government accountable for outcomes is important - as long as we look at the right stuff.
Creating public value is more complex than generating profit. It is driven by different factors, harder to measure in the short term, and more ambiguous to define. When in doubt, here are four factors to determine whether you’re creating public value:
Here are a few examples of public services that provide clear-cut public value:
In summary: It's hard to measure, but it's both important and doable.
Hopefully this helps to clear things up. When you apply a private sector lens to public sector activity, the public sector comes off badly.
If you'd like a richer and more detailed explanation of this, I recorded an explainer video, which you might like to share with others, too.
When I sat down to write this piece, I realised I wanted to say a lot more than I could fit in this pithy piece, so I went live on LinkedIn to record you this video.
It's 20ish minutes long, but they're pretty dense minutes. You'll leave knowing how strategy works, how to be strategically effective regardless of where you work, and the core differences between private business and the public sector. Take a look.
Hit reply if you're enjoying this series, and let me know if you have specific topics or questions you'd like me to tackle. Week by week, we'll get the boot out of the public sector.
Til next week,
AM