Sabine Rotthier – I-scan tool. e-Government: a new cance or a new problem?

719 views

Published on

CORVÉ pre-conference – Tuesday Dec 14th 2010

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
719
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Sabine Rotthier – I-scan tool. e-Government: a new cance or a new problem?

  1. 1. eGovernment: New Opportunity or New Problem?Conclusions of the I-scan Project <br />14th Dec 2010<br />Pre-ConferenceLift-OffTowards Open Government<br />Sabine Rotthier<br />
  2. 2. Mainquestion of the conference: <br />Howcancentralgovernments and the European Union support and promotelocaleGovernment? <br />I-scan project <br />29 Flemishmunicipalities<br />I-scan Project: Study of Local eGov<br />2<br />
  3. 3. I-scan Project: Study of LocaleGov<br />Where does the municipal organisation stand in its development? <br />To which degree has the organisation implemented ICT? <br />How does the municipalityalignorganisation and ICT?<br />3<br />
  4. 4. ICT<br />O = +<br />I = +<br />Pos. alignment<br />O = -<br />I = +<br />No alignment<br />Organisation<br />O = +<br />I = -<br />No alignment<br />O = -<br />I = -<br />Neg. alignment<br />4<br />
  5. 5. 5<br />
  6. 6. Three Key Questions <br />Do municipal divisions think in terms of processes?<br />Organisational framework<br />supportedby<br />Do municipal divisions speak the same language?<br />Do we understand each other? <br />Semantic framework<br />supportedby<br />Canmunicipaldivisionscommunicatewitheachother?<br />Technological framework<br />6<br />
  7. 7. Can Municipal Divisions Talk to Each Other?<br />Software applicationsformunicipalities:<br />4 capitalmarketplayers<br />Problem: <br />No compatibilitybetween different applications<br />Vendor lock-in<br />Islandautomatisation<br />Different ways of coping withthissituation<br />7<br />
  8. 8. Attitude towards ICT suppliers<br />8<br />
  9. 9. Three Key Questions <br />Do municipal divisions think in terms of processes?<br />Organisational framework<br />supportedby<br />Do municipal divisions speak the same language?<br />Do we understand each other? <br />Semantic framework<br />supportedby<br />Canmunicipaldivisionscommunicatewitheachother?<br />Technological framework<br />9<br />
  10. 10. Do MunicipalDivisionsSpeak the Same Language?<br />Problematic in everymunicipality<br />Reasons: <br />Focus on own services and tasks /preference to control own data<br />No use of authentic sources: unknown / unawareness of value for municipalities<br />Data are locked in in applications<br />10<br />
  11. 11. Recommendations to the Central Governements<br />Develop open standards for data <br />Make authentic sources available for municipalities<br />Ensure clear communication about what municipalities can and may do with authentic sources<br />11<br />
  12. 12. Three Key Questions <br />Do municipal divisions think in terms of processes?<br />Organisational framework<br />supportedby<br />Do municipal divisions speak the same language?<br />Do we understand each other? <br />Semantic framework<br />supportedby<br />Canmunicipaldivisionscommunicatewitheachother?<br />Technological framework<br />12<br />
  13. 13. Do MunicipalDivisionsThink in Terms of Processes?<br />E-government<br />NOT: justimplementing ICT<br /> BUT: analysing, reorganising and improving the internalworking and service delivery = BPR<br />Whiletechnologybyitselfcannottransform bad procedures intogoodones, eGovernmentcreates the opportunity for the public sector to manage itstasksdifferently.<br /> No BPR = automatisation of bad processes / reinforcement of existingsituation<br />13<br />
  14. 14. A = Active<br />F = Fragmented<br />I = Intention<br />Aw = Aware<br />N = Notaware<br />The attention devoted to processes<br />14<br />
  15. 15. <ul><li>On the basis of intrinsic needs
  16. 16. Extrinsic motivation
  17. 17. On the basis of intrinsic needs
  18. 18. Extrinsic motivation </li></ul>15<br />
  19. 19. <ul><li>ICT division is not involved, but does show interest and tries to play a bigger role
  20. 20. ICT division is involved
  21. 21. ICT division is not involved and is not interested
  22. 22. ICT division is not involved</li></ul>16<br />
  23. 23. <ul><li>Examining processes, without much added value for the organisation
  24. 24. Description of the desired situation
  25. 25. Lever for concrete improvements, with a view to more efficient operation and services
  26. 26. Analysing
  27. 27. Lever for concrete improvements, with a view to more efficient operation and services
  28. 28. Analysing
  29. 29. Little interest and not much added value
  30. 30. Description of the existing situation </li></ul>17<br />
  31. 31. Recommendations to the Central Governements<br /><ul><li>Support municipalities with process descriptions of regulations
  32. 32. Coordinate your policy with local practice on the basis of mutual consultation
  33. 33. Stimulateknowledgedevelopment about ICT and organisational change</li></ul>18<br />
  34. 34. Recommendations versus Citadel Statement: Does we match?<br />19<br />YES, WE MATCH!<br />Information/ process and applicationlayer<br />Clearguidelines and data models for the use of personal details aboutcitizens<br />Common service deliveryarchitecture<br />Onecommonlanguage<br />Open Data<br />Standards<br />Framework to addresscommonprivacy issues<br />Best practiceshow to workwithauthenticregistrations<br />
  35. 35. Thankyouforyourattention<br />More information: <br />sabine.rotthier@hogent.be<br />Book: eGovernment: New Opportunity or New Problem? OnUSB-Stick in the conference map. <br />20<br />

×