By Aldo Mees, entrepreneur and CEO of IPM Sistemas
One of the best ways to carry out public quality management is to know how to apply the resources correctly. For this, managers need to make decisions that take into account the needs of the city, the planning and the choices, which need to be correct and precise. They have to count on specialists so as not to waste the resources obtained with the collection of taxes, avoiding the purchase of items that are outside the main focus of the city. When it comes to IT investment, we have to be even more discerning: computers are out of date relatively quickly, and can no longer be useful before they have been paid for.
While it is clear that public money has to be treated with extreme responsibility and transparency, some cities may not be able to understand this. Some of them leave the core business of management aside and spend on what already makes little or no sense. In the private sector, where the rule of doing more and more by spending less, the desire to migrate to cloud computing (cloud computing) in 2020 dominates the 94% mindset of the leaders consulted by GlobalData. The company did the research at the request of the multinational Cisco and helps to understand why old platforms need to be replaced.
When migrating to the cloud, companies want to stop worrying (and spending money) about what is not their business. The biggest companies in the world have understood this, and find it absurd to keep teams on standby, buy hardware and budget items with unforeseen events that may happen. But the concern is not only this: they do not want to deal with the possibility of losing all the data stored in the systems if there is a physical incident, such as a flood or a fire, for example.
Such concerns are typical of those who still use a desktop platform, which is characterized by the need to acquire infrastructure, constant technical monitoring and periodic investments with little return. Many Brazilian cities are in this situation: they bought equipment, software licenses and they keep local public employees to maintain systems that will last, at the most, five years. After that, given the low scalability, they tend to have to change the entire technology park or continue with an obsolete solution. Some managers insist on using an outdated solution due to a pure lack of adequate information.
Choosing the cloud in public management is showing zeal for taxpayer money. This type of technology allows cities to always have the last word in quality, safety and efficiency, with scalable and secure systems. More than that: it democratizes access to public information, since the number of external users who can access the systems is unlimited.
One of the main differences is the fact that, in the cloud, information is stored in data centers with enhanced security, monitored by specialists and constantly updated. In desktop systems, it is common for all data in the municipality - from details on each taxpayer to financial transactions carried out - to be kept on local computers (servers), in a room in the city hall itself. If there is an accident, such as a flood, fire or lightning, they can be lost or, at the very least, unavailable for a long period of time.
The time to see the cloud as a basis for improving public management is now. Only then will managers be able to worry about what really matters: the development of cities and the quality of life of the citizens who elected them.
While it is clear that public money has to be treated with extreme responsibility and transparency, some cities may not be able to understand this. Some of them leave the core business of management aside and spend on what already makes little or no sense. In the private sector, where the rule of doing more and more by spending less, the desire to migrate to cloud computing (cloud computing) in 2020 dominates the 94% mindset of the leaders consulted by GlobalData. The company did the research at the request of the multinational Cisco and helps to understand why old platforms need to be replaced.
When migrating to the cloud, companies want to stop worrying (and spending money) about what is not their business. The biggest companies in the world have understood this, and find it absurd to keep teams on standby, buy hardware and budget items with unforeseen events that may happen. But the concern is not only this: they do not want to deal with the possibility of losing all the data stored in the systems if there is a physical incident, such as a flood or a fire, for example.
Such concerns are typical of those who still use a desktop platform, which is characterized by the need to acquire infrastructure, constant technical monitoring and periodic investments with little return. Many Brazilian cities are in this situation: they bought equipment, software licenses and they keep local public employees to maintain systems that will last, at the most, five years. After that, given the low scalability, they tend to have to change the entire technology park or continue with an obsolete solution. Some managers insist on using an outdated solution due to a pure lack of adequate information.
Choosing the cloud in public management is showing zeal for taxpayer money. This type of technology allows cities to always have the last word in quality, safety and efficiency, with scalable and secure systems. More than that: it democratizes access to public information, since the number of external users who can access the systems is unlimited.
One of the main differences is the fact that, in the cloud, information is stored in data centers with enhanced security, monitored by specialists and constantly updated. In desktop systems, it is common for all data in the municipality - from details on each taxpayer to financial transactions carried out - to be kept on local computers (servers), in a room in the city hall itself. If there is an accident, such as a flood, fire or lightning, they can be lost or, at the very least, unavailable for a long period of time.
The time to see the cloud as a basis for improving public management is now. Only then will managers be able to worry about what really matters: the development of cities and the quality of life of the citizens who elected them.
EN 
PT 
