Specification by reporting

This piece of legislation says nothing about computer systems or digital services. It just mentions “performance targets”.

But to report on targets you need to have data, you need to collect data, you need to store data in a database. But it doesn’t specify in any detail what data.

This examples also apply to multiple organisations, local authorities and schools.

The bill is passed, the relevant organisations set up their databases - each selecting and choosing what data and processes they think fit to do so. Their produce reports as requested.

The problem lies in the fact that a single specification of a report can imply a massive range of data items and data processes.

When the report lands, and waste management reports become part of the political landscape then demands will come, sure as eggs is eggs, to change the targets, the reports, to build on the progress, or rectify the lack of it.

At this point the misspecification becomes a problem. The person making the changes (the Minister) has no knowledge of the actual data systems and databases that the local authorities have in place. The decision makers cannot trade off cost Vs desirability, they can just switch from one poor specification to another poor one and let the chips fall as they may.

There is a specify-everything or specify-nothing choice when directing local authorities or sub-ordinate tiers of administration.