The Resource Intensity of Governance

It is now clear that the future will not be the same as the past, as Barak Obama has acknowledged – but still the underlying need to massively reduce the resource intensity of all the goods and services we consume is not being recognised. The two clips below hint at this and the strength of the elastic resisting change.

Americans for Prosperity’s desire for less government and governance is understandable but an ideological stance is not sufficient or appropriate – as in John Cleese’s DVD ‘The Unorganised Manager’ we all have to ask ‘what are we here for?’ 

The long answer to this is that ‘we are here to liberate and enable the ingenuity that will reduce the resource intensity of good and services, whilst maximizing the ‘value they add to society ‘ and minimizing the ‘loss to society’ resulting from their creation, use and disposal.

The short answer is ‘we must improve the ‘quality of life’, by working to continually improve the quality of the goods and services we consume – as the holistic definition of quality is ‘that which maximizes the value added to society resulting from the creation, use and disposal of goods and services’ .

In Toyota speak we must maximize and zeroise.


Management Consulting in the Government, Nancy Killefer, Barack Obama’s nominee to be the government’s chief performance officer

08 January 2009, 04:16:31 | Daniel Stone

………………………………As the decider, he’ll have to figure how much credence he wants give to her suggestions. Alone, Killefer won’t have the authority to make broad changes to administrative infrastructure. But if Obama hears her out when she reports that, for instance, the Attorney General is wasting thousands of dollars on an antiquated way of coordinating conference calls (which a source at Justice tells NEWSWEEK is indeed true), her suggestions could help streamline some of the ways Washington works.

But if Obama decides to just set the ball rolling and limit Killefer’s access to him, Killefer and her staff are likely to be perceived as auditors who come with little consequence. And since government departments traditionally have little incentive to innovate, if neither Obama nor department heads give the new chief performance officer much consideration, she may find that the department sucking up the most resources with little to show…is her own.

Americans for Prosperity, Earmark ban in stimulus and increased transparency

WASHINGTON ─ With the country currently facing a record $1.2 trillion deficit and states, localities, and private companies lining up for federal dollars, Americans for Prosperity cheers two kernels of good news on the earmark reform front: President-elect Barack Obama has committed to ban all earmarks from his proposed economic stimulus plan, and Congress’s top appropriators have promised that for 2010 appropriations all earmark requests will be open to public scrutiny.

“Big government spending isn’t stimulus, but it’s an unexpected silver lining that this bloated big-government bill won’t also be larded up with earmarks,” said Americans for Prosperity President Tim Phillips. “This stimulus bill will burden taxpayers for generations. That’s bad, enough even without excessive earmarks. We’re kicking taxpayers while they’re down and wasting their money down a rat hole of special interest politics. We hope that if Congress must pass a stimulus bill, it makes good on Obama’s commitment to keep the bill earmark free.”



One comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s