Government Undermines Its Own Mission – Part 3 of 5

Investment Waste: Spending Without Impact 

Government agencies invest billions in digital modernization, yet many projects fail to deliver meaningful value. Poor investment decisions waste more than money—they lead to long-term setbacks that undermine government’s ability to improve services. 

Why Investment Waste Matters 

Funding decisions shape the quality and accessibility of public services.

When agencies invest in the wrong solutions, they waste money and create obstacles to service delivery. Instead of improving outcomes, these projects add complexity, drive up maintenance costs, and require expensive rework. 

Unlike the private sector, where market forces phase out ineffective solutions, government lacks direct accountability mechanisms to course-correct.

Large contracts and multi-year projects often continue long after they stop delivering value, stretching limited budgets even thinner and diverting resources from critical improvements. 

Consider the effects of poor investment decisions: 

• Service Disruptions. Flawed systems slow down processes, increasing citizen frustration. 

• Misplaced Spending. Resources go toward short-term fixes instead of modernizing services. 

• Siloed Technology. Systems don’t integrate across agencies, requiring costly workarounds. 

• Reduced Public Trust. Failed projects reinforce skepticism about government efficiency. 

Smart investments not only save money, they advance the mission. When spending misaligns with user needs or goals, it delays progress and value. 

Common Causes of Investment Waste 

Investment waste stems from a lack of strategy and fragmented decision-making. Agencies can avoid these pitfalls by addressing common causes: 

• Duplicative Capabilities. Agencies and divisions fund similar solutions separately, resulting in redundant systems. 

• Opportunity Costs. Funding is directed to underused systems instead of higher-impact projects that advance the mission. 

• Redesign Costs. Poor planning leads to costly late-stage fixes. 

• Underutilization. Poor usability discourages system adoption. 

• Technology Turnover Costs. Frequent tool changes without a long-term strategy leads to churn. 

• Training Costs. Complex systems demand excessive training, driving up operational costs.   

By shifting to a strategic, mission-aligned approach, agencies can reduce waste and maximize the value of taxpayer dollars. 

Example: Investing in the Wrong Solutions 

An agency launches a costly case management system expected to streamline operations. But without user input or alignment with real workflows, the system falls short: 

• Adoption is low due to poor usability. 

• Staff rely on workarounds to complete basic tasks. 

• Fixes and rework double the total investment. 

Instead of improving service delivery, the project drains resources, frustrates users, and reinforces inefficiencies. 

Next time, we'll explore mission waste, the consequences of failing to achieve the intended outcome. 

Let's Make a Change 

Follow this newsletter for weekly insights and join my email list for other great content plus receive updates on my upcoming book, Deliver What Matters: How a Product-Led Strategy Drives Better Outcomes in Government.  

With expertise in strategy, leadership development, and program/product management, I help organizations demonstrate real impact by focusing on what they achieve—not just what they do—driving better data-driven decisions and outcomes. 

Take this journey with me:  

• Follow me on LinkedIn. 

• Subscribe to this newsletter. 

• Join my email list and get weekly thought-provoking Timeless Insights. 

• Connect and start a conversation—let's explore how I might be able to help you.