I had a great opportunity recently to meet with Al Dunn and Bruce Weber of the London Business School. We had a great conversation about governance and information systems, particularly the shape and form of government in the 21st century.

As for my thoughts, I believe that for both the U.S. and U.K. (among other countries), privatization of government functions and outsourcing of personnel seem to be growing trends. Thus, with any solution to exchange knowledge through information system-enabled collaborations, the role of contractors vs. government full-time employees (FTEs) must be considered equally. Where should contractors they fit in any role-based system? Should they have the same access as FTEs? And, as parts of government increasingly become outsourced, how would that affect the interests of government workers (FTEs vs. contractors) with access to data that spans multiple agencies? My own research shows that government contracting personnel have different normative values to sharing knowledge vs. government employees.

Further, I'd like to tell you that my 12-plus years in government show that government does act on behalf of the interest of the people, but I fear that's the ideal, embodied in about 20 percent of the "true believers" present. There's another 40 percent (approximately) for whom it's just about earning a paycheck, and finally another 40 percent for whom it is about personal gain or power-seeking. That said, such a pattern is nothing new. The Founding Fathers actually foresaw the same exact problem and described it quite accurately in the Federalist Papers:

"... the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others... Ambition must be made to counteract ambition."

So, the question to consider with governance and information is who's being empowered (i.e., role-based may be good, but ultimately someone has to be the role-granter/gatekeeper). And what are the counteracting forces that will hopefully "balance" the consolidation of too much power into any such role as such a IS-empowered gatekeeper, because while we would like for altruistic, sharing people to occupy such administrative roles, if the roles have too much power, they'll attract instead members of that 40 percent who are all about personal gain and power-seeking.

"... It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary... In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."

Information systems allow for role-based control, but such control can be dual-edged... either allowing more control (for the power-hungry) or greater democratizing control either within government or shared between government and the public in terms of accountability and transparency. What's to encourage an IS-empowered gatekeeper/switch role to control the granting of roles/switched correctly?

With information systems, does the aggregation and centralization of so much information authority create with it great temptation for either abuses or empire-building? If so, what alternative mechanisms can be placed to discourage such (non-desired) behaviors? I'd suggest organizations concerned with 21st century governance start with the premise that to be human is to be self-interested (most are "programmed" that way). You will have about 20 percent of "true believers" who are altruistic in any organization and will see beyond their own selfish ends, but you will be incredibly lucky if you get more than that percentage. That said, information systems do provide opportunities to provide/remove cues that help tilt the balance toward more collaborative (even unknowingly collaborative) behaviors.

More on that next week...