A telling moment arrived Wednesday at legislators' annual session-starting retreat when seminar leader/innovation guru Larry Keeley asked for a show of hands.

Keeley asked: Is the pace of the changes that you in state government are proposing, debating and achieving faster or slower than the pace of change in the lives of your citizens? "How many think you're moving faster than the citizens' lives?"

No hands went up.

"How many of you think you're moving slower?"

Many hands went up -- some of them accompanied by the glances kids exchange when a teacher asks who didn't do their homework.

"This is a problem, ladies and gentlemen," Keeley said. It is -- and it's not just the Legislature's problem. It's Minnesota's.

This state has long looked to St. Paul to solve problems that citizens can't handle on their own. Minnesotans' habit of locking arms and pocketbooks via their state government has served them well through most of 152 years of statehood.

That's been in fair part because state government has been an adaptable organism. It's been willing to change how it raises money after an economic earthquake (state income tax, 1933), smooth out emerging inequities (Minnesota Miracle, 1971) and meet basic needs that the private sector can't or won't (MinnesotaCare, 1992).

But a decade of hyperpartisan gridlock and seemingly intractable problems now has even legislators wondering about their institution's capabilities. State government seems stuck with the jurisdictions of the 19th century, the structures of the mid-20th century, the funding formulas of the 1970s and the tax fights of the 1980s.

Can a Legislature in the 21st century still be timely, relevant, creative -- and, most desirable of all, effective?

It can, said Keeley, whose Chicago-based firm, Doblin, is paid megabucks by some of the world's biggest corporations and most creative governments to show them how. He agreed to forgo his usual $40,000 per day fee to help the state of his boyhood search for its lost mojo.

Keeley recommended gaining greater "innovation competence" by remaking the state's decisionmaking process. It should be built around a disciplined analysis of state problems and opportunities, he said. That's an exercise quite different from partisan positioning, orchestrated public hearings and theatrical floor debates.

It involves knowing Minnesota's strengths (for example, its well-educated workforce) and discerning what's ahead in those areas (in this example, a demand for more postsecondary graduates). It includes building incentives into financing systems (e.g., performance pay for teachers; college subsidies for classes successfully completed) and enhancing the "customer experience" (more individualized instruction). It encourages new processes (more online and experiential learning). It means junking old structures when they get in the way of results. (The biggest opportunity to change K-12? "Blow up grade levels," Keeley advised.)

Another good idea: Stop basing decisions on anecdotes or the arguments of a few vocal interests. Where there's academic research or other states' experience to be had, find it. Use it.

Washington state does. Its Washington State Institute for Public Policy could be replicated in Minnesota. Its assistant director, Steve Aos, said that it's a nonpartisan, legislature-directed research contractor. With a mix of public and foundation funding, it hires researchers to answer such questions as "What can reduce the dropout rate?" or "What can be done to keep juvenile offenders from offending again?"

Research-based answers ought to lead to smarter spending of scarce tax dollars. They also ought to soften the brittle partisanship that hardens when politicians' positions are grounded in ideology rather than evidence.

Two legislators, DFL Sen. Sandy Rummel of White Bear Lake and Rep. Carlos Mariani of St. Paul, are sponsoring legislation that would set something similar in motion in Minnesota. It would create a Legislative Commission for Policy Innovation and Research, and authorize it to contract with "a consortium of independent organizations" to conduct policy research.

My advice: Make it truly bipartisan. Make its researchers truly independent. Make it very visible to the public. And make it happen soon. Minnesotans are getting way ahead of their government, and government needs to sprint to catch up.

Lori Sturdevant is a Star Tribune editorial writer and columnist. She can be reached at lori.sturdevant@startribune.com.