In his BloombergView column on employer benefits, Tyler Cowen writes:
When it comes to innovation, including benefits innovation, the federal government is often a laggard, due to the nature of bureaucracy, political checks and balances and the one-size-fits-all feature of most legislation.Over the course of my career I've seen companies and government agencies – large and small – from the inside. And while the list below isn't meant to be exhaustive or authoritative, I'd like to offer some thoughts on why government isn't innovative or efficient.
Jobs. Government jobs. Military jobs. Contractor jobs. Losing your job sucks and no one (save perhaps for a well-known reality TV star) likes firing people. Which leads us to ...
Congress (see "Jobs"). Congress spends money; it's what they do. As columnist Robert Samuelson said, "No one wants to take away; it's more fun to give." Whether it's sending someone a check or maintaining government largess back home, Congress spends money. And Congress was sent to Washington by ...
Voters (see "Jobs") who want to see their legislators "do something". That something is usually more of what they did before, be it spending or making new rules (see "Complexity"). Since many members of Congress want to appear good stewards of voters' tax money, they constrain the number of Federal workers and hire ...
Contractors (see "Jobs"). As the cadre of contractors grows it becomes a political force, lobbying Congress, persuading voters, and guiding contracts. As the work becomes more specialized and contractors build their corporate resumes, government has little choice but to hire ...
Incumbents (see "Congress" and "Contractors"). Just as elections have become less competitive for incumbent politicians, government contracts have become less competitive for incumbent contractors. The same can be said for ...
Public-Sector Unions (see "Jobs") who exist to grow membership. Just like contractors, unions rely on ...
Complexity of process and organization because Congress is less likely to address and attack large, complex problems with large constituencies (see "Voters") than smaller, poorly defended scapegoats.
Contracts (see "Congress" and"Contractors") also present an issue. Large, plodding, high-dollar, low-profit contracts are less likely to gain scrutiny than small, agile, highly profitable projects that have a higher chance of ...
Failure. And there it is. Innovation, efficiency, and change involve risk. Doing the same old inefficient thing is low risk. Voters hate failure and politicians hate to lose. That's why incumbents – whether politicians, businesses, or employees – look to limit competition and change.
Change and innovation in government can happen, but it's really hard. And because incumbents are unlikely to lead change, voters wanting change will have to take a deep breath and sometimes vote against their own best interests.
