Government ECM
by Dan Elam, eVisory
When it comes to
knowledge management, state and local governments are a
white-hot market. Why? Because the booming economy has lasted
long enough that agencies are finally seeing the increased taxes
roll in. Budgets such as these only arrive every 15-20 years, so
government agencies are rushing to implement long overdue
technology upgrades to help them move into the next century.
Agencies which generate revenue – and can pay for technology out
of savings – have been at the forefront for some simple
knowledge management technologies for several years. For state
government, tax processing and unemployment reporting have been
very important. Local governments have seen widespread use of
imaging and GIS technology for land records applications. In
each of these cases the departments have been able to show an
increase in revenue or direct cost savings to make their
justification very easy.
As new technologies mature within the knowledge management
industry, some other applications are beginning to also be
justified on traditional hard dollar savings. Child welfare, for
example, is rushing to adopt various new technologies to track
“deadbeat parents” thanks to mandatory federal requirements.
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests have become so
frequent – and costly – for local governments, that
correspondence management and similar knowledge management
systems are being employed to help organize information in
anticipation of FOIA compliance.
But the biggest growth in the knowledge management industry is
coming from more soft dollar justifications. Secretary of State
(SOS) offices, for example, are responsible for tracking
business debts and trademark registrations. Today, law firms or
specialized research firms collect this information and search
databases to look for liens or prior use of various trademarks.
But increasingly, SOS offices such as Ohio are using technology
to reduce their data capture costs and provide lower cost
research for their taxpayers. Such approaches haven’t gone
unnoticed by the taxpayers: Ohio’s Secretary of State, Bob Taft,
was just elected governor, in part because of his aggressive use
of technology to reduce costs and improve service.
Some traditional vertical market strongholds for knowledge
management are still slow to take root in government agencies.
Invoice processing in Accounts Payable, for example, has been a
popular application for commercial firms looking to reduce costs
and avoid payment penalties. The complicated approval process
for government agencies means a large number of users and the
software licensing fees have largely kept agencies from adopting
the technology.
Contact management software – vital for some commercial entities
– is just beginning to work its way into some government
agencies, but in a very limited fashion. Most attempts to manage
organizational knowledge are restricted to departmental pockets
within an agency or are limited to automation attempts that
focus on a single individual (usually the head of the agency).
Vendors are also seeing that working with government agencies
has gotten slightly easier as managers understand the importance
of technology. From a contract perspective, several states have
greatly simplified the procurement process by using master
contracts. Similar to the federal GSA schedule, master contracts
allow state and local government agencies to purchase imaging
systems and knowledge management services such as consulting and
business process reengineering without full fledged competitive
procurements. In California, for example, any state or
California local government agency can purchase these services
from a pre-approved list of vendors. Kansas, Wisconsin, and
Pennsylvania have somewhat similar contracts and West Virginia
is currently in the process of evaluating vendor proposals to be
included on the master list. The use of these master contracts
is allowing agencies to move faster than they might normally
move in the standard Request for Proposal (RFP) environment. By
shortening procurement cycles, vendors can give agencies greater
discounts since they avoid most of the expensive and complicated
procurement regulations.
One downside for vendors to improved funding has been
unrealistic requirements on the part of the agencies. Since
agency officials know that it will be many years before they get
a chance to have another major technology buy, RFPs are
increasingly being released with “wish lists” of requirements.
The people writing the RFPs often read all the vendor literature
and list the features from many products as requirement for
their new system. The result is often conflicting requirements
(such as a relational database for full text indexing) or
unintentional slants to particular vendors. In virtually of
these situations, the wish is so comprehensive that it drives up
the cost of solution and even keeps some vendors from bidding
because of what they say as inflexible “mandatory” requirements.
In most cases, these “mandatory” requirements are not in the
agencies’ best interests and most will waive the requirements –
but only after the vendors have submitted their bids. The
situation makes it very difficult for the vendors as they
“guess” about what the agencies will pay for. The biggest
drawback to all of this has been a sharp increase in the number
of procurements that have been cancelled after everyone bids and
the agencies discovers that the prices (due to unnecessary
requirements) are more than they can spend. In the last year,
some cancelled procurements have had the lowest bidders being as
much as 600% higher than the state’s budget or procurement
authority.
As the economy slows, smart government officials know that this
may be the last wave of money for quite some time. With projects
competing for tax dollars, agencies know they must carefully
justify each project to show that it is the most important one.
Cost justifications – neglected for the last few years – are
beginning to reappear as a requirement to help get a project
sponsored. Expect procurement cycles to stretch out a little
longer as everyone makes sure that knowledge management is where
agencies want to spend their money.
Even if the economy slows, the government market place will
still stay for hot two reasons: budget cycles take time to
correct and the technology is desperately needed to help solve
some very pressing needs. As new knowledge management tools
become available, there will always be progressive thinkers in
government looking for ways to apply the tools to solve these
problems.