The crack of service systems

Recently we have come to know more about why a baby that is being monitored by people (good and bad we could say) still dies. We also know of children whose death has been caused by already identified potential harmful people. The problems are then referred as problems of the systems that serve our society: Schools, police services, social services. The systems crack but we do not know how they do so or why.

What problems of the system? It is difficult to start pointing out, given the culture of name and shame we live in. The blame is to be put in one individual or some of them. The system still needs rethinking, and possibly a review is to be undertaken. In the review, more cracks are discovered, more news are published, and we are left thinking that yes, we are people are good and bad, and that systems need rethinking. We trust the review, hoping that it will highlight the need for important changes.

There is the issue of communication. Information that resides somewhere and needs to be known by everyone in services or agencies is not communicated promptly. The systems do not have such memory to recall information from several parts. The last case we heard of shows that the information is being shared, but the action taken afterwards is that of monitoring. The benefit of the doubt is followed, but the information does not show other fundamental problems: Someone is tricking another system (someone allowing someone 'not good' to live in a house). This information item is not to be shared with those monitoring the system. The system could be very robust in gathering 'known' or 'knowable' information, but is fed the information that people want to give.

We then have the issue of trust. Service systems operate under the premise that those inside and outside align to the purpose of these systems, we trust on the people. When there is a crack, the trust in the people running the system is put into question. Those using the system are still given the benefit of the doubt. Procedures to detect lies in the system are a big problem. One possible reason could be that focus on performance, multi-agency working and service delivery take priority over alerting the system on potential risks. Alarm signals have been raised but then the responsibility of taking action is diluted.

So the issue of systems serving people needs to be accompanied by that of protecting people. But we are very busy protecting ourselves. Are we protecting ourselves from the systems we are part of, the systems we use? Is it not the other way round that has created the need for a system...?

I wonder what is to happen next. Our trust in the systems is once more damaged, but it seems we will then keep them because there is no better alternative.