A SELECTION AND PRIORITISATION FRAMEWORK FOR COLLABORATIVE PUBLIC SERVICES DESIGN

  • 835 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
835
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Sotiris Koussouris (National Technical University of Athens) Panagiotis Kokkinakos (National Technical University of Athens) Dimitrios Panopoulos (National Technical University of Athens) Dimitrios Askounis (National Technical University of Athens) Anshu Jain (IBM India) Alan Hartman (IBM India) Christian Zirpins (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology) Christos Georgousopoulos (INTRASOFT Int.)
  • 2. ‣  A more citizen oriented and transparent government, improved public sector performance etc. are necessary‣  Public unrest within EU shows that citizens want to get their voices considered by decision makers and demand more transparency‣  ICT and Web2.0 can constitute the pillars of innovation and reformation‣  The value of public services can only be identified and assessed through a process of democratic engagement between service providers and service recipients METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 2
  • 3. ✗ ✗ ✔ ✔ CitizensMETTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 3
  • 4. ‣  Engaging Citizens in the Decision Making process, using push and pull based methods‣  Supporting Decision Makers towards serving the citizens in a more efficient way o  Transparency o  Trust o  Undestand the Citizens’ Perspective & Perception of Services‣  Not only for re-engineering or automation purposes, but most importantly for the composition of new service concepts METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 4
  • 5. ‣  Relies on the experiences of the current model by introducing Web 2.0 aspects capturing the whole life cycle of a service‣  Taking into account citizens’ opinions through Opinion Mining‣  Introducing Cost/Value Modelling Mechanisms‣  Offering real time Simulation and Visualisation interfaces for increasing transparency and letting citizens know the expected impact/costs‣  Gives a high level description of how public services should be designed and deployed in the Web2.0 era METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 5
  • 6. ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 6
  • 7. }  Selection of a set of public services that should be examined and prioritised in order to be used for the use case exercise is necessary in every similar effort}  Need for a methodological framework for selecting and prioritising public services for reform purposes}  Initial Requirements Identification and Services Description for rapid process modelling towards simulation METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 7
  • 8. A template which aims to capture important aspects of a service, inorder to thoroughly describe a service in many facets:‣  General Data‣  Service Concept‣  Stakeholders‣  Service Requirements‣  Processes and Tasks‣  Service Online Availability Data‣  Individual Resources‣  Cost of Service Delivery‣  Opinion Mining Sources METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 8
  • 9. METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 9
  • 10. Based on the Analytic Network Process (ANP)‣  Multi Criteria Method‣  Relies on pair wise comparisons o  of clusters o  of elements METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 10
  • 11. Service Flow Service Complexity Service Importance Service Load Data Legal Framework Based on European Public (Final) Service Total Service Duration Implication Policies Level of Compliance with Self-appointed Call of Existence of a Pan- National Interoperability Frequency Service European Dimension Frameworks Requirement for Personal Potential to deliver Value Re-usability by other Presence at the Submission within the time frame of No of Inputs Services of the Application the Project Requirement for PersonalInternal Service Execution Importance for the Service Presence at the Delivery of Domain Provider Organization the ServiceExternal Service Execution Level of Support by IT Domain Systems METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 11
  • 12. Service Alternatives Alternatives - YPES Services Alternatives - Tilburg Services Alternatives - Venice ServicesAccess extracts of insurance record in Building-commercial activities Virtual Tilburg participation toolkit Social Security Organization permissions Authorization and charging for the Certificates for various civil acts City info on an iPhone occupation of public servicesMonitoring compensation procedures Contribution for the purchase of the of Hellenic Organization of Living-care service zone first home Agricultural InsurancesTransferring Citizen’s rights to another WABO combined building permission Integration between Iris and GeoLP Municipality Monitoring an application submitted Werkplein Job intermediation Nomadic work through eGov procedures METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 12
  • 13. Structure of the Model METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 13
  • 14. Pair Wise Comparisons and Priority MatrixIntensity of Definition Explanationimportance 1 equal importance the two elements contribute equally to the objective 2 weak 3 moderate importance experience and judgment slightly favour one element over another 4 moderate plus 5 strong importance experience and judgments strongly favour one element over another 6 strong plus very strong or demonstrated an element is favoured very strongly over another; its dominance is 7 importance demonstrated in practice 8 very, very strong the evidence favouring one element over another is of the highest 9 extreme importance possible order of affirmation If the element i has one of the above nonzeroReciprocals numbers assigned to it when compared with a reasonable assumption of above the element j, then j has the reciprocal value when compared with the element i METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 14
  • 15. METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 15
  • 16. ‣  A methodology for supporting decision makers in: o  recording in detail the workflow of the services, a key factor in order to gain thorough insight to the methods that public service providers and policy makers intuitively follow o  Evaluating/ranking the importance and the readiness of already working to services to be re-engineered for a specific cause‣  The method is capable of handling even more alternatives and can be easily tailored to any re-engineering needs‣  Successful application of the described methodology during COCKPIT project METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 16
  • 17. ‣  The selected service scenarios will be the initial pilots and evaluators of the New Governance Model proposed by COCKPIT Project http://www.cockpit-project.eu‣  Supported by COCKPIT toolkit (opinion mining, public deliberations, cost and value modelling, simulation, visualisation) METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy 17
  • 18. 
 
 
 
 Thank you for your attention!
 
 
 Dr. Sotiris Koussouris
 skous@epu.ntua.gr
www.cockpit-project.eu METTEG 2001 - June 2011 – Camerino, Italy