OECD Peer Review of E-Government in Denmark - ePractice.eu

Alongside the problem of the reliability of measurement data there is a second problem relating
to specification of the measures themselves. For example, Denmark’s e-government strategy is notable
for establishing an economic goal of releasing resources for use elsewhere in government. As already
noted, it states that at least 75% of digitalisation projects should release resources and at least 25%
should do so to a great extent. However, there is no clarity over what is meant by “release resources”,
and even less about what is meant by “a great extent”. Coupled with the fact that organisations are left
to report their own achievements against this goal, the lack of specificity of these measures creates the
potential for lower performance than is expected by the Government, and/or disputes over the level of
actual achievements.
Political and administrative leadership
At the whole-of-government level, Denmark is providing strong leadership for e-government, and
officials express high levels of approval and satisfaction with the way e-government responsibilities
are structured and co-ordinated. The Joint Board of e-Government’s approach of bringing together
top-level leaders from each level of government to take responsibility for a matter of cross-cutting
interest has been an innovation in Danish government that appears to have paid off. The interface
between political and administrative leadership is ensured by the relationship between the Board and
ministers in the Government Finance Committee, who seem to be working well together in addressing
e-government issues at the national political level.
At an administrative level, the Digital Task Force and IT-Policy Centre are seen as effective
leaders, facilitators and co-ordinators of e-government. The Digital Task Force has been successful in
acting as a catalyst to bring interested parties together to solve problems of co-ordination and
collaboration across the levels of the public sector, and its use of staff temporarily seconded from
other organisations has proven to be effective in spreading awareness and best practices. Its role and
expertise have been well complemented by the IT-Policy Centre in the MVTU, which has played an
important role in the development of enablers of e-government (e.g. the digital signature, enterprise
architecture and technical standards) and connecting these to wider government ICT policies.
Proposals for action
9. The Danish e-government vision and strategy has played an important role in guiding the
e-government efforts of individual government organisations, and providing a platform for the leadership and
co-ordination of e-government. The strategy is scheduled to be achieved by the end of 2006, and any plans to
continue with a national e-government strategy beyond this point have not been announced. The Government
should consider whether a further iteration of the e-government strategy would be beneficial in terms of achieving
both e-government and wider policy goals and, if warranted, what the focus of a renewed strategy would be.
10. The structure of e-government leadership and co-ordination, based on the pivotal roles of the
Government Finance Committee, the Joint Board of e-Government, the Danish Digital Task Force, and the
IT-Policy Centre, is well established and proven to be a key success factor for e-government in Denmark. The
Government should take this into account in making decisions on what kind of central leadership, if any, is
needed to support e-government beyond 2006.
11. The Danish e-government strategy is notable for the explicit measures it sets out for assessing
achievement of its goals, particularly with regard to e-government delivering measurable financial benefits.
However, it is not clear that current approaches to measurement of the achievement of these goals will be reliable
or verifiable. To ensure this clarity, and avoid creating confusion and concern among organisations that are
subject to these goals, more robust means of measurement should be developed.
14