The Great Challenge of Public Sector Digitalization: Balancing Trust with Innovation

Gobe was founded in response to a clear need: helping public administrations and organizations procure and integrate technological innovations that improve services for citizens. Naturally, one might assume that our primary clients are the IT departments within these public bodies.

However, that’s not the case. It took us some time to see this clearly—but now we understand why.

IT departments ensure that everything runs smoothly and securely, that systems communicate effectively, and that technology is well integrated across the entire organization. In recent years, their work has been crucial in transforming internal systems that were traditionally made up of multiple layers, legacy systems, and a jumble of technologies, software, and applications. “Getting the house in order” has been no small feat. In fact, it's been more than difficult—it’s been nothing short of heroic.

The challenge now is that governments are entering a new phase of digitalization. The focus has shifted to digitizing the public service model itself. It's not just about integrating systems and organizing infrastructure anymore. Digital technology changes the service model—how existing or new services are delivered. Today, the goal is to provide public services with the same quality, ease, and convenience we have come to expect in other areas of our lives. Until then, the gap between what governments offer and what citizens expect will continue to widen.

This "third wave" requires balancing two approaches that haven't always gone hand in hand: guaranteeing continuity, coordination, and security, and adopting the best market solutions quickly. It's a complex task, but it's achievable, and Gobe is eager to help.

How did we get here?

If we quickly (perhaps too quickly) summarise the last 20 years of digital transformation in the public sector, three phases emerge. The first wave began when digital technology started to become a reality, with each department aiming to incorporate electronic tools into its activities. However, each department or business area acted independently, without centralized governance or a coordinated institutional strategy. This led to internal chaos due to a lack of integration and interoperability. 

The UK was the first to successfully address and reverse this situation by creating the renowned Government Digital Service (GDS). Since then, a second wave emerged, focusing on centralizing technology procurement within IT departments based on common criteria and coordinated standards. This has facilitated better management, security, maintenance, and integration of systems.

Today, after years of ensuring systems are well-connected and integrated, public organizations—and therefore their IT departments—face a new goal: enabling citizens to interact with the administration as easily and conveniently as they do in other areas of their lives. In this third phase, it’s time to change the model once again. 

To start with, it’s essential to give more say in technology procurement decisions to the departments responsible for delivering those services (government departments or business units), with a priority on meeting the needs of service users in purchasing choices. It’s also necessary to change the modus operandi that IT departments have grown accustomed to, as this means relinquishing some degree of control, security, and integration in favour of greater added value for service users—both civil servants and citizens.

This last point is the most challenging, as it requires reconciling two different decision-making approaches—two distinct organisational cultures. As someone once said (whether Steve Jobs or Peter Drucker remains unclear), culture eats strategy for breakfast.

Two distinct cultures

In the public sector, the decision on which technology to purchase typically lies with the IT department. These teams are responsible for protecting the organisation from security risks, ensuring platform longevity, and keeping systems running smoothly even when things go wrong.

Meanwhile, there are the sectoral departments—government areas such as transport, health, urban planning, or social services—and the digital transformation and innovation offices. Their success is measured by tangible outcomes for citizens: faster procedures, broader coverage, and more accessible services.

This difference in responsibilities creates two fundamentally different mindsets and, consequently, two contrasting approaches to what takes priority when deciding whether to purchase a particular technological solution.

IT Department: The CIS Logic (Control, Integration, and Security)

• Procurement tends to prioritise regulatory compliance over added value (such as better service or usability) for the user.
• The focus is on centralised authentication and adherence to cybersecurity standards and regulations.
• Fewer suppliers mean less complexity in system management and, consequently, greater security. It is preferable to buy from one large provider rather than several smaller ones, even if the latter offer better solutions.
• Control and integration across the entire organisation take precedence over ensuring that a particular user (whether a civil servant or citizen) has the best technology to meet their goals.
• The timeframe considered for implementing and maintaining a technological solution is long-term, making the stability and longevity of the provider and technology a priority.
• Costs are calculated based on licences or bespoke developments plus anticipated investments in infrastructure and maintenance.

Business or Innovation Departments: The RUI Logic (Speed, Usability, Impact)

• Their primary goal is to deliver tangible benefits to citizens and improve outcome indicators such as permits granted, reduced waiting times, and service satisfaction.
• Priority is given to purchasing the best solution, regardless of whether the supplier also serves other departments within the organisation.
• Speed matters more than perfect integration. It’s not necessary for everything to be fully integrated if that means delaying the launch of a new service. A functioning API is sufficient.
• The timeframe is much shorter—typically 6 to 36 months—to start reaping the benefits offered to users of the service or public procedure.
• Costs are calculated based on product fees and supplier management, aiming to minimise integration expenses as much as possible.

Tell me your culture, and I’ll tell you what technology you buy

The technological tools purchased by IT departments for distribution and use across the entire organisation are typically integrated suites: software packages offered by a single provider such as Oracle, SAP, or Microsoft, or on-premises solutions developed by third parties or internal teams. Generally, both software suites and on-premises solutions are designed to be used by the entire—or majority of the—organisation without causing major disruptions.

Are there far more useful and efficient solutions for specific departments? Would someone prefer Slack or WhatsApp over Teams or the website chatbot? Are there solutions that provide significantly better service or boost productivity exponentially? That’s not the IT department’s concern. Their priority is ensuring solid integration and security. 

Purchasing technology based on that criterion isn’t the most effective or logical approach, especially given the rapid pace of technological change today. However, IT departments are not unaware of what’s happening around them. They are far from blind to the benefits of technological innovation and certainly use it in their daily work.

Their decision-making approach within their organisational framework simply prioritises different objectives—and rightly so. An IT department steers its purchasing decisions with a strong focus on risk: a cyberattack can cost many jobs and cause unimaginable negative externalities. Business or innovation departments, on the other hand, prioritise time and political capital: they need to show visible results quickly.

There is room for both cultures to coexist

The good news is that these two organisational cultures and procurement approaches aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s not about choosing between an integrated solution or a chaotic jumble of specialised technical tools. Nor should decisions be absolutist—working exclusively with integrated suites, only bespoke developments, going all‑in on cloud platforms, or relying entirely on open‑source software.

The new public digital infrastructure must have a CIS core (control, integration, and security), but at the same time, it needs to be open and modular to incorporate technological innovations that prioritise the RUI principles (speed, usability, and impact).

This means building a foundational layer of platforms—such as shared systems for digital identity, payments, or data exchange—based on open standards that ensure integration, security, and institutional control. On top of this core, specialised digital solutions tailored to each business need can be easily connected via APIs and interoperable architectures, without compromising overall stability.

This approach enables public agencies to innovate rapidly in their services by adopting the best tools available for civil servants and citizens, while the IT department maintains cybersecurity, control, and organisational consistency.

In short, it’s not about committing to a single supplier or choosing between control and agility, but about adopting the right architecture: a solid digital core that provides trust and continuity (CIS), alongside an open ecosystem that allows new high-value public solutions to flourish (RUI).

What now?

It sounds promising—and the picture makes perfect sense. But how do we actually get there?

The reality is that many IT teams are still working to make that core function effectively, but their systems remain closed. When it comes to plugging in specialised solutions, integrations tend to be complex and expensive—or they depend on cooperation from a major provider who controls the system and should support new tools—but isn’t always willing to do so. In recent years, many IT departments have begun engaging with business areas by introducing roles such as “technology delegates” within other departments. 

However, a clear consensus is still lacking on the strategy or organisational changes needed to balance security, integration, and agility in the face of new digital challenges. The roadmap detailing how to combine the CIS and RUI logics—and how this translates into architecture and innovation procurement processes—is yet to be defined.

At Gobe, we want to help shape that roadmap. Having mastered the theory, we now want to hear directly from those working in the trenches every day. We will be interviewing technology and digital transformation leaders across various public administrations and organisations, engaging with both IT departments and business and innovation units. Understanding how they are navigating this transition holds immense value—not only for other public institutions but also for the ecosystem of companies developing new technological solutions with public value.

We will compile our findings into an openly published white paper, so anyone interested can review it, discuss it, and—hopefully—contribute to its development.

Thank you for reading. If this topic interests you or you’d like to take part, please get in touch—we’d love to hear your voice.