A new term of government, a new approach to tech: Seven Nousers on what the next three years should look like

In the wake of Australia's recent election, the government's renewed mandate provides an opportunity to redefine its approach to technology policy and innovation. As we step into this fresh term, we must address pressing challenges while seizing opportunities to position Australia as a global leader in technology. This piece brings together insights from seven Nous consultants, each offering a unique perspective on how the government can harness technological advancements to drive economic growth, improve public services, and foster a culture of innovation.

AI needs to change the way organisations think about technology investment and procurement. Governments should shift their technology investment strategy away from isolated, monolithic solutions to one that creates platforms that enable scalable and responsible AI innovation. This approach empowers individual departments and agencies to develop tailored AI solutions that address their unique challenges. By focusing on enablers, the government can foster a culture of experimentation and adaptability, ensuring that AI solutions evolve alongside emerging needs.

A significant challenge lies in overcoming the notion that AI is a silver bullet for all technology problems, as well as the idea that AI is synonymous with automation and process redesign. This isn't the case. Governments should recognise that AI is about adaptability and learning, while automation is about efficiency and process redesign is about fundamentally rethinking how work gets done. Properly distinguishing between technologies and applying them strategically will allow governments to focus on augmentation – using AI to enhance human judgment and productivity – rather than simply automating existing processes.

Many organisations mistakenly view AI as a standalone solution – as though purchasing a single tool like Copilot will solve all their problems – rather than as a transformative capability requiring strategic integration and new capabilities.

David Diviny, Chief Data and Analytics Officer and Head of AI

While the government has articulated ambitions for inclusion, accessibility, and co-design in its digital strategy, implementation has to this point remained inconsistent, posing risks to major reforms and investments. Establishing clear standards for co-design excellence and focusing on outcomes-driven, pragmatic approaches will be essential to build trust and deliver meaningful improvements in government services as we enter a period of significant transformation potential through AI.

The important thing to remember is that digital transformation must not be technology-led, but user-led. Even when it comes to AI, we should be asking: What problems are we solving for our community, customers, or staff? And how do these tools improve outcomes?

This shift in perspective requires a fundamental rethinking of priorities. Rather than starting with the tools and technologies available, governments must begin by understanding the needs and aspirations of the people they serve. Only then can they determine how digital solutions might support those goals. The commitment to co-design takes this further still, giving end-users agency to influence the decisions that are made. This is a significant and meaningful commitment with the potential to enable inclusive, innovative, and effective government services, if done right.

Brenden Carriker, Principal

AI has shifted the productivity frontier, making it possible for governments to make a greater impact. However, realising this potential requires more than just adopting new tools. It demands a fundamental rethinking of how governments support and augment their workforce to better deliver services.

This shift is not merely about automating tasks or cutting costs. Instead, it involves using AI to enhance human capabilities, enabling public servants to focus on higher-value work. For instance, AI could streamline administrative processes, freeing up time for frontline workers to engage more meaningfully with citizens. Achieving this vision requires a concerted effort to integrate AI into the fabric of government operations, from training and development to organisational culture.

A more immediate and systemic challenge is posed by the constraints of current government policy and the existing service delivery architecture, the latter of which is structured around agencies and programs. This siloed approach often leads to fragmented service delivery, where citizens must navigate a maze of departments, platforms, and processes to access the support they need. True client-centricity requires a more integrated approach, one that brings policy and service delivery experts and decision-makers together from the outset, co-designing new policy and service delivery solutions that are client-centric and cut across siloes of agencies and programs. This collaborative approach could help ensure that policies are not only well-intentioned but also practical and effective in their implementation.

Will Prothero, Principal

AI is catylsing a new operating model for knowledge work, with AI fluency a new and highly-valued capability. AI fluency goes beyond technical know-how. It’s the ability to frame problems such that they can be solved with AI, and to redesign workflows to add value where AI cannot. For public service workers, like all knowledge workers, the capability challenge is to create new value with AI tools. In this new landscape, rethinking how to work is as critical as – and perhaps even more critical than – knowing what to do.

Alongside building AI fluency, knowledge workers must also embrace flux: the capacity to thrive alongside AI advancement. The most future-fit professionals will be those who can readily pivot, reframe, and relearn. The performance edge is adapting faster than the work changes. This is not a one-off shift. It’s the new shape of work. Roles, skills, and even the definition of value-adding work are in constant motion. Now is the time to cultivate workplaces that foster experimentation and adaptive capacity.

Sophie O’Connor, Principal

The prevailing model of digital transformation has been overly reliant on a concept of reuse. This approach assumes that capabilities developed for one initiative can be seamlessly applied across others, creating efficiencies and reducing costs. While the idea is appealing in theory, the reality has often been far less successful. High-profile initiatives like digital front doors, corporate systems, and intergovernmental platforms, have, despite significant investment, struggled to achieve critical mass and deliver on the promise of reuse at scale. This is based on a failure to align processes and practices before introducing new technologies. Ours has been an age of digital-led reform, rather than one of reform-led digital transformation.

Too often, governments start with the question, What tech solution do we need? rather than asking, What changes do we need to make and how can technology support those changes? This can lead to fragmented systems that fail to address the underlying inefficiencies they were meant to solve in the first place. In some cases, it can even add to them. Instead, government should attempt to reform processes and practices to adhere to best practice – or at least to better practice – before they deliver their tech solutions.

When you couple process reform and digital implementation too tightly, you add to the change impact. By separating them, you can focus on getting each element right, building a strong foundation for future initiatives.

Michael Rathjen, Principal

A handful of technology platforms have amassed extraordinary resources, data, and influence. These platforms are no longer confined to shaping how we communicate or consume information. Instead, they are increasingly architecting our lives, influencing everything from our social interactions to our economic opportunities. These are the same companies that are building powerful AI models that underpin many of our products and services.

While often framed in terms of innovation, this influence comes with significant risks, which governments have not yet been able to fully understand or adequately address. As a result, existing regulatory approaches are not yet sufficiently nuanced. For instance, banning social media for users under 16, while well-intentioned, doesn't grapple with the deeper, systemic issues at play. Young people access and use social media in a plethora of ways, some of which are harmful. They also use it in positive ways: to connect with friends, stay updated with current events, and advocate on issues they care about. They also use it to interact with and learn how to use emerging technologies, such AI tools and their potential applications.

Governments must develop a more meaningful and nuanced approach to regulating technology platforms. What is required is a regulatory framework that goes beyond reactive measures to proactively address the complexities of modern technology. This framework should be backed by legislation that considers the architects and developers of these platforms, which are embedded into our everyday lives. This would require governments to invest in expertise, build institutional capacity, and engage in ongoing dialogue with both industry leaders and civil society. The goal is not to stifle innovation but to ensure that it serves the public good rather than undermining it.

Trisha Santhanam, Director

Governments worldwide have invested heavily in digital identity initiatives, and Australia is no exception. With hundreds of millions already allocated, and legislation in place, the groundwork has been laid. However, the current framework primarily focuses on government use, leaving the private sector largely untapped.

The whole-of-economy benefits of digital identity are obvious, including its potential to reduce fraud, enhance security, and save time and money. Yet for these benefits to properly materialise, governments must accelerate adoption by making the system commercially attractive to private enterprise. Competing solutions, such as those developed by the banks, highlight the urgency of this effort. Without a clear plan or industry prioritisation, the full economic and societal advantages of digital identity may remain unrealised.

The other great opportunity of the next three years is to fully unlock the potential of Agile methodologies. These have become a staple in many government technology teams, but their potential remains under-utilised. Agile still operates mostly at the delivery end of the initiative lifecycle, often failing to permeate higher levels of governance and decision-making. To unlock greater value, Agile practices such as retrospectives, stand-ups, and iterative planning should be integrated into program-level and enterprise-level governance. As a result, steering committees and executive teams will be able to focus less on rigid adherence to initial plans and more on real-time business outcomes and trade-offs. This shift could transform how governments approach large-scale transformations, ensuring that agility is embedded, not just in execution, but in strategy.

Sudipto Sarkar, Principal

Get in touch to discuss how your organisation can enhance its technological capabilities in smart, responsible, sustainable ways.

Connect with David Diviny, Brenden Carriker, Will Prothero, Sophie O'Conner, Michael Rathjen, Trisha Santhanam, and Sudipto Sarkar on LinkedIn.