In recent years, there’s been a growing trend of governments trying to adopt startup-like models aiming to be faster, more efficient, and innovation-driven. Politicians and public officials often promote ideas like “move fast,” “test and learn,” and “performance-based management,” hoping to make the public sector more dynamic and responsive. But this shift comes with serious problems, because the goals of governments and businesses are fundamentally different.
Startups typically focus on solving a single, well-defined problem with the aim of financial return and scalability. Their success often depends on rapid experimentation, minimal regulation, and short-term results.
In contrast, governments are responsible for solving deeply interconnected issues such as poverty, healthcare access, environmental sustainability, and national security problems that can’t be solved by quick fixes or single products. These challenges require careful coordination, collaboration across sectors, and a long-term approach.
Applying startup logic to public institutions can lead to fragmented services, increased inequality, and superficial metrics that don’t reflect real outcomes. A flashy new app might help report potholes faster, but it won’t address systemic issues like transportation sustainability or public health. Governments don’t have the luxury of “failing fast” they have to get it right for everyone, especially the most vulnerable.
Instead of copying Silicon Valley, the public sector needs its own model for reform one that values diversity, strategic thinking, long-term planning, and deep social impact. That means building internal capacities to adapt, experiment responsibly, and measure success in meaningful ways.
Efforts like the Public Sector Capabilities Index aim to guide this shift by helping governments focus on what really matters: not just doing things faster, but doing them better, for the long run.
Reading this really made me reflect on how often we try to force ideas from the private sector into places they don’t quite fit. It’s easy to be drawn to the language of innovation apps, startups, disruption especially when public services feel slow or outdated. But the reality is, governing a society isn’t the same as launching a product. The stakes are higher, the timelines are longer, and the impact is much broader.
What struck me most is the reminder that governments have a responsibility not just to be efficient, but to be fair, inclusive, and forward-thinking. They don’t get to “pivot” away from a crisis if things don’t go well. Real public service reform isn’t about copying what works in tech it’s about understanding the unique challenges of governance and designing systems that can grow, learn, and serve over time.
There’s something powerful about thinking of government as a long-term project one that requires continuous learning, collaboration, and deep accountability. In a world that often rewards speed and short-term wins, maybe the most radical thing governments can do is slow down, listen more, and invest in structures that support lasting change.
Written by our correspondent A.A.
