Well, I really like your summary. You first talked about the iterative cycle that is more like time-based pace of agile approach, and then you talked about multi-stakeholder collaboration or, in your words, governance of governance – “collaborative governance” is a more widely-used term, but I think it is essentially the same thing. So, I guess calling it “agile governance” instead of “agile co-governance” or something basically means that, in your jurisdiction, you want to focus on the time aspect. Whereas, in my jurisdiction, we are already pretty agile, time-wise, so we want to expand more on the multi-stakeholder aspect which is why I mostly say collaborative or co-governance, but at the end of the day, these two are like yin and yang. You cannot really do one without doing the other one because if you just iterate within your organization, then it becomes a normal PDCA cycle and there is no innovation to speak of when all your internal goals are not checked and balanced by external multi-stakeholders, and when we want to talk with businesses in the social sector, well, they all move under a faster speed than our four-year election cycle or yearly budgets, so by nature, we need to be more agile if we want to make co-governing multi-stakeholder. So, I think these two aspects are really one and the same. If you start practicing one, you probably practice the other, too. It is just on the emphasis or on like the accent – which vowel you stress more when you are presenting it – and I think it is quite isomorphic to the kind of collaborative governance that we are doing in Taiwan.

Keyboard shortcuts

j previous speech k next speech