[0] https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/government-digit... [1] https://design-system.service.gov.uk/
Edit: Yes, I know the UK Gov's system for benefits isn't easy to understand. That's on the Gov, not GDS :)
[0] https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/government-digit... [1] https://design-system.service.gov.uk/
Edit: Yes, I know the UK Gov's system for benefits isn't easy to understand. That's on the Gov, not GDS :)
In my experience gov.uk has been vastly superior compared to other websites for a long time. Gov.uk seems to be more consistent with everything than most company websites are.
But for web developpers, that’s not all: it’s very deliberate, there’s detailed public guidelines, a scrutiny that developpers of the most popular open source project might recogonise. The overall result is that the people working there are very good. They are principled, and typically very complementary of the independent-minded polymath that many of us have worked with. They understand accessibility in detail and many dimensions (think: both rare handicaps and aging web-clients).
I’ve worked with several and I would strongly recommend considering experience at the Government Digital service (GDS) as a very good signal on a CV, akin to senior role at a big tech, or early engineer at a successful start-up.
Isn't that massively excessive? Why does the Prime Minister need to be spending his time listening to a report direct from a team implementing software services?
With a direct line to the PM, every time a mandarin tried to block things (likely in order to favour his golf buddies from this or that vendor), GDS could go "ok, shall we take it up with the PM then?" and that would be the end of it.
It's effectively the nuclear option, in terms of civil-service management, but sometimes it's the only way to get stuff done.
Which is another way of saying it conveys the reality more realistically than a documentary could ever get away with.
There seems to be a much longer history of MPs and PMs being corrupt than the mandarins.
Not that I'd attribute it to any PM, believe it was driven by the government security services (which department/flavor I could not say).
That all said, it may of been a different aspect but certainly has a longer story than told. With that, it started as an intranet project iirc.
https://gds.blog.gov.uk/story/ has some insight but that seems more to cover the more public web aspects and even they say it is "a story" not "the story".
So be fascinating to peace the "full story" and history together.
GDS was a whole catchment in the early days, that included the phone services and that was contracted to Mercury telecom at one stage, or aspects were. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_Communications
If any credit should be laid, it would be upon the civil servants and associates that came up with the initiative, who sadly will probably remain nameless even if their names were known. Politicians just green light so much and claim credit, so much goes on behind the scenes of any government. With that, best think of politicians as orchestra conductors who depend upon musicians knowing how to do things, often able to do things right without eye sight of the conductors at times.
I don't really like giving them credit for anything but there it is.
> it would be upon the civil servants and associates that came up with the initiative
From what I understand, the power of this was precisely that it came from people outside the career civil service. Although this narrative came from Conservative quarters (who occasionally indulge in civil-service bashing), I find it credible. Established powers in the system tend to have established friends among deep-pocketed vendors, particularly these days that doors tend to revolve quite furiously. For all the good they did elsewhere, one undoubtedly bad legacy of the Blair-Brown years was eccessive trust on friendly vendors vs in-house.
Martha Lane Fox, bless her.
And the brilliant Tom Loosemoore, also behind https://www.theyworkforyou.com/
The GDS started well, but I don't think the GDS can continue to cruise on its earlier reputation. It too has started to fall back into the bad old days of massively wasteful projects with unclear scope, such as the Verify system, that is absorbing hundreds of millions of pounds for dubious benefit [1].
"Unfortunately, Verify is also an example of many of the failings in major programmes that we often see, including optimism bias and failure to set clear objectives." [2]
I think the idea of GDS is a good one, but evidently it needs to continue to reevaluate itself to avoid regressing into what it was originally setup to avoid.
[1] https://www.computerweekly.com/opinion/Back-to-the-past-with... [2] https://www.nao.org.uk/report/investigation-into-verify/
Actually the credit should go to the brilliant and dedicated people in GDS doing great work; though I do not know enough to pick out names. The UI/UX and implementation was first class from the get go.
As a Brit my life is made remarkably easier as a citizen and startup entrepreneur. The benefits to the UK ecomnomy are enorous but not measured. In contrast my personal experience of govt engagement when setting-up and running startups in US between 1991 and 2013 were painful. And would have been very painful without help (thank you YC).
Finally if we are going to give leadership credit it should go to Francis Maude [0]. He happened to be my local MP, so I met him quite a few times, and he was most helpful and astonishingly effective in helping us navigate two big challenges we had in facing down, shall we say, "unethical quango-business partnerships". A remarkable, thoughtful man and effective operator, who was in government over three decades [1].
[0] https://gds.blog.gov.uk/2012/10/16/gov-uk-the-start/ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Maude
Martha Lane Fox also deserves mention for: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/directgov-2010-an...
They all tore up the rulebook. The rule being: Government can’t do computers. Outsource to favourite big consultancy. Twenty years were wasted on that nonsense approach.
Some of the greatest resistance comes from the big departments who are actively hostile to many of the changes required to work in this way. There’s a lot to be said for a round of golf at The Belfry with the splendid chaps from the IT consultancy your department spends £2bn a year with.
Golf days: https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/abfe49d3-f24c-4b93-b8e...
Recently I was with a German friend and she nearly fell on her ass when I showed her that you can actually pay at a car parking machine in the middle of nowhere with Apple Pay here in the UK.
Some important UK government services are still lagging behind. DVLA, since you mention it, has a mix of okay and truly appalling services. I'm in the position of trying to renew my driving licence after it was revoked for medical reasons. It's now six months since my cardiac arrest and I now meet the medically-fit-to-drive criteria. But, I face an 84 day delay in my application being processed, as detailed on the DVLA's 'how-slow-are-we-today' page [0], which is actually labelled as a COVID-19 update. Furthermore, I have to post a paper application form to them as they haven't yet digitized the medical review service [1]. This is life-wrecking stuff for anyone who needs a driving licence for their work or similar.
I do like the gov.uk sites in general, but a lot of the back-office stuff is still disastrous. Some of this is due to strike action and COVID, but a big part of the problem is the continual failure of the various UK Govt departments to successfully manage large IT projects.
[0] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/dvla-coronavirus-covid-19-update
[1] https://www.gov.uk/reapply-driving-licence-medical-condition
To get a decent result on any IT project you have to fix the organisation behind it before you even think about replicating that organisation digitally.
Exactly. I've seen this myself back in the day when I supported the MOD's system development (simulators for training, as it happens). As a techie, I was asked to develop some interoperability middleware between disparate systems. As my career matured, my focus changed to trying to get the systems to use common interfaces protocols / standards. Then I thought - why can't they have common requirements since may of them are doing very similar things, and drive tech commonality top-down. So I started working with the respective acquisition teams to get them to adopt common conventions. Then I started to question why they had disparate acquisition teams in the first place. This turned out to be because there were multiple customer project teams. Why was that? Because the different tribes in the army (infantry, armour, etc) didn't speak to each other at that level.
I eventually realised I was seeing a sort of example of Conway's Law [0], and was finally able to develop a proper briefing for a senior decision maker who was concerned about the technical / contractual complexity at one of his training schools (which had multiple different types of simulator, each with out own through-life support programme). This I believe finally led to some coherence-focussed reorganisations of the MOD teams involved, which was perhaps the most impactful thing I achieved in a couple of decades working in this space.
Part of the problem is that they have multiple back-office legacy systems. I remember reading recently about a modernization of the personalised number plate system. This was apparently completely separate from the licence management so could be modernised quite easily. How convenient that it just happens to be a good revenue generator for DVLA, so presumably it was easier for someone to justify the development costs.
Where've you been?
Agree with your points but the things you mention have been around for almost 10 years now (driving license/passport renewal easy UX etc). I renewed my passport around 7 years ago and it was much easier to use then. It's true there's some services that tail off into the older systems (and you can tell), but the modern things gov.uk has owned have always been good since launch.
https://digitalservices.sfgov.org https://medium.com/san-francisco-digital-services
It continues from strength to strength.
However its pleasing to see a site that works well on crappy computers.