 |
|
|
|
Government Leader home > November 2005 issue
November 2005; Vol. 1 No. 4
The E-government evolution: Evans stresses partnerships, not IT, to drive transformation
Other stories on the E-Government Payoff are:
Editor's Note: The original print-edition version of this article inadvertently omitted the last two lines of the interview. The error occurred due to a production problem during transmission to the printer. The complete text appears below. A reproduction of the corrected article is also available here.
Two years ago, before she took charge of the Office of Management and Budget’s 25 e-government initiatives, Karen Evans knew from her experience as a federal CIO that those programs transcended the CIO’s office and crossed into the acquisition, finance and human capital functions of agencies.
But once on the job as OMB’s administrator for e-government and IT, Evans came to understand more deeply that without acquisition or finance or human capital, the initiatives were just pieces of hardware and software.
“We have a lot of good ideas, but without help, we can only get so much done,” she said. “We have to build partnerships to get all these things done.”
And it’s partnerships with the President’s Management Council, Chief Financial Officers, Chief Acquisition Officers and Chief Human Capital Officers councils that are driving e-government beyond the original 25 projects—the Lines of Business consolidation effort, for example.
Evans likes to say the CIO’s role is not so much about technology as it is about information and the ability to make sure information gets where it needs to be and is used in the right way. That, in the end, is the payoff for the government, because it will mean more efficient and effective services, she says.
In a recent interview with Government Leader staff writer Jason Miller in her Washington office, Evans talked about the lessons OMB has learned from the initial 25 projects and how the administration’s strategy has evolved with the Lines of Business initiatives.
GL: What lessons have you learned from the initial 25 E-Government projects that are being applied to the Lines of Business?
EVANS: We changed the way we are working with the PMC e-government working group [on the e-government initiatives]. We could take the traditional OMB approach, which gives agencies the implementation plan and the additional milestones that we believe they need to have, and [tell them] now they have to do it. But [instead] we asked the agencies for implementation plans and evaluated them.
But before we sent them back to the agencies, we had a special meeting with the PMC working group, gave them the information and said, “If you got this, what would you do with it? Could you advise us on better ways this could be implemented and accepted within the agencies?” [As a result, the working group] gave us some really strategic ways that we could modify the plans so that the discussion of outstanding issues could be taken up to a higher level.
GL: Has the PMC achieved a certain level that it can offer these kinds of candid comments and play a larger role than it previously did in e-government?
EVANS: PMC has been here before this administration. It has to do with evolution and the added value the e-government program is bringing. Because we are more aligned and showing business value and not just talking tech-speak, we are talking more about how we can help, savings we can achieve, the efficiencies in business operations we can gain, and what is core to using architecture efforts and doing the analysis. Our group is tying more to business and mission, and therefore they are more engaged because they see value from analysis we are bringing forward.
GL: How else does e-government need to evolve?
EVANS: We still feel we are in the adoption phase. That is really getting things ingrained in business and agency, like using enterprise architecture analysis as you are going through your capital-planning process. There is a whole series of tools we have put out there, like earned-value management, architecture, business case, capital planning, cybersecurity metrics and all these reports and new policy we have out there with high-risk projects.
We want to work with agencies to get them over the adoption phase and into the transformation phase. They need to use those tools to analyze where they are going and try to get ahead of some of the issues to [keep the project from] failing.
The key, which is part of what we are working on now, is the project descriptions and making sure you are measuring the right milestones. That is why [using EVM to look] at actual milestones, and doing that on a regular basis, will help you get ahead. You will know whether you picked the wrong milestones or indicators.
A lot of our efforts previously were focused on planning types of activities. Now we are following up with execution of those plans.
GL: What did OMB learn from planning the e-gov initiatives that will be applied to the execution part?
EVANS: We’ve done a great job of getting good term papers. We graded the term papers, and agencies for the most part are getting As. When you go through school, it’s one thing to write a good term paper, but you have demonstrate that you really have learned what you said you have learned. In the case of the business case, this is demonstrating the performance that you said you were going to, [for example] gaining the efficiencies that you said you would in the business case, or meeting the program outcome because you are collecting the data that lets people do a certain function more easily.
GL: Looking back, is there anything you could say OMB could have done better? For example, what about using the pass-the-hat method to fund the projects, as was done early on in the program?
EVANS: Given where we were and where the federal government was, the methods used were appropriate. You had to get agencies’ attention to say, “This is not your same business as usual. We really do want to make a difference.”
But then you reach a certain threshold and start getting diminishing returns and can only go so far. At that point, you have to get into the hard work where you are affecting the core mission of these agencies. They have to get clean financial statements. You have to create the business need and value for that. That is the different set of tools going forward.
GL: What are three or four steps needed to tackle something this big?
EVANS: The way I look at it, what are the things you can get accomplished, and what is within your control? This comes from all the management books. You have to break it down into small-enough pieces so that people can see accomplishments and results. It is about being able to do an analysis of a problem and then ask: What do I control? And what is out of my control? How best can I get this done? What do I think is the best solution? And what are the pros and cons of doing this all by myself or working with another part of the agency?
A lot of work we do crosses over into procurement. We have to show where we can work together to show the value and achieve the results for what we are both working toward. If you realize who all your partners need to be, build partnerships and then add value to the partnerships, you will get results. It is never just about you or your organization, especially in the IT world, which is providing services to everyone.
GL: How do you deal with inertia and other impediments to collaboration on e-gov programs?
EVANS: You have to analyze ... what the relationships are. You have to look at who will be responsible, who will be the partners and who will implement [the program]. You have to have multiple relationships [where everyone knows] what is going on. It’s really communications and sharing of information to the greatest extent possible.
Take LOBs: It’s really complicated. You have deputy secretaries, CFOs, budget and performance integration folks, CIOs and acquisition people. You can’t do any of this without the right people, so you’re back into the human capital piece, and there you have all five elements of the PMA.
All four [functional areas]—IT, fi- nancial management, human capital and competitive sourcing—are building toward budget and performance integration. If you implement those four pieces right ... they will get you to the ultimate budget and performance integration, which is [attaining effective ratings on the Program Assessment Rating Tool] and getting program results. You can have a great IT program, but if you have a terrible human capital program, you will not make it. You need those four things together to get to budget and performance integration.
GL: What are the top management challenges for e-government programs?
EVANS: There are continuous challenges, not just with e-government but with any kind of project or transformational type of activity. We are talking about change management. The big fundamental piece that will lead to major transformation [in government] is thinking as one enterprise. Everything else flows from that. If you view the federal government as one entity [and not as] separate departments, that makes you look at the problem and analyze it differently.
GL: What can managers do to help Congress understand the value of e-gov?
EVANS: When Congress has questions, we’ve gone up [to the Hill] with some of the agencies to explain what exactly is going on with some programs. The big key is not to talk about how a program benefits the agency without that agency being there. It [has to be] a very open discussion with appropriators about what is working well and what is not.
GL: What key things should government leaders be doing to help expand e-government beyond meeting the objectives of the PMA?
EVANS: To clarify, we are not working to expand e-government beyond the PMA objectives. In fact, we still have considerable work to accomplish to achieve success. Government leaders can support the PMA by instituting its principles into daily operations, advocating the PMA publicly and taking advantage of the PMA to achieve greater efficiencies and improved services for their programs.
GL: After the LOBs, what are the next steps for e-government expansion?
EVANS: Presently, the Lines of Business task forces provide a very effective method to evaluate all IT investments and develop a common business solution for the government. The LOB approach will continue to serve in the forthcoming year.
Other stories on the E-Government Payoff are:
|
|
| |  |
| "The big fundamental piece that will lead to major transformation is thinking as one enterprise." - Karen Evans |
| | |
|
![Government Leader[valor]](/images/govleader_smlogo.gif "Government Leader [valor]"){kind=small}
