5 ms·

> Typically governments are not expected to build things efficiently and with quality I suspect a large source of that sentiment is just marketing, companies n

> Typically governments are not expected to build things efficiently and with quality I suspect a large source of that sentiment is just marketing, companies need to go out and sell their accomplishments, whereas a civil servant can stop once the job is done. The politicians on the other hand seems to spend most of their time selling promises about the future, rather than things they have actually done.

gridlockd 7y ago
The largest source of that sentiment is the DMV. The reason why typically government institutions are less efficient is that there is no inherent incentive for them to be efficient. A competitive market, on the other hand, inherently rewards efficiency. Of course, there's nothing inherently preventing government institutions from being efficient. That can happen when you have the right people doing the right thing. However, you really want to have a system that makes the wrong people do the right thing.
- sytelus 7y ago
  A large source of it is the vast majority of government agencies. Do you want to repair X in a state park? You are looking at the arduous process to cut through. Do you need to extend your project with government grants by a month or ran over 1% of the assigned budget? You would have a hell to answer for and months to spend in meetings that will well go over 1% in officer salaries. The vast majority of US government website is pure abomination. I had been receiving end of forced to use some of them and wouldn't wish that on anyone. Some of these websites built after spending well over 100s of millions of dollars. Anyone who thinks governments are as efficient in acquiring, retaining, nurturing talent AND equal or better execution then commercial entities, should accept the challenge of getting a government job and see how that feels likes. The exceptions like Estonia and Singapore are rare and far between but should be studied.
  - ben_w 7y ago
    I tend to agree with the others that the problem you’re describing is caused by those government agencies being monopolies rather than them being government agencies — even though I’m non American (and too young anyway), I am aware of the jokes about the poor quality of AT&T towards the end of its monopoly. Conversely, quite a lot of Americans seem to like the military, which might be the single provider of USA national defence but does that by competing with other militaries.
    - sytelus 7y ago
      US military is actually extra-ordinarily inefficient. It's a vast graveyard of massive projects that were either failed or went as much as 10X over budget and/or ran 10X late. In a book called Skunkworks there is some great stories of how these inefficiencies gets enforced on to even those projects that military started with startup model in mind.
    - gridlockd 7y ago
      The military may be popular for various reasons, but that doesn't mean it's efficient. Also, lots of militaries around the world - including the US military - are contracting out to PMCs. Military equipment is usually procured from private companies. Also, most militaries are sitting there idle most of the time, so they're only competing on paper.

gridlockd 7y ago

The largest source of that sentiment is the DMV. The reason why typically government institutions are less efficient is that there is no inherent incentive for them to be efficient. A competitive market, on the other hand, inherently rewards efficiency. Of course, there's nothing inherently preventing government institutions from being efficient. That can happen when you have the right people doing the right thing. However, you really want to have a system that makes the wrong people do the right thing.

sytelus 7y ago
A large source of it is the vast majority of government agencies. Do you want to repair X in a state park? You are looking at the arduous process to cut through. Do you need to extend your project with government grants by a month or ran over 1% of the assigned budget? You would have a hell to answer for and months to spend in meetings that will well go over 1% in officer salaries. The vast majority of US government website is pure abomination. I had been receiving end of forced to use some of them and wouldn't wish that on anyone. Some of these websites built after spending well over 100s of millions of dollars. Anyone who thinks governments are as efficient in acquiring, retaining, nurturing talent AND equal or better execution then commercial entities, should accept the challenge of getting a government job and see how that feels likes. The exceptions like Estonia and Singapore are rare and far between but should be studied.
- ben_w 7y ago
  I tend to agree with the others that the problem you’re describing is caused by those government agencies being monopolies rather than them being government agencies — even though I’m non American (and too young anyway), I am aware of the jokes about the poor quality of AT&T towards the end of its monopoly. Conversely, quite a lot of Americans seem to like the military, which might be the single provider of USA national defence but does that by competing with other militaries.
  - sytelus 7y ago
    US military is actually extra-ordinarily inefficient. It's a vast graveyard of massive projects that were either failed or went as much as 10X over budget and/or ran 10X late. In a book called Skunkworks there is some great stories of how these inefficiencies gets enforced on to even those projects that military started with startup model in mind.
  - gridlockd 7y ago
    The military may be popular for various reasons, but that doesn't mean it's efficient. Also, lots of militaries around the world - including the US military - are contracting out to PMCs. Military equipment is usually procured from private companies. Also, most militaries are sitting there idle most of the time, so they're only competing on paper.