Public Value Decision Making

IMAGINE a society in which

1.      People find fulfilment in community relationships, rather than simply in consumption and leisure

2.      People understand their role within society rather than being a collection of individuals

3.      People are free to help others, rather than wanting freedom from others

4.      There is healthy competition and sustainable cooperation, and

5.      The focus is on community wellbeing rather than simply material wealth

Also imagine

• a vision of “Resilient relationships and good decision making enabling resilient suburbs, organisations, districts and regions” (The Why)

• decision makers setting a vision (Policy), then building decision-making capability to think through and identify the best Portfolio option, and then preparing the business case for decision making ensuring clear measurement of the economic, social, cultural, and environmental, outcomes. (The How)

• clear communication of the vision, equipping of and caring for each other in developing the vision, and speaking up for others. (The who)

• a decision that starts with a vision (Policy) comprising a Portfolio of Programmes (each to achieve an outcome) that will collectively achieve the vision (Policy), a “start-up” decision. Then a decision for each Project (to each improve a service) that will collectively achieve the Programme (outcome), an “initiate” decision. Then a decision to proceed with a Procurement to enable the Project to improve a service, an “implement” decision. (The When)

• a business case that describes a compelling vision (strategic case), describes the best public value Portfolio of Programme options to achieve the vision, (economic case), and describes how the preferred option can be procured well (commercial case), is affordable (financial case) and will be delivered well (management case). (The What)

HOW?

In my view WE need to think in a joined-up way to provide free and frank medium to long term advice to decision makers on options to achieve their vision for their district, region and country:

• economic options (e.g. primary, secondary, tertiary, quaternary and quinary)

• environmental options (e.g. minimum, moderate or maximum standard) 

• social and cultural options (e.g. provider centric or citizen centric)      

Successive Government publications state we need:

1. to develop solutions drawn from local intelligence

2. to focus on medium to long-term including trade-offs

3. a joined-up approach across the public sector that supports coordinated decision making.

4. to make decisions that will result in measurable increases in benefits for New Zealanders

In my view WE need a public value decision system that enables government to participate with the public who are part of a resilient community to achieve vision by thinking together using their different strengths, resulting in measurable benefits that will reduce demand on government criminal justice, benefits and mental health, and eliminate systemic poverty. That approach needs to be a holistic, systematic, and relational. WE need to courageously and transparently navigate the ambiguity of difficult conversations by intentionally leaning in to listen and learn from each other, to build trust and confidence, to set a vision and identify the best public value, affordable and achievable way to achieve that vision.

What do you think?