This is about how to build better government

This is about how to build better government – the Minimum Viable Government – that achieves desired results AND is efficient in the age of relentless change.  This site contains excerpts from the 2016 book.

 “Minimum Viable Government” is not about political arguments for “good” or “bad” government.  Many “good” and “bad” arguments arise due to differences of opinion about:

1. Desired results from government
2. What functions a government should perform
3. How and to what degree a function is implemented
4. If the function is executing well or “correctly”
5. If the function is achieving the desired end results

Desired results influence what functions government should perform. 

Functions should influence form – how government is organized and operated. 

Form – addressed in #3 above – ultimately determines the efficiency and effectiveness of function and therefore results.

What are the implications to form due to relentless change affecting every government?

• Viable – a government must assess external changes and opportunities, then make internal changes to maintain viability amid volatility.
• Minimum – a government should be of a minimum form to achieve viability for at least these reasons:  1) survival through ability to change quickly and at lowest cost due to less that will need change; and 2) viability at the least cost or burden.

An important note:  “minimum” does not mean “small.”  “Minimum” means the least necessary to viably achieve the desired functions.  Therefore, this approach works for both those who think government should do more (more function) and those who think it should do less.

There is not a new “silver bullet” and easy answers, nor is there an exact or quick checklist you can implement without much thought.  The nature of minimum viability leads to two important implications:

There is no single “silver bullet” or
single “right answer” that fits all governments and situations.

Minimum viability will change with time, given relentless change.  We are never “done” unless all else stops changing.

My hope is that the idea of Minimum Viable Government helps you take necessary actions to improve your government and your life, wherever you are and whatever your political views.

An idea on its own is worthless. 
Ultimate worth – results – can only come from action based on an idea. 

“Knowledge is not power.
Action based on knowledge is power.”
Chris Cooper

Who Needs This?

You and I do. 

Citizens

Anyone subject to any government has an interest in Minimum Viable Government, or MVG.

“Government” is neither good nor bad in concept.  It is merely a mechanism for efficient interaction among people, businesses, and other interests within the government’s jurisdiction.  Even if there is no formal government, there is informal government.  People will generate their own customs and cultural mechanisms for interaction.

“Good government” or “bad government” judgements come from how you view government and how well your needs are being met.  Knowing what an efficient and effective government might look like will help you make better “good” and “bad” decisions.  You can then act better to make government better.

Those in government

Anyone working in any role in a government and interested in performing the best service also has an interest in MVG.  Anyone in a leadership role will be doubly interested as leaders work “on” not just “in” an organization.

To fulfill your responsibilities, you need to carry out whatever functions are assigned to you.  Therefore, you also need to know what an efficient and effective government might look like so you can carry out your role and do it well.

If you have any responsibility in designing or changing government, then the MVG concept is critical to your success … and the success of what you design.

Anyone Discussing Government

Discussions about government in our time often rapidly descend into arguments and ever louder posturing based on opinion about “good” or “bad” government. 

Using a framework like the one can help discussions move forward productively by providing a basis for what “good” or “bad” look like from various points of view.  Those points of view can be explored productively to find better views and even better frameworks.

People who have no interest in the opinions of others and aren’t open to different ways of considering government should stop here.  Nothing like this will help.  Your ideal form of government is likely a dictatorship 😊

When Do We Need to Consider Minimum Viable Government?

All the time. 

Forming government

Anytime there is a new election, revolt, or other turnover of the people who are leading or working in government, there will be change.  The new people usually bring new ideas about how government “should be.” 

Those new ideas in turn usually mean the desired results are changing.  With changes in desired results comes the need to review and modify existing functions as necessary to gain the desired results.  That means the form of government will likely need to change as well.

Reforming government

Even without a change in people in government, there may be calls for government “reform.”  While “reform” in these instances often means corrections to actual results, the implication is that the government also needs to “re-form” … take a new form.  That calls for designing new functions or configurations of functions; both are considered in this book.

Evaluating government

To properly evaluate how government is working, examine the chain from desired results to functions to form to actual results. 

If government is working well, the actual results will be the same as or close to the desired results.

There will always be debate about desired results based on different views of government purpose and personal beliefs.  However, evaluating effectiveness from desire to reality can be more objective. 

Given a particular set of desired results and accompanying functions, there should be less debate about form.  Principles of good organizational design already exist, and government is a type of organization.  If we know desired results, we can identify appropriate government forms.  We can then also evaluate government form independently and more objectively at any time.

What is a “Minimum Viable Government” or MVG?

“Perfection is not when there is no more to add, but no more to take away.” 
Antoine De Saint-Exupéry

 The “Minimum Viable _____” heritage

MVP in sports is “Most Valuable Player.”  While there can be those MVPs in business, MVP has come to also mean an entirely different idea in business where MVP is “Minimum Viable Product.” Minimum Viable Product and a range of variations is rapidly expanding in business awareness and use.  All further MVP references will be to this usage.

Frank Robinson is credited with coining the term “Minimum Viable Product” or MVP in 2001.  His definition is a “unique product that maximizes return on risk for both the vendor and the customer.”

Notice that the definition involves both the recipient/user of the product – the customer – and the provider of the product – the vendor.  This is the “viable” part … in essence, does the product work for both the vendor (the investments to provide the product is worth the resulting returns) and the customer (the investments to acquire/use the product is worth the value gained). 

The “minimum” part, when added to “viable,” is the maximization of return on risk on both sides of the transaction while minimizing investment.  Determining the minimum viable product is both art and science and a continuing process in the face of relentless change.  The value is in both trying to get close to the MVP – generating the best return on risk that we can reasonably achieve – and learning more about what MVP means for the next time.

For our purposes, we will let “Product” serve a dual role as either product or service.  Either way, the result is some form of value along with the investment in providing the value.

As the idea of a Minimum Viable Product has gained in acceptance and use, so has the application of “Minimum Viable” in other areas.  For instance, in Wrong Until Right – How to Succeed Despite Relentless Change, I applied “Minimum Viable” to business – the Minimum Viable Business or MVB – and the organization necessary to achieve a MVB – the Minimum Viable Organization or MVO.

So let’s translate those ideas to Minimum Viable Government, beginning with the “Government” and working backward:

Government

Our topic is government instead of business.  Like a MVB, a Minimum Viable Government or MVG is the combination of the functions it performs – essentially its MVPs – and the organization that performs the functions – its MVO. 

This book focuses on the form aspect – the MVO portion of a MVG – rather than details of the product or service aspect.

Viable

Standard definitions of “viable” include practicable and able to live.  For a product or service, ability to live means that the supplier can continue to supply and that the customer or user can and is willing to continue to use or consume.  For a government function, the meaning is largely the same:  the government can supply and continue to supply while the customer or user can continue to use and support … and that the outcome is sufficiently close to the intent.

“Viable” does not automatically mean a certain size of government.  It simply means the government is capable of supplying what is needed for whatever particular functions are selected.

Minimum

Do not read “minimum” and assume “small.”  Minimum means the least government – the government version of a MVO – that is needed to deliver the intended functions and at the intended level of function – the government MVP(s). 

Declaring a government too big or too small is more of an opinion about the:

• Desired results and functions of government compared to current intent and functions … is the government doing too much or too little?
• Actual results gained compared to the current investment or cost of government … is it taking too much investment to get the current results?

A citizen with limited ability (e.g., time or money) or interest to support government will want their needs met, but only those needs.  Their desired needs will determine their view of what constitutes a MVG. 

Any other functions supplied will detract from meeting that citizen’s needs with minimum investment.

What Levels of Government Should Be Minimum and Viable?

All.

If the concept of a Minimum Viable Government makes sense, then it makes sense for all types of governments at all levels.

The “minimum” part is relatively universal.  We need just enough government organization and just enough delivery for a given function to be successful while being most able to adapt to change.

The “viable” part will vary with the specific government and the functions chosen for that government.  Therefore, to apply MVG to a particular government, focus on the principles of MVG first and adapt the specifics to the situation.

Can We Determine the “Right” Government?

 Utopia, dystopia, and stuck in the middle

Can we ever achieve a perfect government … an actual representation of the fictional state of Utopia in Sir Thomas More’s novel? 

This question has less to do with the form of government and more to do with opinion about human beings. 

Unless there is a way to establish a government that operates totally without humans or human input, then humans must be involved in government.  And unless humans can be perfect, government will never be perfect.  Therefore, Utopia is just a utopian dream.

However, just because we may not be able to reach the ideal of perfection, does not mean we cannot or should not try to find better ways of governing … striving for better. 

Those who hold an opposite view of Utopia believe we are heading for dystopia or complete dysfunction. Nothing that humans do will result in anything other than dissolution and dysfunction.

We live between the utopian vision of total perfection and the dystopian vision of total dysfunction.  We cannot reach the former, but we can avoid the latter, short of worldwide apocalypse that is immune to positive human intervention.  We do avoid dystopia by taking action to keep aiming for utopia.  Given being in the middle of the two is much better than letting chaos reign and allowing society to sink toward dystopia, why not act?

The key is having a mindset of
optimistic, opportunistic realism
to find ways to maneuver
instead of resigning to a mindset of fatalistic victimization or conversely, unrealistic optimism that blindly hopes for the best …
both of which result in little or wrong action and no headway. 

Action

What is your view of human beings? 

• Can humans reach perfection? 
• Is a utopian society possible? 
• Is a dystopian existence inevitable? 
• Does your thinking tend either way or is it mostly “in the middle”? 

Your view of human nature significantly impacts your view of government …

Viable versus possible – what is the difference?

There are many forms of government that are possible to construct.  However, not all forms of government are viable, meaning the form is sustainable and has a balance of risk and return for both government and governed.  Just because something is possible does not mean it is desirable or effective.

“Wrong Until Right” instead of “Right Until Wrong”

In the past, leaders have been accustomed to being able to predict what actions were needed – to be “right” in their decisions and how they lead.  Unfortunately, this mindset is becoming increasingly ineffective in today’s world.

To succeed, most leaders must change their approach from “right until wrong” to “wrong until right.” 

“Wrong” in this context does not mean poor judgment or action.  “Wrong” means that despite trying well, we still may miss the mark due to high rates of change and not enough knowledge to determine what will be “right” at the time our product or service reaches the marketplace.  Rather than sticking to some pre-determined path, we must make incremental corrections and use interim “wrongs” to eventually get to “right.”

“Right until wrong” … “wrong until right” … sound like subtle word play but represent the difference needed to win in today’s world.

How Can We Design Government?

 We can leverage a key perspective from business:  C.E.O.S.

Now that we’ve considered the “whys” of change, adaptability, and the concept of systemic feedback underlying a “wrong until right” approach, let’s look at frameworks for designing government. 

The first step is to consider all stakeholders, the Customers, Employees, Owners and Significant other stakeholders – the C.E.O.S. for short – and what they value.  Dr. Michael O’Connor, who originated the C.E.O.S. concept, characterized the interests of each business stakeholder group:

• Customers usually focus on quality of service (including price levels and other factors) and the product. 
• Employees focus primarily on the quality of work life (including salary and benefits),
• Owners value the quality of financial return
• Significant other stakeholders (e.g., supply chain partners, critical vendors, even team members’ significant others who have a stake in the business succeeding) focus on the quality of their relationship.

The related, balanced aims for long-term business success are to provide:

• Customers with legendary service;
• Employees with a fulfilling work environment;
• Owners with enhanced value, (not maximized to the exclusion of C.E.S. interests)
• Significant other stakeholders with a spirit of shared responsibility. 

The same concept can be applied to government.

• A customer is anyone who is subject to government jurisdiction and therefore is a recipient of government influence or services in some way.
• An employee is anyone employed by or serving in the government.
• An owner is a citizen of the government.
• A significant other stakeholder can include anyone or entity with whom the government uses as a vendor, other governments both within and without, etc.

A major difference is in the “owner” category.  Owners in business are those who either own the business directly or hold shares of ownership (portions of the business).  The owners may or may not be customers.  In government, all the owners are also customers by default.  The owners may not receive or be subject to all aspects of government, but cannot escape being a customer in some form.  The only way for an owner to not be a customer is to no longer be an owner or citizen.

“government of the people, by the people, for the people,”
Abraham Lincoln

If you look at the books on business goals, most of them conflict in their opinions of where the business should focus.  Some say put customers first; others say put employees first, while still others say shareholders and owners come first.  But all cannot be “first.”  So forget “customers first,” “employees first,” “profits first,” and so on.

What matters most to success over time is sufficiently balancing the needs and the values of all of the C.E.O.S. or stakeholders.

While targeting customer value is the primary aim to get feedback, we cannot sustain success without balancing customer needs with the needs of the other stakeholder groups.  For a government to function well long-term, all C.E.O.S. must have a somewhat balanced level of satisfaction. 

What Are Different Levels of Government Service?

 A framework for levels of service within functions

 There are many possible functions that a government may perform.  Within each function, there are also different levels of “service” – degree of function.  Here are some possible levels of service, ordered in ascending level of effort/intensity:

• None
• Monitor
• Report
• Tax
• Regulate
• Manage
• Provide
• Enforce

What Are Common Government Functions to Consider?

 Below are the functions we will consider.  There can be more, but these are common functions across many governments.  We will look at some of the service implications for each.

• Eligibility
• Protection
• Commerce
• Transportation
• Education
• Employment
• Health

Explicitly defining and agreeing on definitions of functions is critical to attaining a Minimum Viable Government.  Otherwise, much time and effort will be spent on argument about implementation actions because of differing desired end states that are not apparent or discussed.

“Eligibility” means the function of determining who or what is under the government’s jurisdiction or eligible to receive any government service.  This function is foundational, meaning that it is the one minimum function for any government.  In essence, this function defines the government and governed.

Even if this function is not carried out explicitly, eligibility will be implicitly performed by virtue of how any other government function is performed.

***********

Thanks for reading!
Mike Russell
www.linkedin.com/in/mikelink
https://x.com/MikeRussellX