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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Joint Board’s approach of bringing leaders of organisations at each level of government together to take responsibility for a matter of such cross-cutting interest has been an innovation that appears to have paid off. Commentators regarded the Board as a particular strength of the Danish approach to e-government; it allows the perspectives of each level of government to be reflected in the design of the programme, and helps all government organisations become engaged in e-government implementation. This approach is now being used in a second area – governance of the Forum for Top Executive Management – which is seeking to strengthen top-level management across the whole of the public sector in support of better public governance. As noted, interviews for this review revealed strong approval of the role the Joint Board plays in the design and implementation of the e-government strategy. Interviewees felt that there was a good cross-section of State government organisations represented on the Board and real benefit from including county and municipal representation as well. Many interviewees also observed that there appears to be a positive correlation between Board membership and the level of commitment to e-government shown by State government organisations, suggesting that Board membership can be a good way to engage organisations that may be lagging behind the leaders in the e-government effort. The work being overseen by the Joint Board is clearly having a significant impact on government organisations. The OECD asked which e-government strategies, programmes and projects were significant drivers of organisations’ e-government efforts. Survey respondents reported that the two most significant drivers were the eDay1 (significant for 71% of respondents) and eDay2 (65%) initiatives, both of which have been key government-wide elements of Project e-Government. The e-government strategy itself was reported to be a significant e-government driver by 57% of respondents. While these results are very positive, the fact that only 30% of respondents identified the Danish enterprise architecture as a significant driver, and only 12% cited the public sector modernisation programme, indicates that some aspects of e-government may benefit from more attention and leadership from the Joint Board. Figure 4.4 Impact of national e-government strategies, programmes and projects eDay2 eDay E-government Strategy 2004-06 FESD (Electronic Document Management System) Whitepaper on Enterprise Arechitecture The Agreement on a Structural Reform The Public Sector Modernisation Program Other IT-policy Action Plan 1995 The Digital North Denmark programme 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 % Source: OECD E-Government Survey: Denmark. 73
In addition to support for the Joint Board, there was also strong support for the way the Digital Task Force and the IT-Policy Centre work together to bring a balance of public management and technology perspectives to bear on the e-government programme. It was observed, however, that the relationship between the two organisations has not always been as collegial and complementary as it is today; difficulties in alignment and co-ordination have been a problem in the past. However, efforts to correct this situation, including clarification of their roles and responsibilities, have evidently been successful, with the two organisations now being widely seen to form a strong partnership at the centre of the e-government programme. The Digital Task Force and the IT-Policy Centre are seen as effective leaders, facilitators and co-ordinators of efforts to achieve e-government. The Digital Task Force has been successful as a catalyst to bring interested parties together to solve problems of e-government co-ordination and co-operation across levels of government. It is an unusual organisation for Danish government, drawing the majority of its staff as secondees from other State and local government organisations. These individuals bring essential qualities of enthusiasm and understanding of the potential of ICT to the work of the Task Force. Employment with the Task Force is regarded as recognition of prior good performance and potential, which helps attract top-quality candidates for Task Force positions. With the revision of the e-government strategy in 2004, the mandate of the Task Force was renewed until 2006, at which point it currently expects to be dismantled. This expectation is used by the Task Force to create internal drive towards the achievement of the Government’s goals, and to retain clarity about the fact that e-government is regarded as an enabler of good government in Denmark rather than being an ongoing end in itself. In line with this time-bound mission, the Task Force has limited its staff numbers in order to remain focused, and has relied on use of seconded staff or staff recruited from the private sector to build up e-government expertise across government. Task Force staff return to their own organisations after working on e-government for, on average, 18 months, helping spread this expertise. The Task Force is perceived to be an energetic organisation whose broad-based composition enables it to understand e-government from a wide range of stakeholder perspectives. However, some interviewees expressed concern that Task Force staff members are relatively young and inexperienced in working at the top level of government. Regardless, there is a widespread view that either the Digital Task Force will still be required after its mandate expires in 2006, or that it will need to be replaced by some other means of providing leadership and co-ordination for e-government. The role and expertise of the Task Force is complemented by the IT-Policy Centre in the MVTU, which is seen as playing a very important role in the development of many of the enablers of e-government (e.g. digital signatures and the enterprise architecture). Under the revised e-government strategy its work is seen as being more supportive of government organisations, with greater emphasis on developing concrete solutions to problems they face, while the Digital Task Force retains responsibilities in strategy development and oversight of all-of-government projects. The overall strength of these top-level arrangements for leadership and co-ordination of e-government is indicated by the responses to the OECD survey question that asked organisations about the strength of potential challenges to their implementation of e-government. Duplication of actors and unclear institutional responsibilities at this level of e-government can often be significant problems in OECD countries. In Denmark’s case, however, when presented with a wide range of potential challenges to their implementation of e-government, less than 1% of survey respondents identified “duplication” as being “very important” – the lowest response for any challenge (see Figure 6.1). Also, 65% of respondents did not regard this issue as a challenge at all. However, nearly 13% of respondents reported that duplication was an “important” challenge, and almost 21% said it was 74
Page 1 and 2:
OECD PEER REVIEW OF E-GOVERNMENT IN
Page 3 and 4:
TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ASSESSMEN
Page 5 and 6:
ANNEX A: OVERVIEW OF POLITICAL AND
Page 7 and 8:
OECD PEER REVIEW OF E-GOVERNMENT IN
Page 9 and 10:
While it is vital that the Governme
Page 11 and 12:
Finance and the MVTU following thes
Page 13 and 14:
this challenge was frequently menti
Page 15 and 16:
Alongside the problem of the reliab
Page 17 and 18:
In terms of its impact on organisat
Page 19 and 20:
and businesses. While it is not cer
Page 21 and 22:
considerable strategic importance t
Page 23 and 24: government organisations are aware
Page 25 and 26: 8. Monitoring and evaluation Denmar
Page 27 and 28: Abstract There is a favourable envi
Page 29 and 30: E-government context Government pol
Page 31 and 32: The Structural Reform Between 2005
Page 33 and 34: administrative procedures. The find
Page 35 and 36: Figure 1.2 E-government structure a
Page 37 and 38: II. THE CASE FOR E-GOVERNMENT Denma
Page 39 and 40: • Creation of a competitive marke
Page 41 and 42: Abstract Government organisations c
Page 43 and 44: Source: OECD E-Government Survey: D
Page 45 and 46: Figure 3.2 Legislative and regulato
Page 47 and 48: modernisation process, especially i
Page 49 and 50: and the generally high level of tru
Page 51 and 52: fund it has created providing a tot
Page 53 and 54: outright barriers. The clearest evi
Page 55 and 56: Figure 3.5 Use of public digital se
Page 57 and 58: • Employment status: students and
Page 59 and 60: APPENDIX TO CHAPTER 3: INFORMATION
Page 61 and 62: Figure 3.A.4 ICT usage among Danish
Page 63 and 64: Figure 3.A.8 Internet access among
Page 65 and 66: IV. PLANNING AND LEADERSHIP The e-g
Page 67 and 68: The strategy notes that Denmark is
Page 69 and 70: exchanged electronically. This is e
Page 71 and 72: with even lower rankings for driver
Page 73: involvement in e-government therefo
Page 77 and 78: Figure 4.5 Responsibility for desig
Page 79 and 80: V. ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE This chapt
Page 81 and 82: Structural Reform and e-government
Page 83 and 84: The Task Force has initiated a proj
Page 85 and 86: Figure 5.2 Share of documents recei
Page 87 and 88: Box 5.1 Improving middle management
Page 89 and 90: Abstract Collaboration is relativel
Page 91 and 92: Co-ordination of e-government polic
Page 93 and 94: Box 6.1 Key e-government co-ordinat
Page 95 and 96: The CRS encompasses a number of reg
Page 97 and 98: Digital signatures are now being wi
Page 99 and 100: Denmark - something that could be a
Page 101 and 102: Staffed by employees from the Digit
Page 103 and 104: The additional workload is connecte
Page 105 and 106: such a framework be designed; and 3
Page 107 and 108: schemas used in different areas of
Page 109 and 110: • Changing conditions in the publ
Page 111 and 112: municipalities, which might otherwi
Page 113 and 114: The current situation has evolved o
Page 115 and 116: Figure 6.6 Impacts of partnerships
Page 117 and 118: Source: OECD E-government Survey: D
Page 119 and 120: Abstract The Danish vision for e-go
Page 121 and 122: Figure 7.1 Drivers of e-government
Page 123 and 124: • To ensure internal knowledge of
Page 125 and 126:
• The lack of information and the
Page 127 and 128:
Figure 7.2 Source and type of e-gov
Page 129 and 130:
Figure 7.4 Constraints on demand fo
Page 131 and 132:
When asked about the level of impor
Page 133 and 134:
eing for one group or another (e.g.
Page 135 and 136:
Figure 7.8 Use of electronic delive
Page 137 and 138:
The national portal www.denmark.dk
Page 139 and 140:
identification of the relationship
Page 141 and 142:
Abstract At the all-of-government l
Page 143 and 144:
• At least 60 percent of all publ
Page 145 and 146:
External audit Another important el
Page 147 and 148:
can have impacts: 1) “service cha
Page 149 and 150:
Figure 8.4 Responsibilities for mon
Page 151 and 152:
CASE STUDY 1: STANDARDS-BASED E-GOV
Page 153 and 154:
pharmacies (e.g. referrals and disc
Page 155 and 156:
Danish approach of flexible decentr
Page 157 and 158:
CASE STUDY 2: ACHIEVING E-GOVERNMEN
Page 159 and 160:
Estimation of benefits for both eDa
Page 161 and 162:
ANNEX A: OVERVIEW OF POLITICAL AND
Page 163 and 164:
ANNEX B: INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT AND
Page 165 and 166:
Administrative environment Organisa
Page 167 and 168:
Other State government responsibili
Page 169 and 170:
− Models to support inter-organis
Page 171 and 172:
ICT usage As discussed in Chapter 3
Page 173 and 174:
Promotion of IT Research and Educat
Page 175 and 176:
other reforms. The plan identified
Page 177 and 178:
Overall, these action plans were su
Page 179 and 180:
E-mail addresses for everyone Anoth
Page 181 and 182:
had developed extensive practical k
Page 183 and 184:
ANNEX E: METHODOLOGY Definition of
Page 185 and 186:
The survey asked State and local go
Page 187 and 188:
ANNEX F: GLOSSARY This glossary was
Page 189 and 190:
BIBLIOGRAPHY Agency for Governmenta
Page 191 and 192:
Ministry of Science, Technology and
Page 193:
Statistics Denmark (2004b), Nyt fra
show all

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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?