About this Show





San Francisco, CA, USA

Comcast Cable

Channel 89 (615 MHz)






Chiu 9, The City 2, California 2, Us 2, Lotus 1, Budget City 1, Apple 1, Clee 1, Michigan 1, Farrell 1, City 1, San Francisco 1, Cio 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  SFGTV    [untitled]  

    November 2, 2012
    5:00 - 5:29am PDT  

government, and it's a different problem to solve frankly. it's something i have to relearn frequently that the large company i came from was a large monolithic corporation and 1ceo and pyramid up and trickled and everyone did what they did. government as you know we're are a highly decentralized independently elected, independently operated with our boards and commissions. as much as i would like to say i had the authority or will or desire to cast my will on the organization and have things happen it's not as simple as that, so a lot of my jobs and our jobs come down to partnership and discussion and consensus building and meetings and more meetings and unfortunately that takes more time than a linear top down structure so when i talk at conferences -- i was at dream force not long ago and having
lunch with people "i don't understand government and how this works". i spent time educating people how government is today and how we're trying to change it and streamline it and maybe it more efficient but it's a challenge and it's a transition for a organization. i think like a battle ship city government is not easy to turn quickly. it's going to take us years of hard work and partnership and dedication to make that happen. i think we are forging those partnerships. i think there will be debated about centralize and decentralization but in the interim period or department heads make a determination about that i think it boils down to partnerships and i think department of technology and cio and coit we spend time creating these partnerships and the consolidation project is a great one. i also want to acknowledge the airport and the emergency
management center and we have a great partnership with. we have a great partnership with labor and reclassify it positions and training program whereas in the past it was done on a department by department basis so i think we're creating those partnerships for success, but i think at the end of the day it's a transitional challenge for the organization to go from thinking of itself as minicorporations as they view themselves at times in independent departments to work together as a cohesive unit. it just grew up. we started in the main frame days and monolithic and those terminals and pc revolution game and it was different overnight and everyone had a pc and the expert on how to work things so we are looking for a balance. we are bringing your own device to work and
still balance that and what does it make sense to have centralized and do from a security confidential standpoint and it's exciting time. i welcome the dialogue. i welcome the question. i certainly want to continue the dialogue. i think we are making progress. there are challenges and what we can do and i will own what we can do to make things better but these things to happen, the open conversations, the honest conversation bs what is working, what is not working and will help us in the future in the city. thank you president chiu. >> thank you. i want to thank you for your work you have done at department of technology and tough economic times and the fact of the matter is your department has been subjected to the lion's share of budget cuts we were forced to do and not asking departments to make similar cuts in their it
situation and i think that is part of the tension and why we shouldn't know been able to make headway. you allude to the fact until you get direction from the top about need of centralization you had to form partnerships and you as the head of department of technology can't tell other heads to cooperate and you have to work out and partnership. one of the things that i wished the grand jury spent more time on. this is the trend we're seeing in agencies and governments around the country. by in large most governments have a growing decentralization and we know we're not doing that for everything but there are functions that need to be decentralized and we know there are successes here in
california and the state is expected to save $3 billion. denver went through a great consolidation and saving millions of dollars. what are those entities doing that we're not? what cultural changes or cultural values have they implemented from a leadership standpoint that we're lacking? >> to be frank i think the organizational stomach really for how much it up sets the organization to go through the changes? the company i worked before did out sowzing of it and we went into states and took over the it operations and we could save a government millions of dollars by doing that, but for a government to centralize or out source it it's disruptive, up setting project to have happen, and i think the
majority of us in the city feel enough progress is being made to not take that drastic step and whereas you talk about denver or california and i was familiar with michigan when they consolidated their data centers there and i came to know the head there, and there was a willingness and whether driven by the budget or political desire to upset the entire model. kind of blow it up and put it back together again. if you think it's that broken and it takes political will power to make that happen. we have partnerships and i think i have good partnerships with the cio's and the department heads and that drastic change which i he alluded to is up setting and unsettling and
usually two years and we struggled with large projects and i would ask if this organization is mature enough to take on those initiative disblis think one thing i want to observe and in my first coit meeting in 2009 the body decided we were going to consolidate our email. that was four years ago, and as you know, and as i think many folks in this room knows every few months we got an update why things weren't moving and i wanted to quote a part of the civil grand jury report want the jury has been told that some members vote yes on the policy and with their department drag their heels in implementing that policy and one refused to go along with the full implementation of projects" and i bring this up because i often find there seems to be on the service support for what we are
trying to achieve versus centralization of these functions but when it comes to actual implementation doesn't seem like there is much accountability and again i don't put that on you. i think that is a broader conversation of the management of our agencies and i think that direction needs to come from the top and when we decide as policy makers this is what we're going to do to create accountability and that's the piece i think is really missing in many of these project and getting them done. >> john, quick question for you, and i appreciate all your comments and responses and the time we have worked together on certain projects. i think backing up on the civil grand jury report and president chiu's question you talk about organizational and operational questions and the dialogue and whether it's a structural issue, the centralization? to me it's real. i appreciate your budget
happening? to me as i read through the report and i don't know about you president chiu, there seems to be an issue here. and progress is being made and that is great but is it fast enough? when i tell people i am on lotus notes for email it's a round laughter all along and what needs to take place. >> let me say two things about the conversation and let me put it out there how i perceive the comments and the reports and supervisor your comments. number one is we did studies if we're spending enough on it in the city. if you look at the budget city wide and north of $7 billion a year we spend on city services which is frankly a huge amount of money, so when you look at the percentage
whether it's $150 million or $250 million depending which report you read from it -- >> by the way if i can make one note and we can't figure out that number is astonishing to me and i ask every year in the budget process and this report points to $250 million i think is more accurate and ongoing question to the mayor's office and the controller's office and how we get a handle of that. my apologies for interrupting. >> what do we want to do? do we want to save money? is that our goal in san francisco? i suggest to you and i am not embarrassed by the fact we're are the innovation city and it's a lot of money and i think we
should be innovative with that money and don't you feel bad because you're government and always a lagger? i don't feel i am. i come from the private sector and i can be as innovative as others and granted i don't have certain challenges and i don't have shareholders breathing down my neck but i have other challenges and remember that most organizations that centralize to do it to save money. most are about the performance they're achieving and they out source to inch krimentally save more money and a cost savings discussion and if we use technology as a driver and this is from the department's perspective i think we're kind of squeezing blood out of a turnip at
that point. i think the question is are we getting our money's worth? do we clear clee understand for the money that we spend on it in the city are we achieving what we want to achieve? for that money should you be on the old email system or a new one? i think one the challenges is how much are we spending all the time are we making wise investments and getting our money out of spend something and when we compare to other cities and we are spending about -- a little less than other bigger cities and do than per capita, per person, per population, per employee our numbers are slightly lower on the scale, but are we getting the money's worth? i think that is the frustration and it's a lot of money and some
departments are on old systems and others are on new and the equity. >> i agree with the comments. my question is not how much we spend. i think it spending is worth the investment, but is it are we getting our money's worth? and to your example though how much different email systems are we're running here? is centralized the better way? that is revamping but that question needs to be asked and what i am wondering what are the bigger obstacles in your mind and? and there are different groups responsible and maybe the mayor's office needs to take a look or push with this and if
we have so many systems it doesn't mens sense -- >> >> make sense. >> i think it goes to why we're updating the plan and how we're updating. the original plan -- one of the weakness was there wasn't connection between the department and it is bigger goals to achieve as a city, so there wasn't the direct connection between departmental initiatives and spending and koid and with enterprise systems and collaboration and the things that we spend auto meetings i of in in the last 60 days and the revised plan which will come next year is making that connection. certainly you could do it through organizational structure and easier to tell people to go interest one group
and fall into line and even though i like that simple approach and i have seen others suggest it and it not go anywhere. one thing for koid -- there is one belief we focus and manage they're on time and on budget and i think that is important, but perhaps the bigger challenge for coit and the subcommittee is clearly articulating the goals. one email system as the vision and how does it align to that vision? i see now a laundry list of what departments do and not what coit does and i understand that we don't want to punitive for not participating and all of the projects are important, but in the nextittereration can make that connection and these five projects are the highest