Transcript IRM in Government - Humboldt State University

IRM in Government
Carl Birks
CIS 450 Presentation
Fall 2003
1
Questions we’ll examine
 What is IRM?
 What is democracy?
 What is the role of information in a
democracy?
 What do governments do?
 How are governments using IRM now?
 What are the best practices?
 What’s the future for IRM in
Government?
2
What is Information
Resource Management?
 Recognizes value of information as
asset
 Interaction of people, content, and
technology
 Getting the right content to the
right person at the right time
3
History of IRM:





Federal Reports Act of 1946
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
IRM: term coined by Senator Fred
Thompson of Commission on Federal
Paperwork
most used in US federal governmental
IS department context
(“Paperwork Reduction Act Reauthorization and Government
Information Management Issues”, Relyea, 2000)
4
Democracy
 Democracy
Requires informed citizenry
 Requires that citizens care that system
works and actively participate in process
 Effective and efficient government
increases citizen goodwill and sustains a
healthy and robust democracy

(“A Strategic Perspective of Electronic Democracy”,
Watson and Mundy, 2001)
5
Information in a
Democracy
 creates trust
 Is the mechanism for ensuring
politicians serve the electorate
6
What do governments
do?
 Services toward building a civil
society
 Varies by level:




International
National
State
Local
7
E-Democracy
 Concept of Government that
depends on IT to achieve basic
missions
 Considers long-term impact of
applications on citizens and
government itself
(“Digital Government”, Marchionini, 2003)
8
E-Democracy - Elements
 E-government:

informs citizens about their representatives
and how they can be contacted, enables
access to online information and online
payment transactions
 E-politics


Use of IT to improve effectiveness of political
decision making
Builds citizen awareness of the how and why
of political decision making and facilitates
process participation
(“A Strategic Perspective of Electronic Democracy”,
Watson and Mundy, 2001)
9
E-Democracy– Goals and
Framework
 Goal: deploy IT to improve effectiveness
and efficiency of democracy
 New phenomenon: means citizens will
have to learn how to use it.
 Framework for adoption:




Know what
Know how
Know why
Care why
(“A Strategic Perspective of Electronic Democracy”,
Watson and Mundy, 2001)
10
E-Democracy – E-Politics
 E-Politics (effectiveness side):


Political decision making becomes
increasingly transparent
Requires moving beyond open
government (Freedom of Information
and Open Meeting laws) to open
politics (exposing the process by which
laws are created)
(“A Strategic Perspective of Electronic Democracy”,
Watson and Mundy, 2001)
11
E-Democracy – EGovernment
 E-Government (efficiency side):


Increases timeliness and convenience
of citizen/govt interactions and
reduces their cost
Example: web-enabled property tax
payments decreased per transaction
cost from $5 to $0.22
(“A Strategic Perspective of Electronic Democracy”,
Watson and Mundy, 2001)
12
E-Government
 Application of IT to government
services
 Allows access to government
information and services 24/7
 Provides potential for government
to fundamentally restructure its
operations
(“Digital Government”, Marchionini, 2003)
13
E-Democracy –
Adoption
 3 phases based on framework



Initiation (know what)
Infusion (know how and know why)
Customization (care why)
14
E-Democracy –
Phase 1: Initiation

Critical initial goals:

Provide citizens with single point of access
to government info (e.g. portal)
 Helps citizens navigate myriad agencies
 Example: ezgov based on zip code

Web-enable government payments
 $3 trillion/year changes hands
 < .5 % of payments web-enabled
 Potential for $110 billion savings each year
 Reduces visits, wait time, travel
15
Electronic Democracy –
Phase 2: Infusion
 Innovation is widely embraced
 Organization often restructures to
accommodate the innovation
16
Electronic Democracy –
Phase 3: Customization
 Citizens will increasingly expect
government to offer level of tailoring
they get from private sector
 Implements one to one relationship
between citizen and government
 Enables citizens to:


have personal profile of financial interactions
with government
focus on personally critical issues
17
E-Government and EPolitics Applications
 Three Categories:



Access to information
Transaction services
Citizen participation
(“Digital Government”, Marchionini, 2003)
18
Access to Information
 Most common e-government application
 Governments produce huge amounts of
information, electronic access expanding
 Example: FedStats provides access to statistics
of more than 100 federal agencies
 Library of Congress
 IRS
 SSA
 National Park Service
(“FedStats: Gateway to Federal Statistics, Dippo, 2003)
(“Digital Government”, Marchionini, 2003)
19
Transaction Services
 Taxes: 39.5 million electronic fed.
tax filings in 2001 (up 30% from
previous year)
 Passports, Drivers Licenses
 Patents, Permits
(“Digital Government”, Marchionini, 2003)
20
Transactions: Customized
Workflow Management
 Includes tasks and dependencies
 Used in e-commerce to automate
business processes
 Allows on-the-fly workflow
generation for customization
depending on specific rules
21
Transactions: Customized Geospatial
Workflows
 GIS associates location dependent data
with specific rules and regulations (e.g.
zoning, business development, building)
 Ideal for delivery of e-government
services (e.g. land use planning)
 Generated on the fly from a rule base
 Changes to rules automatically reflected
in newly generated workflows
(“Customized Geospatial Workflows for E-Government Services”,
Holowczak, 2001)
22
Citizen Participation
 E-mails to government officials
 Rule making participation (public
comments/issues debates)
 High-profile application: E-voting
 Unclear how information flow changes between
citizens and government may affect processes
(e.g. will more direct flows diminish influence of
opinion leaders and media on public process?)
(“Digital Government”, Marchionini, 2003)
23
Spice Break
24
E-Rule Making
 Official public comments received and made
part of public record
 Example: Dept of Agriculture National Organic
Program (1997)


Incoming comments sorted, digitized, auto-indexed
and posted in online docket room
Electronic accessibility of comments and related
materials:
 offset manual processing costs for individual FOIA
requests
 Increased public perception of transparency and
legitimacy of process
(“Prospects for Improving the Regulatory Process
using E-Rulemaking”, Fountain, 2003)
25
E-Democracy by level of
Government
 Different levels of government:




International
National
State
Local
 Functions and technology use vary at
each level
26
IRM in National
Government – USA
 Government Performance and Results
Act (1993)
 Clinger-Cohen Act (1996)

Problems intended to address:




High turnover of CIOs/IT staff
Lack of flexibility
Lack of cross-agency cooperation
Traditional separation of telecommunications and
data processing
(“Local Governments and IRM: Policy Emerging from
Practice”, Fletcher, 1997)
27
IRM in National
Government – USA


Set policies and procedures for IRM in
Federal Government (top-down
approach)
OMB –based oversight of agency IT
functions ( OMB Circular A-130)
(“Local Governments and IRM: Policy Emerging from
Practice”, Fletcher, 1997)
28
IRM in National
Government – USA
 Cross Agency Cooperation:

Problems:
Generally info not shared across agencies
 Citizens required to provide redundant info
to different agencies
 Complex processes to match each person
and situation with appropriate government
services

(“Understanding New Models of Collaboration for Delivering
Government Services”, Dawes & Prefontaine, 2003)
29
IRM in National
Government – USA
 Cross Agency Collaboration:




Rests on understood but often tacit working
philosophy
Relationships are evolving and dynamic
Raise issues of data ownership
Needs an institutional framework
 Technology choices affect participation
and results (nature, cost and cost
distribution)
(“Understanding New Models of Collaboration for Delivering
Government Services”, Dawes & Prefontaine, 2003)
30
IRM in National
Government – USA
 Cross Agency Application Example:

Coplink Connect
Provides one-stop access point for data to
alleviate police officers’ information and
cognitive overload
 Supports consolidated access to all major
databases

31
IRM in National
Government – USA
 NSF Digital Government Program


Helps agencies adopt and adapt basic
research to practical problems of
government work
Has stimulated R&D in e-government
applications
(“A Personal History of the NSF Digital Government
Program”, Ciment, 2003)
32
NSF Digital Government
Application areas:










Law enforcement
Judicial administration
Governance
Regulation and policy-making
Housing
Environment
Land use management
Education and training
Access to community libraries
Emergency management
(“A Personal History of the NSF Digital Government
Program”, Ciment, 2003)
33
IRM in National
Government – USA
 TIA:



part of the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency's Information Awareness
Office
Seeks to track individuals through collecting
as much information about them as possible
and using computer algorithms and human
analysis to detect potential activity
Seeks “revolutionary technology for ultralarge all-source information repositories”; a
“virtual, centralized, grand database”
34
IRM in National
Government - USA
 TIA, cont.



Aims to develop data-mining and knowledge
discovery tools to find patterns and
associations
Seeks development of biometric technology
to enable the identification and tracking of
individuals
One TIA project aims to positively identify
people from a distance through technologies
such as face recognition or gait recognition
35
Spice Break
36
IRM in National
Government – EU
 eEurope initiative:

includes online government as a
priority
 EU goal:

greater transparency and participation
in government to strengthen
democracy
(“Digital Government”, Marchionini, 2003)
37
IRM in National
Government – EU
 EC Migration to Open Source Guidelines



Builds on growing use in Europe
Standards focused: “provide practical and
detailed recommendations on how to migrate to
Open Source Software (OSS)-based office
applications, calendaring, e-mail and other
standard applications”
Collaborative: developed with guidance from
public sector IT experts from Denmark, Finland,
Italy, Germany, Malta, the Netherlands, Spain,
Sweden, and Turkey
(Center for Digital Government, 2003)
38
http://www.centerdigitalgov.com/international/story.php?docid=74723
Bottom up v. Top Down
 Bottom up:
 Lets effective solutions be
implemented and only expanded as
they succeed
 Smaller projects:



Easier to design and deploy
Easier to fund
Less catastrophic if they fail
39
Bottom Up v. Top Down
 Top down:


Less flexible
Has its place in setting standards
 Larger projects:



Harder to design and deploy
Harder to fund
More catastrophic if the fail
40
IRM in State Government
 Closer to constituents
 Mixture of top-down and bottom up
approaches
 Open source experimentation/migration
 Legislators need to demonstrate costcutting and a balanced budget
 IT bureaucracy need solutions they can
deploy with little effort and fit seamlessly
(“Linux Access in State and Local Government”,
Adelstein, 2003)
41
Bottom up Open Source
Revolution?
Cities and States are adopting:




Houston, Berlin (10k PCs to Linux)
Rhode Island SOS OSS LAMP portal
TX Legislation pending; OR, CA, OK
legislation failed (vendor opposition)
International: EU, Israel, Portugal,
Columbia, Ukraine require OSS; SA
gives pref. to OSS
(“Linux Access in State and Local Government”,
Adelstein, 2003)
42
OSS Future?
 “As more and more public sector OSS
projects succeed, state and local
governments will start to notice.”
 Government applications sites modeled
on SchoolForge?

information, tools and materials to make
school and all its parts
http://www.schoolforge.net/
43
IRM in Local Government
 Local governments directly affect citizens
 Services:







Roads and bridges maintenance
Social welfare services
Libraries
Parks & recreation
Utilities
Housing
Permits and licenses
44
IRM in Local Government




No federal IRM-style policies/standards
Less strategic planning
bottom up approach fosters innovation
Open source experimentation


Avoids excessive licensing fees
Fosters an open community mentality that
fits well with government (Socialism?)
45
Local E-Government Best
Practices
 Best Practices:




Widely disseminate web site address
Provide combination of navigation tools (e.g.
frames or buttons, search engine and site
map)
Provide information by both service offered
and department
Include different types of information needed
by various users (local or linked)
(“Local E-Government Services”, George, et al, 2001)
46
Local E-Government Best
Practices.
 Best Practices, continued:

Transaction applications:
Minimal: provide applications for download
 Ideal: online purchasing and payments:
 Parking tickets
 Water/sewer bills
 Property taxes

(“Local E-Government Services”, George, et al, 2001)
47
Local E-gov Development
Considerations
 Funding:



Cost of developing, maintaining and
upgrading web sites
Potential for cost savings and other
efficiencies (e.g. improved levels of
service at no additional staffing cost)
How to fund (e.g. general funds, user
fees, volunteers, donations,
advertisements
(“Local E-Government Services”, George, et al, 2001)
48
Local E-gov Development
Considerations, cont.
 Public access to internet (e.g.
digital divide issues)
 Security and privacy of personal
information and government
documents (e.g. removing names
from online property records)
(“Local E-Government Services”, George, et al, 2001)
49
Development and Use of
Local E-government
 Four phases recommended:




Developing an internet presence
Providing interaction between government
and public by e-mail and information
Allowing individuals to conduct business with
the local government
Re-engineering government’s business
practices because of increased use and
functions of e-government
(“Local E-Government Services: A Best Practices
Review”, George, et al, 2001)
50
KM Application to
Government
 Knowledge Management recognizes
that technology is only one part of
effective use of knowledge



Explicit (technology)
Tacit (social)
Recognizes importance of what makes
people human (w/in larger context)
51
The Rosy Future of IRM
in Government?
 Best practice adoption
 Non-proprietary open file standards
 Open source software
 Strengthening of democracy
through the free flow of actionable
information
52
The Scary Future of IRM
in Government?
 “I will tell the people what to do.”
-Arnold Schwarzenegger
 “You will be assimilated.”
-Borg from Star Trek
53
Faces of Information
Resource Management in
Government
Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels (October 29, 1897-May 1, 1945)
was Adolf Hitler's Propaganda Minister
(Propaganda Ministerium) in Nazi Germany.
54
Faces of Information
Management in
Government
John Poindexter is a retired Navy Admiral who
lost his job as National Security Adviser under
Ronald Reagan and was convicted of conspiracy,
lying to Congress, defrauding the government,
and destroying evidence in the Iran Contra
scandal. He now heads the TIA project
55
IRM Considerations
 New technological capabilities raise the need to
apply the eternal verities in new ways
 Values recognized by U.S. founding fathers –
outlined in U.S and other Constitutions globally
 Abuses possible: require new application of
checks and balances, firm values and ethics
base and policies to reflect them
56
Information + Knowledge + Wisdom
Who controls the information?
Who has the knowledge?
Who applies the wisdom?
Healthy democracy requires citizens stay
informed and participate.
 Citizens must apply the human elements of
knowledge and wisdom to IRM in government.




57
Summary and
Conclusions
 Information and participation are key to
democracy
 Transparent, effective and efficient delivery of
services is essential to democratic government
 Governments will increasingly find IRM
principles useful and apply them to become
more efficient and effective
 Citizens must stay informed and participate to
ensure IRM is applied to create healthy
democracy.
58