New academic research shows that the use and understanding of genai by civil servants differ greatly. Photo: Michel Kroll.
Civil servants still do not fully understand or trust the applications and impact of artificial intelligence (AI) in their work.
The use of generator AI varies widely across Australian public and state and territorial services. However, technological failures and concerns about trust in the government cast a major shadow over how it is accepted.
One of the biggest factors contributing to these concerns is the major failure to adopt the tragic and illegal RobodeBT scheme technology.
The UNSW Canberra Public Services Research Group has published a comprehensive study on Genai and how it applies to policy work.
Although the use of genai was growing rapidly within public services, we found that there was a disparity in attitudes, understanding and proficiency among civil servants.
Report co-author Professor Helen Dickinson said opinions on Genai differed significantly among civil servants. She said some viewed it as a valuable tool for increasing efficiency, while others saw its risk outweigh the potential benefits.
“The past challenges regarding implementing new technologies are clearly a mental step forward for many civil servants,” Professor Dickinson said.
“Learning from the massive failures identified in the RobodeBT scheme has impacted how senior civil servants perceive progress in applying Genai.
“Civil servants are wary of any potential compromises in citizens' trust and trust in the government, so they are hesitant to make Genai available in areas such as providing external services.
“Therefore, there is a widespread agreement that the use of genai in policy work requires appropriate human surveillance.”
Scholars interviewed senior civil servants at 22 states, territories and federal agencies to gather perspectives across the public sector.
This study has found that so far the use of GENAI has been used to speed up management tasks requiring large datasets and to summarise large amounts of information and documents.
Some civil servants said they use platforms like ChatGpt to generate new ideas and content in much the same way website searches become commonplace.
Others reported their ability to use technology to create a “subject-specific knowledge base” by supplying relevant policy, data, legal and other institutional materials.
“Many government agencies use Genai to support their goals. However, opinions about Genai's potential differ from senior civil servant to senior civil servant,” the report states.
“Some people believe that policy jobs can be changed, while others become cautious due to perceived risks. Past challenges regarding technology implementation, including learning from policy failure, have influenced how senior civil servants perceive progress in the application of genai.
“There is a widespread agreement that the use of genai in policy work requires proper human surveillance.”
The report shows that the Genai program (easy to get online, often free) now allows civil servants to access features on their personal mobile phones and laptops.
While civil servants were able to build skills when using Genai, it also meant that the level of proficiency varies greatly depending on the workforce.
Other concerns regarding the use of Genai include reliance on data that could potentially amplify bias, and erode data sovereignty by abandoning the control of the information government held on behalf of those they served.
Professor Dickinson said some people also recognize the use of genai as a potential mechanism to hide the functioning of government agencies.
She said it is essential for the government to formalize the intended role of genai in policy activities.
“The statement on why the government is investing in genai is important to understand the intended contributions to high quality policy activities,” Professor Dickinson said. “Through the genai strategy, it can further identify, monitor and evaluate its value.
“One other important goal is to strengthen AI literacy among civil servants to continue to be a feature of the workplace in the future.
“Institutions also need to maintain human policy creation skills, as current AI tools can provide content based on historical data, and to solve complex policy problems that cannot be solved by previous ones.”
The potential environmental impact of Genai also raised the question whether it could be used ethically in public services, as it is expected to grow exponentially in the amount of energy and water needed to rapidly expand AI servers.
The report has detailed recommendations on how the government should ensure that Genai's strategy for adoption is consistent with governance arrangements. Develop plans and resources to build confidence in recruiting. It also reviews workforce training, development and support across all levels of Genai-aged policy craft, including senior executives.
