By Nina Midgley, Head of Public Sector at Nimble Approach
This blog explores why effective transformation in government requires moving at two distinct speeds – and how doing so enables a shorter time to value without compromising long-term reform. In an environment of rising expectations, fiscal pressure, and urgent policy goals, the question is no longer whether to transform, but how quickly meaningful value can be realised for citizens and frontline teams.
Across the public sector, one principle is becoming increasingly clear: transformation cannot – and should not – move at a single pace. Some changes demand patience, deep structural reform, and careful alignment. Others need to be delivered quickly to meet urgent needs or unlock immediate value for users.
This tension between slow, systemic change and fast, mission-led delivery defines the reality of modern digital government. Navigating it well is essential not only for achieving a shorter time to value, but for delivering better services, building trust, maintaining inclusion, and preparing confidently for the future.
Why Government Needs Two Different Speeds of Change
Public services are delivered through layers of interconnected systems, policies, and funding structures. This complexity means that not all transformation is created equal: different types of change naturally run at different speeds.
The Slow Lane: Complex Reform That Can’t Be Rushed
There is important work that must be done deliberately. Cross-government identity services, data infrastructure, funding reform, interoperability standards, legislative alignment. These efforts carry long-term implications and require broad agreement.
They also involve a degree of uncertainty. Often, teams know the current situation isn’t right, but the destination isn’t yet clear. This ambiguity isn’t a sign of failure; it’s a sign that the problem is truly systemic and needs patient unpicking. Moving too quickly here can have serious consequences.
The Fast Lane: Mission-Led Delivery Where Clarity Already Exists
Running in parallel are the missions that do have clarity: reducing operational backlogs, improving a specific service journey, piloting a user-facing AI tool, or responding to an urgent policy need. These are the areas where government can move fast and show visible progress.
Mission-led delivery works because it is anchored in:
- Clear purpose
- Well-understood user needs
- A tightly defined scope
- Iterative releases that deliver value early
These attributes create the conditions for rapid learning and allow teams to sidestep some of the structural inertia that slows bigger reforms.
The Friction in the Middle
Most teams sit between these two speeds. They operate in environments shaped by slow-moving policy, funding, and legacy technology, yet are still responsible for delivering improvements NOW.
Common blockers are familiar across the sector: policies that feel immovable, systems that can’t talk to each other, funding that rewards outputs instead of outcomes, and procurement processes that slow down valuable experimentation. Digital inclusion adds further complexity, with the remaining non-digital users often having the greatest needs.
This is where many public service teams feel stuck, expected to deliver quickly while the conditions around them evolve slowly. And this is precisely why embracing two-speed transformation is so important: it legitimises the need for slow foundational reform while empowering teams to move at a different pace where they can.
Where AI and Capability Building Fit In
The emergence of AI has only heightened the need for dual-speed thinking. AI work requires rapid experimentation: small, transparent proofs of concept, incremental optimisation, and open collaboration. But the governance, ethics, and system-wide adoption of AI demand the caution and structure of the slow lane.
Similarly, digital capability building cannot be treated as a single intervention. Real capability develops gradually, through on-the-job learning, supported experimentation, shadowing, communities of practice, and constructive challenge. Many organisations, including ours, focus on shaping these conditions so that public servants gain confidence and skills as they deliver both quickly and over time.
Helping Teams Move at the Right Speed
Supporting teams in this environment isn’t about artificially accelerating slow work or limiting fast work. It’s about helping them understand which speed is appropriate for which problem, and giving them the clarity and structure to move confidently.
From our experience, the most useful support often looks like this:
- Helping teams identify which areas they can move quickly in, and which will require a slower pace of change
- Shaping work into small, safe steps to reduce risk and encourage learning
- Navigating policy, data, or technical blockers pragmatically to find routes forward
- Building confidence through hands-on collaboration and capability growth
- Championing open working so that learning travels beyond a single service or council
- Ensuring the needs of users – including those with complex or assisted digital needs – remain central
These approaches don’t change the pace of government reform. But they do create momentum where it’s possible, and they allow teams to demonstrate value even when the wider system is moving more slowly.
Conclusion
A two-speed approach to transformation acknowledges the reality of modern public service delivery. Some ambitions will require years of structural reform and deep cross-government alignment. Others can (and should) be delivered quickly to meet pressing needs or unlock immediate improvements.
The art lies in knowing which mode applies when. Moving too fast on foundational issues risks instability; moving too slowly on clear, user-focused missions delays value unnecessarily. When organisations consciously balance these speeds, teams feel less stuck, users benefit sooner, and long-term reform becomes more achievable. If you’d like to explore how a two-speed approach could support your organisation’s goals, reach out to a member of our team.
