FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND AGENCY ADMINISTRATORS

Citizens are increasingly demanding that public sector agencies deploy public funds in a more responsible manner. We are seeing more examples where public services that have been privatized are being operated at a lower cost. The expectation is that public agencies look to some of the best run companies in the private sector as a model for how to manage.

While having some appeal, blindly mimicking the actions of private sector industries is no panacea for improved performance. To the contrary, agencies whose objective is the public good could choose the incorrect metrics and actually decrease customer satisfaction instead of improving it. Other complicating factors are no competitors for many service offerings and a history of "bigger is better". In other words, administrators have been incentivized to create larger bureaucracies which are then viewed as being more valuable and less prone to budgetary reductions.

Whenever new companies from any industry are first introduced to what manufacturers have referred to as the " lean" approach (which is the root of the GAPS^tm program), a typical response is that it may have worked for (fill in the name of an organization that has successfully implemented the lean approach), but WE are different. In most private companies, whether they are manufacturers, builders, or health care providers, the similarities could be highlighted and they could eventually see the benefits. In the case of the public sector, the differences were actually so profound that very, very few leaders were actually able to see the link. This resulted in almost no public sector agencies going further than sitting through a manufacturing-oriented training session. Without seeing the link, process improvement efforts using the GAPS^tm approach were not even being attempted.

The GAPS^tm program makes the link between process waste and stress, poor department performance, and customer dissatisfaction very clear. From the terminology used (i.e. totally avoiding the term "lean" with its negative connotations) to the simulation used (a municipal permitting department as opposed to one centered around increasing profit), to some additional tools introduced to decrease waste (i.e. the tool of "customer collaboration" where the customer is educated to take actions to make the process flow more smoothly), it is designed to respond to the needs of public sector agencies.

The design of the GAPS^tm program also makes sense from a financial perspective. Fees for all GAPS^tm training has intentionally been kept very reasonable. For those agencies who will be using the GAPS^tm approach frequently, knowledge transfer so that internal staff can deliver all aspects of the GAPS^tm program is a natural part of the program's progression. Licensing agreements allow properly trained internal facilitators to use all of the materials offered (including the simulation).

The bottom line is that the GAPS^tm approach is a win for everyone involved. Since it relies on the ideas of those doing the processes on a daily basis, the opportunity for them to be truly heard does miracles for both their stress levels and their morale. It responds to the need of those who manage these processes to have a path down which to travel to achieve better performance. It is a tangible, measurable method to respond to the citizens who expect processes that work well from publicly-funded agencies.

We encourage you to explore the GAPS^tm approach by either registering to attend a publicly offered Principles of GAPS^tm seminar or bringing the Principles of GAPS^tm course to your own site. If this is not currently feasible, at least sign up for our e-mail newsletter. This will keep you in the loop regarding the progress of GAPS^tm as this approach expands. Please let us know how we can further support your improvement efforts.