Skip to main content
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 types1 : 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.
Figure 1. Basic Value Types
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
Telecom Provider
Government Sector
Private Sector
  • Potential of improved service
  • Less down time or interrupted services
  • Continuity of Government
  • 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
  • Improve or maintain trust in government and providers Continuity of Government
  • 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
  • Perception of government as vigilant and on top of things
  • Less rate increases
  • 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
  • Increase in good will
  • Increase perception of the public of the service providers provide
  • Increase in perception of responsiveness and collaboration among providers in a time of crisis
  • Increase or maintain credibility
  • Continuity of service
  • Increase in public confidence
  • 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
  • Good Government
  • Market demands being met
  • Responsiveness to citizenship
  • Continuity of Government
  • Increase in security
  • Quick informed decision making
  • Sound decision making based on just in time data
  • Better ability to plan
  • Sound decision making based on just in time data
  • Better gap analysis
  • Better position for recovery
  • Ability to have contingency plans that are based on good information
  • Trust
  • Increased public confidence in government
  • Continuity of service
  • Provides evidence of corporate stewardship
  • Improved infrastructure investments
  • More informed regulation
  • Better decision making

1 Refer to: Advancing Return on Investment Analysis for Government IT: A Public Value Framework