This past week I had an opportunity to give a presentation at the Annual State Manager’s conference in St. Paul. The title of my talk was “Leading in an era of exponential change,” and the gist of it was that exponential advances in a variety of technologies, including computers, data storage, biotechnology and nanotechnology, will require state leaders to embrace radically different ways of doing the people’s business in the near future.
Afterwards, I stayed and listened to Governor Tim Pawlenty’s keynote speech. He emphasized many of the same themes I did and toward the end of his talk he asked state managers to envision just one scenario of how technology might reform state government.
Pawlenty began by explaining how thousands of DUI arrests are clogging our criminal justice system. And while he was careful to stress that serious and repeat offenders need to be dealt with individually, he argued that the vast majority of offenders are first-timers, whose blood alcohol average was not far above the minimum threshold, and they were respectful to law enforcement officials during their arrest.
The system, Pawlenty continued, now routinely prescribes such offenders with a uniform sentence that requires they serve a few days in a workhouse facility, undergo chemical evaluation, and pay a specified fine. In spite of this cookie-cutter approach, however, the current system still demands thousands of lawyers, judges, and police officers to spend countless adjudicating the penalty.
Pawlenty then asked his audience to envision a future where those offenders who meet certain criteria (first-time offense, low blood alcohol level, etc.) would instead have a computer met out their punishment; pay their fine over a computer; and have their attendance at the chemical evaluation and workhouse facilities confirmed via the Internet.
It is a different way of doing business, but Pawlenty is absolutely right to urge state officials to search for new and innovative ways of doing business—methods that might allow lawyers, judges and law enforcement officials to focus their considerable talents on more productive applications of the law and, in the process, save taxpayer money.
The governor went on to say that not all state functions could be improved by technology and he highlighted the state prison system as one example. But even here, I would argue, technological advances can play a role.
Earlier this year, the Defense Department approved robots to be equipped with guns to monitor and patrol dangerous areas in Afghanistan and Iraq. The robots must still be authorized by a human before they can fire (and they only fire stun-guns and not real bullets), but would it not be possible to augment the security of some state prisons with a similar technology?
Another area ripe for the application of new technologies is the inspection of bridges. Last month, Wisconsin announced it intended to install sensors to monitor the structural integrity of 14 bridges across their state. At the present time, Minnesota has refused to adopt even a single pilot project and is instead relying solely on inspectors.
My point is not to suggest that all bridge inspectors or prison guards should or even can be displaced by robots and sensors, but technology does offer the possibility of doing more with less in some cases.
Consider video games, for instance. It is often said that such games are for young people and historically this has been true. But within the past year, Nintendo has caught the entire video gaming world flat-footed by introducing Wii. What makes Wii so unique is that its ease of use is allowing non-gamers and even senior citizens to enjoy video games for the first time.
In fact, the technology is so intuitive that scores of nursing homes around the country are using the game to engage elderly people in physical activities such as Wii-bowling and Wii-tennis.
What officials at these aging facilities are discovering is that many of their clients are now happier, healthier and more social as a result of this new video game. Moreover, it is freeing up nurses and doctors to better serve those most in need. If the technology were adopted in state-supported facilities, it might also save some money.
Again, my point is not to advocate that we can turn the world over to computers, robots, sensors and virtual reality toys, but these and other emerging technology—such as language translational software that might improve communication with Minnesota’s increasingly diverse population and help them better access state services—can play a vital role in serving the citizens of this state.
To do so, however, we must first be open to the idea that there are different ways of doing the people’s business.
Jack Uldrich is a writer, futurist, public speaker and host of jumpthecurve.net. He is the author of seven books, including Jump the Curve and The Next Big Thing is Really Small: How Nanotechnology Will Change the Future of Your Business. He is also a frequenter speaker on future trends, innovation, change management and executive leadership to a variety of businesses, industries and non-profit organizations and associations.
