AI in public agencies: why the rules are different
Government agencies face the same shift as companies, but under different conditions. The ideas that work for a private company need adapting, and some do not apply at all.
Five differences
The resistance is written into law. Civil service rules, union agreements and procurement regulations exist for good reasons, and they are not changed by a management decision.
Citizens cannot switch to a competitor. There is no market pressure, until political pressure takes its place.
Compliance is the work itself. For a company, regulation is a constraint around the product. For an agency, applying the rules correctly often is the product.
Procurement was designed to prevent abuse, not to be fast. A purchase that takes a year and a half can deliver technology that is out of date on arrival.
And even a small agency sits inside a much larger administration. There is no such thing as changing the whole organisation at once.
Expectations are changing anyway
People who get instant, round-the-clock service from their bank and their phone company find it harder to accept weeks of waiting for a permit. Several governments already answer a large share of routine questions without a person, at any hour. The pressure on public services will come from citizens comparing, not from ministers.
What works
Start beside the existing administration, on one service with high volume and clear rules. Rebuild it, run it in parallel, prove it, then move the work over. Get a mandate from the top, with authority over the budget, because nothing else survives the procedures.
Keep control of the essentials: where the data is, which models run, and who can switch them off. For a public body, depending entirely on one foreign supplier is a policy question, not an IT detail.
And do not start by cutting staff. Removing people without redesigning the work leaves the same work for fewer people, and service gets worse. Build the better process first.