Smart Government

Archives for February 2016 « Recent Articles

Photo of Ruthbea Yesner ClarkeOffline

Despite articles proclaiming smart cities as focused on big cities or mega cities, or vendor-driven top-down agendas, the "smart city" should be a term that is up to the city to define. The concept encompasses some broad common elements - sustainable economic development, data-driven decision-making, innovative thinking and using emerging technologies - but to me, the concept is an ideal and open to adoption by all level of government organizations - cities, towns, counties, provinces and states. The state of Illinois is a recent example of how these concepts can apply beyond the city.

Photo of Shawn P. McCarthyOffline

Budget numbers aren't always what they seem, and the proposed U.S. federal Fiscal Year 2017 IT Budget really isn't as bleak as it looks. But we need to dig a little deeper to fully understand the numbers and the potential growth.

First, let's get the (seemingly) bad news out of the way. On paper, it appears that the proposed information technology budget for FY 2017 will increase to $89.8 billion, a 1.3% increase over the 2016 request. That's not a terrible level of growth, but it's a far cry from a few years ago when federal IT budgets tended to go up 4% to 6% each year.
What's more important is where that money is slated to go. Finding that information is more challenging than it should be, and it's why we spend a great deal of time "following the money."

Photo of Ruthbea Yesner ClarkeOffline

Here's a peek into the conversations that we (Max Claps, Associate VP, Public Sector EMEA and Ruthbea Yesner Clarke, Research Director, global Smart Cities Strategies) often engage in via email or Skype around pressing issues in the public sector. In this blog, we decided to publish our latest dialogue about Smart Mobility and Intelligent Transportation Systems.

Photo of Shawn P. McCarthyOffline

Here’s a quick lesson on how to track government technology spending.
1) Follow the money.
2) Understand the official definition of what is being purchased.
3) Note the location of where the money has been spent. (Assuming that it's accurate. More on that below.).

These three steps are more challenging than you’d think, but they remain key for understanding how and where the U.S. federal government is directing its money. The problem is, for federal cloud computing solutions, these details have become a bit hazy. Cloud categories that were once clear have been changed. It’s a troubling trend because spending on cloud computing is growing. For fiscal Year 2016 it will top $6.7 billion. That’s roughly a 70% increase of FY 2015 cloud spending.

Photo of Adelaide OBrienOffline

IDC Government Insights observes that government agencies are at many different stages of Big Data maturity. A recent survey of 210 U.S. federal government respondents, conducted in October 2015, indicates that the majority, 68.3%, of government agencies surveyed have yet to establish and leverage Big Data capabilities and expertise at the enterprise level (i.e., managed maturity). To help organizations understand the underlying strengths and weaknesses of their Big Data capabilities and compare them with that of their government peers, we also measured maturity across the five key dimensions of the Big Data and Analytics MaturityScape.

Photo of Massimiliano ClapsOffline

Instead of imposing from the inside-out a standard whole-of-government system, public administrations in Europe (and beyond) are exposing data and micro-services to be mashed with services that already exist in the ecosystem. Attempts to re-invent the wheel or establish a one-size-fits-all system for the whole-of-government architecture risk creating never-ending projects that have unintended consequence on the quality of services for citizens and require additional workarounds.

Viewed 1,029,425 times