Beyond E-Government: The World's Most Successful Technology-Enabled Transformations

Foreword By Jim Murphy MP, Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office 2004/2005 has been a period of change in the e-Government agendas of many countries – with re- organisation and new strategy development commonplace. The UK is one of a number of examples with the recent launch of its new strategy Transformational Government Enabled by Technology. However, this change is broader than national level, with 2005 marking the end of the eEurope action plan and the launch of its successor i2010. We commissioned this research under the UK Presidency of the European Council to stimulate the debate on the strategic direction for e- Government during this important period of change. We have focused on the G7 nations, plus Australia and Sweden, to look both within and beyond EU borders. The study has taken a robust analytical approach and is based on an extensive e- Government benchmarking framework. However, you will not find any league tables in this report. e-Government statistics are still very immature and belie critical contextual differences between countries such as government structures and priorities. Also, measurement is a means to an end, and not an end in itself. In this study the measurement framework has been used to define and describe the new, broader e-Government landscape that is emerging. And it has been used to identify good practice and successful Information Communication Technology (ICT)-enabled change programmes. As countries turn their attention to benefits realisation from their extensive investments in e- Government over the past five years, this report is a welcome snapshot of initiatives that have worked and delivered tangible results. Our common challenge is to learn from these initiatives, to broaden success from islands of good practice to all areas of public administration and to realise the widespread social and economic impact that e-Government has promised in pursuit of the Lisbon goals. Countries clearly face some tough challenges ahead in areas such as data sharing, personalisation of services, balancing efficiency with inclusion, and the effective management of huge ICT-enabled change programmes. However, from the evidence within this report, ICT can make a real difference, and we will be most successful in modernising public services when we reduce the over-focus on technology of the past five years, and embrace radical change that is both customer- centred and outcome-based. Jim Murphy MP Parliamentary Secretary Cabinet Office 2 Introduction Describing e-Government. Objectives This report summarises the results of an eight-month study into the level of sophistication of e- and scope - Government across nine countries: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Sweden, UK and USA. It has been commissioned against the backdrop of the UK presidency of the European Council with a particular objective of looking beyond the EU. It is a time of great change for national e-Government programmes worldwide and also those at supranational level. A key objective of our work has therefore been to describe the new e- Government landscape that is emerging. The specific objectives of the study were to: – Develop a state-of-the-art e-Government analysis framework suitable for measuring progress across nations at a level that is useful and actionable. – Identify successful e-Government initiatives focussing both on provision and impact. The themes of the report are focused on what ultimately matters - the transformative impact e- Government has on Public Services. It is not within the scope of this study to produce or publish league tables or country rankings. The ultimate focus is the identification of successful initiatives and the measurement framework proposed is a robust means of achieving this. The framework is a means to an end, not an end in itself. The Comparative analysis at any level presents some formidable challenges: challenges of – Country Contexts, comprising, for example, the legal and market environment, government e-Government structure, and the attitudes of citizens to e-Government vary considerably even amongst our international benchmark group of nine. comparisons – Priorities and overall strategies for e-Government are also different worldwide, with some governments giving greater weight to improving customer service (effectiveness) and others to streamlining processes or reducing costs to serve (efficiency). – Like-for-like comparison is further hindered by the number of entities and layers of government involved: many in our sample group have, for example, initiatives at federal, state and local level. Countries measure different outcomes at different levels of government and also at agency level. This adds to the difficulty of achieving a national level picture of performance in order to compare nations. The bulk of existing studies of ‘e-Government’ take a rather narrow view, focusing heavily on the provision of electronic services to citizens and businesses. There is less coverage of the impact that these services have had, in part because impact is harder than provision to measure. Very little has been published on the intra-governmental aspects of e-Government, especially at the level of individual Public Services like health and education. Responding For all these reasons, comprehensive, all-encompassing performance indices in e-Government to the must be treated with care. Our view is that concrete examples of successful practice are more challenges interesting and instructive. The most useful comparison is one that says: “What are the approaches being taken by the governments of the world’s leading economies in the field of, for example, welfare disbursement?” It is to that end that our framework is deployed. Booz Allen and the e-Government Unit, with academic input from Professor Soumitra Dutta of INSEAD, and advice from the Office for National Statistics, have developed a measurement methodology that enables meaningful comparison, whilst respecting the limitations of performance measurement in this area. Our framework captures Country Context, and focuses on common issues that matter to government practitioners: transforming Public Services, and transforming the processes and capability which lie behind those services. The focus of analysis has been on using the framework to define the new 'e-Government' landscape; comparing and contrasting international approaches, and identifying good practice. Throughout we present case studies which have demonstrated both sophisticated provision and real impact. 6 Introduction Describing e-Government. Broadening The term ‘e-Government’, like ‘e-commerce’ or ‘e-learning’, is associated with the dot-com the definition revolution of the start of the decade and has historically focused on use of the Internet to of e- conduct business between government and citizens (G-C), government and businesses (G-B) Government: or between different parts of government itself (G-G). ICT-enabled For the purpose of this report and as a result of our desk research and discussions with government countries, we have broadened the definition of e-Government to Information Communication Technology (ICT) enabled government, or t-Government - using ICT to enable the business or transformation of government, focused on customers. This definition brings three helpful t-Government principles to bear: – t-Government is about transformation - changing fundamentally the way government does what it does. It is more than moving services online. – Transformation should be business-led and ICT-enabled. Technology should enable a sound piece of business redesign, thought through and costed accordingly. Technology, in other words, should be neither the end nor the sole means of public service transformation. – Transformation should have clear benefits for the customer: citizen, business or frontline civil servant. These should be clear, quantifiable and factored into business cases. Introducing We assess e-Government in terms of three broad themes: Country Context, Public Services our evaluation and Common Processes and Capabilities. The focus is on assessing existing practice and framework reviewing how governments are progressing with their current initiatives. Figure 1.