This post first appeared on IBM Business of Government. Read the original article.
Oxford Economics surveyed 635 government leaders in 44 countries who were in positions of organizational authority during the pandemic to understand how specific behaviors and attitudes adopted during the pandemic influenced levels of preparedness for shock-level events in the future.
From its origins in late 2019 until May 2023, when the World Health
Organization declared the end of its pandemic phase, COVID-19 was an
extraordinary stress test for governments around the world. It revealed
strengths and weaknesses of organizational response and resilience in
ways that will be studied for years to come.
Through the innovation and investment spurred on
by the pandemic, governments entered an era of
growth in functional capabilities and organizational
transformation. In retrospect, the accomplishments
made by governments during the crisis were
recognized and appreciated by many citizens. In fact,
a 2023 survey of 19 countries reported that a median
of 68% of citizens thought that their country did a
good job in dealing with the coronavirus outbreak.
In the US alone, COVID-19 relief laws enacted in
2020 and 2021 provided about $4.6 trillion of funding
for pandemic response and recovery—a historic
governmental commitment to manage and mitigate
a shock event without precedent.
In the aftermath of the pandemic, many governments
recognize that, despite progress made, they are not
as prepared for the next round of future shocks as
they should be. To find out what these leaders are
doing to improve resilience and readiness, the IBM
Institute for Business Value conducted a
survey of global government leaders. Survey insights
focus on the actions and investments made to
improve resilience, as well as mindsets and attitudes
toward organizational transformation.
The survey captured candid responses to questions
about the functional capabilities of governments
in the context of a global shock event, as well as
organizational culture, strategy, behaviors, attitudes
on trust, and technology strategy.
A variety of analytical techniques supported our
hypothesis that maturity in a set of core functional
capabilities led to better performance during the
pandemic and greater preparedness for future
shocks. When we isolated different groups of
governmental organizations based on performance,
the comparison revealed startling differences
as well as valuable insights for government leaders
as they develop their capacities to respond to a range
of potential shock events.