Å®ÉúСÊÓƵ

Bloated bureaucracy is being targeted under sweeping reforms put forward
by President Bill Clinton. The aim is to make the US government less expensive
and more responsive to citizens’ demands, and technology has been given
a key role in bringing this about. ‘We still have a government that’s largely
organised on a top-down, bureaucratic, industrial model when we’re in an
information age,’ says Clinton.

The plan for ‘reinventing government’, which was developed under the
leadership of Vice-President Al Gore and unveiled last week, is a mixture
of administrative and technological changes that aims to cut 252 000 federal
jobs and save $108 billion over five years. But specialists in the use
of technology in government and business are not convinced that the plan
can deliver.

Many jobs will go as new computers and communications systems are introduced.
The hope is that remaining workers will be more effective. But Susan Tanaka
of the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which campaigns
for more efficient government, says big cuts in the workforce did not materialise
in the 1980s when federal offices turned to computers on a grand scale.

‘The work expands. People find other things to do, and other jobs are
added,’ says Tanaka. ‘Then you also have to have people who take care of
the snazzy new equipment.’ Moreover, new computers almost always cost more
than expected, she says. ‘Agencies have a very difficult time planning and
designing these systems and implementing them on time.’

Other technology-related proposals in the blueprint range from the huge
– saving $2.2 billion by closing redundant nuclear weapons laboratories
and redirecting those remaining to meet industrial needs – to the arcane
– automating the filing of annual pension-plan reports that private companies
must make.

The plan would also eliminate the free hand that most government agencies,
such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy,
have in planning what research and development they conduct. Instead, a
new National Science and Technology Council could dictate which projects
should be pursued, providing ‘one-stop shopping for science and technology
±è´Ç±ô¾±³¦²â’.

The plan calls on the government to speed up its procedures for buying
equipment so that the government can exploit the latest computers and telecommunications
devices. At present, it takes more than four years to purchase a computer,
while a new generation of computer comes to market every 13 months, says
Gore. When agencies get their computers, ‘they’re not only obsolete, they’re
out of date by at least two generations of products’, he says.

However, many of Clinton’s technology proposals may miss the mark when
it comes to helping business and individuals, according to Philip Anderson
at Dart-mouth College in New Hampshire, who has studied the use of technology
in business and government.

For example, the plan calls for a ‘node’ for people who want business
and economic information to be built on Clinton’s proposed information superhighway.
This is unnecessary says Anderson: the global Internet computer network
already provides reams of such data. Rather, business needs easier ways
to tap into what is there, he says.

Similarly, the Clinton plan requires the Department of Commerce to create
a database of technical information for manufacturing companies, to help
them capitalise on new developments. This is a waste of time, Anderson concludes.
‘Technology transfer happens through people,’ such as when a company employee
is seconded to a government laboratory. ‘You can publish bulletins and reports
until you’re blue in the face,’ he says, ‘and it won’t do any good.’