Conceptual and Practical Considerations in Alternative Service Delivery
| Author | John K. Wilkins |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020852303069002004 |
| Published date | 01 June 2003 |
| Date | 01 June 2003 |
| Subject Matter | Journal Article |
Conceptual and practical considerations in alternative
service delivery
John K. Wilkins
Abstract
Alternative service delivery (asd) is a Canadian phenomenon that spread, surfaced
important issues and made a wider impact. asd refers to the many and varied
organizational forms and delivery mechanisms governments use to achieve their
objectives. It is anchored in a spectrum of options that mirrors the diversity of the
nation, its governments and its public institutions. Innovations sustain the capacity to
serve the public interest and to leverage efficiency, accountability and renewal. They
embrace a strategy of collaboration across sectors and boundaries to overcome
impediments to change and to transform service delivery. Countless spin-offs cascade
throughout the Canadian public sector. Many governments benchmark the
international scene and adapt innovations to their settings. Respect for situation and
reciprocal learning facilitate the transfer of good practice. Lessons learned from asd
experiences across Canada and in countries like Tanzania, Latvia and New Zealand
improve the prospects of ‘getting service delivery right’.
Introduction
Restructuring is a prominent theme within New Public Management. There has
been a growing challenge to traditional ministries and departments as the pre-
ferred organizational format to best meet public goals. Governments have
experimented with alternative designs because hierarchical, vertically integrated
departments have proven too rigid and unresponsive in a public sector environ-
ment that is increasingly complex, turbulent and demanding. Unbundling bureau-
cracy through alternative service delivery (asd) is an innovative response to the
pressures of scarce resources and the public’s insistence on improved service.
This article is divided into four parts. The first part outlines the conceptual
framework for asd. The second part presents four cases exemplifying Canadian
innovations in asd. The third part profiles three cases typifying the range of inter-
national experiences in asd. The fourth part summarizes the lessons learned about
good asd practice.
John K. Wilkins is the Special Advisor on Alternative Service Delivery with the Treasury
Board of Canada Secretariat. The support of the Treasury Board Secretariat, the editorial
assistance of Toby Fyfe and Maurice Demers and the contributions of Canadian and inter-
national colleagues are gratefully acknowledged. The views expressed are those of
the author and do not necessarily represent Government of Canada policy. CDU:
65.012.3(100).
International Review of Administrative Sciences [0020–8523(200306)69:2]
Copyright © 2003 IIAS. SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New
Delhi), Vol.69 (2003), 173–189; 033514
02_IRAS69/2 articles 22/5/03 12:00 pm Page 173
Conceptual framework for alternative service delivery
According to the World Bank, asd is a uniquely Canadian term that has gained
currency as a worldwide phenomenon (Wilkins, 2000a: 1). Ford and Zussman
(1997: 6) define it as ‘a creative and dynamic process of public sector restructur-
ing that improves the delivery of services to clients by sharing governance func-
tions with individuals, community groups and other government entities’. asd is
part of the process of public sector reform. It is an opportunity to think laterally
and to be creative. It is an attempt by government to reconnect with citizens and to
build new networks. It is a platform for developing relationships among the
public, private and voluntary sectors. It is about strengthening governance,
framed by an ethic of service and innovation. While not a panacea, asd helps
government ‘see the forest for the trees’.
The 1990s witnessed the emergence of a bewildering array of new types of
service delivery mechanisms, some of which straddle whatever boundaries
remain between sectors. There is virtually no limit to the ingenuity of govern-
ments to invent new structural arrangements. And one size does not fit all. asd
ranges from basic reorganization to outright privatization. It forms a spectrum of
experiments in delegation and collaboration along a continuum of change. The
options are a function of autonomy (legal, structural, financial, employment) and
accountability (policy, process, performance). A typical array, derived for the
Province of Manitoba from the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat’s asd
framework, is depicted in Figure 1. Four clusters are discernible: (1) government
ministries and departments; (2) statutory and semi-autonomous agencies; (3) part-
nerships and contracts with other organizations; and (4) private and voluntary
sector entities.
Figure 2 suggests six questions as a threshold test for selecting the right asd
option. These questions are based on the framework for Program Review
employed by the Government of Canada in the mid-1990s. When applied in
association with the decision tree portrayed in Figure 3, these questions bring
strategic focus to the task of narrowing the range of acceptable alternatives and of
integrating asd initiatives in government business plans. The expected outcome
of matching a program or service with the right delivery option is good govern-
ance.
Canadian innovations in alternative service delivery
Osbaldeston (1992: 10) observes: ‘Governing is an untidy business, and the diver-
sity of government structures reflects this reality.’ The asd landscape in Canada
reflects the complexity and interdependence of federalism, the nation’s geograph-
ical and cultural diversity and the increasing need to govern horizontally and
globally. Delegation and collaboration are powerful tools for sharing governance
and for producing a rich mosaic of asd practice. The federal government, most
provinces and territories and a growing number of major cities and municipalities
utilize asd in various forms. Some have programs with formal frameworks and
processes, while others have single-option initiatives that are right for the setting.
174 International Review of Administrative Sciences 69(2)
02_IRAS69/2 articles 22/5/03 12:00 pm Page 174
To continue reading
Request your trial