Assessing the value of a regional telecommunications response
Due to the focus of concern around the added value of new regional coordination capability, CTG asked the participants to consider how value is generated in general. Expanding the traditional Return on Investments (ROI) methodology beyond mere dollars and cents, CTG asked participants to consider the current and ideal telecommunication incident response efforts from six different value types
1 : financial, political, social, strategic, ideological, and stewardship These values types are based on the idea that government generates value to its constituents in two ways:
-
By improving the value of the government itself from the perspective of the citizens, and
-
By delivering specific benefits directly to persons, groups, or the public at large.

The first is based on the idea that, assuming a benign government, the better it functions overall, the better off its citizens will be. The government is an asset to the community or nation that delivers a wide range of values. Internal improvements make it a more valuable asset to the public. The second way of generating value has three forms: financial, political, and social. Financial value results from lowering the cost or increasing the efficiency of government or delivering direct financial benefits to the citizens. Political value consists of increasing participation, fairness, transparency, legitimacy, or conferring political capital to elected officials or citizens. Social returns include increased social status, stronger relationships, or opportunities; increased safety, trust in government, and economic advantage.
|
Table 1.
Exploring Public Value by Key Stakeholder Group
|
|
Value Type
|
Key Stakeholder Groups
|
|
Citizen
|
Telecom Provider
|
Government Sector
|
Private Sector
|
|
Financial |
|
-
Dissemination of information resulting in system reliability and continuous investment in infrastructure
-
Critical resource restoration
-
Avoidance of misappropriation of funds
-
Cost sharing across providers
-
Less regulatory risk of penalties
|
-
Continuity of Government
-
Better use of taxpayers funds – creation of a clearing house
-
Better able to coordinate response efforts to avoid waste of time, resources, and finances.
|
-
Continuity of service allowing rates to be maintained
-
Pass along savings to citizenship.
-
Ability to plan and attend to needs of customer base
-
Responsiveness
|
|
Political |
|
-
Political with a small p –information sharing between providers and government allows for trust to be earned by the regulators
-
Enhanced relationship between providers and government
-
Potential gains in public trust
-
Provides or exhibits capability allowing for increases in public trust, confidence, and continuity of service
|
-
Increases in confidences in providers
-
A show of stability to all sectors
-
Allows for better service to leadership through information sharing
|
|
|
Social |
-
Well informed, confident in government’s ability to take care of infrastructure
-
Good will
-
Increase in public confidence
-
Increase in expectations
-
Ability to know that service will be restored in a timely fashion
-
Reduction in chaos and fear
|
|
|
-
Employee relations and confidence in employer and in government.
-
Less impact to service and ability for employees to maintain productivity.
-
Less frustration on the part of workers
|
|
Ideological |
|
|
| |
|
Strategic |
|
|
|
|
|
Stewardship |
|
|
| |