Section 4: Capacity for change
A look inside institutional constraints and opportunities for congressional teams to improve constituent engagement approaches.
OVERVIEW
In the final section of our findings, we share insights into the mental models and institutional factors limiting innovation, and we offer ideas for overcoming inertia around change.
KEY FINDINGS
1 Offices are underwhelmed and often frustrated by the tools available to them, but they often lack time, resources, and appetite to experiment with new tools or invest in large-scale process innovation.
2 For most offices, the most significant limitations are human hours and financial resources.
3 Teams feel constrained by the rules and entities that regulate technology use, as well as their own limited experience buying and using modern tools. In addition, the lack of a competitive vendor marketplace means tools come at a high cost, and vendors aren’t pushed to provide innovative or forward-thinking solutions.
4 Innovation and experimentation — with tools, approaches, and processes — most often happen in teams lead by Members or senior staff with vision and passion for improvement, and with Party leadership teams that are willing to invest their expanded resources into paving new paths for themselves and their colleagues.
4.1 Institutional barriers
This article is part of From Voicemails to Votes (PDF), a report conducted by The OpenGov Foundation on the mindsets, capacities, tools, and operations of Congressional offices with regard to constituent engagement. More about the project here.
