2001 Berteslmann Interview Guideline

8/8/2019 2001 Berteslmann Interview Guideline

1/23

Interview Guide

"Benchmarking E-Government / E-Democracy"

Booz Allen & Hamilton and Bertelsmann

Foundation

BoozAllen & Hamilton -1-


2/23

Preamble and objective of the interview

With this interview guide the Bertelsmann Foundation, supported byBoozAllen & Hamilton, intends to evaluate status and dynamics of e-

government/e-democracy programs on the basis of interviews withselected best practice candidates; on request the information will betreated confidentially. This evaluation was triggered off by the hypothesisthat until now most e-government programs primarily focused on theaspect of electronic service delivery (ESD), which were traditionallydelivered offline (e.g. visits to the local authorities, writtencorrespondence, etc.). Our current understanding is that e-democracy andparticipation services are yet not fully incorporated in most of the existinge-government programs. This hypothesis is what we would like to discusswith you in the following interview.

Answering the questions should not take longer than 90 minutes in total.We send you the interview guide in advance so you can get familiar withits contents and prepare yourself for the interview. We structured theinterview along six segments:

I. Services / product portfolio

II. Efficiency

III. Transparency and participation

IV. Change management

V. Quantitative data assessment

VI. General information about your organization

In the scope of the project we defined the terms "electronic servicedelivery", "e-democracy" and "e-government" as follows:

[Electronic service delivery]: ICT-based processing of customer-

oriented services of traditional public bodies (legislature, government andadministration, jurisdiction)

[E-democracy]: ICT-based information (transparency) of citizens andbusinesses and their participation in decision making processes ofgovernmental and non-governmental public bodies

[E-government]:Combination of both electronic service delivery and e-democracy offerings of public bodies



3/23

I. Services / product portfolio

Based on our research we understand that you already offer a variety ofelectronic services tailored to the needs of citizens and businesses. However, wegot the impression that most electronic services are associated with traditionaladministrative procedures. E-democracy services are not yet equally reflected

in your service offerings. Please explain briefly how you chose your serviceportfolio that is already established within the scope of your e-governmentprogram. Please explain if any user-specific research was part of the programset-up and if businesses' and citizens' needs are taken into consideration whiledeveloping and improving the service portfolio. Have you already established,or are you planning to establish electronic services tailored to the needs ofspecific customer groups (e.g. citizens or industry groups)? How many of the top10 services (G2C, G2B) have already been implemented? Please estimate theratio of implemented services against all feasible services (G2C, G2B), and theratio of pure information versus transaction services. What help functions, searchengines, etc. if any have you implemented to enhance user friendliness?

To what extent are electronic services actually used by citizens and especially bybusinesses (please briefly explain the ratio of online and offline services) [4, 5, J]?

For important services, please explain the frequency of usage. Does the actualusage go along with the planning (does the targeted group use the offerings)



4/23

[5]?

Have you incorporated any services of different administrative bodies,businesses, etc. on your site [7]? Have you started any initiatives to bring yourinternal procedures in line with user applications (especially resp. businesses),so that an uninterrupted workflow between the applications is achieved [7]?Does the data exchange with users and the internal processing work withoutany interruption/change of media [11]? Have you defined any standards forinterfaces [7]?

Which measures have been taken with regard to your service portfolio toavoid the so-called "digital divide", i.e. the split in social groups which eitherhave very good or very limited access to electronic services [9]? What role playdifferent distribution channels (e.g. call center, Internet, letter/fax, etc.) inyour e-government program [9]? Have you developed plans to offer tailor-madeservices to specific groups? Do you intend to improve the access to electronicservices (e.g. via public web access points)?



5/23

How do you address security issues? Are there any rules or laws in place whichguarantee privacy and security of your electronic services [10]? Whichtechnologies do you use therefore [12]? How do citizens and businesses makeuse of these technologies?

Can you imagine a (further) personalization of electronic services, e.g. byestablishing accounts for every citizen bundling all contacts with yourorganization and the allocation to a virtual personal advisor [F]? If personalizedservices already exist: Why did you introduce such services? What is yourexperience with such services [F, G]? Have personalized services led to a higherdegree of customer bonding [F, G]?



6/23

Note: In case no e-democracy services are available, what are your reasons foryour not offering any e-democracy services (fear of higher utilization ofresources, e.g. with the editorial support; possible misuse by demagogues, legalissues, technical reasons, etc.) [L, M]?In case e-democracy services are available, what is your experience with theusage of such services (especially with regard to businesses) [J]? Can youquantify your internal efforts to process comments, petitions, etc. [L, N]?



7/23

II. Efficiency

From your perspective, has the deployment of modern technologies acceleratedinternal processes? [15]? Which systems measure/evaluate theseaccelerations [14]? To what extent is the deployment of modern technologiestaken into consideration when formulating and modifying internal processes? Do

you adjust internal processes to external necessities [17]? Have you establishedan explicit, formalized feedback mechanism? Have you defined a processmodel/architecture [13]?

Are you following a business case approach in your e-government activities, i.e.are you relating costs and benefits of each project [16]? How do you allocateressources to core processes? Do you know of any projects that have alreadypaid off, resp. projects that are close to break-even?

How do you finance your e-government program? Please explain briefly ifthe projects are financed by public resources only, or in combination with



8/23

innovative financing models (e.g. public-private partnership or other providermodels) [19]. Do you have any sponsors (e.g. businesses)? Do you outsourcespecific processes or services [19]?

Please describe your technological resources deployed for executing your e-government program: Is a comprehensive applications and systemsarchitecture in place [24]? To what extent have you integrated front-end andback-end systems [22]? Which platform technology do you use [25]? Whichdatabase architecture have you implemented [21]?

To what extent do your employees accept new technologies? Do they refuse

to work with them? If so, how do you deal with/solve this issue? Did you observegroup-building in the implementation process of your e-government program("freaks", refusing groups, early adopters, etc.) [30]? Have you established any



9/23

support structures for applications and systems that employees can use [23]?

Can you estimate the total internal effort of your institution's entire e-government program (staff, investments, miscellaneous) [L]?

To what extent are processes and applications within the public body seamlessand synchronized (both within and between departments)? Do you have anystructural problems, (functions, change of media, etc.) in the

communication-/data-flow between departments?If so, are there any plans ready to solve these problems [28]? Did you implementa reliable and effective WAN (communication platform) for all locations of the



10/23

public body [27]? Do you have a Customer Relationship Management or asimilar system in place?

To what extent have employees access to adequate state-of-the-art tools andfacilities (PC, access to the Internet) [31]? To what extent do employeesinternally accept and use the applications and services (e-mail, etc.) [30]? Arethere any training and qualification programs for employees in place thatfocus on efficiency improvements [18]? How did new Information andCommunication Technologies (ICT) affect the processes and resourcerequirements within the public body [20]? To what extent is intellectual capitaldeveloped within the organization and the dissemination process of knowledgeimproved (e.g. is there any specific program at hand that supports the

aggregation of organizational know-how within the public body)?



11/23

III. Transparency and participation

As stated earlier, we believe that e-government should not only focus on anincrease in efficiency and the use of the internet for services associated withtraditional administrative procedures, but also deal with innovative ways ofinvolving citizens and businesses. Please detail briefly the possibility for citizens

and businesses to exert influence on decision processes within the publicbody. Are there any formalized rules for citizens who whish to participate in thedecision making process [41]? Do you actively consult citizens via newInformation and Communication Technologies ("unlocking"/activating publicgroups) [45]? Did you clearly define and communicate ways (e.g. an officialprocedure) for consultation of citizens and businesses? [41, 42]?

To what extent have you integrated chat rooms, forums or any similarplatforms in your e-government program in order to offer the citizens andbusinesses the opportunity of debating topics of public interest? If so, doyou host/moderate or edit such online chats [44]?

Do you know (please give us your best estimate) how often your participationservices/offerings are used by citizens and businesses [J, 45, H]? Do you trace(how) and analyze the usage of these services? What benefits do citizens



12/23

and businesses gain by using them [G]? Do you actively "unlock" (activate)specific public groups that might be interested in specific topics [43]? Please giveus your best guess of how many groups and citizens were activated and are nowfrequent users of your participation services/offerings. Can you assess to whatextent the involvement of citizens and businesses in the public decision makingprocess has changed/increased/improved recently [J, H]?

Do citizens and businesses have access to information about the status oftheir requests, enquiries or submissions [33]? Have you installed, similar toFedEx or UPS, a "track-and-trace" system (in order to track the status of asubmission)? If so, how frequently do citizens and businesses make use of such

a system? Is this system more targeted at the specific needs of citizens orbusinesses? If you have not installed such a system yet, are you planning to doso in the near future?

How do you ensure that your employees are accessible for the "customer"(citizen as well as business)? Is there a single point of contact for both

customer groups? Are there standardized procedures/rules for the process (time)of replying to an enquiry? What is the ratio of online to offline processing orcommunication [40]? Do you offer publicly available specific directory services



13/23

("red pages") including useful search functions/engines [35]? Can users directlyaccess a specific contact persons via e-mail/internet forms or templates [37]? Isthere a feedback mechanism (towards both specific and unspecific contacts)[38, 39]?

How did you enhance the service portfolio with e-democracy andparticipation services over time? Do you have any detailed plans in place, howand when to enhance your service portfolio with such participation services [A,B]? In case you have incorporated e-democracy services/offerings: Did theimplementation of your e-government program improve, accelerate, slow downor become more complicated [L]? Did e-democracy services/offerings sup-port/stimulate the cooperation between private interest groups or business,

communities [I]? What "lessons learned" can you derive from theimplementation process? On looking back, what elements or approacheswould you plan/change today?

To what extent do you display political decision processes and events in theweb, on your portal, or on any other comparable platform [36]? How frequently

make citizens and businesses use of this offering/information? How do you makesure that for citizens and businesses the legislative procedures and decisionmaking processes are entirely transparent [34]? How do you make sure that



14/23

the information provided on the platform is relevant and up-to-date [32]?



15/23

IV. Change Management dynamic criteria

Please provide us with a brief overview of the implementation approach youchose for your e-government program/strategy (starting point, history, significantevents, political responsibility, budget/resource allocation, etc.) [P].

Please describe the current organizational structure of your e-governmentprogram/program team [49]. How large is the team? What kind ofteamcomposition did you choose? To what extent (how) do politicians support thisteam? At which level of hierarchy has this team been installed?

How was the crafting of a vision/strategy and transforming it into concisestrategic goals and targets done [47, P]? Did you systematically conductcomparative studies with competing regions and cities, or with international



16/23

best practice candidates [46]? How did you transform the e-governmentvision/strategy into detailed guidelines and targets which are now beingrealized and transformed by individual teams [47, P]? Is there any standardized,comprehensive coordination process with superior and inferior public bodiesand institutions (federal, regional and local authorities)? Are there anycooperations, pooling of resources and facilities with external providers and

partners [48]?

Please explain briefly the implemented systems/mechanisms in order tocontrol the overall e-government program as well as smaller individual projectswithin the scope of the overall project. Is there a comprehensive, compliant and

regularly updated "project master plan" [50]? Did you establish an empoweredprogram-controlling function? Did you develop and implement a key indicatormanagement for resource allocation and budgeting purposes [51]? Comparedwith the overall e-government program, what percentage of your availableresources did you assign for the project controlling and program management?

Is there any comprehensive portfolio analysis of all your e-governmentprojects, being regularly updated? How (which mechanisms) did you prioritize



17/23

the various e-government projects [50]?

To what extent do you communicate the strategic approach, programtargets and progressof your e-government programs to the public? By what kind of media? Howoften do you publish these targets [52]?

To what degree are employees involved in the development, composition and

implementation of your e-government program [53]? What communicationchannels do you use to inform and involve employees? Do you have explicitemployee training and qualification programs tailored to the specific needs



18/23

of every employee [54]? Did you align/synchronize the personal targets of everyemployee to support the e-government program? Are there anyincentives/motivation programs for employees in place focusing on thesupport of your e-government program [55]?



19/23

V. Assessment and key figures

We now would like to ask you to assess some statements by simplymarking the respective column (1= totally agree, 7= totally disagree, 4=neutral):

Statement

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Totallyagree

Partially

agree

Ratheryes

Neutral

Ratherno

Do notagree

Totallydisagr

ee

Citizens expect us to offerpersonalized electronic services;they want to be treated ascustomers having a real choice [F].

By imbedding participation features,the acceptance of e-government

overall increased significantly [G].

The major difficulties ofimplementing e-government werenot caused by internal problems butsimply by lack of resources.

First we were skeptical with regardto participation of citizens; However,since we incorporated participationservices,e-government can be implementedfaster and easier [L].

The participation in forums forcitizens and in decision makingprocesses stimulate businesses projects can be planned better andmore efficiently and implementedfaster [J].

If we were to launch e-governmentagain, we would think less in termsof technology, consider more theuser perspective, and design ourservices around their benefits.

Our legal mission equally comprisesthe promotion of electronic servicedelivery and participation servicesfor citizens on the basis of newtechnological possibilities [C].

The target group for electronicservice delivery and e-democracyservices is identical [D]

(IT) Systems and processes for

electronic and e-democracy servicesalmost correspond with each other[O, E]



20/23



21/23

We would further like to ask you to answer the following quantitativequestions (if the figures are available to you)

Question Statement

How large was/is the budget (respectively the

given IT resources) from 1998 to 2001, and whatpart of the budget was/is assigned to electronicservices delivery and e-democracy services?

How many employees (project team members)were/are necessary from 1998 to 2001 for thedevelopment and implementation of electronicservices delivery and e-democracy services?

How many online transactions (electronicservices) per year are performed- by users of e-democracy offerings/services?- by users only interested in electronic servicedelivery (and not using any of the e-democracyservices offered)?

How many online transactions (electronicservices) does an e-democracy "customer"perform before and after having used e-democracy offerings for the first time?

What are the comparable costs for an online vs.an offline consultation process of citizens andbusinesses (planning procedure, coordination,referendum, hearings, etc.)?

How many online visits and transactions(electronic services) per year are performed- by users with a personalized entry portal?- by users without a personalized entry portal?

How many users/visitors of your web offerings hadtheir entry portal personalized?

How many e-democracy and participation servicesusers/customers do you have?

On average, how many entries, comments,opinion polls, etc. are done per e-democracyuser/customer?

How many new formations of private and

economic interest groups per year can beobserved before and after the implementation ofe-democracy and participation services on yourweb-portal?

How many "first-time" users took the advantage ofelectronic or e-democracy services in 2000 and2001?

How many business users/customers utilized- electronic service delivery?- e-democracy and participation service offerings?

What is the ratio of businesses using your services

offline vs. online?How many litigations / suits result from an onlineplanning process request and how many suits



22/23

result from an offline planning process requestedby businesses?



23/23

VI. General information on the interview partner and theorganization

We kindly ask you to give us some information on your organization, yourposition, and your responsibilities. We would very much appreciate any

demographic data (population in your area, economical structure, number ofemployees of your organization, etc.).

2001 Berteslmann Interview Guideline

Documents

Transcript of 2001 Berteslmann Interview Guideline