Public sector managers must lead the way and ensure that their own organisations are capable of realising the vision

By the end of 2006, the aim is to ensure that:

• No more than 10 percent of public authorities state that lack of political will and clear goals is a significant obstacle (2003: 9 percent.)

• No more than 20 percent of public authorities state that lack of allocation of resources for work with digitalisation is a significant obstacle (2003: 47 per-cent.)

• At least 75 percent of all digitalisation projects lead to a simplification of working practices, and at least 25 percent do so on a large scale (2003: 70 percent and 15 percent, respectively.)

• A large proportion of public authorities state that digitalisation forms a part of the efficiency strategies, results contracts, and/or plans of action of their institutions (specific goals will be formulated and defined)

• A high proportion of senior executives in public sector institutions (besides IT management) have, or have had, a formal role in the organisation’s own digitalisation projects (such as in the role of steering committee chairman, project owner or the like) (specific goals will be formulated and defined) The central government, regional authorities, and local authorities each contribute DKK 5 million annually in 2004 and 2005 to the project. The work is expected to be complete by the end of 2006.

A clear division of roles and responsibilities is essential to realise the vision and implement the programme plan. Project eGovernment creates a common framework and supports cross-cutting co-operation. However, the realisation of specific gains is in the hands of individual public au-thorities across the boundaries of sectors and levels of authority through-out the public sector. Hence, the project does not alter the responsibility of individual authorities in the transition to eGovernment, or in the usual processes of decision making related to the Government and municipal bodies.

The project is organised under the board, with steering committees appointed for specific projects or business areas. A special task force, with a staff of 20, has been established to serve as secretariat of the Board.

The Task Force is intended to act as a catalyst for co-ordination and co-operation in the digitalisation process across all levels of the public sector.

Most of the projects initiated by the Task Force are cross-sector pro-jects, where business process re-engineering and new eGovernment ser-vices can lead to better and more efficient public serser-vices.

A general policy is that all public institutions shall operate their own homepage.

Typical services provided through the homepage are:

• Easy access to information

• Access to forms, especially electronic forms

• Interactive services with access to the institution’s own data in public sector databases, typically requiring log-on and password.

• Other services: Traffic information, route planning, weather forecasts, e-learning, and different levels of guidance.

The project is intended to provide frameworks and solutions capable of implementing the vision and aims of the strategy. The work itself in-volves all public authorities across sector boundaries and levels of author-ity. A programme plan has been developed with focus areas to ensure that the right framework conditions are present. According to the Govern-ment, Denmark has more competence in some areas than in others. For example, IT infrastructure has progressed relatively far, while more effort is required in communication and management development. The work with business areas is intended to advance the process in the most impor-tant areas and to serve as examples for other areas. Work is currently under way in the areas of G2B services (eBusiness), children and adoles-cents at risk, and medication administration.

Source: “The Danish eGovernment Strategy 2004-06”, Project eGovernment, February 2004

Evaluation of the eGovernment project in Denmark

Project eGovernment was evaluated in the autumn of 2003. The evalua-tion showed that progress had been made, and several results had been achieved, but it also identified obstacles and challenges to be overcome.

These obstacles include:

Lack of familiarity with the vision and strategy is a major obstacle. In-depth knowledge of the vision and strategy of Project eGovernment is not widespread. Familiarity with the project is limited to a small group, while the depth and consequences of the project have not been discussed in the organisations. The vision is not brief and specific, which makes it diffi-cult to communicate.

Furthermore, the “bunker culture” is widespread, and the existing cul-ture does not support inter-organisational approaches and/or actions.

There is no tradition of thinking in cross-organisational and inter-organisational terms, which tends to hinder cross-cutting co-operation and consequently, holistic thinking. There is also a tendency to assess management in terms of the number of employees and tasks. Hence,

merging and relocating tasks and personnel is unpopular, and there is a consequent lack of incentive to participate in cross-cutting co-operation.

“Sow-harvest” issues are unresolved – i.e. the improvements in efficiency that follow a digitalisation process may be harvested by an organisation other than the one that made the investment. The distribution issue is not clear – who will harvest what someone else has sown?

Another obstacle is the lack of managerial commitment and skills, e.g.

ma

ks in several areas relating to

enerally too much focus on the technical as-pec

ark ranks fou

e eGoverne-me

• crease organisational efforts by concentrating on the user

solutions

•

nagement insight into business thinking and familiarity with project management and managerial methodology. There is a pronounced, but unrecognised, need for change management.

Unclear division of responsibilities and tas

Project eGovernment is another barrier to success. This applies, e.g. to the steering committees of cross-cutting projects, leading to a lack of decision-making capability.

One-sided IT thinking – g

ts of IT. The organisational aspects are not a naturally integrated ele-ment, and better interconnection of the two areas is required.

In a report¹⁷ that references international studies, Denm

rth in readiness for eGovernment. At the top of the list are Canada, Singapore, and the USA, which are further advanced than Denmark in adjusting public services to the needs of citizens and businesses. This result is confirmed by the IDC, which, in a corresponding European sur-vey, ranked Denmark in first place. Other analyses from the World Eco-nomic Forum, the OECD, and the UN confirm this picture.

The lessons learned by the progress and obstacles of th

nt project, and from other countries, has given the Danish Government a list of areas upon which Denmark can usefully focus:

In

• Back-office integration must be encompassed by front-office

• The benefits of improvements in efficiency must be realised – measurement and evaluation must be carried out

Leadership and skills must be enhanced

17 Project eGovernment, “The Danish eGovernment strategy 2004-06”, February 2004

Use of IT in the public sector in Denmark

Statistics Denmark annually studies the public sector’s use of IT¹⁸, and found in 2003 that electronic documents are available at most municipali-ties. The most common service offered to citizens is the option to elec-tronically download documents – offered by 93 percent of municipal services, 79 percent of services by state authorities, but only 67 percent of services by regional authorities. Electronic ordering of material is also common – offered by 83 percent of the services at regional level, 79 per-cent at the state level, and 62 perper-cent at the municipal level. Other ser-vices, such online payment, are still limited in electronic form.

Communication with other official authorities is still low, but expecta-tions are high. It is lowest in municipalities and highest in regional au-thorities. It is expected to increase from 11 percent to 42 percent between 2003–2004 at the state level, and from 17 percent to 75 percent at the regional level.

The most severe barriers in state agencies, counties, and municipali-ties are difficulmunicipali-ties with finding resources for development work. Other barriers perceived as troublesome for the organisations involve problems with integrating systems. However, all major barriers, except the costs for IT, have decreased in recent years.

Several effects have been reported from the projects, and the evalua-tion showed that among the most important are those of reforming the work process. Another important consequence of digitalisation concerns new roles within the organisations. At the regional level, freeing of re-sources is more important than at the state and municipal levels.