The newly established Federal Ministry for Digital Affairs and State Modernization, spearheaded by CDU Minister Karsten Wildberger, is facing increasing scrutiny over its perceived lack of transformative impact on Germany’s digital policy landscape. Despite a structural overhaul incorporating departments from five existing ministries and the Chancellery, critics argue the ministry has yielded few concrete results beyond the recently approved modernization agenda within its first six months.
Minister Wildberger, attempting to deflect criticism, has drawn an analogy to football, suggesting that a change in leadership and organizational structure can radically alter a team’s performance. He framed his approach as one of restructuring, rather than wholesale replacement of personnel, emphasizing a reorganisation of existing resources rather than a complete turnover. This defence, however, has failed to quell concerns about the ministry’s effectiveness.
Bernd Schlömer, Digital State Secretary of Saxony-Anhalt and a representative of the FDP, expressed a shared desire for the ministry’s success but lamented the lack of “dynamism and agility” pointing to a dearth of tangible progress. This sentiment underscores a growing perception that the ministry, despite its ambitious remit, is essentially replicating the functions of existing departments without injecting genuine innovation.
Adding further fuel to the debate is Wildberger’s hands-on management style, particularly his willingness to actively engage with and influence the work of his civil servants on key projects, such as the development of planned administrative applications. While he defends this involvement as necessary to ensure a focus on solutions and demonstrate a minister’s engagement, it raises questions about the degree of autonomy afforded to his team and the potential for stifling independent initiative within the bureaucracy. Critics suggest this micromanagement, even when framed as a commitment to problem-solving, ultimately undermines the very agility and dynamism the ministry purports to foster and could reinforce traditional, slower-moving bureaucratic processes. The fundamental question remains: can a ministry fundamentally designed around existing structures truly deliver the modernization Germany urgently requires, or is it destined to become another iteration of the status quo?
