eTropolisReport

8/3/2019 eTropolisReport

1/36

Report on the useof electronic networksin cities

Is your city an eTropolis?

This report was prepared by

The Center for Strategic Technology Research


2/36

About this report

This report is based on a series of case

studies performed in the Spring and

Summer of 1999. The research primarily

consisted of on-site interviews covering

18 technology initiatives in nine locali-

ties. These interviews were complement-

ed by extensive secondary research into

initiatives in many other localities.

This research was conducted by

The Center for Strategic Technology

Research. Primary researchers were

Mark A. Jones and Tony J. Costa.

2 Copyright 1999. Andersen Consulting. All Rights Reserved.


3/36

5 Is your city an eTropolis?

This section discusses the types of initiatives taking place

worldwide. It will help civic and organizational leaders

understand how activities that are currently taking place

in their city stack up against world standards.

6 The Initiative Classification Framework

8 Standalone Applications

10 Integrated Applications

12 Meta-Applications

15 Key areas for concern

Pulling off a successful initiative is difficult. In this

section, eight key areas for concern are discussed in light

of the case studies. Recommendations for overcoming

these challenges are also presented.

16 Overview

18 Fit

20 Comprehensive Approaches22 Buy-in & Commitment

24 Maintaining Cross-Organizational Applications

26 Actionable Visions

28 Systemic Relationships

30 Technological Change

32 Personality & Culture

Copyright 1999. Andersen Consulting. All Rights Reserved. 3

Table of Contents


4/36

Rarely, there are cities

that attempt to rethink

how services are delivered

to an entire portion of the

population.


5/36

Cities everywhere are rushing to

embrace the potential that computing

and communications technologies offer

to transform cities into more economi-

cally and socially prosperous places tolive. Current initiatives vary widely in

terms of their ambition and how much

they impact city life. For the most part,

cities focus on relatively straightforward

applications that make it easier to access

existing information or automate rou-

tine services.

In rare instances, however, there are

cities that attempt to rethink how serv-

ices are delivered to an entire portion ofthe population, or they reengineer inter-

organizational processes across entire

industry sectors to gain new levels of

efficiency. These cities are on the road

to becoming an "eTropolis", a city that

uses technology to fundamentally

change how it works.

Initiatives

Mapping initiatives into the Initiative

Classification Framework will help civic

and organizational leaders understand

the kinds of activities that are currentlytaking place in their city. This report

will discuss benefits and challenges for

each of the three types of initiatives.

This report will also help city leaders

determine if their city is on the road to

true transformational change.

Initiatives fall into one of three classifi-

cations:

1. Most initiatives are StandaloneApplications that can be successfully

developed by a single organization.

These applications range from simple

online information repositories to

sophisticated eCommerce applica-

tions.

2. Some initiatives bring together mul-

tiple organizations to jointly create

Integrated Applications based on a

shared vision for how technology

can help all of the organizationsfunction. By combining the resources

of complementary organizations,

these initiatives can leverage scale

and broader expertise to deliver

greater benefit for their locations.

3. And, only rarely, there are cities that

attempt to create Meta-Applications.

These initiatives rethink how services

are delivered to an entire portion of

the population or reengineer inter-organizational processes across

entire industry sectors.


Is your city an eTropolis?


6/36


Three levels of development

In general, there are three levels of initia-

tive development within cities. These lev-

els describe the ambitiousness of initia-

tives and their intended impact. In a

Wired City, most activity centers on

Standalone Applications such as online

forms and information repositories devel-

oped by a city agency. In a NetworkedCity, organizations also form partnerships

with other local organizations to jointly

create Integrated Applications, such as

real-time data sharing applications. In an

eTropolis, the most complex level, organi-

zations attempt to develop standards and

protocols that govern data sharing, busi-

ness processes, and electronic transactions

across many levels. These Meta-

Applications can be expansive in their

scale and may touch hundreds of organi-

zations within a city or, in some instances,

an entire geographic region.

The InitiativeClassificationFramework


7/36


Standalone Applications

Standalone Applications are thesimplest initiatives and are almostalways the product of a singleorganization. They are best whentargeted at defined user popula-tions such as small businesses orsenior citizens that have common

sets of needs. StandaloneApplications usually extend existingproducts or services or aggregateinformation from publicly availablesources such as government agen-cies, community organizations orusers.

- Online access to content- Routine transactions anyplace,

anytime

- Easy to implement and quick togenerate a return on investment

- Leverages and extends existingproducts and services

- Provides increased exposure toexisting and new user popula-tions

- Lowers transaction coststhrough automation

Integrated Applications

Integrated Applications are theresult of a joint effort by multipleorganizations to implement ashared vision or pursue a commoninterest in a given market. Often,these initiatives involve data orinformation sharing among partici-

pating organizations. In someinstances, new channels are devel-oped to support or deliver productsand services.

- Integration of products andservices from multiple organiza-tions

- New channels for gaining accessto products and services

- Intelligent bundling of productsand services

- Achieves greater efficiencies ofscale, lowering overall costs

- Generates new data and infor-mation assets through aggrega-tion

- Makes better use of informa-tion, services, and resourcesfrom multiple organizations

Meta-Applications

Meta-Applications are the mostcomplex and ambitious initiativesorganizations and cities can under-take. Meta-Applications dramatical-ly restructure the ways in which anentire industry, sector or city inter-acts and delivers products and serv-

ices. As such, Meta-Applicationsrequire the involvement of manyorganizations throughout the city.

- Products and services are organ-ized around user needs andintentions

- Comprehensive access to multi-ple services through one source

- Ensures continuity of serviceacross many organizations andlocations

- Streamlines business-to-busi-ness interactions

- Enables organizations to focuson their core competencies

- Creates competitive advantagesfor an entire industry, sector orcity

Efficient standaloneapplications will makelife more convenient.

Meta-Applicationscreate new structuresthat dramatically improvehow cities function.

Connected organizationswill create new channelsand efficiencies.

Description

UserBenefits

OrganizationBenefits


8/36


At the most basic level are freestanding

applications that create or extend serv-

ice capabilities of a single organization.

Sometimes, these applications are man-

aged by one organization, but use data

or information from other sources, such

as government agencies or the resident

population. Their operation and direc-

tion however are controlled by the core

organization.

Every city will have hundreds or thou-

sands of initiatives in this category, and

they are the first step in getting local

organizations prepared to participate in

more complex initiatives in the future.

Common characteristics of Standalone

Applications include:

- Primarily freestanding with a high

level of independence from other

organizations

- When successful, they focus on a

well defined user population

- Use existing data from government

agencies, community organizations

or users

Benefits

The benefits of initiatives in this area

are many.

User benefits

- Added convenience for users. By

providing essential services in new

ways or adding value to common

interactions, these initiatives add a

new level of convenience to routine

activities.

Organizational Benefits

- Easy to implement. Because these

initiatives are the product of a single

organization, they tend to be easy to

implement. Often, they can be go

from concept to operation relatively

quickly and with low cost.

- Quick wins.While many of the ben-

efits of computing and communica-

tions technologies are focused on

long-term gains spread over a large

audience, initiatives in this area

present a panacea of quick wins that

can begin to capture benefits in the

short-term and grow over time into

larger, more ambitious initiatives.


Standalone Applications are the first step in getting local

organizations prepared to participate in more complex initiativesin the future.


9/36


- Build on existing services. Rather

than require an entirely new infra-

structure or organizational frame-

work, these initiatives build on and

extend existing product and service

offerings. This has the benefit of

capitalizing on existing investments.

- Increased exposure. By leveraging

the ubiquity of electronic networks,

organizations can tap into a larger

audience for their services.

- Lower transaction costs. By leverag-

ing the capabilities of computing

and communications technologies,

many organizations, businesses and

city governments can dramatically

lower their transaction costs by

launching initiatives in this area.

Many eGovernment initiatives focus

on cost reduction.

InfopimeBy aggregating publicly available data-bases from several government agencies,Infopime provides small businesses within

Barcelona with a valuable marketing andresearch tool that helps them plan andbuild their business. In addition to statis-tical data, which can be viewed for all ofBarcelona or just a single neighborhood,Infopime provides a business directory ofall 170,000 business in Barcelona, discus-sion forums, import and export opportu-nities, monographs by industry specialistson current business issues, and more.Although much of this data is availablefrom different government agencies, mostsmall businesses and entrepreneurs lackthe resources and technical ability tointegrate the different databases anddevelop the sophisticated data miningtools that Infopime has. By providing thisvalue added service, small businesses havea unique and powerful tool that helpsthem more intelligently plan and launchnew ventures.

Helsinki Arena 2000A consortium partnership betweenHelsinki Telephone Company (HPY) andthe City of Helsinki, Helsinki Arena 2000is an endeavor to build a three-dimen-sional VRML model of the entire city.When completed, this virtual city willbecome a city portal through which resi-dents and visitors will be able to accessevery cultural, commercial and publicservice offered in Helsinki. One of themost successful components of the proj-ect is a 3D interactive model of theLasipalatsi, a cultural arts center in theheart of Helsinki.

Blacksburg Electronic VillageThe oldest Internet-based communitynetwork in the United States, Blacksburg

Electronic Village's (BEV) goal is build avirtual complement to the physical com-munity, investigate the factors that com-prise a successful community networkand create a model that can help othertowns and communities to build elec-tronic community networks. To date, BEVhas provided residents with an electronictown square where local organizationscan post information, establish electronicmailing lists and advertise their services.With 85% of its 36,000 residents usingthe Internet daily, local organizationssuch as churches and volunteer groupsare fundamentally changing the ways inwhich they interact with residents.

New York City AccessCity Access is an ambitious project inNew York City that is giving residentsaccess to essential city services throughkiosks located throughout the city.Services offered at kiosks include: job andhousing assistance and opportunities;food and public assistance programs;adult and child services; parking rulesand regulations; and senior citizen bene-fits and entitlements. The kiosks alsoallow residents to find out about andcheck the status of parking summonses,real estate taxes and building violations.Parking tickets and real estate taxes canalso be paid at kiosks using a credit cardor debit card.

Case Studies:Standalone Applications

In Helsinki, a sophisticated 3D modelof the city has been developed tofunction as the primary means of

accessing geographically basedservices throughout the city.


10/36


The next level of initiatives involves the

development and creation of Integrated

Applications. These applications are the

result of a combination of compatible

capabilities from multiple organizations

that have a shared vision or common

interest in a given market or domain.

By their very nature, Integrated

Applications often require participating

organizations to alter their internal

processes and systems. Successful initia-

tives overcome tensions caused by

inter-organizational efforts through

trust-building and structured collabora-

tive processes, which are discussed later

in this report.

Common characteristics of these initia-

tives include:

- Formal data sharing agreements

with other organizations

- A strong dependence on and inte-

gration of other organizations into

products or services

- Products or services are based on

mutually exclusive organizational

capabilities

Examples of initiatives in this area are

presented below. These initiatives rep-

resent some of the types of efforts that

focus on developing Integrated

Applications that connect multiple

organizations.

Benefits

Benefits in this area build on and

extend those that are generated for

Standalone Applications.

User Benefits

- Integration of products and services

from multiple organizations. Overall

quality of services is increased due

to organizations combining comple-

mentary expertise to offer richer

service offerings.


- Efficiencies of scale. Organizations

participating in shared services such

as procurement reap benefits

through efficiencies of scale that

reduce costs for al partners. A sec-

ondary benefit is spreading the over-

all risk associated with an applica-

tion through the sharing of

resources and access to greater user

pull.

- New data manipulation through

aggregation. Businesses will have

access to customer data previously

unavailable. When data is combined

from multiple sources, it becomes

more valuable due to new abilities

to compare data, cover a larger area,

or coordinate organizational activi-

ties.


Integrated applications can leverage scale and broader expertise

to deliver greater benefit for their locations than possibleby any one organization.


11/36


BarcelonaNetActivaBuilding off of resources and knowledgegained from BarcelonaActiva, a tradition-al business incubator that provides space,

expertise, and consulting to start-upbusinesses, BarcelonaNetActiva is the firstvirtual business incubator in Europe.BarcelonaNetActiva provides start-upbusinesses many of the essential servicesonline that they would get traditionally.And their approach goes a step towardsseamless integration of information frommultiple service providers. This enablesBarcelonaActiva to serve many more busi-nesses than its physical infrastructuresupports. Services offered include: newsand statistics; access to online industryexperts and consultants; a virtual"Business School" that used CBT to teachbest practices, technology fundamentalsand management skills; as well as severalonline business forums, idea exchangesand billboards for posting ads.

Health Forum/AikenThe Outcomes Tool Kit, developed byHealth Forum, provides community healthorganizations a systemic way to plan,

organize, coordinate, and measure thedelivery of health related services withina community. The Tool Kit functions as anInternet-based, shared database thatdocuments the areas of involvement andactivities of all community health organi-zations. By incorporating benchmarkingand key quality of life indicators, commu-nities can measure the progress of eachorganization and assess how well organi-zations are working to solve a givenproblem. The Tool Kit also enables theorganizations to collaborate with eachother and share data with their peers,resulting in even better delivery ofhealth-related services.

Toronto/NetvilleNetville is a pseudonym for a wired resi-dential development of about 100 homeslocated in suburban Toronto. The initia-

tive was sponsored by a consortium ofcompanies that were brought together toprovide complementary technology andcontent expertise. The consortium had avision of a world where of variety ofadvanced high-bandwidth services couldbe delivered to consumers in wired com-munities. The housing developmentserved as an experimental prototype of afuturistic community hosting advancedservices such as fast Internet connectivity,online educational CD-ROMs, a music-on-demand jukebox, point-to-point videowithin the neighborhood (really a form ofvideo conferencing) and a communityhealthcare application. The consortiumhad an interest in understanding theimpact of new broadband online serviceson community residents, with an eyetowards identifying lucrative markets forthe future.

Case Studies:Integrated Applications

Barcelona has launched a series of smallbusiness development initiatives thataggregate information from manysources into vital resources that individ-ual small businesses couldnt afford ontheir own.


12/36


Meta-Applications are the most complex

and ambitious initiatives organizations

and cities can launch. These initiatives

seek to dramatically restructure the

ways in which an entire industry, sector,

or city functions. As such, Meta-

Applications require the involvement of

many businesses and organizations

throughout the city. The end result of

these initiatives has a profound impact

on the way in which processes take

place, products and services get deliv-

ered and organizations interact with one

another.

Common characteristics of Meta-

Applications include:

- Involvement by an entire industry or

business sector

- High levels of integration between

participating organizations

- Defined standards and processes that

govern organization behavior

Benefits

As with the Integrated Applications,

Meta-Applications incorporate all the

benefits of the other initiatives as well

as add several unique benefits. These

benefits are as follows.

User Benefits

- Products and services are organizedaround user needs and intentions.

Services are organized around entire

lifestyle activity sets, so that users

are aware of available services as

they require them without having to

independently identify appropriate

resources.

- Comprehensive access to multiple

services at one time. By aggregating

several related services, it is possibleto create a valuable bundle of offer-

ings. Often, the applications being

combined will come from different

organizations, but it will appear as

one single application. This intelli-

gent bundling of products and serv-

ices only gives the user the informa-

tion and services they need from

each organization in the services

offering.

- Streamlines interaction.As organi-

zations coordinate how they handle

data and user information, residents

will be able to use the system as if it

Meta-Applications

Meta-Applications dramatically restructure how an entireindustry or service sector within a city functions.


13/36


were operated by a single organiza-

tion. This simplifies the manner in

which users acquire services from

organizations.


- Streamlines business-to-business

interactions. By providing stan-

dards, architectures and defined

processes for interactions, these ini-

tiatives enable businesses and

organizations to streamline interac-

tions the have with one another.

This results in greater speed, lower

costs and more integrated products

and services.

- Enables organizations to focus on

their core competencies. Having

numerous organizations address the

needs of a user segment allows

organizations to focus on the areas

in which they excel.

- Creates competitive advantages for

an entire industry, sector or city.

Systemic inefficiencies, particularly

that are imposed by government

agencies with broad exposure, create

a drag on all organizations that

interact with them. Re-engineered

processes allow all organizations to

operate more efficiently, so that they

can improve service levels and

reduce costs.

Smart Valley Smart PermitsSmart Permits, a new way to deliver con-struction permits and manage construc-tion projects, is the result of a four-year

collaboration among public and privatepartners in Silicon Valley. The Smart Valleycoalition enlisted the involvement of allof the organizations that could potential-ly have been affected by changes in thepermitting process. There were represen-tatives from architecture, government,engineering and construction, as well asthe delivery of public services. Eventually,the group committed to the developmentof a custom software package that wouldallow the management of permits acrossthe various parties involved in the con-struction industry. The result is a processthat changes the way the entire industrydoes business. Early results from the ini-tial test cities (Los Gatos and Sunnyvale,California) have shown significant eco-nomic benefit from the application. Thetime required to issue constructionlicensing has been cut in half, from 10 to5 days in Los Gatos. Meanwhile, 95% ofpermits now get processed in one day inSunnyvale. Businesses benefit becausetheir work process is simpler and morestreamlined, saving time and money.Residents and businesses benefit becausetheir houses and facilities will be com-pleted faster.

Next Generation CitiesNext Generation Cities is a San Francisco-based public-private partnership seekingto develop an Internet-based infrastruc-

ture for enabling community-based elec-tronic networks to function. The goal ofthe initiative is the creation of a DigitalCommunity Network, which consists of aseries of electronic services that include aTrusted Public Databank, IntelligentBusiness Registries and privacy filters forconsumers. Together, these services func-tion as a Municipal Operating Systemthat both streamlines and stimulatesinteraction between governmental agen-cies, businesses and citizens. If it is suc-cessful, this initiative will create a set ofdata protocols, standards and processesfor combining currently incompatibleinformation. Initial applications areplanned for the commercial real estateindustry as well as services for small busi-ness in the South of Market area of SanFrancisco.

Case Studies:Meta-Applications

The san Francisco Bay Area has beenat the forefront of rethinking how

electronic networks can be usedto restructure the ways in which

government, businesses and individualsinteract with one another.


14/36

Initiatives with thetalent, resources

and determinationto succeed often faildue to inattentionto a key issue.


15/36


Creating a successful initiative is very

difficult. It requires not only the talent,

resources and determination to make it

succeed, but also an awareness of and

the ability to overcome issues that can

have a detrimental effect on the out-

come of the initiative. And depending

on the level of sophistication of the ini-

tiative, these issues, or key areas for

concern, will vary.

For example, in relatively simple initia-

tives like electronic bulletin boards or

many eCommerce applications, issues

like how well the application fits intothe user's existing activities or whether

or not training is provided will have a

big influence on the application's suc-

cess.

As an initiative's application becomes

more complex, perhaps involving the

participation of other organizations, new

areas of concern arise. In such a case,

achieving and maintaining buy-in or

ensuring that other organizations stay

on board will be important to consider.

At yet a higher level of complexity,

where initiatives seek to address city-

wide audiences, new areas of concern

arise. These will have to do with under-

standing the systemic relationships that

exist between hundreds of organizations

and being able to co-develop visionswith them that empower them and direct

their efforts in productive ways.

At the same time, all initiatives should

also be aware of overarching areas of

concern, or influencing factors, such as

technological change and differences in

personality and culture among users.

These underlying forces can undermine

even the most promising initiatives

unless leaders plan accordingly.

In this section, these key areas for con-

cern are addressed. Recommendations

for dealing with and overcoming these

areas for concern are also presented.

Key areas for concern


16/36



FitCurrent thinking: Access to technology isthe biggest barrier to technology adop-tion. If you give people access to equip-ment, train them and provide them withapplications, they will use them. Finding:Access to technology does not make

people want to do things that they werenot interested in before.Recommendation: Augmenting andextending existing activities provides aneasy entry point for bringing in newusers.

Comprehensive ApproachesCurrent thinking: Getting an applicationup and running is the biggest task ini-tiatives face. Finding: Getting an applica-tion up and running is only half the bat-tle. Recommendation: Add in to applica-tion plan: training, best practices, tie-into other organizations, packaged solu-tions, ongoing support, etc.

Key Areasfor Concern

The Initiative Classification Framework:

Key Areas for Concern


17/36



Buy-in & CommitmentCurrent thinking: People think thatcentralized control is the best way tomanage projects that involve the par-ticipation of many organizations.Finding: Many participating organiza-tions drop out of initiatives when they

are required to commit their resourcesbecause they have not fully boughtinto the initiative's vision.Recommendation: Use leadership toguide, take the time up front to involvekey organizations in decision makingand use coalitions and neutral thirdparties to build trust.

Maintaining Cross-organizationalApplicationsCurrent thinking: When aggregatingcontent from multiple organizations,guidelines and protocols need to beestablished to ensure the desired levelof quality and consistency. Finding: Theresults of many cross-organizationalinitiatives are diminished by lack of fol-low through by individual organiza-tions. Recommendation: Establishmechanisms to ensure accountabilityby participating organizations.

Meta-Applications

Actionable VisionsCurrent thinking: Organizations havegood intentions and given the properfunding they will do things that benefitthe city. This is especially so when itcomes to current efforts to promotetechnology use in cities. Finding:

Without guidance or direction, theseorganizations will have limited impact onthe city. Recommendation: In order toachieve the desired impact, cities need toco-develop a tailored, actionable visionfor how technology can improve theircity with the participation of the organi-zations and people that will be responsi-ble for implementing it.

Systemic RelationshipsCurrent thinking: People look at lots ofactivity as evidence of progress. Finding:People don't realize that if they appliedthe same money and people differently,they would achieve even greaterprogress. Recommendation: Conduct asystemic analysis of your city to identifysystemic relationships that can be takenadvantage of when planning, developingand running initiatives.

Influencing Factors

Technological ChangeCurrent thinking: Using cutting-edgetechnology in applications is the bestway to ensure that they will be useful forthe long term. Finding: Technology willcontinually change. Recommendation:Plan for change, go for quick wins and

don't get tied to one technology.

Personality & CultureCurrent thinking: All we need to do iswait for society to catch up with tech-nology in order to create mass applica-tions; it's only a matter of time. Finding:Cultural and personal attitudes runextremely deep, and late adopters areunlikely to ever turn into technologyenthusiasts. Recommendation: Assumethat late adopters will remain skepticalof technology, and employ communica-tion and training strategies to compen-sate for engrained attitudes.


18/36


Summary

Current thinking:Access to technology is the biggest barrier to

technology adoption. If you give people access to equipment,

train them and provide them with applications, they will use

them. Finding:Access to technology does not make people

want to do things that they were not interested in before the

introduction of technology. Recommendation:Augmenting and

extending existing activities provides an easy entry point for

bringing in new users.

Findings

Access to technology does not make people want to do things

that they were not interested in before.

1. Involvement is not an access issue.A three year pilot in

Montgomery County, Virginia, equipped the families of

every child in a fifth grade class with a computer, Internet

connectivity and training to use computers as well as

online educational content. One goal was to make it easier

for parents to be involved with their children's education,

and to communicate more often with teachers. Results to

date indicate that parents who were already involved with

their children's education used the technology, while the

technology did not make the other parents participate

more actively.

2. Free access doesnt benefit non-users. Blacksburg, Virginia

also placed public access computers in the local library,

hoping to target people who didnt own computers.

Surveys of people using the computers indicated that the

vast majority of people using the library computers already

had a computer at home and were using the computers as

a supplement when they went to the library. It turned out

that the target audience, people without computers at

home, were not regular library users and were not going to

start going to the library now that they provided computer

access. A similar initiative in Aiken, South Carolina tried

to place computers in a laundry center, figuring that the

under-served already go there, but residents did not seem

interested in learning about computers while they did

laundry.

3. Developers treat the population as homogeneous. This is

due to two reasons: First, many developers are rightly con-

cerned about equal access to technology. Secondly, appli-

cations are often driven by available content, not by what

individual users may want or need. In Sweden, visions of

the Information Society reinforce the notion that everyone

will be equal participants in an information rich age. In a

section of Stockholm, one initiative offered applications

for the community with a diverse set of content drawn

from local sources, none of which would appeal to very

many people. After a spike of initial interest based on

curiosity, usage dropped off to almost nothing.

Recommendations

Often new technology succeeds because it meshes closely with

activities that people already care about or must do.

- Ground applications in the existing use context. Rather

than propose entirely new ways of working, successful

applications often enhance established processes and activ-

ities by making them function more efficiently or effec-

tively. In Manchester, England a technology training and

enablement organization found it difficult to communicate

the benefits of computerization to many small businesses

involved in light manufacturing. It was not until they

showed the small businesses a sales catalog and order

entry application that they got interested. Seeing the tech-nology used in a way that helped them augment an activi-

ty they cared about made the value apparent.

This success extends to many applications. By grounding

applications in the existing use context, successful applica-

tions become tightly integrated into the services and activ-

ities that are commonly accessed by users. This enables

applications to be easily integrated into a user's lifestyle,

Fit

Without compelling applications that fit with users lifestyles

and existing activities, users will not adopt technology.


19/36


activities or processes with minimal cost and effort. It also

ensures that applications are developed in such a way that

they are adding value to user activities.

- Streamline existing processes and activities. This provides

an entry point for adoption. Online banking has succeeded

because it streamlines a process that people already do. In

Sweden, over 35% of Internet users bank online. And

many successful online applications make existing tasks

more efficient or pleasant. In The Hague, over 50,000 peo-

ple used an online apartment registration service because it

saved them significant time going to government offices.

Since most users are not technologically driven, they usu-

ally find it unacceptable to change their processes or activ-

ities to conform to a new technology. They expect technol-

ogy to support their activity rather than direct it.

- Target applications narrowly.When developers target nar-

rower user population segments, it becomes easier to cus-

tomize content that closely matches users needs, which in

turn leads to more use. In Blacksburg, Virginia, a discus-

sion group about education was unsuccessful. The topic

was vague, and people did not know how to focus the dis-

cussion. But in the same location, a discussion group

among social science teachers in the region was very suc-

cessful, since these people had a clearly identifiable focus,

issues that needed to be discussed and a shared context for

setting the discussion.

The social-science listserv succeeds because it is targeted at

a specific audience, and based on the right level of popula-

tion granularity. An analysis of most user segments usual-

ly shows that they are actually composed of several specif-

ic user segments, with each having its own set of charac-

teristics that can be supported better by tailored efforts.

- Establish feedback loops. Feedback loops should be estab-

lished to gain the desired level of input from developers

and users throughout the development process. This

ensures that the applications developed are relevant to user

needs. Feedback needs to vary during different phases of

the development process: it should be extensive during

conceptualization (want as many ideas as possible); limited

during implementation (don't want too many chefs); and

increased somewhat during operations (to find errors, bugs,

usability problems).

The Hague, Netherlands, has leveragednearly universal access to teletext tooffer popular services such as electronicregistration and tracking of applicationsfor public apartments.


20/36


Summary

Current thinking: Getting an application up and running is the

biggest task initiatives face. Finding: Getting an application up

and running is only half the battle. Recommendation:Add in to

application plan: training, best practices, tie-into other organ-

izations, packaged solutions, ongoing support, etc.

Findings

Getting an application up and running is often only the

beginning of efforts. Application developers are often caught

by surprise when they place an application out for public use.

While application developers are reticent to take responsibility

for things outside the scope of the application, in reality, suc-

cess may depend upon it.

1. Users need education to understand what the application

can do for them. Even the best conceived applications

need additional support to make then fly. Barcelona's

Infopime is a potentially valuable application for small

businesses. However, when the developers held promotion-

al sessions throughout the city to explain the application,

they encountered a user population that was mostly uned-

ucated about the Internet and online applications. They

found that their target audience needed a basic computer

and Internet education before they could understand the

value of Infopime.

2. Training needs are often greater than developers expect.

The Health Forum Outcomes Toolkit is an application for

health agencies to jointly create community health goals

and establish common reporting metrics. The developers

planned for and held training sessions for all users, but

were surprised to find that many users were new to com-

puters. They found it difficult to complete effective train-

ing in the allotted time and budget.

3. Ongoing support is key for novice users. Many of the resi-

dents of a wired residential community near Toronto were

novice computer users when they moved onto the experi-

mental neighborhood. The project coordinators were pre-

pared to assist new users purchase a computer, set up their

equipment and provide several training sessions on com-

puter basics and how to use the pilot applications. But the

team was unprepared for the high levels of ongoing tech-

nical support that the residents required to keep their

equipment running properly. And as residents began to use

more applications, they continually encountered new prob-

lems. The team had to set up a full-time help desk on the

fly and was continually burdened by unexpected support

costs.

Recommendations

Incorporate marketing, training and support into initial project

budgets and plans. Because the majority of users are not

innate believers in technology, developers need to help them

understand how applications relate to and improve their daily

activities. By focusing on providing applications, infrastruc-

ture and training in a single area at one time, many of the

barriers to success, such as the lack of support, can be elimi-

nated. Taking a comprehensive approach enables leaders and

developers to pull in a critical mass of organizations and resi-

dents needed for most applications to succeed.

Marketing

- Document and promote best practices. Best practices help

users see how others are using technology and how it is

adding value. It gives them something concrete that they

can relate to their situation. In addition, with references of

others who have had success with an application, later

adopters gain the necessary confidence they need to startusing the technology.

- Promote a few select features. Rather than promote all of

an application's features, choose a select few that apply

most directly to the users being targeted. This enables

them to discern what real benefit is coming from the

application. Senior citizens, for example, react favorably

to being trained explicitly to send and receive email, rather

Comprehensive Approaches

Deciding whether or not to use an application is based on morethan the virtues of the application alone; users also considerthe availability of training and support, they need to understandhow it fits into their existing activities and how well it integrates

with their existing applications.


21/36


22/36


Summary

Current thinking: People think that centralized control is the

best way to manage projects that involve the participation of

many organizations. Finding: Many participating organizations

drop out of initiatives when they are required to commit their

resources because they have not fully bought into the initia-

tive's vision. Recommendation: Use leadership to guide, take the

time up front to involve key organizations in decision making

and use coalitions and neutral third parties to build trust.

Findings

Bringing together multiple organizations to develop common

solutions is not easy. This process tends to bring out latent

mistrust and tension between organizations that is often not

apparent at first.

1. Collaboration raises issues. The collaboration required to

implement visions often raises issues of trust, turf, control

and overlapping boundaries. Shared applications and

processes may require organizations to change their inter-nal operations to accommodate new structures. Sometimes

the very process of negotiating a new service structure will

lead organizations that did not view each other as com-

petitors to begin doing so. Complex healthcare coalitions

routinely encounter this problem. And the difficulties don't

stop once a project has been set up; many applications

require that ongoing data management and ownership be

distributed across several organizations.

2. Existing circumstances can make things even harder. Long

histories of mistrust or bad feelings exist in many loca-tions, especially between organizations that have overlap-

ping service areas. Many localities have a few power play-

ers that do not want to work with each other, or believe

that they do not need to work with other organizations to

succeed. In one location, the cable franchise felt that they

had an edge over the telephone company in delivering

advanced access services, and would not discuss any form

of cooperative agreement for area-wide coverage. Such

people and organizations have their own agendas and do

not want to commit to a process that may reduce their

powerful position, even when collaboration will benefit

them in the long run.

3. People fear committing to a process they don't under-

stand. This is particularly true when unfamiliar technolo-

gies are involved or when data is being entered into a

"black box." Healthcare applications have been particularly

difficult to get off the ground because of client concerns

over privacy and security. Organizations are understand-

ably afraid to release patient data out into the world. To

compensate, cities like Vienna that have created a closed

system with a limited number of partners have gained par-

ticipation. When all of the organizations and people hav-

ing access to the data, and reasons and methods of control

are clearly defined, organizations are more willing to par-

ticipate. On the other hand, open systems are very hard to

pull off.

4. Organizations lose enthusiasm for a project without a

clear value proposition.A consortium in Toronto with

dozens of members slowly fell apart over time as more and

more members realized that the project would not reap

them the benefits they had hoped for. Early participation

in an initiative does not equal commitment. Often an

organization will appear to be agreeing to the progress of

an initiative, waiting to see if things develop in desirable

ways. At some point they determine that there is not

enough value in the initiative to warrant the commitment

of resources to continue participation, and they drop out.

5. Organizations are unwilling to buy-in to a process oragreement that they were not a part of during its cre-

ation. The leaders of the wired community project near

Toronto wanted to get the local government and business-

es interested in developing content for the new communi-

ty. But they waited until the project was nearly up and

running before they enlisted their participation. By that

Buy-in & Commitment

Maintaining buy-in and commitment from many organizationsis best addressed by involving the organizations at every stage

of the planning and development process.


23/36


time there was little time and the local leaders felt that the

scale of the project was too small for them to participate.

Earlier contact would have given the local leaders a chance

to provide input that could have made made a better fit

possible.

Recommendations

To ensure that organizations remain committed to initiatives,

leaders need to establish processes and entities that are inclu-

sive of organizations throughout the planning and develop-

ment stages. Further, it requires leadership to play a facilita-

tive role rather than a driving role.

- Establish neutral third parties or form coalitions to bringorganizations together and achieve compromise solutions

that all organizations can accept. Initiatives do not imple-

ment themselves; they are put in place by people and

organizations. Getting buy-in is fundamentally a bottom-

up process that requires the active participation of all

organizations, and coalitions can give structure to thatprocess. Coalitions can provide a neutral forum that helps

overcome turf and boundary issues, enable shared owner-

ship, establish a common ground for making decisions and

define roles and structures to manage projects without

control and power issues. The Smart Valley initiative in

California received input from over 1000 people by using a

coalition. Every city can have many coalitions, each

focused on improving services for a particular user seg-

ment or rethinking business-to-business workflows.

Smart cities will use coalitions at each stage of the devel-opment process: creating visions, planning, building new

structures and managing projects. Accordingly, the compo-

sition of coalitions should change over time depending on

the projects stage. A coalition might be quite large during

the initial visioning stage, and then contract to the core

leaders during an operational phase.

- Use leadership to guide, not dictate. Leadership is clearly

critical to the success of cross-organizational initiatives.

Strong leadership does make a difference. The successful

health coalition in Aiken, South Carolina is due in part to

the thoughtful leadership by a small, but forward-thinking,

non-profit organization that helped others understand the

advantages of systems thinking. Leaders serve as champi-

ons to help get other people enthused, and their power can

help drive initiatives to completion or overcome obstacles.

But leaders cannot and shouldnt try to control how an

initiative develops. They should simply help direct its

course and keep the right people engaged.

Leaders that take on this role of being a facilitator of

change need be especially sensitive to people issues.

Leaders can be a critical part of the trust-building process

and should employ a wide variety of techniques to keep

developers and users at the table. They can use incentives

to get people involved, bring in or create a neutral third

party as needed, use tools that get diverse people working

together around common interests, and allow others to

take ownership, among other things.

Stockholm has developed one of themost comprehensive fiber optic networks

in the world, and competition amongInternet providers has kept access costs

among the lowest in Europe.


24/36


Summary

Current thinking:When aggregating content from multiple

organizations, getting organizations to contribute data and

setting up a database are the most critical tasks. Finding: The

results of many cross-organizational initiatives are diminished

by lack of follow through by individual organizations.

Recommendation: Establish mechanisms to ensure accountabili-

ty and consistency by participating organizations.

Findings

Despite the many benefits of aggregating and sharing data

across multiple organizations, many organizations are not

willing to commit the resources and make the changes

required for the initiative to fulfill expectations.

1. Initiatives require sustained, long-term commitments from

participants. In Singapore, the National Computer Board

established the Singapore ONE web site as part of its

IT2000 Master Plan. With the goal of transforming

Singapore into an information island, the NationalComputer Board enlisted the help of many organizations to

provide content and services. To help maintain cohesion

between these various services, common graphic standards

were provided to these organizations. Over time, however,

these organizations drifted away from the common look-

and-feel and began to submit content based on individual

preferences. For the organizations involved, the standards

did not provide them with a long-term solution that they

could live with.

2. Initiatives affect the internal operations of participants. InAiken, South Carolina, an informal group was formed by

local health organizations to address the issue of teen

pregnancy. Realizing that they were all involved in one

way or another with the issue, the organizations agreed

that sharing data would be a good first step. But the met-

rics they used to collect their data were incompatible with

one another. In order to get the organizations to collect a

compatible set of metrics, several organizations needed to

alter how they tracked progress.

3. Protocols for maintaining and managing the data are

unclear or ad hoc. Most community web sites set up a

database but do not account for how the data will be

updated. Participating organizations often update their

content irregularly, if at all. Unfortunately, a little poor

content brings down the overall impression of the site, and

end users often have little tolerance for poor quality.

Recommendations

Many of the problems of initiatives that aggregate or share

data across many organizations is the informal approach they

take with participating organizations. Initiatives and organiza-

tions need to approach these situations with the same vigor

and thoroughness that they give business-to-business relation-

ships.

- Clarify the value proposition for all members. When it

comes to the final analysis, sometimes a potential partner

may not have enough of a reason to participate in a sys-

tem that requires ongoing maintenance and attention. But

if there is real value for all partners, then they will commit

resources. An emergency response system in Winston

Salem, North Carolina gained support from all emergency

service providers in the region because centralizing data

allowed everyone to deliver superior, faster services.

- Identify the impact on participating organizations.Organizations that are not prepared for participation in a

shared data environment will often fall short in execution.

One community web site in Chicago found that clearly

outlining organizational responsibilities made things easier.

All participating organizations were required to attend

training, assign a specific person responsibility for submis-

Maintaining Cross-organizational Applications

Initiatives that involve the participation of many organizationscan generate great benefits, but organizations often do not com-

mit the resources needed to support the process.


25/36


sion and updates, and agree to a schedule of updates. This

helped alert the organizations to their expected commit-

ment up front, minimizing the fallout later on.

- Get resource commitments early in the process.

Consistent progress is more likely when particular individ-

uals, rather than organizations as a whole, are responsible

for following through with a commitment. People will not

make time for tasks unless they have final responsibility.

- Plan ahead. Give organizations enough time to ensure that

participating organizations are prepared to deliver quality

content. One city government knew that that all of its city

agencies would in the near future need to contribute data

to a regional Geographic Information System. They also

knew that this would entail process changes in most agen-

cies to comply with new standards. To prepare, all agencies

were asked to begin updating their processes to comply

with future standards two years before any technological

system was in place. This enabled them to make a smooth

transition to the new system when it came online.


26/36


Summary

Current thinking: Organizations have good intentions and given

the proper funding they will do things that benefit the city.

This is especially so when it comes to current efforts to pro-

mote technology use in cities. Finding:Without guidance or

direction, these organizations will have limited impact on the

city. Recommendation: In order to achieve the desired impact,

cities need to co-develop a tailored, actionable vision for how

technology can improve their city with the participation of the

organizations and people that will be responsible for imple-

menting it.

Details

City leaders fundamentally believe that local organizations

have good intentions and given the proper funding they will

do things that benefit the city. This is especially so when it

comes to current movements towards technology adoption in

cities.

In Europe, Asia and the Americas, governments at all levels

are active in advocating and funding initiatives focused on

introducing computing and communications technology into

all aspects of society. These projects have ranged from wiring

schools in the United States to installing extensive high-band-

width networks in Singapore to launching dozens of smaller

initiatives focusing on culture, small business and government

throughout Europe. Unfortunately, most of these projects have

met with mixed success. This is primarily due to three reasons:

1. Initiatives use funding to support work they are already

doing.At one small business assistance initiative that is

entirely dependent on local government funding, the ini-

tiative leader indicated that if a new political party were to

be elected in the upcoming election, they would only re-

message their project's activities to fit the agenda of the

new party. Despite the change in agenda, the initiative

would make few, if any, substantive changes to tie into the

new local agenda.

2. Initiatives are opportunistic.At a United Kingdom location,

a non-profit organization partnered with a university to

apply for a several million-dollar grant. Two years after

receiving the grant, little benefit had been realized from

the partnership. As it turned out, the partnership was

formed solely for the purposes of securing the grant (part-

nering was a requirement) and the services offered by the

non-profit went largely unused by organizations.

3. Initiative visions are unactionable.A multi-million dollar

trial that wired an entire residential community of one

hundred homes near Toronto established a grand vision for

on-demand services and high-speed links to healthcare and

educational resources. This vision was created by a core

group of initiative leaders, and it garnered great excitement

by residents and potential partners who were needed to

implement the vision. When it came time for these partners

to do actual development work, they dropped out of the

consortium. As it turned out, most partners, as well as

local educational and healthcare organizations, were

unwilling to dedicate their limited resources to a risky ini-

tiative that they had little input in shaping and were not

fully committed to.

Recommendations

Without guidance or direction at the local level, organizations

and initiatives are having limited impact on their city. In order

to achieve the expected level of impact, cities need to co-

develop clear and actionable visions that direct the efforts of

people, organizations and initiatives towards activities that are

aligned with local interests. This is best done through inclusiveprocesses that elicit the input and participation of all the

essential people and organizations involved in carrying out the

vision.

- Create compelling, actionable visions for the city.A com-

pelling vision of how technology can be used in your city

has the power to generate excitement and galvanize gov-

ernment, businesses, organizations and residents. People

Actionable Visions

Cities that develop local visions that are embracedand championed by local organizations will be able

to direct organizational effort in more effective ways.


27/36


want to be a part of a compelling future, and a vision that

specifically addresses how technology will benefit your

city provides the focus and direction to make that future a

reality.

These visions however also need to be actionable. It is not

enough to say that you are going to transform secondary

education with computers and Internet connectivity.

Visions need to go further, identifying tangible initiatives

such as creating an educational resource network that

allows secondary education to access underused University

science equipment or creating an online education pro-

gram with content from museums, zoos and cultural insti-

tutions. Moreover, don't assume that there is only one

monolithic vision for your city. Cities can and should have

many complimentary visions that address every aspect of

daily life.

- Reach broadly to develop visions and implement initia-

tives. Creating a citywide vision is fundamentally a bot-

tom-up process that requires the participation of govern-

ment, businesses, organizations and residents and the for-

mation of coalitions to structure to the process. Coalitions

of this type have been successfully used in locations such

as Aiken, South Carolina and at the Next Generation Cities

initiative. Smart cities will use these inclusive coalitions at

every stage of the visioning process from developing the

vision to the launching individual initiatives, changing the

composition of the coalition depending on the stage. A

coalition might be very large during the initial visioning

stage, including input from hundreds of people, and then

sub-divide into several smaller coalitions to tackle finer-

grained issues within a specific service sector.

- Modify visions over time so they adapt and respond to

change. In order for visions to retain their relevance and

applicability to your city, they need to be continually

revised to reflect changes that are taking place. Visions

that don't change over time run the risk of becoming irrel-

evant to organizations. This will erode support for the

vision and cause organizations to direct their efforts else-

where.

Antwerps Telepolis, a public/private part-nership corporation, developed a high-speed network throughout the region thatis helping to foster new business growth aswell as provide residents better access togovernment services and free email.


28/36


Summary

Current thinking: People look at lots of activity as evidence of

progress. Finding: People don't realize that if they applied the

same money and people differently, they would achieve even

greater progress. Recommendation: Conduct a systemic analysis

of your city to identify systemic relationships that can be

taken advantage of when planning, developing and running

initiatives

Details

Maximizing the potential of initiatives in a city requires a

holistic approach. Currently, there is a great deal of activity in

many cities, but the natural synergies that exist between ini-

tiatives are not being exploited. This is resulting in initiatives

that duplicate efforts, solve only part of a problem or operate

in isolation of each other.

1. Initiatives duplicate efforts. Since funding often comes

from many agencies and organizations, it is common for

initiatives in the same location to duplicate efforts. At onesite, an organization was given a grant to conduct a tech-

nology assessment survey of residents. Soon after the grant

was awarded, another organization in the city announced

the findings of a similar survey they conducted. Despite the

fact that the two surveys were nearly identical, the second

survey was conducted to comply with the funding guide-

lines that called for slightly different metrics than the other

survey used. The results of the two surveys were pre-

dictably similar.

2. Initiatives solve only a part of the problem. Too often, userenablement is happening without meaningful applications,

and applications are being built without enablement. Many

initiatives provide training and equipment without consid-

ering exactly what end users are going to do with it. In

rare instances, this is being inadvertently imposed on ini-

tiatives by the funding organizations. In Manchester,

England, limitations placed on funding prevented officials

from offering training in certain areas that were in high

need of their services. In most instances however, partial

solutions are the result of an "if you build it, they will

come" mentality.

3. Initiatives are isolated. Many related initiatives in a single

locality are operating in isolation of one another. In several

locations visited, most government agencies have initia-

tives underway to organize statistical data, building and

road information, as well as resident data based on geogra-

phy. Unfortunately, in most instances, each agency was

defining its own standards and was unaware of similar ini-

tiatives underway in other agencies. This is primarily

because of a lack of understanding of the complex inter-

relationships that exist between the organizations operat-

ing within a city.

Recommendations

Without a clear picture of how initiatives relate to one anoth-

er, initiatives are not able to leverage the capabilities and ben-

efits being generated by other initiatives. This results in ineffi-

cient and non-reinforcing efforts that, in most instances, limit

the impact of each initiative. Only by understanding who and

what is in your city can initiatives take full advantage of local

resources.

- Tool up. Cities are highly complex and inter-related enti-

ties. Fortunately, tools exist that can help cut through the

complexity and develop a clearer understanding of how all

the pieces fit together. For example, system maps and

process diagrams can illustrate what organizations exist in

a given area, which should be involved in an initiative andwhat types of interactions they will have. At a healthcare

initiative in the United States, a comprehensive systems

diagram was developed to help initiative leaders under-

stand how different organizations in their community were

addressing the issue of teen pregnancy. This diagram

helped them identify the complex interrelationships

between different initiatives, the gaps that were being filled

by unconventional (and unexpected) health organizations,

Systemic Relationships

By viewing their city as one large system of inter-related partsand accounting for it in their plans, cities can more effectively

make use of their limited local resources.


29/36


overlapping areas of interest and potential areas for col-

laboration.

- Look past traditional sector boundaries. Include all parties

that could potentially be affected by an outcome in the

planning. This means looking beyond traditional sector

definitions. At the Smart Permits initiative in California, a

wide variety of organizations were involved in what

appeared to be a simple online permitting initiative. This

initiative eventually included government agencies, archi-

tects, construction contractors, civil engineers, real estate

developers and landowners. The result was a system that

radically transformed the permitting process and benefited

a much greater number of organizations than originally

intended.

- Attack foundation areas first. Since many resident-facing

applications depend on business and government computer

systems, it is important that initiatives be targeted in these

areas first. This not only ensures that the essential building

blocks for other applications are in place, but it also gives

businesses and government the time they need to under-

stand the full capabilities and potential the technology has

to offer.

- Focus on areas and user segments with the greatest pull.

Areas and user segments that have the potential to pull in

related areas and users should be considered a high priori-

ty. For example, focusing on the publishing industry in

some locations can pull in related industries such as the

creative arts or printing. These areas and user segments

can be found by identifying existing networks in a locality

and targeting key players in the networks. These networks

typically revolve around social groups such as ethnic com-

munities, key players in an industry such as a hospital and

major governmental agencies or non-profit organizations

that touch many other organizations.

- Focus on high frequency of use areas. Applications that

deal with areas that are accessed frequently by many users

have a high potential for success. Targeting these areas

will benefit a large number of users, and with a high fre-

quency of use the benefit will be multiplied many times

over with successive use. Targeting low-use areas might

result in a successful application, but its benefit on the

locality will be substantially lower.

- Focus on high-impact user segments.Within any locality,

the majority of local products and services will be used

and consumed by a relatively small percentage of resi-

dents. For example, senior citizens typically access many

local products and services such as healthcare organiza-

tions, public transportation, cultural centers, recreation

facilities and volunteer organizations. A college student,

on the other hand, will usually access significantly fewer

local products and services. Creating applications that

address the needs of high-impact users will greatly benefit

those who are most dependent on local products and serv-

ices.

- Establish standardized metrics.A clearly defined set of

standard metrics can help ensure that initiatives are meas-

uring and tracking data in ways that allow cross-compar-

isons and information sharing happen. All organizations

within a given sector should be encouraged to begin the

process of standardization well before any technical inte-

gration occurs. In the City of Aiken, South Carolina, all

city agencies agreed to a set of standards for geographic

information before the computer systems were in place to

integrate it. This has enabled them to make significant

progress while their technology infrastructure is planned

and developed. Even relatively simple efforts, such as stan-

dardizing the segmentation of the user population into age

classifications, can lead to significant benefits for measur-

ing and comparing progress.


30/36


Summary

Current thinking: Using cutting-edge technology in applications

is the best way to ensure that they will be useful for the long

term. Finding: Technology will continually change.

Recommendation: Plan for change, go for quick wins and don't

get tied to one technology.

Findings

Application developers often want to employ cutting-edge

technology in situations where more mature technologies may

be more appropriate.

1. Mixing cutting edge technology with unformed content is

extremely difficult.An experiment to put museum content

online was held back by the difference between the fast

changing multimedia world and the methodical pace of

museum content creation. As was their custom, the muse-

um personnel were extremely diligent in deciding how to

present their material. Meanwhile, the multimedia partner

was repeatedly moving onto the most advanced interface

technologies, resulting in a constant rework of very small

amounts of content.

2. Technology often moves faster than initiatives can. The

consortium that backed the broadband residential initiative

Netville near Toronto wanted to install the most advanced

high-speed network possible. But the technology was so

unstable and the area was moving so quickly, that one

developer commented that the network was outdated and

unsustainably expensive the minute it went into the

ground. The pilot ran into problems with its applicationsas well. One of the features they developed was a custom

music on demand service. Soon after the pilot was

released, streamed music and MPEG hit the Internet, mak-

ing the pilot application obsolete.

3. Leading edge technologies are often ahead of the techno-

logical preparedness of the target population. This some-

times leaves the application underutilized. Potentially use-

ful Internet applications in Barcelona are being underused

due to the very low penetration of internet users in that

city (9%).

Recommendations

Application developers need to acknowledge that communica-

tion and computing technologies are not yet mature enough to

be stable for a long period. Therefore, they should consider

how important it is to employ cutting edge technologies. In

addition, they should anticipate the impact of new standards

as they emerge.

- Plan for change. HPY, a Finnish telephone company, has a

pilot that is designed to accommodate technological

change. They have been experimenting with the creation

of a three dimensional model of Helsinki as a navigation

methods for local services and social spaces. They recog-

nized that delivery platforms were not mature, and were

likely to change significantly in the near future. To com-

pensate for this, they created data models for the city that

were platform and technology independent, so that

whether VRML, or any other viewing platform wins out,

they will not need to reconstruct the data models; they

merely need to establish new access links.

- Don't roll out the technology prematurely. The city of

Aiken is planning to create a multi-faceted Geographic

Information System (GIS) incorporating data from numer-ous agencies. Recognizing that many of the agencies will

need to adjust their internal processes to participate in

such a system, they began process changes two years

before they plan to actually invest in the technology,

allowing the technology to mature. This allows them to

Technological Change

Cutting-edge technologies can be a powerful attractor for users,but application developers that take a more pragmatic view

of technology will achieve better results over the long-term.


31/36


make progress towards their goal without waiting for the

technology to be in place.

- Go for quick wins. Barcelona's Infopime incorporates a GIS

database with demographic and business data from many

city agencies. When they began, they sought to use

already existing data so that they could get the system up

and running immediately. They will add and refine fea-

tures over time as more users have access to the system

and they understand better what is valuable. This is allow-

ing their users to get value out of the system now while

they improve it further.

- Sometimes low-tech is best. Sometimes the power of an

application lies in the data and the capabilities provided by

that data, not in the technology. The successful housing

registration application in the Hague was delivered on

teletext, a text-based TV protocol in Europe, not a high-

end web site. They wanted to ensure that all residents

could access the application, and chose an older, but more

universally accessible medium to deliver the application.

Similarly, the Next Generation Cities project in San

Francisco is limiting its applications to those that will per-

form well on least common denominator Internet access

speeds, which is a dial up modem.

Over 85% of the 36,000 residents ofBlacksburg, VA are able to access The

Blacksburg Electronic Village from home.Recent research findings highlight how local

organizations such as churches and volun-teer organizations are fundamentally

changing the ways in which they interactwith residents as a result of the long-term

use of the community network.


32/36


PSummary

Current thinking:All we need to do is wait for society to catch

up with technology in order to create mass applications; it's

only a matter of time. Finding: Cultural and personal attitudes

run extremely deep, and late adopters are unlikely to turn into

technology enthusiasts. Recommendation:Assume that late

adopters will remain skeptical of technology, and employ

communication and training strategies to compensate for

engrained attitudes.

Findings

Leaders believe that everyone in a community will adopt new

technologies that offer value to them. In addition, developers

depend on having a critical mass of users adopt their applica-

tions. And developers are finding that some users do eagerly

adopt new technologies, but others take months or years to

adopt them, if they do so at all. Cultural and personal atti-

tudes run extremely deep and late adopters are unlikely to

turn into technology enthusiasts.

1. Many people are slow to see the value in new technology.

In one location, University teachers did not want to allow

students to use email on campus computers. They were

afraid that the students would use their limited computing

resources for non-school activities. They did not under-

stand how students rely on email to communicate among

themselves, and they were reticent to view these activities

as proper use of University resources.

2. Hands-on personality types are not attracted to technolo-

gy. In Aiken, South Carolina, a healthcare coalition wasattempting to adopt software to collectively track health

statistics. Many of the participants were hands-on practi-

tioners and didnt relate to technology well. Many were

not even email users, much less comfortable with group-

ware. Repeated prodding and even peer pressure tactics

were required to finally get them online. Some members

eventually dropped out to focus on more hands-on work.

Recommendations

Since late adopters are likely to remain skeptical of technolo-

gy, employ research, communication and training strategies to

understand and compensate for engrained attitudes.

- Recognize each user type. Since each user type has differ-

ent motivations, the development and promotion of appli-

cations need to account for these differences. Initiatives

should develop profiles for each user type. In developing

these profiles, it is important to identify: specific charac-

teristics of each user type; who users look to for technolo-

gy guidance; and what factors they consider before adopt-

ing technologies. Tools for gathering this information

include attitudinal surveys, interviews of users and non-

users, and direct observation of users in their place of

work. This helps initiatives understand how best to tailor

applications to users.

- Use early adopters to inform your long-term strategies.

]Early adopters can be a powerful tool for understanding

how later adopters will use a technology. Educators in

several locations were aware of the value of letting early

adopters lead the way. Because early adopters are the first

to use the technology, they can be a source of insight into

how it can be improved and tailored to the needs of the

majority and provide success stories and best practices. By

incorporating the information learned from early adopters

into the approaches taken with the majority, developers

can increase adoption rates significantly.

- Help users see and understand the value of new technolo-gies. Document and promote best practices. Best practices

help users see how others are using technology and how it

is adding value. It gives them something concrete that they

can relate to their situation. In addition, with references of

others who have had success with an application, the

majority gains the necessary confidence they need to adopt

the technology.

Personality & Culture

Visions of widespread technology adoption are compellingbut the reality is that some people may never become

enthusiastic about trying new technologies.


33/36

In addition, rather than promote all of an application's

features, choose a select few that apply most directly to

the users being targeted. This enables them to discern what

real benefit is coming from the application.

- Employ trusted parties to get people involved. People

engage in behavior with people and organizations they

know and trust before they turn to unfamiliar organiza-

tions. At one location, local churches and cultural groups

were brought in to host computer literacy training to great

success.


A framework developed by Geoffrey Moore called the TechnologyAdoption Life Cycle Framework identifies five types of technologyusers. According to Moore, every population of technology users canbe broken down into five types. These user types are not distributedevenly throughout the user population. The vast majority fall into theEarly and Late Majorities and are static. This means that all people fitinto one type and they do not change types over time. For moreinformation on the Technology Adoption Lifecycle, refer to Crossingthe Chasm by Geoffrey Morre..

Innovators are always the first to adopt new technology. Often, thetechnologies are just out of the lab or still under development.Innovators are easy to spot. They usually have electronic devices

attached to their hip and talk in a techno-speak that only theyunderstand.

Early Adopters can see the benefits and potential of a technologybefore it is proven in the marketplace. Like Innovators, they under-stand the potential that technology holds and are willing to put upwith the bugs and glitches that often accompany new technologies.

The Early Majority user is willing to adopt technologies, but wantsproof that it works before he or she commits. These users are funda-mentally pragmatic. Proof typically comes to them through examplesof how the technology is benefiting others.

The Late Majority is cautious of new technologies and waits for a

dominant standard to emerge. This group wants to be assured thatsolutions work as promised, that adequate technical support existsand that they are adopting the industry standard.

Laggards do not see the need for technology and are often forcedinto adopting it. They are always the last group to adopt any technol-ogy even if waiting causes great inconvenience for them. SomeLaggards are vocal critics of technology and actively work againstattempts to introduce new technologies.

The Technology AdoptionLife Cycle Framework


34/36



35/36


eTropolisReport

Documents

Transcript of eTropolisReport