The report on government costs in Ohio and Cuyahoga County is particularly fascinating. It is wonderful to find clear information like this. It would also be interesting to compare the number of counties in Ohio per capita. I wonder if any similar government efficiencies are achieved through scale in the Southern states.

That’s why you’re working elsewhere, and that’s a good thing. I’m sure you’ll be back soon.

You have caught the spirit of the post. At the same time, I see this idea not as a confrontation, but as an opportunity to leverage our assets (like Lev Gonick’s work with One Community) and develop new regional networks.

The responsibility of leadership in today’s economy is to prepare us (and our children) for a more complex, dynamic and uncertain world.

How do we create a more agile region? Some answers are emerging. Innovation in government services is one of these answers.

As the study I posted shows, we have a big opportunity to reduce the upward pressure on taxes by improving local government performance and effectiveness (and holding people accountable).

There are some excellent models and even a handbook to guide local government innovation (The Reinventor’s Fieldbook).

I’ve participated in these efforts before, and I know it’s possible to bring more responsiveness to local government through focused citizen engagement and stronger citizen networks. Now, in addition, we have Web 2.0 and new, more powerful tools of collaboration.

A couple of weeks ago, I-Open and our partner the Edward Lowe Foundation conducted a three day workshop for regions from Illinois, Missouri, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Indiana, and Louisiana.

Within our own region, we are seeing some impressive collaborations forming in Lorain, Akron and Youngstown. Cleveland and Cuyahoga County are slow moving, to be sure, but that can change.

The question, of course, is whether enough people are tired of costly, patronage-driven sinecures, the incivility of leadership rants, the back room deals of “fixers”, incomprehensible and unaccountable “strategies”, and the propensity of our leadership to think that somehow, somewhere there’s got to be a consultant with some answers.

It seems to me that what you propose will result in a parallel world of governance, until the current one collapses of its own accord, and dies.

I put the link to the report at the end of the post. WordPress doesn’t like links in the comments.

I implied in the post that these rules are evolving and that there are some challenges ahead. But the fact remains that in a networked world, our presumptions on information shift. Federal and state policy need to keep up in this fast evolving area. Why not think of this region as a laboratory for these new approaches?

On the issue of government overhead, I have been advocating this approach since my days at REI. I like the idea of headcounts. Several years ago, I did a report (which I presented Joe Roman and his assistant Dan? at the GCP) on the need for these type of measures. Nothing much happened. You can download the report here.

At the same time, this metric is a good one for FFEF to follow in their “government efficiency” work.

To Vince:

Thanks for alerting me to the failed links. WordPress does some funky stuff sometimes with links, and I need to pay more attention to what I am doing.

I’m certain that there are many other aspects of government business that require specific approaches, rather than the blanket statement that “more openness is better.”

I’ll also add to the discussion the concept that the total government burden on the regional economy, measured in dollars and cents, should be kept within a target zone as defined not by goverenment itself, not by politicians, and not by reference to spending levels of other government entities, but by me, you, and Brad Whitehead–or some other such group of citizens.

Finally, Kyle, the U.S. is a “democratic republic,” not a “democracy,” and thank God for that.

1. Network mapping: The quality of the relationships can be included. We’re not talking about one map. Rather, we are talking about using maps to gain insights. See Valdis Krebs’ site here.

2. The disenfranchisement issue is a red herring in my view. Today, over 80% of the world is covered by mobile networks. This connectivity gives rise to many new opportunities at the “bottom of the pyramid” (See Prahalad’s book here.

I-Open is working with Community Renewal in Louisiana which is pioneering network based models for inner city renewal.