As members follow my different groups, it's easy to see they are all focused on very practical, "boots on the ground" questions related, to getting the job done. Each looks at common assumptions of knowledge, education, understanding, basic skills and know-how.
I challenge our assumptions of basic knowledge, at the ground floor, whether it be in evaluation, collaboration, social networking, and the need for mixed age teams, to maximize excellent results. This group, on capacity building, will focus on what systems, organizations and people need to be successful. What do we need to do to help them be successful.
I venture to say we may be setting some groups up for disappointment and failure. I don't think that is fair or responsible. We don't gain anything by just looking at what the smartest people know how to do, the trick is to broaden the circle and make it possible for us to act, walk and talk like what we want to create.
I propose we assume too much about what people know and understand, their willingness to change and their fundamental organizational skills to follow through successfully. Apart from a probable discomfort with change, I challenge our own lack of clarity in defining what we mean by collaboration, participation, accountability, transparency and data.
These words, what they mean and how they look are a constant work in progress. There may be some objective definitions, but how they look in different organizational systems and among the public may be quite different.
No less significant is our assumption that people actually know how to do the work needed, to be successful, and our lack of taking the time to teach and build confidence in skills, understanding and ability.
I don't think anyone has a corner on all the skills to be a confident agent of change within or without an organization or system. I think this group, along with others on GovLoop, can explore what we fundamentally need to do to create system readiness, as we place high expectations on performance.