In Britain, Prime Minister David Cameron is on to something unique and innovative. In his desire to increase citizen engagement and reinvent the role of government in British society, he is moving an entire nation towards a new orientation. This orientation is premised on something simple: tapping into civic energy.

In this era of government right-sizing, tapping into civic energy is an incredibly smart and sound strategy. Why? Because the need to save and maximize dollars is real and immediate. But for every dollar saved, it means that the resources necessary to tackle pressing social and community issues are gone. Government is in the businesses of putting scarce resources towards certain issues, but when the line in the sand is drawn, and government says it can no longer invest in social or community issues, who receives the hand off?

In the United States, the nonprofits are the ones bracing themselves for the hand off and the fact is they will be overwhelmed if government simply bows out of the problem. And this is where tapping civic energy is critical. Civic engagement, primarily through service and volunteering, can no longer be seen as a “nice to do.” It is becoming a “must do.”

Now, I’m of the opinion that government can’t merely hand over responsibilities. Stated bluntly, it’s just not possible. In California, for example, our budget deficit totals an estimated $26 billion. The government cannot simply say to local communities, “We have to cut resources and we hope you have the bandwidth and resources necessary to take on the extra responsibilities.” What government must do is invite all of the sectors (nonprofit, private and public) to a common table, work out a framework that identifies distinct community challenges and resources, and help them create real solutions that leverage civic energy.

A multi-sector approach is based on the idea that each sector will collaborate to find a solution to a problem based on its own strengths with the end goal of offering people a pathway to engagement. It is simply the idea of letting each sector play to its strengths, with a resource broker making the connection.

For example, the nonprofit sector is flexible, accountable and trustworthy. Government has more resources and is stable. The private sector is efficient, with a quick in, quick out philosophy that maximizes ROI. And the human capital is just waiting to be tapped.

In using this multi-sector strategy, the key player is government. Government plays a more critical role (rather than a larger one) because it must embrace its role as a trusted broker and learn to effectively leverage that role. In the past government has simply put dollars behind a problem with the aim of getting issues solved. In lean budget times, that philosophy is antiquated. Instead, government must accept the new paradigm, where government, business, the nonprofit sector and citizens solve problems together. It is the new way for government to do business and it’s only going to increase. When cuts are made, it’s not time for government to bow out of the problem; it’ll be time for government to blow out this approach.