Comments on: The Future Challenges of The Post-Bureaucratic Age http://www.talkstandards.com/the-future-challenges-of-the-post-bureaucratic-age/ Tue, 18 Oct 2011 15:30:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: A. Rebentisch http://www.talkstandards.com/the-future-challenges-of-the-post-bureaucratic-age/comment-page-1/#comment-935 A. Rebentisch Sun, 07 Mar 2010 14:06:57 +0000 http://www.talkstandards.com/?p=3609#comment-935 "Yes, we will always need some kind of bureaucracy but the ‘Post-bureaucratic age’ argument is that the bureaucracy is there to set the rules rather than necessarily to deliver the services itself." Was it different in Britain? “Yes, we will always need some kind of bureaucracy but the ‘Post-bureaucratic age’ argument is that the bureaucracy is there to set the rules rather than necessarily to deliver the services itself.”

Was it different in Britain?

]]> By: Mattias Ganslandt http://www.talkstandards.com/the-future-challenges-of-the-post-bureaucratic-age/comment-page-1/#comment-781 Mattias Ganslandt Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:29:46 +0000 http://www.talkstandards.com/?p=3609#comment-781 BTW: Sometimes hierarchy is preferable to decentralized and “networked” decision-making. I’d much rather fly with a well-trained and professional pilot in sole control than a loosely defined network of wikipedians. With asymmetric information you sometimes have to trust those more informed than yourself. /Mattias BTW: Sometimes hierarchy is preferable to decentralized and “networked” decision-making. I’d much rather fly with a well-trained and professional pilot in sole control than a loosely defined network of wikipedians. With asymmetric information you sometimes have to trust those more informed than yourself. /Mattias

]]> By: Niklas Lindblom http://www.talkstandards.com/the-future-challenges-of-the-post-bureaucratic-age/comment-page-1/#comment-780 Niklas Lindblom Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:28:49 +0000 http://www.talkstandards.com/?p=3609#comment-780 Helen, I agree that government could facilitate eHealth developments by setting priorities, however not by interfering in standardization processes. And as you mention, their wallet is a welcome buffert. Further, eHealth technologies will raise efficiency regarding both time and cost. This will be fruitfull to society as a whole, regardless of computer ownership. /Niklas Helen, I agree that government could facilitate eHealth developments by setting priorities, however not by interfering in standardization processes. And as you mention, their wallet is a welcome buffert.
Further, eHealth technologies will raise efficiency regarding both time and cost. This will be fruitfull to society as a whole, regardless of computer ownership. /Niklas

]]> By: Helen Disney http://www.talkstandards.com/the-future-challenges-of-the-post-bureaucratic-age/comment-page-1/#comment-777 Helen Disney Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:15:12 +0000 http://www.talkstandards.com/?p=3609#comment-777 Yes, we will always need some kind of bureaucracy but the 'Post-bureaucratic age' argument is that the bureaucracy is there to set the rules rather than necessarily to deliver the services itself. The greater participation of voters/consumers/patients is important for making services more responsive though it is true that government will need to play a role in fairness ie making sure all voices are heard even those who are not tech-savvy or well-educated or indeed those who are ill and can't always be their own advocates. As for bottom up healthcare allocation - I see the government's role as one of pooling the risk so that we have enough money in the pot that the least well off can always receive free care. Beyond that, consumers should be free to choose their own care and let competition drive up standards. Yes, we will always need some kind of bureaucracy but the ‘Post-bureaucratic age’ argument is that the bureaucracy is there to set the rules rather than necessarily to deliver the services itself. The greater participation of voters/consumers/patients is important for making services more responsive though it is true that government will need to play a role in fairness ie making sure all voices are heard even those who are not tech-savvy or well-educated or indeed those who are ill and can’t always be their own advocates. As for bottom up healthcare allocation – I see the government’s role as one of pooling the risk so that we have enough money in the pot that the least well off can always receive free care. Beyond that, consumers should be free to choose their own care and let competition drive up standards.

]]> By: Ajit Jaokar http://www.talkstandards.com/the-future-challenges-of-the-post-bureaucratic-age/comment-page-1/#comment-763 Ajit Jaokar Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:30:05 +0000 http://www.talkstandards.com/?p=3609#comment-763 Hello Helen Re >>> More open, networked systems may benefit the patient but it will be less easy for Governments to intervene or impose a single solution, which will affect which standards end up being widely used. <<< I agree on the diversity and also the non-practicality in implementing solutions mandated by governments. However, some governments could argue(with some justification) that in many cases, they are the 'business model' - by that - I mean some of the initiatives like Smart Grids, e-health etc would not come about had the government not become the 'customer' i.e. the buyer of these services. In that case, they could say that they are justified in getting involved in standards What do you think of that view? rgds Ajit Hello Helen

Re
>>>
More open, networked systems may benefit the patient but it will be less easy for Governments to intervene or impose a single solution, which will affect which standards end up being widely used.
<<<

I agree on the diversity and also the non-practicality in implementing solutions mandated by governments. However, some governments could argue(with some justification) that in many cases, they are the 'business model' – by that – I mean some of the initiatives like Smart Grids, e-health etc would not come about had the government not become the 'customer' i.e. the buyer of these services.

In that case, they could say that they are justified in getting involved in standards

What do you think of that view? rgds Ajit

]]> By: Mattias Ganslandt http://www.talkstandards.com/the-future-challenges-of-the-post-bureaucratic-age/comment-page-1/#comment-760 Mattias Ganslandt Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:21:21 +0000 http://www.talkstandards.com/?p=3609#comment-760 Helen, Good points. First, while bureaucracy may sound dull, it could actually be important and desirable if it reflects objectivity, neutrality and fairness (the classical golden principles of good governance). I am a bit concerned that “participatory” health care could easily turn into health care for the most vocal. The old rule that emergency health care after a traffic accident should be given first to those quiet and last to those screaming loudest is still valid. Question is – with limited resources – how do you ensure that an allocation of health care resources based on bottom-up is both efficient and fair?/Mattias Helen, Good points. First, while bureaucracy may sound dull, it could actually be important and desirable if it reflects objectivity, neutrality and fairness (the classical golden principles of good governance). I am a bit concerned that “participatory” health care could easily turn into health care for the most vocal. The old rule that emergency health care after a traffic accident should be given first to those quiet and last to those screaming loudest is still valid. Question is – with limited resources – how do you ensure that an allocation of health care resources based on bottom-up is both efficient and fair?/Mattias

]]>