3 ms·

When I hear questions such as "what did person P accomplish with X?" I like to reframe them. To assess the value of intervention X, one may want to compare the

by dj-wonk 10y ago

When I hear questions such as "what did person P accomplish with X?" I like to reframe them. To assess the value of intervention X, one may want to compare the actual effect (E1) with some estimates of what would have happened (E2) if X did not happen. If one does not use a comparison of this manner, one probably is not distinguishing between luck and causation.

dj-wonk 10y ago
To answer my own question, without the Digital Service, I would estimate that: * Existing agencies would struggle to assemble a talented, motivated critical mass of software developers. Why? Attracting these kinds of developers requires cultural shifts and 'economies of people' (to riff on the term 'economies of scale'.) It also requires a concerted effort on hiring and knowing how to slot skilled technologists in government pay scales. Not all (few?) agencies have figured out to make this happen. * Existing agencies would likely continue to procure work as before; e.g. through a maze of procurement and perhaps through some (limited, if any) internal development resources. I would welcome a continuation of this line of thinking from those who have worked closely with and/or observed the USDS.
- sjg007 10y ago
  Well there have always been contractors but the ACA health exchanges had to work.. the first attempt did not, why because they were contractors and as one could surmise not actually effective at scale. So bring in the digital service who did things as they should have been done... This can be as simple as code to spec vs take ownership and go above and beyond. And it worked. It had to. In the next administration Palantir is going to clean up.. why b/c of Thiel and because of current contractor ineffectiveness. The Digital 18F will survive but it's not clear that the agencies they serve will.

3 ms·

When I hear questions such as "what did person P accomplish with X?" I like to reframe them. To assess the value of intervention X, one may want to compare the

by dj-wonk 10y ago

dj-wonk 10y ago
To answer my own question, without the Digital Service, I would estimate that: * Existing agencies would struggle to assemble a talented, motivated critical mass of software developers. Why? Attracting these kinds of developers requires cultural shifts and 'economies of people' (to riff on the term 'economies of scale'.) It also requires a concerted effort on hiring and knowing how to slot skilled technologists in government pay scales. Not all (few?) agencies have figured out to make this happen. * Existing agencies would likely continue to procure work as before; e.g. through a maze of procurement and perhaps through some (limited, if any) internal development resources. I would welcome a continuation of this line of thinking from those who have worked closely with and/or observed the USDS.
- sjg007 10y ago
  Well there have always been contractors but the ACA health exchanges had to work.. the first attempt did not, why because they were contractors and as one could surmise not actually effective at scale. So bring in the digital service who did things as they should have been done... This can be as simple as code to spec vs take ownership and go above and beyond. And it worked. It had to. In the next administration Palantir is going to clean up.. why b/c of Thiel and because of current contractor ineffectiveness. The Digital 18F will survive but it's not clear that the agencies they serve will.