To: Policy Director

From: Policy Advisor

Subject: The Role of Data in Government Decision Making: A Case for “Big Data”
Implementation to Improve Processes
Date: February 26, 2022

In a fast-paced world, with ever improving and increasing technological advances, it is necessary
to examine the benefits and consequences of new methods and processes to enhance government
decision making. The recent discovery and use of “big data” to make decisions within
organizations, while complex, has proven beneficial and often invaluable. It increases democratic
involvement and provides unique insight to understanding human behavior and interactions.1 I
propose the consideration of a big data trial project within the state’s social service agency to
understand how big data can change and benefit agency decision making.

Big data is a collection of large data sets that can be analyzed to understand human behavior and
interactions by discovering trends, patterns, and similarities.2 It can also be used to build
connections with other organizations and share information about relevant issues. Big data is
collected automatically through online software, programs, medias, and tracking methods, but
can be collected intentionally and for specific reasons in a variety of ways, such as surveys,
websites, emails, and other channels. It has most commonly been used in private sector
businesses as a way to increase business success, discover customer needs, and improve
efficiency, which are also things the state’s social service agency seeks to improve.

A recent example of the use of big data in a government organization is Boston City.3 Using an
initiative called CityScore, the Mayor and city management have been able to track data to
determine the status and needs of citizens in their city and can then use this information to more
quickly resolve issues. They are able to track data such as call center performances, trash pick-up
efficiency, parks maintenance, crime rates, etc. The program also gives citizens opportunities to
share needs and concerns, which can be compared with big data to resolve issues in more
specific ways. Additionally, big data maintains organizations’ focus on their goals and visions.

To implement and use big data, it is necessary to have sufficient storage space, proper expertise,
and training.4 These resources can be expensive and take time. But the expense required is
eventually outweighed by reduced time in decision making using big data and reduced costs by
improved efficiency and solving problems using less resources overall. Without big data it may
also prove difficult to capture sufficient information in coming years as populations increase and
technology continues to advance.

Attempting a trial project using big data will instigate further understanding of benefits and
needs for implementation. Introducing new technologies into the state’s social service agency
will inevitably require great change and consideration. However, using big data will not only
allow the agency to better understand public needs, but respond to those needs more efficiently.
1
Big Data in the Public Sector: Applications and Benefits. (2021) Analytic Steps. https://analyticsteps.com.
2
What is Big Data?. (n.d.) Oracle Cloud Infrastructure. https://www.oracle.com/big-data/what-is-big-data/.
3
CityScore. (2021) City of Boston. https://www.boston.gov/innovation-and-technology/cityscore.
4
Debating Big Data. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems. (2017) https://www.sciencedirect.com/.
To: Professor
From: Student
Subject: A Case on Habitat for Humanity of Medina: Confronting the Changing Times
Date: April 17, 2022

Julie Young faces difficult choices in the case of Habitat for Humanity of Medina5. The
organization has not only lost an extreme amount of funding (and potential for funding if houses
are not constructed) but has to now consider changing their mission and using funds for things
outside of their original strategic plan, which was to build low-income housing.

The various external and internal pressures surrounding her decision create intense consequences
regardless of the choices made. External pressures include that of the change in property values,
a rapid decline of funds provided by grant makers, private businesses forced to cut costs, and a
decrease in individual donations. Internal pressures include the lack of funds that limits the
amount of homes Habitat can build, pressure from stakeholders to change the mission, board
members advocating for staff reductions, and the city council encouraging Habitat to use funds
to rehab homes or help those facing foreclosure.

There are a few possibilities for how Habitat could change to meet these pressures and work
through a time of economic difficulty. Julie could follow advice from stakeholders, city council,
or board members. Alternatively, I believe a different option would be to reformulate their 5-year
strategic plan into that of a risk management program to 1) maintain the core mission of the
organization, and 2) simplify resources in order to save their organization during this time of
economic difficulty and until funding is more stable. Dr. Head, an expert in the field,
recommends this method to then use such an opportunity to better navigate and prepare for
similar catastrophes in the future.6 This also follows the basic steps introduced by Kotter in his
article about transformation steps and efforts, including institutionalizing new approaches.7

Risks involved with making a choice that contradicts any of her stakeholders or board members
is loss of public and internal trust, lack of future support, and frustration within her organization
if solutions are unsuccessful. That is why including these individuals in the new plan is key to
maintaining her organization and vision. Using Kotter’s steps, Julie could create a coalition using
representatives from the city council, her board, and other stakeholders to create a united vision
focused on maintaining Habitat’s core mission while accomplishing other needs as necessary.

Detailed steps might include building 8-10 houses and using leftover funds to create a savings
account for future catastrophes and supporting a handful of families in efforts the city desires, to
maintain public trust. This follows step 6, which would at least provide a bit more grant funding
for houses built and can slowly be compounded into step 7. The ultimate purpose would be to
save the organization while taking steps to open doors for the future and prevent risk. As
stakeholders see slow progress within Habitat, previous funders would be more inclined to
donate as the economy improves over time and Habitat would be built up stronger than before.

5
Habitat for Humanity Case, Sarah Schaefer, School of PEA, Indiana University Purdue University-Indianapolis.
6
Head, G. Sustaining Nonprofits During Economic Downturns. Link to webpage.
7
Kotter, J. (1995). Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail. Harvard Business Review.