"In the age of Gov 2.0, the public served by a government program expects to see “alignment” between the policy presented by their elected leaders, the architecture of the program, and, most importantly, the user experience.

The citizens of 2011 Canada who access a government program have the same expectations for quality service as they have come to expect from their favourite shopping outlet, bank, or service provider. Today’s “consumers” don’t think consciously about these expectations — it’s what they have been trained to expect.

It should be obvious to the political and public service leaders that this is the case. But scanning the newspaper, one can quickly identify any number of current events that highlight a “misalignment” within some government service."

-- Alcide DeGagné, in Strategic & Operational Reviews: We Can't Agree to Disagree

Those working inside the walls of governments needn't even pick up a paper to see that there is a misalignment between citizen expectations and available services. Furthermore, if you think it is frustrating for citizens, try to imagine what it must be like for those on the inside. Even the most attentive bureaucrats are stuck in a myriad of antiquated systems, normative behaviors, and unchallenged assumptions. While they work tirelessly to try to prepare the organization for coming storms they are met with public criticism of unresponsive or slow moving government. Many of the first movers moved long ago are stuck trying to push, pull or otherwise incite others to cross the chasm. I've argued elsewhere that we should expect casualties when forging ahead without strong organizational support, and since in many areas such support is lacking we allow the discourse to be dominated by "how to use Twitter to push a press release" rather than how new advancements in communications technology are fundamentally reshaping the face of modern democracies.

As further evidence I offer the overwhelming demand for social media 101 seminars; as long as this continues to be a viable market for gurus and mavens we will be mired in a discourse around shiny objects rather than of transformation. I'm constantly reminding myself and others what Clay Shirky argued in a TED talk:

"These tools don't get socially interesting until they get technologically boring. It isn't when the shiny new tools show up that their uses start permeating society. It's when everybody is able to take them for granted. Because now that media is increasingly social, innovation can happen anywhere that people can take for granted the idea that we're all in this together."

I don't harbor any ill will towards mavens and gurus who are making a living based on market conditions, but I do think their profits often come at a cost that is unseen. Whenever anyone focuses on the object rather than the substance it slows our progress; and in the public sector we simply cannot afford to move any slower.