> If I were running this, I would take a radical approach, where the strategy would be a venture model that micro-funded projects to create useful products that solved for providing future services and applications, and not legacy ones.
The above is more similar to some ideas being floated about in various halls of government than you might think. That of course doesn't mean it will happen, given the quirks of government.
> While I am not qualified for this job, with a long enough lever, I have no doubt I could move the whole thing.
I think your above insight and actually addressing some of the real issues and opportunities shows you are (technically-speaking) well-qualified for the job. Better than a lot of candidates, and better than anyone else that will take up the post.
The fiefdoms in central government are very real, but there's a value to the people who are able to navigate these, use rivalries to good effect, and achieve the desired outcome by pitching everyone off against each other correctly. Of course very different in a "CDO" role than as an outside consultant coming in with a scoped brief of what needs achieved and which eggs are able to be cracked in the process.
The sad part is that the whole system is such that you'll probably not want to apply for the role, due to the highly politicised nature of most senior appointments - you need to implement what an elected minister wants, even if it doesn't make technical sense. The civil servants who are happy to project-manage the blockchain-backed AI-enabled boondoggle (that lacks a ledger and any form of ML) are the ones that survive.