As the host of The Business of Government Hour, I’ve had the privilege of engaging with some of the sharpest minds in public administration, delving into the challenges and opportunities shaping government today. Recently, I attended the annual conference of the American Society for Public Administration (ASPA) in Washington DC. ASPA is the leading interdisciplinary public service organization that advances the art, science, teaching and practice of public and nonprofit administration. This year’s conference themed “Not Robots Yet: Keeping Public Servants in Public Service,” offered a worthwhile opportunity to explore how artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming public service while keeping the human element at its core.
The Business of Government Hour, hosted on-site at the conference, featured insightful interviews with Professor Alan Shark from the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University and Dr. Rudy de Leon Dinglas, Chief of Staff at the Bloomberg Center for Government Excellence at Johns Hopkins University.
This essay synthesizes key themes and insights from these interviews -- AI as a collaborative partner, the evolution of performance management, workforce readiness, ethical governance, and the critical need for transparency -- that resonate deeply with my interest to bridge theory and practice in government innovation.
Embracing AI as a Collaborative Partner
A prominent theme in Professor Alan Shark’s interview was the transformative potential of AI as a tool to augment, rather than replace, public servants. Shark, with his lifelong passion for technology and public management, emphasized that AI’s impact is comparable to the internet’s debut, offering unprecedented opportunities for efficiency and innovation.
He argued that AI excels in handling repetitive tasks, thereby freeing public servants to focus on higher-value work, However, he dismissed exaggerated claims, such as those suggesting AI could replace 50% of federal jobs in 90 days, asserting that the nuances of government work demand human oversight. Shark advocated for public servants to "lean into" AI by embracing curiosity and continuous learning. He recommended practical steps like experimenting with AI tools for tasks such as budget presentations or summarizing documents.
What resonated most was Stark’s vision of a “human-machine partnership” describing AI as “our coaches… our brainstorm partners.”
His optimism was tempered by a call for accountability, urging public administrators to remain in charge and fact-check AI outputs to avoid errors or "hallucinations." As I listened, I saw a clear path for public administrators to embrace AI not as a threat but as a tool to amplify their impact.
Dr. Rudy de Leon Dinglas complemented this perspective by highlighting AI’s role in enhancing data-driven governance at the local government level. As chief of staff at GovEx, Dinglas emphasized that AI’s effectiveness depends on robust data practices, including governance, quality, capacity, use, and transparency. He cited examples of AI applications in cities, such as digital assistants for legislative summaries, chatbots for multilingual constituent communication, and analytics for complex problem-solving in public safety and infrastructure planning. Dinglas stressed that AI’s accessibility, likened to the intuitiveness of social media—sets it apart from previous technological advancements, enabling frontline staff to executives to leverage it for real-time decision-making. Yet, like Shark, Dinglas cautioned that AI’s efficacy hinges on robust data practices, warning, “As we know, crap in, crap out.”
Elevating Performance Management Through Data Strategies
Dinglas’s expertise in performance management, shaped by his work on Baltimore’s CitiStat and his dissertation on public service motivation, offered an first hand perspective into how AI enhances data-driven governance.
He defined performance management as “practices and processes… that ensure that organizations are on track to meet their goals… effectively but efficiently.”
Its evolution, from 1990s “stat” programs like New York’s CompStat to modern open data initiatives, now integrates generative AI to deliver real-time insights. Dinglas noted, “AI gives every level of local government… this ability to see things in real time, to generate inquiries and… get immediate results.”
Central to this evolution is GovEx’s citywide data strategy, comprising five elements: data governance, data quality, data capacity, data use, and data transparency. Dinglas explained, “For cities… to really institutionalize those [performance management] practices, they must have a robust citywide data strategy.” A success story from Montevideo, Uruguay, illustrates this: during a water crisis, the city leveraged data governance to track and communicate water quality issues, while AI-driven bike lane data engaged residents on CO2 reduction. These efforts, Dinglas said, address “challenges around knowledge, around capacity, and around the culture shift” needed for data-driven governance.
As I probed deeper, I began to see how AI, paired with strong data practices, can elevate performance management to meet modern demands.
Stark’s perspective added another layer, suggesting AI makes public servants “more productive individuals.” He envisioned a future where AI reduces hiring needs not through layoffs but by enhancing efficiency: “When people retire, there may be less of a pressure to rehire somebody… it’s going to slow down hiring.” Together, their insights highlight AI’s potential to elevate performance management, provided governments invest in data infrastructure and training.
Adapting the Workforce for an AI-Driven Future
Both guests addressed the critical challenge of preparing public servants for an AI-driven world, emphasizing curiosity and adaptability.
Shark, reflecting on resistance at his university, shared, “There’s a number of people… one in particular, said if I’m forced to deal with AI, I’m out of here.” To counter this, he proposed AI user groups for peer learning, noting, “When people start seeing it right in front of them, they become more confident in using it.” He also advocated for a return to generalist skills, suggesting, “Having a degree in liberal arts might be something worthy to re-explore” alongside certificates in AI adoption or knowledge management.
Dinglas emphasized “soft skills” like curiosity: “It’s the curiosity. It’s asking the question and digging deep… going down that rabbit hole of why, why, why?” He argued that public servants must view data as “everyone’s job,” not just for IT specialists, to fully leverage AI. GovEx’s initiatives, like the City AI Connect platform with over 400 cities, foster this adaptability by enabling peer learning. Dinglas advised, “Connect with others. Chances are they’re also grappling around the same questions… there’s no need to reinvent the wheel.”
Their shared focus on workforce development aligns with the conference theme, ensuring public servants remain central. Shark’s call to “embrace it as something that’s going to augment what everything that you do” and Dinglas’s emphasis on cultural shifts underscore the need for training and collaboration to navigate technological change.
Building Trust Through Transparency
Maintaining public trust was a unifying theme, with transparency as a critical strategy.
Shark expressed concern about distrust in government, stating, “There is a generation or two of people that are very distrustful… and then you add technology to it, they’re even more distrustful.” He recommended clear disclaimers for AI tools like chatbots, citing Denver’s “Sunny” as an example: “Give it a fun name… and say… if you’re uncomfortable with me at any time, press # and I’ll get you to one of my human brethren.” This ensures citizens know they’re interacting with AI and have human alternatives.
Dinglas emphasized transparency in local government, where accountability is direct: “Local governments are directly accountable to the public… they often deal with sensitive services like policing.” He proposed “plain language summaries” to explain AI models and “tiered transparency” for different audiences, ensuring clarity without overwhelming complexity. Both guests underscored that transparency counters distrust, with Dinglas noting, “A lot of it is trust tied to transparency...”
Conclusion
My interviews with Professor Alan Shark and Dr. Rudy de Leon Dinglas at the 2025 ASPA Conference illuminated a forward-looking vision for public administration in the AI era. Their insights underscore the potential of AI to enhance efficiency, performance management, and resident outcomes, provided it is grounded in robust data practices and ethical governance.
By fostering curiosity, soft skills, and peer learning, public servants can adapt to technological changes while preserving the accountability and judgment that define their roles.
As Shark succinctly stated, public servants must "remain optimistic, be curious, and embrace AI as an augmentative tool," while Dinglas’s focus on data strategies and transparency ensures that technology serves the public good. Together, their perspectives offer a roadmap for keeping public servants—not robots—at the heart of public service, aligning with the conference’s call to balance innovation with humanity.