Filter By

Economy is in flow, not scale

Professor John Seddon tackles the iniquities of the Gershon analysis

With the parties furiously competing to see who can make the greatest ‘efficiency savings', a veritable tsunami of scale-based change is about to hit the public services. Sir Peter Gershon has advised the Conservatives that if they come to power they should outsource the entire public-sector back office within 18 months.

But this nightmarish vision – centralism on steroids – would kill stone dead the ferment of service innovation that is currently offering not just the hope but the reality of improvement at local councils up and down the land. Managers and workers at these bodies have reached the liberating and counterintuitive realisation that big is not better; making services truly local is both morally and economically attractive.

They have learned that in services, economies of scale – separating services into front and back offices so that processes can be standardised and automated – are a myth. The secret of service improvement (both financial and qualitative) lies in streamlining the flow. The more services are fragmented and batch-processed, the worse and more expensive they get. Saving isn't in sharing services or building giant back-office factories like HMRC and DWP. It is getting clear about purpose and redesigning the service to meet real local demand. Gershon has it the wrong way round. Cost reduction is a by-product of the focus on purpose and improvement, not vice versa.

Councils that have quietly rejected central specification of method – reminiscent of Soviet-style central planning – are making service improvements that make a mockery of official targets, while driving out costs in the process. They do it through small-scale iteration and adaptation rather than adoption of an all-embracing central plan – this is how innovation works; this is why bubbling capitalist economies outperform centrally planned ones.

For example, by studying what claimants needed and redesigning the work to match, East Devon and Stroud Councils have dramatically beaten the official target time to pay housing benefit, and spend less doing so. Stockport council's IT help desk now does just that – help – making customers happy and saving taxpayers' money at the same time. Or take potholes. Local authorities in the UK and New Zealand have doubled productivity in road repairs by studying demand and redesigning the work so that local teams have both the equipment and the responsibility to maintain the highways in their area in tip-top condition.

Where work is designed like this, people can use local knowledge to solve local problems. As a direct result the morale of those doing the work rises, fuelling further improvement, and the symptoms of poor morale – sickness and absence – fall away. But even better, when citizens experience good (local) service, their behaviour changes. Indifference turns into awareness, engagement and responsibility. Visitors to Portsmouth's estates, which have been transformed by the new service localism, are struck by their spick-and-span appearance and the positive attitude of residents. None of this could be achieved by Gershon-style industrialisation of services, and the value extends far beyond cost-cutting. Better services create better communities; the moral economics of localism outweigh even the financial benefits, considerable as they are.

***

Many of the case studies referred to in this blog are published in: “Systems Thinking in the Public Sector; delivering public services that work,” Triarchy Press.

Comments on: Economy is in flow, not scale

Gravatar Alex 17 April 2010
Just noticed the above poster claiming the greatest English socialist ie Orwell against socialism. Remarkable.
Reply
Gravatar Hansson 13 April 2010
Yes Jonathan, Alex is right. you need to explain this more.

I thin there is something in what you are saying.

Thatcher did pursue the catallaxy: she really achieve the mutual adjustment of several economies towards a common, shared goal: that of 'baking a bigger cake.'

But: was this the right telos?

The flip of Hayek is that large forces can decide the common shared goal of the catallaxy.

And Hayek did after all say that when you have a force that is too large - a monopoly - it should be nationalised.

Food for thought.

Reply
Gravatar Hansson 13 April 2010
Yes Jonathan, Alex is right. you need to explain this more.

I thin there is something in what you are saying.

Thatcher did pursue the catallaxy: she really achieve the mutual adjustment of several economies towards a common, shared goal: that of 'baking a bigger cake.'

But: was this the right telos?

The flip of Hayek is that large forces can decide the common shared goal of the catallaxy.

And Hayek did after all say that when you have a force that is too large - a monopoly - it should be nationalised.

Food for thought.

Reply
Gravatar Alex 10 April 2010
Cattallaxy defines almost exactly the ideal state of the economy that Hayek was after, something that Thatcher actively pursued. Have I stepped into a parallel universe here?
Reply
Gravatar Jonathan Maier 09 April 2010
... and has lots in common with John's article above, albeit at a finer level of detail.
Reply
Gravatar Jonathan Maier 09 April 2010
Alex, Hayek was a small-statist but he was no fan of monopolies either. There is a hidden wisdom in work on catallaxy that bears little resemblance to the modern market economy.
Reply
Gravatar Alex 08 April 2010
Yes, the Austrian school, like Hayek who sponsored Thatchers political philosophy of slash and burn. Or like Von Mises who called members of the Mont Pelerin society 'too liberal'.
Reply
Gravatar Eleanor McHugh 07 April 2010
Scaling society is no different to scaling computer networks: do as much of the work locally to where demand occurs as possible and make sure that whenever remote resources are needed there's multiple routes by which they can be accessed, choosing the least costly wherever practicable (assuming it's possible to know that in advance, which isn't always the case).

The only things which should come from the centre are the intent to solve a certain class of problems and the supportive environment necessary to pull in fresh resources when local demand exceeds capacity. Anything beyond that and instead of solving the desired problems the centre is entrenching bureaucracy to the detriment of everyone - not least itself.

Socialism has always misunderstood this, probably because so many who crave the New Jerusalem (not in itself an unworthy aim) have failed to understand either Thomas Moore or George Orwell... there is no one plan which deals with the messiness of human life, only an ongoing series of conversations and negotiations which we prosaically refer to as markets.

The freedom of those markets to act is directly proportional to the engagement of people with each other and the broader community. Leveraging those markets to do good is much more likely to succeed than any imposition by fiat from a committee limited in knowledge or means. Were that not the case biology would itself have adopted a different mechanism than evolution (a market in environmental adaptation) and nervous systems (a market in environmental interaction).

Unfortunately the majority of economists still seem to be living in the Age of Reason with its bias towards order and determinism, even though its great child - science - has long since embraced chaos and uncertainty as more accurate descriptions of reality. Would that there were more followers of the Austrian school and fewer of these Keynesians...

Reply
Gravatar Trafalmadore 07 April 2010
Thank you for making this case, John. Can we quantify the savings from economies of flow? Perhaps that should be the subject of the Seddon Review.

Can ResPublica oblige?
Reply

Join the discussion Have opinions on this matter? Why not get involved and comment on this below.

Become a Member Joining ResPublica give you an exclusive amount of features. Gain early access to ResPublica events, contribute to topics and much more.

Detailed Summary

Date Published
07 April 2010

Categories
john seddon
localism
reform
services
Welfare and Public Services

About The Authors

Professor John Seddon

John Seddon is an occupational psychologist and management thinker, credited with developing the systems approach t...